It's simple actually...
The scan and recognition software isn't going to work much better than human recognition.
The scanner has to go over a larg database in a short ammount of time.
So to make things go faster everyone of the same ethnicity, gender and nose as a suspected terrorist will be tagged as that suspected terrorist. Be processed. Go on his permenet record. Maybe on the front page news all while conferming who he is and probably being pissed off at people speaking a language he dosen't understand. Becouse the tagged person speaks ENGLISH and the terrorist dosen't so they'll insist on speaking in the language the terrorist understand and the tagged person dose not.
And get strip searched poked proded and generally inspected in ways that would make X files aliens blush.
All becouse we desided to use a technology that isn't quite ready yet.
On the inverse the human will most likely miss most terrorist but if there is a match it's generaly a good match.
Also as far as I understand the watch list wasn't that big... Not a whole database of every know terrorist but a watch list of a handfull of people.
Those terrorist would have walked by the scanner gone unrecognised unless he happend to have the same nose as somebody else who IS on the long list. Becouse they wouldn't be on the database yet. Burrocratics.. While we can get information on-line in seconds it takes months or years to happen when left to an unintrested paper pusher.
It would make existing Windows and Unix PCs illegal.
Existing software won't work.
Apple would have problems with this.
Apple is in the whole back room inventor type motif. This sort of thing runs against that philosophy.
Microsoft would have problems with this.
Everyone would have to junk the systems they have and start over.
The hold Microsoft has over users is to switch to Unix or Mac users would have to dump everything. If they have to anyway most users will switch to something else.
Sun would like this. Solarus can be easly refitted to handle this. It means everyone buys Solarus all over again and every application the need.
Also Sun sells workstations and servers not PCs so Sun Sparc systems are exempt.
Sun also sells some Linux based servers but they are still servers and remain exempt.
Rebel Computing.. I don't know how they'd react.
The Netwinder is actually a workstation computer running Linux not a PC and thus exempt.
Re:So I will drive with my windows open, NEXT
on
Remote Breathalyzer
·
· Score: 2
But shouldn't you give up that privacy given that a) you're in control of a perfect mass-murder weapon and b) might just be intoxicated?
No you should not...
Those freedoms exist for a reason.
Let's take the automatic camras that take pictures of cars that cross the red light.
How could you object to that? I mean it's just a way to catch people crossing the red and thats all it dose.
Well.. no... the camras are defective.
They fire off on the yellow and green as well as the red.
There is the problem. With automation you have defects. With defects you have innocent people getting tagged. Even if there is a way to challange the machine somebody is going to trust the machine anyway.
If Disney gives it to you and says "Do what ever you want" you can do what ever you want.
Well actually you can't becouse it's still his and no matter what he says he can sue you later.
There inlay the problem.
Legally it is the publics responsability to determine if the work is property or not.
So before you go to a movie your responsable for making sure the movie house has a liccens to show the movie.
Before reading a book you have to be sure you legally can.
I could tell you more but sadly I'd have to break the strink wrap liccens on my math homeowork.
Frankly, I'm as astounded by your stupidity as I was at theirs.
Your text is good but.. this single line kills it..
In PR and advocacy letters NEVER call someone stupid.
It was.. an error in judgement.. a mistake.. not 'stupid' nothing your reader ever dose is stupid..
You have a wonderful, insightful and enlightening letter.. This could make it's way up the chain..
But alas the person who reads it will see the word "stupid" and just hit the delete key..
If they don't the next person up the chain will.
Also if the PR people are really smart they have 'stupid' in the filter and it never makes it to human eyes.
For the chips Trident has already provided support to us the support will continue it just won't look so good PR wise when the comments come from hackers saying nasty things in the source code.
The fact is once support is provided it never gose away. Drivers will live on..
I have two scanners that only work on Linux becouse the Windows drivers are obsolete.. Both support only Windows 3.11... with a patch to 95 they work on 95.. but not 98..
On the other hand drivers for new Trident products won't be available. So we'll just won't buy new Trident products.
It seems to happen every so often some company gains notice for providing support for Microsoft compeditors (Mac or Linux) and then for some mistereous reason the company with larg amounts of positive PR for supporting Linux and Mac and a "must have" product on those platforms suddenly pulls the plug... There is never a reason given and the company always suffers for it.
Excuse me for sounding paranoid for a moment but I smell Microsofts hand...
The company that falls apart almost always seems to do so for unrelated reasons.
So here are my conspericy type theroys..
Microsofts people have walked through offering jobs to employees of existing company..
Those that accept are asked to pull strings in certen areas for Microsoft..
