Ha! I'm still using Office X from 2001 when I got my first iBook. Sure I was a little worried it might not work on Leopard on the intel-based MacBook (like certain Adobe products I could name), but she's screaming along just fine.
And I never lost VBA support--so I can still support clients who are using office macros I wrote 15 years ago!
Its a maxim I teach my web development students every day. I run a windows/linux/mac environment on my home network, and run Apache/Tomcat/PWS on one of my windows boxes and use my Linux/Apache/Samba server as a live web server while windows is for development. My Mac I use for design and Photoshop work. I love Linux and OSS, but I'll still choose the best tool for the job--which is why I look at all the tools I use with a critical eye. Having the source avaiable and free (in both senses of the word) makes a tool valuable to me, but if it still isn't best-in-breed for what I need, I'll spend money on it.
Dreamweaver UltraDev 4 w/ Homesite vs Frontpage 2000 -- there's no comparison.
For a server, Linux always. For a web programming environment, sometimes I'll choose Windows, sometimes Linux--depends on the client's needs. For design, it'll always be a Mac.
In my (granted limited) experience, and from what I've heard, I think BeOS is an excellent little OS, even if it does have a small niche. That said, I hope it can survive as Open Source Software. If you ask me the more OSS Operating Systems (OSSOSs?) we have out there the better off we are--giev more leverage perhaps against the bit monolithic software houses who produce their proprietary crap (MS WinXP anyone?)
The backlash we saw here on/. and elsewhere against the RAND recommendation fromt he W3C, and the subsequent response from HP and Apple says something quite significant--I think-- about who the real customers of web technology are.
Apple and HPs move are PR motivated, and it looks like they were motivated by the response from their 'real' web cutomers -- the web developers and web designers who work with HTML and W3C 'standards' every day.
I find it interesting to note that Microsoft has yet to say anything about the backlash or its current position. Like always I suspect they hold their customers, and developers in nothing less than utter contempt.
If some of the original files (dbm, expat, jpeg etc.) are still being licensed under their original licenses (BSD, MIT etc.) how is that going to affect the overall GPL compatiablity of the triple-license scheme for the whole project? And if, as I suspect, it will make the whole Mozilla project incompatible with the GPL, what was the point of the tripple licensing scheme?
But is this a new kind of war, or is this simply a police manhunt on a massive scale. What bin Laden has done (or what his people have done) are commit crimes against humanity. Yes we've moved against members of Governments to aprehend them for crimes against humanity, and moved against them in a war footing, but bin Laden isn't a member of the Taliban, or any other government faction -- he's one man with his own organization.
Would we send the army in to a country to capture the CEO of a forign corporation and call it war? I hope not.
I don't think this is truly a 'new kind of war', I think that's rhetoric to get the public onside for a long, and likely bloody policing action.
Surely a much better test would involve people/companies who don't share the linux view of the world but who wish to leverage the codebase for their own gain..
Yes, but the more the FSF and GPL are seen as enforceable in a business content (even if the 'business' who agrees to abide by the GPL is one of 'us') the more bigger business who isn't one of 'us' will see it as not worth taking on the FSF and GPL.
Especially if there are a legion of rabid slashdotters ready to take on the eveil bad-guys.
While working as a network admin once, I had a processor burn out without its heatsink. Smoke started rising from the open case, so one of my comrads in arms decided to 'put out the fire' with his bottle of Coke.
I've never seen a machine burn so brightly. We were lucky (or maybe not) that the building's sprinklers were on the blink.
There was a similar case where the company went into recievership and the reciever sold off client information as an asset of the company. I can't remember the details, but it was a real big stink here on/. and elsewhere.
In this day and age of information though, information is an asset. Yours and likely an asset of any company you provide it to. Remember, you're not being made to give out your personal info, you're providing it in exchange (along with money sometimes) for a service.
Sadly the acts that the terrorists took part in on Tuesday were very much conventional warfare, in that it was likely planned and executed through a cell-structure, and with conventional 'weapons' (ie non-NBC).
I wonder if the Internet was used heavily in this action, and if it would be used heavily by such groups in the future. we all know the security issues involved with using technology (and read that as a privacy issue as well). Its been reported that bin Lauden doesn't use cel phones or other wireless devices any more to keep the US from triangulating or tapping in on his communications. Much as I hate to admit it, these people arn't stupid. Tapping the internet without warrants won't keep them from communicating, they'll go to other methods less easy to tap.
Meanwhile we loose a bit more of our own liberty. There is the first lesson, and likely the terrorist's first victory.
Kudos to Slashdot and the Slashteam
on
Handling the Loads
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I've spent the last few days in something of a daze, waiting for the real ramifications of Tuesdays horror to sink in. Many of my collegues up here in Canada are not sure what to make of the events, and possible response, but we're sure it will be bad.
