Software Piracy is theft from the publisher of the software, and software vendors.
Pretend we're talking books. Let's say you are running a book store, and you are anticipating the latest Stephen King novel because of the spike in sales it brings - people come in the store to buy it, and usually leave with one or two other books "while they are there".
Now, assume that the novel is released as a pirated soft copy on the Internet, and 70% of the people who WOULD have come in to buy the book decide to download it instead.
Suddenly your spike is a small anthill, and you are pissed. Were any copies of the book "stolen" from you? (No, and that's where your fictional victimless crime scenario comes in)
But what about the VALUE of the books? By legitimizing software piracy, you reduce the value that the software vendors work (hard!) to produce.
That's not to say that Open Source Software should be banned. But, if the creators of the software decide to license it Closed Source (TM), they should have the right to do so, and software piracy is just that - theft.
If you don't like their terms, then don't buy it. But don't pretend that you aren't hurting anybody by stealing.
An emulator emulates a CPU or platform. VMWare is an emulator, because it emulates an x86 host system.
Except that it doesn't, which is why VMWare is NOT an emulator - VMWare cannot be run on non-X86 hardware. It actually uses 386 Enhanced mode to "split" the CPU into multiple logical CPUs, minimizing performance costs in so doing.
Are you aware that the GPL applies to customers only? There's no requirement to publish sources in a public FTP directory. (Missed that one, didn't you?)
Also, GPL applies to copyrights on source code, not trademarks.
To sum it up: a) Coca Cola's recipe is a proprietary recipe not published under GPL
But the SRPMS are a *BINARY* format of source code. They don't have to publish it in a method so convenient, and certainly could license the SRPMS against redistribution.
b) You stole it
Stole? It was given! By Red Hat! On PUBLIC SERVERS! (You really missed this one, didn't you?)
c) You misused their Reg. TM to advertise a competing product
If RedHat doesn't defend their TradeMark under US law, they lose it. Would you sit down while somebody took hard-earned bread off your table? (I didn't think so)
And CentOS: a) Is based on Red Hat's OS (GPL) which anyone can redistribute
The O/S isn't GPL, the source code is. The BINARY format of SRPMs can be licensed to restrict distribution. RedHat chose not to do this. (didn't I say this before?)
b) They did not steal the source code, SRPMs are publicly available on the Web/FTP and RH is obliged to make them available
By RedHat - who are nice enough to make this PUBLIC. (See above)
c) CentOS has not mislead any customers - they only pointed to RH's Web site as the source (base) of their product. And prior to receiving the letter they had a disclaimer about them not being associated with RH in any way.
And here is where the Coca-cola analogy comes into play. Red Hat is giving away their sources, and CentOS was saying that "this is RHEL, but it's not 'technically' RHEL". Red Hat has a problem with CentOS using RedHat's name to compete with RedHat.
And this is... surprising? You have the source, OK. That's fine. But don't pitch something that's not under the trademark of RH, using RH's trademark! I don't see the problem.
CentOS and WhiteBoxLinux play a very fine line. I admire what they're doing, and if they weren't doing it, RedHat would stand to lose money. (from me, anyway) It's not surprising that there are some skirmishes from time to time.
PS: Using parts of your male anatomy to describe things indicates what's on your mind. Move your thought process a few feet further up the spinal column - you'll be amazed at the result!
It's quite silly to dismiss the power of (ahem) alternative power.
For example, the Freedom Tower now under construction in NYC, USA will generate a significant amount of its own power. (as much as 20%!)
I'm a supporter of Nuclear technology, but only if it's open. The current "don't ask, don't tell" nuclear regime is stupid, stupid, stupid, and will never result in an industry that's truly safe. Nuclear technology should, like cryptography, be open, and should only be trusted when it's withstood significant, public, peer review.
Have you ever heard of Changing world technologies and their plans to convert garbage into crude oil? I've been following this one for about 2 years, and I think it's the "real deal". It's still in its infancy, but it's viable in many places now, today!
They're taking their time to refine things, and if I were them, I would, too. When I get the chance to invest in their technology, chances are, I will.
