Linux is good, but if you honestly think it ought to be the OS of every computer from the largest supercomputer to the tiniest embedded system, you're officially worse than Microsoft.
Why would anyone care what OS the Slurpee dispenser is running?
So barring that what can they do? They could try and blacklist GPL programmers and call us all socialists or communists or something =) Unfortunately for them, McCarthy already tried that and look where it got him.
You seem to forget that the McCarthy Communist Inquistion was successful and devastating for quite a while.
The GPL Community needs a Joseph N. Welch to stand up IMMEDIATELY and ask, "Have you left no sense of decency?" before this is allowed to go any further.
Then, we look back another 15 years. CP/M is the best OS available.
Best OS available for home and small business microcomputers, at least. Unix and VMS, among others, existed and were far better.
Then, to 1995. OS/2 comes out. Windows 95 comes out.
OS/2 predated Win95 by around 8 years. Do you mean OS/2 Warp 3 specifically?
>OS/2 is good, Windows 95 is junk.
Win95 may be junk, but it was leaps and bounds beyond the DOS/Win3.1 combination that preceded it on the typical PC. I still run Win95 on my laptop.
Windows 95 sells for under $100. OS/2 sells for
a few hundred.
That's not why OS/2 Warp died. It died because it had no support for Win32 binaries, had minimal support for multimedia and if you wanted a TCP/IP stack, you had to pay $100 extra and get Warp Connect. That still wouldn't get you a web browser that could render tables in 1996, though, because one didn't exist.
There is no 'correct' way to render HTML, nor is any browser under any obligation to display a page as the author(s) 'intended'. The end-user can change the appearance of a page through CSS, or browser settings, and it's all allowed as Fair Use modification of your copyrighted material for personal use, and Smart Tags are allowed by the same principle.
If it were up to Slash-holes like you, blind people wouldn't be allowed you use text-to-speech converters on web pages, because the web page was intended to be 'seen, not heard...'
Microsoft complains that the GNU Public License places unfair restrictions on how code may be developed... and their response to this is to release a license that places unfair restrictions on how code may be developed???
If the auto industry were receptive to adding car features at the government's whim, and the government were interested in enforcing speed limit laws with a hammer of justice, then the cars we buy would already be mechanically stunted to prevent them from going any faster than 65 mph.
Yet, I can get above 90 mph in my cheapo economy car.
The article says nothing that suggests the connection between the desktop (tray-top?) and the plane's satellite link 'router' will be wireless. Since the submitter thought it appropriate to speculate, I will too -- there'll simply be an Ethernet jack built into the armrest, right next to the headphone jack and the recline button.
All the "FAA regulations prohibit this"-type comments ought to be modded down -1 Offtopic.
By your logic, I shouldn't be allowed to write a song until I have a thorough understanding of the physics of sound.
You don't need to know every minute detail before you can start applying concepts at a high level. Beginning programmers are always going to produce sloppy code, no matter whether it's in Java or BASIC or Fortran or pure machine code.
Re:Interesting, but I wouldn't want it...
on
DSLBlaster?
·
· Score: 1
1) Transformers. They furk the signal up completely. You can't get a signal 'upstream' from a transformer any faster than 9600 bits/sec.
That might be true for the smaller Decepticons like Rumble & Frenzy, but a larger one customized for data transmission (Soundwave, for instance) can probably handle bandwidth similar to a fiber bundle.
Gee, Netscape is dominating the 10-15% of web browser usage that isn't MSIE. Many large websites are no longer even designing pages to display properly in Netscape.
I wouldn't say they've lost the war, but they're certainly not winning.
If you're thinking from a programmatic angle--"I want to run GNUCash to balance my checkbook"--then the software is accessible to anyone that wants to use GNUCash on a standalone basis. [Barring weird system calls, etc.] But you're right--in a developer's standpoint, it is inaccessible for those who don't choose to develop under the GPL.
Well, in that case, GNUCash still seems to have less restrictions on it than your average closed-source product. The only way you'll get the opportunity to develop new code based on MS Money, for example, is if you get hired by Microsoft to write a new version of MS Money for them.
Ballmer is using arguments which are applicable to developers and using them to breed FUD in the user base, which is irresponsible. He needs to be called out on his statements.
McDonalds is putting poison in their hamburgers. Burger King knows that what McDonalds is doing could be harmful to the public at large, but instead of drawing attention to the problem they say "We don't think McDonalds burgers merit discussion. We'll let our own burgers do the talking."
When someone does something which could hurt the public, whether it's spreading FUD about Linux or poisoning fast food, those who know the truth have a responsibility to come forward and point out what is wrong. Every time a Microsoft exec tells a lie about the GPL's terms, RMS has an obligation to point out exactly why the MS statement is untrue. Playing the "I'm not going to dignify that with a response" game will NEVER get you a win in the court of public opinion, which is the venue that Open Source desperately NEEDS a victory.
Open source is not available to commercial companies. The way the license is written, if you use any open-source software, you have to make the rest of your software open source.
This may be well-worded, but is still completely false. Even disregarding the ambiguous definition of what it means to 'use' software, what Ballmer is saying by 'you have to make the rest of your software open source' is that if you use open source software for project A, but not projects B or C, you have to make all of projects A, B, and C open source.
There is not a single software license I can think of for which such a claim holds true. Certainly not GPL.
The building should have several spires made of invisible white gold, and if there are chairs inside they should be comfortable and girls should not be allowed to chew gum or twirl their hair.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux is good, but if you honestly think it ought to be the OS of every computer from the largest supercomputer to the tiniest embedded system, you're officially worse than Microsoft.
Why would anyone care what OS the Slurpee dispenser is running?
