Be sure to factor in any additional costs of using a proprietary package. For example, you don't want this one package to hold you back from switching to Linux on all desktops and servers, assuming all other needs are met. Any OS / server license costs that wouldn't be needed with the Open Source solution must be included in the cost of the proprietary one.
That being said, why not contract a brilliant but currently unemployed geek (lots of them out there these days!) to help you deploy the Open Source solution. Have them make any customizations or improvements needed to make the Open Source solution fit your organization like a glove. Perhaps they can even help with the training or at least preparing training manuals for the staff. And if needed, keep them on retainer to provide support services in the future. As long as you're not paying this person more than you'd spend on proprietary licenses, you're budget is still in the black and you're getting a superior solution with no obnoxious vendor ties.
I always get such a kick when people post this sort of thing to Slashdot with such indignation. "They're trying to use patents to keep people from doing things!" How dare they.
That's right. How dare they. Software patents are wrong, immoral, unjust, and IMO unconstitutional. If you don't believe this, frankly, you're a fool.
This is nowhere near Open Source / Free software. The license specifically states that you cannot use the code for any commercial purpose whatsoever--even writing your own software to use for your own purposes in running a business. Furthermore, the license states:
You may use any information in intangible form that you remember after accessing the Software. However, this right does not grant you a license to any of Microsoft's copyrights or patents for anything you might create using such information.
In other words, they're trying to use software patents to keep people from writing their own implementations of C# / CLI libraries and software.
Which all boils down to: Microsoft wants a programming language for which you have to pay them royalties just to use, with the exception of academic use. They realize that their monopoly on operating environments is crumbling so they want to "own" and control the "next C++ or Java". My opinion: boycott this crap.
It is a blatantly false myth that using a closed source driver will protect the secrets of your specialized hardware interface from competitors. Sure, it may make the task slightly harder, but it absolutely will NOT prevent your product from being reverse engineered. Furthermore, some of your customers may be frustrated by not having the source-code. If it was I making an embedded systems purchase, I would insist upon having any relevant driver source-code both for audit and for customization to my needs.
Perhaps you should show your managers a good book on reverse-engineering techniques. Show them how easy it is. Show them how everything 'hidden' comes into plain view under the 'light' of a logic analyzer and disassembler.
Why does this always happen?! Just last night I'm reading in Practical Antenna Handbook (excellent book, btw) about how atmospheric conditions can increase radio communications range.. and I check Slashdot this morning and there's a relevant story.
Yes, this is good news for the Free Software world, although not nearly as good as it could have been. But.....
Honestly, how many of you people are actively doing something to fight the Microsoft monopoly we all complain about? How many of you are willing to strike out on your own as a Open Source based consultant? How many of you refuse to work for companies that focus on proprietary Windows software? I would have to guess not near enough, because if so, Microsoft would not be in the position it is today. If you want Justice, go out and wrangle away Microsoft's market share until they wither and die. All the tools you need are right in front of you--take advantage of them!
Yes, they are an improvement, but they're not the ideal--especially not current designs! A far more intelligent design is to have a completely electric drive while powering the motors with a small IC engine that drives a generator. This small engine can be engineered to run at an optimized constant RPM, making it very efficient. Batteries and a capacitor bank can supplement the gasoline generator and allow regenerative braking. Eventually, once fuel cells or some other energy storage technology have matured, just replace the small IC generator. That's the beauty of this design: the energy source is completely seperate from the drive. Modularity! And you gain all the advantages of a fully electric drive: greater low-end torque, electronic traction control, no transmission or drivetrain, and very hack-friendly! Dang.. if I had the resources, I'd build one myself (:
At least by my definitions, Real is neither "going the Open Source way" nor becoming a true community player. The code they have released does nothing that MPlayer and others can't already. We already have (usually superior) Open Source implementations of MP3, H.263, RTSP, RTP, RTCP, etc. and we don't need their cheezy bloated client frontend. Real makes money on their proprietary codec licensing and associated marketing / branding / etc. Although I believe this is a flawed business model, it's unlikely they will change anytime soon, though we can hope for the best. I think most of their protocols and codecs have been reverse enginneered and re-implemented by now anyways. If not, it's only a matter of time. Unless they get big into the whole DRM nonsense game..
