The converse to your argument is - to find out if Linux can be 'easy to use' by John Q Public - let's give 2 layman users 2 PC's - one with Suse 9.1 Beta and one with Windows XP Home - I'm willing to bet they both will find EITHER one more or less easy to use.
That's why I think the 'ease of use' argument is (somewhat) moot.
3) how everyone was just jealous of Microsoft for their success, and allowing the Justice department to ride that wave of public sentiment
Success is a (as anything else I suppose) relativistic term. Just like happiness is. I believe what you meant to say is how "jealous" everyone else is of Microsoft's momentum/dollars, which does not necessarily describe their "success". If success in this or any other country is measured in terms of dollars and dollars alone, but nothing else - then God help/save us, because that is the quickest way to beating this country's current intelectual prowess into a pulp.
What you're saying is, in essence, while generalizing most of the population as stupid and uninformed, is that it's OK to be mediocre... and that no one has a right to an opinion unless they have 2 billion in the bank....
Money is a _consequence_ of human effort/intelect/education/productivity... If the latter aren't sharpened, pushed forward, progressing... then the lull of mediocrity and complacency taking over this country will become so huge, we will eventually collapse under our own weight. In the current context, Microsoft's cash boat only mitigates their eventual demise...
Take for example Canada's Eaton's... or PanAm... or a plethora of other companies that had existed for a LONG long time - all gone, partly for reasons of mediocrity, mismanagement, greed, utter arrogance, recklessness, fraud, etc.
Microsoft's business is software. It just so happens that the centerpiece of their collection, Windows is the _worst_ possible operating system in existence since MS-DOS. There never was an effort on Microsoft's part to correct this - they just kept following the buck....
M$'s reign in the operating systems arena (or elsewhere too) will end. It is not a matter of if - it is now only a matter of when.
You know, I never thought Slashdot has people with a fucking ounce of brain posting on it.. but you just redeemed my hope that there is smart people here too. Everyone needs to read what you said and turn it into a god damn gospel, because that's what is coming....
Unless one can control the actual mechanism for generation of random numbers, then they cannot guarantee that some 'man in the middle' will generate the 'random' numbers for you.
That's crap. One can say a CS grad understands it better because they think more abstract. You need to know both, the 'subatomic' level (or the electorinc level as you said) as well as be able to understand higher, more abstract concepts.
Neither an EE nor a CS major who has no indepth knowledge in both of these areas can survive in the field. Well, maybe survive, but they'll remain mediocre at best...
There's a huge difference between Computer Science and Software Engineering
That's like saying there's a huge difference between math and physics. One does not live without the other. Reminds me of that 'which came first - chicken or egg' joke.. To say that SE is 'vastly different' as you put it, than CS, is misguided at best, and blasphemous at worst.
is cold and dark throughout most of the year. I don't blame him for not wanting to go back home. Most of the northern europeans are like that... soon as they see the sun (e.g. in the tropics, on a vacation), they tuck tail and run from their country. Who wants to live in mostly cold weather anyway:)?
Men will be truly from Mars! Next - are women truly Venutian?
Re:Stop looking for "programming" jobs
on
Exporting Myself?
·
· Score: 1
Before one becomes a designer, of the caliber you suggest, one must be a supreme codemonkey. In other words, in order to truly become an artist (designer) at computer science, one has to first master the science.
You won't get there fast. Especially not fresh out of college. And even top education from best C.S. schools won't guarantee you will ever be good at designing software. You either know it, get there on your own and are good at it, or you aren't and remain a codemonkey forever.
I see someone raised concern over the desktop issue - if Apple can port their GUI layers (Aqua, etc) over to Yellow Dog Linux, so that we can have a Linux+Mac OS X-like GUI - this will blow a galaxy size hole in Microsoft's desktop share in due time.
I'm only wondering if there's someone else at apple or IBM contemplating the same idea...
The 1000 stings that you speak of, would cost each of the developers money they probably don't want to spend suing SCO. I am sure they can fend off or procrastinate (if nothing else) 1000 lawsuits filed by individuals. In _either_ case, the lawyers will win big, not the end user/plaintiff, so your point is a little moot. I could say the converse of what you said, that is one large, massive hit/sting/whatever placed in the right spot, at the right time, could irreperably damage SCO. The lawyers you need anyway, cause they give legal form to your pragmatism... Thus in the end, they will win the most, however you slice it:).
