I earlier hypothisized that SCO may try to prove that any code published under the GPL should not be covered by Copyright Law, but be put in the Public Domain. If they were (by some unfortunate circumstance) able to do this, then all of thier legal issues regarding the use of GPL code would vanish in a puff of smoke, and thier claims to all *NIX IP would suddenly gain a huge amount of credence. (For those of you wearing aluminum foil hats - Microsoft would be laughing all the way to the bank yet again, too...)
(Shamelessly lifted from this page, though I've seen many versions posted in college and in electrical shops...)
1. Beware the lightning that lurketh in an undischarged capacitor, lest it cause thee to be bounced upon thy buttocks in a most ungentlemanly manner.
2. Cause thou the switch that supplies large quantities of juice to be opened and thusly tagged, so thy days may be only on this earthly vale of tears.
3. Prove to thyself that all circuits that radiateth and upon which thou worketh are grounded, less they lift thee to high frequency potential and cause thee to radiateth also.
4. Take care thou useth the proper method when thou taketh the measure ofhigh voltage circuits so that thou doth not incinerate both thee and the meter; for verily, thou hast no account number and can easily be replaced, the meterdoth have one, and as a consequence, bringeth much woe unto the supply department.
5. Tarry not amongst those who engage in intentional shocks, for they are not long for this world.
6. Take care thou tampereth not with interlocks and safety devices, for this will incur the wrath of thy seniors and bringeth the fury of the safety officer down about thy head and shoulders.
7. Work thou not on energized equipment, for if you doth, thy buddies will surely be buying beers for thy widow and consoling her in other ways not generally accepted by thee.
8. Verily, verily I say unto thee, never service high voltage equipment alone, for electric cooking is a slothful process and thy might sizzle in thine own fat for hours on end before thy Maker sees fit to end thy misery and drag thee into His fold.
9. Trifle thou not with radioactive tubes and substances, lest thou commence to glow in the dark like a lightning bug, and thy wife be frustrated nightly and have no further use for thee except thy wage.
10.Commit thou to memory the works of the prophets, which are written in the instruction books, which giveth the straight dope and which consoleththee, and thou cannot make mistakes, sometimes, maybe.
This is not quite so dumb as it sounds, however. (Disclaimer - IANAL, I'm also Canadian) According to US law, there's 2 ways to release your work - with or without copyright. They seem to be arguing that the GPL invalidates itself since it doesn't seek to restrict how the work is distributed, and all GPLed works should therefore be in the public domain (no copyright).
OK, so it's really a bad argument, since the GPL does place restrictions on distrubuton, but it's likely the best of a bad lot.
Unfortunately for SCO, they're about to get on the wrong side of Microsoft too, since MS allows large coprorate customers to make unlimited copies of thier software, but with restrictions. Someone could use the precedent set by this case (should SCO win - HA) to invalidate those licenses as well.
All in all, I'd say RMS was at his insideous best when he crafted the GPL - delcare the GPL invalid, and all other IP licenses are fair game too.
Unfortunatley for Microsoft, they allow 3rd party drivers into kernel space, even if that driver has never been seen by a Microsoft employee. That is likely what he's saying - "We provide the means to have your code not fuck up our OS, and half of you don't do it!".
The hardware/system drivers are allowed into kernel space after a user clicks a window that basically says "Microsoft has never seen this driver before - it could blow up your system. Want me to install it anyway?" and the user usually says "Yup, no problem. Them programmers are sooo smart...". It's very much a parallel argument to Windows Security - expecting everyone to know how to be a sysadmin without being a sysadmin.
If MS should learn anything from Linux development, it's that free, on-line and open collaboration breeds better drivers and a more stable OS.
I recently took a contract job to bring the IT operations of a local, growing business from a mom & pop deal to a more enterprise ready footing.