In most states, the law says that if you order goods from out of state, then it is your responsibility to report and pay the "use tax".
Actually, this is true.. though most people are entirely unaware of it. The only folks that really pay this 'use tax' are businesses, because they actually stand a chance of being audited. It is also rather inconvenient for the average consumer to track taxable online purchases, which is why legislators want to automate the process so there's no choice but to pay the local sales tax. Fine by me as long as they eliminate unfair taxes such as property tax. Sales tax is actually the most equitable and non-discriminatory form of taxation.
That's a valid point, in a sense. But on the other hand, in a copyright-free society, you would have no incentive to try to sell this 'new fandoozy version of Emacs' except for perhaps gaining access to the first copy. Because of this, you'd have no incentive to improve Emacs for monetary gain and thus this 'elite' version would never exist. And if you tried to keep the source secret, you'd just be branded a lamer and be ignored. Of course, this is all a worthless hypothetical pondering right now anyhow. (:
Neither myself or anyone in my family agreed to the software; the cable guy did. And is there anyway to get cable companies to stop doing this as I can imagine since the cable company is a monopoly in this town, that the percentage of people who still have this software on their computers is pretty high.
If this is a local provider, break the story to the local news media (tv/newspaper/radio.. whoever will listen). Do some research as to how this garbage spyware will invade customers' privacy. And let the media know that this software can be removed easily. Maybe that'll get the word out.
The technology required to truly replace pen and paper with something more effective is probably 10-20 years off. A 75-100 dpi LCD screen just doesn't cut it compared to a quality fine-tip pen on a piece of notebook paper. Neither does the lag of screen output and character recognition. And what more, these Tablet PC's are way too large and heavy.. and they use short-lived batteries.. and they're really, really expensive!
When I brainstorm, sketch, diagram, etc. I use paper and pen. When I write, program, or do anything else structured, I use a keyboard. I have precisely zero need or desire for one of these "Tablet PC's."
Now, a real piece of innovation would be "electronic paper" nearly as flat and flexible as the real thing. Think 400dpi with a reversible draw/erase stylus. But it should be dumb--nothing more than a reflective monochrome bitmap device. You draw to turn pixels on and erase to turn them off. And it's only interface would be to transfer these page bitmaps to and from my desktop or laptop. (where I can do character recognition if I really need it) This electronic paper would also be excellent for reading books, newspapers, docs, man pages, etc.
GPL exists because proprietary software exists. If software was not protected by copyright, all software would be public domain and #1.) there would be no proprietary software #2.) there would be no GPL.
The sole purpose of GPL is to turn copyright against itself with the goal of defeating proprietary software. If all software in the world was forced to being GPL, it would be identical to all software being public domain. So, in a sense, the GPL aims diminish or remove the institution of copyright with respect to computer software.
So it's a simple question: Do we want proprietary software or not? If you believe there should be proprietary software in this world, then government funded software should be BSD or public domain. (depending on if the authors want credit.) If you believe proprietary software is unnecessary and damaging to society, government funded software should be GPL until the government agrees to stop recognizing software copyrights.
For my own interests, I would prefer GPL, which is the core of what my business is based upon. I provide complete Open Source consulting services. All software I write is covered by GPL so that my proprietary-minded competitors cannot benefit from my work, while other community-focused businesses can.
Debian is for people who USE their computers, not lamers like this guy who go through Linux distros like candy. Yeah, the installer does suck. On the other hand, I haven't used it on my machine for 2 years now because the package system is so rock solid. (read: I have never had to reinstall Debian since I started using it) I use testing/unstable for 'production' machines and I rarely have ANYTHING go wrong. Worst thing that happens is you downgrade and wait a few days for that package to be fixed. And there are more debs than any other packaged linux software out there. over 10,000 in the official trees, thousands more unofficial / experimental / pre-release / third-party. Debian is a dream and I will NEVER go back.