Stop support for compeating platforms and damage company in a number of ways.
Leave dying hulk of company to Microsoft..
Posability number two..
Company is dying...
Microsoft people say "Hay all this open source support your giving isn't helping you.. just dump it" healthy companys don't pay attention to this.. dying companys look for anything...
But Microsofts suggestions don't help dying companys and dying companys should know better than to turn to Microsoft for advice.
In the face of this I don't beleave anyone will be hearing our complaints.
But if you feel you must respond please please like all the threads say.. be polite.. be clear.. don't for the love of Cmdr Taco mention Microsoft, 31337 or saying anything bad to them.
Be a statesperson.. be nice.. polite.. and kind. Piriod...
Sticking people who aren't qualified on Windows machines is the reason for many problems.
Microsoft themselves will gladly admit it's unqualified admin that cause Windows to crash.
Even if your running a Lan if you couldn't install and configure Linux you can forget getting a Lan to stay functional for more than a month.
Forget Os related problems...
Bent cables.. poorly installe drivers... poor or non-existent network configurations..
Add tracking down normal hardware failures..
Cables that get damaged.. some times by users.. streched pulled etc.. or unplugged..
network cards get damaged.
Some times drivers get removed and user configs change frequently on Windows.
Track it down.. find it.. fix it..
Thats not the job for untrainned staff...
Welcome to 3 weeks downtime while your monkeys try and find a cable somebody cut..
The real moral of the story is Microsoft Zelots exist..
Managment often turns to the Microsoft expert when the Linux expert recomends Linux for a certen job.
The reasonning is that Linux people are zellots and Microsoft people are profesionals.
It's a simple way of weeding out Linux Zelots. The flaw in this is the Microsoft expert is most likely a Zelot and tag anything not 100% pro-Microsoft as being 100% Microsoft bashing.
Microsoft zelots have basicly gotten away with pimping Windows for any application even when Windows is horrably unqualified.
This isn't to say Linux Zelots don't becouse they do.
But it's simply foolish to think the opposate will be any less a zelot.
You need to look at what Loki is before you can say that...
Dose Loki buy or sell a product?
You need a credit line when buying a larg quantity of product for the first time.
When stepping up quanity you need credit again.
That need dosen't end. When it comes time to sell a larger quanity you'll usually be cought off guard and lacking the cash..
But Loki dosn't buy or sell any product.
They are a service and don't need credit to expand.
When demand increases they can contract the extra load with other Linux programmers. If the demand remains high they can hire for the long term.
Instead of credit Loki can just ask that the spill over contact pay in advance..
I personally don't like this.. It spells bad things for the CEO...
This may go against them if a company is picking between Loki and some other porting company compeating for business.
This says "We could pay our bills we just don't WANT to"...
It probably means they could pay creditors but that would mean not buying new equipment or holding back in some way.
It would look better PR wise if they had not made this move. They'll have this on them for a while..
"Well why should we port our games to Linux.. didn't you guys go chapter 11 a while back?"
This isn't the last nail in the coffen...
The first? maybe.. but certenly not the last..
It is unlikely your house will be broken into if your living in a "safe" neighborhood.
Criminals prefer easy targets... this has been proven time and time again...
A criminal will target Windows over Linux any day..
Linux CAN be cracked... Windows is an easier target....
[Of course if your really sereous about security you'll look into BSD or Solarus and into a steel door and a dead bolt...
As for my car.. if you want it that bad you can have it...]
When you buy a house, you know for a FACT that glass will break when hit with a hammer.
Windows is sold as shatter proof glass..
This means it will not break.
Linux is sold as theft resistent..
This means it can break but it's difficult to gain entry..
Microsoft says:
When Windows breaks "well all software breaks"
When Linux breaks "See it breaks.. everyone breaks..."
Linux says:
When Windows breaks "Where is the patch?"
When Linux breaks "Here is the patch"
Security experts say:
"Get the operating system patched ASAP..
If you have the source code.. fix it yourself NOW don't wait for an offical patch"
Microsoft security experts say:
"Wait for an offical patch.. don't do it yourself"
RL security experts say:
"Fix it now.."
RL theafs say:
"BWAR.. Break Window And Run.... thwarts any security system....
Wait a while. If they don't fix the window quickly they'll soon forget...
Once they relax.. walk in the openning and walk out.." (taken from a 1980's text file on how to steal...)
From TV:
"We have to wait for Microsoft to relase a patch and then we have to test the system to be sure it works correctly and all the apps continue to work correctly." - Microsoft certifyed System admin being interviewed by a reporter...
Picture this... You spend years writing a story. Then your friend copys you and makes a similer story. Change a few words but it's basicly the same.
