AS far as corporate culture goes, how often does a small company try to simultaneously sue multiple hulking giants who eat companies for breakfast? Namely IBM who has helped define the use of FUD and the "destroy a company with your legal department" game?
Why not also have a seriously mislead or moral lacking CEO write a PR letter?
Linux Software Raid works nice. You can install the OS on it too. Or at least I have, MANY times.
I've never had any problems with it. I have a production server that has been running it for a year. I have a ResierFS MDRaid5 volume for storage. Some of the other stuff is raid0 and raid1, depending on my attitude for different mount points at the time. No problems with any of it on the storage level, ever. Even when I had to swap a bad drive out. The rebuild went faster than the hardware rebuilds I've had to deal with too.
So far my experience with software raid is that it is so configurable and flexible that hardware raid is just too asphyxiating. Oh yeah that plus I've never experienced a stability issue with it.
Plus, there's that beautiful EVMS package that makes volume management really fast and easy.
Griping about software raid should be specific to operating system, application, and method, etc.
Ask the HP-UX guys how solid software raid is for them.
In Verizon's incredible company aquisitions, did they strategy start eating peripheral (plus all the other crap that Belkin makes) manufacturers as well?
I thought the European diesels were so polluting and needed a different emissions package in US because the diesel available in US is crap, and pretty far down on the grade qualities available in Europe.
So how are you connecting the two exactly? Power plants running Windows, or firms somehow getting the worm and lots of high power consuming devices being triggered?
New York City police officials told ABCNEWS.com that they were puzzled and did not know what was going on or the source of the power outage. They said their televisions were not working and they only had use of their phones.
Natasha Sidhari, police spokeswoman, says phone lines and lights are out throughout NYC police headquarters. They have no idea of the extent of the problem, what's causing it, or whether there are any related disturbances.
When my power and/or phones go out, I usually call the power and phone companies, not the police.
Ever heard of binary packages? It takes 0 days to compile packages that are already compiled.
So what about things that you need to install that there aren't any available binaries for? Well, even RedHat and Debian and whatever else has to compile software that isn't in binary form.
Gentoo is only bleeding edge if you use bleeding edge software. Just like any other GNU/Linux that you install a bunch of bleeding edge software on. If you use nothing but stable packages, that YOU know are stable, what the hell is the problem? The "magic Gentoo application" running under everything makes it bleeding edge? Have you ever used a GNU/Linux distro before? It's not like something is being hidden from you. Gentoo just makes a few things easier in a way that a lot of people are really enjoying. If you don't have the competence to configure and lock down GNU/Linux, and you require some special agreement with a big company distro like Red Hat, maybe you should learn a little more about GNU/Linux before deploying ANY distro. Of course I'd rather you stick to some GNU/Linux distro to run your pretty purple servers that some slick salesman made you feel all warm and fuzzy about, but only a newbie would spout off about what distros are being used and be SO wrong.
So how is Gentoo a Hobby and just a Desktop OS? What software makes it such? And what is so unstable and unpredictable and unreliable about it? Or whatever the problem is that you are focused on.
Just curious: have you got some examples of CSS that have the same amount of hours put into them as OSS? And examples of CSS that have the same amount of hours as OSS that works as good as OSS? How do you even find out how many hours were spent on *any* project?
Who cares about "programming hours" anyhow. If a company is deciding on a product offered in both OSS and CSS, someone isn't going to pop up and say, "this package doesn't work as good, but they spent 10% of the time programming it!"...
I realize that there would be a point to evaluating OSS and CSS with the same amount of hours spent, but you also need to consider how close together those hours were. If someone spent 200 hours on a package in a year for an OSS application, it might make a big deal of difference compared to someone spending several weeks. And in some cases it might be for better or for worse.
Regardless, people should use what actually performs better instead of what was marketed better.
Perhaps to not see the truth in his criticism it takes a "drooling illiterate imbecile". Thus I wouldn't be surprised if most of his hatemail came from that type. And he did say "hatemail", not "criticism".
Can you think of a better example of hatemail that he might have gotten?
Oh well... Neither me or my company has had to use any OSS yet that requires either licenses, or has any limitation on usage.
I really can't think of any OSS that costs a company to purchase either. Other than having to pay for a distribution CD. You still aren't paying licenses. Who would want to contribute freely to an open source project that is going to turn around and sell the software to profit off your work that you aren't rewarded for?
What is an exmaple of this? I'm always willing to reduce my ignorance.
OSS is free as far as the cost of software goes. It's not as if you can buy microsoft or oracle, or what have you, without paying people or having computers to run it. Evaluating it is often cheaper as well, and only *isn't* cheaper when the commercial software offers a free eval period.
We've evaluated many "free" OSS solutions at my company and it hasn't cost us ANYTHING beyond our normal operating costs. We have a test environment where I've loaded Gentoo Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD, to test out several different apps and servers. We had to invest nothing to perform this eval. We also would spend nothing if we implemented parts of it.
Are you talking about something beyond the same capital that is required by commercial software - the software cost?