I think you're referring to what is known as a class-action lawsuit. Indeed, one can be filed on behalf of the entire OSS community. I'm just not sure who would be funding the legal fees to such an action as the OSS community is not tightly coupled in a company, but represented by a loosely nit group of developers working/contributing in their spare time for the betterment of our collective. Perhaps the EFF can represent them?
But that's why you have Apple/Mac OS X, Linux, and a few others _very_ hopeful systems, so you _don't_ have to rely on Microsoft anymore. You just dump them, it's _that_ easy. The process has to start somewhere, and it can start with you, me or whoever...
You're wrong about Microsoft having top notch people. While I don't doubt they do, most of what's in there is useless hordes of programmers who can't really think on their own feet... bunch of code monkeys who come in 9-5pm, and hope for a paycheck or their options to come afloat.... You'd be a fool to think there are many people with true, genuine understanding of operating systems, OO design, etc. - all that matters today. Those are few and far between at Microsoft or anywhere else in corporate US of A.
Yes... isn't that just the flipside of Dirk's argument - the total dumbing down of America, the intellectual fleecing, the political meandering, the litigious corporate assholes at each other's throats... it's a really nice environment for growth one can foster with that much money, isn't it? Or at that point it doesn't even matter if you have quality eh? It is all about quantity...
Well said Dirk Diggler. And I may add to what you just said, that there is one company that has taken most others to school on how to design a proper as well as a usable OS - it's Mac OS X. I hate to say it, as I do most of my work on Linux, but I did swing by the Mac store in San Diego not too long ago, just to fuck around with some of the Mac OS X GUI, to see what it's all about.. talk about an intuitive, easy to use GUI... Everything that KDE and GNOME want to accomplish, is more or less done on Mac OS X, the simplicity, ease of use, lot of graphic pizzazz, Aqua/OpenGL shit.... Add to that a usable MS Office suite (which I find to be a killer app, in spite of my embedded hatred toward Microsoft Operating Systems), I was impressed to the point where I am considering buying a Mac OS X laptop in the next 6-12 months. What is really amazing is that I never really thought of Macs much up till not too long ago... and then it became apparent to me that they've done a lot of what others are immitating on e.g. Linux desktops (not that there's anything wrong with that) for the average end user...
If Linux can put together a GUI such as the one on OS X, then you're looking at the next desktop revolution, and hopefully the death of Windows! Oh and about the only other objection I have about Mac is that they're so damn pricey (hardware-wise).. Indeed this may be well deserved, considering what you're getting.. but hey.. the bottom line's my wallet:).
If you think Microsoft is going to quit on providing an OS (market) to its customers, you're deluded. Longhorn is supposedly going to be a major overhaul in Windows' architecture, and a better OS than any of their previous ones. If, and when they build this OS, more than likely, it will look like UNIX! The old adage goes, "Those who do not understand UNIX, are forced to re-invent it". And if I know one thing about Bill Gates (and no, I don't know the man personally, only what I've read about him) - he does not like to lose. Losing out to Linux or some other OS on the desktop and moving purely to a VM solution (a la.NET, or even better Java - if Bill wishes to bend over for McNealy and take it), would be considered a fiasco in Bill Gates' world. It isn't about money to him anymore, it's about ego and powerplay - and this goes directly at the heart of it.
If they were genuinely smart, they could have done what Steve Jobs did w/FreeBSD, but do that with BeOS for instance - take an already existing OS (or fuckin' buy it! Buy Be Inc. they went out of business anyway!), redo most of their money-making software first for BeOS, and run with that! Just like Jobs did... But Jobs is actually far ego-less than Bill (IMHO), so he did what he did... And Mr. Gates is doing what he does best - trying to crush competition with his monetary momentum....
Windows is _not_ going away, remember that. With Windows gone, Microsoft actually has to compete on merits/quality of software. Not to say they won't survive solely on that - Microsoft is _very_ good at apps, but dropping Windows will put a galaxy-size hole in their profits, you can be sure of it.
Slashdot Mirror
The converse to your argument is - to find out if Linux can be 'easy to use' by John Q Public - let's give 2 layman users 2 PC's - one with Suse 9.1 Beta and one with Windows XP Home - I'm willing to bet they both will find EITHER one more or less easy to use.
That's why I think the 'ease of use' argument is (somewhat) moot.
