How on earth CAN one compare open source to closed source software in any meaningful way when it comes to competition? Can someone point me at a single Open sourced project that offers the same, or at least equivalent, service as the closed source version? I'm not just talking about technical specifications or functionality of the app itself, but also service, support, AND legal responsibility.
Just because we as informed users are able to make use of equivalent FUNCTIONALITY it does not mean that it is an equivalent good in terms of the commercial world. Can we say that a program where the creating company is liable for the effects of its software on your system is truely equivalent in the business world versus the exact same functionality but "NO RESPONSIBILITY, IN WHOLE OR IN PART.." yadda yadda yadda.
Note that I'm not saying open source is bad, or that closed source is better, merely that the two tend to be completely different when you look at all sides.
am i totally out of sync (end of a long workday) or did i nail it ? I think the saddest thing for SCO from all of this is the fact that that is actually a valid question.
So, that would make them the most naive member of the FCC they had? or is she just good at acting surprised...
I look forward to the restructuring of the FCC after this where they purge the evil and the misguided statistics....because i'm absolutely sure that will happen.
and no, i'm definitely not being sarcastic. at all.
Remember though, they have the added benefit of drawing off research from NASA and European space agencies. Breaking into a developed field is much different than pioneering it, and many of the problems during the mercury/gemini era have been not only solved, but have had solutions refined over the years since. I somehow find it unlikely that the solutions being used today are the same, in both method and materials, as those used in the 60s and 70s. Information showing otherwise would be appreciated if available.
I sincerely doubt a direct correlation between time and effort expended by NASA has much bearing on their likelyhood for success for manned moon missions and such. It has more to do with how they well are making use of what is already "known", and managing to purchase or leverage experts who have already worked on such projects.
This is also the exact reason why i get a little annoyed with Second Life being seen as such an innovation. The larger chunk of the people still playing UO, especially on the OSI servers, use it in essentially the same way. It has become much more of a graphical IRC than the game it was originally (especially with the death of unregulated [read: player regulated] pvp).
This concept wasnt even new when UO came out, remember such things as Meridian 59? MUD's? granted MUD's werent graphical but it was still a virtual representation of physical space and social contact.
Not that I see second life's engine becoming available as OSS as a bad thing, but can someone out there point out to me what Second Life has done that is so innovative in this medium? I can see the value of popularizing virtual contact, especially for such things as telecommute meetings and Seaquest DSV flashbacks, but i dont see the technological innovation that everyone seems to be praising them for.
"I find it somewhat hard to believe but this story over at PC world, indicates that the ipod has sold over 100 million units. It also asks how many are broken and replaced which makes me believe the number may be more accurate." A) More accurate than what?
B) Hard to believe? The company is making a statement of fact flat out, and just not including the caveats such as replacement or upgrade purchases.
Why is this at all confusing to ANYONE. If you EARN INCOME from a source, you DECLARE IT AND PAY TAXES ON IT in YOUR HOST COUNTRY. Just because people arent thinking to declare their farmed gold income does NOT meant that we need new legislation to remind them.
This is not complicated. This is not a problem. Am I completely insane here?
Funny if nothing else, i swear to god thats the first car analogy i've seen in months that was even CLOSE to a proper parallel, and this is spot on.
Of course this still does not mean that anything will change, nor does it mean future computer purchases and upgrades will guarantee microsoft its current market share in the future.
If anything, I hope this is that 'clue-in' year we've all been waiting for as a turning point. Seems companies are finding it harder and harder to obfuscate their products and services now that people can *gasp* confer with other consumers more and more.
Just consider Westray or Yujialing....or if you want a more domestic and recent alternative, Consider Sago west virginia.
First you get the data, then you get the opinion, then you get the point.
Oh and to get you started on your quest to become self-informed check here. And before you start comparing numbers, search for related incidents to these.
Let me know what you 'consider' safer AFTER check for other related disasters in both industries.
Many academic IT departments are suggesting that students and teachers either use an alternative browser such as FireFox or Opera, or disable the feature altogether. but I'm somehow not shedding many tears over this issue.
so, since the students works are the primary resource for TurnItIn to remain viable, how much of a cut should the clean students get for their work? or should turnitin be making a profit off others materials with no recompense for those who supply them with the means to do so?
And why should the students have egg on their face for not wanting others to profit from their works with no compensation?
Just curious since the tone of your post seems to assume that the students are in the wrong in some way.
