Since the Walled Garden makes pricing information a state secret, it's kind of hard too really. At least with Amazon, I can see if any given new movie can be "rented". All I need is a standard web browser. It doesn't matter if my display platform is supported or not.
Although the idea that a DVD is "clunky", is just mindless elitist claptrap. You stick it in the device and it plays. That's fairly simple really. If not for compulsory ads, there would be no real reason to seek out something else for a rental.
Streaming services and Virtual Jukeboxes are more advantageous for things you are going to watch more than once.
We already have Apple. Thus anyone trying to be an Apple wannabe in the Linux community is redundant.
Not that being Apple has done that much good for their computing platform. They are still the same marginal also-ran that they have been since before Linux ever started.
No one is interested in corporate megalomania. We already have enough corpses of the companies that tried to do things in all of the ways that "helpful" people think Linux should.
One party "in charge" just makes Linux an easier target.
I just pulled up one of these websites and it put me at about 20 miles off my actual location. Although it's not as bad as ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD, it's hardly very accurate.
A defense attorney could have a lot of fun with this. Perhaps a defense attorney already did and that's what led to this ruling.
They can perhaps identify a particular household. Unless you live alone, that doesn't reasonably define a single person. It defines a number of people. How do you decide which party to sue?
Add mobile devices including laptops into the mix and a street address really doesn't tell you anything.
It's like you've got a bus full of hackers and perhaps one of them is your perp. You can't definitively pin the infraction on any single person on the bus. It could have been any of them.
Single digit market share really isn't "hugely successful". MacOS based on Unix really isn't that much more successful than MacOS NOT based on Unix. Whatever "success" this alleged Unix has had really has nothing to do with it's Unix-ness. What meagre success it has had has been being tied to a well established brand name that's about as far away from Unix as you can get.
What's the point of a "successful Linux" if it abandons all of the useful design ideas of Unix?
At best, something like that is redundant. You can go somewhere else and buy that if you really want that. There's no need to pervert someone else's platform.
> People need to share their windows (efficiently, not with VNC) for teleconferencing. > > Both OS X and Windows achieved these by focusing on the display server.
No. MacOS did not achieve this. Quit trying the bullshit of associating your crap with Windows and expecting no one to call you out on it. Screen sharing on MacOS is a big festering pile.
Having used it is why I don't want Apple wannabes any where near by user experience. They're idiots blindly following even bigger idiots.
X may need replaced. Except Wayland and Mir are no X replacement. Neither is Quartz.
> X.org is not "feature complete" in any meaningful sense. It is incapable of doing the kind of GPU-accelerated, alpha-blended compositing
It's fascinating what the eggheads decide to fixate on. This is really where the problem starts. Instead of focusing on practical features, you're fixating on the most trivial sort of nonsense and eye candy possible. Most normal people ignore that stuff or turn it off completely.
It's nice that you are finally noticing these things only about 15 years since the Englightement window manager was created but some of us actually have work to do.
No. People object to the idea that everything is a "narrative".
Journalism is no longer about facts. It's just another form of fiction. This is what the fixation over "narrative" has done to journalism. Meanwhile, so-called professionals still attempt to pretend that they are objective.
The old school party rags were at least honest about their bias.
> Free hypocrisy points to all the posters who bash these guys but would gladly sign up for the Obama brown-shirt core to enforce "fairness" and "equality" on Fox new
I think these people only exist in your own mind. It's like many things that Tea Baggers like to believe in.
That's probably what it's really for. It's something to stir up the faithful and give them something fear. Otherwise they might assimilate or just wander off to another church.
The way evangelicals treat evolution always reminded me of 1984.
> If you've never used any variety of Linux before, you will need training.
That's true across the board. That's the problem with the usual propaganda that you can be a total clueless idiot and still be a Windows admin. The same skill, aptitude, and inclination that's required to be a Unix admin is also required to be a COMPETENT NT admin.
Otherwise you're just kidding yourself and sitting on a a time bomb.
