You don't transfer 20GB of data every time you sync? Syncing few songs do not result in so much difference in time. At least that's how I believe both iPod and Neuros work, but I admit I don't own either.
Give iTunes a shot; if you love it's ID3 tag based interface, you'll definitely love the iPod ^^
You are right - iTunes is a great selling point for iPod integration. But, unfortunately, I use Linux as my desktop almost all of the time, so, unless iTunes runs under wine (which I haven't tried), it would not be useful to me.
Don't get me wrong - iPod has a lot of advantages, but if I am talking strictly about myself, I am also taking into account Vorbis support (a lot of my ripped CDs are in Vorbis and I am not going to re-encode them into MP3 or AAC), and Linux sync software support. Obviously, there are a lot more differences to take into account, like my comments and others' replies suggest.
As far as ID3 tags, I have never been a huge fan of those. OGG has a better tagging system that's easier to use, add your custom tags to, and organize by. Again, it'd be good to find out if anyone has experience with support of these tags on Neuros.
up to 40 times as long to copy files (USB 1.1 is absolutely unacceptable for a hard drive and you KNOW this)
I do know, but also consider that this is not as much of an issue as you are making it when you simply sync few files over; i.e. you don't wipe your whole HD and re-copy everything. Again, I don't own iPod or Neuros, so I am assuming that's how they both work.
The rest of the differences you are pointing out are valid points to consider when purchasing either device.
All in all, it looks like an iPod knock off that tried really hard and nearly succeeded in being a better unit. You're right, integrated FM and microphone are neato...and these are two features Belkin and others are trying their damnedest to shove into the iPod...but they're also features most people will never use.
I am not sure how you are determining that most people will never use FM radio player and transmitter. My understanding is (from other people's comments) that people who own Neuros do use the FM transmitter to play it in cars and other radios. It is also nice and something that I would use - to record an MP3 off of FM radio, or if I like the song [on the radio] ask Neuros to remember it to remind me during next sync. I don't see why most people would never use these.
There's a design rule I like to follow, one that I think always makes devices easier to use: make common things simple, and complex things possible.
Well, if you define "common things" = "whatever iPod/Apple offers" than there is no argument. But I think an FM transmitter and recording off of FM radio is something that I would commonly use if I decided to purchase Neuros (which I am considering). So, it would be a "common thing" to me, but yet impossible with an iPod. Obviously, this is not the only factor - there are others like you and other posters pointed out.
As I understand, it is bigger than iPod with the HD attached, but with an added bonus (as others reported) that the HD is a regular laptop HD; so you can attach 80GB (or any other) model if you really wanted to. One thing to also keep in mind is that when you get the $230 backpack model, you can remove the HD for jogging, and other lightweight activities and it will operate off of flash memory. As I said in a reply to another post, if this flash memory is removable, so I can replace it with the storage capacity that I want, then the weight/size would be less of an issue overall.
If you really want radio, a pocket-sized FM radio is like $10...For the whole damn thing!
I think because you can record off of it, or you can ask Neuros to remember the song you like, so it reminds you of it during the next sync. Also, it has the FM transmitter so you can play it on any FM radio without any [required] connections on the radio or the portable player. If it works as advertized like that, and like people have been reporting, it sounds like a great feature to me.
Doesn't sound ultra portable, which the ipod is in the hdd based market (small with rounded edges). OGG and linux support don't amount to much market share (maybe a few thousand units per year).
You are right - it is heavier and bigger when HD is attached. On the other hand, the advantage (as others reported) is that it uses regular laptop HDs which makes it possible to attach any [size] HD you want or is available for laptops. Also, it is not clear to me whether it has a removable flash memory, so I can replace it with a bigger card. In that case, with HD removed, and relatively good flash size, makes the size/weight issue not as big a deal.
On the other side of things, I know Vorbis and Linux support is not a big selling point for general public (it is for me), but other features like FM radio playback and recording, FM transmitter, mircrophone are very nice.
People also said (responding to the story), there is a new version of Neuros coming out soon with a better featureset. I'm torn between what "better" means and what is available now. Also, others pointed out that iPod organizes better than this guy. So, to conclude, I am confused.
If it was the very first page served by the router, that could be different... the first time I tunred on my home router it directed me to a welcome and setup page... which is quite different.