I'm not playing the "evil corporation" bs. I'm saying that corporations are out for their wellfare and that's ALL. Everything else is a result of them trying to GROW and make more money, no matter how predatory or apathetic they have to be.
"We believe that procurement decisions should be based on the overall merits and value of the software under consideration," said Alex Mercer, a Microsoft spokeswoman.
In other words, it should be based on how well that software is Marketed, not on how well it performs.
Would they not discover the "overal merits and value" by evaluating software instead of ONLY listening to the production of one of the most aggressive marketing engines in the world, and online opinion?
I disagree. I think this law is useful. It can save a lot of tax dollars for now and the future, increase the security and stability of government systems, and help break apart the commercial dominators on the playing field... If they were required to evaluate OSS software (which is free as far as capital goes), then they wouldn't be able to just choose whatever commercial software company's slick salesman talks them into. They would have to really take a look at a free solution. If they decide the free soultion is better, then we are really benefiting. If they don't, well, the time they spent evaluating the free software won't even compare to the money they will spend on the commercial software.
One more thing... The less influence that commercial software has on the government, the better. Because that means the less influence some company, whose primary concern is their own income, will have over our lives. Maybe you disagree but I'd rather have the people we voted into office making decisions for my life than a corporation like Microsoft.
Yeah, in other words, instead of just picking the first thing that comes along, which is ALWAYS commercial software, they would be REQUIRED to consider an OSS alternative.
A few good points: 1. Good chance at finding a cheaper solution for the initial implementation. 2. Good chance at finding a more secure solution. 3. The solution would be maintainable, and free to upgrade to meet future technologies. 4. No source code is hidden from you. 5. If they decide not to use an evaluated OSS solution then the resulting report could greatly benefit that OSS projects future. 6. If the OSS solution is decided on, it will bring this OSS project further into the public for other's to consider using. 7. The more OSS solutions that organizations are aware of and implement, the more organizations that will be aware of and implement them as a compounding result. etc 8. Future change: If something is free, you aren't held back from changing because of all the money you already dumped into it. And you most likely wouldn't get involved in a platform that was designed to lock you into it with no escape (microsoft), so you'd have a better chance at changing in the future as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe things would go better if they renamed Lindows to LexPea?
AS far as corporate culture goes, how often does a small company try to simultaneously sue multiple hulking giants who eat companies for breakfast? Namely IBM who has helped define the use of FUD and the "destroy a company with your legal department" game?
Why not also have a seriously mislead or moral lacking CEO write a PR letter?
Linux Software Raid works nice. You can install the OS on it too. Or at least I have, MANY times.
I've never had any problems with it. I have a production server that has been running it for a year. I have a ResierFS MDRaid5 volume for storage. Some of the other stuff is raid0 and raid1, depending on my attitude for different mount points at the time. No problems with any of it on the storage level, ever. Even when I had to swap a bad drive out. The rebuild went faster than the hardware rebuilds I've had to deal with too.
So far my experience with software raid is that it is so configurable and flexible that hardware raid is just too asphyxiating. Oh yeah that plus I've never experienced a stability issue with it.
Plus, there's that beautiful EVMS package that makes volume management really fast and easy.
Griping about software raid should be specific to operating system, application, and method, etc.
Ask the HP-UX guys how solid software raid is for them.
In Verizon's incredible company aquisitions, did they strategy start eating peripheral (plus all the other crap that Belkin makes) manufacturers as well?
I thought the European diesels were so polluting and needed a different emissions package in US because the diesel available in US is crap, and pretty far down on the grade qualities available in Europe.
Sure it would, but there aren't any laws that require kids to recite the Declaration of Independence every day.
So how are you connecting the two exactly? Power plants running Windows, or firms somehow getting the worm and lots of high power consuming devices being triggered?
secured permanently? So they unplugged it from the network to finally get that C2 security level eh?
The point was, it doesn't take DAYS to get up. Nothing to do with whether or not it's just another distro.
However, if you must get it up and running as fast as possible, use the binaries. Then when you have time, compile it.
Ever heard of binary packages?
It takes 0 days to compile packages that are already compiled.
So what about things that you need to install that there aren't any available binaries for? Well, even RedHat and Debian and whatever else has to compile software that isn't in binary form.
dear troll,
Gentoo is only bleeding edge if you use bleeding edge software.
Just like any other GNU/Linux that you install a bunch of bleeding edge software on.
If you use nothing but stable packages, that YOU know are stable, what the hell is the problem? The "magic Gentoo application" running under everything makes it bleeding edge? Have you ever used a GNU/Linux distro before? It's not like something is being hidden from you. Gentoo just makes a few things easier in a way that a lot of people are really enjoying. If you don't have the competence to configure and lock down GNU/Linux, and you require some special agreement with a big company distro like Red Hat, maybe you should learn a little more about GNU/Linux before deploying ANY distro. Of course I'd rather you stick to some GNU/Linux distro to run your pretty purple servers that some slick salesman made you feel all warm and fuzzy about, but only a newbie would spout off about what distros are being used and be SO wrong.
