What if the development effort adopts the Intel-based free compiler? I heard it compiles faster than GCC anyway, and I'm sure they wouldn't make a fuss about calling it Intellinux.
SoftImage is a Canadian-based CGI software company that was bought out by MS, plugged to Hollywood to be used in such films as Jurassic Park, and then promptly sold off. MS has since sold SoftImage and has no control of the code they write. It seems that the code in question was actually being used by SoftImage before it was bought out by MS. (although under license). This just seems like a red herring to shovel dirt on MS over an inherited problem from buying out SoftImage. Seems like the/. crowd is getting desperate for MS dirt to me...
I think they meant that HPQ will be going bankrupt in two years time, hence the 150K employees getting sacked. But don't worry, I believe Carla and Cappy will be well-imbursed for their troubles.
Basically, you're going to spend as much as you discern the value of security to your system. Given that your webserver is repeatedly being compromised, your needs and concerns have been raised due to the nature of being hacked. You can elect to pay a run-of-the-mill techie to do a security audit for your system, but in the end you are going to get what you pay for. If you take the cheap route out, you are going to end up with an incomplete solution. I'm not saying every layman out there is going to do a shoddy job, but unless they do security analysis for a living, then their experience is going to be quite limited. You could take your car to the neighborhood mechanic, and he might fix the problem you're having, but if you take it to the dealership, they are going to have an intricate knowledge of all of the parts in the car and how they work together. Their narrower focus allows them to have a deeper knowledge of the subject.
It's called electrical stimulus. In 1984 they just used a cage with rats who crave eyeballs wrapped around your face. I'm sure after a few trials, you'd think about moving, but refrain from doing so...
Linus wouldn't know how to fly one though. He's too busy scanning through all of the kernel updates.
this is what happens when...
on
A Loki Timeline
·
· Score: 1
people find themselves suddenly out of a job and way too much time on their hands.
if only they could do something cooler, like add all of their source into sourceforge for the world to build upon.
Re:I know Linus doesn't like it...
on
Linus Does Not Scale
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That is why the CVS tree must have a code review process before is accepted. CVS is only part of the solution, and when you are only using 1/10th of the solution, you should expect to get 9/10ths more confusion.
Having one person own the entire "tree" of code slows the development process to a crawl. Linux will never be able to bring functionality to the table as fast as Windows if everything has to go through one man. Do you think Bill Gates is sitting at his desk and reviewing Windows XP code? No. He has better things to do. Linus should realize this and work on implementing a development environment that will enable broader management.
I propose CVS is a part of this solution. I would also recommend code reviews by three independant parties before a branched segment of code becomes part of the main tree. Design reviews/requirements/UML should be designed before coding should ever take place. Yes, its a lot of overhead, but it allows for new people to fill your shoes when you grow weary of development. It also allows more people to have ownership of the entire project and enable faster development, with a broader level of quality control.
Or.... he's just really a control freak. I think he's taken this entire Linux explosion a little too overboard. Not that I'm saying that Linux is bad, but I think the idea of one guy owning the entire movement is wrong. Linux is a product for the masses, which should be OWNED by the masses. I don't deny Linus being a great programmer, but I think he has too much invested/personal stake in this project that is clouding his judgement.
The only way to take Linux to the next level is to professionalize the development effort to ensure an efficient and stable environment. Without these proper methodologies in place, Linux will just end up as unreliable as Windoze.
I just think this entire idea is amusing. He's only censoring himself from the rest of the world so we don't have to listen to his POV. He can happily send email out to me, and I'll never know, nor care.
Now, if we could only get the spammers and L3373 script kiddies to adopt this strategy!
Its funny that you can say Palm is the superior platform when the WinCE platform has a faster processor, more memory, and is just as expandable with new products coming out every day. With CompactFlash and PCMCIA support, the iPaq is going to kill the Palm with expandability.
I've owned both the Clie and the iPaq, and have to admit the iPaq is just too damn sexy, AND powerful to even be compared to the Clie. The Clie ended up being a toss-down to the girlfriend while I enjoy the benefits of the iPaq.
I really don't understand your complaint about the memory requirements with the relatively cheap prices on memory right now. (and considering your palm is permanently limited to the 2-8MBs it comes with out of the box, doesn't it just scream "640k ought to be enough for everybody" days?