You bring up a valid point. Maybe if they included this ad/link in their setup tool (via browser/HTTP) it would not have brought this much backlash. Many people do need to set up their routers anyway.
We don't have the ability to spam you at a later time if you select "No Thanks" or turn off the reminder manually.
Riiiiiiiiight. Not until the next router software update maybe.
Well, if they can turn it off with a "click" like that, and they do send a packet to the router to do so (as the manager admitted) then who's to say that they can't "turn it on" again with a similar packet? They could in theory start sending out these packets to some collection of IP addresses on DSL and cable networks in hopes of hitting their routers, turning on the "feature", and advertizing more spam.
Or, even better, who's to say that only Belkin can do it? Why can't spammers, Belkin partners/advertizers, or script kiddies with free time?
Next in line, Belkin telephones that automatically dial 1800-VIAGRA for you (every 8 hours) and if you don't specifically say "No Thanks" they go ahead and purchase the product for you? Good luck Belkin! Fortunately, router market is a competitive one and this type of shit won't fly easily.
Here is a better portable audio player that does the stuff the article talks about (and some more) and has a very reasonable price - Neuros.
- First off, it comes with a small memory card and optional 20GB HD attachment, so you can go light when you are jogging and attach HD for long road trips;
- Speaking of road trips, it has an FM transmitter that lets it play any audio on any FM radio without extra connections;
- It has FM radio, and is able to record directly from FM radio to MP3 format;
- It has a microphone and a voice recorder;
- It has full Linux support;
- It has Vorbis support;
- The whole package - the unit itself, software, USB cable, earphones, 20GB HD attachment, regular charger, car charger = $230.
That would be less than half the price of iPod. I would like to see some reviews of this baby.
Why the hell should the taxpayers shoulder the massive costs of building a device like that which would be completely immune to misuse? Does it add $1000 per? $10000 per? How much per emergency vehicle?
While we are at it, I'd like to see the financial analysis of the reverse side as well. i.e., how much does it cost to install these systems (as they currently are), maintain and operate them, install security systems that trap abusers of these systems, maintain and monitor security systems, charge and prosecute abusers - vs. the benefit of these systems in the first place?
I'd like to see this kind of cost-benefit analysis vs. that taxpayer money being used for other methods of improving emergency response time - how about more emergency workers? more fire stations? better roads? wider and more lanes? roadside shoulders? better public transporation?
It seems that people accept that it's OK that gov't wants to exert control over population by any means possible, even if it means enacting (1) unreasonable laws, installing (2) unreasonable surveillance systems, and punishing those who violate 1 and get caught by 2. Meanwhile, the public interest gets lost somewhere in between discussing the improvements/additions to these installed systems and related laws, and arguing "good guys" vs. "bad guys" philosophy vis-a-vis this ideology.
In case you haven't guessed, I consider RH's move to drop their mainstream versions to be a crucial blunder. But, it's their company......
I think RH is shooting itself in the foot by dropping the most popular Linux distro and associated brand, support and backing. Isn't this what made them popular and put them in a leadership position in the first place? They are assuming that enterprise will simply fork over more and more money but they may not enjoy the same rooted admin and developer support as they did in the beginning (even with their many screw-ups). This effect may not show in the short term but will definitely be a factor after some time.
I am also confused as to why RH cannot keep providing the RedHat Linux product on the shelf or via paid download. i.e., they could have introduced the free, community-supported Fedora, but still offer RedHat Linux (as a product) for customers who wished to pay for it. It seems to me that there is a big part of market that cannot afford RHEL that RedHat simply chose to disregard. This is losing market share and does absolutely no good. On the financial side of things, advanced desktop users who want free software would choose Fedora, while paying customers, including small to medium size businesses, educational establishments, and other cash-strapped organizations would happily purchase few copies of RedHat Linux per year. I don't understand why selling more software that they work on and test and develop anyway would be causing them to lose money if they followed this route.
On Novell/SUSE side my hope is that Novell keeps SUSE as a desktop distro. Remember SUSE's ambitions for corporate desktop, server, and home desktop? Well, Novell has very little experience with anything desktop, anything consistently successful that is. Novell knows their bread and butter, they have their customers and they are offering upgrade path to them as well as trying to attract similar new potential customers. Where does this leave SUSE as a distro? Well, according to the Novell webcast regarding the acquisition, they are not planning to compete against Microsoft in any way, desktop or server. This is disappointing in many ways as SUSE probably had the most promise for such competition on both desktop and server. So, is Novell going to continue and stay true to SUSE's established desktop strategy? Given Novell's statements, past product line, and experience, many are placing bets against that. Only time will tell, but I sure do hope they keep the product.
