is the cost of the wires. Especially the wires out to remote areas. If we all paid for our share of the infrastructure, the upfront cost would be huge and the incremental cost tiny. LD companies can get away with charging low rattes precisely because they don't have to maintain the local loop from your phone to the CO. LD rates are higher than they would be otherwise because the LD carriers pay the local carriers for bringing calls into the local system.
Why is source code important?
on
Linux on CNN
·
· Score: 1
The source code is important so that you can compile and install the modules and devices with the optimizations that you need rather than have a one-size fits all kernel. But no one has to install the source if they don't want to do this. {insert your favorite distribution} will install functional, precompiled modules. It's valuable just having the option even if you don't choose to take advantage of it.
In the long run, the source code is crucial so that Linux will continue to exist and be supported. How many good commercial products have died an ignoble death just because the company that bought the code didn't want to enhance or support it any more? How many good products have been bought and buried so that an inferior product would be preserved from competition? This *can't* happen with Linux or with GNU.
This is research into the genes that control development. By understanding how genes control the devlopment of limbs, we can understand how deformities occur and perhaps how to prevent them.
These "three-legged" chickens were made my manipulating the embryos. These modifications will not be passed on to the next generation. Furthermore, the third "leg" retains some wing-like features.
No one is going to make three-legged chickens especially when each embryo needs to be individually manipulated.
"There go the heebies, but I've still got the jeebies"
Micrso~1 could very easily E&E Linux. MS made early inroads with their compiler technology. MS could make and sell (not give away) a compiler with a Win32 compatability lib as well as port NT services to Linux without ever releasing the sources.
A MS Linux (for ~$100 with a Win32.so and $whatever per user for WinNT.so network services) could be easily put together. MS is a company big enough to be persuing all of these avenues. They could enter an existing market and maintain their pricing.
MS Office for Linux would ride on the Win32.so library and provide nominal Office compatability. How far it lags behind the native MS version will depend on how long that want to string us along.
Don't think that the PHB's won't buy it.
"There go the heebies, but I've still got the jeebies." -- Kate on The Drew Carey Show
Well, a lot of this depends on the hardware you're using. I don't believe that Linux has heavy support for TWAIN (the protocol used for scanners, digital cameras, etc), nor many of these devices at the driver level are supported. Best bet would be to write the creator of your hardware and demand a set of Linux drivers, then work on getting the TWAIN support you need, with a program, not unlike a situation in windows.
Rather than TWAIN, Linux has SANE (Scanner Access Now Easy). Try http://www.mostang.com/sane/ . Quite a few scanners are supported and it works as a plug-in for Gimp so that images pop up into a Gimp window for editing/printing/saving. There is some discussion at that site on the inadequacies of TWAIN. SANE supports sharing a scanner over a network which is not possible with TWAIN.
Slashdot Mirror
What would you like to do?
Install or remove individual components of Microsoft Office.
is the cost of the wires. Especially the wires out to remote areas. If we all paid for our share of the infrastructure, the upfront cost would be huge and the incremental cost tiny. LD companies can get away with charging low rattes precisely because they don't have to maintain the local loop from your phone to the CO. LD rates are higher than they would be otherwise because the LD carriers pay the local carriers for bringing calls into the local system.
Oh, maybe the FCC. Don't sell one of those.
The source code is important so that you can compile and install the modules and devices with the optimizations that you need rather than have a one-size fits all kernel. But no one has to install the source if they don't want to do this. {insert your favorite distribution} will install functional, precompiled modules. It's valuable just having the option even if you don't choose to take advantage of it.
In the long run, the source code is crucial so that Linux will continue to exist and be supported. How many good commercial products have died an ignoble death just because the company that bought the code didn't want to enhance or support it any more? How many good products have been bought and buried so that an inferior product would be preserved from competition? This *can't* happen with Linux or with GNU.
This is research into the genes that control development. By understanding how genes control the devlopment of limbs, we can understand how deformities occur and perhaps how to prevent them.
These "three-legged" chickens were made my manipulating the embryos. These modifications will not be passed on to the next generation. Furthermore, the third "leg" retains some wing-like features.
No one is going to make three-legged chickens especially when each embryo needs to be individually manipulated.
"There go the heebies, but I've still got the jeebies"
Well, I patented First Post! You owe me. Vinnie and Guido will be over in the morning to discuss "licensing terms".
Micrso~1 could very easily E&E Linux. MS made early inroads with their compiler technology. MS could make and sell (not give away) a compiler with a Win32 compatability lib as well as port NT services to Linux without ever releasing the sources.
A MS Linux (for ~$100 with a Win32.so and $whatever per user for WinNT.so network services) could be easily put together. MS is a company big enough to be persuing all of these avenues. They could enter an existing market and maintain their pricing.
MS Office for Linux would ride on the Win32.so library and provide nominal Office compatability. How far it lags behind the native MS version will depend on how long that want to string us along.
Don't think that the PHB's won't buy it.
"There go the heebies, but I've still got the jeebies." -- Kate on The Drew Carey Show
Well, a lot of this depends on the hardware you're using. I don't believe that Linux has heavy support for TWAIN (the protocol used for scanners, digital cameras, etc), nor many of these devices at the driver level are supported. Best bet would be to write the creator of your hardware and demand a set of Linux drivers, then work on getting the TWAIN support you need, with a program, not unlike a situation in windows.
Rather than TWAIN, Linux has SANE (Scanner Access Now Easy). Try http://www.mostang.com/sane/ . Quite a few scanners are supported and it works as a plug-in for Gimp so that images pop up into a Gimp window for editing/printing/saving. There is some discussion at that site on the inadequacies of TWAIN. SANE supports sharing a scanner over a network which is not possible with TWAIN.