Windows just makes it easier to kid yourself. It makes it look easy and gives the appearance that you can ignore the underlying details.
The NT admins that aren't just a waste of skin are capable of getting Unix certs just for lulz.
> Banks aren't in the business of manufacturing ATM machines, they buy them.
The same logic applies regardless of whether or not you are building the device yourself or buying it from someone else.
This Microsoft style approach to "real work" is why we desperately needed something, anything to blunt Microsoft's assimilation of server and embedded computing. Better options need to be available.
This is the perfect example of why gratis doesn't mean so much. The really important thing here is that the user or even the "integrator" can have complete control of the system. They don't have to worry about ANYONE else interfering with the degree of control they want and the features that they want to be active.
The people building the ATM are in total control. For a device like an ATM, that's really how it should be.
> Oh if only Microsoft had given them more than like 10 years notice of end-of-support, they might have had time to prepare....
I've been in shops where the key mission critical app was 30 years old. All of the shiny new MBAs would come in and try and replace that thing with newer tech but would ultimately fail. The 30 year old product did the job and the shiny new things couldn't.
ATMs are such a key part of their business that it really makes no sense for them to not be in total control.
Linux allows that.
Although they should have used a more industrial product to begin with. The choice really shouldn't be between Linux and Microsoft. There should be better targeted options and the market should have allowed those to thrive.
> Don't forget U.S. corporate tax rates which are the highest in the world,
Stop swimming in the Fox News Kool-aid.
The US tax code is specifically set up to be easy on anyone that's not a working stiff. Those "published rates" will quickly get reduced to nothing as all manner of legal loopholes and exceptions are applied to corporations that don't apply to individuals.
Even a single working person can benefit greatly from being reclassified as something other than a wage earner.
If you think US corporate tax rates are high, you really have no clue at all about how things really work.
Not quite. Corporations are quite happy to lobby for increased government interference when it suits them. They want the government to stay out of their way but they are more than happy to lobby for measures that increase government meddling in a way that harms competition.
> There's no clear distinction between design and code any more, therefore no clear distinction between engineers and programmers.
That's probably the single best reason to treat "software engineering" as an oxymoron.
The industry is still very immature an there doesn't seem any prospect of that changing any time soon. If anything, things may be getting worse rather than better.
...so that puts a plumber ahead of a programmer in terms of genuine credentials. A plumber is more like an engineer in this regard than a programmer is.
That certain special faction of the peanut gallery will just LOVE that. '-)
No, not really. Companies are complaining about lack of supply and are unwilling to do anything about it when they hold most of the power and have most of the resources. They want to treat people like dirt and they're surprised it's biting them in the butt.
Of course American companies cooperated. What exactly were they supposed to do?
"Nice company you've got there. It would be a shame if anything happened to it."
It would have been nice if someone would have shown some spine here. However, the fact that no one had the balls to stand up to the NSA really doesn't get them off the hook for anything.
> and I think any rational person can see that the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
You are a corporate toadie and a moron. There is nothing "obvious" about this situation in rational terms. This is a pathetically weak trademark that never should have been granted. This action does NOTHING to protect the consumer. This is just another example of overly expansive notions of "intellectual property" being used to stifle competition and to AVOID focusing on or improving the product.
Bullshit like this will cause progress to grind to a halt because it does nothing but service the interest of entrenched players.
The abuse of a weak trademark benefits no one but a company willing to ignore their real point for existing.
> You dont think coca-cola would be upset if a product came out called coka-cola in a red and white can?
Except this wasn't anything like that.
Coke Inc. Certainly shouldn't be able to "own" the colors red and white.
Although Coke does have a distinctive enough bottle design to qualify for a genuine trademark. Ironically you overlooked it in your rush to fellate your corporate masters.
Slashdot Mirror
Since the Walled Garden makes pricing information a state secret, it's kind of hard too really. At least with Amazon, I can see if any given new movie can be "rented". All I need is a standard web browser. It doesn't matter if my display platform is supported or not.
