The new Crossover "bottles" concept enables you to have separate spins of Wine for each application. They independant of each other, and independant of "official" Wine. I believe Codeweavers has contributed the code back to Wine (Codeweavers is a very good Wine citizen (in terms of OSS). They fund several of the Wine developers salaries, and contribute back all their code. They contributed back even before Wine was LGPL; it used to be BSD or X11, can't remember).
It's actually pretty cool; create a Crossover Wine Bottle on one of your development systems, setup up the application(s) for that bottle the way you like them, roll them into an RPM, and then roll that RPM out over your network. It's slick.
In particular, the "Legal Aid Manitobe" one documents where Crossover built a custom Wine capable of running a specific application for them, at a cost of $2000. Remember, since its all LGPL, you get the source, and the Wine project gets the patches, too. Furthermore, since you can distribute them on your network as RPM bottles, it doesn't matter if the patches become difficult to merge, or whether or not they get into Wine-Trunk; you just keep running the custom version of Wine for your legacy Windows app.
Notice that Google contracted with Codeweavers to get the Picassa Wine'd version working. I haven't tried it, but the initial reports have been pretty positive.
Paying Codeweavers is not terribly different from paying an individual Wine developer, and if you read either the Wine list-serv or WineHQ's WWN newsletter, you'll see a lot of good will towards Codeweavers. From my perspective, dealing with codeweavers is wonderful; and from a corporative perspective, Codeweavers gives you an entity to rely upon, and some one to take responsibility; not to mention provide a turn-key solution.
Best of both worlds, IMHO. Unlike Transgaming, whom I like as well, but whom has a great deal of tension with the Wine project.
The moment Linux can handle desktop apps, Microsoft is the next Osborne.
Have you evaluated Novell's SuSE? Depending on the apps you use, Novell's SuSE is already there.
Also, given that you are a large (Fortune 100, w00t) company, you do know that Codeweavers will do custom distributions of Wine for any application that you might need, at very, very reasonable prices ($5k-$10k), and then its yours, forever.
OneCare will necessitate more than "less(much) than once a month", because OneCare will automatically apply patches, and give you a "Please restart your system, automatically restarting in 5 minutes unless you cancel" every 15 minutes.
It'll do this, at minimum, once a month, and more likely twice a month.
If you have long Windows uptimes, you aren't patching. This is not the case for *NIX.
Now, I don't really see why someone who knew what they were doing (read: not me) could make a shell script that would properly edit the config files and do the install properly for such a unified distro as ubuntu and pack it into the ubuntu package manager, but I digress...
1. This is easy. 2. SuSE does it. 3. I have no idea why no other distribution can get it right. 4. I have no idea why Nvidia doesn't permit redistribution of their binary.
How far are you distributing this data? Is it going places Internet2 doesn't go? Is it prohibitively expensive to hop on to Internet2, given the budgets of these sorts of projects?
Seems to me that needing to distribute this kind of data is _exactly_ the sort of impetus needed to kickstart next generation internet infrastructure. Of course, this does nothing for storage problems.....
One should be able to get ~ 1Gb/sec over fiber. Conservatively, assuming 500Mb/sec real throughput, that means 12 hours in transmission time, per day. That's faster than most sorts of not-too-expensive shipping techniques.
Heck, 10 of Verizon's FiOS connections would be able to handle the bandwidth, assuming you didn't have to deal with Verizon's bottlenecks, or could somehow get the data on to their network.
Keep in mind I'm not suggesting that the infrastructure exists right now to handle this sort of thing, but it seems that the technological barriers are long in the past, and the remaining barriers are fairly simple economic ones.
The U.S. doesn't need additional security monitoring than what had been in place pre-9/11. The U.S. needs to implement the VISA screening, and other procedures, that we had in place before 9/11.
The 9/11 hijackers did not enter this country on valid visas. Well; they were GIVEN visas, but even a cursory review of these visas would have denied them entry.