That said, in all my experiences on the net over the last couple of days, it was Slashdot I came back to for my info feed/dump. Who had their site up and running in the face of the massive demand? Slashdot.
CNN was there during the Gulf War. Slashdot was there for the start of this new era, and I'm sure will be there in the face of whatever is to come. You guys are just another indication of the strength the US can have in the face of adversisty.
These 'secret' proprietary processes always seem to generate a lot of hyp, investment/funding, whatever and never seem to generate the proposed technology. A good example's a Calgary company that hyped its 'new' large-scale flat screen (non morticed screens) technology. It ended up that the founder had fraudulently demonstrated 'their' tech to shareholders using a compeditor's equiptment.
You've got to give it to sun though--they seem pretty keen on GNOME usability. Heck, I can see how having a blind developer would certainly push usability in a whole new direction...
What I find most interesting about this Software Libre idea as proposed by some of the legaslative bodies involved is their definition of it. They seem to want to avoid the "Open Source vs. Free Software" rhetoric that we've been seeing recently--but even more interestingly, it seems that they're combining the two key factors the Free Software and Open Source communities expouse:
Firstly, the freedom to do what you will with the software. Who wants their government's (and by extension their) rights to use software restricted by a multi-national headquartered in another country?
And Secondly, the price is right. I'd rather see my tax dollars go towards quality software and support, -and- other services, than into MS's pocket for proprietary software that doesn't work (anyone remember Russia's lost nuclear materials? thanks MS SQLServer.)
I talked to some developers with Corel a couple of years ago when they were just getting into the Linux market (it was at a job fair when I was looking for work) and they seemed pretty keen on how they were going to bring a fully integrated GUI to the Linux desktop (integrated as in from install through to user's desktop--like Windows does).
I liked the idea, and was especially happy to hear that it was a Canadian company. That said, I always thought Copland was a little flakey, and as it turned out his 'Copland Research Labs' got rid of him--and unfortunatly it seems their Linux distro. What can you expect when MS invests in you though?
I just wonder if all of Corel's GUI work was proprietary, or if it might be released Open Source with the distro's move?
I have to agree. A couple of years ago we installed SuSE (I think it was a 5.x or something) and YaST just wasn't up to my installation needs (that I be able to teach some kid network admins how to do it too). Red Hat was the way to go then, but now...
I like the increased useability in the install on all distro's these days. makes it as simple to install Linux as to format a Windows NT 4.0 box...
That said, i still do all my admin on the command line.
The revelation that Microsoft would hold a gun to their OEM's heads doesn't suprise me. Microsoft may not be the 'Great Satan', but their business practices are somewhat sinister, cloak and dagger, and monopilist.
What surprises me is that some of the major hardware vendors would put up with this. Compaq, Dell and IBM? Without them to pre-load windows (which would happen if MS pulled their license) half of Window's market share would evaporate. It's true--few people would install their own OS. If MS pulled their license, why doesn't IBM or Compaq just install Linux for free and say to hell with Redmond?
Maybe there's more to this than just the license thing. maybe Bill Gates has several CEO's families held hostage in the basement of his Redmond Complex....
I would imagine that Mr. Steele's article might be a little premature in looking at the economic impact of the 'net. The Internet itself may have been around for a while, but the Web (which for all intents and purposes has been driving this economic 'boom') has only been around for slightly more than 10 years (slight being in the order of months).
It's the mode of the day for pundits to jump on the bandwagon and look at the economic impact of the net, but in terms of history, we're still looking at the birth of this industry. It's too early to truly gauge the real impact.
Despite the recent bubble burst, I think the golden days are still to come. Where we are now is at the dawn of a new age, akin to the very earliest decade of the Industrial Revolution. What happens next will change the world, beyond anything we could imagine.
Sure, why not pay a leavy on all data storage devices. Given a hard drive I can carry my stolen MP3 and warez anywhere I want--all i need is an IDE cable to plug into...
Or maybe I could copy it all by faxing it to myself. How about a leavy on fax paper?
Slashdot Mirror
That said, you're right--these are the first battles, and I fear we the people are losing.
Sean
Ha! I'm still using Office X from 2001 when I got my first iBook. Sure I was a little worried it might not work on Leopard on the intel-based MacBook (like certain Adobe products I could name), but she's screaming along just fine.
And I never lost VBA support--so I can still support clients who are using office macros I wrote 15 years ago!