Slashdot Mirror
How on earth CAN one compare open source to closed source software in any meaningful way when it comes to competition? Can someone point me at a single Open sourced project that offers the same, or at least equivalent, service as the closed source version? I'm not just talking about technical specifications or functionality of the app itself, but also service, support, AND legal responsibility.
Just because we as informed users are able to make use of equivalent FUNCTIONALITY it does not mean that it is an equivalent good in terms of the commercial world. Can we say that a program where the creating company is liable for the effects of its software on your system is truely equivalent in the business world versus the exact same functionality but "NO RESPONSIBILITY, IN WHOLE OR IN PART.." yadda yadda yadda.
Note that I'm not saying open source is bad, or that closed source is better, merely that the two tend to be completely different when you look at all sides.
Well you know...In Soviet Russia...
No Way!
tsk tsk,
dont forget! hate leads to suffering!
Gah, s/she/he/
So, that would make them the most naive member of the FCC they had? or is she just good at acting surprised...
I look forward to the restructuring of the FCC after this where they purge the evil and the misguided statistics....because i'm absolutely sure that will happen.
and no, i'm definitely not being sarcastic. at all.
Remember though, they have the added benefit of drawing off research from NASA and European space agencies. Breaking into a developed field is much different than pioneering it, and many of the problems during the mercury/gemini era have been not only solved, but have had solutions refined over the years since. I somehow find it unlikely that the solutions being used today are the same, in both method and materials, as those used in the 60s and 70s. Information showing otherwise would be appreciated if available.
I sincerely doubt a direct correlation between time and effort expended by NASA has much bearing on their likelyhood for success for manned moon missions and such. It has more to do with how they well are making use of what is already "known", and managing to purchase or leverage experts who have already worked on such projects.
Ding Ding Ding.
This is also the exact reason why i get a little annoyed with Second Life being seen as such an innovation. The larger chunk of the people still playing UO, especially on the OSI servers, use it in essentially the same way. It has become much more of a graphical IRC than the game it was originally (especially with the death of unregulated [read: player regulated] pvp).
This concept wasnt even new when UO came out, remember such things as Meridian 59? MUD's? granted MUD's werent graphical but it was still a virtual representation of physical space and social contact.
Not that I see second life's engine becoming available as OSS as a bad thing, but can someone out there point out to me what Second Life has done that is so innovative in this medium? I can see the value of popularizing virtual contact, especially for such things as telecommute meetings and Seaquest DSV flashbacks, but i dont see the technological innovation that everyone seems to be praising them for.
Now thats a scary uniform.
What you're saying really IS the purpose of this material, those who are confusing you took the usual rtfa-less slashdot tangent and ran with it.
s/minors/americans in general/
As opposed to reading statements of the obvious, just absorb the details yourself and draw your own conclusions from Apple's Press Release.
B) Hard to believe? The company is making a statement of fact flat out, and just not including the caveats such as replacement or upgrade purchases.
Slow. News. Day.
Why is this at all confusing to ANYONE. If you EARN INCOME from a source, you DECLARE IT AND PAY TAXES ON IT in YOUR HOST COUNTRY. Just because people arent thinking to declare their farmed gold income does NOT meant that we need new legislation to remind them.
This is not complicated. This is not a problem. Am I completely insane here?
Funny if nothing else, i swear to god thats the first car analogy i've seen in months that was even CLOSE to a proper parallel, and this is spot on.
Of course this still does not mean that anything will change, nor does it mean future computer purchases and upgrades will guarantee microsoft its current market share in the future.
If anything, I hope this is that 'clue-in' year we've all been waiting for as a turning point. Seems companies are finding it harder and harder to obfuscate their products and services now that people can *gasp* confer with other consumers more and more.
Just consider Chernobyl?
Just consider Westray or Yujialing....or if you want a more domestic and recent alternative, Consider Sago west virginia.
First you get the data, then you get the opinion, then you get the point.
Oh and to get you started on your quest to become self-informed check here. And before you start comparing numbers, search for related incidents to these.
Let me know what you 'consider' safer AFTER check for other related disasters in both industries.
Or, its advocacy like this that gives idiocy a bad name.
tolerance versus significance versus discretion in a no holds bar battle royale, SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY!
so, since the students works are the primary resource for TurnItIn to remain viable, how much of a cut should the clean students get for their work? or should turnitin be making a profit off others materials with no recompense for those who supply them with the means to do so?
And why should the students have egg on their face for not wanting others to profit from their works with no compensation?
Just curious since the tone of your post seems to assume that the students are in the wrong in some way.
Corsican indeed.