This is a simple one. I write perl, you write C#. You write a routine in C#, and a front-end in C#. I don't like your front-end so I rewrite mine in perl, and it all works.
However, I have a biggol' feeling that this will wind up as Java's platform independance. Half-Working.
.NET is there so that they can lump everything into it, say they Innovated it at the.NET inception date, and look like there is cohesive plan.
So far, NET involves a way to log into Hotmail, a planned Java rewrite, and..., and..., um..., and...
First of all, this should be modded flamebait. I thought flamebait meant a post specifically designed to start a flame. I have my doubts as to whether this poster actually believes anything he posted.
If he did:
No its not. If an employee can't act like a professional, you get rid of them. Very, very few projects require people smart enough to put up with a bunch of crap from them.
Depends on how you define crap, depends on your project. First of all, there is a shortage of truly high level programmers. "You're right, the guy writing this compiler is a pain, we'll just hire one of the Millions of guys out there who can write a compiler from scratch, and are stodgy non-nerf, docker-wearing professionals." The applications should flood in.
Speaking of which, I don't know why people who support the arts put up with the quirky behaviour exhibited by artists. Just get some artist who wants to act like a professional.
Maybe i'm at your cube, waiting patently for you to get done PLAYING.
Perhaps you should talk to the department supervisor. They are our official liason with customers. I'm very sorry ma'am, I'm not up to speed on your end of the transaction. Please speak with our supervisor.
Nah, don't explain it to them. Just sit in your cubes and make Dilbert jokes.
We would explain it if you could understand it. I have met very few programmers who are not excited about sharing information with other programmers. I have met fewer who will sit and try to explain code to a non-programmer.
Yes, we could dumb it down for you, but how far down?? Also we understand these things on a totally different level. "Well, we are just using an iframe with absolute positioning that is then imported with SSI to the main page where the showdiv code allows us to flexibly replace divs based on classes." "HunH?" "This thingy goes in that thingy." "oh..."
"Why will this take an extra month??" "Because we have to redo the DB routines to work with Oracle instead of Access now." "But I told Bill it was no problem... It'll still be on time."
Yeah, its really hip to have that one guy come in at work at 2pm and work until 9 at night, because he's so damn elite, until you realize that he's unable to interact with all of the _adults_ who have children and real-life responsibilities. Its called a team. "Oh, I don't work well in the morning." Oh, i'm so sorry! Gee, because the rest of us automatically wake up at 6:30am chipper and ready to go!
I spent almost 4 years working 11pm to 7am doing nightly maint when I got my first job. I believe that is pretty much the norm in my industry. When I took this job I'm at now, I asked for noon to 8PM. Of our pressmen, amny would never go to days, they're used to working late at night.
Who is this mythical "Rest of Us" that all get up at 6:30 A.M.?? If being in the majority makes it right, as you seem to believe, then your argument is baseless because the very stereotype you present is based on a majority of programmers. Hence 6:30 AM is not normal.
My Grandfather was a bartender and never got up before 2PM. Raised 6 kids, and was able to spend time with them afterschool. My uncle works in a factory and doesn't go in 'til 2AM.
Not only that, but:
Maybe the rest of us _aren't_ working late that night and need to get stuff done. Maybe we come in late because we don't want to be around people like you who think "I'm miserable, why shouldn't everybody else be." Maybe it's because our bosses do not do a good job of keeping world+dog out of your cube when you're coding.
I'm looking at moving up to management as well, but you sure as hell shouldn't. I'm not looking to liberate my brothers from clueless management, i'm just sick of working with people who are so busy playing video games, installing linux, and bitching about management
Be sure to tell them that at the meeting. If you feel that way about the employees you supervise, the good ones will leave and the bad ones will stay, and you'll wind up getting lees work from them than before. Hopefully your upper management is cognizant of this and will not let you destroy their IT department.
Regardless of whether you supervise Programmers or Envelope Stuffers, you still need to regard them with respect. Respect is the hardest currency to get, the most valuable when spent, and multiplies as it is spent.
I will also now correct your quoted statement:
Everyone has special needs, and accommodating those needs (and 'odd' behaviors) is a good idea all around, for both employee morale and department output.
You'd be suprised how much the girl in accounting appreciates 2 hours off in the middle of the day so she can pick up her kids. Or how much the guy in the mail room appreciates the flexible schedules.
Supply and demand baby, as long as geeks are in high demand, they'll get their asses kissed in the workplace. And I got news, there will always be a shortage of competent programmers, just like there is a shortage of competent lawyers even though we've got tons of 'em.
We do a thing here at work where we monetize our contributions to the company as a programmer. We take cost of outside program development + gross revenue generated + salaries saved - salary = Money we made the company. Outside of sales, no other department could even start this. Sales already does this, and sales departments are treated like Programmers. Good salespeople are also hard to find.
Soda is 30 cents a can. Suck it up. I made my company $638,000 last year, deal with it. And that was bad year.
Maybe the rest of us _aren't_ working late that night and need to get stuff done. And maybe that programmer puts in 60+ Hrs. a week?? Many of the ones I know do. One of the reasons that we are afforded alot of autonomy here is that we get paid for 40 Hrs. and work 50-60. Am I playing on your time or mine??
There's the rub, when they crack down on our stress valves, we put in an even 40hr. week, no staying late, etc... Guess what, no nerf gun = lower productivity.
Until the rest of the company, who work just as hard as the programmers
I can tell you that few people in my company put in the hours I do, have the big picture of our operation, or get called at all hours day or night to fix a system in 15 minutes so we can make the mail truck. None of them take the responsability for the quality of output that I do.
~Hammy
"Why does he get the nice chair??" "Because he's skilled labor."
WE need a content management system that allows us to create web site.
- is different from -
We need to find out how to use Oracle, why don't you write a Content Managenment System in VB that will interact with our Oracle DB. Oh, and make sure it uses SOAP or XML or.NET or something.
- Or my favorite -
Can't you write that program (stand-alone executable) in JavaScript??
I have always told my bosses I am output only. I don't accept input.
You tell me waht the program is suppoed to do, not what language to write it in, and it needs a "relational database" and should be a "net service". I am the programmer, I determine if we need a relational database.
The worst thing about programming is always being Buzzword compliant.
And then all the "Souldn't that say 'Associate' instead of 'employee'". "The mission statement doesn't include the word dynamic..."
Changes.... That's why it's called version 2.0 The point releases is where it doesn't change much for the programmer.
Actually, the Olympic games were revived as an event for the wealthy. First of all, you have to pay your way there generally, so that hinders Somalian track stars from competing to some extent.
So where does all of the money generated by the Olympics go?? The IOC.
The Olympics has never been about showcasing up and coming talent. I don't know where you got that Idea. The no pros rule was instituted because of one particularily talented athelete who defeated some wealthy *sshole.
I forget the guy's name right now, but one of the contestants against Thorpe in 1912 became IOC director and was responsable for denying Thorpe his medals.
His medals were taken for playing Minor league baseball two years earlier for $60 a month. Ironically, many atheletes, Thorpe included, stated that they had made more money playing College Football than Semi-Pro baseball.