Musicians have long done audio delay using an analog tape machine with playback "taps" for trippy overlayed sound effects. Just look for DSP software designed to replicate this functionality. There are numerous possibilities for Linux or Windoze.
Then again.. this is all a lot of work just to watch a silly sports event. (:
that they'll be putting Hollywood out of business, possibly within the next three years.
This is the first good news I've heard on Slashdot this week!
Although I think he's being a little bit optimistic on how soon this will happen. Have a look on IMDB at how much money even the worst recent movies have made vs. their production cost.. That's a disgusting profit margin for any industry.
Protect our freedoms! Fight DMCA / CBDTPA / SDMI / SSSSA / Palladium / etc. Boycott Big Media!
Here's an exchange that will open the audience' ears.
Q.) "Suppose I boot my computer with a non-Microsoft, non-Palladium operating system.. such as Linux or BSD or Plan9. Will I be locked out of all my Palladium multimedia, software, and documents?"
expected BS: A.) "Well, the idea of Palladium is to create a trusted platform for all data exchange, so each part of the computer needs to cooperate for this to work. I can't say for sure how other operating systems will fall into this picture."
FollowUp Q.) So what you're saying is that any software which does not or can not cooperate with Microsoft Palladium will be locked out of certain media and documents?
That's right. No patents. No shareware. Post your idea right here for all to see and critique. This is the only way you'll get any credibility whatsoever. Sorry bud, but there's no such thing as unbreakable crypto where the ciphertext is longer than the key. This has been mathematically proven and if you insist otherwise, either you don't understand crypto theory sufficiently or you're off your rocker. So basically what you're talking about here is performing some form of hash or permutation of the pad to make it more difficult to recover from the ciphertext when used multiple times. This is not a new idea, nor is it unbreakable. In fact, if done improperly, it might be less secure than a traditional block cipher. Including the pad hash function / permutation within the first length of ciphertext won't make it unbreakable either--even if it changes with every consecutive use of the recycled pad.
On the other hand, it's nice that you're trying your hand at cryptography.. it's always a fun mathematical game. But for your own sake, let go of the notion that some sort of get-rich-quick idea is waiting for you. Mathematics is a field of discovery. Patenting discovery is plain wrong.
.. That allows copying or moving material between the computers, a task that would otherwise be more difficult.
I can see it now.. "Error: The clipboard content you have selected may contain copyrighted material and cannot be transferred to this machine without prior authorization"
BTW, if you want multiple-desktop keyboard / mouse / clipboard integration today, check this out.
Frankly, the Liberty Alliance Project, open or not, sounds like it'll do about as much for my privacy and security as the Patriot Act. Why would I want all commercial services I use to have the same login? It makes for a central point of failure (or security breach.. or gov't intrusion..). I certainly don't want Palladium, but I don't know that I really care for LAP either. We don't need universal logins. We need more intelligent browsers, smart cards, and people who know how to make decent passwords. (-:
Frankly, as an HP employee, I am alarmed at all this closeness with Microsoft lately
No surprise here. Megacorps aren't compatible with the very essense of Open Source because it does not allow them to corner and manipulate markets--simple as that. So stop complaining and don't work for them! Take your skills elsewhere. Start your own small business. Do whatever it takes to join the grassroots opposition to corporate controlled technology. It's not just about Open Source and buzzwords. It's about control. It's about keeping greed in check so that it doesn't erode basic freedom and privacy.
Supposed open-source geeks who go work for proprietary-minded companies are hypocrites. It'd be like fighting with the Nazi's in WW2 because they offered you better pay. Grow some backbone people and stand up for what you believe!
Put your unique passwords in a single encrypted text file or use a utility to simplify.. Universal logins are a retarded and inherently insecure idea that only serve to destroy your privacy and make you liable to identity theft. Try thinking next time before you troll.