I have about 25 XP/98 machines to look after, but only 2 of them laptops (3 if I count my own). First thing I did when I was hired was grab both of the laptops and patch the hell out of them. Next was the 2K server, and lastly today I spent the whole day running around updating everything I could on the rest of the desktops. No programs got hosed in the update process either, which was a relief. We're behind a small NAT engine too, so I feel rather confident that we'll weather the storm.
My point is that businesses such as my current customer have no clue that an operating system (indeed, almost any program as well) needs to be taken care of. This is the issue that will keep biting Microsoft in the ass - until they make it plain as day that "You need to do regualar maintenance to our products" people will run with security holes. If they can't see that it's broken, why would they fix it?
Another point - I'm looking into SUS so I don't have to worry nearly as much (or spend so much time waiting for WindowsUpdate) but I'll need another server to use it. The lone server my customer has is almost over loaded at the moment, runing SBS with 256M of RAM. SUS requires 2k Server or above to run - why, I don't know. Just like Microsoft to turn a problem they've created into a marketing opportunity. No wonder they're having trouble stemming the Linux tide.
Go ahead and force MS to sell those in the EU a copy w/o WMP. Now EU users will be forced to pay $30 to $40 to Real, Music Match, Quicktime, etc. to get the same functionality they get for free with WMP.
I recently got a development contract with this exact argument.
My customer is getting a fully tailored, customised solution to thier problem - a solution based totally on open source technologies. (Nice Linux server, PostgresSQL, etc.) To boot, all of that custom work came in at a price significantly less than anyone else who bid for the job. Significantly less.
I get a very nice paycheck, once it's done. Should be more on the way, too, since I get to re-sell the solution and customise it for other customers. And support contracts if the customer so chooses, will supplement my income, too. (BTW, they don't need to pick me for support, since they have the code, and that code is based on known OSS tools, etc. Certainly makes one pay attention to customer service.)
Microsoft got squat. Well, this time, anyway. I might need to throw Bill & Co. the odd scrap (if the customer gets new desktop machines, for example, and insists on XP) down the road, but that depends wholly on the customer. They can use Windows if they want, but they sure don't need Windows. Customers seem to like that.
It's 4am, I've been coding for too long tonight, and can't truly parse the article as well.
That being said, I'd say that perhaps the young man, not being a "classical" physicist, has a fresh perspective on the matter? You know, perhaps he's seeing the forest through some different trees....
It may come as a shock to you - but the IT guys don't actually own the PCs either.
It may be suprising to you that his job depends on ensuring corporate standards are in place and enforced on IT infrestructure.
I understand a user wanting to run thier own show on the workstation assigned to them, but if a major problem with Linux surfaces and the sysadmin didn't do anything about a non-standard installation that they knew about, that's akin to dereliction of duty, and they should be fired. A corporate environment requires stringent management, or it spirals into a huge, black, money sucking pit.
IOW, it's up to the SA to ensure that everyone plays nice on the network. If you want to use Desktop Linux at work, ask. Maybe the sysadmin be a lot more friendly towards the idea - I know I would.
The problem isn't that the Australian government is spending money on computers and software, but that the world's richest and one of the most politically powerful man on the earth has the government in a vice with its OS and other monopolies.
Bingo. Witness the Munich descision - it wasn't a move based on saving $ now, it was a strategic move to free themselves from a single-source vendor, who could potentially hold thier IT infrestructure hostage in some way, shape or form. What is really damaging to MS is the fact that this is a good, long term business decision that the astute businessman will recognize as such.
As more knowlegeable and informed people clue in to just how dependant they are on Microsoft (if they fall out of Microsofts good graces they're likley to have a rather expensive software audit on thier hands) they'll go for alternatives just to make sure they're in control of thier own software (and therefore business) from then on. Licensing 6.0 tipped Microsofts' hand way too much - it showed people that MS has lost a lot of respect for thier customers. That being the case, the end is inevitable. One year, 2 years, 5 years - doesn't matter. Zero-choice software is on it's way out, Freedom-of-choice software is on it's way in.