The real issue is this: Shouldn't the IOC be looking at the benefits of the Olympics reaching a larger audience as opposed to their profitability??
The decision to take VC funding was unavoidable at the time
Why was it unavoidable?? I keep hearing all of these things that were unavoidable, that we couldn't do. The VC funding was not unavoidable.
companies that had already raised 30 to 40 million dollars. Ironically, those companies went out of business long before we did because their burn rates were outrageous.
So one could almost assume from your statements that getting more VC money would have ran you out of buisness faster?? Back to what was unavoidable, had you not recieved the VC money what would have been the worst scenario?? Your buisness fails earlier??
The Dot.com boom was all about look at how rich my neighbor is getting. You took the VC funding to try to build your big important buisness. You want to be a Microsoft, an Oracle.
Oddly enough, most of the Dot Commies were so focused on the carrot, they never saw the stick. "I don't need to read this do I??" I personally don't understand why a company of 35 needs 5 Million in cash to begin with. There are advertising expenses and such, and I know waht all of the excuses work out to be.
The reality of it is that someone sat in their bedroom and wrote a program/built a website/used buzzwords in a fascinating manner. Now they believe that they must have 5 Million to advertise their Programming Firm/Design Comp./Consulting outfit. Well, 4 Million for advertising, 1 million for Aeron chairs. (Actually, all of those Aerons might have been the best use of VC money.)
Finally, these geeks wouldn't take an economics class in college, and now are convinced that they can run a multi-million dollar company. Well, the VC's didn't believe it either, which is why all of that money was generally tied to "as long as you're not in charge."
This is just another playing of the tortoise and the hare. Perhaps without that VC you would not have gone as fast, but you might have finished the race. My company is not Microsoft, but we're still around, and we're 2 years in the black. I can not think of a single competitor in the area who has survived the meltdown. I can think of 3 that tried hard to buy me with VC money, and they're out of buisness right now.
We turned down any and all VC funding. The only funding we have ever had is $60,000 in loans from my in-laws. (Paid Back, but I still owe them for my Kitchen Renovation...)
And honestly, we are well positioned for a market rebound. We have a longer development cycle due to fewer employees, but we are far more speculative in our products, and so generally have the luxury of being the first to start.
Just like Enron, you keep you money in because you're greedy and you don't think you can lose, and then you're mad becuase noone explained it was possible to lose.
Apologies to the original poster. I've gotten a bit off-subject, and I am not trying to indict your past. But remember, there are very few things in this world that are truly unavoidable. Next time do yourself a favor, just list the VC funding as a biggol' mistake so people aren't fooled into thinking there's a way to win at that game. "They took all of my money in Vegas, I should have hit on the 5." No, you should have avoided Vegas.
~Hammy
Pissing you off on Slashdot for over 5 years!
Now where's that Tom Christiansen punk!?
Re:The devil must have had to put on a sweater
on
Linus Tries Out BitKeeper
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
And then Linus complains and complains....
I personally like the comment about he was only able to do 50 patches etc... (Gee Linus that's ten off from last month??) This is still about the fact that Linus is overwhelmed and refuses to delegate. The community gets up in arms about it finally, and Linus gets a CVS system instead of splitting up some work.
Well, maybe this will quiet the community until Alan C. can get back to it.
OK, Now we have admitted it, I feel better. Now, I know that most of you out there also pirate shareware. (That was the point of the article...)
1.) If the registration process was easier... No, this argument is invalid. The real problem is that pirating is too easy. I can confess, that I go out and download a program, go to Google and type in "Program Name Serial" or "Program Name crackz (or cracks)" and find what I need in about 5 minutes.
2.) The problem is the dedicated Hackers...
True, but not the real problem. If your program is popular enough to have someone make a keygen for it, congrats. 9 times out of 10, someone gets the serial off the version at work and then publishes it. Or they purchase the software and publish the codes. This feeds back to 1.
Here at work, they lock up the coffee. There is a note on the door about "Call so-so", etc. I hate calling anyone. So, I grab a paper clip and open the door. This hearkens back to the ease argument. It is realistically harder for me to pick the lock than call on the phone, so why do I do it??
It's about two things: Knowing that I can get at these locked away resources, and knowing that they can't control me.
More than that, every lock serves as a challenge for someone.
Now, I can see this really affecting productivity apps like Ultra-Edit or something, but with Games you have so many options for enforcing the shareware purchase that this should not be a problem. (Witholding levels, unlocking save capabilities, etc...)
Now, to go more into apps like Ultra-Edit, if you pirate them for private use, you will want them at work. (Since UE is one of my pirate progs....) I can tell you that the Ultra-Edit I pirated led to our company buying 25 copies. Had I not been a UE user, we would have gone with Notetab Pro. The same could be said for Paint Shop Pro, Homesite (Back when it was shareware), and 100 other programs).
And while Ambrosia complains about the cost of piracy, how many users would they have if they had been forced to actually market that initial project on a CD in Comp USA. I can assure you that Ambrosia has not lost as much to piracy as many of these studios pay for a one week end-cap at Compusa.
Piracy has its problems, but it also led to MS getting a 90% market share, the tech boom of the late '90s, etc...
This is the same argument that existed with Napster. Does downloading tracks mean you won't buy the CD?? If you pirate Ambrosia software, will you not buy the next version?? If you hadn't pirated software would you have ever heard of Ambrosia??
My guess is that if Ambrosia had not had the Net to act as a marketing medium that guy'd be in the cube next to me, talking about starting a game company some day. Now that you have used the Net as your initial marketing medium, you want to complain about it's deficiencies??
As Tom Waits once said, "If I exorcise my devils will my angels leave me too??" If you use rumors to spread information, don't complain when rumors circulate about you. When you use the Net and word of mouth to promote a program, don't be suprised when that same medium starts promoting getting your program for free. It comes from the same drive, "I really like this program, you should try it...." becomes "Hey I found a serial so you can have this great program free." Merry Freakin' X-mas.
They want all of the benefits and none of the problems. Besides when you can pirate PhotoShop, MS Office, and all of the other Non-Shareware just as easy (or even easier), what is shareware worth??
When you can get Photoshop 6.0 for free, is $99 too much for Paint Shop Pro?? "Hey, I have a leftover Filet Mignon you can have..." "Sorry, I don't eat leftovers, I'm going to go spend $10 on McDonalds."
As the higher price Apps stop piracy, the effect will trickle down to the Shareware shops, but not until.
Emusic has been up and operating their service for over a year now, with services like TMBG Unlimited, and 9.95 for unlimited downloads.
Granted, e-music is not perfect. Most new artists are not there, but the oldies are there in force. But the real triumph for e-music is it is easy to use, software agnostic, and affordable.
These services are not supposed to be popular. I think Pressplay and others are like the 100 mile Carbureator. The Music Industry really wants this to fail. Then they can claim that the only reason for the popularity of Napster and clones is that their free, not that consumers want digital music.
The record companies have already waited too long for this. With the ubiquity of MP3 hardware in our homes, and a need for the RC's to make an alternative with capable DRM. If they move away from MP3, you'll just see a whole bunch of converters out there so that the new files can be played on old equipment.
