Why run Office 2k when you have a perfectly good application in Star Office
Because a lot of businesses use Windows Office products, and you might need to share files back and forth. Using the same word processor just makes things easier, and thus makes it more likely that people will start running Office without Windows. This is actually a good thing.
The articles and comments come from the readers, and not so much from an editorial staff... this is a forum, not a news outlet. Slashdot should not be held accountable for what some idiot or troll posts.
You're completely right there. Local calls are "free" (In the US) after you pay your flat monthly fee. For long distance, there are about a thousand different plans to sign up for, dependant on your needs. The same goes for ISPs. If "light" internet users aren't happy with how much they are paying, they should switch to another ISP, or use the local library to check e-mail for free.
It's not as if there is a problem with bandwith, typically. If there were slowdowns due to high user traffic (over the whole internet, not just a few sites) then I could maybe see a metering system like they have for long distance calling.
Besides, I have DSL, and I'm already paying more for my connectivity and heavy usage. So there.
True enough, I am extremely biased. The best we can do is choose from the options that we are given. I just think there should be less restrictions, so we can have better-informed opinions, and more options to choose from. Making a decision out of ignorance is no decision at all. Again, this is just my own opinion. Feel free to have your own. That is what freedom of information is all about.
Hitler tried to recreate a more nazi-friendly world by burning books. We Americans only ban them. It's a step up I suppose, but not a large one. The government does a fairly good job of brain washing by restricting the information that people, especially young people, are exposed to. If you are only fed certain information, especially biased information, you tend to have a very specific opinion.
The opinions that are being encouraged include: America is the greatest and needs no improvement (I half agree with that), christianity is the only true religion, money is the most important thing in life, and (most importantly, I think) you need the government to run your life.
Now, whether or not you hold these opinions is up to you, and there is nothing neccesarily wrong with any of them, but I think everone can agree (esp. on/.) that NO type of restriction on information is a good thing.
And if you don't, you were probably fed biased information.
Honestly, these companies never just come right out and say what they mean. They hide behind the DMCA and IP, when what they are really worried about is money. This is the one quote from the article that really summed it up for me:
"Our revenue model is being the gate keeper between codes and their destinations online."
In other words, they want to protect their bottom line. The truth is, they should have thought of this sort of thing happening, and taken steps to protect their interests before releasing their product. It's their own damn fault, and I have no sympathy.
Or you could use this as a backup, replacing tape drives. Seriously, you could store a new backup of your server every night for a week or two and still not eat up all the space.
Of course, you would need to make sure it's pretty reliable, but then again, when's the last time anyone was ever really comfortable with a tape backup?
Of course in the end the lawyers will end up with all the money, that's the downside.
Not necessarily... maybe if the lawyers take everything, people will stop trying to sue each other, and actually try and work things out in a more reasonable manner.
I have to agree with this completely. My nephew (7 years old) has ADD, and has been stuck on Ritalin (Which I hate, but I'm not his father and thus have no say). Last Christmas I bought him a gameboy and Pokemon (because I'm the coolest uncle EVER). He plays it constantly, although he's not allowed to bring it to school. Because of all the reading in it, as well as puzzle solving, his reading and comprehension is well above the second grade level. He is the best reader in his class. This is signifigant because just a year ago he was among the worst.
And its not the Ritalin which caused the improvement, because he was on it then, too.
Even assuming that, at some point god DID actually speak through the people who wrote the bible, you can't seriously expect anyone to believe anything in there is still accurate. The damn thing has been "retranslated" so many times throughout the years, and everyone who translated it put out their own interpretation of "god's word".
And do you want to talk about hoaxes (re: the dinosaur hoax)? Don't even get me started on the number of hoaxes the almighty church brewed up.
Okay, I don't really follow copyright law too closely, and I don't like researching things before I make a claim, so I could be completely wrong. Wouldn't it be possible for DVD console manufacturers to use something like DeCSS as the decoding software? If it isn't a copyright violation, then it could possibly be used as an alternative. It might even be supported as something that promotes competition in a market that is pretty well dominated.
Of course, the DVDA would sue like nuts, but if I recall, something similar happened on Nintendo's first system. Some software company wanted to publish games on Nintendo's platform using (I believe) reversed engineered software. Nintendo sued and lost. They also sued to stop the Game Genie. And lost. Granted, this isn't the same thing, but some maufacturers might want to look in on this as an alternative. If it flies, then the studios and the DVDA will really have to take a hard look at their business practices.
Okay, I know I'm going to get flamed like hell for this, but I am actually in favor of a game rating system... Of course, I'm 29 and can buy whatever the heck I want, but hear me out before responding.
