It's not just the money to go through the certification process.
The process involves certifying binaries as compliant. The next patch scarfed from Usenet to fix the security-hole-of-the-week in library xxx decertifies the whole thing again and requires retesting of the new version.
Linux is far too ad-hoc to ever become formally certified. If Red hat had poured the money into such a process, we could probably say that by now Red Hat 4.3 would be POSIX compliant, by the books.
There's a 'hold still, damnit!' requirement that Linux, the friskly little puppy of OSes, will never be able to meet.
Please, oh please, tell me that that database telling people that I've bought countless audio connectors other mediocre electronic components isn't vulnerable to the legions of SCO crackers!!!
I told all my friends I only buy Switchcraft connectors!!! Now word will get out!!!
Speaking of Caldera's goals, how would purchasing SCO fit in with their main objective, which is to serve as a robust lawsuit generating platform for the angry old man (Noorda)? Is there some new angle by which grumpy old Ray can sue because of Xenix originating at Microsoft or something?
Open Linux is only the 'front' product at Calera. Spite is their primary product.
vi is far more difficult to navigate than msdos's edit command.
There are flavors of vi that have pulldown menus (the main advantage of 'edit') but that's not the norm.
vi is an antique editor with it's heritage in the first crt display terminals and crofty old VT-100ish escape sequences. I like it because I can edit files from within a telnet session on OS/2 boxes all over the company where I work, but I seldom fire it up in any environment where a more powerful editor is available. It's universally available, and it can be piped through a tty port, those are it's real values. Not it's power as an editor.
Linux Urinal (aka Linux Journal) has been deteriorating, fast. It used to be a mostly black-print article magazine. Lately it's mostly color ads and flash. And zealously partisan when it comes to Linux.
It's more like the print equivalent of a fan site than an objective work of journalism.
I've not read the other dead tree Linux magazines, but seen them on the news stand. From all appearances they appear to be even worse.
I've subscribed to Linux Journal for about four years now and seen it slowly going downhill.
I'd heard that about Slackware (now tamed down again and at a well-behaved 7.1 release, after that giant jump from 4.0 to 7.0) but I've never heard such a story about TurboLinux. Pat at Slack can just decide to do something like that, no suits stand in his way.
#plug_mode That's part of why Slack is my favorite flavor of Linux, going back now to 1994 when I switched over from Yggdrasil. #edom_glup
Actually, yes they can. Hookers would be far more likely to linger around an adult-only game parlour than they would around a kiddie place.
Drug dealers would be more likely to hang around, too.
Hookers and pushers don't make a lot of money selling to kids with an allowance or a minimum wage after school job. They target where the over 20 crowd with money to burn hangs out.
You're mistaken, if you mean 'computer user' and not 'linux user.'
Some people use 'Linux' to be elite and run the latest-greatest kernel. Then, after the fact, they come up with things they can use the computing equipment for. For people like that, it's essential that they always be able to upgrade to the kernel of the week.
Other people use 'their computer' to get things done in their life. Their life and self-esteem doesn't revolve around their computer, it's simply a tool they use. People like this acquire a new Computer and it's operating system every several years, and generally don't 'upgrade' the core system when it's working right for them. They're too busy living life, and making good use of their computing equipment to a degree where it's not a self-serving entity.
Geeks can never figure out how this second group of people find happiness.
The paradox is that Linux also provides it's users with the freedom from having to choose from the huge amount of software and hardware in stores like CompUSA which their OS won't support. I agree that it makes life simpler when there isn't much in the store worth buying.
Truly: "Freedom's Just Another Word For Nothing Else To Lose", to quote a dirty hippy from an earlier generation.
They figure they can use their refusal as a crowbar. If hardware wants to run on Linux, it had better have 'open sourced' driver code. If the Linux market share grows, and hardware vendors want a slice of that market, they'll be forced to disclose their proprietary details. It goes to the heart of the GNU ideology.
I don't agree with it, but they have their right to be rigid and inflexible and hold onto their vision of how software should be developed, just like Microsoft does.