Are you aware of the purpose of a sit in?? The idea is that the business of the Company/Government/Whatever cannot continue until such sit-in has ended. This was the purpose of operation rescue, a sit-in in front of the Abortion clinics so noone could kill a baby. (Not anti-abortion, just making a point.)
Now, in the hypothetical sense, if you knew that they could not put a man (someone you'd save) to death until the computer starts the Lethal Injection machine, you could save that man over a wire. By the same token, you could disrupt the activities of the aforementioned Abortion clinic by taking out their computer, or by taking out the electric company.
What is lame and cowardly, is hiding behind a police force to enforce unfair and discriminatory policies paid for by the people you are intimidating. You would not argue with the violent overthrow of a slave master, and the US Govt. is little more than that.
I don't argue that this LA guy was a whacko, or that we should be publishing bomb information on the internet. But If you really believe that publishing how to make a bomb AT ALL is criminal, lets go lock up Tom Robbins, Einstein, most spy book authors, and the writers of McGuyver. Let's go lock up anyone who has ever written a Chemistry book.
"They'd be better off by actually writing letter to the companies they hate, but of course, that takes actual time and effort." You're joking right?? Yes, we all know that writing a letter to a company gets big notice.
I'm sure that with your long and illustrious history of social activism you would be more than capable of giving us a run down of how you have managed to end 1 or 2 social injustices of the world, and perhaps give us some insight on the best method for changing the world.
At least this person stood for something, no matter how misguided the means. Lame is not doing something stupid to try and stop injustice, lame is doing nothing at all to try and stop injustice.
But the logic is flawed. One of the points brought out was that there is, and has been, an "unofficial patch penguin" for years and years now. Alan Cox and now Dave Jones have provided that service for many years. Most anyone knew that you always applied the -ac patches, even though they were not in the official kernel.
What is wrong with calling them the -pp patches and having them have some sort of official backing?? Then, as the maintainer of this tree changes, there is not a huge shift.
I have been writing Drivers, etc. for Linux since 0.6, and I know that there is alot of work not being evaluated for the Kernel. Perhaps the greatest danger is the forming of a "Linux elite", a group of programmers who are the only ones able to contribute code to the Kernel. This has already happened in an unofficial sense.
Linus generally doesn't even look at patches from other people, unless it is specifically reccommended to him by someone else (Like A.C.), or come from someone he knows and trusts. (About 10 people) This weakens us. Vonnegut once said: "It is not ideas that hurt our children, but a lack of them." and this is true of Linus' child too. I'm not saying that 300 people need kernel access, but I do say the system breaks down when only 10 people even warrant consideration. And even among those there are too many waiting for important work to be integrated into the kernel.
Linus is the single greatest obstacle to keeping existing maintainers, and attracting new ones. Existing maintainers get tired of NO feedback, new maintainers just don't know what to think.
How to patch Linux:
1. Create patch
2. Mail to Linus
3. Send Linus e-mail asking if he got the patch you sent a month ago.
4. Send Linus an e-mail asking if he got the patch you sent 3 months ago.
5. Send to Alan Cox asking if perhaps Linus had died.
6. Send to Dave Jones after finding out that he's not accepting patches anymore.
7. E-mail Linus while creating your own fork in CVS
8. Update patch and re-send
9. Search the Internet for other open source projects that actually need you.
10. Recieve e-mail from Linus that your patch wasn't accepted. No reason. (Real reason? You haven't updated the patch for the 2.5 series)
Estimated time from 1-10, one year....
The point that the poster made was that since Linus has his hands in too many pies, and patch integration is so vital, appointing someone to be in charge of this would do alot for getting the backlog of integration work done, and leave Linus more time to do what he does best, CODE!
Linus and his ego be damned. He can take this "I'll take my ball and go home" attitude and leave it. Linux is an OS. An OS trying to make critical inroads in business. If Linus is still under the perception that this is still just his hobby, Linux is not an OS worth supporting, because it's only future is being Linus' hobby.
Linux is up to 20-30 kernel forks being distributed. Can Linus tell me he really doesn't see the problem here?? Notice that when he was asked if important work was not being included because of him, he ignored the question. So instead you have the distros adding ext3, and ReiserFS support and any semblance of a standard is beginning to break.
"One 'patch penguin' scales no better than I do", is an interesting statement. Is (one person = patches) >= (one person = patching, coding, designing, and representing)?? He means to tell us that one focused person would do no better than his scattered efforts?? I mean no dis here, but that just doesn't make sense.
Linus is doing the unthinkable. He is leaving us to seriously question his integrity, his motives, and his judgement. This is not the first time this has happened, and it is becoming all too frequent.
You owe me a shirt friend. The reality of it is, spamming works. If it didn't work, people wouldn't bother. Notice you get less telemarketers lately?? Telemarketing is not as effective as it once was.
Why is Bernie Shifman any less guilty that AOL, Amazon, or MSN?? I have only been to MSN once, and then I changed the homepage preference, but I get e-mails from them daily. Why?? A hotmail user e-mailed me.
When I did consulting work, I used to harvest directories of local IT managers and send brochures and resumes for our companies services. While I was somewhat targeted in my spamming, I got alot of wrong e-mail addresses.
I am looking over old records, and I made over $27k from "cold calls(S)" (notation for people I spammed) in 1997. I admit it was spam, and I am proud of it.
Of course, realtors look through tax records and find people who bought their houses 5 years ago and contact all of them.
The real concept of Spam vs. Bulk mail seems to revolve around the idea that there is no penalty for the spammer. He doesn't pay for stamps, paper, etc. But to me there is far less of an environmental impact to sending an e-mail than a glossy brochure.
Just look at all of the junk mail you recieve and know that every person in america gets just as much. All of those glossy catalogs and 4.9% credit card offers consuming the landfills oif America.
The effectivness of an advertising message sent via e-mail is just as effective than that sent by snail mail. The real key is to have a good advertising message. If you send a subject "Resume Attached: " your response is not as good as say... "New streaming solutions for multimedia in the Mobile Paradigm" or even "Multimedia pioneer seeks new java-based challenges.". You might read that e-mail, the guy in accounting won't.
Yes, your subject should reflect the body of your message. If you are looking for a job as a Unix admin, put it in the subject! "Unix admin and scripter seeks employment." If they have a Unix job, they'll read it, otherwise, they won't.
I'll bet none of the resumes I sent in 1997 still exist today, but I'm sure that 99% of the paper resumes sent in that same year are still cluttering something up.
I'll spam you and let you know where to mail that shirt.
That is not even a standard enterprise agreement. While some of that language was part of it, there are still license provisos that would be most unacceptible to an enterprise.
What if you have one copy of Borland BSA builder in your company, they still claim these rights??
Also, they have not released new license terms. What are my rights concerning the program now?? The old license was not intended for you, but there is no new license, hence, the terms of the old license remain in effect.
Remember, people use these tools to write code for money. Licensing is very important when it becomes a big part of your business.
The opposing viewpoint is "Since we have to use closed source, it would be impossible to do this." This is incredibly myopic. But we can get these programs written faster with closed alternatives.... More hogwash.
