The problem is that "client/server" computing messed up the concept in many people's minds. A lot of people tend to assume that the server is the remote machine, while the client is local machine. This is not always the case. Servers are systems that provide services to clients, and clients are always in charge, regardless of whether they are remote or local.
The X server provides display services to the client, and thus runs on the system with the display, usually local to the user. If you are running the application remotely, then the X client will be remote.
The health care system CAN work in a free market economy. Unfortunately, the US does not have a free market economy. It is instead a managed market economy, that has a market system, but is encumbered by government intervention.
The core of the US problem is that there is a disconnect between the consumer and the producer. We don't buy our health care, our insurance company, via our employer, does. We don't care how much it costs, because we pay the same no matter what. Hell, we don't even know how much it costs. The insurance companies are the real consumers of the system. It might not be as bad if we actually shopped around for insurance, but we don't, our employers do. Two levels of indirection. We don't even see the money going to pay for it all, because it never hits our paychecks. Add to that the massive government intrusion into the process, and it's no wonder the system is broken.
There are solutions to the problem, but they are not simple one-step solutions, because it is not a simple one-cause problem. Certainly handing over the reins to a massive bureacracy is not it. Anyone who thinks so doesn't know the first thing about economics.
p.s. Adam Smith is old school. He had a lot of very good insights, but the field of economics did not come to close with him. Start reading some modern economists like Friedman, Hayek, von Mises, etc.
And virtually every car I passed on the way honked at me. Why?
Because you were walking down the middle of the street? Seriously, NO ONE honks at pedestrians on the sidewalk. I've lived in three major cities, and NO ONE does this.
Nonsense. Perhaps it's the terminology that confuses you. X servers run on the client, while X clients run on the server. There is no need to run an X server on a server.
This is the same argument Trolltech uses when people tell it to make Qt GPL-only. "Don't sell a proprietary version to proprietary developers like me," people say, "make it GPL then charge for everyone for support." Trolltech's answer was that kind of business model encourages the production of software that needs support. This is in sharp contrast to the current Qt which has a clean well documented API.
One rule of sales is to not denigrate the other guy. It's an important rule, and it makes more sales than you would otherwise think. But that's not what this ad is doing. Instead it is positively promoting Apple. It is not attacking Microsoft, it is presenting the Mac a solution to common computer problems. That these computer problems are only common on the OS with 95% marketshare is irrelevant.
Hungry? Come to our restaurant.
Automobile engine knocking? Buy our high octane gasoline.
...but i still think that OpenSSH funding should be more important than such political quarrels.
So how come no one's blaming Theo then? If it is true that his attitude lost him his funding (which isn't demonstrated, btw), then let's blame the attitude. You don't tell someone to fuck off and then expect them to fund you.
I agree. While NFS is nice, it does have some problems, particularly in the area of security. Samba just a big reverse engineered hack. A new modern network file system for ALL operating systems would be great.
It doesn't matter. He is in denial. He has been told by too many people that he can't do it. It doesn't matter how much he trusts me and my technical expertise, there are too many idiots on the other side saying he can't.
So what? Their actual installed base is much much higher than five years ago. When the market itself is growing, you don't need to take the whole pie to grow. Sheesh.
Besides, Apple's goal is not to dominate the desktop.
A friend of mine hates Windows, but says he can't switch because he has thousands of dollars invested in Windows-only software. What software is this? Photo and video editing...
He is one person who wants a Mac, but has been convinced by Microsoft/Dell/PC-World that he is unable to. There are lots of people like this. They've been led to believe that they can't switch because: it's too expensive, it doesn't do what you want, it's hard to find software, you don't wear the right sandals, you don't belong to the correct political party, etc, etc.
Some people have such an irrational visceral hatred towards Wal-Mart that any sort of neutral point of view is going to look biased to them. To those people, the current article is indeed just like the your quote.
Not throwing Bill Gates in jail is proof that the DOJ is pro-Microsoft. Failure to impeach Bush is proof that there is no democracy in the US. An NPOV article on Wal-Mart is proof that Wikipedia is a corporate stooge.
The only reason for all this spam is that it still pays.
Here's the funny thing. Joe will receive a spam that has been carefully constructed as to appear to be coming from his mother. Why the fsck would he believe it? Is he so stupid that he would buy viagra and hoodia from his mother? The answer, unfortunately, is yes...