Now the rejection letters in the mail read
"This has already been done.. try something original"
You want to kill...
Now picture this. You spend years writing a story and publish...
Now 15 other writers you never heard of before clame you copied them.
The problem is simple. A lot of storys are going to be very much alike.
In programming...
A friend of mine was working on a program with someone else..
That someone else make some small changes and clammed it as his own.
On the other hand.. I wrote my own BBS ground up and some idiot I never meet in my LIFE ordered me to stop using HIS software.
(My prompt looked like his prompt.. My prompt looked like everyones prompt..)
Basicly my 3 year old BBS was somehow a clone of his 6 month old BBS..
Anyway.. There is the problem..
Some people are theafs.. some people are crybabys.. and current IP law isn't very good at telling the diffrence..
I have already come to this conclusion after reading Verizons comments and then the countless complaints by your costummers and Verizon costummers as posted on Slashdot.
It seems Verizon is incompatent in the FUD department as well.
Chances are fairly good Linux shops don't need/want your services.
Keep in mind management knows Linux isn't a real Unix. Calling you guys might seem as silly as calling a Windows expert to for a Mac.
I agree on one point. A server is a fuction. But it is likely they are mesuring speed not function. That produces a poisoned result.
I would say your client list is also a bad sample.
There isn't a market for Linux consultents like there is for Windows and Solarus consultents.
Linux consultents are more like Mac consultents. Rarely needed.
Also the sereousness of the need will tend to dictate BSD or Solarus over anything else.
But thats not bulk but importence...
For importent stuff BSD is the best choice.
Forget who paid for the study. It could be Andover.
The problem is what the study is.
In effect they are counting the amount of preinstalls. Linux is mostly installed after market. Windows is mostly preinstalled. So Windows is automaticly going to show up the better.
Also Windows requirements increase over time forcing new machine sales just to use the latest updates. Linux requirements don't incrase so Linux sales only relfect the need for better hardware.
At most maybe Gartner set a higher standard for "server" than IDG did.. Linux usefulness starts to fall off at a certen point on the high end so sales of extreamly high end is likely to be Windows NT only.
The reality is however that for Linux a 386 is a server but to Windows nothing less than a Pentium Pro.
But you can only mesure "server" by CPU power. But what makes it a server is the intended use. That is an unknown.
A bunch of Win 2K server boxes sold could be for workstations or game machines. A bunch of the Linux servers in the sample could be destend for a Beowolf cluster.
It's a self poisoning servey...
I would presume to say that Linux is under represented. But being truthful... Linux could also be over represented.
It is a random number of no meaning.
A lot of Dr Who (and Star Trek) was writen by it's fans.
The made for TV movie was NOT a fan job...
As I understand it the movie was addapted from the last book in a searies that took off from the TV searies.
The books were profesion and it was a profesional addaption.
That is the problem. Writing isn't a job of cold profesionalism but of passionet fan-ish stuff.
The 1980s saw a whole bunch of movies that relied on FX.. You can turn out FX in mass production.. great writing however isn't so easy.
On-line comics tend to have indepth storylines etc. The writer/artists are really into what they are doing. The artist for one comic however noticed the fan art is higher quality than the original strip. A lot of the best artists are self trainned anime fans not profesional writers.
There are two good reasons for going with McCoy.
One is this is in-line with the Dr Who linage. Pick up where it left off. Tom Baker left Dr Who.
The doctors that came after Tom Baker were made into clones of Tom Baker. Preveously each Dr had his own unqiue personality tallored to the actor. Tom Baker himself was a dramatic shift from the preveous whos.
On that note. I'd like to point out that Dr. Who is for you the first Dr. Who you see.
Someone in DC comics pointed out this was the case for Superman artists. The Superman you grow up with is the one you expect. But there have been many artists each with a slightly diffrent take on his apperence.
But Dr Who transends it's actors. With a new generation of producers is Sylvester McCoy dosn't work out we'll see someone new.
I personally liked all the Doctors. Even the post Tom Bakers. It did appear they reduced the carricter to Tom Bakers take and that was a bit sad.
Also I'd like to quickly note while a lot of people keep bringing up the cheap specal effects Doctor Who uses what was available at the time. Near the end they were using some pritty spiff computer graphics.
What Doctor Who didn't do was push the edge. The BBC was just using equipment they had on hand. Dr. Who was never about flashy effects but about great story telling. But the effects were not always cheap.
It could be becouse Dr Who near the end was entering a time when FX was a big deal. Every movie or SiFi had to have advanced FX. If it was a SiFi movie they had to blast your eyeballs out with it.