There's also a question of SUSE's desktop (literally) software. SUSE has been a major supporter of KDE team and their development efforts, both financially, and by action. Novell's acquisition of Ximian and their product does bring up a conflict of interest in this regard. Will we see SUSE desktop move to GNOME? Will Novell keep SUSE's prior committments/engagements with KDE? These are types of questions that Novell has to answer and do so fast; meaning, these are types of issues (among others) that they should have thought of before announcing the deal. And they should make their stance and their plans clear in these regards.
Having said all this now, how much advantage is Novell going to take of the market that RedHat simply discarded? How will they appeal to small business and consumer desktop market? Will they do so at all? Their webcast did not address any of these issues, and they need to make that clear to everyone pretty soon, IMO.
Quite frankly, I am worried with this acquisition. Novell is not really known for their desktop software presence and, I am afraid, they will not make such committment with SUSE's product either. When they start running short on cash and investors start demanding numbers, what are they going to stick to? Server, server software, eDirectory, rest of their bread and butter solutions, while ditching their desktop product, and giving into MS' dominance. Not like they haven't done that before.
I'd rather SUSE stayed separate - they were considering going public at some point - and Novell gotten into agreement a la UnitedLinux. Would have been great for both companies, AND their respective customers.
It repeatedly refers to using the "world wide web" to do its magic.
As most slashdot geeks know, the internet is far, far more than the world wide web. The web is a small subset of the internet.
So do everything outlined in the patent, just use ftp, ssh, NFS or samba.
I think the lawyer/patent agent who wrote this thing needs a cluestick.
So there's still time to get a patent on storing and updating preferences over the rest of the Internet. OK, "Patent attorneys" ---> I'm feeling lucky!
Shell? What shell? To see a better image of the thing I have to agree to an "image license agreement." In a small box that I can't even scroll and see what it says. Motorola has gone nuts. Nobody is relying on copyrights anymore. They want to suck every little blood drop out of fair use.
Good luck, Motorola, with your "proprietary intellectual property". What kind of a proprietary intellectual property is a picture of a phone?
Maybe after you get that phone, it will have a printed license agreement inside the box that you agree that you don't say anything bad about the phone or your license to use it is terminated.
Aha! We found the source of the problem! You are telling others what they should like and what they should not like! What they should use and not use. What is "ugly" and what is "cool".
Gimme a break! I think I'll be in charge of what I like and what I need, not some/. troll! No further comment.
It sounds like to me you are so stuck in how you are doing things now you are unwilling to learn anything new.
I see the opposite. I am willing to try out different desktop environments, window managers, play with [real] customization, until I find the one(s) that I like; doesn't matter Linux, OS X or anything else; after awhile try new stuff again and adjust them to my new tastes. I am not stuck on one thing.
My fear is, if I do make a switch, then I will be stuck mostly to whatever Apple decides is good for me. Although, again, as I said, availability of X changes this balance greatly and hopefully for the better and more competition.
multiple virtual desktops (as article mentioned); I've been hooked on this since I started using Linux few years ago and I simply cannot give this up
Yeah, you can. It's called Expose.
I have looked at http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/expose/ but it does not say anything about multiple virtual desktops. It says it "arranges" windows in some manner to reduce clutter when too many of them are open.
Mac OS X gives you the ability to customize the look and feel. It just doesn't let you break it, or make it look ass-ugly.
I don't know what you mean by "customize" but either you haven't seen real "customization" and/or didn't completely understand what I meant.
sometimes I get tired of one window manager or a desktop environment, and use another one for a day or two
That's because you haven't found a good one yet.
That's a problem - you deciding what I have found or not. I definitely have found the desktop environment that I like, that can be customized and changed any way I want. And, once in a while, I reserve the right to use others as well. If you don't like it, well I wasn't talking for you, only for myself.
Exactly what I did.. I used to use linux on my desktop, debian, used it for quite some time, but after a while I got a little annoyed that every time I wanted to do something more "Exotic" like using bluetooth...