Not to mention the damning security video footage of hijackers setting of metal detectors, showing their 4" blades to security screeners, and than walking through..... Even though their names triggered responses on the CAPS systems.
Until the U.S. security organs are capable of implementing the OLD school systems properly, I see no reason to believe that new, greater "Total Information" long-view screening will be succesful.
Not all of us are this crazy. And most of us acknowledge that these stupid rights infringements don't help our security.
It's not that the U.S. government wants to treat E.U.'ers (or anyone, really) as 2nd class. It's that the U.S. government wants to keep everyone under intense surveillance, so that they can maintain political and economic superiority over any upstarts.
Notice the NSA threatening leakers via their domestic telephone surveillance program?
I'm guessing wife is supportive. However, he's probably double checking (seeking advice) to make sure that his default opininon of, "Yes, its a good idea", and his wife's default opinion of, "Yes, I love him, I can make it work," are pratical.
If his wife was 86'ing the idea, I'm guessing he wouldn't bother asking Slashdot;-)
As soon as humans band together into large enough groups you need government to keep them from killing each other; but since that government needs to hold near-total monopoly on violence to accomplish this and is made from human beings it will inevitably end up abusing its power. Any attempt to stop this process only slows it down; and even if you stop the actual government from growing out of control, it simply provides a power vacuum for aristocracy or corporations / robber parons to do it instead.
This is what a federalist system is supposed to solve. Power conglomerates upwards only as needed; the government, as-is, is supposed to devolve responsibilities as often as possible.
Sadly, we see the opposite today in the U.S. The states get weaker every day.
The current "visionaries" planning a space elevator are no different than the early flying machine designs of the enlightenment.
Da Vinci dreamed of flying. Tesla dreamed of flying without wings. All kinds of scientists dream of the future.
That doesn't meant that when the dreams come to fruition they have anything but a passing resembalance to past visions. A space elevator will probably not be constructed of carbon nanotubes, at least not of the variety we are currently playing with. Nor will it be "staffed" by climbing robots, at least not of the variety we can currently build.
I don't know anything about materials science, but I wouldn't be surprised to see us develop something that could be artifically strengthed via electromagnetism, or something else. Gotta keep it juiced up or something.
I believe the best way to characterize the article is, "Carbon nanotubes are most likely not sufficent for space elevator construction," rather than, "Space Elevator an Impossible Dream?"
The Space Elevator was an Impossible Dream before carbon nanotubes, too. That doesn't mean we give up looking for a suitable tether material, nor do we give up looking for elegant paths around the limitations in tether strength.
Actually, yes, I do believe it would become your fault.
If someone vandalizes your property, and creates conditions hazardous to others, you are liable, unless you take every reasonable effort to deal with the issue at hand. Obviously, if terrorsists setup a nuke on your land and defend it to the death, I doubt you would get sued. On the other hand, if someone ripped apart your water main, and flooded a street, and you just ignored it and said, "Not my problem, I dinna do it", you'd be in a heap of trouble.
It's a reasonability standard. Not keeping your own system secure is not reasonable.
Not just for consumers, of course. Make sure you tax government & corporate packets, too. And implement the tax per-ip.
Probably easier than taxing e-mails/SMS, too; with less chance of falsification, and a more reliable metric (usage costs per e-mail is completely goofy; usage cost per packet makes slightly more sense).
Until they can drop the white elephant of incompatibilty and sluggishness known as Java, it will never be able to compete.
HUH???
Incompatibility: Are you seriously alleging that Java makes OO.org less compatibile than MS Office? What the FUCK could such an idiotic statement mean? In what sense is OO.org at ALL less compatible than MS Office or associated technologies (Exchange/Sharepoint/ActiveX/OLE)? And how exactly does Java contribute to this???