The real truth of it is this. If we wait ten more years to pass something like this, there will be an ever increasing number of proprietary apps wormed through our research code. There is nothing so pressing in science that it cannot afford to be done right. (In fact, we should probably slow the march of progress long enough to perfect what we have anyway...)
The author of the opposing viewpoint carps about the millions of lines of proprietary code that would have to be re-written first. Would this be easier in ten years?? No.
The author comments on some proprietary projects of his own he has in mind. Fine, don't produce them with public money.
My belief is that public money should benefit the public. If this had been in place ten years ago, the state of computer programming the world over would be that much better. Just like an author reads Melville, Hawthorne, etc. to learn to write well, so could we study this large public codebase as programmers, and see how the pro's do it.
If the academic world in infested with proprietary software, it is time to eradicate the vermin. Besides, some programmer(s) will just end up getting a grant to re-write the proprietary portions. You can't honestly tell me that this would be more drastic than Y2K prep, or a BSA audit. Or are you against programmers working??
You are no doubt inundated with e-mails complaining about this, but I have recently read an article that points out some very shady clauses in the licensing for your Linux products.
Most notably I take issue with the following clauses that were pointed out in the article posted at http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/369/
12. AUDIT. During the term of this License and for one(1) year thereafter, upon reasonable notice and duringnormal business hours, Borland or its outside auditors willhave the right to enter your premises and access yourrecords and computer systems to verify that you have paidto Borland the correct amounts owed under this Licenseand determine whether the Products are being used inaccordance with the terms of this License. You willprovide reasonable assistance to Borland in connectionwith this provision. You agree to pay the cost of the auditif any underpayments during the period covered by theaudit amount to more than five percent (5%) of the feesactually owed for that period.
14.4 No Jury Trials; No Joinder. Each party hereby
irrevocably waives its right to a jury trial in any legal
action, suit or proceeding between the parties arising out
of or relating to this License. A copy this License may be
filed with the court as written consent by both parties to a
bench trial. You agree that any dispute you may have
against Borland cannot be joined with any dispute of any
other person or entity in a lawsuit, arbitration or any other
proceeding, or resolved on a classwide basis.
This sounds like a company that believes it's customers to be criminal, while knowing the company itself is criminal. You have neither the demand nor the market strength to set such barriers for use and succeed. Would you grant a vendor these same rights??
I have been a customer of your company for over 10 years. From my first C compiler to the more modern IDE's offered. I have consistently paid for my software and associated licenses. Indeed, your sensible licensing terms was one of the main reasons that I was drawn to Borland software initially. Now you believe that you deserve the right to come and invade my privacy without reason. It is quite possible that I am mistaken, but I do not believe that I have ever broken your trust in the past, so why have I lost that trust??
In addition, you require that I place a greater amount of trust in your company and strip me of many of the rights I am guaranteed by law.
My computer systems contain quite a bit of sensitive data pertaining to my business, finances, life, work, and play. I have no desire to open these systems to your company simply for the right to continue paying more and more for your software.
I have a total of 11 Borland products between my home and work computer. I have 17 other co-workers with similar usage. You have lost all of our business. Perhaps you could recommend a competing product that would make a suitable replacement??
With the hard times the company has fallen on for years now, and absurd licensing terms driving away the business you have been able to retain, I also must voice my concerns for the longevity of Borland as an application provider. I cannot recommend Borland based solutions to my customers as a solution that is tenable for the future.
Not only will these predatory licensing terms end my own personal relationship with your company, but will also signal the end of the use of Borland products in my division.
Not only do your backward-ass licensing terms alienate developers, it punishes legal users of your software while doing nothing to prevent illegal use. I buy software and register, hence you can search my house. I steal software and don't register, you can't search my house. (At least not without proving that I had a copy of Kylix, et. al. in there.) It would seem that you have made the theft of your software the safest/best option for using a Borland product.
I am flabbergasted that you would consider this an acceptible license agreement, and I wonder what it was that you might have hoped to accomplish with these terms. I can only hope that like so many other products in Borland history, it will be swept up by a company who can market it even worse than you.
~Jason Maggard
Address and Phone witheld
(I don't want you showing up at my house...)
If you are really a student, Sun offers incredible discounts on Hardware. Also comparing that Sun Blade to the O2 I bought 3 years ago for $6,000, sounds like a heck of a deal to me.
Besides, how much should a computer cost that you can use for more than ten years?? I have a SparcStation 20 here that is older than most of the Slashdot members. It went from App server to print server, to development workstation. If Sun hadn't bundled that stupid Hot Java browser, I wouldn't even notice that this machine is kinda slow.
If you run Solaris on x86, you can plan on paying $500 three or four times before the Blade gives out. Goes to show that some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
If OS'es were houses, Microsoft would be a trailer park.
~Hammy
Nothing4sale.org
With comments like this, I start to wonder if RMS really believes in Open Source. Where the shell is concerned, wouldn't it be better to have some OSS bundled into a commware product?? Wouldn't it be lovely if all of these Mac people suddenly said, "I can use Linux, it's got BASH!"
What is the difference between Caldera selling their version of Linux+Proprietary and Apple?? Red Hat and SuSE still sell their OS, although it is obstensibly "the cost of the CD".
Zealots are only good for burning others, or being burned.
Agreed, snood has not only lost out on my PC buisness but my Game Boy Advance business as well.
The funny thing is that I used to run Gator because I needed gator for remembering my passwords for Nutscrape 4.72. Then it lingered on the machine for a year or so, then it came a parasite-ware. It just reminded me to remove it.
These programs are trojans. No doubt about it. They exist because they are installed by users who don't know better, don't explain what they do, and then hide in the system. Ummm... That's a trojan. Would BackOrfice still be a trojan if it was required to install it when you installed Jimbo's Chicken Pluckin' game??
The problem is that the available advertising systems are owned by companies like "Cydoor". (Formerly Auerate, formerly Radiate) And they are the kind of people who think that this kind of thing is acceptible.
I like in the story where the "ClickTillUWin" guy is complaining about lost buisness. You are advertising with a shady group. You should expect backlash. You should have known that Cydoor was responsable for the Real Player spyware, etc., etc., etc.... If you're advertising Jeri Curl juice in the Klan Times, don't be suprised at a drop off in buisness.
Along similar lines, advertising with DoubleClick is the easiest way to make sure your ad gets blocked. doubleclick.net has had a permanent 127.0.0.1 since before Jon Katz screwed up Slashdot.
When you respond to annoying advertising, you get more annoying advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
Why use different languages??
.NET inception date, and look like there is cohesive plan.
..., um..., and...
This is a simple one. I write perl, you write C#. You write a routine in C#, and a front-end in C#. I don't like your front-end so I rewrite mine in perl, and it all works.
However, I have a biggol' feeling that this will wind up as Java's platform independance. Half-Working.
.NET is there so that they can lump everything into it, say they Innovated it at the
So far, NET involves a way to log into Hotmail, a planned Java rewrite, and..., and
First of all, this should be modded flamebait. I thought flamebait meant a post specifically designed to start a flame. I have my doubts as to whether this poster actually believes anything he posted.
If he did:
No its not. If an employee can't act like a professional, you get rid of them. Very, very few projects require people smart enough to put up with a bunch of crap from them.