"Dear Son,
I am so sorry to hear about your injury. Have you considered **Ci@L15**? My arthritis is acting up, I think I will LAST ALL WEEKEND! When will you come down next, because PLEASE THE CHICAS!
Since I run a "tight ship", always knowing what my system is running, I don't bother filtering outgoing. But then again, I don't run Windows. If I ran Windows I would NOT now what my system is running, making it impossible to run a tight ship. But I wouldn't trust the Microsoft firewall. Instead I would get an external firewall and filter outgoing packets.
Your argument applies to the Windows Vista Home(tm) edition, it does not apply to Windows Vista Professional(tm), Windows Vista Enterprise(tm), Windows Vista Server 2007(tm) editions. Or whatever their names are going to be.
Corporate IT pukes who whine about security by default deserve the insecurity they'll get shipped. These guys aren't your grandma trying to configure the firewall so she can continue to send viruses to all her friends, it's about trained *professionals* who should know better.
Moving from SunOS to Solaris had NOTHING to do with GNOME. Hell, I doubt GNOME was even a project at the time. Instead the move was about changing to a SysV UNIX instead of the traditional BSD UNIX, because AT&T told them to.
Those small specialty stores are still around. In fact a small bicycle shop is just down the street from me. But I guess people would much rather shop at Wal-Mart and bitch about it being big, cold and impersonal.
Mod parent up! There is no excuse for Torvald's rude boorish behavior. To run with your analogy, Linus isn't acting like a world-class athlete, he's acting like a WWF goon showing off on camera.
You're arguing that Linux has more performance than Windows. Pretty much everyone in the known universe agrees with tha. However, the performance differences between Linux and FreeBSD are insignificant. Artificial antiseptic benchmarks might be able to tell the difference, but real world usage can't.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that "client/server" computing messed up the concept in many people's minds. A lot of people tend to assume that the server is the remote machine, while the client is local machine. This is not always the case. Servers are systems that provide services to clients, and clients are always in charge, regardless of whether they are remote or local.
The X server provides display services to the client, and thus runs on the system with the display, usually local to the user. If you are running the application remotely, then the X client will be remote.
The health care system CAN work in a free market economy. Unfortunately, the US does not have a free market economy. It is instead a managed market economy, that has a market system, but is encumbered by government intervention.
The core of the US problem is that there is a disconnect between the consumer and the producer. We don't buy our health care, our insurance company, via our employer, does. We don't care how much it costs, because we pay the same no matter what. Hell, we don't even know how much it costs. The insurance companies are the real consumers of the system. It might not be as bad if we actually shopped around for insurance, but we don't, our employers do. Two levels of indirection. We don't even see the money going to pay for it all, because it never hits our paychecks. Add to that the massive government intrusion into the process, and it's no wonder the system is broken.
There are solutions to the problem, but they are not simple one-step solutions, because it is not a simple one-cause problem. Certainly handing over the reins to a massive bureacracy is not it. Anyone who thinks so doesn't know the first thing about economics.
p.s. Adam Smith is old school. He had a lot of very good insights, but the field of economics did not come to close with him. Start reading some modern economists like Friedman, Hayek, von Mises, etc.
And virtually every car I passed on the way honked at me. Why?
Because you were walking down the middle of the street? Seriously, NO ONE honks at pedestrians on the sidewalk. I've lived in three major cities, and NO ONE does this.
Nonsense. Perhaps it's the terminology that confuses you. X servers run on the client, while X clients run on the server. There is no need to run an X server on a server.
Mod parent up. Servers should NOT be running X servers. In fact, you should not run an X server on any system with untrusted accounts.
This is the same argument Trolltech uses when people tell it to make Qt GPL-only. "Don't sell a proprietary version to proprietary developers like me," people say, "make it GPL then charge for everyone for support." Trolltech's answer was that kind of business model encourages the production of software that needs support. This is in sharp contrast to the current Qt which has a clean well documented API.
One rule of sales is to not denigrate the other guy. It's an important rule, and it makes more sales than you would otherwise think. But that's not what this ad is doing. Instead it is positively promoting Apple. It is not attacking Microsoft, it is presenting the Mac a solution to common computer problems. That these computer problems are only common on the OS with 95% marketshare is irrelevant.
Hungry? Come to our restaurant.
Automobile engine knocking? Buy our high octane gasoline.
