No, they won't bother with it because it's completely meaningless to the vast majority of their consumers. The people who would actually care about an F$F endorsement is a microscopic minority.
Now more than ever before, we need people to understand the difference between open and locked-down hardware, and to help them make rational choices while shopping.
Translation: The "rational choice" is only the one that I approve of you making. People do understand the difference, they just overwhelming don't care.
To me, it is unthinkable that my personal computers should be remote-controlled by a third party
Then *gasp* don't buy that product. Wow, that was hard, right?
but the crowds are only beginning to wake up to the pain that proprietary platforms are causing them.
If by "the crowds" you mean a bunch of irrelevant whining by some nerds on a few tech sites, then yes, they truly are "waking up".
With our endorsement mark and the strong criteria that back it, we plan to bridge that gap and demonstrate to manufacturers that they stand to gain plenty by making hardware that respects people's freedom instead of curtailing it.
Yeah, I'm real sure most manufacturers care about whether the F$F endorses their products. You might have a case if the basement-dwelling Linux market was more than a statistical anomaly.
But in truth, all it reveals is a sadly biased study, one which doesn't reveal its sources
So, here's some facts [linuxtoday.com].
LOL. It's funny how you claim that the Net Applications site is wrong because it's a "biased study, one which doesn't reveal its sources" and yet you post a link to a linuxtoday article that just has a bunch of people posting their random speculation with no sources and yet that's where you get "facts".
Where? I've never paid more than 30 bucks a month ever for basic cable.
~$1300 for digital/HD cable
Wow, you really are dumb. I got digital cable with all the non-premium HD channels for only 20 bucks more over the price of basic cable. Even including the 15/2 internet I get I don't pay more than maybe 1100 a year for the entire package and that's not with any sort of special deals or anything.
I didn't realize that a computer with an Athlon/Pentium 4 running at 1 ghz was now a "supercomputer"? Or maybe you're another idiot that doesn't realize that CryEngine 2 is the game engine you were thinking of?
Well, for one thing, most corporations that contribute code do so so that Linux will work better with their hardware.
Which means they aren't contributing out of altruism but in their own self-interest. Way to refute yourself in the same sentence.
It's not like they're contributing something that's generally useful to most Linux users, like a codec or a font, or a filesystem. So stop acting like it is.
Funny cause I never made any such claim. Secondly, what do codecs and fonts have to do with kernel hacking? And secondly, most corporate contributions are really of no benefit but to themselves and their own hardware/software platforms and not to the users at large.
I was talking about the point in general. Yes, I did read the summary and know that he's bitched at other companies. Though it seems that he has the generosity to not publicly flame them unlike Microsoft.
So what? How does that stop anyone from using the license? There are plenty of other websites to host code on that will.
It raises the barrier of entry for anyone that wants to use an alternative license.
No it doesn't. Because you can use the half dozen other sites that will let you like Sourceforge or Google Code.
(First they need a website to host it, and if none exist because the MS foundation effectively squashed them... you reduce competition by increasing the barrier to entry.)
How exactly is Microsoft going to squash other code hosting sites? This conspiracy theory is even more ridiculous than most anti-Microsoft nonsense.
Slashdot Mirror
No, they won't bother with it because it's completely meaningless to the vast majority of their consumers. The people who would actually care about an F$F endorsement is a microscopic minority.
Now more than ever before, we need people to understand the difference between open and locked-down hardware, and to help them make rational choices while shopping.
Translation: The "rational choice" is only the one that I approve of you making. People do understand the difference, they just overwhelming don't care.
To me, it is unthinkable that my personal computers should be remote-controlled by a third party
Then *gasp* don't buy that product. Wow, that was hard, right?
but the crowds are only beginning to wake up to the pain that proprietary platforms are causing them.
If by "the crowds" you mean a bunch of irrelevant whining by some nerds on a few tech sites, then yes, they truly are "waking up".