Depends on how you define crap, depends on your project. First of all, there is a shortage of truly high level programmers. "You're right, the guy writing this compiler is a pain, we'll just hire one of the Millions of guys out there who can write a compiler from scratch, and are stodgy non-nerf, docker-wearing professionals." The applications should flood in.
Speaking of which, I don't know why people who support the arts put up with the quirky behaviour exhibited by artists. Just get some artist who wants to act like a professional.
Maybe i'm at your cube, waiting patently for you to get done PLAYING.
Perhaps you should talk to the department supervisor. They are our official liason with customers. I'm very sorry ma'am, I'm not up to speed on your end of the transaction. Please speak with our supervisor.
Nah, don't explain it to them. Just sit in your cubes and make Dilbert jokes.
We would explain it if you could understand it. I have met very few programmers who are not excited about sharing information with other programmers. I have met fewer who will sit and try to explain code to a non-programmer.
Yes, we could dumb it down for you, but how far down?? Also we understand these things on a totally different level. "Well, we are just using an iframe with absolute positioning that is then imported with SSI to the main page where the showdiv code allows us to flexibly replace divs based on classes." "HunH?" "This thingy goes in that thingy." "oh..."
"Why will this take an extra month??" "Because we have to redo the DB routines to work with Oracle instead of Access now." "But I told Bill it was no problem... It'll still be on time."
Yeah, its really hip to have that one guy come in at work at 2pm and work until 9 at night, because he's so damn elite, until you realize that he's unable to interact with all of the _adults_ who have children and real-life responsibilities. Its called a team. "Oh, I don't work well in the morning." Oh, i'm so sorry! Gee, because the rest of us automatically wake up at 6:30am chipper and ready to go!
I spent almost 4 years working 11pm to 7am doing nightly maint when I got my first job. I believe that is pretty much the norm in my industry. When I took this job I'm at now, I asked for noon to 8PM. Of our pressmen, amny would never go to days, they're used to working late at night.
Who is this mythical "Rest of Us" that all get up at 6:30 A.M.?? If being in the majority makes it right, as you seem to believe, then your argument is baseless because the very stereotype you present is based on a majority of programmers. Hence 6:30 AM is not normal.
My Grandfather was a bartender and never got up before 2PM. Raised 6 kids, and was able to spend time with them afterschool. My uncle works in a factory and doesn't go in 'til 2AM.
Not only that, but:
Maybe the rest of us _aren't_ working late that night and need to get stuff done. Maybe we come in late because we don't want to be around people like you who think "I'm miserable, why shouldn't everybody else be." Maybe it's because our bosses do not do a good job of keeping world+dog out of your cube when you're coding.
I'm looking at moving up to management as well, but you sure as hell shouldn't. I'm not looking to liberate my brothers from clueless management, i'm just sick of working with people who are so busy playing video games, installing linux, and bitching about management
Be sure to tell them that at the meeting. If you feel that way about the employees you supervise, the good ones will leave and the bad ones will stay, and you'll wind up getting lees work from them than before. Hopefully your upper management is cognizant of this and will not let you destroy their IT department.
Regardless of whether you supervise Programmers or Envelope Stuffers, you still need to regard them with respect. Respect is the hardest currency to get, the most valuable when spent, and multiplies as it is spent.
I will also now correct your quoted statement:
Everyone has special needs, and accommodating those needs (and 'odd' behaviors) is a good idea all around, for both employee morale and department output.
You'd be suprised how much the girl in accounting appreciates 2 hours off in the middle of the day so she can pick up her kids. Or how much the guy in the mail room appreciates the flexible schedules.
Supply and demand baby, as long as geeks are in high demand, they'll get their asses kissed in the workplace. And I got news, there will always be a shortage of competent programmers, just like there is a shortage of competent lawyers even though we've got tons of 'em.
We do a thing here at work where we monetize our contributions to the company as a programmer. We take cost of outside program development + gross revenue generated + salaries saved - salary = Money we made the company. Outside of sales, no other department could even start this. Sales already does this, and sales departments are treated like Programmers. Good salespeople are also hard to find.
Soda is 30 cents a can. Suck it up.
I made my company $638,000 last year, deal with it. And that was bad year.
Maybe the rest of us _aren't_ working late that night and need to get stuff done.
And maybe that programmer puts in 60+ Hrs. a week?? Many of the ones I know do. One of the reasons that we are afforded alot of autonomy here is that we get paid for 40 Hrs. and work 50-60. Am I playing on your time or mine??
There's the rub, when they crack down on our stress valves, we put in an even 40hr. week, no staying late, etc... Guess what, no nerf gun = lower productivity.
Until the rest of the company, who work just as hard as the programmers
I can tell you that few people in my company put in the hours I do, have the big picture of our operation, or get called at all hours day or night to fix a system in 15 minutes so we can make the mail truck. None of them take the responsability for the quality of output that I do.
~Hammy
"Why does he get the nice chair??" "Because he's skilled labor."
Yeah, I really wished I had a boss who micromanaged my time and was always looking over my shoulder to make sure I was working.
Besides, you can't monitor everyone's work habits to identify slackers without being all up in the business of the good and bad employees.
I know plenty of guys who can get their text editor up in a second and look like they've been working for hours.
~Hammy
"Not a bad opinion, shame it wasn't thought out."
Which comes down to being honest with the client which most managers aren't.
No, It requires a proper plan.
.NET or something.
WE need a content management system that allows us to create web site.
- is different from -
We need to find out how to use Oracle, why don't you write a Content Managenment System in VB that will interact with our Oracle DB. Oh, and make sure it uses SOAP or XML or
- Or my favorite -
Can't you write that program (stand-alone executable) in JavaScript??
I have always told my bosses I am output only. I don't accept input.
You tell me waht the program is suppoed to do, not what language to write it in, and it needs a "relational database" and should be a "net service". I am the programmer, I determine if we need a relational database.
The worst thing about programming is always being Buzzword compliant.
And then all the "Souldn't that say 'Associate' instead of 'employee'". "The mission statement doesn't include the word dynamic..."
Changes.... That's why it's called version 2.0 The point releases is where it doesn't change much for the programmer.
~Hammy
"Shibby"
Actually, the Olympic games were revived as an event for the wealthy. First of all, you have to pay your way there generally, so that hinders Somalian track stars from competing to some extent.
So where does all of the money generated by the Olympics go?? The IOC.
The Olympics has never been about showcasing up and coming talent. I don't know where you got that Idea. The no pros rule was instituted because of one particularily talented athelete who defeated some wealthy *sshole.
I forget the guy's name right now, but one of the contestants against Thorpe in 1912 became IOC director and was responsable for denying Thorpe his medals.
His medals were taken for playing Minor league baseball two years earlier for $60 a month. Ironically, many atheletes, Thorpe included, stated that they had made more money playing College Football than Semi-Pro baseball.
The real issue is this: Shouldn't the IOC be looking at the benefits of the Olympics reaching a larger audience as opposed to their profitability??
~Jason
The decision to take VC funding was unavoidable at the time
Why was it unavoidable?? I keep hearing all of these things that were unavoidable, that we couldn't do. The VC funding was not unavoidable.
companies that had already raised 30 to 40 million dollars. Ironically, those companies went out of business long before we did because their burn rates were outrageous.
