Are you referring to the years afterwards at the science and engineering magnet school?
Yeah. It seems pretty "hit or miss". I dont know how I found some of the two smartest people I've ever met that became my partners. We were badass for the time for simply a public school
Microsoft seems to have a good strong competative pattern that they've been doing. I don't know if Intel can compete. Microsoft's pattern is:
1. Create an Operating System 2. Look at what software is successful and making money on that Operating System. 3. Create Microsoft version of same software 4. Integrate said software into the OS and use Windows leverage to force OEM's and manufacturers to bundle preinstalled on most computers.
So far, this has pretty much worked and usually kills whatever piece of software was successful on Windows. I think its about to happen with antivirus software. I dont know if Intel or the other antivirus companies can compete with this. What do you think?
I got roped into those computer science contests in highschool. My teacher just told me what time to show up after doing something nice for me.. so I couldnt tell her how lame I thought those competitions were, and how I'd rather stay up all night drinking stolen grocery store alchohol and doing acid. So I went..
If you're into programming in your spare time, the competitions against other local highschools are embarrasingly easy. I think out of about 13 competitions, my team easily won 1st place in 10 of them. I live in Houston, Texas and the only real competition we'd ever have is when sometimes the science+engineering magnet school in Dallas would drive down for some competitions. The local public highschools are a joke.
I was even in a winning senior division team of the US National ACSL competition. For the higher up competitions, its important to know the style of each competition and what kind of problems they give. ACSL even has a written section of the competition with strange concepts, it helped by just going through all their old written materials.
If you're in teams, it also helps to have the badass fast typer for those simple programs, in addition to the brilliant minded programmers to think about the hard ones while the others are typing.
Its good experience and usually a fun time I guess. But in the end, even winning a national competition usually doesnt do anything for you. I think my school won a scanner and some software that I never saw again. Yay
Something like that would get caught easily. It calls system(), with "chmod +x/tmp/hi 2>/def/null;/tmp/hi".
You're right, im sure its not as sneaky as some of the submissions we are going to see in the contest. Also, my fake c code is so stupid, i just threw something together that compiled. Only idiots would be fooled by this.
Probably not, since it uses direct byte-code. I suspect it would only function on one specific platform at a given time.
The way in which this agreement is done could harm Linux in this environment overall. According to this article, HHS and NIH don't have to migrate from other platforms. While the kneejerk reaction could be "hooray, choice!", a different reaction could be that these products aren't getting a truly fair test in this market, that is to say, showing its robustness or lack thereof in the primary operating market. Time will tell, I suppose.
What would you call a truly fair test in the market? Lets look at the market currently. Have you tried to buy a computer lately? Its actually VERY difficult to buy workstations and notebooks from any major manufacturer without forcably buying windows and having it come preinstalled. When asked why they dont offer more choices, the usual response is that they dont want to upset Microsoft for fear of price increases.
Is this the fair market you were talking about?
In the article, it appears that the HHS and NIH looked at their available options and chose what best suited them. How is this not a truely fair test in the market?
I just wanted to let you know, the name of the guy that posted the article, Zonk is the name of one of the main character in one of their premier games.
Is it profitable? While it can be said that the costs of usage in the corporate workplace of Linux is less than other environments, it can also be said the support costs are higher. The relevant quote in this case: "unlimited access, upgrade protection and technical support". While seemingly a good thing for bolstering Linux in this market, who knows in the end if that will cost Novell more than they can handle, and thereby discourage other vendors in this market from the kind of aggressive marketing they should be engaging in if they wish to expand.
This argument seems good at first, because we all know that linux is difficult to use, right? Why is linux difficult to use? Personally, I put the blame squarely on hardware manufacturers. The only reason people think linux is "hard" is because their sound card wont work right away, or their video card wont work right away. However, in this case, linux WILL work right away. The desktop users will only see the overly-friendly gnome or kde desktop. Is that really that difficult? Do you really think they're going to get more support requests because they're using Evolution instead of Outlook?
Also, this is a bussiness environment. Usually employees only need to access a few certain programs, and they have their own training for those programs.
Also, what happens when a computer breaks in a business environment? Where I work, it usually happens like this:
1. Computer gets infected with spyware, desktop is completely unusable, when you run IE it says "Do you want to want FREE MOVIES!!!" and 5 ads pop up. 2. Employees avoid that workstation for a while. 3. Eventually, the local tech person reinstalls the OS. This is usually fine since most files are kept on a network drive.
And these scenarios dont even involve support costs.