3) how everyone was just jealous of Microsoft for their success, and allowing the Justice department to ride that wave of public sentiment
Success is a (as anything else I suppose) relativistic term. Just like happiness is. I believe what you meant to say is how "jealous" everyone else is of Microsoft's momentum/dollars, which does not necessarily describe their "success". If success in this or any other country is measured in terms of dollars and dollars alone, but nothing else - then God help/save us, because that is the quickest way to beating this country's current intelectual prowess into a pulp.
What you're saying is, in essence, while generalizing most of the population as stupid and uninformed, is that it's OK to be mediocre... and that no one has a right to an opinion unless they have 2 billion in the bank....
Money is a _consequence_ of human effort/intelect/education/productivity... If the latter aren't sharpened, pushed forward, progressing... then the lull of mediocrity and complacency taking over this country will become so huge, we will eventually collapse under our own weight. In the current context, Microsoft's cash boat only mitigates their eventual demise...
Take for example Canada's Eaton's... or PanAm... or a plethora of other companies that had existed for a LONG long time - all gone, partly for reasons of mediocrity, mismanagement, greed, utter arrogance, recklessness, fraud, etc.
Microsoft's business is software. It just so happens that the centerpiece of their collection, Windows is the _worst_ possible operating system in existence since MS-DOS. There never was an effort on Microsoft's part to correct this - they just kept following the buck....
M$'s reign in the operating systems arena (or elsewhere too) will end. It is not a matter of if - it is now only a matter of when.
Are you feeling philanthropic these days? How about donating that killer Aqua GUI to the Linux/OSS effort? Can we beg? Please? :) Please please...
You know, I never thought Slashdot has people with a fucking ounce of brain posting on it.. but you just redeemed my hope that there is smart people here too. Everyone needs to read what you said and turn it into a god damn gospel, because that's what is coming....
or I should say, money and idealism of any sort, hardly ever mix.. They're like water and oil.... they intersperse and coexist but hardly ever mix.
Pardon - they cannot guarantee that some 'man in the middle' will _NOT_ generate the random numbers.
Unless one can control the actual mechanism for generation of random numbers, then they cannot guarantee that some 'man in the middle' will generate the 'random' numbers for you.
That's crap. One can say a CS grad understands it better because they think more abstract. You need to know both, the 'subatomic' level (or the electorinc level as you said) as well as be able to understand higher, more abstract concepts.
Neither an EE nor a CS major who has no indepth knowledge in both of these areas can survive in the field. Well, maybe survive, but they'll remain mediocre at best...
There's a huge difference between Computer Science and Software Engineering
That's like saying there's a huge difference between math and physics. One does not live without the other. Reminds me of that 'which came first - chicken or egg' joke.. To say that SE is 'vastly different' as you put it, than CS, is misguided at best, and blasphemous at worst.
is cold and dark throughout most of the year. I don't blame him for not wanting to go back home. Most of the northern europeans are like that... soon as they see the sun (e.g. in the tropics, on a vacation), they tuck tail and run from their country. Who wants to live in mostly cold weather anyway :)?
Men will be truly from Mars! Next - are women truly Venutian?
Before one becomes a designer, of the caliber you suggest, one must be a supreme codemonkey. In other words, in order to truly become an artist (designer) at computer science, one has to first master the science.
You won't get there fast. Especially not fresh out of college. And even top education from best C.S. schools won't guarantee you will ever be good at designing software. You either know it, get there on your own and are good at it, or you aren't and remain a codemonkey forever.
JBoss Group has already done what you're asking. They have paid their OSS developers with money they get off servicing/supporting/documenting JBoss.
It's because Apple still hasn't ported the Mac OS X GUI layer to Linux (Yellow Dog e.g.) :).
I see someone raised concern over the desktop issue - if Apple can port their GUI layers (Aqua, etc) over to Yellow Dog Linux, so that we can have a Linux+Mac OS X-like GUI - this will blow a galaxy size hole in Microsoft's desktop share in due time.
I'm only wondering if there's someone else at apple or IBM contemplating the same idea...
The 1000 stings that you speak of, would cost each of the developers money they probably don't want to spend suing SCO. I am sure they can fend off or procrastinate (if nothing else) 1000 lawsuits filed by individuals. In _either_ case, the lawyers will win big, not the end user/plaintiff, so your point is a little moot. I could say the converse of what you said, that is one large, massive hit/sting/whatever placed in the right spot, at the right time, could irreperably damage SCO. The lawyers you need anyway, cause they give legal form to your pragmatism ... Thus in the end, they will win the most, however you slice it :).