Video game makers are heavily restricted in the content they can put on a game, especially console games (although not as much as most parental groups would like). The lack of "adult-oriented" (ie. violent)content on consoles is no big deal now, but the new generations of consoles (DC, PS2, etc) will change a lot of how consoles are viewed and used.
In the minds of most non-game playing adults, game players = kids. This is not true, obviously, but try convincing anyone of that. A rating system could change that, and I (and you, after you turn 18) would not be limited to watered down, tame versions of games.
It would also help to re-focus attention on bad kids to where it belongs: the parents and society. Example: Did little Jimmy go nuts and shoot up the school? Does everyone want to blame the latest gory FPS? Well, it was clearly marked for adults only, so why did the parents let him play it?
A ratings system would releive game makers of the responsibility to raise our kids, and allow them to do what they do best.
Slashdot Mirror
C'mon, now.. be honest. When was the last time you actually paid for that kind of software? ;)
Because a lot of businesses use Windows Office products, and you might need to share files back and forth. Using the same word processor just makes things easier, and thus makes it more likely that people will start running Office without Windows. This is actually a good thing.
The articles and comments come from the readers, and not so much from an editorial staff... this is a forum, not a news outlet. Slashdot should not be held accountable for what some idiot or troll posts.
It's not as if there is a problem with bandwith, typically. If there were slowdowns due to high user traffic (over the whole internet, not just a few sites) then I could maybe see a metering system like they have for long distance calling.
Besides, I have DSL, and I'm already paying more for my connectivity and heavy usage. So there.
True enough, I am extremely biased. The best we can do is choose from the options that we are given. I just think there should be less restrictions, so we can have better-informed opinions, and more options to choose from. Making a decision out of ignorance is no decision at all. Again, this is just my own opinion. Feel free to have your own. That is what freedom of information is all about.
The opinions that are being encouraged include: America is the greatest and needs no improvement (I half agree with that), christianity is the only true religion, money is the most important thing in life, and (most importantly, I think) you need the government to run your life.
Now, whether or not you hold these opinions is up to you, and there is nothing neccesarily wrong with any of them, but I think everone can agree (esp. on /.) that NO type of restriction on information is a good thing.
And if you don't, you were probably fed biased information.
"Our revenue model is being the gate keeper between codes and their destinations online."
In other words, they want to protect their bottom line. The truth is, they should have thought of this sort of thing happening, and taken steps to protect their interests before releasing their product. It's their own damn fault, and I have no sympathy.
Of course, you would need to make sure it's pretty reliable, but then again, when's the last time anyone was ever really comfortable with a tape backup?
Not necessarily... maybe if the lawyers take everything, people will stop trying to sue each other, and actually try and work things out in a more reasonable manner.
On the other hand...nah, probably not.
And its not the Ritalin which caused the improvement, because he was on it then, too.
Still, if it evens the field a little, then go, Big Blue!
Biomechanical guy #2: "No, what?"
Biomechanical guy #1: "BSOD"
Biomechanical guy #2: "Oooh... When's the funeral?"
Of course, the DVDA would sue like nuts, but if I recall, something similar happened on Nintendo's first system. Some software company wanted to publish games on Nintendo's platform using (I believe) reversed engineered software. Nintendo sued and lost. They also sued to stop the Game Genie. And lost. Granted, this isn't the same thing, but some maufacturers might want to look in on this as an alternative. If it flies, then the studios and the DVDA will really have to take a hard look at their business practices.
Okay, I know I'm going to get flamed like hell for this, but I am actually in favor of a game rating system... Of course, I'm 29 and can buy whatever the heck I want, but hear me out before responding.
Video game makers are heavily restricted in the content they can put on a game, especially console games (although not as much as most parental groups would like). The lack of "adult-oriented" (ie. violent)content on consoles is no big deal now, but the new generations of consoles (DC, PS2, etc) will change a lot of how consoles are viewed and used.
In the minds of most non-game playing adults, game players = kids. This is not true, obviously, but try convincing anyone of that. A rating system could change that, and I (and you, after you turn 18) would not be limited to watered down, tame versions of games.
It would also help to re-focus attention on bad kids to where it belongs: the parents and society. Example: Did little Jimmy go nuts and shoot up the school? Does everyone want to blame the latest gory FPS? Well, it was clearly marked for adults only, so why did the parents let him play it?
A ratings system would releive game makers of the responsibility to raise our kids, and allow them to do what they do best.
Of course, it still sucks if you are under 18.