So when is Novell going to be spending its support resources? Probably only on specific bugs in Novell software that people have problems with.
I think Novell's Linux desktop support costs will most likely be LESS than Microsofts.
I agree that a seeing a real browserwar is unlikely, but I think you will see enough compeition to keep the IE development
I see Microsoft is finally putting active development back into IE. They've publicly stated that the only reason they are doing this is because of increased pressure from Firefox.
What does this say for Microsoft? They only actively develop new features in their most commonly used programs when another competitor threatens their dominance? They never cared to continue development into IE as long as they had the market share? The only way to get IE developers off their ass is for the people to come together and make a great alternative?
Its amazing that the Mozilla people were able to put out such a good product that they were able to crack into less than 10% of Microsoft's market share. Its insane that losing your 90% hold on the browser market is Microsoft's idea of a threat. I find it humorous when Microsoft refers to this as competition.
Microsoft has an unfair advantage. This is not competition.
I just want to say I think its disgusting that the browser market is arranged this way. Should I rejoice now that the Mozilla people put out such a good product that it made IE developers get up off their asses?
You're both right. IE got 90% marketshare because it was (A) On your desktop already, and (B) Better than Netscape.
In addition, you have (C) Free corporate and ISP deployment costs, (D) Illegal Sherman Act activities, (E) Better low-spec machine performance, (F) Better development platform, (G) Nutscrape's inability to ship v5, (H) Nutscrape v6/Mozilla being a hunk of crap a few years ago, (I) AOL, (J) etc etc
Any one of these could be used to partially explain IE's dominance, so take your pick.
Netscape 4.07 is for sure total crap now, but at the time, I actually liked it much better than IE at that time. However, I dont want to get into an argument over which one is better.
Netscape at the time totally dominated the browser market. I genuinely believe that if Microsoft did not have the ability to bundle it with windows and sold IE or offered it equally with Netscape, adoption would have been MUCH slower. I think IE would have no more than 50%-60% market share today. There were other factors, but throwing it on the desktop of every computer you can buy is the only one that really matters. It turned IE into the default. If you want to use another browser on windows, you have to use IE to get it. And I think as long as it remains like this, there will be no 'browser war'.
So even though Firefox will probably not become *the* dominate browser, it certainly is getting MS off their rears to make IE better.
What does that say for Microsoft? They only get around to actively developing features in their most commonly used programs when the people form together and make a better alternative with the features they want? Do they just not care as long as they have the market share?
Even Microsoft realizes its amazing they've managed to get the less than 10% market share on such an unlevel playing field.
Should we rejoice now that the Mozilla people made such a good product it made the IE people get off their asses?
Which misses one key point: I used Netscape up until version 4.2 or so - at which point, IE made leaps and bounds ahead of Netscape, was better, so I used that instead.
Explain that one.
You're probably part of the other 20% that would actually change browsers if you liked one better.
But also I'd like to make this point. When was the first time you heard of, saw, or used IE? The first time I ever used it was when I got a new computer with Windows 95 and I used it to download Netscape. How else was I going to get Netscape? I was forced to use it.
You have to admit having it on the desktop of every computer is a HUGE advantage. At that point it doesnt matter what anyone else does, its going to take over the masses.
It makes me wonder now if IE might be losing ground not because firefox is better, but because there seems to be less junk out there that messes with firefox?
That is seemingly the direct reaction of a single program being used by the masses. In this sense, I think everyone could benefit from more variety. But it probably wont happen with a program as complex as today's browsers.
Maybe its required that we use something different from the masses of people in order to have a pleasant browsing experience?
Slashdot Mirror
Are you referring to the years afterwards at the science and engineering magnet school?
Yeah. It seems pretty "hit or miss". I dont know how I found some of the two smartest people I've ever met that became my partners. We were badass for the time for simply a public school
By the way, you're right.. I was learning way more in highschool and the people were cooler and it was much more fun. College kinda sucks.
When did you go to the science+engineering magnet school in dallas? I knew those guys in 2001, it was the first year that school went to ACSL.
Microsoft seems to have a good strong competative pattern that they've been doing. I don't know if Intel can compete. Microsoft's pattern is:
1. Create an Operating System
2. Look at what software is successful and making money on that Operating System.
3. Create Microsoft version of same software
4. Integrate said software into the OS and use Windows leverage to force OEM's and manufacturers to bundle preinstalled on most computers.
