What do you mean 2 hours away? Two hours time difference when the clocks change? But, you wouldn't be flying to say Sydney from Singapore in two hours!
AUD$500 effort? Given the price of hardware in this region (I'm in Singapore, ~7 hours flight away) I reckon it's possible to get that machine for AUD$1200.
I would have thought that the legality of the activity would prohibit insurance companies from covering the risk. SCO haven't established that the use of Linux is illegal. On the other hand, it has been established that copyright infringement is not legal. Don't think too many insurance companies will be rushing for this opportunity.
I liked emusic.com because I could spend $10/month and download a reasonable amount of music. Alas, their OS X and Linux clients are broken at the moment (for me and a number of others anyway..).
You really must give off a bad vibe. I and most of my colleagues travel with laptops all over the world (USA, Western Europe, MiddleEast, parts of Africa and SE Asia for me). I've never paid any re-entry fees - I've only been asked once. That was in Amsterdam and I explained that I carried the laptop for business. After spending sometime talking to them about where I lived and what I did, they let me carry on. I think being taken aside was down to me looking hungover, scruffy and knackered from a 12hour flight with a flight case containing alot of gadgets (laptop, spare HDD, pda, 2 mobiles and a digital camera).
I agree with you up to a point, C# is pretty late. But Microsoft were also pretty late catching on to web broswers and they managed to force the uptake of IE. Anti-trust and monopoly arguments aside, they are capable of putting the lnaguage about and competing with 'established' languages like Java.
Perhaps IBM's discussions with Sun on making Java open source will be frutiful and we see Java being taken down a path where current deficienies are better addressed.
My impression from reading the order is that IBM do have to produce contributions made to Linux, which I'm assuming would amount to producing code. Also, I'm wondering what form they have to provide the AIX & Dynix releases to SCO in?
Unlikely - according to this article. The easiest thing for SCO to do is to sue a small company who can't afford to fight back (i.e. a protracted court case would kill their cashflows). Get a nominal out of court settlement and seal the details under the terms of the settlement. Gives them a 'win' that they feel will add legitimacy / publicity to their main case.
What pompous disregard Those "kind of products" you mention and the public's blind acceptance of them fuel the fires of Vendor Lock In, and this acceptance is the problem. Take a step to one side and look at Apple's product history and then talk to me about the concept of planned obsolescence. The same techniques created a Microsoft monopoly, and brought it to the point where you admit that taking some of Microsoft's market away would be fine by you. Apple and MS are lumped together. The only difference is that the one is smaller than the other. When you talk about 'pompous disregard', I'm not entirely sure what I'm pompously disregarding. My comment about 'those kind of products' was a comparison between the products of Microsoft and Apple. I use a Mac and I find the quality of software vastly superior to that produced by Microsoft and a number of the third parties who produce software for the platform. I don't see anything pompous about that, I'm stating personal experience. Blind acceptance certainly doesn't come into play. If by vendor lock-in you mean people consistently buy Apple products then I would agrue that it is because they want to and not because they have to. Frequently the argument is made that x86 systems are hugely cheaper, so there is a cheaper solution available. People stick with Apple because they wouldn't change not because they can't change. I presume your comment on product obsolescence is a diversion because I don't see the relevance at this point. The Microsoft monopoly came about by locking vendors into an operating system no matter who made the hardware. Apple make the hardware and the software, they're not screwing over other companies. I don't see them telling IBM or Compaq what should be installed on end-user systems. I suggest you revise your concept of a monopoly in capitalist economics. They are two vastly different companies.
"Disingenuous" is what Al Sharpton says about someone when he doesn't want to say "liar" on television. I'm not Al Sharpton, I certainly wouldn't be as audacious as to even suggest you are a liar. You have a considered opinion which you argue, I disagree with and think you are harsh in your treatment. But I'd be an arsehole to write you off with a trivial accusation.
Darwin runs on PPC and broadly speaking x86. Given that diversity and the availability of the source I don't see an issue in how widely it can be applied. So I believe my like for like is justifiable.
I'm not familiar with the GNU-Darwin project so I just read the FAQ quickly. My impression of the project is that it aims to bring GNU software to the Darwin OS by forking the Darwin OS. We come back to the issue of the additional software developed by Apple to run on their GUI (and associated) layers and not in the core OS. This doesn't detract in anyway from Apple's efforts are deride them. We're not talking about like-for-like as an issue here, we're talking about a project building upon a base.
If I'm missing something mammoth I'm open to being enlightened....
Your wage comment doesn't make sense, the person posing the question could well improve their position vastly by changing jobs. The the 'you're from India' comment?? Such a change in career is not the preserve of Indians.