CentOS is not just "like" RedHat - it literally *IS* RedHat Linux! Same sources, same compile tree.
The/ONLY/ thing different is the manufacturing date! (compile time)
Can you imagine the SHITFIT that Coca-Cola would have if there was a competing product called "Co-sola - Coca-Cola derived soda"??? I mean, artificial diamond production would quintuple overnight, and the Men's Wearhouse would have a run on all the suits needed to cover all the lawyers' bodies involved...
RedHat is being very, very good about this. And it's a good thing, too - RedHat would lose all future business from me (and very nearly did with their RHL -> Fedora switcharoo) if they did anything to actually stop CentOS or WhiteBox.
But, the name is theirs, and they have every right and responsibiltiy to protect it as legally required.
And many customers really want out. People complain about MS a lot now.
Doing some tech support, it's amazing to me how bad the problem with spyware, viruses, and trojans has gotten in WindowsLand. I've used Linux almost 100% since 1999 - so I'm pretty well insulated from all that - but now I see systems I'd only described as "hosed" routinely.
I make sure to make a plug for a Macintosh, and inform them that we only use 100% Linux systems to ensure good uptimes and near immunity to viruses, worms, etc. People get hysterical when they're told that their computer really needs to be examined yet AGAIN by a "qualified technician" due to porn site links showing up at random on their desktop, or it behaving very slowly, etc. I don't mince words when I discuss the insecurity of their Windows system, and what it's costing them.
Oh, and in our small software company, we're working on a Mac port, due (hopefully) by mid-summer 2005 so that we can be part of the solution. We're sick of the tech support phone calls, too!
I write this on a Fedora C3 Laptop. I have a VMware window running with an instance of Windows 2000, and an instance of White Box Linux. I have an MP3 player streaming from my network server, over my encrypted wireless connection.
I have 2 OpenOffice documents, and two monitors, giving me an effective resolution of 2650x1200, a smattering of Xterms, a calculator, and Kmail. Oh, and there are a total of 6 desktops - that's just what's running on THIS desktop.
In spite of all this, my 1.7 Ghz Centrino system is snappy and responsive. Even the Windows 2000 Virtual Machine performance is good enough to load Word XP and provide reasonable performance.
Where the h-ll are YOUR cycles going?
But, cost is a consideration!
on
Hondas in Space
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
If it costs $1,000,000 per pound to send somebody to space, virtually nobody goes to space, no matter how "safe". At that cost, it isn't worth it.
However, when the cost comes down enough, SO WHAT if a few people die?
Now, it sounds callous, but when you look at statistis, Motorcycles (AKA murder-cycles) are MIGHTY DANGEROUS..
NOBODY IS BANNING THE KAWASAKI, ARE THEY?
When you see somebody get on board a relatively cheap, fast, murder-cycle, do you tell them about the risks?
See, when space travel is cheap and "good enough", people will use it, even if it's as dangerous as a (gulp!) murder-cycle.
Wifi has lots of issues with interference. It shares bandwidth with cordless telephones, microwave ovens, and too many other similar devices to name.
Also, wifi is short range - directional antennas are at best a partial solution, and aren't much easier in many cases than running cat5.
You never specified the actual problem you're trying to solve. You already have telephone wires going to the greenhouses, what is wrong with your existing setup? Speed? Connection problems?
Or is it just plain "Geek factor"?
Before investing a time-consuming, unreliable 802.11b/g/n network, I'd wait a year and deploy wimax. It's MADE for longer ranges, and MADE for higher bit rates, and it's also supposed to have reduced sensitivity to interference.
It all depends on what having an "Open Source Career" means to you.
I write database-driven weblications with Linux/Apache/PostgreSQL/PHP. I get plenty of opportunities to contribute to the OSS community, (and I do) typically by providing documentation.
I don't primarily make my living actually writing OSS code, but I frequently release libraries and codebases I consider "commodity". I help out other people.
I contribute to email lists, online forums, etc. and use Open Source software as a platform to provide services for small to mid-size organizations.
Now just force SMTP Authentication on the ISP side. They didn't implement it just for fun. Everybody put his login/password in the pop3/imap textboxes, just put your login/password in the smtp textboxes. Won't kill anyone.
