>>Yeah. Free market will solve everything. Bandwidth ? Free market. Energy ? Free market. IP laws ? Free market. Pollution ? Free market. World hunger ? Free market. Greed ? Free market.
Actually, the free market does have a pretty track record for controlling many of these of these problems. Ever read P.J. O'Rourk's book: "All the Trouble in the World."
1) Difficulty, and expense, in supporting two or more standards. Dual boot, emulators, running two machines, or whatever, is a pain. It also kills of your cost advantages. Businesses can't just hire MS support people, they would have to hire MS and Linux support people. Windows exclusive users don't have to do this.
2) Entrenchment. If I have a lot of Viseo files, and MS-Project files, then Linux isn't even an option. If I have already paid for the OS and applications, what's the point? It can be a pain to learn a new system, or application.
3) Confidence in big names. Names that don't support desktop Linux. Many individuals and businesses like to buy from trusted name brands, like Dell, HP/Compaq, Gateway, or Apple. These big name brands usually have the OS installed. You could remove the OS, but there is no cost advantage. Dell used to sell server systems with Linux pre-installed, I don't think even Dell does that anymore. Having the OS pre-installed can save a lot of time, especially since you don't have to worry about un-supported hardware. I think a lot of potential Linux users would be more confident in using Linux if they could go to CompUSA, Circut City, or BestBuy, and find a Linux system set up and ready to go. Then they could try it out and know for sure that it works okay.
4) ISP support. This applies more to individuals than businesses. A lot of ISPs may allow you to use Linux, but if call with a problem, no matter who is at fault, that ISP will probably tell you they don't support Linux. This is especially true with broadband.
5) No compelling reason to switch. No "killer" Linux applications or anything like that. I don't know of any "must have" desktop Linux application, that I can't find the equivalent for in Windows.
6) Convenience. I don't think many users want to have to order their OS from cheapbytes, or download. You can buy the full version from CompUSA, but you will bay about $80, thereby losing your cost advantage.
7) Reliability advantage is negligible at best. MS is improving. At least, in some ways. XP and 2000 seem stable enough - much improved from Windows 9.x.
8) Cost advantage is negligible at best. A PC with windows pre-installed only costs about $75 more. If you use that PC for three years, that comes to $25 a year. Just like Linux, there is tons of freeware for Windows, including OpenOffice and Mozilla.
9) Performance advantage is negligible at best. I get better desktop performance with MS. I suppose you boost performance by using trimmed down, relatively obscure, windows managers. But, you lose functionality.
10) Security advantage is negligible at best. Use decent AV software and your PC will be safe enough. Linux has also had virus attacks. The vast majority of security related problems is caused by user sloppiness, not an OS flaw.
Seems to me that Suse in following Xandros: including crossover office in their diesto. Xandros is less expensive, and, I think, includes a commercial version of wordperfect.
For eight years Ronald Regan insisted that US markets stay open, while Japan kept their markets closed. This ruined a lot of US companies. The day Regan got out of office, he went to Japan and picked up a two million dollar *ahem* "speaker's fee."
Clinton was even worse, selling pardons to convicted criminals, like so much cotton candy. Communist Chinese running around the white house with trash bags full of cash (litterally).
Of course the USA has the best congress money can buy, why do you think so many wealthy companies, like intel, are subsidized by the US taxpayer?
MS may be evil, but they are hardly unique in the fact that they grease palms for special favors. Could you imagine what would happen to MS if they didn't cough up the money? I bet MS would be out of business in a week.
I remember Mandrake 7.2 bragging about having 11 different GUIs. I don't think the typical desktop user wants 11 different GUIs.
I think it would make more sense to improve Linux's ability to run MS-Windows applications, or access windows documents. Rather than forever tinkering with dozens of different GUIs.
How does cleanflix hurt the Directors Guild of America? It seems to me that movies are being sold, which would not have been sold otherwise, so where is the harm?
Since only 1 desktop in 400 runs linux, it just doesn't make economic sense for many companies to port to linux.