What do you think Steve Jobs is capable of doing if it means more market share? If it means taking a share out of Microsoft's music downloads market. Taking a share out of the Unix market? The Linux market. He saw the BSD stuff there for the taking, with no obligation to give back. He took.
Lumping Apple and Microsoft together is pretty unfair to Apple. Your main gripe is that Apple is closed-sourced. To say that Apple just took from BSD is disingenuous, they have opened Darwin. You could say that's giving like for like. The GUI wasn't part of what they took and they didn't give it back. Accepted, that goes against the open source philosophy. That's where capitalism stands right now. I'd rather see Apple stay in business and produce the kind of products they do rather than try to 'do right' and go out of business because it wasn't sustainable for them. Taking a share out of the *nix markets is fine by me. I have no issue with having a greater choice of stable platforms. Taking from the Microsoft music download market is fine by me - I have a product which works the way I want...
Let's see, they're a company that specialises in using the names of popular people to generate hits at a site advertising products completely unrelated. They have extensive prior history in this area.
No, they are attempting to profit from the assets of the JRR Tolkien estate. In so doing it could also be claimed that they are affecting the value of the assets. The difference between the cases of the estate and SCO is the existence of relevant substantiating evidence.
I don't care what the general public calls it That's my point. You don't care what they think and therefore assume that makes them irrelevant. I would disagree that the cognoscenti consider it 'kind of moronic'. Perhaps they identify a person as from a particular usage demographic (casual computer user or some such grouping) when that person uses the term...
As an aside I don't think someone has to be a nerd or extremely technical to be among the cognoscenti of internet users.
No, I referred to a section of the Slashdot community. The ones that jump in at the start of the discussion with drivel. There is a lot of valuable input from members of the remaining section however it is frequently lost in the nosie.
My posting was not a "All Slashdotters should have the same opinions!". Read it again and you might see that the sentiment is 'support not subvert' the OSS movement.
I appreciate that, I guess this morning I'm in bad humour. Must have picked the wrong articles to read first:) There are just a lot of times when I think the support of OSS isn't motivated by the philosophy rather it is being used as a stick too often.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you mean 2 hours away? Two hours time difference when the clocks change? But, you wouldn't be flying to say Sydney from Singapore in two hours!
AUD$500 effort? Given the price of hardware in this region (I'm in Singapore, ~7 hours flight away) I reckon it's possible to get that machine for AUD$1200.
Bugger! I have mod points but 'wanker' isn't an option...
Wish I had some mod-points now ..
I would have thought that the legality of the activity would prohibit insurance companies from covering the risk. SCO haven't established that the use of Linux is illegal. On the other hand, it has been established that copyright infringement is not legal. Don't think too many insurance companies will be rushing for this opportunity.
..).
I liked emusic.com because I could spend $10/month and download a reasonable amount of music. Alas, their OS X and Linux clients are broken at the moment (for me and a number of others anyway
You really must give off a bad vibe. I and most of my colleagues travel with laptops all over the world (USA, Western Europe, MiddleEast, parts of Africa and SE Asia for me). I've never paid any re-entry fees - I've only been asked once. That was in Amsterdam and I explained that I carried the laptop for business. After spending sometime talking to them about where I lived and what I did, they let me carry on. I think being taken aside was down to me looking hungover, scruffy and knackered from a 12hour flight with a flight case containing alot of gadgets (laptop, spare HDD, pda, 2 mobiles and a digital camera).
I agree with you up to a point, C# is pretty late. But Microsoft were also pretty late catching on to web broswers and they managed to force the uptake of IE. Anti-trust and monopoly arguments aside, they are capable of putting the lnaguage about and competing with 'established' languages like Java.
Perhaps IBM's discussions with Sun on making Java open source will be frutiful and we see Java being taken down a path where current deficienies are better addressed.
Dumbest question I'm ever going to ask, but here goes anyway .. What alternate shells are there to explorer?
...but presuming that *all* technology can be defeated is a bit of a stretch.
:)
Isn't that what patents are for?
My impression from reading the order is that IBM do have to produce contributions made to Linux, which I'm assuming would amount to producing code. Also, I'm wondering what form they have to provide the AIX & Dynix releases to SCO in?
I agree that the title reads horribly, though.
Unlikely - according to this article. The easiest thing for SCO to do is to sue a small company who can't afford to fight back (i.e. a protracted court case would kill their cashflows). Get a nominal out of court settlement and seal the details under the terms of the settlement. Gives them a 'win' that they feel will add legitimacy / publicity to their main case.
I prefer 'Redundant'. But 'Incorrect' would be useful.
What pompous disregard Those "kind of products" you mention and the public's blind acceptance of them fuel the fires of Vendor Lock In, and this acceptance is the problem. Take a step to one side and look at Apple's product history and then talk to me about the concept of planned obsolescence. The same techniques created a Microsoft monopoly, and brought it to the point where you admit that taking some of Microsoft's market away would be fine by you. Apple and MS are lumped together. The only difference is that the one is smaller than the other.