Computer crashing? Buy our Mac.
...but i still think that OpenSSH funding should be more important than such political quarrels.
So how come no one's blaming Theo then? If it is true that his attitude lost him his funding (which isn't demonstrated, btw), then let's blame the attitude. You don't tell someone to fuck off and then expect them to fund you.
I agree. While NFS is nice, it does have some problems, particularly in the area of security. Samba just a big reverse engineered hack. A new modern network file system for ALL operating systems would be great.
My point is, some people WILL believe it. Not me. Not you. But there are people who will.
It doesn't matter. He is in denial. He has been told by too many people that he can't do it. It doesn't matter how much he trusts me and my technical expertise, there are too many idiots on the other side saying he can't.
So what? Their actual installed base is much much higher than five years ago. When the market itself is growing, you don't need to take the whole pie to grow. Sheesh.
Besides, Apple's goal is not to dominate the desktop.
A friend of mine hates Windows, but says he can't switch because he has thousands of dollars invested in Windows-only software. What software is this? Photo and video editing...
He is one person who wants a Mac, but has been convinced by Microsoft/Dell/PC-World that he is unable to. There are lots of people like this. They've been led to believe that they can't switch because: it's too expensive, it doesn't do what you want, it's hard to find software, you don't wear the right sandals, you don't belong to the correct political party, etc, etc.
Precisely. It's like immigration. Obey the law and get penalized.
Some people have such an irrational visceral hatred towards Wal-Mart that any sort of neutral point of view is going to look biased to them. To those people, the current article is indeed just like the your quote.
Not throwing Bill Gates in jail is proof that the DOJ is pro-Microsoft.
Failure to impeach Bush is proof that there is no democracy in the US.
An NPOV article on Wal-Mart is proof that Wikipedia is a corporate stooge.
The only reason for all this spam is that it still pays.
Here's the funny thing. Joe will receive a spam that has been carefully constructed as to appear to be coming from his mother. Why the fsck would he believe it? Is he so stupid that he would buy viagra and hoodia from his mother? The answer, unfortunately, is yes...
"Dear Son,
I am so sorry to hear about your injury. Have you considered **Ci@L15**? My arthritis is acting up, I think I will LAST ALL WEEKEND! When will you come down next, because PLEASE THE CHICAS!
Love,
Mum"
Since I run a "tight ship", always knowing what my system is running, I don't bother filtering outgoing. But then again, I don't run Windows. If I ran Windows I would NOT now what my system is running, making it impossible to run a tight ship. But I wouldn't trust the Microsoft firewall. Instead I would get an external firewall and filter outgoing packets.
Your argument applies to the Windows Vista Home(tm) edition, it does not apply to Windows Vista Professional(tm), Windows Vista Enterprise(tm), Windows Vista Server 2007(tm) editions. Or whatever their names are going to be.
Corporate IT pukes who whine about security by default deserve the insecurity they'll get shipped. These guys aren't your grandma trying to configure the firewall so she can continue to send viruses to all her friends, it's about trained *professionals* who should know better.
Moving from SunOS to Solaris had NOTHING to do with GNOME. Hell, I doubt GNOME was even a project at the time. Instead the move was about changing to a SysV UNIX instead of the traditional BSD UNIX, because AT&T told them to.
Those small specialty stores are still around. In fact a small bicycle shop is just down the street from me. But I guess people would much rather shop at Wal-Mart and bitch about it being big, cold and impersonal.
Mod parent up! There is no excuse for Torvald's rude boorish behavior. To run with your analogy, Linus isn't acting like a world-class athlete, he's acting like a WWF goon showing off on camera.
You're arguing that Linux has more performance than Windows. Pretty much everyone in the known universe agrees with tha. However, the performance differences between Linux and FreeBSD are insignificant. Artificial antiseptic benchmarks might be able to tell the difference, but real world usage can't.
Alternately, it could also be South Bay kernel-fu (Santa Clara) versus East Bay kernel-fu (Berkeley)...
I don't know for sure about 2.6.x, but I am certain that Linux 2.4.x used COW for fork.
According to Torvalds, that means linux-2.4.x must have been written by "incompetent idiots."
Most people have a sense of humor.
Calling someone an "incompetent idiot" is not humor. The FreeBSD and Mach developers aren't laughing because Torvalds didn't say anything funny.