Is StarOffice really bloatware, or is there just a lot of code because it does so many things?
It's bloatware, pure and simple, because I can't just install the word processor portion of it. With Office 2000 I can install just the components I want. With Star Office you have to install the whole fricking Aircraft Carrier.
Why would you ship around a Word.doc file? Print it to PDF and distribute that. Or save to HTML, then go inside that and clean it up some to remove any traces.
Then again, I suspect I'm talking to someone with a hat lined with aluminum foil... never mind...
He, like many Slashdotters, is proud of the fact that he's avoided paying 'the man' because he continues to run the initial release of Windows 95. Plus, that way it's sportin' good fun to carry on about Windows defects.
Here's a clue for anybody who wants to know: You can run a positively ancient version of Windows 95 if you get ahold of the 5-1/4 floppy disk version. There was a coupon on the back page of the Windows 95 manual telling how to order it for about $10. Copy all the diskettes to a \win95 folder and burn it onto a CDR. You'll end up with a copy of Windows 95 so ancient that it contains no traces whatsoever of Internet Explorer.
A 'sudden shift' in IE6 would cut out Microsoft's install base at the same time. So that's not gonna happen.
The standard is imposed by the content developing community. To claim otherwise, you have to also slam tools like GCC for 'extending and embracing' the C language with all the little goodies and proprietary extensions inherent in the Gnu C compiler.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just the money to go through the certification process.
The process involves certifying binaries as compliant. The next patch scarfed from Usenet to fix the security-hole-of-the-week in library xxx decertifies the whole thing again and requires retesting of the new version.
Linux is far too ad-hoc to ever become formally certified. If Red hat had poured the money into such a process, we could probably say that by now Red Hat 4.3 would be POSIX compliant, by the books.
There's a 'hold still, damnit!' requirement that Linux, the friskly little puppy of OSes, will never be able to meet.
Say it isn't so!
Please, oh please, tell me that that database telling people that I've bought countless audio connectors other mediocre electronic components isn't vulnerable to the legions of SCO crackers!!!
I told all my friends I only buy Switchcraft connectors!!! Now word will get out!!!
Speaking of Caldera's goals, how would purchasing SCO fit in with their main objective, which is to serve as a robust lawsuit generating platform for the angry old man (Noorda)? Is there some new angle by which grumpy old Ray can sue because of Xenix originating at Microsoft or something?
Open Linux is only the 'front' product at Calera. Spite is their primary product.
vi is far more difficult to navigate than msdos's edit command.
There are flavors of vi that have pulldown menus (the main advantage of 'edit') but that's not the norm.
vi is an antique editor with it's heritage in the first crt display terminals and crofty old VT-100ish escape sequences. I like it because I can edit files from within a telnet session on OS/2 boxes all over the company where I work, but I seldom fire it up in any environment where a more powerful editor is available. It's universally available, and it can be piped through a tty port, those are it's real values. Not it's power as an editor.
you used the wrong tense in your sentence, there.
National Public radio is considered by many to be the most liberal source of radio news.
Then a value judgement is made, as to wether 'liberal' is good or bad, and you have it all laid out.
I would choose to not pay a dime for NPR, but I don't have that choice, because they get a lot of goverment subsidies.
Linux Urinal (aka Linux Journal) has been deteriorating, fast. It used to be a mostly black-print article magazine. Lately it's mostly color ads and flash. And zealously partisan when it comes to Linux.
It's more like the print equivalent of a fan site than an objective work of journalism.
I've not read the other dead tree Linux magazines, but seen them on the news stand. From all appearances they appear to be even worse.
I've subscribed to Linux Journal for about four years now and seen it slowly going downhill.
No, Linux should ideally do a 'Free Beer.'
Unfortunately, Linux is still really only ready to sponsor a canned malted barley extract (beer 'mix'). Not for free, either.
Careful there, now.
You don't want the DOJ's whole case to crumble.
I can assure you, he'd never answer my questions. And I can assure you I wouldn't be alone on that.
Pepsi had the "Pepsi People" campaign. People playing volleyball on the beach, etc.