So one could almost assume from your statements that getting more VC money would have ran you out of buisness faster?? Back to what was unavoidable, had you not recieved the VC money what would have been the worst scenario?? Your buisness fails earlier??
The Dot.com boom was all about look at how rich my neighbor is getting. You took the VC funding to try to build your big important buisness. You want to be a Microsoft, an Oracle.
Oddly enough, most of the Dot Commies were so focused on the carrot, they never saw the stick. "I don't need to read this do I??" I personally don't understand why a company of 35 needs 5 Million in cash to begin with. There are advertising expenses and such, and I know waht all of the excuses work out to be.
The reality of it is that someone sat in their bedroom and wrote a program/built a website/used buzzwords in a fascinating manner. Now they believe that they must have 5 Million to advertise their Programming Firm/Design Comp./Consulting outfit. Well, 4 Million for advertising, 1 million for Aeron chairs. (Actually, all of those Aerons might have been the best use of VC money.)
Finally, these geeks wouldn't take an economics class in college, and now are convinced that they can run a multi-million dollar company. Well, the VC's didn't believe it either, which is why all of that money was generally tied to "as long as you're not in charge."
This is just another playing of the tortoise and the hare. Perhaps without that VC you would not have gone as fast, but you might have finished the race. My company is not Microsoft, but we're still around, and we're 2 years in the black. I can not think of a single competitor in the area who has survived the meltdown. I can think of 3 that tried hard to buy me with VC money, and they're out of buisness right now.
We turned down any and all VC funding. The only funding we have ever had is $60,000 in loans from my in-laws. (Paid Back, but I still owe them for my Kitchen Renovation...)
And honestly, we are well positioned for a market rebound. We have a longer development cycle due to fewer employees, but we are far more speculative in our products, and so generally have the luxury of being the first to start.
Just like Enron, you keep you money in because you're greedy and you don't think you can lose, and then you're mad becuase noone explained it was possible to lose.
Apologies to the original poster. I've gotten a bit off-subject, and I am not trying to indict your past. But remember, there are very few things in this world that are truly unavoidable. Next time do yourself a favor, just list the VC funding as a biggol' mistake so people aren't fooled into thinking there's a way to win at that game. "They took all of my money in Vegas, I should have hit on the 5." No, you should have avoided Vegas.
~Hammy
Pissing you off on Slashdot for over 5 years!
Now where's that Tom Christiansen punk!?
And then Linus complains and complains....
I personally like the comment about he was only able to do 50 patches etc... (Gee Linus that's ten off from last month??) This is still about the fact that Linus is overwhelmed and refuses to delegate. The community gets up in arms about it finally, and Linus gets a CVS system instead of splitting up some work.
Well, maybe this will quiet the community until Alan C. can get back to it.
~Hammy
Limited File Movement: Semms like you could burn it to CD, rip the CD and then move the files anywhere you damn well please....
Streaming?? That's radio, and can be supported by commercials. Same thing for music I download and can't keep.
~Hammy
OK, Now we have admitted it, I feel better. Now, I know that most of you out there also pirate shareware. (That was the point of the article...)
1.) If the registration process was easier... No, this argument is invalid. The real problem is that pirating is too easy. I can confess, that I go out and download a program, go to Google and type in "Program Name Serial" or "Program Name crackz (or cracks)" and find what I need in about 5 minutes.
2.) The problem is the dedicated Hackers...
True, but not the real problem. If your program is popular enough to have someone make a keygen for it, congrats. 9 times out of 10, someone gets the serial off the version at work and then publishes it. Or they purchase the software and publish the codes. This feeds back to 1.
Here at work, they lock up the coffee. There is a note on the door about "Call so-so", etc. I hate calling anyone. So, I grab a paper clip and open the door. This hearkens back to the ease argument. It is realistically harder for me to pick the lock than call on the phone, so why do I do it??
It's about two things: Knowing that I can get at these locked away resources, and knowing that they can't control me.
More than that, every lock serves as a challenge for someone.
Now, I can see this really affecting productivity apps like Ultra-Edit or something, but with Games you have so many options for enforcing the shareware purchase that this should not be a problem. (Witholding levels, unlocking save capabilities, etc...)
Now, to go more into apps like Ultra-Edit, if you pirate them for private use, you will want them at work. (Since UE is one of my pirate progs....) I can tell you that the Ultra-Edit I pirated led to our company buying 25 copies. Had I not been a UE user, we would have gone with Notetab Pro. The same could be said for Paint Shop Pro, Homesite (Back when it was shareware), and 100 other programs).
And while Ambrosia complains about the cost of piracy, how many users would they have if they had been forced to actually market that initial project on a CD in Comp USA. I can assure you that Ambrosia has not lost as much to piracy as many of these studios pay for a one week end-cap at Compusa.
Piracy has its problems, but it also led to MS getting a 90% market share, the tech boom of the late '90s, etc...
This is the same argument that existed with Napster. Does downloading tracks mean you won't buy the CD?? If you pirate Ambrosia software, will you not buy the next version?? If you hadn't pirated software would you have ever heard of Ambrosia??
My guess is that if Ambrosia had not had the Net to act as a marketing medium that guy'd be in the cube next to me, talking about starting a game company some day. Now that you have used the Net as your initial marketing medium, you want to complain about it's deficiencies??
As Tom Waits once said, "If I exorcise my devils will my angels leave me too??" If you use rumors to spread information, don't complain when rumors circulate about you. When you use the Net and word of mouth to promote a program, don't be suprised when that same medium starts promoting getting your program for free. It comes from the same drive, "I really like this program, you should try it...." becomes "Hey I found a serial so you can have this great program free." Merry Freakin' X-mas.
They want all of the benefits and none of the problems. Besides when you can pirate PhotoShop, MS Office, and all of the other Non-Shareware just as easy (or even easier), what is shareware worth??
When you can get Photoshop 6.0 for free, is $99 too much for Paint Shop Pro?? "Hey, I have a leftover Filet Mignon you can have..." "Sorry, I don't eat leftovers, I'm going to go spend $10 on McDonalds."
As the higher price Apps stop piracy, the effect will trickle down to the Shareware shops, but not until.
~Hammy
Is there a moderation for "Funny, Insightful, and BRIEF"???
Until they improve and define moderation terms, you will continue to get poor moderation.
~Hammy
From 50 -> 1 in 30 days on one post a day
Emusic has been up and operating their service for over a year now, with services like TMBG Unlimited, and 9.95 for unlimited downloads.
Granted, e-music is not perfect. Most new artists are not there, but the oldies are there in force. But the real triumph for e-music is it is easy to use, software agnostic, and affordable.
These services are not supposed to be popular. I think Pressplay and others are like the 100 mile Carbureator. The Music Industry really wants this to fail. Then they can claim that the only reason for the popularity of Napster and clones is that their free, not that consumers want digital music.
The record companies have already waited too long for this. With the ubiquity of MP3 hardware in our homes, and a need for the RC's to make an alternative with capable DRM. If they move away from MP3, you'll just see a whole bunch of converters out there so that the new files can be played on old equipment.