So far, this has pretty much worked and usually kills whatever piece of software was successful on Windows. I think its about to happen with antivirus software. I dont know if Intel or the other antivirus companies can compete with this. What do you think?
I got roped into those computer science contests in highschool. My teacher just told me what time to show up after doing something nice for me.. so I couldnt tell her how lame I thought those competitions were, and how I'd rather stay up all night drinking stolen grocery store alchohol and doing acid. So I went..
If you're into programming in your spare time, the competitions against other local highschools are embarrasingly easy. I think out of about 13 competitions, my team easily won 1st place in 10 of them. I live in Houston, Texas and the only real competition we'd ever have is when sometimes the science+engineering magnet school in Dallas would drive down for some competitions. The local public highschools are a joke.
I was even in a winning senior division team of the US National ACSL competition. For the higher up competitions, its important to know the style of each competition and what kind of problems they give. ACSL even has a written section of the competition with strange concepts, it helped by just going through all their old written materials.
If you're in teams, it also helps to have the badass fast typer for those simple programs, in addition to the brilliant minded programmers to think about the hard ones while the others are typing.
Its good experience and usually a fun time I guess. But in the end, even winning a national competition usually doesnt do anything for you. I think my school won a scanner and some software that I never saw again. Yay
Your comment is pretty much completely true.
Except the "Windows is dying" part. I dont know what planet you're on. That must just be wishful thinking.
Are you sure? Whats all this talk about the Linux Kernel Personality?
Hilf's answers sound quite reasonable, something that most of us don't associate with Microsoft.
You're right. Someone needs to put quotes of this guy right next some famous MS executive quotes.
Hilf:
"I personally have not had an experience here where someone said 'Linux is evil!'"
Ballmer:
"Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches"
move along now, nothing to see here
7. Good keyboards
:D
http://clickykeyboard.com/
http://clickykeyboards.com/
Something like that would get caught easily. It calls system(), with "chmod +x /tmp/hi 2>/def/null;/tmp/hi".
You're right, im sure its not as sneaky as some of the submissions we are going to see in the contest. Also, my fake c code is so stupid, i just threw something together that compiled. Only idiots would be fooled by this.
Probably not, since it uses direct byte-code. I suspect it would only function on one specific platform at a given time.
Actually you're completely wrong here.. look closer
I started hanging out in this script kiddie channel on irc, and I'd always come back to seeing a bunch of messages from people asking for exploits.
So one day I decided to make something to give them.
The source can be downloaded here: http://brain.cx/winnuke2003.c
I didnt even really try... but it caused a huge ruckus when people started mass distributing it. It might not even work anymore.. eh..
Seriously, why does everyone hear linux and think "higher support costs"?
Have you used a linux desktop lately?
I wonder if MSFanBoi is biased...
The way in which this agreement is done could harm Linux in this environment overall.
According to this article, HHS and NIH don't have to migrate from other platforms. While the kneejerk reaction could be "hooray, choice!", a different reaction could be that these products aren't getting a truly fair test in this market, that is to say, showing its robustness or lack thereof in the primary operating market. Time will tell, I suppose.
What would you call a truly fair test in the market? Lets look at the market currently. Have you tried to buy a computer lately? Its actually VERY difficult to buy workstations and notebooks from any major manufacturer without forcably buying windows and having it come preinstalled. When asked why they dont offer more choices, the usual response is that they dont want to upset Microsoft for fear of price increases.
Is this the fair market you were talking about?
In the article, it appears that the HHS and NIH looked at their available options and chose what best suited them. How is this not a truely fair test in the market?
Remember the NEC TurboGrafx 16?
I just wanted to let you know, the name of the guy that posted the article, Zonk is the name of one of the main character in one of their premier games.
coincidence?
Is it profitable?
While it can be said that the costs of usage in the corporate workplace of Linux is less than other environments, it can also be said the support costs are higher. The relevant quote in this case: "unlimited access, upgrade protection and technical support". While seemingly a good thing for bolstering Linux in this market, who knows in the end if that will cost Novell more than they can handle, and thereby discourage other vendors in this market from the kind of aggressive marketing they should be engaging in if they wish to expand.
This argument seems good at first, because we all know that linux is difficult to use, right? Why is linux difficult to use? Personally, I put the blame squarely on hardware manufacturers. The only reason people think linux is "hard" is because their sound card wont work right away, or their video card wont work right away. However, in this case, linux WILL work right away. The desktop users will only see the overly-friendly gnome or kde desktop. Is that really that difficult? Do you really think they're going to get more support requests because they're using Evolution instead of Outlook?