I've looked at it from a little different perspective. I mean I know OS X looks good, is extremely easy to use, and is very well integrated. I have actually considered getting one of those sexy laptops, but when it comes down to it, I figure, novelty and "looking good" wears off, and it comes down to efficiency and personalization. I mean I'd rather spend few extra minutes trying to get bluetooth to work right (which I did) rather than give up things like:
- multiple virtual desktops (as article mentioned); I've been hooked on this since I started using Linux few years ago and I simply cannot give this up. Single desktop environment makes me feel claustrophobic as I need to (and do) switch between variety of tasks or task groups often while keeping them alive in their state where I left them off. Single desktop in this case becomes a big mess.
- ability to customize look and feel, themes, window/keyboard/mouse behavior to my tastes and usage preferences which many times are not the default chosen by someone else.
- many applications I've gotten used to are not available on OS X or equivalents cost more money. As an example, I am not a graphic designer, but I do use GIMP sometimes. I'd feel less likely to make the switch if I had to shell out few hundred to Adobe or someone else. Although, I have to admit, Apple is making this more attractive by enabling X install in the update (per article).
- sometimes I get tired of one window manager or a desktop environment, and use another one for a day or two; just for kicks, just for a little change-up. I lose that freedom with those "integrated" environments.
There are other smaller things that make my life "better and easier" when I have more choices. And again, I'd rather extend little extra energy into making sure I get compatible hardware than give up those benefits. Mind you, Linux hardware support is pretty good, and most hardware just works without needing any driver installation or configuration on major distros.
Let me repeat. OS X 10.1 and 10.2 are not vulnerable
[...]
Indeed, the spin and dishonesty in the article is so severe, and the pro-Micorosoft bias in the (mis)reporting of the facts so obvious, that I'm surprised even Intel zealots would buy it outright, hook-line-and-sinker, without even a thought to the contrary.
[snip bunch of Apple-ologist stuff]
Nonsense. If you actually look up bugtraq reports by @stake, you will see all OS X versions 10.2.8 and below are vulnerable. Here, here and here.
It seems that the more we try to "high-tech" the voting process, the more problems and uncertainty we will introduce into the system.
Not necessarily. It depends on what the interests of the parties involved are. More "high-tech" processes can, in fact, give you more guarantees that election results have not been tampered with. How about something like following:
0. When starting a vote process, assign a unique one-way hash to each voter; 1. Have voters vote electronically, and record their electronic vote record in a database; 2. Have the voting machine (or the server) generate a paper trail of each vote and keep those papers separately; 3. Give the voter the paper confirmation "receipt" of the vote record with their hash on it that they deposit in a safe box right before they exit the voting area.
Count votes from (1) and certify the election. In case of any challenges, or any reasons to believe that electronic results were tampered with, do a recount on (2) and (3), compare and reconcile any differences. As long as different groups/parties are in charge of (1), (2), and (3), you can easily tell where tampering occurred, and how.
Now, there are a lot of different variations and ways to accomplish such redundancy to make sure tampering with elections is extremely hard if not impossible. This means that we can use technology to our advantage, not to score political points, and enable backdoors for tampering with results. Again, as I stated in the beginning, it depends what the interests of the parties involved are.
Also, consider that pure paper ballot voting is prone to tampering as well. Realize that paper ballots are not marked in any way, they are contained in boxes that are usually guarded, that only very few people have access to. This creates an excellent opportunity for "dumping" extra ballots without anybody's knowledge, and no ability to recover from such "dumping" if it indeed occurs.
If the GPL is invalid, what other licensings would also be in question?
How about any licensings that violates or circumvents a persons constitutional rights (US)?
I was thinking like that too. Hey, look, if this holds we'll have:
- sharing source code is unconstitutional (under GPL); - DMCA is constitutional (outlawing public activities that are not copyrightable); - next, I'll be wondering if laughing at all this is constitutional or not.
I followed your (well, Darl's) logic that you outlined here. But even if I do follow and blindly believe its assumptions, I still see a big hole:
SCO says it contributed to GPLed code but didn't know and mean to. OK, SCO gets their copyrights back (without GPL restrictions) since they didn't mean to GPL their copyrighted code (and eventually public domain as they argue).