Several bio-tech and software companies, the names of whom are undisclosed, today filed a joint patent infringement lawsuit against Universe Creator, Inc. [GOD, 12777.12, +65-1/8] for allegedly violating a patent on the use of parity checking algorithms in DNA genetic sequencing. "We don't see any evidence of prior art.." a legal representative commented, "Much like Corn(tm)--we invented that too. That stuff the Native Americans used to grow was some other crop they called 'maize.' We've been gyped for all these years." If they win the lawsuit, the parties involved will release an army of Red Robots to extract royalty fees from all Hu-mans.
In the meantime, I'm still searching my newly aquired Gene Map for a copy of DeCSS...
MySQL and Postgres are nowhere near the level of sophistication of Oracle or DB2 at this time. Nobody who knows what they're talking about is gonna argue that at this point. People developing huge database solutions for huge companies with copious IT budgets aren't going to use low-budget tools if they compromise the job. I think IBM and others realize this. So why diss MySQL? Because it attacks the low-end of their market--customers with very moderate needs for whom Oracle or DB2 is way overkill. For example, I know of a local startup company doing simple web application services for a small, focused customer base. First they paid tens of thousands for Oracle licensing (but at least running on Linux). Then they hired some wrong people and were duped by M$ marketing into switching to SQL Server--more tens of thousands for now-XP boxes and SQL Server licensing. All this because of the perceived need to go with "the big popular choice." And all they're using SQL for is basic customer and user records and some lightweight database backend work with JSP/J2EE. I don't have any real statistics, but from what I see, at least 50% of the high-end SQL server expenditure across the industry is probably wasteful overkill.
On the other hand, it would be wise for companies who are currently shelling out megabucks for heavyweight database software (and truly need it) to donate at least a little bit to Open Source efforts in hopes of long-term ROI of breaking free of vendor dependance. I'll say that again: It's not charity, it's an investment in future technology. Be greedy.. support free software. (-:
Slashdot Mirror
Be sure to factor in any additional costs of using a proprietary package. For example, you don't want this one package to hold you back from switching to Linux on all desktops and servers, assuming all other needs are met. Any OS / server license costs that wouldn't be needed with the Open Source solution must be included in the cost of the proprietary one.
That being said, why not contract a brilliant but currently unemployed geek (lots of them out there these days!) to help you deploy the Open Source solution. Have them make any customizations or improvements needed to make the Open Source solution fit your organization like a glove. Perhaps they can even help with the training or at least preparing training manuals for the staff. And if needed, keep them on retainer to provide support services in the future. As long as you're not paying this person more than you'd spend on proprietary licenses, you're budget is still in the black and you're getting a superior solution with no obnoxious vendor ties.
I always get such a kick when people post this sort of thing to Slashdot with such indignation. "They're trying to use patents to keep people from doing things!" How dare they.
That's right. How dare they. Software patents are wrong, immoral, unjust, and IMO unconstitutional. If you don't believe this, frankly, you're a fool.
Read the license here
This is nowhere near Open Source / Free software. The license specifically states that you cannot use the code for any commercial purpose whatsoever--even writing your own software to use for your own purposes in running a business. Furthermore, the license states:
You may use any information in intangible form that you remember after accessing the Software. However, this right does not grant you a license to any of Microsoft's copyrights or patents for anything you might create using such information.
In other words, they're trying to use software patents to keep people from writing their own implementations of C# / CLI libraries and software.
Which all boils down to: Microsoft wants a programming language for which you have to pay them royalties just to use, with the exception of academic use. They realize that their monopoly on operating environments is crumbling so they want to "own" and control the "next C++ or Java". My opinion: boycott this crap.
It is a blatantly false myth that using a closed source driver will protect the secrets of your specialized hardware interface from competitors. Sure, it may make the task slightly harder, but it absolutely will NOT prevent your product from being reverse engineered. Furthermore, some of your customers may be frustrated by not having the source-code. If it was I making an embedded systems purchase, I would insist upon having any relevant driver source-code both for audit and for customization to my needs.