~Hammy
Is that why Pay-Per-View is $8.95 for a movie I could rent for $1.....
Are you aware of the purpose of a sit in?? The idea is that the business of the Company/Government/Whatever cannot continue until such sit-in has ended. This was the purpose of operation rescue, a sit-in in front of the Abortion clinics so noone could kill a baby. (Not anti-abortion, just making a point.)
Now, in the hypothetical sense, if you knew that they could not put a man (someone you'd save) to death until the computer starts the Lethal Injection machine, you could save that man over a wire. By the same token, you could disrupt the activities of the aforementioned Abortion clinic by taking out their computer, or by taking out the electric company.
What is lame and cowardly, is hiding behind a police force to enforce unfair and discriminatory policies paid for by the people you are intimidating. You would not argue with the violent overthrow of a slave master, and the US Govt. is little more than that.
I don't argue that this LA guy was a whacko, or that we should be publishing bomb information on the internet. But If you really believe that publishing how to make a bomb AT ALL is criminal, lets go lock up Tom Robbins, Einstein, most spy book authors, and the writers of McGuyver. Let's go lock up anyone who has ever written a Chemistry book.
"They'd be better off by actually writing letter to the companies they hate, but of course, that takes actual time and effort." You're joking right?? Yes, we all know that writing a letter to a company gets big notice.
I'm sure that with your long and illustrious history of social activism you would be more than capable of giving us a run down of how you have managed to end 1 or 2 social injustices of the world, and perhaps give us some insight on the best method for changing the world.
At least this person stood for something, no matter how misguided the means. Lame is not doing something stupid to try and stop injustice, lame is doing nothing at all to try and stop injustice.
~Hammy
But the logic is flawed. One of the points brought out was that there is, and has been, an "unofficial patch penguin" for years and years now. Alan Cox and now Dave Jones have provided that service for many years. Most anyone knew that you always applied the -ac patches, even though they were not in the official kernel.
What is wrong with calling them the -pp patches and having them have some sort of official backing?? Then, as the maintainer of this tree changes, there is not a huge shift.
I have been writing Drivers, etc. for Linux since 0.6, and I know that there is alot of work not being evaluated for the Kernel. Perhaps the greatest danger is the forming of a "Linux elite", a group of programmers who are the only ones able to contribute code to the Kernel. This has already happened in an unofficial sense.
Linus generally doesn't even look at patches from other people, unless it is specifically reccommended to him by someone else (Like A.C.), or come from someone he knows and trusts. (About 10 people) This weakens us. Vonnegut once said: "It is not ideas that hurt our children, but a lack of them." and this is true of Linus' child too. I'm not saying that 300 people need kernel access, but I do say the system breaks down when only 10 people even warrant consideration. And even among those there are too many waiting for important work to be integrated into the kernel.
Linus is the single greatest obstacle to keeping existing maintainers, and attracting new ones. Existing maintainers get tired of NO feedback, new maintainers just don't know what to think.
How to patch Linux:
1. Create patch
2. Mail to Linus
3. Send Linus e-mail asking if he got the patch you sent a month ago.
4. Send Linus an e-mail asking if he got the patch you sent 3 months ago.
5. Send to Alan Cox asking if perhaps Linus had died.
6. Send to Dave Jones after finding out that he's not accepting patches anymore.
7. E-mail Linus while creating your own fork in CVS
8. Update patch and re-send
9. Search the Internet for other open source projects that actually need you.
10. Recieve e-mail from Linus that your patch wasn't accepted. No reason. (Real reason? You haven't updated the patch for the 2.5 series)
Estimated time from 1-10, one year....
The point that the poster made was that since Linus has his hands in too many pies, and patch integration is so vital, appointing someone to be in charge of this would do alot for getting the backlog of integration work done, and leave Linus more time to do what he does best, CODE!
Linus and his ego be damned. He can take this "I'll take my ball and go home" attitude and leave it. Linux is an OS. An OS trying to make critical inroads in business. If Linus is still under the perception that this is still just his hobby, Linux is not an OS worth supporting, because it's only future is being Linus' hobby.
Linux is up to 20-30 kernel forks being distributed. Can Linus tell me he really doesn't see the problem here?? Notice that when he was asked if important work was not being included because of him, he ignored the question. So instead you have the distros adding ext3, and ReiserFS support and any semblance of a standard is beginning to break.
"One 'patch penguin' scales no better than I do", is an interesting statement. Is (one person = patches) >= (one person = patching, coding, designing, and representing)?? He means to tell us that one focused person would do no better than his scattered efforts?? I mean no dis here, but that just doesn't make sense.
Linus is doing the unthinkable. He is leaving us to seriously question his integrity, his motives, and his judgement. This is not the first time this has happened, and it is becoming all too frequent.
Perhaps the Linux 3 mascot will be an Ass??
~Hammy
Nothing4sale.org
You owe me a shirt friend. The reality of it is, spamming works. If it didn't work, people wouldn't bother. Notice you get less telemarketers lately?? Telemarketing is not as effective as it once was.
Why is Bernie Shifman any less guilty that AOL, Amazon, or MSN?? I have only been to MSN once, and then I changed the homepage preference, but I get e-mails from them daily. Why?? A hotmail user e-mailed me.
When I did consulting work, I used to harvest directories of local IT managers and send brochures and resumes for our companies services. While I was somewhat targeted in my spamming, I got alot of wrong e-mail addresses.
I am looking over old records, and I made over $27k from "cold calls(S)" (notation for people I spammed) in 1997. I admit it was spam, and I am proud of it.
Of course, realtors look through tax records and find people who bought their houses 5 years ago and contact all of them.
The real concept of Spam vs. Bulk mail seems to revolve around the idea that there is no penalty for the spammer. He doesn't pay for stamps, paper, etc. But to me there is far less of an environmental impact to sending an e-mail than a glossy brochure.
Just look at all of the junk mail you recieve and know that every person in america gets just as much. All of those glossy catalogs and 4.9% credit card offers consuming the landfills oif America.
The effectivness of an advertising message sent via e-mail is just as effective than that sent by snail mail. The real key is to have a good advertising message. If you send a subject "Resume Attached: " your response is not as good as say... "New streaming solutions for multimedia in the Mobile Paradigm" or even "Multimedia pioneer seeks new java-based challenges.". You might read that e-mail, the guy in accounting won't.
Yes, your subject should reflect the body of your message. If you are looking for a job as a Unix admin, put it in the subject! "Unix admin and scripter seeks employment." If they have a Unix job, they'll read it, otherwise, they won't.
I'll bet none of the resumes I sent in 1997 still exist today, but I'm sure that 99% of the paper resumes sent in that same year are still cluttering something up.
I'll spam you and let you know where to mail that shirt.
~Hammy
That is not even a standard enterprise agreement. While some of that language was part of it, there are still license provisos that would be most unacceptible to an enterprise.
What if you have one copy of Borland BSA builder in your company, they still claim these rights??
Also, they have not released new license terms. What are my rights concerning the program now?? The old license was not intended for you, but there is no new license, hence, the terms of the old license remain in effect.