Also won't do much good. This is a young thread, and I've already seen several suggestions like this.
See, Outlook (Express) keeps that login information handy so that it can send a message without buggering you for said login information.
What's to say that the virus/worm won't use a COM call to tell OE to send the spam, effectively bypassing
A) SMTP-AUTH B) SSL C) TLS
and whatever else is set up.
What I'd suggest to the ISP is to put a virus filter on the mail server, require smtp_auth, and then block relaying for a client (with a descriptive error message) when they try to send a virus infected message.
Don't turn it on until the customer swears up and down they have CURRENT antivirus package installed.
So, there you are, in your car, with your spouse/girlfriend/evening hopeful. You've just enjoyed a movie, and are on your way to a nice dinner, and you're talking passionately about the best scenes in the movie.
You're talking and thinking about the movie. Do you drive like a drunk? Assuming that "hands free" improves nothing, should we pass laws forbidding conversation in cars?
As someone who admins along with other duties, I'd say that anything you can do to make everything consistent is probably worth doing.
If possible, use the same distro everywhere. RedHat is probably the best if you need/want "official" support. A mix of RHEL and WhiteBox Linux would qualify in my book as "consistent" since they are basically the same thing.
Debian is probably the best non-commercial distro.
Gentoo is a newcomer. Some swear by it, others are put off by the 3-days of compile time and the requirement to "get down and dirty" with your Linux install.
Suse in Europe is probably about like RedHat in the US. Now with Novell in on the picture, we'll see how things fare in the US.
As a RedHat user for years (since 5.1) I'm not eager to switch unless Novell makes a GOOD case. I came real close to jumping ship when RedHat changed their business plans - whitebox (and CentOS) have stopped me from leaving RedHat altogether.
So, pick your poison, and then get real familiar with your distro of choice. And, do everything possible to unify your technology base. Keep them all the !@#@ same because even within a distro, you run into issues. Like RH 6.2 supported source routing by default, making a mockery of carefully crafted firewall rules. Like RedHat 6.x uses ipchains, RedHat 7.x emulates ipchains with iptables (with a few differences) and RedHat 9 and above uses iptables.
These little differences can eat up time and make administration a pain. You should focus on the effect of administration, not the means, and unifying your install base means that when an issue is identified anywhere, you can quickly propogate your fix everywhere.
With this methodology, I've boiled patching and reviewing some 20+ systems down to a day or two every month! As soon as RHEL (Whitebox) 4.x comes out, I'm doing a major upgrade cycle, upgrading everything I can.
Certainly none of the desktop-replacement Wintel laptops I've seen have that little volume--they're gargantuan. In fact, the only thing that would equal it is, well, a Mac laptop.
It's quite small. It's light - definitely NOT "gargantuan".
And, It's full-strength. I bought one a year ago to replace my Athlon 2000+ - and it's suprprised me at how adept it is at it. I run Fedora Core 3 on it, and with VMWare, I routinely run 3 or 4 OS's at a time - and it handles it all with grace.
It amazes me to see so much in such a small package. Complete with Gb ethernet, 802.11g, and just about every other connection option possible built in. (No floppy - but the macs you're comparing this to don't have one either, and in any event, I've never missed it)
Re:Biggest Market for $100 PC? Developed World
on
The Hundred-Buck PC
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Given that most customers use PCs almost exclusively for word processing, e-mail, and web surfing,
But, that's not what most people use their computers for! Read up on the The 80/20 Myth to get some idea what I mean.
True, 80% of computer use is what you specify - but what about the other 20%?
It's ALL OVER THE PLACE. CAD/CAM. Web design. Graphic arts. Video games. Taxes and book-keeping. Software engineering. Encoding MP3s. Playing DVDs, MP3s, DivX, MPG content. Building quilt patterns. Serving database content.
Just because you can satisfy 80% of the uses of a computer doesn't mean that you can satisfy 80% of the users out there with 80% of the applications. If they were to be sold, your 80% computers would leave 100% of its users 20% dis-satisfied.