Although the idea that a DVD is "clunky", is just mindless elitist claptrap. You stick it in the device and it plays. That's fairly simple really. If not for compulsory ads, there would be no real reason to seek out something else for a rental.
Streaming services and Virtual Jukeboxes are more advantageous for things you are going to watch more than once.
We already have Apple. Thus anyone trying to be an Apple wannabe in the Linux community is redundant.
Not that being Apple has done that much good for their computing platform. They are still the same marginal also-ran that they have been since before Linux ever started.
No one is interested in corporate megalomania. We already have enough corpses of the companies that tried to do things in all of the ways that "helpful" people think Linux should.
One party "in charge" just makes Linux an easier target.
I just pulled up one of these websites and it put me at about 20 miles off my actual location. Although it's not as bad as ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD, it's hardly very accurate.
A defense attorney could have a lot of fun with this. Perhaps a defense attorney already did and that's what led to this ruling.
No. Houses are an entirely different analogy.
They can perhaps identify a particular household. Unless you live alone, that doesn't reasonably define a single person. It defines a number of people. How do you decide which party to sue?
Add mobile devices including laptops into the mix and a street address really doesn't tell you anything.
It's like you've got a bus full of hackers and perhaps one of them is your perp. You can't definitively pin the infraction on any single person on the bus. It could have been any of them.
Single digit market share really isn't "hugely successful". MacOS based on Unix really isn't that much more successful than MacOS NOT based on Unix. Whatever "success" this alleged Unix has had really has nothing to do with it's Unix-ness. What meagre success it has had has been being tied to a well established brand name that's about as far away from Unix as you can get.
What's the point of a "successful Linux" if it abandons all of the useful design ideas of Unix?
At best, something like that is redundant. You can go somewhere else and buy that if you really want that. There's no need to pervert someone else's platform.
> People need to share their windows (efficiently, not with VNC) for teleconferencing.
>
> Both OS X and Windows achieved these by focusing on the display server.
No. MacOS did not achieve this. Quit trying the bullshit of associating your crap with Windows and expecting no one to call you out on it. Screen sharing on MacOS is a big festering pile.
Having used it is why I don't want Apple wannabes any where near by user experience. They're idiots blindly following even bigger idiots.
X may need replaced. Except Wayland and Mir are no X replacement. Neither is Quartz.
> X.org is not "feature complete" in any meaningful sense. It is incapable of doing the kind of GPU-accelerated, alpha-blended compositing
It's fascinating what the eggheads decide to fixate on. This is really where the problem starts. Instead of focusing on practical features, you're fixating on the most trivial sort of nonsense and eye candy possible. Most normal people ignore that stuff or turn it off completely.
It's nice that you are finally noticing these things only about 15 years since the Englightement window manager was created but some of us actually have work to do.
No. People object to the idea that everything is a "narrative".
Journalism is no longer about facts. It's just another form of fiction. This is what the fixation over "narrative" has done to journalism. Meanwhile, so-called professionals still attempt to pretend that they are objective.
The old school party rags were at least honest about their bias.
I also seem to recall spectacular failures in the media of the F-14, the F16, and the F-18s.
> Free hypocrisy points to all the posters who bash these guys but would gladly sign up for the Obama brown-shirt core to enforce "fairness" and "equality" on Fox new
I think these people only exist in your own mind. It's like many things that Tea Baggers like to believe in.
You can equate creationism to war propaganda.
That's probably what it's really for. It's something to stir up the faithful and give them something fear. Otherwise they might assimilate or just wander off to another church.
The way evangelicals treat evolution always reminded me of 1984.
> If you've never used any variety of Linux before, you will need training.
That's true across the board. That's the problem with the usual propaganda that you can be a total clueless idiot and still be a Windows admin. The same skill, aptitude, and inclination that's required to be a Unix admin is also required to be a COMPETENT NT admin.
Otherwise you're just kidding yourself and sitting on a a time bomb.
Windows just makes it easier to kid yourself. It makes it look easy and gives the appearance that you can ignore the underlying details.