Remember, people use these tools to write code for money. Licensing is very important when it becomes a big part of your business.
P.S. Who qualifies as an enterprise again??
~Hammy
The opposing viewpoint is "Since we have to use closed source, it would be impossible to do this." This is incredibly myopic. But we can get these programs written faster with closed alternatives.... More hogwash.
The real truth of it is this. If we wait ten more years to pass something like this, there will be an ever increasing number of proprietary apps wormed through our research code. There is nothing so pressing in science that it cannot afford to be done right. (In fact, we should probably slow the march of progress long enough to perfect what we have anyway...)
The author of the opposing viewpoint carps about the millions of lines of proprietary code that would have to be re-written first. Would this be easier in ten years?? No.
The author comments on some proprietary projects of his own he has in mind. Fine, don't produce them with public money.
My belief is that public money should benefit the public. If this had been in place ten years ago, the state of computer programming the world over would be that much better. Just like an author reads Melville, Hawthorne, etc. to learn to write well, so could we study this large public codebase as programmers, and see how the pro's do it.
If the academic world in infested with proprietary software, it is time to eradicate the vermin. Besides, some programmer(s) will just end up getting a grant to re-write the proprietary portions. You can't honestly tell me that this would be more drastic than Y2K prep, or a BSA audit. Or are you against programmers working??
Dear Borland,
You are no doubt inundated with e-mails complaining about this, but I have recently read an article that points out some very shady clauses in the licensing for your Linux products.
Most notably I take issue with the following clauses that were pointed out in the article posted at http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/369/
12. AUDIT. During the term of this License and for one(1) year thereafter, upon reasonable notice and duringnormal business hours, Borland or its outside auditors willhave the right to enter your premises and access yourrecords and computer systems to verify that you have paidto Borland the correct amounts owed under this Licenseand determine whether the Products are being used inaccordance with the terms of this License. You willprovide reasonable assistance to Borland in connectionwith this provision. You agree to pay the cost of the auditif any underpayments during the period covered by theaudit amount to more than five percent (5%) of the feesactually owed for that period.
14.4 No Jury Trials; No Joinder. Each party hereby
irrevocably waives its right to a jury trial in any legal
action, suit or proceeding between the parties arising out
of or relating to this License. A copy this License may be
filed with the court as written consent by both parties to a
bench trial. You agree that any dispute you may have
against Borland cannot be joined with any dispute of any
other person or entity in a lawsuit, arbitration or any other
proceeding, or resolved on a classwide basis.
This sounds like a company that believes it's customers to be criminal, while knowing the company itself is criminal. You have neither the demand nor the market strength to set such barriers for use and succeed. Would you grant a vendor these same rights??
I have been a customer of your company for over 10 years. From my first C compiler to the more modern IDE's offered. I have consistently paid for my software and associated licenses. Indeed, your sensible licensing terms was one of the main reasons that I was drawn to Borland software initially. Now you believe that you deserve the right to come and invade my privacy without reason. It is quite possible that I am mistaken, but I do not believe that I have ever broken your trust in the past, so why have I lost that trust??
In addition, you require that I place a greater amount of trust in your company and strip me of many of the rights I am guaranteed by law.
My computer systems contain quite a bit of sensitive data pertaining to my business, finances, life, work, and play. I have no desire to open these systems to your company simply for the right to continue paying more and more for your software.
I have a total of 11 Borland products between my home and work computer. I have 17 other co-workers with similar usage. You have lost all of our business. Perhaps you could recommend a competing product that would make a suitable replacement??
With the hard times the company has fallen on for years now, and absurd licensing terms driving away the business you have been able to retain, I also must voice my concerns for the longevity of Borland as an application provider. I cannot recommend Borland based solutions to my customers as a solution that is tenable for the future.
Not only will these predatory licensing terms end my own personal relationship with your company, but will also signal the end of the use of Borland products in my division.
Not only do your backward-ass licensing terms alienate developers, it punishes legal users of your software while doing nothing to prevent illegal use. I buy software and register, hence you can search my house. I steal software and don't register, you can't search my house. (At least not without proving that I had a copy of Kylix, et. al. in there.) It would seem that you have made the theft of your software the safest/best option for using a Borland product.
I am flabbergasted that you would consider this an acceptible license agreement, and I wonder what it was that you might have hoped to accomplish with these terms. I can only hope that like so many other products in Borland history, it will be swept up by a company who can market it even worse than you.
~Jason Maggard
Address and Phone witheld
(I don't want you showing up at my house...)
If you are really a student, Sun offers incredible discounts on Hardware. Also comparing that Sun Blade to the O2 I bought 3 years ago for $6,000, sounds like a heck of a deal to me.
Besides, how much should a computer cost that you can use for more than ten years?? I have a SparcStation 20 here that is older than most of the Slashdot members. It went from App server to print server, to development workstation. If Sun hadn't bundled that stupid Hot Java browser, I wouldn't even notice that this machine is kinda slow.
If you run Solaris on x86, you can plan on paying $500 three or four times before the Blade gives out. Goes to show that some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
If OS'es were houses, Microsoft would be a trailer park.
~Hammy
Nothing4sale.org
For free, I could download an ISO from a warez site.
All software is free until you get caught.
With comments like this, I start to wonder if RMS really believes in Open Source. Where the shell is concerned, wouldn't it be better to have some OSS bundled into a commware product?? Wouldn't it be lovely if all of these Mac people suddenly said, "I can use Linux, it's got BASH!"
What is the difference between Caldera selling their version of Linux+Proprietary and Apple?? Red Hat and SuSE still sell their OS, although it is obstensibly "the cost of the CD".
Zealots are only good for burning others, or being burned.
~Hammy
Radio Free Albemuth would make a great movie, and you can munge stuff from the Valis trilogy to pad with some sense of story.
Agreed, snood has not only lost out on my PC buisness but my Game Boy Advance business as well.
The funny thing is that I used to run Gator because I needed gator for remembering my passwords for Nutscrape 4.72. Then it lingered on the machine for a year or so, then it came a parasite-ware. It just reminded me to remove it.
These programs are trojans. No doubt about it. They exist because they are installed by users who don't know better, don't explain what they do, and then hide in the system. Ummm... That's a trojan. Would BackOrfice still be a trojan if it was required to install it when you installed Jimbo's Chicken Pluckin' game??
The problem is that the available advertising systems are owned by companies like "Cydoor". (Formerly Auerate, formerly Radiate) And they are the kind of people who think that this kind of thing is acceptible.
I like in the story where the "ClickTillUWin" guy is complaining about lost buisness. You are advertising with a shady group. You should expect backlash. You should have known that Cydoor was responsable for the Real Player spyware, etc., etc., etc.... If you're advertising Jeri Curl juice in the Klan Times, don't be suprised at a drop off in buisness.
Along similar lines, advertising with DoubleClick is the easiest way to make sure your ad gets blocked. doubleclick.net has had a permanent 127.0.0.1 since before Jon Katz screwed up Slashdot.
When you respond to annoying advertising, you get more annoying advertising.
~Hammy
Nothing4Sale.org
Because if we all used FreeNet it would crash like a Microsoft built cessna flown by John Denver.