The Tartus going through time image.. an old anolog FX machine.. probably cerca 1960s. While Dr Who dates back earlyer so I expect there is an older version of that.
Then there is the newer version using digital graphics.. 1980s...
A Dr Who today could use advanced make up and CGI. But the story will never rely on it.
Now I did say there were two good reasons for this.. The second?
The FOX Dr Who made for TV movie is removed from the conical Dr Who history.. much the same way the Star Trek cartoon series was removed from the Star Trek history when Rodenbury took control again.
That means the Master lives again...
As for "FanBoy writing"...
A lot of Dr Who was "FanBoy writing" So was Star Trek. The TV movie was a profesional hack job.
Writers do better when they are familure with the show and are themselfs fans of it.
The ultimate fan of any given SiFi is it's crator.
Ok good reason. The computers need to talk.
But this is still good for dedicated networking.
With the Internet you still have hacks, Access to critical systems etc.
Plus the Internet is not as reliable as a network could be. It's no technical falt. Simply the bulk of the systems are untrusted. Even back bones and ISPs aren't entirely trustworthy.
Add to the picture the other traffic. The Internet carrys my Slashdot news, your Quake traffic, your power grid data could be delayed at a critical moment.
The Internet is best for NON CRITICAL information exchange. If you have critical information on critical systems put together a dedicated network. Same software same hardware as the Internet just dedicated equipment and a diffrent configuration.
Internet servers need to support 10 year old software pacages. Dedicated networks could reject packets at the backbone or service side that don't run the latest indent or what ever solution you pick.
When every server is "watching your back" it's much harder to hack and much easier to secure.
They'll have no social lives and never go outside. IRC and Slashdot...
Back in the 1980s it was FidoNet and local chat BBSes.
Tomarow it'll be VR worlds and VR games...
My mother knew I wasn't out parting getting hooked on drugs...
She was worryed about the phone bill.
Todays PC operating systems already isolate the programmer from the hardware so much that this is no longer an option.
Using querks works great for the Commodore 64. Every machine is identical.
But this can hold a game console maker back.
Some times game consoles have small improvments over time to keep up with compeating machines. Games that use querks may no longer work on the updated machines.
It is generally clear what they did when they do it. A plug in module into an existing game console. If some games don't work you can unplug the module.
I suspect they are looking at making the game consoles even more expandable so they can keep up with the ever improving console market.
Also most games today are made to be easy to move from platform to platform. Querks are a make or break issue when porting software.
I've writen a lot of games for the C64.. all for personal use. I never did make much use of querks. I did use a few.
I work at a recycling center where we do recycle computers.
The older units (386s and 486s) my mother is regularly suggesting we make a cluster.
I usually shot the idea down.
But then I can afford current systems so a 486 cluster isn't exactly useful for me.
She however is quite happy with a 486 laptop...
The typical "avrage user" can not tell the diffrence between Linux and Windows..
I'm not saying Linux is easy...
Linux is a powerful and easy command line.. As easy as command line could be anyway. Windows is a slipshot GUI.. It's not very easy at all.
In the end they both daze and confuse new users..
Windows just PRETENDS to be easy...
And Microsoft expects you to know IRQs.. It's more of a PC thing actually and you don't want to understand complex hardware issues don't use complex hardware. The os isn't going to help.
The admin could have been on crack and posted his pasword on Usenet..
It could have been the sock people...
It could have been CmdrTaco over his contention that it's Gnu/Linux...
I'm kidding.. but you have a point...
IMHO It really dosen't matter what you use. Hire a good admin let that admin run what ever he thinks is best. It dosn't need to be a pure Linux or Windows system.. Throw in Solarus, BSD, Mac and BeOs machines if the Sysadmin thinks it'll enhance the system.
You think Windows or Linux can do everything perfictly?
If so.. stay away from me...
Your right about the advocacy facter..
Linux advocacy rises to match that of Microsoft FUD (in otherwords no better than)
Two wrongs do NOT make a right.. three make a uturn and four make a left..
Ok why should Slashdot ever post a Windows defect anyway?
On the other hand.. Go read the stuff on Windows websites.. Every Linux defect is published as proof Linux is poor defective etc etc etc.
Getting the facts straight..
Windows can be secure Linux can be cracked..
It's the SysAdmin that make it happen...
Software is just tools...
But never tell an auto repair profesional he must use the brand of tools you picked..
Same for SysAdmin...
If the SysAdmin prefers Dos he shouldn't be forbiden from using it if it can do the job.
(Some tasks are insainly low overhead and can run from a XT running Dos... very few...)