Safari is access to the whole content of the book on-line, as well as searching for text within that content as well as any other books they have available on-line. IOW, Safari is actually a superset of the Amazon thing, since you can pay to read the whole book, not just search through it for snippets and passages.
I love Safari as well - saves shelf space, trees and frustration (because of the search function). I wouldn't want to read a novel on-line, since a paper book is a better interface for that, but for reference material about programming/networking/Operating Systems etc., Safari works well, since you're in front of a machine anyway. And IIRC, errata in the books is applied directly to the text on-line, and you get the latest edition without having to get another book, just updated content.
The only time having all of your reference material on-line would be a problem is if you need ref. material to get your Cisco router that connects you to the Internet back on-line.
I've had the "privilege" of installing OpenServer. It is, IMHO, shite. I'd relate it to compost, but compost is usefull.
I'm very happily consuming a bottle of Crown Royal, celebrating my un-recovery, and don't want to depress myself by thinking aboot the pain that OpenServer 5.0 caused me. 3 years ago.;_;
Suffice it to say that I'd rather use a Pharlap DOS extender than anything SCO has ever written themselves. Bleah.
Good idea. I want my free phone, my free internet, and my free electricity as well.
Seriously though, it seems that he's not making a distinction between "free as in speech" and "free as in beer"...
Those are goods and services that cost the provider of the goods and services a lot of money to reproduce. Actually, you can run a power station, ISP and Telephone system all on your own if you wish. The cost of doing so, relative to reproducing a software package, is astronomical. IOW, with digital content, supply == demand at almost $0 per copy.
Besides, he said "social infrastructure", which implies it's a basic societal building block, like the free exchange of ideas. Sounds to me like he has the free speach/free beer thing straight.
Though Microsoft underbid IBM and SuSE by $11.9 million in Munich, city officials were concerned about the unpredictable long-run cost of Microsoft upgrades, says Munich council member Christine Strobl, who championed the switch to Linux.
Game.
And the more Microsoft discounted, the more it underscored the notion that as a sole supplier, Microsoft could -- and has been -- naming its own price, she says.
Set.
''Microsoft's philosophy is to change our software every five years,'' Strobl says. ''With open-source, it is possible for us to make our own decision as to when to change our software.''
Match.
Munich must still prove that Linux is ready for prime time on the desktop. Research firm Gartner cautions it won't be until 2005 before it is known how well it works in Munich.
Now don't trip jumping over the net.;^)
Soko
Re:you know it's true
on
All The Rave
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
and even if you are tired of hearing it, it doesn't make it any less true:
ALL COPYRIGHT = GREED
Really? So the GPL == GREED too? After all. the power of the GPL comes from Copyright Law, even though it's used to grant freedoms instead of restrict them.
and copying music is NOT stealing in any sense of the word "stealing"
PERIOD
Here nor there - it's still not legal. You're either on a crusade to "stick it to da man" or you yourself are GREEDY.
This station wagon has a significantly reduced ping latency. Routes are still a problem, though....
Soko
Re:Linux is still waiting in the wings
on
Linux on the Desktop
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm giving up modpoints on this article to respond to this. Here goes...
"they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years"
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
Have you ever heard of the term "Strategic Advantage"? When we get Mom and Pop to use Lindows, we get one more reason for more people/companies/organisations to develop products for Free Software - like drivers for web-cams etc., which attracts yet more usrs, who attract more devs, snowballing support for OSS. This process will ingrain OSS into the normal lives of all people, making it very difficult to remove. Going after Mom and Pop isn't for $ or anyting, it's a stategic move to protect the future of OSS.
Linux innovates very little except in technological areas. It's GUIs even today fall short of Windows and Mac GUIs, and several years from now I don't expect Linux will catch up. I don't see MS or Apple kicking back sipping pina coladas at the poolside.
I disagree with your future looking statement, especially when Linux is now at the point of being very useable for most of the populace. Yes, MS and Apple will continue to innovate, and OSS devs will continue to integrate those technologies in the name of interoperability. Once Linux catches up to them, though, thier lives will be made miserable.