I recommend getting your high school diploma and/or college degree first. Computers are a tool. The "high cost" of Windows software is irrelevant compared to the cost of the computer and maintaining it. That's true for Windows users, that's true for Macintosh users, it's true for Linux users. (like me)
Use whatever best suits you. I use Linux because my profession leans heavily towards web servers, email, and big databases. I use Linux because it's cheap, reasonably secure, and very stable. (I enjoy sleeping at night) Notice I did not say anything about ease of use?
Linux is free, the market will correct itself, and Linux itself is proof.
The sticker was working on the signal in the space around the phone, where the sticker actually had an electromagnetic interaction.
Yeah, it uses an incredible signal-distortion phenomenon called the "placebo effect". If you want to know more about the science of this mysterious effect, you can read up on it here.
I've been saying for a while, an inexpensive device with a good display that can access the web, and nothing else, would be pretty compelling to a huge segment of the population.
Lots of people have been saying stuff like this for years. The problem is: nobody's buying it.
Any company willing to blow capital on yet another attempt at this deserves the painful financial death they'll suffer as a result.
Remember WebTV? Neither does anybody else, except those unfortunate enough to have bought one. How many others can YOU name?
Thin client sounds good, until you want to do XYZ and it's not supported. (or impossible)
Slashdot Mirror
Software piracy is victimless theft.
This is OT, so I'm not using my usual mod bonus.
Software Piracy is theft from the publisher of the software, and software vendors.
Pretend we're talking books. Let's say you are running a book store, and you are anticipating the latest Stephen King novel because of the spike in sales it brings - people come in the store to buy it, and usually leave with one or two other books "while they are there".
Now, assume that the novel is released as a pirated soft copy on the Internet, and 70% of the people who WOULD have come in to buy the book decide to download it instead.
Suddenly your spike is a small anthill, and you are pissed. Were any copies of the book "stolen" from you? (No, and that's where your fictional victimless crime scenario comes in)
But what about the VALUE of the books? By legitimizing software piracy, you reduce the value that the software vendors work (hard!) to produce.
That's not to say that Open Source Software should be banned. But, if the creators of the software decide to license it Closed Source (TM), they should have the right to do so, and software piracy is just that - theft.
If you don't like their terms, then don't buy it. But don't pretend that you aren't hurting anybody by stealing.
An emulator emulates a CPU or platform. VMWare is an emulator, because it emulates an x86 host system.
Except that it doesn't, which is why VMWare is NOT an emulator - VMWare cannot be run on non-X86 hardware. It actually uses 386 Enhanced mode to "split" the CPU into multiple logical CPUs, minimizing performance costs in so doing.
An actual X86 emulator is BOCHS.
If population density makes it so easy to provide fast & cheap broadband, why doesn't it exist in New York or San Francisco?
What, it doesn't?
I suggest you get a wifi capable notebook, and stroll the lovely streets of San Fransisco. You'll find an open "hotspot" all over the place.
Heck, in Phoenix, AZ, I'm sitting at a rented condo borrowing some neighbor's hotspot! It's a Linksys, with default p/w.
It's not fiber, but the speed is decent enough that I can stream The Elegant Universe with little to complain about...
What's the point of having super-secure Linux server if admin leave '1234' as password?
Damn. Guess I'd better go change it, now...
Not sure if you're making a point, or typing words because you like the feel of your new keyboard.
What are you saying? Maybe a few too many beers?
Soooo? Have you heard of GPL?
Are you aware that the GPL applies to customers only? There's no requirement to publish sources in a public FTP directory. (Missed that one, didn't you?)
Also, GPL applies to copyrights on source code, not trademarks.
To sum it up:
a) Coca Cola's recipe is a proprietary recipe not published under GPL
But the SRPMS are a *BINARY* format of source code. They don't have to publish it in a method so convenient, and certainly could license the SRPMS against redistribution.
b) You stole it
Stole? It was given! By Red Hat! On PUBLIC SERVERS! (You really missed this one, didn't you?)
c) You misused their Reg. TM to advertise a competing product
If RedHat doesn't defend their TradeMark under US law, they lose it. Would you sit down while somebody took hard-earned bread off your table? (I didn't think so)
And CentOS:
a) Is based on Red Hat's OS (GPL) which anyone can redistribute
The O/S isn't GPL, the source code is. The BINARY format of SRPMs can be licensed to restrict distribution. RedHat chose not to do this. (didn't I say this before?)
b) They did not steal the source code, SRPMs are publicly available on the Web/FTP and RH is obliged to make them available
By RedHat - who are nice enough to make this PUBLIC. (See above)
c) CentOS has not mislead any customers - they only pointed to RH's Web site as the source (base) of their product. And prior to receiving the letter they had a disclaimer about them not being associated with RH in any way.