Slashdot Mirror
It's simple actually...
The scan and recognition software isn't going to work much better than human recognition.
The scanner has to go over a larg database in a short ammount of time.
So to make things go faster everyone of the same ethnicity, gender and nose as a suspected terrorist will be tagged as that suspected terrorist. Be processed. Go on his permenet record. Maybe on the front page news all while conferming who he is and probably being pissed off at people speaking a language he dosen't understand. Becouse the tagged person speaks ENGLISH and the terrorist dosen't so they'll insist on speaking in the language the terrorist understand and the tagged person dose not.
And get strip searched poked proded and generally inspected in ways that would make X files aliens blush.
All becouse we desided to use a technology that isn't quite ready yet.
On the inverse the human will most likely miss most terrorist but if there is a match it's generaly a good match.
Also as far as I understand the watch list wasn't that big... Not a whole database of every know terrorist but a watch list of a handfull of people.
Those terrorist would have walked by the scanner gone unrecognised unless he happend to have the same nose as somebody else who IS on the long list. Becouse they wouldn't be on the database yet. Burrocratics.. While we can get information on-line in seconds it takes months or years to happen when left to an unintrested paper pusher.
It would make existing Windows and Unix PCs illegal.
Existing software won't work.
Apple would have problems with this.
Apple is in the whole back room inventor type motif. This sort of thing runs against that philosophy.
Microsoft would have problems with this.
Everyone would have to junk the systems they have and start over.
The hold Microsoft has over users is to switch to Unix or Mac users would have to dump everything. If they have to anyway most users will switch to something else.
Sun would like this. Solarus can be easly refitted to handle this. It means everyone buys Solarus all over again and every application the need.
Also Sun sells workstations and servers not PCs so Sun Sparc systems are exempt.
Sun also sells some Linux based servers but they are still servers and remain exempt.
Rebel Computing.. I don't know how they'd react.
The Netwinder is actually a workstation computer running Linux not a PC and thus exempt.
But shouldn't you give up that privacy given that a) you're in control of a perfect mass-murder weapon and b) might just be intoxicated?
No you should not...
Those freedoms exist for a reason.
Let's take the automatic camras that take pictures of cars that cross the red light.
How could you object to that? I mean it's just a way to catch people crossing the red and thats all it dose.
Well.. no... the camras are defective.
They fire off on the yellow and green as well as the red.
There is the problem. With automation you have defects. With defects you have innocent people getting tagged. Even if there is a way to challange the machine somebody is going to trust the machine anyway.
If Disney gives it to you and says "Do what ever you want" you can do what ever you want.
Well actually you can't becouse it's still his and no matter what he says he can sue you later.
There inlay the problem.
Legally it is the publics responsability to determine if the work is property or not.
So before you go to a movie your responsable for making sure the movie house has a liccens to show the movie.
Before reading a book you have to be sure you legally can.
I could tell you more but sadly I'd have to break the strink wrap liccens on my math homeowork.
Frankly, I'm as astounded by your stupidity as I was at theirs.
Your text is good but.. this single line kills it..
In PR and advocacy letters NEVER call someone stupid.
It was.. an error in judgement.. a mistake.. not 'stupid' nothing your reader ever dose is stupid..
You have a wonderful, insightful and enlightening letter.. This could make it's way up the chain..
But alas the person who reads it will see the word "stupid" and just hit the delete key..
If they don't the next person up the chain will.
Also if the PR people are really smart they have 'stupid' in the filter and it never makes it to human eyes.
For the chips Trident has already provided support to us the support will continue it just won't look so good PR wise when the comments come from hackers saying nasty things in the source code.
The fact is once support is provided it never gose away. Drivers will live on..
I have two scanners that only work on Linux becouse the Windows drivers are obsolete.. Both support only Windows 3.11... with a patch to 95 they work on 95.. but not 98..
On the other hand drivers for new Trident products won't be available. So we'll just won't buy new Trident products.
It seems to happen every so often some company gains notice for providing support for Microsoft compeditors (Mac or Linux) and then for some mistereous reason the company with larg amounts of positive PR for supporting Linux and Mac and a "must have" product on those platforms suddenly pulls the plug... There is never a reason given and the company always suffers for it.
Excuse me for sounding paranoid for a moment but I smell Microsofts hand...
The company that falls apart almost always seems to do so for unrelated reasons.
So here are my conspericy type theroys..
Microsofts people have walked through offering jobs to employees of existing company..
Those that accept are asked to pull strings in certen areas for Microsoft..
Stop support for compeating platforms and damage company in a number of ways.
Leave dying hulk of company to Microsoft..
