Personally I'd rather see a standard stereo component sized box, a UI that operates through your television and normal remote, and 30+ gigs, but this one is looking like a great start.
You might want to look at an AudioRequest. It has ethernet, a TV- or front panel-based UI, 30 GB of disk, plus ethernet, etc. etc. The remote works just fine as well. It also does things like automatic freecddb lookups, automatic encoding and catagorizing, plays CD-Rs burned full of MP3s, and lots more.
It's a QNX-based device. But it's all about the right tool for the job, right? I could personally care less whether my AudioRequest runs Linux or not as long as it actually runs. Worth mentioning, I guess.
I don't really think any real "damage" was done by releasing the see-through drivers and then these newer ones. As performance improvements and tweaks get added to newer drivers, people will gradually move on. Anyone who would keep older drivers just to cheat is the kind that would stoop to other kinds of cheating anyway. And I guess they deserve the performance hit they're going to take. It's hard enough just keeping honest people honest. Asus is fine.
What would be kinda nice is to have newer patches for games detect players with the see-through drivers. I run a Tribes2 server, and would love to be able to find out who likes to cheat. I'm not saying I'd boot them automatically or anything (the maps in T2 are big enough that I'm not sure a player would get any benefit out of seeing through stuff), but if I saw a player with an absurdly high score who was also using the drivers, I'd be very tempted to ban them. A guy using those drivers (especially after they've been phased out for a while) is probably the sort who would cheat in other ways as well. And it would be nice to look at the players on a server and see if they are using the drivers. I wouldn't like to play on a server where everyone but me could see through walls. Then again, I play for the fun of it, so...
What's to like? When I saw the first X-Files, I thought it was satire. It's probably the worst series ever produced for TV. It's worse than bad. It's not even bad-good. It's just plain bad. It's Sandra Bullock and The Net bad, not Bruce Campbell and Evil Dead bad.
The plots are nonsensical, the characters one dimensional and the premise is completely absurd. Most science fiction is so far out there that it's not hard for one to suspend disbelief, and this is usually required (unless you're insane or some such). But the X-Files tried to be just on the edge of reality, yet had so many incongruities that disbelief was required. It's vey contradictory.
I just never understood why anyone with more than two neurons to rub together would willingly watch the X-Files. I guess it's a matter of taste. Otherwise I'm stumped.
Thanks for the witticism. Here's one of mine: "If you have to say it anonymously, it isn't worth saying."
I had high score (32-ish) on a server with like 27 people on it. I'm allowed to bitch about the latest DRI snapshot sucking when I'm high scorer. Keep the Zen platitudes to yourself.
The two have nothing to do with one another, but I can tell you that replacing a machine which had been running Windows for over two years certainly tested my new non-need for nicotine.
Tribes2 came from tuxgames, and I no longer work at Eudora. I don't really need Windows anymore. So I wiped my big, fast SCSI drive and threw Linux on it. No more using the tinier and slower drive in dual boot when I want Linux. I'm going to have an actual uptime on my main, daily-use machine. And now the only Win32 machines in the house are my wife's.
I've been using Linux since 1994 (Slack, even) and I'm pretty familiar with it. I have a couple machines at home that run Linux (including a gateway built from the Linux Router Project's stuff that has no hard disk). I'm confident when working with Linux, and I use it at work. I don't really like Windows all that much and I've been wanting to dump it for years. Yet it was a hard decision to leave Windows completely.
What games will I be giving up? Will there be some new killer app I cannot run? Can I live with Samba for all my non-Linux connectivity? Will all my USB stuff work? Will the latest CVS snapshot Voodoo5 drivers be better than the six month old Win32 ones? Will they work at all? How will I update my BIOS now that they pack them in Win32 self-extracting EXEs? How's WINE doing these days? Can I get drivers for my old Canon laser printer?
I think things are fine. I've got stunnel doing cool things, and ssh port forwards for my mail. Opera runs like a champ, and I can get pix out of my digital camera. I'm thinking of installing GNUCash. I feel comfortable for the first time in years. It's like being home again. I wrote a shell script that did absolutely nothing, just because I could.
But if the decision to completely switch was hard for me, it must be really, really hard for the casual user. I can't imagine what a new Linux user would do. ("I have to link a GLU DRI to what.so thingy where? Huh?") I think it would be nearly impossible for the average/new Linux users to make the switch.
So we need WINE. We also need native ports. It's a very tough question. I can tell you that the people like me won't support Lokigames -- there aren't enough of us. But if we rely on WINE to run all our non-ported apps, MS (or someone) will work on breaking the implementation, just like what happened to AIM and Samba. I'll deal with either WINE or a native port (ports preferred), but if the goal is new Linux users then games aren't where the answer is. Ask anyone with Mac OSX to burn a disc and see what they think of Unix. The interface to the OS needs significant ease-of-use changes.