Perhaps you should show your managers a good book on reverse-engineering techniques. Show them how easy it is. Show them how everything 'hidden' comes into plain view under the 'light' of a logic analyzer and disassembler.
Why does this always happen?! Just last night I'm reading in Practical Antenna Handbook (excellent book, btw) about how atmospheric conditions can increase radio communications range.. and I check Slashdot this morning and there's a relevant story.
Yes, this is good news for the Free Software world, although not nearly as good as it could have been. But.....
Honestly, how many of you people are actively doing something to fight the Microsoft monopoly we all complain about? How many of you are willing to strike out on your own as a Open Source based consultant? How many of you refuse to work for companies that focus on proprietary Windows software? I would have to guess not near enough, because if so, Microsoft would not be in the position it is today. If you want Justice, go out and wrangle away Microsoft's market share until they wither and die. All the tools you need are right in front of you--take advantage of them!
Yes, they are an improvement, but they're not the ideal--especially not current designs! A far more intelligent design is to have a completely electric drive while powering the motors with a small IC engine that drives a generator. This small engine can be engineered to run at an optimized constant RPM, making it very efficient. Batteries and a capacitor bank can supplement the gasoline generator and allow regenerative braking. Eventually, once fuel cells or some other energy storage technology have matured, just replace the small IC generator. That's the beauty of this design: the energy source is completely seperate from the drive. Modularity! And you gain all the advantages of a fully electric drive: greater low-end torque, electronic traction control, no transmission or drivetrain, and very hack-friendly! Dang.. if I had the resources, I'd build one myself (:
At least by my definitions, Real is neither "going the Open Source way" nor becoming a true community player. The code they have released does nothing that MPlayer and others can't already. We already have (usually superior) Open Source implementations of MP3, H.263, RTSP, RTP, RTCP, etc. and we don't need their cheezy bloated client frontend. Real makes money on their proprietary codec licensing and associated marketing / branding / etc. Although I believe this is a flawed business model, it's unlikely they will change anytime soon, though we can hope for the best. I think most of their protocols and codecs have been reverse enginneered and re-implemented by now anyways. If not, it's only a matter of time. Unless they get big into the whole DRM nonsense game..
In most states, the law says that if you order goods from out of state, then it is your responsibility to report and pay the "use tax".
Actually, this is true.. though most people are entirely unaware of it. The only folks that really pay this 'use tax' are businesses, because they actually stand a chance of being audited. It is also rather inconvenient for the average consumer to track taxable online purchases, which is why legislators want to automate the process so there's no choice but to pay the local sales tax. Fine by me as long as they eliminate unfair taxes such as property tax. Sales tax is actually the most equitable and non-discriminatory form of taxation.
That's a valid point, in a sense. But on the other hand, in a copyright-free society, you would have no incentive to try to sell this 'new fandoozy version of Emacs' except for perhaps gaining access to the first copy. Because of this, you'd have no incentive to improve Emacs for monetary gain and thus this 'elite' version would never exist. And if you tried to keep the source secret, you'd just be branded a lamer and be ignored. Of course, this is all a worthless hypothetical pondering right now anyhow. (:
Neither myself or anyone in my family agreed to the software; the cable guy did. And is there anyway to get cable companies to stop doing this as I can imagine since the cable company is a monopoly in this town, that the percentage of people who still have this software on their computers is pretty high.
If this is a local provider, break the story to the local news media (tv/newspaper/radio.. whoever will listen). Do some research as to how this garbage spyware will invade customers' privacy. And let the media know that this software can be removed easily. Maybe that'll get the word out.
The technology required to truly replace pen and paper with something more effective is probably 10-20 years off. A 75-100 dpi LCD screen just doesn't cut it compared to a quality fine-tip pen on a piece of notebook paper. Neither does the lag of screen output and character recognition. And what more, these Tablet PC's are way too large and heavy.. and they use short-lived batteries.. and they're really, really expensive!
When I brainstorm, sketch, diagram, etc. I use paper and pen. When I write, program, or do anything else structured, I use a keyboard. I have precisely zero need or desire for one of these "Tablet PC's."