Other GPLed software contributors also contributed to the GPLed programs while still retaining copyrights; but, again, they didn't mean for their contributions to become public domain. So, then, they copyrights should go back to individual contributors just like SCO's code would.
The point being that - you cannot accidentally (re)assign or otherwise get rid of the copyright protections of your own work. i.e., if you didn't mean to contribute your own copyrighted works willfully, but it happenned by accident without your knowledge (like SCO claims), then the copyrights go back to their original owners (also like SCO claims). So, developers who contributed to GPL knowingly, would accidentally be putting their copyrighted works in public domain, which they never meant to do.
That is assuming MS wanted to win the case. They could have easily won the case if they wanted.
Yeah, it's a conspiracy theory, but I'm not sure what you mean by they could have easily won. If you read the details of the case, they - Microsoft - were not allowed to present any prior art evidence in front of the jury (the judge determined it would be too "prejudicial"). That's why they lost. But then Microsoft didn't just hand over cash, they appealed to be able to present prior art evidence that they were denied in the original trial.
Unless you claim that there's some grand conspiracy going on that Microsoft actually appealed to have the ruling certified by a higher court, while deliberately presenting evidence in a "bad" manner, while (again) pushing underground negotiations to acquire Eolas after the lawsuit has ended, while (again) secretly funding Eolas or paying for its lawyers to prolong and iron out the outcome.
But all this is up there with landing on the moon conspiracy thing. It's just too unrealistic.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't transfer 20GB of data every time you sync? Syncing few songs do not result in so much difference in time. At least that's how I believe both iPod and Neuros work, but I admit I don't own either.
You are right - iTunes is a great selling point for iPod integration. But, unfortunately, I use Linux as my desktop almost all of the time, so, unless iTunes runs under wine (which I haven't tried), it would not be useful to me.
Don't get me wrong - iPod has a lot of advantages, but if I am talking strictly about myself, I am also taking into account Vorbis support (a lot of my ripped CDs are in Vorbis and I am not going to re-encode them into MP3 or AAC), and Linux sync software support. Obviously, there are a lot more differences to take into account, like my comments and others' replies suggest.
As far as ID3 tags, I have never been a huge fan of those. OGG has a better tagging system that's easier to use, add your custom tags to, and organize by. Again, it'd be good to find out if anyone has experience with support of these tags on Neuros.
I do know, but also consider that this is not as much of an issue as you are making it when you simply sync few files over; i.e. you don't wipe your whole HD and re-copy everything. Again, I don't own iPod or Neuros, so I am assuming that's how they both work.
The rest of the differences you are pointing out are valid points to consider when purchasing either device.
I am not sure how you are determining that most people will never use FM radio player and transmitter. My understanding is (from other people's comments) that people who own Neuros do use the FM transmitter to play it in cars and other radios. It is also nice and something that I would use - to record an MP3 off of FM radio, or if I like the song [on the radio] ask Neuros to remember it to remind me during next sync. I don't see why most people would never use these.
Well, if you define "common things" = "whatever iPod/Apple offers" than there is no argument. But I think an FM transmitter and recording off of FM radio is something that I would commonly use if I decided to purchase Neuros (which I am considering). So, it would be a "common thing" to me, but yet impossible with an iPod. Obviously, this is not the only factor - there are others like you and other posters pointed out.
As I understand, it is bigger than iPod with the HD attached, but with an added bonus (as others reported) that the HD is a regular laptop HD; so you can attach 80GB (or any other) model if you really wanted to. One thing to also keep in mind is that when you get the $230 backpack model, you can remove the HD for jogging, and other lightweight activities and it will operate off of flash memory. As I said in a reply to another post, if this flash memory is removable, so I can replace it with the storage capacity that I want, then the weight/size would be less of an issue overall.
I think because you can record off of it, or you can ask Neuros to remember the song you like, so it reminds you of it during the next sync. Also, it has the FM transmitter so you can play it on any FM radio without any [required] connections on the radio or the portable player. If it works as advertized like that, and like people have been reporting, it sounds like a great feature to me.
You are right - it is heavier and bigger when HD is attached. On the other hand, the advantage (as others reported) is that it uses regular laptop HDs which makes it possible to attach any [size] HD you want or is available for laptops. Also, it is not clear to me whether it has a removable flash memory, so I can replace it with a bigger card. In that case, with HD removed, and relatively good flash size, makes the size/weight issue not as big a deal.