Cheers,
Sean
Its a maxim I teach my web development students every day. I run a windows/linux/mac environment on my home network, and run Apache/Tomcat/PWS on one of my windows boxes and use my Linux/Apache/Samba server as a live web server while windows is for development. My Mac I use for design and Photoshop work. I love Linux and OSS, but I'll still choose the best tool for the job--which is why I look at all the tools I use with a critical eye. Having the source avaiable and free (in both senses of the word) makes a tool valuable to me, but if it still isn't best-in-breed for what I need, I'll spend money on it.
Dreamweaver UltraDev 4 w/ Homesite vs Frontpage 2000 -- there's no comparison.
For a server, Linux always. For a web programming environment, sometimes I'll choose Windows, sometimes Linux--depends on the client's needs. For design, it'll always be a Mac.
Best tool for the situation I say.
In my (granted limited) experience, and from what I've heard, I think BeOS is an excellent little OS, even if it does have a small niche. That said, I hope it can survive as Open Source Software. If you ask me the more OSS Operating Systems (OSSOSs?) we have out there the better off we are--giev more leverage perhaps against the bit monolithic software houses who produce their proprietary crap (MS WinXP anyone?)
Just IMHO...
Does this mean that it'll move the OS Wars (Linux vs Windows) to gaming consoles?
Then again, looking at the menu system for the Xbox, I can honestly say I'd prefer windows to what MS is doing on their console system....
Wonder if Sony's Linux port will have wacky interface options?
The backlash we saw here on /. and elsewhere against the RAND recommendation fromt he W3C, and the subsequent response from HP and Apple says something quite significant--I think-- about who the real customers of web technology are.
Apple and HPs move are PR motivated, and it looks like they were motivated by the response from their 'real' web cutomers -- the web developers and web designers who work with HTML and W3C 'standards' every day.
I find it interesting to note that Microsoft has yet to say anything about the backlash or its current position. Like always I suspect they hold their customers, and developers in nothing less than utter contempt.
Intel might be winning the chip wars here -- then again the G5 is comming out in January, and that should rock a few worlds :)
(or you could buy yourself a giant 106 processor Sun box instead...)
If some of the original files (dbm, expat, jpeg etc.) are still being licensed under their original licenses (BSD, MIT etc.) how is that going to affect the overall GPL compatiablity of the triple-license scheme for the whole project? And if, as I suspect, it will make the whole Mozilla project incompatible with the GPL, what was the point of the tripple licensing scheme?
just wondering.
But is this a new kind of war, or is this simply a police manhunt on a massive scale. What bin Laden has done (or what his people have done) are commit crimes against humanity. Yes we've moved against members of Governments to aprehend them for crimes against humanity, and moved against them in a war footing, but bin Laden isn't a member of the Taliban, or any other government faction -- he's one man with his own organization.
Would we send the army in to a country to capture the CEO of a forign corporation and call it war? I hope not.
I don't think this is truly a 'new kind of war', I think that's rhetoric to get the public onside for a long, and likely bloody policing action.
Yes, but the more the FSF and GPL are seen as enforceable in a business content (even if the 'business' who agrees to abide by the GPL is one of 'us') the more bigger business who isn't one of 'us' will see it as not worth taking on the FSF and GPL.
Especially if there are a legion of rabid slashdotters ready to take on the eveil bad-guys.
Go my unholy army of the night...
While working as a network admin once, I had a processor burn out without its heatsink. Smoke started rising from the open case, so one of my comrads in arms decided to 'put out the fire' with his bottle of Coke.
I've never seen a machine burn so brightly. We were lucky (or maybe not) that the building's sprinklers were on the blink.
And I live to tell the tale....
There was a similar case where the company went into recievership and the reciever sold off client information as an asset of the company. I can't remember the details, but it was a real big stink here on /. and elsewhere.
In this day and age of information though, information is an asset. Yours and likely an asset of any company you provide it to. Remember, you're not being made to give out your personal info, you're providing it in exchange (along with money sometimes) for a service.
COuld this possibly be useful with Ximian's Mono project, or Gnu.NET? I could imagine using this as a VM for C# could seriously PO M$ :)
Sadly the acts that the terrorists took part in on Tuesday were very much conventional warfare, in that it was likely planned and executed through a cell-structure, and with conventional 'weapons' (ie non-NBC).
I wonder if the Internet was used heavily in this action, and if it would be used heavily by such groups in the future. we all know the security issues involved with using technology (and read that as a privacy issue as well). Its been reported that bin Lauden doesn't use cel phones or other wireless devices any more to keep the US from triangulating or tapping in on his communications. Much as I hate to admit it, these people arn't stupid. Tapping the internet without warrants won't keep them from communicating, they'll go to other methods less easy to tap.
Meanwhile we loose a bit more of our own liberty. There is the first lesson, and likely the terrorist's first victory.