I think alot of great work has been done in Linux and I'm a Linux user myself, but not as my primary desktop. Linux is an OS made for geeks by geeks that love to push the geek envelope. That's great stuff in and of itself, but it's not going to put Linux in the mainstream.
Linux is being installed in more places everyday, by people who *gasp* aren't even geeks. I just set up a Linux server for a non-techie type, and he's quite at home in GNOME. Gracious, I even have him able to generate a report from the CLI! Again, I don't know if Linux will be "mainstream", but I think bringing it to the masses is a viable target , and would be beneficial to the OSS community at large. Most Linux advocates agree, too. BTW, with linux, you can have your cake (Debian for ubergeeks) and eat it too (the aforementioned Lindows).
And does it want to be mainstream? Do Linux users want it to be mainstream? For the most part, I think not. When asking a technical question in Linux circles, the responses you get range from apathetic to offensive. RTFM! NEWB! It's pretty rare you actually get someone with a little compassion that has felt your pain and is willing to help you out.
Try #linux on irc.arstechnica.com. Very n00b friendly - most of the people there were once n00bs too and remember what it was like. Actually, where most of the flamage comes from is people who are unwilling to learn or think they're owed something - "Help me set up my printer, dammit!" usually engenders the "RTFM" response. Once they learn the "share and share alike" mentality of the OSS community, all of the hostility usually fades quickly. 4 years ago I'd of agreed with you, but today with so many people learning *NIX through OSS, things are much, much different. At present, that statement is nothing but FUD, pure and simple. (Unless you're an unfortunate luser who happens by alt.sysadmin.recovery. *Clickety-Click*)
Everything about Linux (and Unix in general) seems to be as if it is some kind of rite of passage. You must fight the bear without weapons, then you must walk the fire barefooted and then you must master Unix! It is that final task at which the brave warrior often stumbles...
Counterpoint: Ask a regular Windows user to open the registry on your XP machine and edit it, with no help or backup. A task for a Brave Windows Warrior to do before they master Windows. As someone who's mastered Windows, it would be no trouble at al
Wow, the sleeping giants' alarm clocks have just gone off. I guess that nothing has any value until there's a billion dollar lawsuit over it.:)
I never considered that - Linux is valued at over 3 Billion at present because of SCO. Heh. This must just be driving SCO bonkers to see "all that revenue that could have been ours!!" stay with the CE vendors. Nice to see.
Firstly, this is a pay-to-join consortium. I assume that until you pay, you won't get to see the specs.
When you buy one of thier Linux powered gadgets, you can request and then recieve the source. Unless they want to directly defy the GPL and be sued in court - where they'd likely loose. Or they're silly enough to hire Daryl McBride as CEO.
Does this mean that the 'extensions' are going to be presented to Linus as a fait-accompli patch? How is he supposed to react to something that he doesn't like? It's one thing pissing off the odd developer, but rejecting a patch from a consortium of major keiretsu is surely going to have a bigger backlash. Maybe I'm being too pessimistic.
Fait-accompli, as in "Put a fork in it, it's done."? I think you catch my drift here.
Secondly, they are acting as if they are the first people to have had this idea. Linux has been in several consumer eletronics devices already (Empeg & Tivo to name but two). What makes this consortium so special? What are they going to bring to the table that isn't already there?
Having not read the article yet, I would imagine that these electronic giants will be using Linux CE as a standard in any device with a microprocessor - IOW "your DVD talks to my reciever just fine". As it is now, you can plug your Toshiba DVD into your Sony TV and it works. With incompatible OSes in CE devices, consumers would loose this capability, and the CE makers support costs would skyrocket. Détente is another French word that applies to Linux - that way they stay electronics companies and not OS vendors.