On the other side of things, I know Vorbis and Linux support is not a big selling point for general public (it is for me), but other features like FM radio playback and recording, FM transmitter, mircrophone are very nice.
People also said (responding to the story), there is a new version of Neuros coming out soon with a better featureset. I'm torn between what "better" means and what is available now. Also, others pointed out that iPod organizes better than this guy. So, to conclude, I am confused.
You bring up a valid point. Maybe if they included this ad/link in their setup tool (via browser/HTTP) it would not have brought this much backlash. Many people do need to set up their routers anyway.
Well, if they can turn it off with a "click" like that, and they do send a packet to the router to do so (as the manager admitted) then who's to say that they can't "turn it on" again with a similar packet? They could in theory start sending out these packets to some collection of IP addresses on DSL and cable networks in hopes of hitting their routers, turning on the "feature", and advertizing more spam.
Or, even better, who's to say that only Belkin can do it? Why can't spammers, Belkin partners/advertizers, or script kiddies with free time?
Next in line, Belkin telephones that automatically dial 1800-VIAGRA for you (every 8 hours) and if you don't specifically say "No Thanks" they go ahead and purchase the product for you? Good luck Belkin! Fortunately, router market is a competitive one and this type of shit won't fly easily.
Here is a better portable audio player that does the stuff the article talks about (and some more) and has a very reasonable price - Neuros.
- First off, it comes with a small memory card and optional 20GB HD attachment, so you can go light when you are jogging and attach HD for long road trips;
- Speaking of road trips, it has an FM transmitter that lets it play any audio on any FM radio without extra connections;
- It has FM radio, and is able to record directly from FM radio to MP3 format;
- It has a microphone and a voice recorder;
- It has full Linux support;
- It has Vorbis support;
- The whole package - the unit itself, software, USB cable, earphones, 20GB HD attachment, regular charger, car charger = $230.
That would be less than half the price of iPod. I would like to see some reviews of this baby.
While we are at it, I'd like to see the financial analysis of the reverse side as well. i.e., how much does it cost to install these systems (as they currently are), maintain and operate them, install security systems that trap abusers of these systems, maintain and monitor security systems, charge and prosecute abusers - vs. the benefit of these systems in the first place?
I'd like to see this kind of cost-benefit analysis vs. that taxpayer money being used for other methods of improving emergency response time - how about more emergency workers? more fire stations? better roads? wider and more lanes? roadside shoulders? better public transporation?
It seems that people accept that it's OK that gov't wants to exert control over population by any means possible, even if it means enacting (1) unreasonable laws, installing (2) unreasonable surveillance systems, and punishing those who violate 1 and get caught by 2. Meanwhile, the public interest gets lost somewhere in between discussing the improvements/additions to these installed systems and related laws, and arguing "good guys" vs. "bad guys" philosophy vis-a-vis this ideology.
I think RH is shooting itself in the foot by dropping the most popular Linux distro and associated brand, support and backing. Isn't this what made them popular and put them in a leadership position in the first place? They are assuming that enterprise will simply fork over more and more money but they may not enjoy the same rooted admin and developer support as they did in the beginning (even with their many screw-ups). This effect may not show in the short term but will definitely be a factor after some time.
I am also confused as to why RH cannot keep providing the RedHat Linux product on the shelf or via paid download. i.e., they could have introduced the free, community-supported Fedora, but still offer RedHat Linux (as a product) for customers who wished to pay for it. It seems to me that there is a big part of market that cannot afford RHEL that RedHat simply chose to disregard. This is losing market share and does absolutely no good. On the financial side of things, advanced desktop users who want free software would choose Fedora, while paying customers, including small to medium size businesses, educational establishments, and other cash-strapped organizations would happily purchase few copies of RedHat Linux per year. I don't understand why selling more software that they work on and test and develop anyway would be causing them to lose money if they followed this route.
