A recent administration... Obama and the auto industry? Bush and oil? Clinton signing the DMCA and Mickey Mouse copyright extension act? Could you narrow it down a bit?
All excellent examples. I should have written "recent administrations". It seems all of those were pretty susceptible to lobbying or campaign influence.
I'm not sure the auto industry is as applicable in monopoly terms since the auto industry is already pretty competitive so I don't see it as government's job to "rescue" them. Maybe it makes short-term sense, but not what I consider part of government's job of ensuring competition.
So basically you need government regulation to have a free market?
Yes, but only to the extent of preventing monopolies. If the government hadn't broken up ATT we'd still be paying $1/minute for long distance. In Germany the same thing happened after the government broke up the telephone monopoly. Prices went from ~4DM (~2$) a minute down to 10 cents a minute and are now flat unlimited rate for 10 Euros a month.
No system is perfect. And free markets only work if they are free and there is sufficient competition. In "capitalism" it is the job of the government to ensure competition, but, that idea got pretty hammered in a recent administration, which felt it was the job of government to make sure campagne contributors can maintain their monopolies.
AFIK, they cannot unilaterally change the terms of an existing contract unless that is agreed to in the original contract. If it is, then a customer can opt out.
I was using Xenix at home in the late 80s on a 286 computer. It may have been designed for academics but it was build for a typical home PC of the time. Coherent was strictly designed for the home PC user.
Arg. I don't care how shit you think the Windows OS is, Gates' philanthropy is worth it.
I appreciate Gate's philanthropy but he gives less percentage of his wealth than many average Americans. Still, he is devoting his time to some important causes which I think is great.
Or just maybe... it might just be in Oracle's best interest to provide an OS platform, which they control, totally optimized for their DB from the kernel on up. Add Sun's servers into the mix and you've got a high-performance h/w, s/w environment tuned for Oracle. They can't really accomplish this with Linux, but they could with Solaris.
The question is, would some other company with enough clout take Open Solaris under it's wings. From what I've heard, it does have a very good kernel for high volume transactional environments.
4) Install Linux and discover that you can't set the proper resolution for your monitor.
Huh? I've never had any problem with Linux recognizing my monitors. I've got it on a netbook, laptop and two desktops at home and on 60 desktops of various sizes and manufacturers at work.
I also had to reinstall a Windows laptop for a friend recently and was surprised at just how little hardware Windows recognizes. If you lose your manufacturer's restore disk with the drivers, you have to find them and download them from the internet. Window itself only recognized a VGA screen. You can waste a good weekend doing it.
There are other problems with X that I think they wanted to solve as well. I read a list of these somewhere but I can't remember what they were. I do know that JavaFX has been delayed on Linux and Solaris for the same reasons.
In the second category we had technology knowledgeable companies that wanted to transition to all Unix/Linux, and considered it important but not critical. IBM, Oracle, Sun (Sun Java desktop) being leading examples.
Huh? I was at Sun in Munich a couple of years ago and they were running most of their workstations and PC's on something other than Windows (Linux or Solaris). They also had 300 or so thin clients running off a couple of Sun servers.
You are only looking at the initial cost. Plus, as with most ground-breaking moves, there are alot of issues to work out at the beginning. Each progressive city to switch with have an easier time.
MS has made it their business policy to make switching hard. They've suceeded at that. But, it's not impossible and their worst nightmare is starting to come true: people are switching.
So are we going to require browsers to install with codec packs?
Support for ogg is in the browser itself and requires no additional libraries or plugins. Of course there may be browser vendors (not naming any names here) which don't support standards.
It's scary that you can be fined (or jailed) for doing something you cannot know is a crime. You have non-elected people creating and maintaining the list in secret.
the average computer user isn't going to spend months learning how to use a CLI and then hours compiling packages so that they can get a workable graphic interface to check their mail with
True, they'll use Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution from the last 8 or so years. You stick with Windows and let us know when you get your registry fixed.
I'm assuming that their trojan is a Windows program installed and running as a full privileged service or background process, much like anti-virus software.
Just go, Steve, and when you there, watch how the US finally revives the anti-trust suit against MS and restores real competition and innovation in the software market. We've got a govt which is starting to act like it's "for the people" and not for the campaign contributors.
Basically, then, if they offered to split the prize money with an insider they didn't break into the system. The service StrongWebMail itself isn't 100% secure. But, on the other hand, I guess I would feel pretty safe as a consumer knowing that, until someone finds an insider and is willing to pay, my email is prertty secure from outside hackers.
Slashdot Mirror
A recent administration... Obama and the auto industry? Bush and oil? Clinton signing the DMCA and Mickey Mouse copyright extension act? Could you narrow it down a bit?
All excellent examples. I should have written "recent administrations". It seems all of those were pretty susceptible to lobbying or campaign influence.
I'm not sure the auto industry is as applicable in monopoly terms since the auto industry is already pretty competitive so I don't see it as government's job to "rescue" them. Maybe it makes short-term sense, but not what I consider part of government's job of ensuring competition.