Jack, please... use your words. Say it clearly. These are geeks in here, they can help you. But you need to help them. By saying what you mean. They don't respond to marketroids...
I'm still recommending KDE to my clients when they need a Linux solution.
What? You're saying KDE is a "Linux solution"? Aside from the fact that the word "solution" is powerfully overused and underuseful, that makes no sense. KDE is a GUI, and has almost nothign to do with the OS (not intrinsically, anyway). My boss runs KDE on his Ultra 10 (that's a Sun running Solaris, Jack). I'd love for you to come into his office and remark on what a lovely "Linux solution" he has set up...
KDE has a much better synergy with regards to any value assessment I've done.
OK, more buzzwords. How can one thing have -- in and of itself -- synergy? Synergy implies a set of at least two. How can one thing have much better anything than itself? You need a comparitive statement in there.
And what value assessment are you talking about? GNOME, KDE, Blackbox, etc are free. ROI is a non-issue. Are you talking about TCO? If so: bullshit. Every time a new version of Word or Excel (or Windows) comes out, every secretary in the world is flummoxed for five days. So it's not a cross-OS issue. Is it that KDE is easier to learn than GNOME? I'd argue that one.
While Gnome is stable like a rock and probably more "fun" than KDE, my gut tell me the latest paradigm shift is leading to customer centric initiatives and away from affinity marketing, which is more than likely a good thing.
You're nearing 100% ISO-certified buzzword compliance, Jack. But what are you saying? I can't even guess what the hell the above statement means. Have you used this double-speak to sell things to people? Did they actually buy it? Did they understand what they were buying after you told them about it?
I'm actually waiting for someone to step up to the open source plate, as it were, and show me a real forward thinking Desktop.
There's plenty of 3D desktops out there, Jack. Can't get much more forward than that. Probably not very useful, though. And GNOME/KDE/whatever are so customizable that the desktop can almost be as forweard-thinking as the user needs or wants. Where -- specifically -- are current desktops lacking? We need details.
I don't want change just for the sake of change, nor do my clients, I want a new direction, something that leads us out of the copy windows rutm not that that's totally bad, it's just tired.
But how does change for change's sake affect your TCO/ROI/value assessment? You're contradicting yourself here. Which do you want, Jack: something cheap and ubiquitous, or something which is forward-thinking and expensive enough not to qualify as a copy of Windows? Pick one, because you can't have both.
People will need somthing which looks beyond our limited thinking to deal with the problems that lie ahead.
What problems? I get on just fine with what I have. What we most emphatically do not need is more of the kind of wooly thinking which leads to paperclips telling me how to write a letter. Do you want a port of MS Bob for Linux, Jack?
Jack, for your clients' sake (and the sake of fellow/. readers): Cancel your subscriptions to InfoWorld and all ZD publications, do not go to COMDEX, and in the future try to say what you mean. Use words which serve your ideas, not just because they sound pretty, hip, or forward-thinking. You'll find very few venture capitalists in here, Jack. But you will find plenty of people willing to discuss nearly any topic. Even marketing double talk...:-)
"We don't think e-mail recipients are more sensitive [to unsolicited messages], but there's a very vocal minority who have an objection," said Robert Weintzen, president of the Direct Mail Assn., the industry trade group.
My response? Oh really now. So you don't think that most people dislike spam, huh? Since you're obviously not in that vocal minority, then you wouldn't mind if I changed my.sig to include every dma.org email address I can find, would you?
Now when the bottom feeders troll through Usenet and web pages slurping email addresses, they'll pick these up as well. And if there's any karmic justice left in the universe, they haven't had the foresight to add themselves to their own block lists.
-B
Re:They're called "viruses"...
on
New Linux Worm
·
· Score: 2
It is, however, a somewhat archaic grammatical structure. But it's still considered linguistically correct.
Bullshit. It's wrong, annoying, and used only by people who either want to make other people think they're smart or just don't know any better.
A "somewhat archaic grammatical structure"?!? WTF are you talking about? You sound like Ash in Army of Darkness: "Your primitive brains can't comprehend things with alloys and molecules, and uh..."
So I have a choice between your opinion and those of two dictionaries. Hmmm, let me see... Yeah, I think you're right and both dictionaries are wrong! Uh huh. Any other words you care to invent that you would like to share?
Look it up. Links are in the original post.
-B
They're called "viruses"...
on
New Linux Worm
·
· Score: 2
The preferred plural form of "virus" is "viruses".
I don't mean to split hairs, but the word "virii" makes my skin crawl, the same way "irregardless" or "it's" used possessively does...
As for testing sovereignty, I'd say the armed invasion over a decade ago, and subsequent military recapture, where the Germans send diplomats directly to
Sealand to negotiate the release of a private citizen being held as POW, is a stronger test of sovereignty than a Napster server!