I've spent the last few days in something of a daze, waiting for the real ramifications of Tuesdays horror to sink in. Many of my collegues up here in Canada are not sure what to make of the events, and possible response, but we're sure it will be bad.
That said, in all my experiences on the net over the last couple of days, it was Slashdot I came back to for my info feed/dump. Who had their site up and running in the face of the massive demand? Slashdot.
CNN was there during the Gulf War. Slashdot was there for the start of this new era, and I'm sure will be there in the face of whatever is to come. You guys are just another indication of the strength the US can have in the face of adversisty.
Thank you.
These 'secret' proprietary processes always seem to generate a lot of hyp, investment/funding, whatever and never seem to generate the proposed technology. A good example's a Calgary company that hyped its 'new' large-scale flat screen (non morticed screens) technology. It ended up that the founder had fraudulently demonstrated 'their' tech to shareholders using a compeditor's equiptment.
I can't help but think of 'The Spanish Prisoner.'
Not to support MS here, but...
:)
IIRC, didn't SGI used to have IRIX running on 64 bit systems? Didn't SGI make a move to Linux? Didn't SGI assist with some 64 bit code?
If I do remember that right, then Linux had a leg up thanks to SGI--a company that use to have a little pocket change itself
You've got to give it to sun though--they seem pretty keen on GNOME usability. Heck, I can see how having a blind developer would certainly push usability in a whole new direction...
What I find most interesting about this Software Libre idea as proposed by some of the legaslative bodies involved is their definition of it. They seem to want to avoid the "Open Source vs. Free Software" rhetoric that we've been seeing recently--but even more interestingly, it seems that they're combining the two key factors the Free Software and Open Source communities expouse:
Firstly, the freedom to do what you will with the software. Who wants their government's (and by extension their) rights to use software restricted by a multi-national headquartered in another country?
And Secondly, the price is right. I'd rather see my tax dollars go towards quality software and support, -and- other services, than into MS's pocket for proprietary software that doesn't work (anyone remember Russia's lost nuclear materials? thanks MS SQLServer.)
Check out this humorix article.
Looks like ESR might be able to sue the Supreme Court--if he moved Down Under!
I talked to some developers with Corel a couple of years ago when they were just getting into the Linux market (it was at a job fair when I was looking for work) and they seemed pretty keen on how they were going to bring a fully integrated GUI to the Linux desktop (integrated as in from install through to user's desktop--like Windows does).
I liked the idea, and was especially happy to hear that it was a Canadian company. That said, I always thought Copland was a little flakey, and as it turned out his 'Copland Research Labs' got rid of him--and unfortunatly it seems their Linux distro. What can you expect when MS invests in you though?
I just wonder if all of Corel's GUI work was proprietary, or if it might be released Open Source with the distro's move?
I have to agree. A couple of years ago we installed SuSE (I think it was a 5.x or something) and YaST just wasn't up to my installation needs (that I be able to teach some kid network admins how to do it too). Red Hat was the way to go then, but now...
I like the increased useability in the install on all distro's these days. makes it as simple to install Linux as to format a Windows NT 4.0 box...
That said, i still do all my admin on the command line.
The revelation that Microsoft would hold a gun to their OEM's heads doesn't suprise me. Microsoft may not be the 'Great Satan', but their business practices are somewhat sinister, cloak and dagger, and monopilist.
What surprises me is that some of the major hardware vendors would put up with this. Compaq, Dell and IBM? Without them to pre-load windows (which would happen if MS pulled their license) half of Window's market share would evaporate. It's true--few people would install their own OS. If MS pulled their license, why doesn't IBM or Compaq just install Linux for free and say to hell with Redmond?
Maybe there's more to this than just the license thing. maybe Bill Gates has several CEO's families held hostage in the basement of his Redmond Complex....
I would imagine that Mr. Steele's article might be a little premature in looking at the economic impact of the 'net. The Internet itself may have been around for a while, but the Web (which for all intents and purposes has been driving this economic 'boom') has only been around for slightly more than 10 years (slight being in the order of months).
It's the mode of the day for pundits to jump on the bandwagon and look at the economic impact of the net, but in terms of history, we're still looking at the birth of this industry. It's too early to truly gauge the real impact.
Despite the recent bubble burst, I think the golden days are still to come. Where we are now is at the dawn of a new age, akin to the very earliest decade of the Industrial Revolution. What happens next will change the world, beyond anything we could imagine.
Sure, why not pay a leavy on all data storage devices. Given a hard drive I can carry my stolen MP3 and warez anywhere I want--all i need is an IDE cable to plug into...
Or maybe I could copy it all by faxing it to myself. How about a leavy on fax paper?
::sheesh::