When you talk about 'pompous disregard', I'm not entirely sure what I'm pompously disregarding. My comment about 'those kind of products' was a comparison between the products of Microsoft and Apple. I use a Mac and I find the quality of software vastly superior to that produced by Microsoft and a number of the third parties who produce software for the platform. I don't see anything pompous about that, I'm stating personal experience. Blind acceptance certainly doesn't come into play. If by vendor lock-in you mean people consistently buy Apple products then I would agrue that it is because they want to and not because they have to. Frequently the argument is made that x86 systems are hugely cheaper, so there is a cheaper solution available. People stick with Apple because they wouldn't change not because they can't change. I presume your comment on product obsolescence is a diversion because I don't see the relevance at this point. The Microsoft monopoly came about by locking vendors into an operating system no matter who made the hardware. Apple make the hardware and the software, they're not screwing over other companies. I don't see them telling IBM or Compaq what should be installed on end-user systems. I suggest you revise your concept of a monopoly in capitalist economics. They are two vastly different companies.
"Disingenuous" is what Al Sharpton says about someone when he doesn't want to say "liar" on television.
I'm not Al Sharpton, I certainly wouldn't be as audacious as to even suggest you are a liar. You have a considered opinion which you argue, I disagree with and think you are harsh in your treatment. But I'd be an arsehole to write you off with a trivial accusation.
Darwin runs on PPC and broadly speaking x86. Given that diversity and the availability of the source I don't see an issue in how widely it can be applied. So I believe my like for like is justifiable.
I'm not familiar with the GNU-Darwin project so I just read the FAQ quickly. My impression of the project is that it aims to bring GNU software to the Darwin OS by forking the Darwin OS. We come back to the issue of the additional software developed by Apple to run on their GUI (and associated) layers and not in the core OS. This doesn't detract in anyway from Apple's efforts are deride them. We're not talking about like-for-like as an issue here, we're talking about a project building upon a base.
If I'm missing something mammoth I'm open to being enlightened....
Your wage comment doesn't make sense, the person posing the question could well improve their position vastly by changing jobs.
The the 'you're from India' comment?? Such a change in career is not the preserve of Indians.
What do you think Steve Jobs is capable of doing if it means more market share? If it means taking a share out of Microsoft's music downloads market. Taking a share out of the Unix market? The Linux market. He saw the BSD stuff there for the taking, with no obligation to give back. He took.
...
Lumping Apple and Microsoft together is pretty unfair to Apple. Your main gripe is that Apple is closed-sourced. To say that Apple just took from BSD is disingenuous, they have opened Darwin. You could say that's giving like for like. The GUI wasn't part of what they took and they didn't give it back. Accepted, that goes against the open source philosophy. That's where capitalism stands right now. I'd rather see Apple stay in business and produce the kind of products they do rather than try to 'do right' and go out of business because it wasn't sustainable for them. Taking a share out of the *nix markets is fine by me. I have no issue with having a greater choice of stable platforms. Taking from the Microsoft music download market is fine by me - I have a product which works the way I want
Let's see, they're a company that specialises in using the names of popular people to generate hits at a site advertising products completely unrelated. They have extensive prior history in this area.
No, they are attempting to profit from the assets of the JRR Tolkien estate. In so doing it could also be claimed that they are affecting the value of the assets. The difference between the cases of the estate and SCO is the existence of relevant substantiating evidence.
Read the article: Rev. Bernard McCoy runs the operation. Is he 'real' enough? :)
... guess you could call the Crusades the transport method of an early P2P network then
I think he's aiming at subliminal 'stud' link ... :)
The use of 'faith' in the grandparent post implies faith in a deity or the divine, rather than faith in a method as you have implied.
Because disagreeing with /. today gets you hammered by moderators...
I don't care what the general public calls it
That's my point. You don't care what they think and therefore assume that makes them irrelevant. I would disagree that the cognoscenti consider it 'kind of moronic'. Perhaps they identify a person as from a particular usage demographic (casual computer user or some such grouping) when that person uses the term...
As an aside I don't think someone has to be a nerd or extremely technical to be among the cognoscenti of internet users.
No, I referred to a section of the Slashdot community. The ones that jump in at the start of the discussion with drivel. There is a lot of valuable input from members of the remaining section however it is frequently lost in the nosie.
My posting was not a "All Slashdotters should have the same opinions!". Read it again and you might see that the sentiment is 'support not subvert' the OSS movement.
I appreciate that, I guess this morning I'm in bad humour. Must have picked the wrong articles to read first :) There are just a lot of times when I think the support of OSS isn't motivated by the philosophy rather it is being used as a stick too often.