Slashdot Mirror
I earlier hypothisized that SCO may try to prove that any code published under the GPL should not be covered by Copyright Law, but be put in the Public Domain. If they were (by some unfortunate circumstance) able to do this, then all of thier legal issues regarding the use of GPL code would vanish in a puff of smoke, and thier claims to all *NIX IP would suddenly gain a huge amount of credence. (For those of you wearing aluminum foil hats - Microsoft would be laughing all the way to the bank yet again, too...)
This seems to add some weight to my conjecture.
Soko
If a site is "Akamized", as this one was, or is otherwise distributed, you'll see the OS of the front end, not what the site actually runs.
So it's Windows in the back end? Sounds about right...
Soko
Whoa there - I agree with you.
I'm asserting that the tack that SCOs lawyers seem to be taking is to try and push GPLed works into the public domain and not copyright.
Soko
Or is the Godzilla vs Rodan analogy more appropriate?
IMHO this case will more resemble Bambi vs Godzilla. SCO's about to get squashed.
Or would a simple shark feeding-frezny do.
There's an old joke about sharks not eating lawyers out of professional courtesy. Draw your own conclusions.
Soko
Exactly.
This is not quite so dumb as it sounds, however. (Disclaimer - IANAL, I'm also Canadian) According to US law, there's 2 ways to release your work - with or without copyright. They seem to be arguing that the GPL invalidates itself since it doesn't seek to restrict how the work is distributed, and all GPLed works should therefore be in the public domain (no copyright).
OK, so it's really a bad argument, since the GPL does place restrictions on distrubuton, but it's likely the best of a bad lot.
Unfortunately for SCO, they're about to get on the wrong side of Microsoft too, since MS allows large coprorate customers to make unlimited copies of thier software, but with restrictions. Someone could use the precedent set by this case (should SCO win - HA) to invalidate those licenses as well.
All in all, I'd say RMS was at his insideous best when he crafted the GPL - delcare the GPL invalid, and all other IP licenses are fair game too.
Soko
True enough.
Unfortunatley for Microsoft, they allow 3rd party drivers into kernel space, even if that driver has never been seen by a Microsoft employee. That is likely what he's saying - "We provide the means to have your code not fuck up our OS, and half of you don't do it!".
The hardware/system drivers are allowed into kernel space after a user clicks a window that basically says "Microsoft has never seen this driver before - it could blow up your system. Want me to install it anyway?" and the user usually says "Yup, no problem. Them programmers are sooo smart...". It's very much a parallel argument to Windows Security - expecting everyone to know how to be a sysadmin without being a sysadmin.
If MS should learn anything from Linux development, it's that free, on-line and open collaboration breeds better drivers and a more stable OS.
Soko
Even Debian is getting the marketing bug. Debian 10? Directly from 3? Shades of Red Hat, SuSE et al. Debian isn't suppo...
Cake? Candles? Ooops.
Nevermind.
Soko
(P.S. - Thanks Debian team for leading the way. And for supporting my Alpha when others won't.)
Just because you stink, it doesn't mean you're clever!
You are correct, sir. All of the (20+ so far) "smelly nerd" jokes stink, and none are clever.
Soko
I recently took a contract job to bring the IT operations of a local, growing business from a mom & pop deal to a more enterprise ready footing.
I have about 25 XP/98 machines to look after, but only 2 of them laptops (3 if I count my own). First thing I did when I was hired was grab both of the laptops and patch the hell out of them. Next was the 2K server, and lastly today I spent the whole day running around updating everything I could on the rest of the desktops. No programs got hosed in the update process either, which was a relief. We're behind a small NAT engine too, so I feel rather confident that we'll weather the storm.
My point is that businesses such as my current customer have no clue that an operating system (indeed, almost any program as well) needs to be taken care of. This is the issue that will keep biting Microsoft in the ass - until they make it plain as day that "You need to do regualar maintenance to our products" people will run with security holes. If they can't see that it's broken, why would they fix it?