So basically you need government regulation to have a free market?
Yes, but only to the extent of preventing monopolies. If the government hadn't broken up ATT we'd still be paying $1/minute for long distance. In Germany the same thing happened after the government broke up the telephone monopoly. Prices went from ~4DM (~2$) a minute down to 10 cents a minute and are now flat unlimited rate for 10 Euros a month.
The free market doesn't work without competition.
No system is perfect. And free markets only work if they are free and there is sufficient competition. In "capitalism" it is the job of the government to ensure competition, but, that idea got pretty hammered in a recent administration, which felt it was the job of government to make sure campagne contributors can maintain their monopolies.
AFIK, they cannot unilaterally change the terms of an existing contract unless that is agreed to in the original contract. If it is, then a customer can opt out.
I was using Xenix at home in the late 80s on a 286 computer. It may have been designed for academics but it was build for a typical home PC of the time. Coherent was strictly designed for the home PC user.
Arg. I don't care how shit you think the Windows OS is, Gates' philanthropy is worth it.
I appreciate Gate's philanthropy but he gives less percentage of his wealth than many average Americans. Still, he is devoting his time to some important causes which I think is great.
It was also the second OS with the ability to do preemptive multitasking (the first being the Amiga ten years earlier).
Xenix had been around since the 1980. Coherent since 1980. These were true preemtive multi-tasking operating systems that ran on PC hardware.
Then think about how you're only powering one datacenter with them...
I think they are talking about a server farm which could be significantly bigger, depending on demand.
I've got my pictures and videos which I would like to be able to still view in my retirement and perhaps my grandkids will want to view them as well.
Or just maybe ... it might just be in Oracle's best interest to provide an OS platform, which they control, totally optimized for their DB from the kernel on up. Add Sun's servers into the mix and you've got a high-performance h/w, s/w environment tuned for Oracle. They can't really accomplish this with Linux, but they could with Solaris.
The question is, would some other company with enough clout take Open Solaris under it's wings. From what I've heard, it does have a very good kernel for high volume transactional environments.
4) Install Linux and discover that you can't set the proper resolution for your monitor.
Huh? I've never had any problem with Linux recognizing my monitors. I've got it on a netbook, laptop and two desktops at home and on 60 desktops of various sizes and manufacturers at work.
I also had to reinstall a Windows laptop for a friend recently and was surprised at just how little hardware Windows recognizes. If you lose your manufacturer's restore disk with the drivers, you have to find them and download them from the internet. Window itself only recognized a VGA screen. You can waste a good weekend doing it.
There are other problems with X that I think they wanted to solve as well. I read a list of these somewhere but I can't remember what they were. I do know that JavaFX has been delayed on Linux and Solaris for the same reasons.
In the second category we had technology knowledgeable companies that wanted to transition to all Unix/Linux, and considered it important but not critical. IBM, Oracle, Sun (Sun Java desktop) being leading examples.
Huh? I was at Sun in Munich a couple of years ago and they were running most of their workstations and PC's on something other than Windows (Linux or Solaris). They also had 300 or so thin clients running off a couple of Sun servers.
You certainly didn't see alot of Windows there.
What are you basing you statement on?
You are only looking at the initial cost. Plus, as with most ground-breaking moves, there are alot of issues to work out at the beginning. Each progressive city to switch with have an easier time.
MS has made it their business policy to make switching hard. They've suceeded at that. But, it's not impossible and their worst nightmare is starting to come true: people are switching.
So are we going to require browsers to install with codec packs?
Support for ogg is in the browser itself and requires no additional libraries or plugins. Of course there may be browser vendors (not naming any names here) which don't support standards.
I thought the ogg codec was embedded in Firefox 3.5 so you wouldn't need to download it even if your platform didn't support it.
It's scary that you can be fined (or jailed) for doing something you cannot know is a crime. You have non-elected people creating and maintaining the list in secret.
Interesting points and very informative. Thanks.
There will probably be copies of hosts files floating around soon and soon it will be against the law to make host files available.
"Nazi-Esque GPL" ???
The GPL merely says enjoy the freedom to use the software but grant that same freedom to others.
I suppose you find the Windows EULA grants you more freedom?
the average computer user isn't going to spend months learning how to use a CLI and then hours compiling packages so that they can get a workable graphic interface to check their mail with
True, they'll use Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution from the last 8 or so years. You stick with Windows and let us know when you get your registry fixed.
I'm assuming that their trojan is a Windows program installed and running as a full privileged service or background process, much like anti-virus software.
I'll bet they don't allow Linux.
Just go, Steve, and when you there, watch how the US finally revives the anti-trust suit against MS and restores real competition and innovation in the software market. We've got a govt which is starting to act like it's "for the people" and not for the campaign contributors.
Basically, then, if they offered to split the prize money with an insider they didn't break into the system. The service StrongWebMail itself isn't 100% secure. But, on the other hand, I guess I would feel pretty safe as a consumer knowing that, until someone finds an insider and is willing to pay, my email is prertty secure from outside hackers.