Maybe OS-X will help change this. If you're going to write something for BSD, you might as well port it to linux.
Disgusted with inkjets, bought a HPLJ II for 9.95
on
Printer Makers' Ploys
·
· Score: 1
Couldn't be happier. A new toner cartridge from half.com cost me $23 with shipping. Bought it just in cast the toner cartridge that came with printer *ever* runs out.
Sick to death of outragously expensive ink cartridges, messy refill kits that don't work, cartridges drying up is you don't use them etc.
No color, but the HPLJ II just works and works, not matter what I do.
I saw someting on 60 minutes (or something) about this tribe in South Africa that goes around hacking the arms off the diamond mine workers. The diamond companies do little to protect their workers.
I have installed both windows and linux dozens of times. I would say that, on balance, windows is a lot easier.
You must consider: what if the installation is not 100% smooth? With linux, you're lucky if drivers exist at all. If they do exist, it can be difficult to find and install. X11 configuation can be a nightmare, it can ruin the entire installation.
Slashdot Mirror
>>Yeah. Free market will solve everything. Bandwidth ? Free market. Energy ? Free market. IP laws ? Free market. Pollution ? Free market. World hunger ? Free market. Greed ? Free market.
Actually, the free market does have a pretty track record for controlling many of these of these problems. Ever read P.J. O'Rourk's book: "All the Trouble in the World."
I can run windows-95 on a 386 with 640x480 VGA.
Just how "pico" is this gui? I went to the site, but I didn't find anything about system requirements.
but, since you asked:
1) Difficulty, and expense, in supporting two or more standards. Dual boot, emulators, running two machines, or whatever, is a pain. It also kills of your cost advantages. Businesses can't just hire MS support people, they would have to hire MS and Linux support people. Windows exclusive users don't have to do this.
2) Entrenchment. If I have a lot of Viseo files, and MS-Project files, then Linux isn't even an option. If I have already paid for the OS and applications, what's the point? It can be a pain to learn a new system, or application.
3) Confidence in big names. Names that don't support desktop Linux. Many individuals and businesses like to buy from trusted name brands, like Dell, HP/Compaq, Gateway, or Apple. These big name brands usually have the OS installed. You could remove the OS, but there is no cost advantage. Dell used to sell server systems with Linux pre-installed, I don't think even Dell does that anymore. Having the OS pre-installed can save a lot of time, especially since you don't have to worry about un-supported hardware. I think a lot of potential Linux users would be more confident in using Linux if they could go to CompUSA, Circut City, or BestBuy, and find a Linux system set up and ready to go. Then they could try it out and know for sure that it works okay.
4) ISP support. This applies more to individuals than businesses. A lot of ISPs may allow you to use Linux, but if call with a problem, no matter who is at fault, that ISP will probably tell you they don't support Linux. This is especially true with broadband.
5) No compelling reason to switch. No "killer" Linux applications or anything like that. I don't know of any "must have" desktop Linux application, that I can't find the equivalent for in Windows.
6) Convenience. I don't think many users want to have to order their OS from cheapbytes, or download. You can buy the full version from CompUSA, but you will bay about $80, thereby losing your cost advantage.
7) Reliability advantage is negligible at best. MS is improving. At least, in some ways. XP and 2000 seem stable enough - much improved from Windows 9.x.
8) Cost advantage is negligible at best. A PC with windows pre-installed only costs about $75 more. If you use that PC for three years, that comes to $25 a year. Just like Linux, there is tons of freeware for Windows, including OpenOffice and Mozilla.
9) Performance advantage is negligible at best. I get better desktop performance with MS. I suppose you boost performance by using trimmed down, relatively obscure, windows managers. But, you lose functionality.
10) Security advantage is negligible at best. Use decent AV software and your PC will be safe enough. Linux has also had virus attacks. The vast majority of security related problems is caused by user sloppiness, not an OS flaw.
Sadly, I think security will one of the few growing areas in the near future.
Security usually has to be handled close to home, you don't farm out security work to somebody in India.