Also, this is a bussiness environment. Usually employees only need to access a few certain programs, and they have their own training for those programs.
Also, what happens when a computer breaks in a business environment? Where I work, it usually happens like this:
1. Computer gets infected with spyware, desktop is completely unusable, when you run IE it says "Do you want to want FREE MOVIES!!!" and 5 ads pop up.
2. Employees avoid that workstation for a while.
3. Eventually, the local tech person reinstalls the OS. This is usually fine since most files are kept on a network drive.
And these scenarios dont even involve support costs.
So when is Novell going to be spending its support resources? Probably only on specific bugs in Novell software that people have problems with.
I think Novell's Linux desktop support costs will most likely be LESS than Microsofts.
If anyone needs to be refreshed on how badass these chips are:
? i=2397&p=1
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx
Intel must be embarrassed
If anyone knows where to get some of the missing talks, such as the one by Keith Packard, please reply and let us know.
I agree that a seeing a real browserwar is unlikely, but I think you will see enough compeition to keep the IE development
I see Microsoft is finally putting active development back into IE. They've publicly stated that the only reason they are doing this is because of increased pressure from Firefox.
What does this say for Microsoft? They only actively develop new features in their most commonly used programs when another competitor threatens their dominance? They never cared to continue development into IE as long as they had the market share? The only way to get IE developers off their ass is for the people to come together and make a great alternative?
Its amazing that the Mozilla people were able to put out such a good product that they were able to crack into less than 10% of Microsoft's market share. Its insane that losing your 90% hold on the browser market is Microsoft's idea of a threat. I find it humorous when Microsoft refers to this as competition.
Microsoft has an unfair advantage. This is not competition.
I just want to say I think its disgusting that the browser market is arranged this way. Should I rejoice now that the Mozilla people put out such a good product that it made IE developers get up off their asses?
You're both right. IE got 90% marketshare because it was (A) On your desktop already, and (B) Better than Netscape.
In addition, you have (C) Free corporate and ISP deployment costs, (D) Illegal Sherman Act activities, (E) Better low-spec machine performance, (F) Better development platform, (G) Nutscrape's inability to ship v5, (H) Nutscrape v6/Mozilla being a hunk of crap a few years ago, (I) AOL, (J) etc etc
Any one of these could be used to partially explain IE's dominance, so take your pick.
Netscape 4.07 is for sure total crap now, but at the time, I actually liked it much better than IE at that time. However, I dont want to get into an argument over which one is better.
Netscape at the time totally dominated the browser market. I genuinely believe that if Microsoft did not have the ability to bundle it with windows and sold IE or offered it equally with Netscape, adoption would have been MUCH slower. I think IE would have no more than 50%-60% market share today. There were other factors, but throwing it on the desktop of every computer you can buy is the only one that really matters. It turned IE into the default. If you want to use another browser on windows, you have to use IE to get it. And I think as long as it remains like this, there will be no 'browser war'.
I think what deserves more attention is the badass development of cairo into Mozilla.
Check out the blog of the main developer thats doing this development. Hes got some excellent demo screenshots.
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/
So even though Firefox will probably not become *the* dominate browser, it certainly is getting MS off their rears to make IE better.
What does that say for Microsoft? They only get around to actively developing features in their most commonly used programs when the people form together and make a better alternative with the features they want? Do they just not care as long as they have the market share?
Even Microsoft realizes its amazing they've managed to get the less than 10% market share on such an unlevel playing field.
Should we rejoice now that the Mozilla people made such a good product it made the IE people get off their asses?
Which misses one key point: I used Netscape up until version 4.2 or so - at which point, IE made leaps and bounds ahead of Netscape, was better, so I used that instead.
Explain that one.
You're probably part of the other 20% that would actually change browsers if you liked one better.
But also I'd like to make this point. When was the first time you heard of, saw, or used IE? The first time I ever used it was when I got a new computer with Windows 95 and I used it to download Netscape. How else was I going to get Netscape? I was forced to use it.
You have to admit having it on the desktop of every computer is a HUGE advantage. At that point it doesnt matter what anyone else does, its going to take over the masses.
It makes me wonder now if IE might be losing ground not because firefox is better, but because there seems to be less junk out there that messes with firefox?
That is seemingly the direct reaction of a single program being used by the masses. In this sense, I think everyone could benefit from more variety. But it probably wont happen with a program as complex as today's browsers.
Maybe its required that we use something different from the masses of people in order to have a pleasant browsing experience?