Posability number two..
Company is dying...
Microsoft people say "Hay all this open source support your giving isn't helping you.. just dump it" healthy companys don't pay attention to this.. dying companys look for anything...
But Microsofts suggestions don't help dying companys and dying companys should know better than to turn to Microsoft for advice.
In the face of this I don't beleave anyone will be hearing our complaints.
But if you feel you must respond please please like all the threads say.. be polite.. be clear.. don't for the love of Cmdr Taco mention Microsoft, 31337 or saying anything bad to them.
Be a statesperson.. be nice.. polite.. and kind. Piriod...
I'll disagree..
Sticking people who aren't qualified on Windows machines is the reason for many problems.
Microsoft themselves will gladly admit it's unqualified admin that cause Windows to crash.
Even if your running a Lan if you couldn't install and configure Linux you can forget getting a Lan to stay functional for more than a month.
Forget Os related problems...
Bent cables.. poorly installe drivers... poor or non-existent network configurations..
Add tracking down normal hardware failures..
Cables that get damaged.. some times by users.. streched pulled etc.. or unplugged..
network cards get damaged.
Some times drivers get removed and user configs change frequently on Windows.
Track it down.. find it.. fix it..
Thats not the job for untrainned staff...
Welcome to 3 weeks downtime while your monkeys try and find a cable somebody cut..
The real moral of the story is Microsoft Zelots exist..
Managment often turns to the Microsoft expert when the Linux expert recomends Linux for a certen job.
The reasonning is that Linux people are zellots and Microsoft people are profesionals.
It's a simple way of weeding out Linux Zelots. The flaw in this is the Microsoft expert is most likely a Zelot and tag anything not 100% pro-Microsoft as being 100% Microsoft bashing.
Microsoft zelots have basicly gotten away with pimping Windows for any application even when Windows is horrably unqualified.
This isn't to say Linux Zelots don't becouse they do.
But it's simply foolish to think the opposate will be any less a zelot.
You need to look at what Loki is before you can say that...
Dose Loki buy or sell a product?
You need a credit line when buying a larg quantity of product for the first time.
When stepping up quanity you need credit again.
That need dosen't end. When it comes time to sell a larger quanity you'll usually be cought off guard and lacking the cash..
But Loki dosn't buy or sell any product.
They are a service and don't need credit to expand.
When demand increases they can contract the extra load with other Linux programmers. If the demand remains high they can hire for the long term.
Instead of credit Loki can just ask that the spill over contact pay in advance..
I personally don't like this.. It spells bad things for the CEO...
This may go against them if a company is picking between Loki and some other porting company compeating for business.
This says "We could pay our bills we just don't WANT to"...
It probably means they could pay creditors but that would mean not buying new equipment or holding back in some way.
It would look better PR wise if they had not made this move. They'll have this on them for a while..
"Well why should we port our games to Linux.. didn't you guys go chapter 11 a while back?"
This isn't the last nail in the coffen...
The first? maybe.. but certenly not the last..
This is not quite true...
It is unlikely your house will be broken into if your living in a "safe" neighborhood.
Criminals prefer easy targets... this has been proven time and time again...
A criminal will target Windows over Linux any day..
Linux CAN be cracked... Windows is an easier target....
[Of course if your really sereous about security you'll look into BSD or Solarus and into a steel door and a dead bolt...
As for my car.. if you want it that bad you can have it...]
When you buy a house, you know for a FACT that glass will break when hit with a hammer.
Windows is sold as shatter proof glass..
This means it will not break.
Linux is sold as theft resistent..
This means it can break but it's difficult to gain entry..
Microsoft says:
When Windows breaks "well all software breaks"
When Linux breaks "See it breaks.. everyone breaks..."
Linux says:
When Windows breaks "Where is the patch?"
When Linux breaks "Here is the patch"
Security experts say:
"Get the operating system patched ASAP..
If you have the source code.. fix it yourself NOW don't wait for an offical patch"
Microsoft security experts say:
"Wait for an offical patch.. don't do it yourself"
RL security experts say:
"Fix it now.."
RL theafs say:
"BWAR.. Break Window And Run.... thwarts any security system....
Wait a while. If they don't fix the window quickly they'll soon forget...
Once they relax.. walk in the openning and walk out.." (taken from a 1980's text file on how to steal...)
From TV:
"We have to wait for Microsoft to relase a patch and then we have to test the system to be sure it works correctly and all the apps continue to work correctly." - Microsoft certifyed System admin being interviewed by a reporter...
Picture this... You spend years writing a story. Then your friend copys you and makes a similer story. Change a few words but it's basicly the same.