Now, a real piece of innovation would be "electronic paper" nearly as flat and flexible as the real thing. Think 400dpi with a reversible draw/erase stylus. But it should be dumb--nothing more than a reflective monochrome bitmap device. You draw to turn pixels on and erase to turn them off. And it's only interface would be to transfer these page bitmaps to and from my desktop or laptop. (where I can do character recognition if I really need it) This electronic paper would also be excellent for reading books, newspapers, docs, man pages, etc.
GPL exists because proprietary software exists. If software was not protected by copyright, all software would be public domain and #1.) there would be no proprietary software #2.) there would be no GPL.
The sole purpose of GPL is to turn copyright against itself with the goal of defeating proprietary software. If all software in the world was forced to being GPL, it would be identical to all software being public domain. So, in a sense, the GPL aims diminish or remove the institution of copyright with respect to computer software.
So it's a simple question: Do we want proprietary software or not? If you believe there should be proprietary software in this world, then government funded software should be BSD or public domain. (depending on if the authors want credit.) If you believe proprietary software is unnecessary and damaging to society, government funded software should be GPL until the government agrees to stop recognizing software copyrights.
For my own interests, I would prefer GPL, which is the core of what my business is based upon. I provide complete Open Source consulting services. All software I write is covered by GPL so that my proprietary-minded competitors cannot benefit from my work, while other community-focused businesses can.
Debian is for people who USE their computers, not lamers like this guy who go through Linux distros like candy. Yeah, the installer does suck. On the other hand, I haven't used it on my machine for 2 years now because the package system is so rock solid. (read: I have never had to reinstall Debian since I started using it) I use testing/unstable for 'production' machines and I rarely have ANYTHING go wrong. Worst thing that happens is you downgrade and wait a few days for that package to be fixed. And there are more debs than any other packaged linux software out there. over 10,000 in the official trees, thousands more unofficial / experimental / pre-release / third-party. Debian is a dream and I will NEVER go back.
According to the produce description, this sub-sub-sub-notebook has:
"Mega Bass with Theatre sound"
Methinks Sony's marketing staff needs beat over the head with reality. (:
Musicians have long done audio delay using an analog tape machine with playback "taps" for trippy overlayed sound effects. Just look for DSP software designed to replicate this functionality. There are numerous possibilities for Linux or Windoze.
Then again.. this is all a lot of work just to watch a silly sports event. (:
that they'll be putting Hollywood out of business, possibly within the next three years.
This is the first good news I've heard on Slashdot this week!
Although I think he's being a little bit optimistic on how soon this will happen. Have a look on IMDB at how much money even the worst recent movies have made vs. their production cost.. That's a disgusting profit margin for any industry.
Protect our freedoms! Fight DMCA / CBDTPA / SDMI / SSSSA / Palladium / etc. Boycott Big Media!
Here's an exchange that will open the audience' ears.
Q.) "Suppose I boot my computer with a non-Microsoft, non-Palladium operating system.. such as Linux or BSD or Plan9. Will I be locked out of all my Palladium multimedia, software, and documents?"
expected BS: A.) "Well, the idea of Palladium is to create a trusted platform for all data exchange, so each part of the computer needs to cooperate for this to work. I can't say for sure how other operating systems will fall into this picture."
FollowUp Q.) So what you're saying is that any software which does not or can not cooperate with Microsoft Palladium will be locked out of certain media and documents?
A.) some form of 'yes'
That's right. No patents. No shareware. Post your idea right here for all to see and critique. This is the only way you'll get any credibility whatsoever. Sorry bud, but there's no such thing as unbreakable crypto where the ciphertext is longer than the key. This has been mathematically proven and if you insist otherwise, either you don't understand crypto theory sufficiently or you're off your rocker. So basically what you're talking about here is performing some form of hash or permutation of the pad to make it more difficult to recover from the ciphertext when used multiple times. This is not a new idea, nor is it unbreakable. In fact, if done improperly, it might be less secure than a traditional block cipher. Including the pad hash function / permutation within the first length of ciphertext won't make it unbreakable either--even if it changes with every consecutive use of the recycled pad.