I think the Palm's days are numbered... With the advent of Linux being used as an embedded OS for handhelds, and with Java support, who is going to need/want PalmOS? Sure, it was good for a time, but it hasn't done anything to make its own niche. If you want lots of features, use WinCE. If you want light-weight, go with a Linux machine.
If you've played the Quake port to the iPaq, you'd be wondering why this hasn't happened sooner. The graphics capability on the iPaq BLOWS the GBA away. Even with the GameShark, the GBA's screen is practically useless anywhere other than standing on the sun. Games, schmames. It's all in the development effort. If its easier to build games for XBox, the games will come. As that freaky voice guy said in Field of Dreams, 'If you build it, they will come'. If MS can one-up the GBA with better graphics capability, you'll be certain to see a catalogue of games grow behind it.
I'm just waiting for MS to buy out Nintendo and port all of the games to X-Paq/XBox/XPad. Maybe Sega had the right idea all along...
News for Nerds != Linux Developers
You'd be surprised to find that slashdot's user base has come a long way since it was first opened. Sorry, but all techies have invaded this place you thought was home. Blame it on commercialization or the slashdot effect, but the s-dot has become a mainstay of geeks everywhere, not just the Linux uber-geeks.
I wasn't saying MS has legal ground to do this, I was just outlining their reasons for the suit. It seems that people believe that MS is against the product Lindows is producing, but in reality, as far as MS is concerned, the more fragmented the Linux environment becomes, the sooner they win the war. If, Lindows is as it claims, a new OS, then the dilution of what is truly Linux has already begun.
Although MS has no more right to the word Windows as does Bob & Janes' Window Cleaning, they still have to protect the rights of their trademarks, "Microsoft Windows" et al. I'm not saying MS has exclusive rights to the word "windows" as it pertains to the tech-adopted sense of the word, but they do have the responsibility to protect their name against products which are trying to profit from the marketing that MS has paid for.
Since Lindows is boasting that they are going to simulate MS-Windows and can run MS-Windows applications, it could be construed that they are not using the generic term/definition of the word "Windows" as it relates to technology, but are hijacking the established trademark of Microsoft Windows to create brand confusion.
I honestly believe if they changed their name, the problem would quickly be resolved, and maybe, we'll get another Linux distro with WINE built-in.
Microsoft isn't trying to sue them to stop them from making their product. MS is suing to stop them from using their name "Lindows" which is a blatant rip-off of Windows. In order for MS to protect their IP, they have to defend their property from being diluted. I imagine if Lindows changed their name to Lindoors there wouldn't be a lawsuit. (of course maybe the chocolate company by the name Lindor might sue them:)
Anyway, what they are doing is perfectly legal. They're trying to make a business of that teeny segment of people that might in the slight chance want to run windows and linux on one platform.
I'm pretty sure DavidJones.com.au was doing this way before anyone else. (They even had classy cards, long before bluemountain ever rose from the bloody sea). It was quite funny, as they are a respectable retail outlet down in Australia (similar scale to Sears, sorry aussies), but all its site was really useful for was sending cool postcards of dalmatians or pointy hats.
Maybe they should change the pricing structure of Linux to $1 per install. This way it would be easy to track Linux usage in the market. Of course, this goes against the grain of the open-source movement. but hey, for market penetration, and world dominance, won't you chip in your buck?
The problem with mom&pop shops adopting linux is that they have the least amount of time to learn a new technology, let alone be interested in implementing one. They want something off the shelf that works immediately to fit their needs. Not something they need to tinker with and install a half-dozen software patches to ensure their video card works properly.
Until Linux has the application support and ease-of-use of Windows, there won't be a large flock of users knocking on its door. Linux is still a developer-oriented system. Its perks are that it allows the tech-savvy user to customize every nook and cranny of the environment, and to even recode and compile if desired. Windows is much easier to use, and will always have the AOL-crowd as customers until Linux matures on the ease-of-use front.
I don't think it was the stupid employees who only knew ASP that made all of those companies go bankrupt... I think it had more to do with the fact that their companies had no business plan and were giving their wares away for next to free.
asp or not, if you don't have a good product, you're going to go under.
Slashdot Mirror
What if the development effort adopts the Intel-based free compiler? I heard it compiles faster than GCC anyway, and I'm sure they wouldn't make a fuss about calling it Intellinux.