So how is Gentoo a Hobby and just a Desktop OS? What software makes it such? And what is so unstable and unpredictable and unreliable about it? Or whatever the problem is that you are focused on.
thanks
Just curious: have you got some examples of CSS that have the same amount of hours put into them as OSS? And examples of CSS that have the same amount of hours as OSS that works as good as OSS? How do you even find out how many hours were spent on *any* project?
Who cares about "programming hours" anyhow. If a company is deciding on a product offered in both OSS and CSS, someone isn't going to pop up and say, "this package doesn't work as good, but they spent 10% of the time programming it!"...
I realize that there would be a point to evaluating OSS and CSS with the same amount of hours spent, but you also need to consider how close together those hours were. If someone spent 200 hours on a package in a year for an OSS application, it might make a big deal of difference compared to someone spending several weeks. And in some cases it might be for better or for worse.
Regardless, people should use what actually performs better instead of what was marketed better.
Perhaps to not see the truth in his criticism it takes a "drooling illiterate imbecile". Thus I wouldn't be surprised if most of his hatemail came from that type. And he did say "hatemail", not "criticism".
Can you think of a better example of hatemail that he might have gotten?
Honestly, no I wouldn't expect SCO to do this to protect my investment.
Is that so freaking hard to image?
And not to mention that he is also claiming that everyone who has an opinion should be running for office.
Forget doing the work that keeps this country running. Stop all of that and spend your time trying to get elected.
Not only is that rediculous, but not everyone wants to be an elected official. The counter part to his idea is: "don't speak your opinion"
Oh well... Neither me or my company has had to use any OSS yet that requires either licenses, or has any limitation on usage.
I really can't think of any OSS that costs a company to purchase either. Other than having to pay for a distribution CD. You still aren't paying licenses. Who would want to contribute freely to an open source project that is going to turn around and sell the software to profit off your work that you aren't rewarded for?
What is an exmaple of this? I'm always willing to reduce my ignorance.
OSS is free as far as the cost of software goes.
It's not as if you can buy microsoft or oracle, or what have you, without paying people or having computers to run it. Evaluating it is often cheaper as well, and only *isn't* cheaper when the commercial software offers a free eval period.
We've evaluated many "free" OSS solutions at my company and it hasn't cost us ANYTHING beyond our normal operating costs. We have a test environment where I've loaded Gentoo Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD, to test out several different apps and servers. We had to invest nothing to perform this eval. We also would spend nothing if we implemented parts of it.
Are you talking about something beyond the same capital that is required by commercial software - the software cost?
I'm not playing the "evil corporation" bs.
I'm saying that corporations are out for their wellfare and that's ALL. Everything else is a result of them trying to GROW and make more money, no matter how predatory or apathetic they have to be.
We don't vote corporations into office.
"We believe that procurement decisions should be based on the overall merits and value of the software under consideration," said Alex Mercer, a Microsoft spokeswoman.
In other words, it should be based on how well that software is Marketed, not on how well it performs.
Would they not discover the "overal merits and value" by evaluating software instead of ONLY listening to the production of one of the most aggressive marketing engines in the world, and online opinion?
I disagree. I think this law is useful. It can save a lot of tax dollars for now and the future, increase the security and stability of government systems, and help break apart the commercial dominators on the playing field... If they were required to evaluate OSS software (which is free as far as capital goes), then they wouldn't be able to just choose whatever commercial software company's slick salesman talks them into. They would have to really take a look at a free solution. If they decide the free soultion is better, then we are really benefiting. If they don't, well, the time they spent evaluating the free software won't even compare to the money they will spend on the commercial software.
One more thing... The less influence that commercial software has on the government, the better. Because that means the less influence some company, whose primary concern is their own income, will have over our lives. Maybe you disagree but I'd rather have the people we voted into office making decisions for my life than a corporation like Microsoft.
Yeah, in other words, instead of just picking the first thing that comes along, which is ALWAYS commercial software, they would be REQUIRED to consider an OSS alternative.
A few good points:
1. Good chance at finding a cheaper solution for the initial implementation.
2. Good chance at finding a more secure solution.
3. The solution would be maintainable, and free to upgrade to meet future technologies.
4. No source code is hidden from you.
5. If they decide not to use an evaluated OSS solution then the resulting report could greatly benefit that OSS projects future.
6. If the OSS solution is decided on, it will bring this OSS project further into the public for other's to consider using.
7. The more OSS solutions that organizations are aware of and implement, the more organizations that will be aware of and implement them as a compounding result.
etc
8. Future change: If something is free, you aren't held back from changing because of all the money you already dumped into it. And you most likely wouldn't get involved in a platform that was designed to lock you into it with no escape (microsoft), so you'd have a better chance at changing in the future as well.
Someone else list bad points; I'm going to bed.
You obviously totally missed the point you unmodified clod.
Like a user who is going to decide which linux to get based on the version numbers is going to say, "GNU/Linux X"
Better yet, I'm modifying clod back over to insenstive for you too.
Some kind of Japanese Web Browser that manages to trample all over other processes on a Microsoft Windows machine.
Gentoo is currently 1.4 rc3. Maybe when they hit final they'll rename it to 10, so everyone knows who the highes version linux is.
Ooh look at me! I'm using Linux X!