The part of human nature that makes me especially sick is that which believes everything their television and government tells them. Another part of human nature that is annoying is hypocritical part which puts a blind eye to Northern Ireland yet bumbles around interefering with non-allied countries. Another part of human nature that is troubling is the part that prefers to spend money on blowing things up rather than supplying aid and education to those who need it.
Of course, my favourite part of human nature is that which destroys small european natures to cover up a president's latest sexual adventures...
Microsoft does not have a 'lasting monopoly' on anything. Microsoft has not yet existed long enough to be capable of having a 'lasting monopoly.'
Well, Microsoft has been in existence for a little over 10 years or so (maybe 15 I don't know), right?.. And the last 4 or 5 years they have held a monopoly over the PC operating system market (I'll pretend PC/DOS from IBM was a competitor earlier than that). I'd say anything over 1 year in the computer industry is "lasting." In other industries that might not be true, but in the computer industry it seems everything happens several times faster and with several times the profit of "normal" industries.
I know this is comparing apples to oranges, but ISDN technology is older than Microsoft's ownership of DOS.
Apples and oranges, right. I don't see how this relates at all.
While personally I don't think it is necessary for the government to break up microsoft (they will lose in the end, simply because their products are inferior) I do think that something should be done about their coercive licensing (Computer manufacturers are economically punished by microsoft if they don't install Windows on every system they sell).
IMO, as long as I have to pay the "Windows tax" at my local computer store whenever I buy a system, Microsoft has a monopoly. If informed customers are given a REAL CHOICE, they will choose the technically superior product (hint: not Windows).
I do not think the BSD license is a good idea, nor do I think that the artistic license is a good idea.
I know this is not the topic of the essay, but I'm interested in your reasons for not liking these licenses. To me BSD/Artistic seem MORE free than GPL (because they are less coercive).
Yes, and Red Hat makes most of their money on CD sales, not support. (and now Certification Programs, which aren't GPL, btw) If Red Hat linux distribution wasn't so huge they wouldn't be making a cent! Troll Tech's QT library is small enough that it can be downloaded via modem and so they won't be able to make money on CD sales. They have to make money somehow! Charging non-free customers to use QT seems reasonable to me.
Couldn't this effort be better spent elsewhere? It seems like a waste of time to me. If a business wants to make money by selling a program that uses Qt, they should have to pay Troll Tech! The Troll Tech programmers need to eat!
Sorry folks, but an individual shouldn't have a.COM domain. It just doesn't make any sense. COM is for businesses not personal home pages! (I get equally pissed when I see a business on an.ORG domain)
Not to mention the default Slackware install is much less secure than any other distributions.. For example, systat enabled in inetd.. huh??? Most unixes don't have stupid stuff like this enabled by default.
FreeBSD doesn't have SVGAlib. They have something that is equivalent to SVGAlib (libvgl?) but I don't know of any programs that support it... (which is a shame, I'd love to use zgv on freebsd)
There is a debian package of Mozilla if you have trouble getting it to run yourself. I think the package is a little out of date though... It runs, but seems to be much slower than the 4.5 series...
IE 5 seems to have been a flop, but I'm still not going to use netscape on Windows until they make a navigator-only 4.5+ version!! When are they going to realize that no one wants to use their damn crappy email and news clients.
Bad example. RedHat does not require all distributions of Linux to be called "RedHat Linux" (otherwise we'd have "Stampede Redhat") whereas RMS wants all distributions to call themselves "GNU/Linux."
Slashdot Mirror
The part of human nature that makes me especially sick is that which believes everything their television and government tells them. Another part of human nature that is annoying is hypocritical part which puts a blind eye to Northern Ireland yet bumbles around interefering with non-allied countries. Another part of human nature that is troubling is the part that prefers to spend money on blowing things up rather than supplying aid and education to those who need it.
Of course, my favourite part of human nature is that which destroys small european natures to cover up a president's latest sexual adventures...
Well, Microsoft has been in existence for a little over 10 years or so (maybe 15 I don't know), right? .. And the last 4 or 5 years they have held a monopoly over the PC operating system market (I'll pretend PC/DOS from IBM was a competitor earlier than that). I'd say anything over 1 year in the computer industry is "lasting." In other industries that might not be true, but in the computer industry it seems everything happens several times faster and with several times the profit of "normal" industries.
I know this is comparing apples to oranges, but ISDN technology is older than Microsoft's ownership of DOS.
Apples and oranges, right. I don't see how this relates at all.
While personally I don't think it is necessary for the government to break up microsoft (they will lose in the end, simply because their products are inferior) I do think that something should be done about their coercive licensing (Computer manufacturers are economically punished by microsoft if they don't install Windows on every system they sell).
IMO, as long as I have to pay the "Windows tax" at my local computer store whenever I buy a system, Microsoft has a monopoly. If informed customers are given a REAL CHOICE, they will choose the technically superior product (hint: not Windows).
No, I don't think that is the type of 'enforcement' the quote's author meant..
I know this is not the topic of the essay, but I'm interested in your reasons for not liking these licenses. To me BSD/Artistic seem MORE free than GPL (because they are less coercive).
Microsoft is government enforced? News to me..
Yes, and Red Hat makes most of their money on CD sales, not support. (and now Certification Programs, which aren't GPL, btw) If Red Hat linux distribution wasn't so huge they wouldn't be making a cent! Troll Tech's QT library is small enough that it can be downloaded via modem and so they won't be able to make money on CD sales. They have to make money somehow! Charging non-free customers to use QT seems reasonable to me.
Whenever KDE reaches 2.0 :P
The Linux|Apache|BSD programmers are doing at as a hobby, not as their sole source of income.
Couldn't this effort be better spent elsewhere? It seems like a waste of time to me. If a business wants to make money by selling a program that uses Qt, they should have to pay Troll Tech! The Troll Tech programmers need to eat!
DOS...
Where do these IRC talks take place?
ORG.. or perhaps something else.. if we could break the internic monopoly.
Why is this comment +2 ???
Sorry folks, but an individual shouldn't have a .COM domain. It just doesn't make any sense. COM is for businesses not personal home pages! (I get equally pissed when I see a business on an .ORG domain)
Right on. Who cares.
Debian has glibc 2.1 in their unstable branch (the next release). I think.
Not to mention the default Slackware install is much less secure than any other distributions.. For example, systat enabled in inetd.. huh??? Most unixes don't have stupid stuff like this enabled by default.
I am running kfm in WindowMaker with no problems...
I don't have a link to LSB but I don't think it goes as far as default window manager. It is more for very basic system utilities and libraries.
While you're at it try the web browser built into kfm! While I don't use KDE, I love their web browser (Konquerer?)! Who needs netscape???
FreeBSD doesn't have SVGAlib. They have something that is equivalent to SVGAlib (libvgl?) but I don't know of any programs that support it... (which is a shame, I'd love to use zgv on freebsd)
There is a debian package of Mozilla if you have trouble getting it to run yourself. I think the package is a little out of date though... It runs, but seems to be much slower than the 4.5 series...
IE 5 seems to have been a flop, but I'm still not going to use netscape on Windows until they make a navigator-only 4.5+ version!! When are they going to realize that no one wants to use their damn crappy email and news clients.
Great work!
Bad example. RedHat does not require all distributions of Linux to be called "RedHat Linux" (otherwise we'd have "Stampede Redhat") whereas RMS wants all distributions to call themselves "GNU/Linux."