Nope.
Strong coffee. All the way. If you need something sweet, a good stiff Mocha.
I'd heard that about Slackware (now tamed down again and at a well-behaved 7.1 release, after that giant jump from 4.0 to 7.0) but I've never heard such a story about TurboLinux. Pat at Slack can just decide to do something like that, no suits stand in his way.
#plug_mode
That's part of why Slack is my favorite flavor of Linux, going back now to 1994 when I switched over from Yggdrasil.
#edom_glup
Actually, yes they can. Hookers would be far more likely to linger around an adult-only game parlour than they would around a kiddie place.
Drug dealers would be more likely to hang around, too.
Hookers and pushers don't make a lot of money selling to kids with an allowance or a minimum wage after school job. They target where the over 20 crowd with money to burn hangs out.
You're mistaken, if you mean 'computer user' and not 'linux user.'
Some people use 'Linux' to be elite and run the latest-greatest kernel. Then, after the fact, they come up with things they can use the computing equipment for. For people like that, it's essential that they always be able to upgrade to the kernel of the week.
Other people use 'their computer' to get things done in their life. Their life and self-esteem doesn't revolve around their computer, it's simply a tool they use. People like this acquire a new Computer and it's operating system every several years, and generally don't 'upgrade' the core system when it's working right for them. They're too busy living life, and making good use of their computing equipment to a degree where it's not a self-serving entity.
Geeks can never figure out how this second group of people find happiness.
The paradox is that Linux also provides it's users with the freedom from having to choose from the huge amount of software and hardware in stores like CompUSA which their OS won't support. I agree that it makes life simpler when there isn't much in the store worth buying.
Truly: "Freedom's Just Another Word For Nothing Else To Lose", to quote a dirty hippy from an earlier generation.
It's ideology.
They figure they can use their refusal as a crowbar. If hardware wants to run on Linux, it had better have 'open sourced' driver code. If the Linux market share grows, and hardware vendors want a slice of that market, they'll be forced to disclose their proprietary details. It goes to the heart of the GNU ideology.
I don't agree with it, but they have their right to be rigid and inflexible and hold onto their vision of how software should be developed, just like Microsoft does.
Is StarOffice really bloatware, or is there just a lot of code because it does so many things?
It's bloatware, pure and simple, because I can't just install the word processor portion of it. With Office 2000 I can install just the components I want. With Star Office you have to install the whole fricking Aircraft Carrier.
Why would you ship around a Word .doc file? Print it to PDF and distribute that. Or save to HTML, then go inside that and clean it up some to remove any traces.
Then again, I suspect I'm talking to someone with a hat lined with aluminum foil... never mind...
It will force you to register online, or cease to work at all.
Are you sure you're not talking about Star Office?
I remember having to get down on my knees and ask nice-like for a serial number before I could even install it on my machine.
If I remember right, it asked for personal information before proceeding.
p.s. It's also a version of W95 that isn't fingerprinted, and never, ever, asks for a CD-key.
He, like many Slashdotters, is proud of the fact that he's avoided paying 'the man' because he continues to run the initial release of Windows 95. Plus, that way it's sportin' good fun to carry on about Windows defects.
Here's a clue for anybody who wants to know: You can run a positively ancient version of Windows 95 if you get ahold of the 5-1/4 floppy disk version. There was a coupon on the back page of the Windows 95 manual telling how to order it for about $10. Copy all the diskettes to a \win95 folder and burn it onto a CDR. You'll end up with a copy of Windows 95 so ancient that it contains no traces whatsoever of Internet Explorer.
There! Go to it, boys.
Ah, I see.
You intend to spam everyone in sight with your opinions about yesmail.
How clever.
Why should there be an active opt-out required?
Why not phrase it the other way, so it isn't censorship?
A 'sudden shift' in IE6 would cut out Microsoft's install base at the same time. So that's not gonna happen.
The standard is imposed by the content developing community. To claim otherwise, you have to also slam tools like GCC for 'extending and embracing' the C language with all the little goodies and proprietary extensions inherent in the Gnu C compiler.