Sluggishness? You DO know that OO.org, although it may contain some java internals, does not require a JRE, and becomes a great deal faster as you utilize native widgets. Continuing efforts to integrate external printing systems and file access mechanisms are further improving speed. Furthermore, even ZDNet's claims are suspect: http://www.matt13.com/computer/open_office_or_ms_o ffice/index.html
Java, in many ways, contributes to OO.org's portability. OO.org runs on many more platforms than MS Office. Why are you trolling?
They don't want to release it to the general public yet. They are offering it to the state of massachusettes first.
Yes, they are playing games with it. But I think thats a fact of life when fighting against MS. Also, I doubt that they want to release it before the next version of Office, just to give them (MS) a head start against "breaking" the plugin.
My dad runs Office 2003 on an 8-year-old 450Mhz PIII, and Word/Excel/Powerpoint all start in less than a second and run perfectly smoothly (and no, they're not preloaded).
Sorry, I don't believe this.
I've seen Office 2003 on a PIII 800 Mhz, on a clean install, ith 256 Mb ram. It was not fun to work with, and certainly did NOT start applications in less than a second.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not ;-)
The new Crossover "bottles" concept enables you to have separate spins of Wine for each application. They independant of each other, and independant of "official" Wine. I believe Codeweavers has contributed the code back to Wine (Codeweavers is a very good Wine citizen (in terms of OSS). They fund several of the Wine developers salaries, and contribute back all their code. They contributed back even before Wine was LGPL; it used to be BSD or X11, can't remember).
It's actually pretty cool; create a Crossover Wine Bottle on one of your development systems, setup up the application(s) for that bottle the way you like them, roll them into an RPM, and then roll that RPM out over your network. It's slick.
Take a look at their case studies: http://www.codeweavers.com/products/case_studies/
In particular, the "Legal Aid Manitobe" one documents where Crossover built a custom Wine capable of running a specific application for them, at a cost of $2000. Remember, since its all LGPL, you get the source, and the Wine project gets the patches, too. Furthermore, since you can distribute them on your network as RPM bottles, it doesn't matter if the patches become difficult to merge, or whether or not they get into Wine-Trunk; you just keep running the custom version of Wine for your legacy Windows app.
Notice that Google contracted with Codeweavers to get the Picassa Wine'd version working. I haven't tried it, but the initial reports have been pretty positive.
Paying Codeweavers is not terribly different from paying an individual Wine developer, and if you read either the Wine list-serv or WineHQ's WWN newsletter, you'll see a lot of good will towards Codeweavers. From my perspective, dealing with codeweavers is wonderful; and from a corporative perspective, Codeweavers gives you an entity to rely upon, and some one to take responsibility; not to mention provide a turn-key solution.
Best of both worlds, IMHO. Unlike Transgaming, whom I like as well, but whom has a great deal of tension with the Wine project.
The moment Linux can handle desktop apps, Microsoft is the next Osborne.
Have you evaluated Novell's SuSE? Depending on the apps you use, Novell's SuSE is already there.
Also, given that you are a large (Fortune 100, w00t) company, you do know that Codeweavers will do custom distributions of Wine for any application that you might need, at very, very reasonable prices ($5k-$10k), and then its yours, forever.
OneCare will necessitate more than "less(much) than once a month", because OneCare will automatically apply patches, and give you a "Please restart your system, automatically restarting in 5 minutes unless you cancel" every 15 minutes.
It'll do this, at minimum, once a month, and more likely twice a month.
If you have long Windows uptimes, you aren't patching. This is not the case for *NIX.
Now, I don't really see why someone who knew what they were doing (read: not me) could make a shell script that would properly edit the config files and do the install properly for such a unified distro as ubuntu and pack it into the ubuntu package manager, but I digress...
1. This is easy.
2. SuSE does it.
3. I have no idea why no other distribution can get it right.
4. I have no idea why Nvidia doesn't permit redistribution of their binary.
Is this honestly cheaper/easier than switching from MS solutions?
How much of a pain in the ass does Windows have to get for people to ditch it?