On Novell/SUSE side my hope is that Novell keeps SUSE as a desktop distro. Remember SUSE's ambitions for corporate desktop, server, and home desktop? Well, Novell has very little experience with anything desktop, anything consistently successful that is. Novell knows their bread and butter, they have their customers and they are offering upgrade path to them as well as trying to attract similar new potential customers. Where does this leave SUSE as a distro? Well, according to the Novell webcast regarding the acquisition, they are not planning to compete against Microsoft in any way, desktop or server. This is disappointing in many ways as SUSE probably had the most promise for such competition on both desktop and server. So, is Novell going to continue and stay true to SUSE's established desktop strategy? Given Novell's statements, past product line, and experience, many are placing bets against that. Only time will tell, but I sure do hope they keep the product.
There's also a question of SUSE's desktop (literally) software. SUSE has been a major supporter of KDE team and their development efforts, both financially, and by action. Novell's acquisition of Ximian and their product does bring up a conflict of interest in this regard. Will we see SUSE desktop move to GNOME? Will Novell keep SUSE's prior committments/engagements with KDE? These are types of questions that Novell has to answer and do so fast; meaning, these are types of issues (among others) that they should have thought of before announcing the deal. And they should make their stance and their plans clear in these regards.
Having said all this now, how much advantage is Novell going to take of the market that RedHat simply discarded? How will they appeal to small business and consumer desktop market? Will they do so at all? Their webcast did not address any of these issues, and they need to make that clear to everyone pretty soon, IMO.
Quite frankly, I am worried with this acquisition. Novell is not really known for their desktop software presence and, I am afraid, they will not make such committment with SUSE's product either. When they start running short on cash and investors start demanding numbers, what are they going to stick to? Server, server software, eDirectory, rest of their bread and butter solutions, while ditching their desktop product, and giving into MS' dominance. Not like they haven't done that before.
I'd rather SUSE stayed separate - they were considering going public at some point - and Novell gotten into agreement a la UnitedLinux. Would have been great for both companies, AND their respective customers.
So there's still time to get a patent on storing and updating preferences over the rest of the Internet.
OK, "Patent attorneys" ---> I'm feeling lucky!
Shell? What shell? To see a better image of the thing I have to agree to an "image license agreement." In a small box that I can't even scroll and see what it says. Motorola has gone nuts. Nobody is relying on copyrights anymore. They want to suck every little blood drop out of fair use.
Good luck, Motorola, with your "proprietary intellectual property". What kind of a proprietary intellectual property is a picture of a phone?
Maybe after you get that phone, it will have a printed license agreement inside the box that you agree that you don't say anything bad about the phone or your license to use it is terminated.
Aha! We found the source of the problem! You are telling others what they should like and what they should not like! What they should use and not use. What is "ugly" and what is "cool".
/. troll! No further comment.
Gimme a break! I think I'll be in charge of what I like and what I need, not some
I see the opposite. I am willing to try out different desktop environments, window managers, play with [real] customization, until I find the one(s) that I like; doesn't matter Linux, OS X or anything else; after awhile try new stuff again and adjust them to my new tastes. I am not stuck on one thing.
My fear is, if I do make a switch, then I will be stuck mostly to whatever Apple decides is good for me. Although, again, as I said, availability of X changes this balance greatly and hopefully for the better and more competition.
I have looked at http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/expose/ but it does not say anything about multiple virtual desktops. It says it "arranges" windows in some manner to reduce clutter when too many of them are open.
I don't know what you mean by "customize" but either you haven't seen real "customization" and/or didn't completely understand what I meant.
That's a problem - you deciding what I have found or not. I definitely have found the desktop environment that I like, that can be customized and changed any way I want. And, once in a while, I reserve the right to use others as well. If you don't like it, well I wasn't talking for you, only for myself.
I've looked at it from a little different perspective. I mean I know OS X looks good, is extremely easy to use, and is very well integrated. I have actually considered getting one of those sexy laptops, but when it comes down to it, I figure, novelty and "looking good" wears off, and it comes down to efficiency and personalization. I mean I'd rather spend few extra minutes trying to get bluetooth to work right (which I did) rather than give up things like:
- multiple virtual desktops (as article mentioned); I've been hooked on this since I started using Linux few years ago and I simply cannot give this up. Single desktop environment makes me feel claustrophobic as I need to (and do) switch between variety of tasks or task groups often while keeping them alive in their state where I left them off. Single desktop in this case becomes a big mess.
- ability to customize look and feel, themes, window/keyboard/mouse behavior to my tastes and usage preferences which many times are not the default chosen by someone else.