Another point - I'm looking into SUS so I don't have to worry nearly as much (or spend so much time waiting for WindowsUpdate) but I'll need another server to use it. The lone server my customer has is almost over loaded at the moment, runing SBS with 256M of RAM. SUS requires 2k Server or above to run - why, I don't know. Just like Microsoft to turn a problem they've created into a marketing opportunity. No wonder they're having trouble stemming the Linux tide.
Soko
No, not a monopoly. Just a patent. ;^)
Soko
Go ahead and force MS to sell those in the EU a copy w/o WMP. Now EU users will be forced to pay $30 to $40 to Real, Music Match, Quicktime, etc. to get the same functionality they get for free with WMP.
RealOne player: Here, free.
MusicMatch : Here, free.
QuickTime: Here, free.
You were saying?
(Oh, don't forget Winamp! Probrably the best of the bunch, IMHO.
Soko
Bingo.
I recently got a development contract with this exact argument.
My customer is getting a fully tailored, customised solution to thier problem - a solution based totally on open source technologies. (Nice Linux server, PostgresSQL, etc.) To boot, all of that custom work came in at a price significantly less than anyone else who bid for the job. Significantly less.
I get a very nice paycheck, once it's done. Should be more on the way, too, since I get to re-sell the solution and customise it for other customers. And support contracts if the customer so chooses, will supplement my income, too. (BTW, they don't need to pick me for support, since they have the code, and that code is based on known OSS tools, etc. Certainly makes one pay attention to customer service.)
Microsoft got squat. Well, this time, anyway. I might need to throw Bill & Co. the odd scrap (if the customer gets new desktop machines, for example, and insists on XP) down the road, but that depends wholly on the customer. They can use Windows if they want, but they sure don't need Windows. Customers seem to like that.
Soko
It's 4am, I've been coding for too long tonight, and can't truly parse the article as well.
That being said, I'd say that perhaps the young man, not being a "classical" physicist, has a fresh perspective on the matter? You know, perhaps he's seeing the forest through some different trees....
Dunno, just a point for discussion.
Soko
It may come as a shock to you - but the IT guys don't actually own the PCs either.
It may be suprising to you that his job depends on ensuring corporate standards are in place and enforced on IT infrestructure.
I understand a user wanting to run thier own show on the workstation assigned to them, but if a major problem with Linux surfaces and the sysadmin didn't do anything about a non-standard installation that they knew about, that's akin to dereliction of duty, and they should be fired. A corporate environment requires stringent management, or it spirals into a huge, black, money sucking pit.
IOW, it's up to the SA to ensure that everyone plays nice on the network. If you want to use Desktop Linux at work, ask . Maybe the sysadmin be a lot more friendly towards the idea - I know I would.
Soko
The problem isn't that the Australian government is spending money on computers and software, but that the world's richest and one of the most politically powerful man on the earth has the government in a vice with its OS and other monopolies.
Bingo. Witness the Munich descision - it wasn't a move based on saving $ now, it was a strategic move to free themselves from a single-source vendor, who could potentially hold thier IT infrestructure hostage in some way, shape or form. What is really damaging to MS is the fact that this is a good, long term business decision that the astute businessman will recognize as such.
As more knowlegeable and informed people clue in to just how dependant they are on Microsoft (if they fall out of Microsofts good graces they're likley to have a rather expensive software audit on thier hands) they'll go for alternatives just to make sure they're in control of thier own software (and therefore business) from then on. Licensing 6.0 tipped Microsofts' hand way too much - it showed people that MS has lost a lot of respect for thier customers. That being the case, the end is inevitable. One year, 2 years, 5 years - doesn't matter. Zero-choice software is on it's way out, Freedom-of-choice software is on it's way in.
Soko
Not exactly, I think.
Safari is access to the whole content of the book on-line, as well as searching for text within that content as well as any other books they have available on-line. IOW, Safari is actually a superset of the Amazon thing, since you can pay to read the whole book, not just search through it for snippets and passages.