The NT admins that aren't just a waste of skin are capable of getting Unix certs just for lulz.
> Banks aren't in the business of manufacturing ATM machines, they buy them.
The same logic applies regardless of whether or not you are building the device yourself or buying it from someone else.
This Microsoft style approach to "real work" is why we desperately needed something, anything to blunt Microsoft's assimilation of server and embedded computing. Better options need to be available.
> They originally chose XP because it had a much lower cost of entry than anything else
Yes. Because that is certainly an appropriate approach to take with a machine that dispenses CASH.
The Eugene Crabs mentality is OK for consumer toys and is pretty much completely inappropriate for anything more serious than that.
No. Not really. Even a competent NT admin has to some clue. Otherwise you're just kidding yourself and sitting on a ticking time bomb.
This is the perfect example of why gratis doesn't mean so much. The really important thing here is that the user or even the "integrator" can have complete control of the system. They don't have to worry about ANYONE else interfering with the degree of control they want and the features that they want to be active.
The people building the ATM are in total control. For a device like an ATM, that's really how it should be.
> Oh if only Microsoft had given them more than like 10 years notice of end-of-support, they might have had time to prepare....
I've been in shops where the key mission critical app was 30 years old. All of the shiny new MBAs would come in and try and replace that thing with newer tech but would ultimately fail. The 30 year old product did the job and the shiny new things couldn't.
ATMs are such a key part of their business that it really makes no sense for them to not be in total control.
Linux allows that.
Although they should have used a more industrial product to begin with. The choice really shouldn't be between Linux and Microsoft. There should be better targeted options and the market should have allowed those to thrive.
> Don't forget U.S. corporate tax rates which are the highest in the world,
Stop swimming in the Fox News Kool-aid.
The US tax code is specifically set up to be easy on anyone that's not a working stiff. Those "published rates" will quickly get reduced to nothing as all manner of legal loopholes and exceptions are applied to corporations that don't apply to individuals.
Even a single working person can benefit greatly from being reclassified as something other than a wage earner.
If you think US corporate tax rates are high, you really have no clue at all about how things really work.
Not quite. Corporations are quite happy to lobby for increased government interference when it suits them. They want the government to stay out of their way but they are more than happy to lobby for measures that increase government meddling in a way that harms competition.
> There's no clear distinction between design and code any more, therefore no clear distinction between engineers and programmers.
That's probably the single best reason to treat "software engineering" as an oxymoron.
The industry is still very immature an there doesn't seem any prospect of that changing any time soon. If anything, things may be getting worse rather than better.
...so that puts a plumber ahead of a programmer in terms of genuine credentials. A plumber is more like an engineer in this regard than a programmer is.
That certain special faction of the peanut gallery will just LOVE that. '-)
No, not really. Companies are complaining about lack of supply and are unwilling to do anything about it when they hold most of the power and have most of the resources. They want to treat people like dirt and they're surprised it's biting them in the butt.
Of course American companies cooperated. What exactly were they supposed to do?
"Nice company you've got there. It would be a shame if anything happened to it."
It would have been nice if someone would have shown some spine here. However, the fact that no one had the balls to stand up to the NSA really doesn't get them off the hook for anything.
> and I think any rational person can see that the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
You are a corporate toadie and a moron. There is nothing "obvious" about this situation in rational terms. This is a pathetically weak trademark that never should have been granted. This action does NOTHING to protect the consumer. This is just another example of overly expansive notions of "intellectual property" being used to stifle competition and to AVOID focusing on or improving the product.
Bullshit like this will cause progress to grind to a halt because it does nothing but service the interest of entrenched players.
The abuse of a weak trademark benefits no one but a company willing to ignore their real point for existing.
> You dont think coca-cola would be upset if a product came out called coka-cola in a red and white can?
Except this wasn't anything like that.
Coke Inc. Certainly shouldn't be able to "own" the colors red and white.
Although Coke does have a distinctive enough bottle design to qualify for a genuine trademark. Ironically you overlooked it in your rush to fellate your corporate masters.