SoftImage is a Canadian-based CGI software company that was bought out by MS, plugged to Hollywood to be used in such films as Jurassic Park, and then promptly sold off. MS has since sold SoftImage and has no control of the code they write. It seems that the code in question was actually being used by SoftImage before it was bought out by MS. (although under license). This just seems like a red herring to shovel dirt on MS over an inherited problem from buying out SoftImage. Seems like the /. crowd is getting desperate for MS dirt to me...
I think they meant that HPQ will be going bankrupt in two years time, hence the 150K employees getting sacked. But don't worry, I believe Carla and Cappy will be well-imbursed for their troubles.
Basically, you're going to spend as much as you discern the value of security to your system. Given that your webserver is repeatedly being compromised, your needs and concerns have been raised due to the nature of being hacked. You can elect to pay a run-of-the-mill techie to do a security audit for your system, but in the end you are going to get what you pay for. If you take the cheap route out, you are going to end up with an incomplete solution. I'm not saying every layman out there is going to do a shoddy job, but unless they do security analysis for a living, then their experience is going to be quite limited.
You could take your car to the neighborhood mechanic, and he might fix the problem you're having, but if you take it to the dealership, they are going to have an intricate knowledge of all of the parts in the car and how they work together. Their narrower focus allows them to have a deeper knowledge of the subject.
video streams nicely over ADSL... This would be the telecom's best way to muscle into the cable market.
so THAT is how Jon Katz gets his reviews... I always wondered if he ever really did go to the theater or not.
This is freaking awesome! Now, if they only had an order form to BUY one now! I'd be all over that like a fat kid on a smartie.
actually, most of the people who use search engines are just looking for pr0n which doesn't inherently make them techies.
It's called electrical stimulus. In 1984 they just used a cage with rats who crave eyeballs wrapped around your face. I'm sure after a few trials, you'd think about moving, but refrain from doing so...
that with enough monkeys at enough terminals, that they could think up Linux?
Linus wouldn't know how to fly one though. He's too busy scanning through all of the kernel updates.
people find themselves suddenly out of a job and way too much time on their hands.
if only they could do something cooler, like add all of their source into sourceforge for the world to build upon.
That is why the CVS tree must have a code review process before is accepted. CVS is only part of the solution, and when you are only using 1/10th of the solution, you should expect to get 9/10ths more confusion.
Having one person own the entire "tree" of code slows the development process to a crawl. Linux will never be able to bring functionality to the table as fast as Windows if everything has to go through one man. Do you think Bill Gates is sitting at his desk and reviewing Windows XP code? No. He has better things to do. Linus should realize this and work on implementing a development environment that will enable broader management.
I propose CVS is a part of this solution. I would also recommend code reviews by three independant parties before a branched segment of code becomes part of the main tree. Design reviews/requirements/UML should be designed before coding should ever take place. Yes, its a lot of overhead, but it allows for new people to fill your shoes when you grow weary of development. It also allows more people to have ownership of the entire project and enable faster development, with a broader level of quality control.
Or.... he's just really a control freak. I think he's taken this entire Linux explosion a little too overboard. Not that I'm saying that Linux is bad, but I think the idea of one guy owning the entire movement is wrong. Linux is a product for the masses, which should be OWNED by the masses. I don't deny Linus being a great programmer, but I think he has too much invested/personal stake in this project that is clouding his judgement.
The only way to take Linux to the next level is to professionalize the development effort to ensure an efficient and stable environment. Without these proper methodologies in place, Linux will just end up as unreliable as Windoze.
I just think this entire idea is amusing. He's only censoring himself from the rest of the world so we don't have to listen to his POV. He can happily send email out to me, and I'll never know, nor care.
Now, if we could only get the spammers and L3373 script kiddies to adopt this strategy!
Its funny that you can say Palm is the superior platform when the WinCE platform has a faster processor, more memory, and is just as expandable with new products coming out every day. With CompactFlash and PCMCIA support, the iPaq is going to kill the Palm with expandability.
I've owned both the Clie and the iPaq, and have to admit the iPaq is just too damn sexy, AND powerful to even be compared to the Clie. The Clie ended up being a toss-down to the girlfriend while I enjoy the benefits of the iPaq.
I really don't understand your complaint about the memory requirements with the relatively cheap prices on memory right now. (and considering your palm is permanently limited to the 2-8MBs it comes with out of the box, doesn't it just scream "640k ought to be enough for everybody" days?