I believe you. That sounds like a truer test of national sovereignty than a server responding to Napster requests. But I don't think business will see it that way.
In order to for commercial entities to put their money into Sealand/HavenCo, there must be some sort of precedent set that protects their investment. They have to know that the model is tested and stable. The rescue of a POW doesn't do it for them. They need a court somewhere that says "Yeah, you bad guys tried to get at these poor fellows, but we have decided that doing so would be tantamount to invading France. Piss off." Then they can sink time and effort into setting up some servers because when someone comes after them, they can point to precedent (without hiring expensive lawyers).
Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of HavenCo, and Sealand. (I'm card-carrying member of the Libertarian party, after all.) It's just that someone needs to prime the pump of sovereignty with a legal battle. POWs and armed captures do nothing but scare the corporate mind.
I can tell you one thing: this will let us know whether Sealand really is a sovereign nation or not. The jury is still out on that question, and it's one that has to be answered before anyone spends their cash on a colo setup there.
For example, let's say you set up a gambling operation there. You're running along happily, until one day the British Gov't comes calling because you've violated the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act of 2000, which was enacted so that MI5 can listen for bad guys by reading your email. Then some bigwig public official in Norwich happens to be gambling on a game of canasta with the Crown's money, and the Brits get all upset because they can't find out who he is, what he bet, when he plays, etc. So they sue, he sues, everyone sues everyone else. It becomes a big mess, and the anonymous email operation you set up six months prior is caught in the middle of it. How do you repel a DoS attack from the Home Office?
Later on, the providers of HavenCo's bandwidth get pressured from all sorts of people. See, Sealand might be independant, but the companies that give HavanCo their pipe are based in countries which most certainly are not. They can (and will) be pressured. They get leaned on, and then HavenCo gets leaned on. Shit runs downhill. (And don't give me that satellite rap; you know that's only an expensive worst-case backup of dubious technical merit.) The upshot here is that everyone who gave money to HavenCo is now officially S.O.L.
Which is why we need something "friviolous" like a Napster server to take up residence on Sealand. If it goes down because of the Strong Arm of the Law(TM), then it really isn't that big of a deal. It gets sorted out in court and we all wait to see what happens. In the meantime, we run our gambling and pr0n operations off some island like everyone else has been doing. We're listenign to stuff off FreeNet, and grabbign MP3s from OpenNap servers.
But the court will have to decide one way or the other. The RIAA -- for one -- will surely force the issue (like through the U.N., maybe?). And the decision will likely be binding; what's good for Mr. Napster Server Clone is good for you and me (please note: IANAL and I don't want to be one, either). If the verdict is for the Napsterites, then we can all put our servers on Sealand. If the verdict favors whatever government happened to bitch, then we lost no money setting precedent ourselves.
...they can patent anything. Yes, someone has actually patented goat sex.
People have even patented goat cheese and rubber duckies, of all things. And people have laid claim to inventing hamburger buns, spatulas, and corn holders (which, actually, is a good thing since would make it hard for someone to patent the concept of a barbeque).
Hell, someone's even patented the concept of a sharp stick.
The patent office doesn't have a clue, and I don't think they ever did.
I would not move to redhat on my own boxes or any of the smaller servers, BUT on the other hand i want to get Linux on this box, and that
means i have to play ball with others and move to redhat!
So, I have to ask... Why use Linux at all? You have an Intel SMP development machine. Production boxes run Solaris (I assume, since you said they are 420Rs). Presumeably, you want to develop something on this new Dell and then move it into production on your Sun(s). Why not use another Sun for development? There's a lot of satisfaction in knowing that your dev machines are identical to your production systems (QA becomes orders of magnitude easier, for example). You just have to use Linux? Is it the right OS for the job, or an OS for the job?
I don't mean to sound like a shill for Sun, but this post struck me as odd. Everyone needs a machine they can re-image if their "I wrote this, and it kinda did this instead of this..." software dorks the OS, and Linux is more than fine. Preferrable, even. You might even run an home-built, buggier-than-a-rainforest MP3 server off that same "pre-dev" Linux box (I did for many years), or whatever other wacky things you have going on after seven p.m. But why does Linux have to go on this box? Is it because you have the box already and it's an x86? I'd just really want a dev machine to match a production machine. If at all possible, that is. And it might not be for you.
I guess I'm just missing the point. And I don't know enough about what you do, where, how, etc., etc. So I guess just ignore me...:-)
In this way, even someone on my machine can't send mail as me.
Hate to say it, but that's not true. If you've got something like Back Orifice (or a keystroke sniffer, or even a shoulder surfer) on your machine, then the jig is up. You need to use something which incorporates biometrics in order to be really sure your communications are secure and identifiable. Heck, even a SecuurID is better than a plain password dialog.
... I have yet to see good commercial (shrinkwrapped?) applications that can help pursuade commercial vendors that Linux applications really can be profitable.
I was at Fry's the other day and decided to pick up a boxed version of Oracle 8i for Linux. It's a Macmillan deal, and they throw in a book (11K pages worth) and free support (from Linuxcare, which I'm anxious to try for that reason alone). It looks pretty good, and was only US$99.00 (yeah, I know you can get it off the web site, but the package deal was pretty cool). I've been meaning to get familiar with Oracle, and replacing my MP3 server's MySQL database will do just that.
Anyway, my point was that not only was it a shrinkwrapped Linux software purchase, but it was an impulse buy as well. It could also be argued that Oracle is "good commercial software". I know I probably ought to have my head examined for replacing MySQL on a low-load, home network machine with Oracle, but I'm a geek, so what can I say? It was fairly cheap, and I need to learn things anyway.
Actually, it was small-business sized cheap, come to think of it. Imagine a 15 employee company that can get their stuff on a Oracle DB running Linux for 100 bucks and the cost of hardware, with 90 days free support. If it was like $1000, I think they'd have a hard time making the sale, but a hundred dollars is petty cash sized.
Well, nobody but them knows what they use for in-house servers/workstations/etc, but the DoD "homepage" uses Netscape Enterprise httpd on Solaris, according to Netcraft (the DoD's Defense Technical Information Center runs this combo as well).
What's really odd about the Netcraft link above is the history of the DoD website. As of 11 Oct 00, their OS was listed as "unknown" (and the DTIC's OS was unknown as of 12 Oct 00; looks like they all swicthed at the same time). Maybe that's what the article was referring to?
And if you want to see something really odd, try Netcrafting to the DTIC's IP addr. Their httpd/OS information was changed 9 Dec 00, which is tomorrow. And if you're not into conspiracy theories, then just tell yourself that it's because the run on GMT and they just made the switch to a new machine like ten minutes ago (it's currently 00:41 as I write this).
Anyone else here get schitzy at the thought of putting all your eggs in one basket like Telia's done? Granted, I'm not at all familiar with their past implementation (i.e., they could have had all 70 machines doing different things, with no fail-over between them at all), but it strikes me as being a bad idea. Well, a "spooky" idea at least.
Of course, maybe I'm too young (at 33 no less!:-) to remember the mainframe days very well, but in my recent experience these days, big iron always has a little buddy somewhere waiting to help out when a boot drive fails, a router blows, whatever. I guess I'm just not used to one big box doing everything. I just can't get away from the notion that three smaller machines behind some sort of load balancing deal is better than one big machine doing everything. It just makes more sense to me.
Oh well. So much for thinking outside the box. Anyone got a VAX for sale?
We read above that freeware games will be eligable for certification at no cost, but I am
interested to know how well this will fit with the fact that the GPL explicitly permits commercial distribution. In fact, a GPL
program cannot legally be distributed under any terms that forbid commercial distribution. Will Indrema be able to make this work?
Who said anything about releasing anything under the GPL? Did anyone see the letters "GPL" in this interview? I didn't. He merely said that everything would be "Open Source". That term is not synonymous with "being GPL'ed". For all we know, they might have an Indrema Public License coming out soon...
So the games are Open Source (speech), but "owned" by someone, and maybe they are given away for free (beer). But maybe not -- they might be sold for profit. I don't see the problem.
The person who invents the corporate-whapping mechanism will become my one true personal hero...
And then watch them patent the idea. Anyone tries to whap someone else gets two whaps and a lawsuit. In the end, we'll be wondering "Who whaps the whappers?"
I'm sorry. This guy is full of shit. He's making broad generalizations about an entire industry based on two (well, one and a half, really) examples. What ESR made was more of a case study with regards to one project. So if Mr. Connell can make such a sweeping generalization that OSS is unviable, I'll exactly counter that argument with exactly two examples of my own: XEmacs and Perl.
Take this quote:
Most likely, the code "forks" as several people create new releases at the same time. This is part of the bazaar process.
Anyone here ever use Emacs? What about XEmacs? Isn't that exactly what Connell describes?
And here's another tidbit which he says describes "true" bazaar work:
Development continues in this dynamic, organic method. Leaders emerge
briefly, as they create a new release or argue for one fork over another, but
they then become equal community members again. All decisions about
features, design, bug fixes, etc. are made in this way.
Someone her please tell me that I'm not the only one who knows what the Perl Pumpkin is? Someone?
While he may have some intersting points, someone ought to whack him with a clue stick a couple times...
I don't know if it's a good book, but there's a book called PostgreSQL by Jeff Perkins coming out in October. Fatbrain didn't have a description, but Amazon did:
PostgreSQL is the perfect book for you if you use PostgreSQL at work and on your Web sites wherever you expose data
on the Web using Linux and Apache. It covers the new features of PostgreSQL as well as the PostgreSQL processor,
which defines all necessary objects in a database, to get acquainted with SQL and to test ideas and verify joins and
queries. Database developers for corporate and Web applications will find this book useful. It is geared toward
intermediate to advanced developers who have designed and administered databases, but not PostgreSQL. The
accompanying CD includes PostgreSQL, plus sample databases and modules.
If you just want to use it (and not admin it), O'Reilly's Programming the Perl DBI has some info on accessing a PostgreSQL DB (hint: it's not that different from any other DB when seen through DBI).
Oh yeah, MySQL & mSQL, also from O'Reilly has a little bit about it (but not very much at all). I guess readmes, man pages and HOW-TOs are your friends for the next couple months.
If you're really curious, throw it on a test machine and (if possible) "port" some apps to use Postgres instead of MySQL or whatever. You probably won't reach any real conclusion (or do nearly enough work to justify moving to another DB for a production environment), but the effort will very likely get you very familiar with how it works, how to set it up, how to admin it, its performance, its quirks, etc. That's both a good and a bad thing, BTW...:-)
I think it was at the first Perl Conference, I dunno. But it was pretty damn cool. More than a couple people ran it (just for grins, I guess -- it was easy enough to read on it's own) to see what it did.
I just had another thought: instead of emailing an an ascii resume as an attachment to a potential new employer, why not slurp in your resume, encode it somehow, and then send them the script/source/whatever as an attachment? As hard as it is to hire good people, I don't think that it would be a turn-off or keep you from being considered. It might piss off HR, but that's never a bad thing. If someone sent me their resume that way, I recommend they be hired on the spot. At any rate, you could use it as a filter: anyone that either didn't get it, didn't run it or didn't appreciate it wouldn't likely be a place you'd want to work anyway.
Of course, my.sig might make me out to be a little biased...:-)
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to look at an AudioRequest. It has ethernet, a TV- or front panel-based UI, 30 GB of disk, plus ethernet, etc. etc. The remote works just fine as well. It also does things like automatic freecddb lookups, automatic encoding and catagorizing, plays CD-Rs burned full of MP3s, and lots more.
It's a QNX-based device. But it's all about the right tool for the job, right? I could personally care less whether my AudioRequest runs Linux or not as long as it actually runs. Worth mentioning, I guess.
-B
What would be kinda nice is to have newer patches for games detect players with the see-through drivers. I run a Tribes2 server, and would love to be able to find out who likes to cheat. I'm not saying I'd boot them automatically or anything (the maps in T2 are big enough that I'm not sure a player would get any benefit out of seeing through stuff), but if I saw a player with an absurdly high score who was also using the drivers, I'd be very tempted to ban them. A guy using those drivers (especially after they've been phased out for a while) is probably the sort who would cheat in other ways as well. And it would be nice to look at the players on a server and see if they are using the drivers. I wouldn't like to play on a server where everyone but me could see through walls. Then again, I play for the fun of it, so...
-B
The plots are nonsensical, the characters one dimensional and the premise is completely absurd. Most science fiction is so far out there that it's not hard for one to suspend disbelief, and this is usually required (unless you're insane or some such). But the X-Files tried to be just on the edge of reality, yet had so many incongruities that disbelief was required. It's vey contradictory.
I just never understood why anyone with more than two neurons to rub together would willingly watch the X-Files. I guess it's a matter of taste. Otherwise I'm stumped.
-B
Thanks for the witticism. Here's one of mine: "If you have to say it anonymously, it isn't worth saying."
I had high score (32-ish) on a server with like 27 people on it. I'm allowed to bitch about the latest DRI snapshot sucking when I'm high scorer. Keep the Zen platitudes to yourself.
-B
The two have nothing to do with one another, but I can tell you that replacing a machine which had been running Windows for over two years certainly tested my new non-need for nicotine.
Tribes2 came from tuxgames, and I no longer work at Eudora. I don't really need Windows anymore. So I wiped my big, fast SCSI drive and threw Linux on it. No more using the tinier and slower drive in dual boot when I want Linux. I'm going to have an actual uptime on my main, daily-use machine. And now the only Win32 machines in the house are my wife's.
I've been using Linux since 1994 (Slack, even) and I'm pretty familiar with it. I have a couple machines at home that run Linux (including a gateway built from the Linux Router Project's stuff that has no hard disk). I'm confident when working with Linux, and I use it at work. I don't really like Windows all that much and I've been wanting to dump it for years. Yet it was a hard decision to leave Windows completely.
What games will I be giving up? Will there be some new killer app I cannot run? Can I live with Samba for all my non-Linux connectivity? Will all my USB stuff work? Will the latest CVS snapshot Voodoo5 drivers be better than the six month old Win32 ones? Will they work at all? How will I update my BIOS now that they pack them in Win32 self-extracting EXEs? How's WINE doing these days? Can I get drivers for my old Canon laser printer?
I think things are fine. I've got stunnel doing cool things, and ssh port forwards for my mail. Opera runs like a champ, and I can get pix out of my digital camera. I'm thinking of installing GNUCash. I feel comfortable for the first time in years. It's like being home again. I wrote a shell script that did absolutely nothing, just because I could.
But if the decision to completely switch was hard for me, it must be really, really hard for the casual user. I can't imagine what a new Linux user would do. ("I have to link a GLU DRI to what .so thingy where? Huh?") I think it would be nearly impossible for the average/new Linux users to make the switch.
So we need WINE. We also need native ports. It's a very tough question. I can tell you that the people like me won't support Lokigames -- there aren't enough of us. But if we rely on WINE to run all our non-ported apps, MS (or someone) will work on breaking the implementation, just like what happened to AIM and Samba. I'll deal with either WINE or a native port (ports preferred), but if the goal is new Linux users then games aren't where the answer is. Ask anyone with Mac OSX to burn a disc and see what they think of Unix. The interface to the OS needs significant ease-of-use changes.
-B
Bruce is going to be giving the following seminars:
I'm sure amidst all those talks, you could find him meandering about on the ship and corner him for some one-on-one.
No, I don't work for geekcruises.com, I'm just excited to go... :-)
-B
I'm still recommending KDE to my clients when they need a Linux solution.
What? You're saying KDE is a "Linux solution"? Aside from the fact that the word "solution" is powerfully overused and underuseful, that makes no sense. KDE is a GUI, and has almost nothign to do with the OS (not intrinsically, anyway). My boss runs KDE on his Ultra 10 (that's a Sun running Solaris, Jack). I'd love for you to come into his office and remark on what a lovely "Linux solution" he has set up...
KDE has a much better synergy with regards to any value assessment I've done.
OK, more buzzwords. How can one thing have -- in and of itself -- synergy? Synergy implies a set of at least two. How can one thing have much better anything than itself? You need a comparitive statement in there.
And what value assessment are you talking about? GNOME, KDE, Blackbox, etc are free. ROI is a non-issue. Are you talking about TCO? If so: bullshit. Every time a new version of Word or Excel (or Windows) comes out, every secretary in the world is flummoxed for five days. So it's not a cross-OS issue. Is it that KDE is easier to learn than GNOME? I'd argue that one.
While Gnome is stable like a rock and probably more "fun" than KDE, my gut tell me the latest paradigm shift is leading to customer centric initiatives and away from affinity marketing, which is more than likely a good thing.
You're nearing 100% ISO-certified buzzword compliance, Jack. But what are you saying? I can't even guess what the hell the above statement means. Have you used this double-speak to sell things to people? Did they actually buy it? Did they understand what they were buying after you told them about it?
I'm actually waiting for someone to step up to the open source plate, as it were, and show me a real forward thinking Desktop.
There's plenty of 3D desktops out there, Jack. Can't get much more forward than that. Probably not very useful, though. And GNOME/KDE/whatever are so customizable that the desktop can almost be as forweard-thinking as the user needs or wants. Where -- specifically -- are current desktops lacking? We need details.
I don't want change just for the sake of change, nor do my clients, I want a new direction, something that leads us out of the copy windows rutm not that that's totally bad, it's just tired.
But how does change for change's sake affect your TCO/ROI/value assessment? You're contradicting yourself here. Which do you want, Jack: something cheap and ubiquitous, or something which is forward-thinking and expensive enough not to qualify as a copy of Windows? Pick one, because you can't have both.
People will need somthing which looks beyond our limited thinking to deal with the problems that lie ahead.
What problems? I get on just fine with what I have. What we most emphatically do not need is more of the kind of wooly thinking which leads to paperclips telling me how to write a letter. Do you want a port of MS Bob for Linux, Jack?
Jack, for your clients' sake (and the sake of fellow /. readers): Cancel your subscriptions to InfoWorld and all ZD publications, do not go to COMDEX, and in the future try to say what you mean. Use words which serve your ideas, not just because they sound pretty, hip, or forward-thinking. You'll find very few venture capitalists in here, Jack. But you will find plenty of people willing to discuss nearly any topic. Even marketing double talk... :-)
-B
My response? Oh really now. So you don't think that most people dislike spam, huh? Since you're obviously not in that vocal minority, then you wouldn't mind if I changed my .sig to include every dma.org email address I can find, would you?
So here's my new .sig:
--
These guys love spam!
webmaster@the-dma.org kebeling@the-dma.org echo@the-dma.org twalsh@the-dma.org lrc@the-dma.org chapters@the-dma.org customerservice@the-dma.org conference@the-dma.org consumer@the-dma.org councils@the-dma.org mmicali@the-dma.org dmef@the-dma.org Governme@the-dma.org hr@the-dma.org Internat@the-dma.org membership@the-dma.org Presiden@the-dma.org privacy@the-dma.org Sweep@the-dma.org kelli@dma.org.uk dma@dma.org.uk rweintzen@the-dma.org
--
Now when the bottom feeders troll through Usenet and web pages slurping email addresses, they'll pick these up as well. And if there's any karmic justice left in the universe, they haven't had the foresight to add themselves to their own block lists.
-B
Bullshit. It's wrong, annoying, and used only by people who either want to make other people think they're smart or just don't know any better.
A "somewhat archaic grammatical structure"?!? WTF are you talking about? You sound like Ash in Army of Darkness: "Your primitive brains can't comprehend things with alloys and molecules, and uh..."
So I have a choice between your opinion and those of two dictionaries. Hmmm, let me see... Yeah, I think you're right and both dictionaries are wrong! Uh huh. Any other words you care to invent that you would like to share?
Look it up. Links are in the original post.
-B
I don't mean to split hairs, but the word "virii" makes my skin crawl, the same way "irregardless" or "it's" used possessively does...
I'll shut up now... :-)
-B
I believe you. That sounds like a truer test of national sovereignty than a server responding to Napster requests. But I don't think business will see it that way.
In order to for commercial entities to put their money into Sealand/HavenCo, there must be some sort of precedent set that protects their investment. They have to know that the model is tested and stable. The rescue of a POW doesn't do it for them. They need a court somewhere that says "Yeah, you bad guys tried to get at these poor fellows, but we have decided that doing so would be tantamount to invading France. Piss off." Then they can sink time and effort into setting up some servers because when someone comes after them, they can point to precedent (without hiring expensive lawyers).
Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of HavenCo, and Sealand. (I'm card-carrying member of the Libertarian party, after all.) It's just that someone needs to prime the pump of sovereignty with a legal battle. POWs and armed captures do nothing but scare the corporate mind.
-B
For example, let's say you set up a gambling operation there. You're running along happily, until one day the British Gov't comes calling because you've violated the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act of 2000, which was enacted so that MI5 can listen for bad guys by reading your email. Then some bigwig public official in Norwich happens to be gambling on a game of canasta with the Crown's money, and the Brits get all upset because they can't find out who he is, what he bet, when he plays, etc. So they sue, he sues, everyone sues everyone else. It becomes a big mess, and the anonymous email operation you set up six months prior is caught in the middle of it. How do you repel a DoS attack from the Home Office?
Later on, the providers of HavenCo's bandwidth get pressured from all sorts of people. See, Sealand might be independant, but the companies that give HavanCo their pipe are based in countries which most certainly are not. They can (and will) be pressured. They get leaned on, and then HavenCo gets leaned on. Shit runs downhill. (And don't give me that satellite rap; you know that's only an expensive worst-case backup of dubious technical merit.) The upshot here is that everyone who gave money to HavenCo is now officially S.O.L.
Which is why we need something "friviolous" like a Napster server to take up residence on Sealand. If it goes down because of the Strong Arm of the Law(TM), then it really isn't that big of a deal. It gets sorted out in court and we all wait to see what happens. In the meantime, we run our gambling and pr0n operations off some island like everyone else has been doing. We're listenign to stuff off FreeNet, and grabbign MP3s from OpenNap servers.
But the court will have to decide one way or the other. The RIAA -- for one -- will surely force the issue (like through the U.N., maybe?). And the decision will likely be binding; what's good for Mr. Napster Server Clone is good for you and me (please note: IANAL and I don't want to be one, either). If the verdict is for the Napsterites, then we can all put our servers on Sealand. If the verdict favors whatever government happened to bitch, then we lost no money setting precedent ourselves.
It's a good thing. I want to see it happen.
-B
The patent office doesn't have a clue, and I don't think they ever did.
-B
So, I have to ask... Why use Linux at all? You have an Intel SMP development machine. Production boxes run Solaris (I assume, since you said they are 420Rs). Presumeably, you want to develop something on this new Dell and then move it into production on your Sun(s). Why not use another Sun for development? There's a lot of satisfaction in knowing that your dev machines are identical to your production systems (QA becomes orders of magnitude easier, for example). You just have to use Linux? Is it the right OS for the job, or an OS for the job?
I don't mean to sound like a shill for Sun, but this post struck me as odd. Everyone needs a machine they can re-image if their "I wrote this, and it kinda did this instead of this..." software dorks the OS, and Linux is more than fine. Preferrable, even. You might even run an home-built, buggier-than-a-rainforest MP3 server off that same "pre-dev" Linux box (I did for many years), or whatever other wacky things you have going on after seven p.m. But why does Linux have to go on this box? Is it because you have the box already and it's an x86? I'd just really want a dev machine to match a production machine. If at all possible, that is. And it might not be for you.
I guess I'm just missing the point. And I don't know enough about what you do, where, how, etc., etc. So I guess just ignore me... :-)
-B
Hate to say it, but that's not true. If you've got something like Back Orifice (or a keystroke sniffer, or even a shoulder surfer) on your machine, then the jig is up. You need to use something which incorporates biometrics in order to be really sure your communications are secure and identifiable. Heck, even a SecuurID is better than a plain password dialog.
-B
Get it? Like Torvalds couldn't come up with a good OS, so he's reduced to using C# on Win2K. Since Linux has failed and Microsoft has won and all...
What a weenie.
-B
I was at Fry's the other day and decided to pick up a boxed version of Oracle 8i for Linux. It's a Macmillan deal, and they throw in a book (11K pages worth) and free support (from Linuxcare, which I'm anxious to try for that reason alone). It looks pretty good, and was only US$99.00 (yeah, I know you can get it off the web site, but the package deal was pretty cool). I've been meaning to get familiar with Oracle, and replacing my MP3 server's MySQL database will do just that.
Anyway, my point was that not only was it a shrinkwrapped Linux software purchase, but it was an impulse buy as well. It could also be argued that Oracle is "good commercial software". I know I probably ought to have my head examined for replacing MySQL on a low-load, home network machine with Oracle, but I'm a geek, so what can I say? It was fairly cheap, and I need to learn things anyway.
Actually, it was small-business sized cheap, come to think of it. Imagine a 15 employee company that can get their stuff on a Oracle DB running Linux for 100 bucks and the cost of hardware, with 90 days free support. If it was like $1000, I think they'd have a hard time making the sale, but a hundred dollars is petty cash sized.
Have patience, the apps will come.
-B
What's really odd about the Netcraft link above is the history of the DoD website. As of 11 Oct 00, their OS was listed as "unknown" (and the DTIC's OS was unknown as of 12 Oct 00; looks like they all swicthed at the same time). Maybe that's what the article was referring to?
And if you want to see something really odd, try Netcrafting to the DTIC's IP addr. Their httpd/OS information was changed 9 Dec 00, which is tomorrow. And if you're not into conspiracy theories, then just tell yourself that it's because the run on GMT and they just made the switch to a new machine like ten minutes ago (it's currently 00:41 as I write this).
-B
Of course, maybe I'm too young (at 33 no less! :-) to remember the mainframe days very well, but in my recent experience these days, big iron always has a little buddy somewhere waiting to help out when a boot drive fails, a router blows, whatever. I guess I'm just not used to one big box doing everything. I just can't get away from the notion that three smaller machines behind some sort of load balancing deal is better than one big machine doing everything. It just makes more sense to me.
Oh well. So much for thinking outside the box. Anyone got a VAX for sale?
-B
I'm so confused...
-B
Who said anything about releasing anything under the GPL? Did anyone see the letters "GPL" in this interview? I didn't. He merely said that everything would be "Open Source". That term is not synonymous with "being GPL'ed". For all we know, they might have an Indrema Public License coming out soon...
So the games are Open Source (speech), but "owned" by someone, and maybe they are given away for free (beer). But maybe not -- they might be sold for profit. I don't see the problem.
-B
And then watch them patent the idea. Anyone tries to whap someone else gets two whaps and a lawsuit. In the end, we'll be wondering "Who whaps the whappers?"
-B
Take this quote:
Anyone here ever use Emacs? What about XEmacs? Isn't that exactly what Connell describes?And here's another tidbit which he says describes "true" bazaar work:
Someone her please tell me that I'm not the only one who knows what the Perl Pumpkin is? Someone?While he may have some intersting points, someone ought to whack him with a clue stick a couple times...
-B
If you just want to use it (and not admin it), O'Reilly's Programming the Perl DBI has some info on accessing a PostgreSQL DB (hint: it's not that different from any other DB when seen through DBI). Oh yeah, MySQL & mSQL, also from O'Reilly has a little bit about it (but not very much at all). I guess readmes, man pages and HOW-TOs are your friends for the next couple months.
If you're really curious, throw it on a test machine and (if possible) "port" some apps to use Postgres instead of MySQL or whatever. You probably won't reach any real conclusion (or do nearly enough work to justify moving to another DB for a production environment), but the effort will very likely get you very familiar with how it works, how to set it up, how to admin it, its performance, its quirks, etc. That's both a good and a bad thing, BTW... :-)
-B
I just had another thought: instead of emailing an an ascii resume as an attachment to a potential new employer, why not slurp in your resume, encode it somehow, and then send them the script/source/whatever as an attachment? As hard as it is to hire good people, I don't think that it would be a turn-off or keep you from being considered. It might piss off HR, but that's never a bad thing. If someone sent me their resume that way, I recommend they be hired on the spot. At any rate, you could use it as a filter: anyone that either didn't get it, didn't run it or didn't appreciate it wouldn't likely be a place you'd want to work anyway.
Of course, my .sig might make me out to be a little biased... :-)
-B