I think you're referring to what is known as a class-action lawsuit. Indeed, one can be filed on behalf of the entire OSS community. I'm just not sure who would be funding the legal fees to such an action as the OSS community is not tightly coupled in a company, but represented by a loosely nit group of developers working/contributing in their spare time for the betterment of our collective. Perhaps the EFF can represent them?
But that's why you have Apple/Mac OS X, Linux, and a few others _very_ hopeful systems, so you _don't_ have to rely on Microsoft anymore. You just dump them, it's _that_ easy. The process has to start somewhere, and it can start with you, me or whoever...
You're wrong about Microsoft having top notch people. While I don't doubt they do, most of what's in there is useless hordes of programmers who can't really think on their own feet... bunch of code monkeys who come in 9-5pm, and hope for a paycheck or their options to come afloat.... You'd be a fool to think there are many people with true, genuine understanding of operating systems, OO design, etc. - all that matters today. Those are few and far between at Microsoft or anywhere else in corporate US of A.
Yes... isn't that just the flipside of Dirk's argument - the total dumbing down of America, the intellectual fleecing, the political meandering, the litigious corporate assholes at each other's throats... it's a really nice environment for growth one can foster with that much money, isn't it? Or at that point it doesn't even matter if you have quality eh? It is all about quantity...
how fucking sad...
Well said Dirk Diggler. And I may add to what you just said, that there is one company that has taken most others to school on how to design a proper as well as a usable OS - it's Mac OS X. I hate to say it, as I do most of my work on Linux, but I did swing by the Mac store in San Diego not too long ago, just to fuck around with some of the Mac OS X GUI, to see what it's all about.. talk about an intuitive, easy to use GUI... Everything that KDE and GNOME want to accomplish, is more or less done on Mac OS X, the simplicity, ease of use, lot of graphic pizzazz, Aqua/OpenGL shit.... Add to that a usable MS Office suite (which I find to be a killer app, in spite of my embedded hatred toward Microsoft Operating Systems), I was impressed to the point where I am considering buying a Mac OS X laptop in the next 6-12 months. What is really amazing is that I never really thought of Macs much up till not too long ago... and then it became apparent to me that they've done a lot of what others are immitating on e.g. Linux desktops (not that there's anything wrong with that) for the average end user...
:).
If Linux can put together a GUI such as the one on OS X, then you're looking at the next desktop revolution, and hopefully the death of Windows! Oh and about the only other objection I have about Mac is that they're so damn pricey (hardware-wise).. Indeed this may be well deserved, considering what you're getting.. but hey.. the bottom line's my wallet
In a court of law - it's called perjury. You lie, or you tell something that is opposite of what you said you'd say under oath, and you go to jail.
You can't lie even when you're marketing. There's something called 'truth in advertising' as well
Either a liar, or Viagra-dependent, a.k.a. impotent.
"What would you do if you were accused of a murder, you had not committed... yet?"
It'd be like heaven on earth for insurance companies...
If you think Microsoft is going to quit on providing an OS (market) to its customers, you're deluded. Longhorn is supposedly going to be a major overhaul in Windows' architecture, and a better OS than any of their previous ones. If, and when they build this OS, more than likely, it will look like UNIX! The old adage goes, "Those who do not understand UNIX, are forced to re-invent it". And if I know one thing about Bill Gates (and no, I don't know the man personally, only what I've read about him) - he does not like to lose. Losing out to Linux or some other OS on the desktop and moving purely to a VM solution (a la .NET, or even better Java - if Bill wishes to bend over for McNealy and take it), would be considered a fiasco in Bill Gates' world. It isn't about money to him anymore, it's about ego and powerplay - and this goes directly at the heart of it.
If they were genuinely smart, they could have done what Steve Jobs did w/FreeBSD, but do that with BeOS for instance - take an already existing OS (or fuckin' buy it! Buy Be Inc. they went out of business anyway!), redo most of their money-making software first for BeOS, and run with that! Just like Jobs did... But Jobs is actually far ego-less than Bill (IMHO), so he did what he did... And Mr. Gates is doing what he does best - trying to crush competition with his monetary momentum....
Windows is _not_ going away, remember that. With Windows gone, Microsoft actually has to compete on merits/quality of software. Not to say they won't survive solely on that - Microsoft is _very_ good at apps, but dropping Windows will put a galaxy-size hole in their profits, you can be sure of it.
what kind of a stupid response is that? you'd actually think they'd LAUNCH w/out calculating for a return?
that almost sounded like a snide political innuendo. I'm not defending China, but to think they're as stupid as you imply, is preposterours.