Now the rejection letters in the mail read
"This has already been done.. try something original"
You want to kill...
Now picture this. You spend years writing a story and publish...
Now 15 other writers you never heard of before clame you copied them.
The problem is simple. A lot of storys are going to be very much alike.
In programming...
A friend of mine was working on a program with someone else..
That someone else make some small changes and clammed it as his own.
On the other hand.. I wrote my own BBS ground up and some idiot I never meet in my LIFE ordered me to stop using HIS software.
(My prompt looked like his prompt.. My prompt looked like everyones prompt..)
Basicly my 3 year old BBS was somehow a clone of his 6 month old BBS..
Anyway.. There is the problem..
Some people are theafs.. some people are crybabys.. and current IP law isn't very good at telling the diffrence..
22,000 appointments where Verizon techs simply didn't show up.
I have already come to this conclusion after reading Verizons comments and then the countless complaints by your costummers and Verizon costummers as posted on Slashdot.
It seems Verizon is incompatent in the FUD department as well.
Chances are fairly good Linux shops don't need/want your services.
Keep in mind management knows Linux isn't a real Unix. Calling you guys might seem as silly as calling a Windows expert to for a Mac.
I agree on one point. A server is a fuction. But it is likely they are mesuring speed not function. That produces a poisoned result.
I would say your client list is also a bad sample.
There isn't a market for Linux consultents like there is for Windows and Solarus consultents.
Linux consultents are more like Mac consultents. Rarely needed.
Also the sereousness of the need will tend to dictate BSD or Solarus over anything else.
But thats not bulk but importence...
For importent stuff BSD is the best choice.
Forget who paid for the study. It could be Andover.
The problem is what the study is.
In effect they are counting the amount of preinstalls. Linux is mostly installed after market. Windows is mostly preinstalled. So Windows is automaticly going to show up the better.
Also Windows requirements increase over time forcing new machine sales just to use the latest updates. Linux requirements don't incrase so Linux sales only relfect the need for better hardware.
At most maybe Gartner set a higher standard for "server" than IDG did.. Linux usefulness starts to fall off at a certen point on the high end so sales of extreamly high end is likely to be Windows NT only.
The reality is however that for Linux a 386 is a server but to Windows nothing less than a Pentium Pro.
But you can only mesure "server" by CPU power. But what makes it a server is the intended use. That is an unknown.
A bunch of Win 2K server boxes sold could be for workstations or game machines. A bunch of the Linux servers in the sample could be destend for a Beowolf cluster.
It's a self poisoning servey...
I would presume to say that Linux is under represented. But being truthful... Linux could also be over represented.
It is a random number of no meaning.
A lot of Dr Who (and Star Trek) was writen by it's fans.
The made for TV movie was NOT a fan job...
As I understand it the movie was addapted from the last book in a searies that took off from the TV searies.
The books were profesion and it was a profesional addaption.
That is the problem. Writing isn't a job of cold profesionalism but of passionet fan-ish stuff.
The 1980s saw a whole bunch of movies that relied on FX.. You can turn out FX in mass production.. great writing however isn't so easy.
On-line comics tend to have indepth storylines etc. The writer/artists are really into what they are doing. The artist for one comic however noticed the fan art is higher quality than the original strip. A lot of the best artists are self trainned anime fans not profesional writers.
There are two good reasons for going with McCoy.
One is this is in-line with the Dr Who linage. Pick up where it left off. Tom Baker left Dr Who.
The doctors that came after Tom Baker were made into clones of Tom Baker. Preveously each Dr had his own unqiue personality tallored to the actor. Tom Baker himself was a dramatic shift from the preveous whos.
On that note. I'd like to point out that Dr. Who is for you the first Dr. Who you see.
Someone in DC comics pointed out this was the case for Superman artists. The Superman you grow up with is the one you expect. But there have been many artists each with a slightly diffrent take on his apperence.
But Dr Who transends it's actors. With a new generation of producers is Sylvester McCoy dosn't work out we'll see someone new.
I personally liked all the Doctors. Even the post Tom Bakers. It did appear they reduced the carricter to Tom Bakers take and that was a bit sad.
Also I'd like to quickly note while a lot of people keep bringing up the cheap specal effects Doctor Who uses what was available at the time. Near the end they were using some pritty spiff computer graphics.
What Doctor Who didn't do was push the edge. The BBC was just using equipment they had on hand. Dr. Who was never about flashy effects but about great story telling. But the effects were not always cheap.
It could be becouse Dr Who near the end was entering a time when FX was a big deal. Every movie or SiFi had to have advanced FX. If it was a SiFi movie they had to blast your eyeballs out with it.