With our endorsement mark and the strong criteria that back it, we plan to bridge that gap and demonstrate to manufacturers that they stand to gain plenty by making hardware that respects people's freedom instead of curtailing it.
Yeah, I'm real sure most manufacturers care about whether the F$F endorses their products. You might have a case if the basement-dwelling Linux market was more than a statistical anomaly.
I heard that CmdrTaco and kdawson have tiny (think smaller than a newborn) penises. Is this true?
Who in the world wants to be Michael Jackson?
Pedophiles the world 'round?
What next? A Rick James MMO?
But it was so tiny that no one can spot the difference.
Exactly. It's quite rude to compare a Ford Escort to something as low quality as Linux. That would be an insult to even a Yugo.
In SW cannon, the force has a scientific reason for existing.
This statement doesn't make any sense. What does is the relevance of a Star Wars cannon have to do with anything? Or did you perhaps mean canon?
We don't give our fixes to a trained monkey we give them to System Administers
There's a difference?
Well my SSD is smaller than a pinhead
That's funny. I heard your dick is the same size, too.
But in truth, all it reveals is a sadly biased study, one which doesn't reveal its sources
So, here's some facts [linuxtoday.com].
LOL. It's funny how you claim that the Net Applications site is wrong because it's a "biased study, one which doesn't reveal its sources" and yet you post a link to a linuxtoday article that just has a bunch of people posting their random speculation with no sources and yet that's where you get "facts".
You pay around $800 a year for basic cable
Where? I've never paid more than 30 bucks a month ever for basic cable.
~$1300 for digital/HD cable
Wow, you really are dumb. I got digital cable with all the non-premium HD channels for only 20 bucks more over the price of basic cable. Even including the 15/2 internet I get I don't pay more than maybe 1100 a year for the entire package and that's not with any sort of special deals or anything.
Yeah, and?
From the viewpoint of the student, it seems to me to be a uniformly bad deal.
Yes, practical knowledge that will actually help you get a job after you graduate is clearly a bad deal!
Yeah because if its employees were so badly treated they would continue to stick around. *rolls eyes*
I didn't realize that a computer with an Athlon/Pentium 4 running at 1 ghz was now a "supercomputer"? Or maybe you're another idiot that doesn't realize that CryEngine 2 is the game engine you were thinking of?
It's a shame that you're an idiot. The engine you were thinking of is CryEngine 2. This is the original CryEngine.
Well, for one thing, most corporations that contribute code do so so that Linux will work better with their hardware.
Which means they aren't contributing out of altruism but in their own self-interest. Way to refute yourself in the same sentence.
It's not like they're contributing something that's generally useful to most Linux users, like a codec or a font, or a filesystem. So stop acting like it is.
Funny cause I never made any such claim. Secondly, what do codecs and fonts have to do with kernel hacking? And secondly, most corporate contributions are really of no benefit but to themselves and their own hardware/software platforms and not to the users at large.
They didn't donate this code out of any altruism, only pure self-interest.
And that's any different than any other corporation that contributes code to the Linux kernel, how?
Well then they released what they were supposed to so either take it or shut up.
I was talking about the point in general. Yes, I did read the summary and know that he's bitched at other companies. Though it seems that he has the generosity to not publicly flame them unlike Microsoft.
Because it's Microsoft and no matter what they do these people will still criticize them regardless.
Not offer it as an option on the site for one.
So what? How does that stop anyone from using the license? There are plenty of other websites to host code on that will.
It raises the barrier of entry for anyone that wants to use an alternative license.
No it doesn't. Because you can use the half dozen other sites that will let you like Sourceforge or Google Code.
(First they need a website to host it, and if none exist because the MS foundation effectively squashed them... you reduce competition by increasing the barrier to entry.)
How exactly is Microsoft going to squash other code hosting sites? This conspiracy theory is even more ridiculous than most anti-Microsoft nonsense.
Completely irrelevant since I never claimed Microsoft was some great innovator.