On the other hand, it's nice that you're trying your hand at cryptography.. it's always a fun mathematical game. But for your own sake, let go of the notion that some sort of get-rich-quick idea is waiting for you. Mathematics is a field of discovery. Patenting discovery is plain wrong.
.. That allows copying or moving material between the computers, a task that would otherwise be more difficult.
I can see it now.. "Error: The clipboard content you have selected may contain copyrighted material and cannot be transferred to this machine without prior authorization"
BTW, if you want multiple-desktop keyboard / mouse / clipboard integration today, check this out.
You want theLiberty Alliance Project
Frankly, the Liberty Alliance Project, open or not, sounds like it'll do about as much for my privacy and security as the Patriot Act. Why would I want all commercial services I use to have the same login? It makes for a central point of failure (or security breach.. or gov't intrusion..). I certainly don't want Palladium, but I don't know that I really care for LAP either. We don't need universal logins. We need more intelligent browsers, smart cards, and people who know how to make decent passwords. (-:
Frankly, as an HP employee, I am alarmed at all this closeness with Microsoft lately
No surprise here. Megacorps aren't compatible with the very essense of Open Source because it does not allow them to corner and manipulate markets--simple as that. So stop complaining and don't work for them! Take your skills elsewhere. Start your own small business. Do whatever it takes to join the grassroots opposition to corporate controlled technology. It's not just about Open Source and buzzwords. It's about control. It's about keeping greed in check so that it doesn't erode basic freedom and privacy.
Supposed open-source geeks who go work for proprietary-minded companies are hypocrites. It'd be like fighting with the Nazi's in WW2 because they offered you better pay. Grow some backbone people and stand up for what you believe!
Put your unique passwords in a single encrypted text file or use a utility to simplify.. Universal logins are a retarded and inherently insecure idea that only serve to destroy your privacy and make you liable to identity theft. Try thinking next time before you troll.
Several bio-tech and software companies, the names of whom are undisclosed, today filed a joint patent infringement lawsuit against Universe Creator, Inc. [GOD, 12777.12, +65-1/8] for allegedly violating a patent on the use of parity checking algorithms in DNA genetic sequencing. "We don't see any evidence of prior art.." a legal representative commented, "Much like Corn(tm)--we invented that too. That stuff the Native Americans used to grow was some other crop they called 'maize.' We've been gyped for all these years." If they win the lawsuit, the parties involved will release an army of Red Robots to extract royalty fees from all Hu-mans.
In the meantime, I'm still searching my newly aquired Gene Map for a copy of DeCSS...
MySQL and Postgres are nowhere near the level of sophistication of Oracle or DB2 at this time. Nobody who knows what they're talking about is gonna argue that at this point. People developing huge database solutions for huge companies with copious IT budgets aren't going to use low-budget tools if they compromise the job. I think IBM and others realize this. So why diss MySQL? Because it attacks the low-end of their market--customers with very moderate needs for whom Oracle or DB2 is way overkill. For example, I know of a local startup company doing simple web application services for a small, focused customer base. First they paid tens of thousands for Oracle licensing (but at least running on Linux). Then they hired some wrong people and were duped by M$ marketing into switching to SQL Server--more tens of thousands for now-XP boxes and SQL Server licensing. All this because of the perceived need to go with "the big popular choice." And all they're using SQL for is basic customer and user records and some lightweight database backend work with JSP/J2EE. I don't have any real statistics, but from what I see, at least 50% of the high-end SQL server expenditure across the industry is probably wasteful overkill.
On the other hand, it would be wise for companies who are currently shelling out megabucks for heavyweight database software (and truly need it) to donate at least a little bit to Open Source efforts in hopes of long-term ROI of breaking free of vendor dependance. I'll say that again: It's not charity, it's an investment in future technology. Be greedy.. support free software. (-: