My 80 year old grandfather, on getting his first PC 4 years ago installed Linux first. (true story) He was brand new to computers in general as a user, so he backed out of the situation, and went to Windows, which he still has trouble using. He's fond of it, but with his strong anticorporate beliefs, he's just can't wait for Linux to be accessible to him without need for support. (he uses digital cameras, scanners, video cameras, and all sorts of gadgets, which arent Linux friendly nowdays).
There is a bigger market for Linux. I don't think the article shows that Microsoft isn't worried. They should be, and I see that they are responding. Anything that gets a 95% monopoly to do anything more than blink (and Linux did much more) must have some real value.
It reminds me of a tv-shopping ad I once saw, where some guy was selling a "computer program" that did a (phonetic I think) search in the hebrew version of the bible. As examples, he said that the word "Hitler" is somewhere in the bible and some other interesting buzzwords. Perhaps IBM should use this program to search for prior art in some other ancient scripture?;)
Is it just me, or does the article jump from idea to disjoint idea assuming I know where they're coming from? I got half way through and just gave up. All I got out of it was that Psion wants Linux but Symbian too.. ?!
So what do you do with GMC? Would a company making engines calling itself Jeneral Motors Corporation be infringing on GMC?
The phrase "general motors" existed before the company. Note the brand difference between General Motors and General Electric... These names sound so generic that it's obvious that they do not infringe on each other's brand.
This is a TOUGH case. Nobody reasonable looking at the name General Electric thinks of the car company. Yet EVERYONE reasonable looking at Lindows thinks of the similarity to the Windows brand.
This kind of issue needs to be resolved on a case by case basis. Just the fact that "windows" was a computer term before MS Windows does not mean that it now doesn't posess serious marketing power.
To give an example, there was a Windows (95) beer in Russia. Unlicensed, of course, but the word Windows gave it a serious marketing kick in a different industry! That's a powerful brand, folks. And I think Lindows should pay some damages.
I like to be able to tell my cellphone by voice to call my wife and have it react without having to touch the phone.
Also my fabulous 1year old Sony Ericsson t68i lets me use it as a remote for my home computer and laptop for watching movies and flipping PowerPoint presentations at work. AND the Bluetooth GPRS connection when the phone is in my wardrobe in some jacket pocket works like a charm. I'm free to walk around a hotel room with my laptop and work in any *ahem* position I like.
Features - real features - like that are really useful. On my old basic Motorola V I didn't know how to use the address book. It was so damn ugly I winced just looking at the menu.
Phones will do more handy things in the future, and don't you for a second make the mistake of so many before you:
"A [insert invention name here]?! It's neat, but who will ever really use it?"...:) Every time I hear that in reference to a toy/gadget I look twice; it could be the next big thing.
Dude, my family left the Eastern Bloc in '86 out of desperation, and we had to trick authorities into letting us out. And we didn't live in the USSR. At one point in time my parents (well off) bought me a ZX Spectrum for the equivalent of a year's salary at the time. The USSR was poorer still.
The USSR sponsored all these communist parties you speak of. The Russians weren't letting elections be played fair. Man.. I don't want to rant right now, but watch the Manchurian Candidate or read 1984 one day and know that to someone who's been through living behind the iron curtain these works are no fiction.
I understand that you fear for US workers. But saying that it was wrong to help those hundreds of millions of people is a mistake on the scale of saying that fighting Hitler wasn't a good thing.
Is it just me, or is the quality of the articles published by Newsforge and other tech-only papers very poor?
When I read these articles, I get the feeling that I'm listening to a kid complaining about something. They are scant on details and very one sided. The articles remind me in style and structure of high school essays, written on the break befor class.
A prime example is the article I just read from the link. It sounds like "SCO is using FUD! SCO is using FUD, I tell you! Look at all these corporations that use linux, it can't be bad. And foreginers use it too; they should be compensated for their work by being given access to US software." This is really no argument.
What should the article sound like? It should give an objectiv account of what SCO says.. not a link to the whole frickin document. It should report what the opposing view states without crying foul and let the reader decide what is right. That would be an article. What I just read is garbage.
I'm against SCO claims, but honestly I could not recommend my father (MS fan) reading that piece. He would just read it and say, "so?" And based on the "facts" presented in the article all I could say would be, "SCO is using FUD..."
I haven't seen a much better article on what SCO is doing to date. If I was to bet which magazine was to have the first reasonable sounding article on the issue, I would guess The Economist. But they're not a tech paper, and tech papers should be saying what The Economist will say months ahead!
In fact, it was the Polish intelligence service that cracked the way the Enigma worked and devised a system to break the code. They also got the Enigma examples that were worked on. The brits only took the info and used it with some refinements.
I don't mean to belittle the British contribution, as the refinements were significant. But not mentioning Poland while saying the Brits did it is just like saying that the Americans did it:)
Every time I go into a toy store (I'm 26), I want a toy. And there are very few toys I find interesting. One of them is a LEGO set. And lately I have been searching toy stores for a nice lego set for myself or as a present for some kid. Lego sets these days aren't the Lego sets I used to play with. They are no fun!
The magic of Lego was that you could build your dream spaceship out of the stuff. Given the same set two different kids would come up with wildly different designs. Now it seems a lego set can only become what it was designed to become.
This is why while being thirsty for some Lego fun and wanting to spend $$, I haven't done so in 10 years!
Too bad it took Lego so long to realize their mistake. I welcome the comback of the block!
I have lived in both, North America and Europe. I can see where most of you are getting precisely into a taboo-led discussion over the split between America and (part of) EU on Bush's policies.
Let me apply the suggestion in the article and stipulate that what the Americans regard as ridiculous and heretical of the Europeans may in fact be the truth. And what the Europeans deem as heretical of the US may also be true.
Most of you will ask now: It's the same thing! That's why we're arguing. But I say that it probably isn't the same thing, because both sides are just as stubborn. I think each argues a different point.
The Europeans think that, in general, the US is the world's bully. Bush's strategy is just the latest volley. And the EUs use this as a starting point to argue that the US shouldn't be in Iraq.
Notice that America does not think it's the world's policeman as a starting point on why it should be in Iraq in the first place. America is acting *in self defense*. Europeans scoff at this justification.... but this really is the justification; it's no veil for another "fascist" agenda.
On the other hand, Americans think Europeans are chicken and undecided on what they should do, and that the EU politicians are trying to put the best face on letting the opportunity to do the right thing and lead the fight for good pass them by. This, of course, is not why the EU was reluctant to act in Iraq. I'm sure Europe would support an agressive plan that dealt with Israel and Palestine.
Really, I could write an essay here, but I assume that most of you are open minded and inquisitive enough to think about this on your own.
Here I used my own life rule, which I would like to add to the article:
When there is a viscious fight about an issue, and both sides are standing strong and unyielding this is a sure sign that they're fighting for different issues.
I find this out every time I get into an argument with my wife.
Implement this in a wristwatch/ring anyone?
on
Contiki Ported To x86
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Whoever said this has to do with old computers?! How about getting this running on a PIC? Having a wristwatch (a SMALL one!) or a grad ring act as a web server or some real functional computer would be really cool.
This is something I have been thinking about quite a bit. In order to be successful financially, you have to make money. Free Software does not have that model down packed yet. It seems that in order to make money with Free Software (note the "with" and not "on") is to do a hell of a lot of work.
RedHat, for example, has to really work hard to stay afloat, and being in the black did not come easy for them.
And, like any business, I think a FS/GPL project needs a hefty time (and money) investment, before it will return something. We, in the IT business (the ones who make money and carry around diplomas saying we are "professionals"), are used to making money quickly and easily. All I had to do to land my first job was to find a simple bug in a little proprietary niche application for a guy I met. The dude was sick of his old programmer, and he figured I was good, so he hired me to do the next release of the software. And, seriously, I didn't know the first thing about writing a real application at the time - I was 18 (I started late) and liked to play Age of Empires. I am sure that I wasn't the only one who had it this easy.
Now I'm 26 and have worked on some insane sw projects. I've seen code generator heaven. And now I know what it really takes to make a great piece of software. What I did back then could be repeated in not more than 2 weeks by any experienced programmer worth his beans. And what I did back then sells for around $5000 a pop to this day. And BTW - code generator heaven took 2 months to develop by a very talented programmer and is worth a hell of a lot of money on the proprietary market (easily around 7-8 digits). It is very hard to think of letting go of such a treasure.
Proprietary software makes it very easy to make money on very little work. FS like going to a fighting championship without a jock strap. You can't be lazy, since you are in open competition with the best from the outset, and you have to work 10 times as hard as the guy with the jock strap (proprietary software).
When I think of making money (In order to devote a significant portion of my time to a project I NEED to make money on it), I think "proprietary". But I am pulled to the idea of Open Source, because it feels right.
I now work for a giant firm, but I keep thinking of projects that I can do in a small team as a private enterprise. And I'm weighing what can FSing the work give me apart from 10 times the required effort? It gives me better quality, of course, but in a niche market often quality is not worth as much as it costs!
So maybe FSing once the product is mature? FS seems to make sense in a service-based business model. So connection of hardware and free software, like someone said earlier.
Well... yea. So where do I fall in all of this? According to the other post here, I am wrong in my original comment. Now let me get out from underneath my chair and say this:
It still unquestionably is a sohpism to believe that a lack of objection to amalgamating words implies correctness of usage. Word amalgamation strips language of its granularity in defining thought... and, since we think thanks to language in a large part, it therefore limits thought.
I like to be able to say "beatutiful" of one thing, while "handsome" of another without meaning the same thing.... the distinction adds flavour.
Please, please, please! Do not use "comprise" unless you know how to use it! comprise != is composed of !!!
Example sentence: 14 elements comprise the whole. which means: The whole is composed of 14 elements.
I can take spelling errors, but comprise is not a commonly used word, and using it improperly just says you know the word vaguely and would like to show off your "literacy".
is what comes to mind when I read "a computerized system for selecting and ordering a variety of information, goods and services"... These small businesses should be able to defend themselves sans lawyer.
From what I know, Orwell saw how the Soviet Union was being governed first hand in the 40s... The book he wrote was a description of what was actually going on, not of what would happen... The technology he describes really is just a cover. People were being watched 24/7.... by their neighbours. History WAS altered - a lot of russians still think Lenin invented the radio (.. in Marconi's attic, the joke goes).
I didn't read the article associated with this post, but the subject is DEAD wrong.
The black and white solution was superior in quality. You have to remember that this is meant for READING.. in this area, resolution is far more important than colour, and so a black and white screen with the same pixel density as colour will provide 3-4 times (depending on pixel geometry) the resolution. This is an INSANE advantage over this thing.
First of all, netscape pretty much gave up after it started losing to IE. This isn't going to happen with Windows and Linux.
Hence, I would like to add one last (worst of all) scenario in the Linux vs Windows war (yes, there definitely is one despite all the denial): **At the very WORST, M$ is going to make a much much MUCH better Windows.**
And Linux won't die because it thrives on M$ bs. Without M$ there wouldn't be a popular Free Software movement:) Linux is a product of Windows, so as long as M$ tries to force Windows, Linux will be the Newtonian second law's equal but opposing force... bleh.. what a stuipd metaphor.
Why isn't anyone using this argument? I think I read somewhere that the video game industry is bigger than hollywood, and they don't seem to b*ch nearly as much, while their medium is solely computers. They can deal with it, why can't Hollywood/RIAA?
Slashdot Mirror
I would liket to negate a lot of the posts I see. I believe the question was very specific.
"What is the influence of technology on stress?"
The answer to this cannot be "Tech is not stressful" The preceding quote would be an answer to the question:
"Is technical work more or less stressful than other work?"
So I stand by my hypothesis.. It's Interesting god Damn It! Sombebody mod this up!
J
So even if the technology reduces stress for the same workload, the workload increases, so that stress remains the same... so that:
DIFFICULTY x WORK = STRESS = a constant
make that your thesis.
J
My 80 year old grandfather, on getting his first PC 4 years ago installed Linux first. (true story) He was brand new to computers in general as a user, so he backed out of the situation, and went to Windows, which he still has trouble using. He's fond of it, but with his strong anticorporate beliefs, he's just can't wait for Linux to be accessible to him without need for support. (he uses digital cameras, scanners, video cameras, and all sorts of gadgets, which arent Linux friendly nowdays).
There is a bigger market for Linux. I don't think the article shows that Microsoft isn't worried. They should be, and I see that they are responding. Anything that gets a 95% monopoly to do anything more than blink (and Linux did much more) must have some real value.
J
It reminds me of a tv-shopping ad I once saw, where some guy was selling a "computer program" that did a (phonetic I think) search in the hebrew version of the bible. ;)
As examples, he said that the word "Hitler" is somewhere in the bible and some other interesting buzzwords. Perhaps IBM should use this program to search for prior art in some other ancient scripture?
Are you gonna let them do it alone?
Is it just me, or does the article jump from idea to disjoint idea assuming I know where they're coming from? I got half way through and just gave up. All I got out of it was that Psion wants Linux but Symbian too.. ?!
So what do you do with GMC?
Would a company making engines calling itself Jeneral Motors Corporation be infringing on GMC?
The phrase "general motors" existed before the company. Note the brand difference between General Motors and General Electric... These names sound so generic that it's obvious that they do not infringe on each other's brand.
This is a TOUGH case. Nobody reasonable looking at the name General Electric thinks of the car company. Yet EVERYONE reasonable looking at Lindows thinks of the similarity to the Windows brand.
This kind of issue needs to be resolved on a case by case basis. Just the fact that "windows" was a computer term before MS Windows does not mean that it now doesn't posess serious marketing power.
To give an example, there was a Windows (95) beer in Russia. Unlicensed, of course, but the word Windows gave it a serious marketing kick in a different industry! That's a powerful brand, folks. And I think Lindows should pay some damages.
Shameless plug alert!
... :) Every time I hear that in reference to a toy/gadget I look twice; it could be the next big thing.
I like to be able to tell my cellphone by voice to call my wife and have it react without having to touch the phone.
Also my fabulous 1year old Sony Ericsson t68i lets me use it as a remote for my home computer and laptop for watching movies and flipping PowerPoint presentations at work. AND the Bluetooth GPRS connection when the phone is in my wardrobe in some jacket pocket works like a charm. I'm free to walk around a hotel room with my laptop and work in any *ahem* position I like.
Features - real features - like that are really useful. On my old basic Motorola V I didn't know how to use the address book. It was so damn ugly I winced just looking at the menu.
Phones will do more handy things in the future, and don't you for a second make the mistake of so many before you:
"A [insert invention name here]?! It's neat, but who will ever really use it?"
not always tho...
Dude, my family left the Eastern Bloc in '86 out of desperation, and we had to trick authorities into letting us out. And we didn't live in the USSR. At one point in time my parents (well off) bought me a ZX Spectrum for the equivalent of a year's salary at the time. The USSR was poorer still.
The USSR sponsored all these communist parties you speak of. The Russians weren't letting elections be played fair. Man.. I don't want to rant right now, but watch the Manchurian Candidate or read 1984 one day and know that to someone who's been through living behind the iron curtain these works are no fiction.
I understand that you fear for US workers. But saying that it was wrong to help those hundreds of millions of people is a mistake on the scale of saying that fighting Hitler wasn't a good thing.
Cheers,
J
Is it just me, or is the quality of the articles published by Newsforge and other tech-only papers very poor?
When I read these articles, I get the feeling that I'm listening to a kid complaining about something. They are scant on details and very one sided. The articles remind me in style and structure of high school essays, written on the break befor class.
A prime example is the article I just read from the link. It sounds like "SCO is using FUD! SCO is using FUD, I tell you! Look at all these corporations that use linux, it can't be bad. And foreginers use it too; they should be compensated for their work by being given access to US software." This is really no argument.
What should the article sound like? It should give an objectiv account of what SCO says.. not a link to the whole frickin document. It should report what the opposing view states without crying foul and let the reader decide what is right. That would be an article. What I just read is garbage.
I'm against SCO claims, but honestly I could not recommend my father (MS fan) reading that piece. He would just read it and say, "so?" And based on the "facts" presented in the article all I could say would be, "SCO is using FUD..."
I haven't seen a much better article on what SCO is doing to date. If I was to bet which magazine was to have the first reasonable sounding article on the issue, I would guess The Economist. But they're not a tech paper, and tech papers should be saying what The Economist will say months ahead!
In fact, it was the Polish intelligence service that cracked the way the Enigma worked and devised a system to break the code. They also got the Enigma examples that were worked on. The brits only took the info and used it with some refinements.
:)
I don't mean to belittle the British contribution, as the refinements were significant. But not mentioning Poland while saying the Brits did it is just like saying that the Americans did it
Every time I go into a toy store (I'm 26), I want a toy. And there are very few toys I find interesting. One of them is a LEGO set. And lately I have been searching toy stores for a nice lego set for myself or as a present for some kid. Lego sets these days aren't the Lego sets I used to play with. They are no fun!
The magic of Lego was that you could build your dream spaceship out of the stuff. Given the same set two different kids would come up with wildly different designs. Now it seems a lego set can only become what it was designed to become.
This is why while being thirsty for some Lego fun and wanting to spend $$, I haven't done so in 10 years!
Too bad it took Lego so long to realize their mistake. I welcome the comback of the block!
I have lived in both, North America and Europe. I can see where most of you are getting precisely into a taboo-led discussion over the split between America and (part of) EU on Bush's policies.
Let me apply the suggestion in the article and stipulate that what the Americans regard as ridiculous and heretical of the Europeans may in fact be the truth. And what the Europeans deem as heretical of the US may also be true.
Most of you will ask now: It's the same thing! That's why we're arguing. But I say that it probably isn't the same thing, because both sides are just as stubborn. I think each argues a different point.
The Europeans think that, in general, the US is the world's bully. Bush's strategy is just the latest volley. And the EUs use this as a starting point to argue that the US shouldn't be in Iraq.
Notice that America does not think it's the world's policeman as a starting point on why it should be in Iraq in the first place. America is acting *in self defense*. Europeans scoff at this justification.... but this really is the justification; it's no veil for another "fascist" agenda.
On the other hand, Americans think Europeans are chicken and undecided on what they should do, and that the EU politicians are trying to put the best face on letting the opportunity to do the right thing and lead the fight for good pass them by. This, of course, is not why the EU was reluctant to act in Iraq. I'm sure Europe would support an agressive plan that dealt with Israel and Palestine.
Really, I could write an essay here, but I assume that most of you are open minded and inquisitive enough to think about this on your own.
Here I used my own life rule, which I would like to add to the article:
When there is a viscious fight about an issue, and both sides are standing strong and unyielding this is a sure sign that they're fighting for different issues.
I find this out every time I get into an argument with my wife.
Whoever said this has to do with old computers?! How about getting this running on a PIC? Having a wristwatch (a SMALL one!) or a grad ring act as a web server or some real functional computer would be really cool.
This is something I have been thinking about quite a bit. In order to be successful financially, you have to make money. Free Software does not have that model down packed yet. It seems that in order to make money with Free Software (note the "with" and not "on") is to do a hell of a lot of work.
RedHat, for example, has to really work hard to stay afloat, and being in the black did not come easy for them.
And, like any business, I think a FS/GPL project needs a hefty time (and money) investment, before it will return something. We, in the IT business (the ones who make money and carry around diplomas saying we are "professionals"), are used to making money quickly and easily. All I had to do to land my first job was to find a simple bug in a little proprietary niche application for a guy I met. The dude was sick of his old programmer, and he figured I was good, so he hired me to do the next release of the software. And, seriously, I didn't know the first thing about writing a real application at the time - I was 18 (I started late) and liked to play Age of Empires. I am sure that I wasn't the only one who had it this easy.
Now I'm 26 and have worked on some insane sw projects. I've seen code generator heaven. And now I know what it really takes to make a great piece of software. What I did back then could be repeated in not more than 2 weeks by any experienced programmer worth his beans. And what I did back then sells for around $5000 a pop to this day.
And BTW - code generator heaven took 2 months to develop by a very talented programmer and is worth a hell of a lot of money on the proprietary market (easily around 7-8 digits). It is very hard to think of letting go of such a treasure.
Proprietary software makes it very easy to make money on very little work. FS like going to a fighting championship without a jock strap. You can't be lazy, since you are in open competition with the best from the outset, and you have to work 10 times as hard as the guy with the jock strap (proprietary software).
When I think of making money (In order to devote a significant portion of my time to a project I NEED to make money on it), I think "proprietary". But I am pulled to the idea of Open Source, because it feels right.
I now work for a giant firm, but I keep thinking of projects that I can do in a small team as a private enterprise. And I'm weighing what can FSing the work give me apart from 10 times the required effort? It gives me better quality, of course, but in a niche market often quality is not worth as much as it costs!
So maybe FSing once the product is mature? FS seems to make sense in a service-based business model. So connection of hardware and free software, like someone said earlier.
No conclusions yet, just thoughts.
Well... yea. So where do I fall in all of this?
According to the other post here, I am wrong in my original comment. Now let me get out from underneath my chair and say this:
It still unquestionably is a sohpism to believe that a lack of objection to amalgamating words implies correctness of usage. Word amalgamation strips language of its granularity in defining thought... and, since we think thanks to language in a large part, it therefore limits thought.
I like to be able to say "beatutiful" of one thing, while "handsome" of another without meaning the same thing.... the distinction adds flavour.
j
Please, please, please! Do not use "comprise" unless you know how to use it! comprise != is composed of !!!
Example sentence:
14 elements comprise the whole.
which means:
The whole is composed of 14 elements.
I can take spelling errors, but comprise is not a commonly used word, and using it improperly just says you know the word vaguely and would like to show off your "literacy".
j
R.epeat-
R,epeat\
Re.peat\
Rep.eat|
Repe.at/
Repea.t-
Re,peat|
Rep,eat/
Repe,at-
Repea,t\
Dumb filter
is what comes to mind when I read "a computerized system for selecting and ordering a variety of information, goods and services"...
These small businesses should be able to defend themselves sans lawyer.
J
I heard the military consulted with him on this stuff :)
Like, dude.. this guy handled the problem. That's why it WORKS! And the stereo camera thing. He did that about 15 years ago.
j
From what I know, Orwell saw how the Soviet Union was being governed first hand in the 40s... The book he wrote was a description of what was actually going on, not of what would happen... The technology he describes really is just a cover. People were being watched 24/7.... by their neighbours. History WAS altered - a lot of russians still think Lenin invented the radio (.. in Marconi's attic, the joke goes).
I didn't read the article associated with this post, but the subject is DEAD wrong.
J
The black and white solution was superior in quality. You have to remember that this is meant for READING.. in this area, resolution is far more important than colour, and so a black and white screen with the same pixel density as colour will provide 3-4 times (depending on pixel geometry) the resolution. This is an INSANE advantage over this thing.
J
Yes, I agree with a few exceptions:
:) Linux is a product of Windows, so as long as M$ tries to force Windows, Linux will be the Newtonian second law's equal but opposing force... bleh.. what a stuipd metaphor.
First of all, netscape pretty much gave up after it started losing to IE. This isn't going to happen with Windows and Linux.
Hence, I would like to add one last (worst of all) scenario in the Linux vs Windows war (yes, there definitely is one despite all the denial): **At the very WORST, M$ is going to make a much much MUCH better Windows.**
And Linux won't die because it thrives on M$ bs. Without M$ there wouldn't be a popular Free Software movement
Cheers!
Why isn't anyone using this argument? I think I read somewhere that the video game industry is bigger than hollywood, and they don't seem to b*ch nearly as much, while their medium is solely computers. They can deal with it, why can't Hollywood/RIAA?