I love Safari as well - saves shelf space, trees and frustration (because of the search function). I wouldn't want to read a novel on-line, since a paper book is a better interface for that, but for reference material about programming/networking/Operating Systems etc., Safari works well, since you're in front of a machine anyway. And IIRC, errata in the books is applied directly to the text on-line, and you get the latest edition without having to get another book, just updated content.
The only time having all of your reference material on-line would be a problem is if you need ref. material to get your Cisco router that connects you to the Internet back on-line.
Soko
You ARE wrong. Big time.
;_;
I've had the "privilege" of installing OpenServer. It is, IMHO, shite. I'd relate it to compost, but compost is usefull.
I'm very happily consuming a bottle of Crown Royal, celebrating my un-recovery, and don't want to depress myself by thinking aboot the pain that OpenServer 5.0 caused me. 3 years ago.
Suffice it to say that I'd rather use a Pharlap DOS extender than anything SCO has ever written themselves. Bleah.
*pours another arf-and-arf in order to forget*
Soko
Good idea. I want my free phone, my free internet, and my free electricity as well.
Seriously though, it seems that he's not making a distinction between "free as in speech" and "free as in beer"...
Those are goods and services that cost the provider of the goods and services a lot of money to reproduce. Actually, you can run a power station, ISP and Telephone system all on your own if you wish. The cost of doing so, relative to reproducing a software package, is astronomical. IOW, with digital content, supply == demand at almost $0 per copy.
Besides, he said "social infrastructure", which implies it's a basic societal building block, like the free exchange of ideas. Sounds to me like he has the free speach/free beer thing straight.
Soko
Though Microsoft underbid IBM and SuSE by $11.9 million in Munich, city officials were concerned about the unpredictable long-run cost of Microsoft upgrades, says Munich council member Christine Strobl, who championed the switch to Linux.
;^)
Game.
And the more Microsoft discounted, the more it underscored the notion that as a sole supplier, Microsoft could -- and has been -- naming its own price, she says.
Set.
''Microsoft's philosophy is to change our software every five years,'' Strobl says. ''With open-source, it is possible for us to make our own decision as to when to change our software.''
Match.
Munich must still prove that Linux is ready for prime time on the desktop. Research firm Gartner cautions it won't be until 2005 before it is known how well it works in Munich.
Now don't trip jumping over the net.
Soko
and even if you are tired of hearing it, it doesn't make it any less true:
ALL COPYRIGHT = GREED
Really? So the GPL == GREED too? After all. the power of the GPL comes from Copyright Law, even though it's used to grant freedoms instead of restrict them.
and copying music is NOT stealing in any sense of the word "stealing"
PERIOD
Here nor there - it's still not legal. You're either on a crusade to "stick it to da man" or you yourself are GREEDY.
Kids. Sheesh.
Soko
This station wagon has a significantly reduced ping latency. Routes are still a problem, though....
Soko
I'm giving up modpoints on this article to respond to this. Here goes...
"they expect adoption of desktop Linux to increase over the next few years"
That's what they said a few years ago. And that's probably what they'll be saying a few years from now. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. But it's just not for mom and pop and I doubt it ever will be given who is working on it and what they've been doing.
Have you ever heard of the term "Strategic Advantage"? When we get Mom and Pop to use Lindows, we get one more reason for more people/companies/organisations to develop products for Free Software - like drivers for web-cams etc., which attracts yet more usrs, who attract more devs, snowballing support for OSS. This process will ingrain OSS into the normal lives of all people, making it very difficult to remove. Going after Mom and Pop isn't for $ or anyting, it's a stategic move to protect the future of OSS.
Linux innovates very little except in technological areas. It's GUIs even today fall short of Windows and Mac GUIs, and several years from now I don't expect Linux will catch up. I don't see MS or Apple kicking back sipping pina coladas at the poolside.