And here is where the Coca-cola analogy comes into play. Red Hat is giving away their sources, and CentOS was saying that "this is RHEL, but it's not 'technically' RHEL". Red Hat has a problem with CentOS using RedHat's name to compete with RedHat.
And this is... surprising? You have the source, OK. That's fine. But don't pitch something that's not under the trademark of RH, using RH's trademark! I don't see the problem.
CentOS and WhiteBoxLinux play a very fine line. I admire what they're doing, and if they weren't doing it, RedHat would stand to lose money. (from me, anyway) It's not surprising that there are some skirmishes from time to time.
PS: Using parts of your male anatomy to describe things indicates what's on your mind. Move your thought process a few feet further up the spinal column - you'll be amazed at the result!
It's quite silly to dismiss the power of (ahem) alternative power.
For example, the Freedom Tower now under construction in NYC, USA will generate a significant amount of its own power. (as much as 20%!)
I'm a supporter of Nuclear technology, but only if it's open. The current "don't ask, don't tell" nuclear regime is stupid, stupid, stupid, and will never result in an industry that's truly safe. Nuclear technology should, like cryptography, be open, and should only be trusted when it's withstood significant, public, peer review.
Have you ever heard of Changing world technologies and their plans to convert garbage into crude oil? I've been following this one for about 2 years, and I think it's the "real deal". It's still in its infancy, but it's viable in many places now, today!
They're taking their time to refine things, and if I were them, I would, too. When I get the chance to invest in their technology, chances are, I will.
CentOS is not just "like" RedHat - it literally *IS* RedHat Linux! Same sources, same compile tree.
/ONLY/ thing different is the manufacturing date! (compile time)
The
Can you imagine the SHITFIT that Coca-Cola would have if there was a competing product called "Co-sola - Coca-Cola derived soda"??? I mean, artificial diamond production would quintuple overnight, and the Men's Wearhouse would have a run on all the suits needed to cover all the lawyers' bodies involved...
RedHat is being very, very good about this. And it's a good thing, too - RedHat would lose all future business from me (and very nearly did with their RHL -> Fedora switcharoo) if they did anything to actually stop CentOS or WhiteBox.
But, the name is theirs, and they have every right and responsibiltiy to protect it as legally required.
I dunno. There's something about his designs that leave me wondering if my name wasn't really Pinnochio, just swallowed by a whale.
Some of these shots might be nice if they didn't leave me with strong impressions of the intestinal tract...
And many customers really want out. People complain about MS a lot now.
Doing some tech support, it's amazing to me how bad the problem with spyware, viruses, and trojans has gotten in WindowsLand. I've used Linux almost 100% since 1999 - so I'm pretty well insulated from all that - but now I see systems I'd only described as "hosed" routinely.
I make sure to make a plug for a Macintosh, and inform them that we only use 100% Linux systems to ensure good uptimes and near immunity to viruses, worms, etc. People get hysterical when they're told that their computer really needs to be examined yet AGAIN by a "qualified technician" due to porn site links showing up at random on their desktop, or it behaving very slowly, etc. I don't mince words when I discuss the insecurity of their Windows system, and what it's costing them.
Oh, and in our small software company, we're working on a Mac port, due (hopefully) by mid-summer 2005 so that we can be part of the solution. We're sick of the tech support phone calls, too!
Only on Slashdot: a senseless reply to sarcastic humor gets modded "insightful"...
I write this on a Fedora C3 Laptop. I have a VMware window running with an instance of Windows 2000, and an instance of White Box Linux. I have an MP3 player streaming from my network server, over my encrypted wireless connection.