I think the Palm's days are numbered... With the advent of Linux being used as an embedded OS for handhelds, and with Java support, who is going to need/want PalmOS? Sure, it was good for a time, but it hasn't done anything to make its own niche. If you want lots of features, use WinCE. If you want light-weight, go with a Linux machine.
I think we should all send Stallman an email with a "Hello World" word document attached.
rms@gnu.org
If you've played the Quake port to the iPaq, you'd be wondering why this hasn't happened sooner. The graphics capability on the iPaq BLOWS the GBA away. Even with the GameShark, the GBA's screen is practically useless anywhere other than standing on the sun. Games, schmames. It's all in the development effort. If its easier to build games for XBox, the games will come. As that freaky voice guy said in Field of Dreams, 'If you build it, they will come'. If MS can one-up the GBA with better graphics capability, you'll be certain to see a catalogue of games grow behind it.
I'm just waiting for MS to buy out Nintendo and port all of the games to X-Paq/XBox/XPad. Maybe Sega had the right idea all along...
News for Nerds != Linux Developers
You'd be surprised to find that slashdot's user base has come a long way since it was first opened. Sorry, but all techies have invaded this place you thought was home. Blame it on commercialization or the slashdot effect, but the s-dot has become a mainstay of geeks everywhere, not just the Linux uber-geeks.
I wasn't saying MS has legal ground to do this, I was just outlining their reasons for the suit. It seems that people believe that MS is against the product Lindows is producing, but in reality, as far as MS is concerned, the more fragmented the Linux environment becomes, the sooner they win the war. If, Lindows is as it claims, a new OS, then the dilution of what is truly Linux has already begun.
Although MS has no more right to the word Windows as does Bob & Janes' Window Cleaning, they still have to protect the rights of their trademarks, "Microsoft Windows" et al. I'm not saying MS has exclusive rights to the word "windows" as it pertains to the tech-adopted sense of the word, but they do have the responsibility to protect their name against products which are trying to profit from the marketing that MS has paid for.
Since Lindows is boasting that they are going to simulate MS-Windows and can run MS-Windows applications, it could be construed that they are not using the generic term/definition of the word "Windows" as it relates to technology, but are hijacking the established trademark of Microsoft Windows to create brand confusion.
I honestly believe if they changed their name, the problem would quickly be resolved, and maybe, we'll get another Linux distro with WINE built-in.
Microsoft isn't trying to sue them to stop them from making their product. MS is suing to stop them from using their name "Lindows" which is a blatant rip-off of Windows. In order for MS to protect their IP, they have to defend their property from being diluted. I imagine if Lindows changed their name to Lindoors there wouldn't be a lawsuit. (of course maybe the chocolate company by the name Lindor might sue them :)
Anyway, what they are doing is perfectly legal. They're trying to make a business of that teeny segment of people that might in the slight chance want to run windows and linux on one platform.
I'm pretty sure DavidJones.com.au was doing this way before anyone else. (They even had classy cards, long before bluemountain ever rose from the bloody sea). It was quite funny, as they are a respectable retail outlet down in Australia (similar scale to Sears, sorry aussies), but all its site was really useful for was sending cool postcards of dalmatians or pointy hats.
Maybe they should change the pricing structure of Linux to $1 per install. This way it would be easy to track Linux usage in the market. Of course, this goes against the grain of the open-source movement. but hey, for market penetration, and world dominance, won't you chip in your buck?
The problem with mom&pop shops adopting linux is that they have the least amount of time to learn a new technology, let alone be interested in implementing one. They want something off the shelf that works immediately to fit their needs. Not something they need to tinker with and install a half-dozen software patches to ensure their video card works properly.
Until Linux has the application support and ease-of-use of Windows, there won't be a large flock of users knocking on its door. Linux is still a developer-oriented system. Its perks are that it allows the tech-savvy user to customize every nook and cranny of the environment, and to even recode and compile if desired. Windows is much easier to use, and will always have the AOL-crowd as customers until Linux matures on the ease-of-use front.
I don't think it was the stupid employees who only knew ASP that made all of those companies go bankrupt... I think it had more to do with the fact that their companies had no business plan and were giving their wares away for next to free.
asp or not, if you don't have a good product, you're going to go under.