Look. MSN and Outlook Express are two separate applications. Microsoft is telling users if they want to use one, they have to use the other as well.
That's software bundling and that's monopolistic.
Are you claiming MS controls the e-mail market?
Not yet they don't, but they seem to be working on it...
-Poot
(PS: IANAL)
You seem to forget that the McCarthy Communist Inquistion was successful and devastating for quite a while.
The GPL Community needs a Joseph N. Welch to stand up IMMEDIATELY and ask, "Have you left no sense of decency?" before this is allowed to go any further.
Best OS available for home and small business microcomputers, at least. Unix and VMS, among others, existed and were far better.
Then, to 1995. OS/2 comes out. Windows 95 comes out. OS/2 predated Win95 by around 8 years. Do you mean OS/2 Warp 3 specifically? >OS/2 is good, Windows 95 is junk. Win95 may be junk, but it was leaps and bounds beyond the DOS/Win3.1 combination that preceded it on the typical PC. I still run Win95 on my laptop.
Windows 95 sells for under $100. OS/2 sells for a few hundred.
That's not why OS/2 Warp died. It died because it had no support for Win32 binaries, had minimal support for multimedia and if you wanted a TCP/IP stack, you had to pay $100 extra and get Warp Connect. That still wouldn't get you a web browser that could render tables in 1996, though, because one didn't exist.
The real world doesn't work like that, dork. The software industry is not a meritocracy.
YANAL, why are you trying to give legal advice?
IANAL either, but...
There is no 'correct' way to render HTML, nor is any browser under any obligation to display a page as the author(s) 'intended'. The end-user can change the appearance of a page through CSS, or browser settings, and it's all allowed as Fair Use modification of your copyrighted material for personal use, and Smart Tags are allowed by the same principle.
If it were up to Slash-holes like you, blind people wouldn't be allowed you use text-to-speech converters on web pages, because the web page was intended to be 'seen, not heard...'
Of course not. They just want you to debug it for them.
I was so afraid that I was going to see the goatse.cx guy on that results page...
Microsoft complains that the GNU Public License places unfair restrictions on how code may be developed... and their response to this is to release a license that places unfair restrictions on how code may be developed???
If the auto industry were receptive to adding car features at the government's whim, and the government were interested in enforcing speed limit laws with a hammer of justice, then the cars we buy would already be mechanically stunted to prevent them from going any faster than 65 mph.
Yet, I can get above 90 mph in my cheapo economy car.
Do you have any test results that "prove" this test's results are flawed, or are you just parroting generally-accepted preconceptions about each OS?
I can practically get a cell phone in the US the size of a stick of gum already. How much smaller do they need to be?
The article says nothing that suggests the connection between the desktop (tray-top?) and the plane's satellite link 'router' will be wireless. Since the submitter thought it appropriate to speculate, I will too -- there'll simply be an Ethernet jack built into the armrest, right next to the headphone jack and the recline button.
All the "FAA regulations prohibit this"-type comments ought to be modded down -1 Offtopic.
By your logic, I shouldn't be allowed to write a song until I have a thorough understanding of the physics of sound.
You don't need to know every minute detail before you can start applying concepts at a high level. Beginning programmers are always going to produce sloppy code, no matter whether it's in Java or BASIC or Fortran or pure machine code.
Let's say my source architecture uses interrupt-based I/O. My target uses memory-mapped. Will this translator be able to handle that?
To be honest, translating one CPU's version of 'CMP R1, R2' to another's doesn't sound like it will user in a renaissance of anything.
-Poot
HI BEABLE!
You misspelled "certain explodable ports". PLOMK!
That might be true for the smaller Decepticons like Rumble & Frenzy, but a larger one customized for data transmission (Soundwave, for instance) can probably handle bandwidth similar to a fiber bundle.
Gee, Netscape is dominating the 10-15% of web browser usage that isn't MSIE. Many large websites are no longer even designing pages to display properly in Netscape.
I wouldn't say they've lost the war, but they're certainly not winning.
Well, in that case, GNUCash still seems to have less restrictions on it than your average closed-source product. The only way you'll get the opportunity to develop new code based on MS Money, for example, is if you get hired by Microsoft to write a new version of MS Money for them.
Ballmer is using arguments which are applicable to developers and using them to breed FUD in the user base, which is irresponsible. He needs to be called out on his statements.
Companies do not have an inalienable right to sell products.
Government should be beholden to the people it represents, not to companies.
Here's a different scenario:
McDonalds is putting poison in their hamburgers. Burger King knows that what McDonalds is doing could be harmful to the public at large, but instead of drawing attention to the problem they say "We don't think McDonalds burgers merit discussion. We'll let our own burgers do the talking."
When someone does something which could hurt the public, whether it's spreading FUD about Linux or poisoning fast food, those who know the truth have a responsibility to come forward and point out what is wrong. Every time a Microsoft exec tells a lie about the GPL's terms, RMS has an obligation to point out exactly why the MS statement is untrue. Playing the "I'm not going to dignify that with a response" game will NEVER get you a win in the court of public opinion, which is the venue that Open Source desperately NEEDS a victory.
This may be well-worded, but is still completely false. Even disregarding the ambiguous definition of what it means to 'use' software, what Ballmer is saying by 'you have to make the rest of your software open source' is that if you use open source software for project A, but not projects B or C, you have to make all of projects A, B, and C open source.
There is not a single software license I can think of for which such a claim holds true. Certainly not GPL.
Did you even read the interview, stupid? The context in which Ballmer said "Linux is a cancer" is RIGHT THERE for you to evaluate.
ATOM.
-Archimedes Pootonium
I don't see the word "criminal" anywhere in that sentence, stupid.
There's a BIG difference between preventative action and punitive action.