I have 2 OpenOffice documents, and two monitors, giving me an effective resolution of 2650x1200, a smattering of Xterms, a calculator, and Kmail. Oh, and there are a total of 6 desktops - that's just what's running on THIS desktop.
In spite of all this, my 1.7 Ghz Centrino system is snappy and responsive. Even the Windows 2000 Virtual Machine performance is good enough to load Word XP and provide reasonable performance.
Where the h-ll are YOUR cycles going?
If it costs $1,000,000 per pound to send somebody to space, virtually nobody goes to space, no matter how "safe". At that cost, it isn't worth it.
However, when the cost comes down enough, SO WHAT if a few people die?
Now, it sounds callous, but when you look at statistis, Motorcycles (AKA murder-cycles) are MIGHTY DANGEROUS..
NOBODY IS BANNING THE KAWASAKI, ARE THEY?
When you see somebody get on board a relatively cheap, fast, murder-cycle, do you tell them about the risks?
See, when space travel is cheap and "good enough", people will use it, even if it's as dangerous as a (gulp!) murder-cycle.
Is it just me, or are there lots of similarities between AOL and Microsoft?
1) Early provider of technology in a new area.
2) Commanding lead in user base
3) Targetting "clueless" users
4) Dropping status among geek users "in the know"
5) Attemp to move from technology service to media
6) Inability to expand outside early-obtained cash cow. (Aol=access, Msft=Win/Office)
7) Encroachment of free/reduced cost options eating at core profit center
Given all this, will Microsoft follow AOL's fate?
Wifi has lots of issues with interference. It shares bandwidth with cordless telephones, microwave ovens, and too many other similar devices to name.
Also, wifi is short range - directional antennas are at best a partial solution, and aren't much easier in many cases than running cat5.
You never specified the actual problem you're trying to solve. You already have telephone wires going to the greenhouses, what is wrong with your existing setup? Speed? Connection problems?
Or is it just plain "Geek factor"?
Before investing a time-consuming, unreliable 802.11b/g/n network, I'd wait a year and deploy wimax. It's MADE for longer ranges, and MADE for higher bit rates, and it's also supposed to have reduced sensitivity to interference.
Horsepuckey.
It all depends on what having an "Open Source Career" means to you.
I write database-driven weblications with Linux/Apache/PostgreSQL/PHP. I get plenty of opportunities to contribute to the OSS community, (and I do) typically by providing documentation.
I don't primarily make my living actually writing OSS code, but I frequently release libraries and codebases I consider "commodity". I help out other people.
I contribute to email lists, online forums, etc. and use Open Source software as a platform to provide services for small to mid-size organizations.
No career in OSS? PFFFT!
Now just force SMTP Authentication on the ISP side. They didn't implement it just for fun. Everybody put his login/password in the pop3/imap textboxes, just put your login/password in the smtp textboxes. Won't kill anyone.
Also won't do much good. This is a young thread, and I've already seen several suggestions like this.
See, Outlook (Express) keeps that login information handy so that it can send a message without buggering you for said login information.
What's to say that the virus/worm won't use a COM call to tell OE to send the spam, effectively bypassing
A) SMTP-AUTH
B) SSL
C) TLS
and whatever else is set up.
What I'd suggest to the ISP is to put a virus filter on the mail server, require smtp_auth, and then block relaying for a client (with a descriptive error message) when they try to send a virus infected message.
Don't turn it on until the customer swears up and down they have CURRENT antivirus package installed.
So, there you are, in your car, with your spouse/girlfriend/evening hopeful. You've just enjoyed a movie, and are on your way to a nice dinner, and you're talking passionately about the best scenes in the movie.
You're talking and thinking about the movie. Do you drive like a drunk? Assuming that "hands free" improves nothing, should we pass laws forbidding conversation in cars?
As someone who admins along with other duties, I'd say that anything you can do to make everything consistent is probably worth doing.
If possible, use the same distro everywhere. RedHat is probably the best if you need/want "official" support. A mix of RHEL and WhiteBox Linux would qualify in my book as "consistent" since they are basically the same thing.
Debian is probably the best non-commercial distro.