The Tartus going through time image.. an old anolog FX machine.. probably cerca 1960s. While Dr Who dates back earlyer so I expect there is an older version of that.
Then there is the newer version using digital graphics.. 1980s...
A Dr Who today could use advanced make up and CGI. But the story will never rely on it.
Now I did say there were two good reasons for this.. The second?
The FOX Dr Who made for TV movie is removed from the conical Dr Who history.. much the same way the Star Trek cartoon series was removed from the Star Trek history when Rodenbury took control again.
That means the Master lives again...
As for "FanBoy writing"...
A lot of Dr Who was "FanBoy writing" So was Star Trek. The TV movie was a profesional hack job.
Writers do better when they are familure with the show and are themselfs fans of it.
The ultimate fan of any given SiFi is it's crator.
Ok good reason. The computers need to talk.
But this is still good for dedicated networking.
With the Internet you still have hacks, Access to critical systems etc.
Plus the Internet is not as reliable as a network could be. It's no technical falt. Simply the bulk of the systems are untrusted. Even back bones and ISPs aren't entirely trustworthy.
Add to the picture the other traffic. The Internet carrys my Slashdot news, your Quake traffic, your power grid data could be delayed at a critical moment.
The Internet is best for NON CRITICAL information exchange. If you have critical information on critical systems put together a dedicated network. Same software same hardware as the Internet just dedicated equipment and a diffrent configuration.
Internet servers need to support 10 year old software pacages. Dedicated networks could reject packets at the backbone or service side that don't run the latest indent or what ever solution you pick.
When every server is "watching your back" it's much harder to hack and much easier to secure.
They'll have no social lives and never go outside.
IRC and Slashdot...
Back in the 1980s it was FidoNet and local chat BBSes.
Tomarow it'll be VR worlds and VR games...
My mother knew I wasn't out parting getting hooked on drugs...
She was worryed about the phone bill.
Todays PC operating systems already isolate the programmer from the hardware so much that this is no longer an option.
Using querks works great for the Commodore 64. Every machine is identical.
But this can hold a game console maker back.
Some times game consoles have small improvments over time to keep up with compeating machines. Games that use querks may no longer work on the updated machines.
It is generally clear what they did when they do it. A plug in module into an existing game console. If some games don't work you can unplug the module.
I suspect they are looking at making the game consoles even more expandable so they can keep up with the ever improving console market.
Also most games today are made to be easy to move from platform to platform. Querks are a make or break issue when porting software.
I've writen a lot of games for the C64.. all for personal use. I never did make much use of querks. I did use a few.
I work at a recycling center where we do recycle computers.
The older units (386s and 486s) my mother is regularly suggesting we make a cluster.
I usually shot the idea down.
But then I can afford current systems so a 486 cluster isn't exactly useful for me.
She however is quite happy with a 486 laptop...
The typical "avrage user" can not tell the diffrence between Linux and Windows..
I'm not saying Linux is easy...
Linux is a powerful and easy command line.. As easy as command line could be anyway. Windows is a slipshot GUI.. It's not very easy at all.
In the end they both daze and confuse new users..
Windows just PRETENDS to be easy...
And Microsoft expects you to know IRQs.. It's more of a PC thing actually and you don't want to understand complex hardware issues don't use complex hardware. The os isn't going to help.
The admin could have been on crack and posted his pasword on Usenet..
It could have been the sock people...
It could have been CmdrTaco over his contention that it's Gnu/Linux...
I'm kidding.. but you have a point...
IMHO It really dosen't matter what you use. Hire a good admin let that admin run what ever he thinks is best. It dosn't need to be a pure Linux or Windows system.. Throw in Solarus, BSD, Mac and BeOs machines if the Sysadmin thinks it'll enhance the system.
You think Windows or Linux can do everything perfictly?
If so.. stay away from me...
Your right about the advocacy facter..
Linux advocacy rises to match that of Microsoft FUD (in otherwords no better than)
Two wrongs do NOT make a right.. three make a uturn and four make a left..
Ok why should Slashdot ever post a Windows defect anyway?
On the other hand.. Go read the stuff on Windows websites.. Every Linux defect is published as proof Linux is poor defective etc etc etc.
Getting the facts straight..
Windows can be secure Linux can be cracked..
It's the SysAdmin that make it happen...
Software is just tools...
But never tell an auto repair profesional he must use the brand of tools you picked..
Same for SysAdmin...
If the SysAdmin prefers Dos he shouldn't be forbiden from using it if it can do the job.
(Some tasks are insainly low overhead and can run from a XT running Dos... very few...)