How far are you distributing this data? Is it going places Internet2 doesn't go? Is it prohibitively expensive to hop on to Internet2, given the budgets of these sorts of projects?
Seems to me that needing to distribute this kind of data is _exactly_ the sort of impetus needed to kickstart next generation internet infrastructure. Of course, this does nothing for storage problems.....
One should be able to get ~ 1Gb/sec over fiber. Conservatively, assuming 500Mb/sec real throughput, that means 12 hours in transmission time, per day. That's faster than most sorts of not-too-expensive shipping techniques.
Heck, 10 of Verizon's FiOS connections would be able to handle the bandwidth, assuming you didn't have to deal with Verizon's bottlenecks, or could somehow get the data on to their network.
Keep in mind I'm not suggesting that the infrastructure exists right now to handle this sort of thing, but it seems that the technological barriers are long in the past, and the remaining barriers are fairly simple economic ones.
This is *fucking* retarded.
The U.S. doesn't need additional security monitoring than what had been in place pre-9/11. The U.S. needs to implement the VISA screening, and other procedures, that we had in place before 9/11.
The 9/11 hijackers did not enter this country on valid visas. Well; they were GIVEN visas, but even a cursory review of these visas would have denied them entry.
Not to mention the damning security video footage of hijackers setting of metal detectors, showing their 4" blades to security screeners, and than walking through..... Even though their names triggered responses on the CAPS systems.
Until the U.S. security organs are capable of implementing the OLD school systems properly, I see no reason to believe that new, greater "Total Information" long-view screening will be succesful.
Or is your post a clever troll?
This administration is insane. Read my sig.
Not all of us are this crazy. And most of us acknowledge that these stupid rights infringements don't help our security.
It's not that the U.S. government wants to treat E.U.'ers (or anyone, really) as 2nd class. It's that the U.S. government wants to keep everyone under intense surveillance, so that they can maintain political and economic superiority over any upstarts.
Notice the NSA threatening leakers via their domestic telephone surveillance program?
I hate these bastards.
Yes, RPM can do this. As can YaST, Smart, KPackage, and all the various RPM GUI utilities.
Not to mention that if you are running a properly configured Beagle/Slocate, you don't NEED to....
How many people can sit on a modern GPU?
Possibly one, if you aren't concerned about a) cutting your butt, or b) sterility.
Them things get hot.
Err... yes, and no.
;-)
I'm guessing wife is supportive. However, he's probably double checking (seeking advice) to make sure that his default opininon of, "Yes, its a good idea", and his wife's default opinion of, "Yes, I love him, I can make it work," are pratical.
If his wife was 86'ing the idea, I'm guessing he wouldn't bother asking Slashdot
how do you collect taxes from people who have the right to be anonymous?
Sales tax. Not an income tax.
That's how is was supposed to be, anyways.
As soon as humans band together into large enough groups you need government to keep them from killing each other; but since that government needs to hold near-total monopoly on violence to accomplish this and is made from human beings it will inevitably end up abusing its power. Any attempt to stop this process only slows it down; and even if you stop the actual government from growing out of control, it simply provides a power vacuum for aristocracy or corporations / robber parons to do it instead.
This is what a federalist system is supposed to solve. Power conglomerates upwards only as needed; the government, as-is, is supposed to devolve responsibilities as often as possible.
Sadly, we see the opposite today in the U.S. The states get weaker every day.
The current "visionaries" planning a space elevator are no different than the early flying machine designs of the enlightenment.
Da Vinci dreamed of flying. Tesla dreamed of flying without wings. All kinds of scientists dream of the future.
That doesn't meant that when the dreams come to fruition they have anything but a passing resembalance to past visions. A space elevator will probably not be constructed of carbon nanotubes, at least not of the variety we are currently playing with. Nor will it be "staffed" by climbing robots, at least not of the variety we can currently build.
I don't know anything about materials science, but I wouldn't be surprised to see us develop something that could be artifically strengthed via electromagnetism, or something else. Gotta keep it juiced up or something.