I disagree with your future looking statement, especially when Linux is now at the point of being very useable for most of the populace. Yes, MS and Apple will continue to innovate, and OSS devs will continue to integrate those technologies in the name of interoperability. Once Linux catches up to them, though, thier lives will be made miserable.
I think alot of great work has been done in Linux and I'm a Linux user myself, but not as my primary desktop. Linux is an OS made for geeks by geeks that love to push the geek envelope. That's great stuff in and of itself, but it's not going to put Linux in the mainstream.
Linux is being installed in more places everyday, by people who *gasp* aren't even geeks. I just set up a Linux server for a non-techie type, and he's quite at home in GNOME. Gracious, I even have him able to generate a report from the CLI! Again, I don't know if Linux will be "mainstream", but I think bringing it to the masses is a viable target , and would be beneficial to the OSS community at large. Most Linux advocates agree, too. BTW, with linux, you can have your cake (Debian for ubergeeks) and eat it too (the aforementioned Lindows).
And does it want to be mainstream? Do Linux users want it to be mainstream? For the most part, I think not. When asking a technical question in Linux circles, the responses you get range from apathetic to offensive. RTFM! NEWB! It's pretty rare you actually get someone with a little compassion that has felt your pain and is willing to help you out.
Try #linux on irc.arstechnica.com. Very n00b friendly - most of the people there were once n00bs too and remember what it was like. Actually, where most of the flamage comes from is people who are unwilling to learn or think they're owed something - "Help me set up my printer, dammit!" usually engenders the "RTFM" response. Once they learn the "share and share alike" mentality of the OSS community, all of the hostility usually fades quickly. 4 years ago I'd of agreed with you, but today with so many people learning *NIX through OSS, things are much, much different. At present, that statement is nothing but FUD, pure and simple. (Unless you're an unfortunate luser who happens by alt.sysadmin.recovery. *Clickety-Click*)
Everything about Linux (and Unix in general) seems to be as if it is some kind of rite of passage. You must fight the bear without weapons, then you must walk the fire barefooted and then you must master Unix! It is that final task at which the brave warrior often stumbles...
Counterpoint: Ask a regular Windows user to open the registry on your XP machine and edit it, with no help or backup. A task for a Brave Windows Warrior to do before they master Windows. As someone who's mastered Windows, it would be no trouble at al
Asshole....
(Sorry - had to.)
Soko
Wow, the sleeping giants' alarm clocks have just gone off. I guess that nothing has any value until there's a billion dollar lawsuit over it. :)
I never considered that - Linux is valued at over 3 Billion at present because of SCO. Heh. This must just be driving SCO bonkers to see "all that revenue that could have been ours!!" stay with the CE vendors. Nice to see.
Firstly, this is a pay-to-join consortium. I assume that until you pay, you won't get to see the specs.
When you buy one of thier Linux powered gadgets, you can request and then recieve the source. Unless they want to directly defy the GPL and be sued in court - where they'd likely loose. Or they're silly enough to hire Daryl McBride as CEO.
Does this mean that the 'extensions' are going to be presented to Linus as a fait-accompli patch? How is he supposed to react to something that he doesn't like? It's one thing pissing off the odd developer, but rejecting a patch from a consortium of major keiretsu is surely going to have a bigger backlash. Maybe I'm being too pessimistic.
Fait-accompli, as in "Put a fork in it, it's done."? I think you catch my drift here.
Secondly, they are acting as if they are the first people to have had this idea. Linux has been in several consumer eletronics devices already (Empeg & Tivo to name but two). What makes this consortium so special? What are they going to bring to the table that isn't already there?
Having not read the article yet, I would imagine that these electronic giants will be using Linux CE as a standard in any device with a microprocessor - IOW "your DVD talks to my reciever just fine". As it is now, you can plug your Toshiba DVD into your Sony TV and it works. With incompatible OSes in CE devices, consumers would loose this capability, and the CE makers support costs would skyrocket. Détente is another French word that applies to Linux - that way they stay electronics companies and not OS vendors.
Soko