Gentoo is a newcomer. Some swear by it, others are put off by the 3-days of compile time and the requirement to "get down and dirty" with your Linux install.
Suse in Europe is probably about like RedHat in the US. Now with Novell in on the picture, we'll see how things fare in the US.
As a RedHat user for years (since 5.1) I'm not eager to switch unless Novell makes a GOOD case. I came real close to jumping ship when RedHat changed their business plans - whitebox (and CentOS) have stopped me from leaving RedHat altogether.
So, pick your poison, and then get real familiar with your distro of choice. And, do everything possible to unify your technology base. Keep them all the !@#@ same because even within a distro, you run into issues. Like RH 6.2 supported source routing by default, making a mockery of carefully crafted firewall rules. Like RedHat 6.x uses ipchains, RedHat 7.x emulates ipchains with iptables (with a few differences) and RedHat 9 and above uses iptables.
These little differences can eat up time and make administration a pain. You should focus on the effect of administration, not the means, and unifying your install base means that when an issue is identified anywhere, you can quickly propogate your fix everywhere.
With this methodology, I've boiled patching and reviewing some 20+ systems down to a day or two every month! As soon as RHEL (Whitebox) 4.x comes out, I'm doing a major upgrade cycle, upgrading everything I can.
You are too retarded for words.
And a guy, too! Truth hurts?
Certainly none of the desktop-replacement Wintel laptops I've seen have that little volume--they're gargantuan. In fact, the only thing that would equal it is, well, a Mac laptop.
Well, then, perhaps you haven't seen this little gem?
It's quite small. It's light - definitely NOT "gargantuan".
And, It's full-strength. I bought one a year ago to replace my Athlon 2000+ - and it's suprprised me at how adept it is at it. I run Fedora Core 3 on it, and with VMWare, I routinely run 3 or 4 OS's at a time - and it handles it all with grace.
It amazes me to see so much in such a small package. Complete with Gb ethernet, 802.11g, and just about every other connection option possible built in. (No floppy - but the macs you're comparing this to don't have one either, and in any event, I've never missed it)
And, it seems that my observations are supported by other indendent scrutiny.
So, what's that you say?
Given that most customers use PCs almost exclusively for word processing, e-mail, and web surfing,
But, that's not what most people use their computers for! Read up on the The 80/20 Myth to get some idea what I mean.
True, 80% of computer use is what you specify - but what about the other 20%?
It's ALL OVER THE PLACE. CAD/CAM. Web design. Graphic arts. Video games. Taxes and book-keeping. Software engineering. Encoding MP3s. Playing DVDs, MP3s, DivX, MPG content. Building quilt patterns. Serving database content.
Just because you can satisfy 80% of the uses of a computer doesn't mean that you can satisfy 80% of the users out there with 80% of the applications. If they were to be sold, your 80% computers would leave 100% of its users 20% dis-satisfied.
Zahg,
I recommend getting your high school diploma and/or college degree first. Computers are a tool. The "high cost" of Windows software is irrelevant compared to the cost of the computer and maintaining it. That's true for Windows users, that's true for Macintosh users, it's true for Linux users. (like me)
Use whatever best suits you. I use Linux because my profession leans heavily towards web servers, email, and big databases. I use Linux because it's cheap, reasonably secure, and very stable. (I enjoy sleeping at night) Notice I did not say anything about ease of use?
Linux is free, the market will correct itself, and Linux itself is proof.
The sticker was working on the signal in the space around the phone, where the sticker actually had an electromagnetic interaction.
Yeah, it uses an incredible signal-distortion phenomenon called the "placebo effect". If you want to know more about the science of this mysterious effect, you can read up on it here.
I've been saying for a while, an inexpensive device with a good display that can access the web, and nothing else, would be pretty compelling to a huge segment of the population.
Lots of people have been saying stuff like this for years. The problem is: nobody's buying it.
Any company willing to blow capital on yet another attempt at this deserves the painful financial death they'll suffer as a result.
Remember WebTV? Neither does anybody else, except those unfortunate enough to have bought one. How many others can YOU name?
Thin client sounds good, until you want to do XYZ and it's not supported. (or impossible)