- many applications I've gotten used to are not available on OS X or equivalents cost more money. As an example, I am not a graphic designer, but I do use GIMP sometimes. I'd feel less likely to make the switch if I had to shell out few hundred to Adobe or someone else. Although, I have to admit, Apple is making this more attractive by enabling X install in the update (per article).
- sometimes I get tired of one window manager or a desktop environment, and use another one for a day or two; just for kicks, just for a little change-up. I lose that freedom with those "integrated" environments.
There are other smaller things that make my life "better and easier" when I have more choices. And again, I'd rather extend little extra energy into making sure I get compatible hardware than give up those benefits. Mind you, Linux hardware support is pretty good, and most hardware just works without needing any driver installation or configuration on major distros.
If the USA PATRIOT Act stands ... terrorists would have won.
Or Los Angeles Lakers.
Nonsense. If you actually look up bugtraq reports by @stake, you will see all OS X versions 10.2.8 and below are vulnerable. Here, here and here.
Not necessarily. It depends on what the interests of the parties involved are. More "high-tech" processes can, in fact, give you more guarantees that election results have not been tampered with. How about something like following:
0. When starting a vote process, assign a unique one-way hash to each voter;
1. Have voters vote electronically, and record their electronic vote record in a database;
2. Have the voting machine (or the server) generate a paper trail of each vote and keep those papers separately;
3. Give the voter the paper confirmation "receipt" of the vote record with their hash on it that they deposit in a safe box right before they exit the voting area.
Count votes from (1) and certify the election. In case of any challenges, or any reasons to believe that electronic results were tampered with, do a recount on (2) and (3), compare and reconcile any differences. As long as different groups/parties are in charge of (1), (2), and (3), you can easily tell where tampering occurred, and how.
Now, there are a lot of different variations and ways to accomplish such redundancy to make sure tampering with elections is extremely hard if not impossible. This means that we can use technology to our advantage, not to score political points, and enable backdoors for tampering with results. Again, as I stated in the beginning, it depends what the interests of the parties involved are.
Also, consider that pure paper ballot voting is prone to tampering as well. Realize that paper ballots are not marked in any way, they are contained in boxes that are usually guarded, that only very few people have access to. This creates an excellent opportunity for "dumping" extra ballots without anybody's knowledge, and no ability to recover from such "dumping" if it indeed occurs.
I was thinking like that too. Hey, look, if this holds we'll have:
- sharing source code is unconstitutional (under GPL);
- DMCA is constitutional (outlawing public activities that are not copyrightable);
- next, I'll be wondering if laughing at all this is constitutional or not.
I followed your (well, Darl's) logic that you outlined here. But even if I do follow and blindly believe its assumptions, I still see a big hole:
SCO says it contributed to GPLed code but didn't know and mean to. OK, SCO gets their copyrights back (without GPL restrictions) since they didn't mean to GPL their copyrighted code (and eventually public domain as they argue).
Other GPLed software contributors also contributed to the GPLed programs while still retaining copyrights; but, again, they didn't mean for their contributions to become public domain. So, then, they copyrights should go back to individual contributors just like SCO's code would.
The point being that - you cannot accidentally (re)assign or otherwise get rid of the copyright protections of your own work. i.e., if you didn't mean to contribute your own copyrighted works willfully, but it happenned by accident without your knowledge (like SCO claims), then the copyrights go back to their original owners (also like SCO claims). So, developers who contributed to GPL knowingly, would accidentally be putting their copyrighted works in public domain, which they never meant to do.
Yeah, it's a conspiracy theory, but I'm not sure what you mean by they could have easily won. If you read the details of the case, they - Microsoft - were not allowed to present any prior art evidence in front of the jury (the judge determined it would be too "prejudicial"). That's why they lost. But then Microsoft didn't just hand over cash, they appealed to be able to present prior art evidence that they were denied in the original trial.
Unless you claim that there's some grand conspiracy going on that Microsoft actually appealed to have the ruling certified by a higher court, while deliberately presenting evidence in a "bad" manner, while (again) pushing underground negotiations to acquire Eolas after the lawsuit has ended, while (again) secretly funding Eolas or paying for its lawyers to prolong and iron out the outcome.
But all this is up there with landing on the moon conspiracy thing. It's just too unrealistic.