I believe the best way to characterize the article is, "Carbon nanotubes are most likely not sufficent for space elevator construction," rather than, "Space Elevator an Impossible Dream?"
The Space Elevator was an Impossible Dream before carbon nanotubes, too. That doesn't mean we give up looking for a suitable tether material, nor do we give up looking for elegant paths around the limitations in tether strength.
Aren't the post offices run by the gov't in most EU countries?
Wouldn't switching to snail mail be _exactly_ the thing they want you to do?
There are better ways around this, most of which involve obsfucation, encryption, and non-SMTP non-SMS protocols.
An alphabet soup of microsoft protocols, and they go after AAC players.
Good grief.....
Make it "industry wide", idiots. That it ONLY applies to music players makes me thing MS is behind the scenes, somehow.
Har Har.
You're so funny.
Can't you be at _little_ more creative in your trolling?
Actually, yes, I do believe it would become your fault.
If someone vandalizes your property, and creates conditions hazardous to others, you are liable, unless you take every reasonable effort to deal with the issue at hand. Obviously, if terrorsists setup a nuke on your land and defend it to the death, I doubt you would get sued. On the other hand, if someone ripped apart your water main, and flooded a street, and you just ignored it and said, "Not my problem, I dinna do it", you'd be in a heap of trouble.
It's a reasonability standard. Not keeping your own system secure is not reasonable.
Not just for consumers, of course. Make sure you tax government & corporate packets, too. And implement the tax per-ip.
Probably easier than taxing e-mails/SMS, too; with less chance of falsification, and a more reliable metric (usage costs per e-mail is completely goofy; usage cost per packet makes slightly more sense).
*giggle*. I'd love to see a per-packet EU tax.
It's bundled and streamlined.
IE is not needed; it uses a built in Gecko.
Wine is not needed; it's statically compiled in.
It's easier to install; you don't have to worry about Gotchas with a particular Wine version.
Until they can drop the white elephant of incompatibilty and sluggishness known as Java, it will never be able to compete.
o ffice/index.html
HUH???
Incompatibility: Are you seriously alleging that Java makes OO.org less compatibile than MS Office? What the FUCK could such an idiotic statement mean? In what sense is OO.org at ALL less compatible than MS Office or associated technologies (Exchange/Sharepoint/ActiveX/OLE)? And how exactly does Java contribute to this???
Sluggishness? You DO know that OO.org, although it may contain some java internals, does not require a JRE, and becomes a great deal faster as you utilize native widgets. Continuing efforts to integrate external printing systems and file access mechanisms are further improving speed. Furthermore, even ZDNet's claims are suspect: http://www.matt13.com/computer/open_office_or_ms_
Java, in many ways, contributes to OO.org's portability. OO.org runs on many more platforms than MS Office. Why are you trolling?
Not released yet.
They don't want to release it to the general public yet. They are offering it to the state of massachusettes first.
Yes, they are playing games with it. But I think thats a fact of life when fighting against MS. Also, I doubt that they want to release it before the next version of Office, just to give them (MS) a head start against "breaking" the plugin.
And let me guess, in Version 2.0, you'll be required to encode the images in Windows Media Photo.
Never trust Microsoft bearing gifts. Ever. MS never released something for "free" without an eye towards damaging a market.
My dad runs Office 2003 on an 8-year-old 450Mhz PIII, and Word/Excel/Powerpoint all start in less than a second and run perfectly smoothly (and no, they're not preloaded).
Sorry, I don't believe this.
I've seen Office 2003 on a PIII 800 Mhz, on a clean install, ith 256 Mb ram. It was not fun to work with, and certainly did NOT start applications in less than a second.
Huh? Zip is a well known format. Most tools natively handle it, and in KDE you can treat Zips like a filesystem.
If you are writting a tool of _any_ sophistication, any sort of PHP or ASP app, I don't see why you can't transparently handle OO.org's ZIPs.