No, they need OOo. Of all the competitors to Office, OOo is the most used one. I know a good amount of people who use OOo and most are even Windows users, yet I know of no one that uses Google Docs, ThinkFree, or Zoho. I'm sure there are some users, but no where near as many as OOo.
But how many businesses use e-mail? A bunch. How many use even plain-text e-mails? A good amount. How many use Windows and don't keep up with security patches? A ton. How many do you think have an outdated version of Apache running the webserver they have? One with a known flaw? How many even use unencrypted wireless networks? Or weak passwords? There are a lot more things the businesses have to and should worry about than a reputable company (Google) being hacked or broken into by a competitor.
I don't think that web apps will ever replace desktop apps for a while. First off, the issue of screen resolution. It is really easy to get OOo to work on my EEE PC even if it wasn't already installed, on the other hand, Google maps shrinks to a tiny little box. And even though decreasing the size in Firefox 3 makes it bigger, the font size becomes too tiny to even read. That's not to mention all the mobile devices that can have a ported version of OOo or Office to them with a customized interface to work well with each device while the web-based app doesn't cut it because it is too small. Will all these bugs be ironed out in the next 5-10 years, I would think so. But for now, no web app is ready to take on the desktop environment until it works well with various screen resolutions. (Google docs doesn't suffer from this problem, but Google maps does and I haven't tried either ThinkFree nor Zoho)
Yes, I've used Opera a few times and think it is ok, but really I don't like the closed source aspect of it. Sure it is secure, but if it was the dominant browser, I think it would have as many exploitable holes as IE does now, Firefox and Safari both have open source going for them.
But, neither Opera nor Safari are used as much as Firefox. And Safari and Opera are both non-free so they are more reluctant to give detailed fix reports.
Or, as I stated in a previous post, it would make it a whole lot easier to control people. Think of it this way, educate in all the schools that you search the web with *insert government controlled website here*, that only searches government-approved sites. Now, some person is bound to know about other search engines such as Google, so you take Google, and rather then having a Google search, you use the same search as the government-controlled website one, only it looks like Google, repeat for all other search engines. Now, block all websites you don't want people to access, however rather then "This page has been blocked by Cuba" you add in a complex error message that the average citizen will think that the site is down or something like that. A person is much more likely to try to get around a block than to deal with an error message.
They didn't need it until recently because until recently very few people were allowed to even have Internet (or cell phones or many types of things that allow people to communicate with the outside world).
Remember this is Cuba we're talking about, not some free Socialist utopia...
But honestly, if you are going to control people, the internet would be an excellent tool to have. Think about it, educate people in public schools that you go to *insert government controlled website here* to search for everything. Use that to give people propaganda, and replace popular search engines such as Google and Yahoo with Cuba-controlled ones that look like Google and act like Google but only searches the government sites. For just about anything else, just put a generic error such as a "time out error". The best way to control the public isn't to make it look like they have such a horrible life, but that they believe they have the best life out there so there is no use trying to find a better life.
Hmmm... Lets see... Which is the better way to get rid of a dictatorship A) don't allow any material into the country that tells of a better life or B) Flood Cuba's shores with artists, with musicians, give them Google, and the Wikis, give them/., blogs, The Pirate Bay, give them an uncensored internet and things start working themselves out. Think of it this way, if after we nuked Japan, we didn't help rebuild, and still called it evil, Japan would have most likely rebuilt a dictator-style empire. But we didn't do that, we gave them animation which turned into Anime, we gave them our technology which was taken and now Japan is a leader in technology. We could have done the same with Cuba, but instead we preferred to call names and run and hide.
Wow a +5 funny to you. But in all seriousness, why would NASA want to start fires to put out in the first place? NASA's public opinion isn't that low for most of US citizens, now if Bush was out there with matches and a fire extinguisher we might all understand....
Loyalty? You said it yourself, the highest bidder wins which is not someone you want to hire.
Most of these people honor a contract. And after all, if there is a flaw in the code, they will be the first one that gets blamed. And I highly doubt that third-parties would pay to sabotage code for a police department or business. Very few governments/citizens care about a police department, and other businesses don't want a paper trail leading them to the downfall of a competitor. And other hackers won't think it fun to pay someone to inject a vulnerability.
Think of people like him as code mercenaries. They go to the highest bidder. Now, he is a person you don't want working against you, so why not hire him? Now, granted you would be stupid to give him the root password of your server, but for security, do you want some guy who has only read about rootkits and trying to protect your system from them, or a guy who writes rootkits. Would you rather have a guy who has read about programming, or say Linus Torvalds? This man is very accomplished and talented as this shows. So it is either hire him and earn loyalty for the term of the contract, or he might just hack you. Which one do you want?
... paying everyone who forwards an e-mail message $245.00
And you will need it too, because the price for Windows 7 is going to be $600 for the upgrade-from-Vista-doesn't-do-anything version and the $2000 for the does-the-same-as-XP-version
Microsoft knows that the best way to secure future high speed users is to have them as current dialup users.
I don't think MS even has a high-speed internet service. And anyways the reason that 99.999% of people are stuck on dial up is because there is no high-speed internet where they live (and for anyone living outside of a rural town, the hope of getting high-speed internet is very slim)
I cannot understand why Debian hasn't forked Linux.
There are a lot of reasons. Number 1, support. Even today it is hard to find a place that will support Linux without it being a major vendor of Linux itself and Debian being a community project couldn't or wouldn't have commercial support. Number 2, bugfixes, the Debian project is big, but there is so much that goes into the Debian OS other than the kernel and the Linux development team is huge. Number 3, image, the Debian project is well known for drama over minor things (like having to fork Firefox because of logo issues) and forking the kernel would make it seem that Debian is making an incompatible OS. Number 4, popularity, Debian is a well-used OS, but Ubuntu is much more popular and uses Debian as a base, now that is all good and well, but Debian can't risk having half the development team it has switch sides to Ubuntu over a fork. So no, Debian has no reason to fork the kernel.
Yes, I know that, but the post which I was referring too basically called Linux obscure with hidden things and confusing names, and so I used that point to get my point across.
Why bother with Linux?, get a proper OS. You know, one that doesn't make you create everything yourself, and hide stuff with obscure names in obscure locations, unique for the developer who shat it out.
BeOS died long ago. And AmigaOS runs on specialized hardware. And OS X is UNIX-based so it does the "hide stuff with obscure names in obscure locations" and runs offically only on specialized hardware. And don't even get me started with Windows... So basically, all competition for OSes died after Windows 95. So either you get a UNIX-like OS such as Linux, or you get Windows.
You keep insisting that you hold the secret to profitability for viacom, by repeatedly insisting that all their content should be made freely available on the web paid for by adverts.
Works for just about every other industry that has tried it. The only ones that have failed are the ones that upload it to some obscure site and expect everyone to go there for *insert show here* rather then going to YouTube where they watch the other 98% of the videos they watch online. And you can't say that they have tried it yet.
Seriously, if you think this is such an awesome idea, why isn't every movie and TV producer on earth submitting their content to youtube?
As other posts have said, why bother when someone else will upload it for you. And it is because TV isn't in as much jam as the music business is. But if you look just about every band has most, if not all of the music videos they have made either uploaded by the record label or by the bands themselves. As bandwidth increases and someone can download a show in about as much time as it takes them to download an MP3 now, we will start to see more push to YouTube to distribute them, much as how music videos are now. They will either have to adapt or die. And right now Viacom is heading to die. If an industry doesn't adapt, it dies.
First party titles usually will never be on any other console. For example, you won't find a Mario game on the 360, nor will we see Brawl on the PS3. With a third party game, you lose the fact that you know that it won't be on any other console. For example, if Konami decides that Metal Gear Solid 4 isn't selling that well on the PS3, they may port it to the Wii or 360, sometimes adding in extra features. So if you bought a PS3 only for MGS 4 and you already have a Wii, if it gets released for the Wii, you just lost $500ish.
Slashdot Mirror
No, they need OOo. Of all the competitors to Office, OOo is the most used one. I know a good amount of people who use OOo and most are even Windows users, yet I know of no one that uses Google Docs, ThinkFree, or Zoho. I'm sure there are some users, but no where near as many as OOo.
But how many businesses use e-mail? A bunch. How many use even plain-text e-mails? A good amount. How many use Windows and don't keep up with security patches? A ton. How many do you think have an outdated version of Apache running the webserver they have? One with a known flaw? How many even use unencrypted wireless networks? Or weak passwords? There are a lot more things the businesses have to and should worry about than a reputable company (Google) being hacked or broken into by a competitor.
I don't think that web apps will ever replace desktop apps for a while. First off, the issue of screen resolution. It is really easy to get OOo to work on my EEE PC even if it wasn't already installed, on the other hand, Google maps shrinks to a tiny little box. And even though decreasing the size in Firefox 3 makes it bigger, the font size becomes too tiny to even read. That's not to mention all the mobile devices that can have a ported version of OOo or Office to them with a customized interface to work well with each device while the web-based app doesn't cut it because it is too small. Will all these bugs be ironed out in the next 5-10 years, I would think so. But for now, no web app is ready to take on the desktop environment until it works well with various screen resolutions. (Google docs doesn't suffer from this problem, but Google maps does and I haven't tried either ThinkFree nor Zoho)
Yes, I've used Opera a few times and think it is ok, but really I don't like the closed source aspect of it. Sure it is secure, but if it was the dominant browser, I think it would have as many exploitable holes as IE does now, Firefox and Safari both have open source going for them.
Non-free, as in closed-source, as in proprietary. Sure Safari is mostly open-source, but Opera is as much proprietary as IE.
But, neither Opera nor Safari are used as much as Firefox. And Safari and Opera are both non-free so they are more reluctant to give detailed fix reports.
Yes, and there are tons of posts about it. Just Google, remove awesome bar. And you will get tons of ways to make it like the FF 2 toolbar.
Hmmm... Never read it. What was the title? Sounds interesting
Or, as I stated in a previous post, it would make it a whole lot easier to control people. Think of it this way, educate in all the schools that you search the web with *insert government controlled website here*, that only searches government-approved sites. Now, some person is bound to know about other search engines such as Google, so you take Google, and rather then having a Google search, you use the same search as the government-controlled website one, only it looks like Google, repeat for all other search engines. Now, block all websites you don't want people to access, however rather then "This page has been blocked by Cuba" you add in a complex error message that the average citizen will think that the site is down or something like that. A person is much more likely to try to get around a block than to deal with an error message.
They didn't need it until recently because until recently very few people were allowed to even have Internet (or cell phones or many types of things that allow people to communicate with the outside world). Remember this is Cuba we're talking about, not some free Socialist utopia...
But honestly, if you are going to control people, the internet would be an excellent tool to have. Think about it, educate people in public schools that you go to *insert government controlled website here* to search for everything. Use that to give people propaganda, and replace popular search engines such as Google and Yahoo with Cuba-controlled ones that look like Google and act like Google but only searches the government sites. For just about anything else, just put a generic error such as a "time out error". The best way to control the public isn't to make it look like they have such a horrible life, but that they believe they have the best life out there so there is no use trying to find a better life.
Hmmm... Lets see... Which is the better way to get rid of a dictatorship A) don't allow any material into the country that tells of a better life or B) Flood Cuba's shores with artists, with musicians, give them Google, and the Wikis, give them /., blogs, The Pirate Bay, give them an uncensored internet and things start working themselves out. Think of it this way, if after we nuked Japan, we didn't help rebuild, and still called it evil, Japan would have most likely rebuilt a dictator-style empire. But we didn't do that, we gave them animation which turned into Anime, we gave them our technology which was taken and now Japan is a leader in technology. We could have done the same with Cuba, but instead we preferred to call names and run and hide.
Wow a +5 funny to you. But in all seriousness, why would NASA want to start fires to put out in the first place? NASA's public opinion isn't that low for most of US citizens, now if Bush was out there with matches and a fire extinguisher we might all understand....
Loyalty? You said it yourself, the highest bidder wins which is not someone you want to hire.
Most of these people honor a contract. And after all, if there is a flaw in the code, they will be the first one that gets blamed. And I highly doubt that third-parties would pay to sabotage code for a police department or business. Very few governments/citizens care about a police department, and other businesses don't want a paper trail leading them to the downfall of a competitor. And other hackers won't think it fun to pay someone to inject a vulnerability.
Think of people like him as code mercenaries. They go to the highest bidder. Now, he is a person you don't want working against you, so why not hire him? Now, granted you would be stupid to give him the root password of your server, but for security, do you want some guy who has only read about rootkits and trying to protect your system from them, or a guy who writes rootkits. Would you rather have a guy who has read about programming, or say Linus Torvalds? This man is very accomplished and talented as this shows. So it is either hire him and earn loyalty for the term of the contract, or he might just hack you. Which one do you want?
Hmmm... That could be true. I didn't click it of course....
Rule number 1 of shock site linking, don't tell people what the link is until after they click it.
And you will need it too, because the price for Windows 7 is going to be $600 for the upgrade-from-Vista-doesn't-do-anything version and the $2000 for the does-the-same-as-XP-version
Microsoft knows that the best way to secure future high speed users is to have them as current dialup users.
I don't think MS even has a high-speed internet service. And anyways the reason that 99.999% of people are stuck on dial up is because there is no high-speed internet where they live (and for anyone living outside of a rural town, the hope of getting high-speed internet is very slim)
AIM. If MS can put AIM and MSN together, they have about 80% of the worlds IM market. Think of all the data to mine from there.
I cannot understand why Debian hasn't forked Linux.
There are a lot of reasons. Number 1, support. Even today it is hard to find a place that will support Linux without it being a major vendor of Linux itself and Debian being a community project couldn't or wouldn't have commercial support. Number 2, bugfixes, the Debian project is big, but there is so much that goes into the Debian OS other than the kernel and the Linux development team is huge. Number 3, image, the Debian project is well known for drama over minor things (like having to fork Firefox because of logo issues) and forking the kernel would make it seem that Debian is making an incompatible OS. Number 4, popularity, Debian is a well-used OS, but Ubuntu is much more popular and uses Debian as a base, now that is all good and well, but Debian can't risk having half the development team it has switch sides to Ubuntu over a fork. So no, Debian has no reason to fork the kernel.
Yes, I know that, but the post which I was referring too basically called Linux obscure with hidden things and confusing names, and so I used that point to get my point across.
Why bother with Linux?, get a proper OS. You know, one that doesn't make you create everything yourself, and hide stuff with obscure names in obscure locations, unique for the developer who shat it out.
BeOS died long ago. And AmigaOS runs on specialized hardware. And OS X is UNIX-based so it does the "hide stuff with obscure names in obscure locations" and runs offically only on specialized hardware. And don't even get me started with Windows... So basically, all competition for OSes died after Windows 95. So either you get a UNIX-like OS such as Linux, or you get Windows.
The maximum length of a standard USB cable is 5.0 meters (16.4 ft).
So, no that wouldn't work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB
You keep insisting that you hold the secret to profitability for viacom, by repeatedly insisting that all their content should be made freely available on the web paid for by adverts.
Works for just about every other industry that has tried it. The only ones that have failed are the ones that upload it to some obscure site and expect everyone to go there for *insert show here* rather then going to YouTube where they watch the other 98% of the videos they watch online. And you can't say that they have tried it yet.
Seriously, if you think this is such an awesome idea, why isn't every movie and TV producer on earth submitting their content to youtube?
As other posts have said, why bother when someone else will upload it for you. And it is because TV isn't in as much jam as the music business is. But if you look just about every band has most, if not all of the music videos they have made either uploaded by the record label or by the bands themselves. As bandwidth increases and someone can download a show in about as much time as it takes them to download an MP3 now, we will start to see more push to YouTube to distribute them, much as how music videos are now. They will either have to adapt or die. And right now Viacom is heading to die. If an industry doesn't adapt, it dies.
First party titles usually will never be on any other console. For example, you won't find a Mario game on the 360, nor will we see Brawl on the PS3. With a third party game, you lose the fact that you know that it won't be on any other console. For example, if Konami decides that Metal Gear Solid 4 isn't selling that well on the PS3, they may port it to the Wii or 360, sometimes adding in extra features. So if you bought a PS3 only for MGS 4 and you already have a Wii, if it gets released for the Wii, you just lost $500ish.