Also, security is quite so product specific. It usually doesn't come down to a specific version, of a specific language, on a specific OS.
Seems to me that Suse in following Xandros: including crossover office in their diesto. Xandros is less expensive, and, I think, includes a commercial version of wordperfect.
But a lot of people really like Suse.
4) Marketing.
For eight years Ronald Regan insisted that US markets stay open, while Japan kept their markets closed. This ruined a lot of US companies. The day Regan got out of office, he went to Japan and picked up a two million dollar *ahem* "speaker's fee."
Clinton was even worse, selling pardons to convicted criminals, like so much cotton candy. Communist Chinese running around the white house with trash bags full of cash (litterally).
Of course the USA has the best congress money can buy, why do you think so many wealthy companies, like intel, are subsidized by the US taxpayer?
MS may be evil, but they are hardly unique in the fact that they grease palms for special favors. Could you imagine what would happen to MS if they didn't cough up the money? I bet MS would be out of business in a week.
A few years back, I worked for Royal Caribbean as "systems specialist." Sort of an on board systems admin.
Didn't really see the "world" and what I did see was sort of "touristy." But the pay was good, and it was a decent experience.
and VCR have been around for decades. So why is this an issue all of the sudden?
Save untold millions by stopping the flood of aol cdroms, and then lower prices to $15 a month?
The dial-up ISP I used, access4less.net, only charged $6 a month. Juno charges $10. I think AT&T charges about $14.
MSN charges $23, but they only get away with that by giving away $400 off the price of new computer.
So maybe AOL isn't price competitive anymore?
I'm no lawyer but, my understanding is that the copying is not what's illegal; it's the selling that's illegal.
I remember Mandrake 7.2 bragging about having 11 different GUIs. I don't think the typical desktop user wants 11 different GUIs.
I think it would make more sense to improve Linux's ability to run MS-Windows applications, or access windows documents. Rather than forever tinkering with dozens of different GUIs.
I started in computers as computer operator for the USAF. Some people like, some people hate it, I hated it.
Remember, there is no easy way out. If you hate it, you are just screwed - for years.
Needless to say: those armed forces commercials make for light comedy for anybody who has actually been there.
How does cleanflix hurt the Directors Guild of America? It seems to me that movies are being sold, which would not have been sold otherwise, so where is the harm?
Television does this to movies all the time.
there's no point in sueing them anyway. I had to sign similar papers when I was laid off.
Since only 1 desktop in 400 runs linux, it just doesn't make economic sense for many companies to port to linux.
Maybe OS-X will help change this. If you're going to write something for BSD, you might as well port it to linux.
Couldn't be happier. A new toner cartridge from half.com cost me $23 with shipping. Bought it just in cast the toner cartridge that came with printer *ever* runs out.
Sick to death of outragously expensive ink cartridges, messy refill kits that don't work, cartridges drying up is you don't use them etc.
No color, but the HPLJ II just works and works, not matter what I do.
Some personal favorites.
If I telecommute, won't I be competing with a PhD from India, who is happy to work for $500 a month?
As I understand it, Apple has provided special deals for schools all along. I'm sure the idea is to promote *Apple* computers.
So, what's the difference?
I saw someting on 60 minutes (or something) about this tribe in South Africa that goes around hacking the arms off the diamond mine workers. The diamond companies do little to protect their workers.
Horrible business, I want no part of it.
I have installed both windows and linux dozens of times. I would say that, on balance, windows is a lot easier.
You must consider: what if the installation is not 100% smooth? With linux, you're lucky if drivers exist at all. If they do exist, it can be difficult to find and install. X11 configuation can be a nightmare, it can ruin the entire installation.
I think the phone companies still charge a premium for touch tone capabilities. This technology was first introduced in 1962.
Go back to the 80's. The internet really wasn't all about money then.
I used to work in a shop that had a top-secret security protected area. Obviously, we could not connect the secure network with the un-secure network.
But there was a process where we could bring floppies into the secure area to transfer a few small files, then destroy the floppies.
Made sense.