It maybe that what you say is true for long haul and it has certainly been universally true in the past.
But with the current number of wireless laptops around...
I can easily see a city running as it should networked by the laptops within it. Exactly what the Internet was designed for - or a general case of what i was designed for, error correcting, sporadic contact, resilient).
There are already 'price' parameters that can be set for routing. All it needs is a little software and configuration, not that much really.
I have mine sitting in the box next to me yet to be unwrapped, 20, 2gig. And I bought the thing to replace a Dual CPU G5 PowerMac with 3.5 gig which I use to play WoW and not much else nowadays (and that is why I never metamoderate any more). Thanks for making me sure I made the right choice!
I would have thought that the days of Tor and onion routing would have made such shenannigans futile.
Mind you, we don't want them to know that. Let them think they are in control.
To all you Australians blaming Americans for this: we're not going to invade you. You're actually allowed to not do what our head jerks say. If you let it happen, you're now officially as bad as us.
(1) You have already invaded. When out government was considering asking you to remove your military bases, you turned over our government. We are only allowed governments you will let us have.
(2) Our courts did indeed, reject your crap. DeCSS was legal to use and the availability of region-free players was made mandatory. In response you 'bought' our officials with a 'free trade' agreement that screwed us even worse.
Hmmm.... That doesn't look like an IsNot patent to me. Read the whole thing and then re read the last paragraph. Thats a patent for a BASIC IDE. Looks like it attempts to patent software development...
Ok, another great reply. First I would say that people don't pay for IE specifically. When someone goes and buys WinXP off the shelf, they are buying with an OS in mind most of the time (hopefully...heh). Granted, IE is integrated so they arereally paying for IE as well, but more then that they are getting what I would call a "User Experience". Thats what I believe people want...a good experience with the software. If the user experience is good, people will buy it, and hence you can see where I'm getting at... there is demand. I believe Microsoft understand this concept and is taking advantage of it.
Thank you. But I was only using IE as an example.
Usage and Demand Oh boy. Now I FULLY understand your position on the bluriness of usage and demand. 90 percent of people use IE because it's in front of them. But to see logic in your comments above then, you would have to assume that people want to use IE and not take advantage of the user experience.. This is where I disagree. I believe people use IE not only the fact that it's right in front of them, but that its part of the user experience. So when people want a specific user experience and are willing to pay for it, that is what I would call demand.
Thing is, it doesn't just apply to IE but to the whole situation that MS is in. Basicly, People use MS software because it is already there. Not because they demand is or even choose it. In the examples of where they do actually choose some MS goods it it is often for the sake of consistency.
I suppose a thing to note here might be the degree of user satisfaction in an Apple user and a XP user. I can't recall anyone I know who doesn't bitch about windows (in the workplace or out of it).a I certainly cannot see anyone demanding it.
"And if there was something that was not harder for them to deal with and they had a real choice they would abandon MS gleefuly and rapidly." Well actually I would have to agree with part of the statement here. If there was something that was easier to maintainand provide business sense, then that would be enough for me to consider switching. I would like to you define what a "real
" choice is, as I believe that MS is not blocking you in choosing a browser. I don't think anybody will be gleeful in moving many users from one piece of software to another when your job is on the line though;)
OK. We have to be careful to distinguis between bussiness and home here though. A real choice is an even choice. Now if you got a couple of PC's, one with a nice well set up Unix (in which I include GNU/Linux) and another with XP. Put them on a showroom floor. Let all the customers know nothing about computers of the MS/OSS debates. Even hide the price tags. Do you really think the choice would be 90/10? I just can't see it.
I'm hanging off getting a new PC because I have to buy it with XP on it (unless I buy an Apple). I'm actually seriously thinking about the Apple (it may be Apple that kills Linux, not MS) as I bought one for a daughter and am much impressed. With GNU utilities, I don't lose any capability. FWIW, I think the current Apple OS/X is the best of a bad lot. But truthfully, I don't think there is much "deman" out there for anything you can buy or get for free. The quality is abyssmal.
If you want to see something people would 'demand' or at least be happy with, we need to look at hardware first. The only
thing worse than Windows is the machinery it runs on.
OK, fair comment. I'm multi-tasking right now and I'm old and not that good at it, so perhaps I did not make myself clear.
The thing in contention here is "demand". Now, OK, frex; IE has 90% of the market, Firefox less than 10%. A conventional view says that IE is in considerable more demand than Firefox (or Opera). Now, allright, I can accept that, but I don't agree with it. The bottom line is that no one (or very few) actually want IE but they have it and don't want another browser enough to learn how to download and install (or are not permitted to... or...). Given that you had to choose and download a browser would the ratio of 90/8/2 (IE/Firefox/Opera) be the same? I sincerely and very strongly doubt that that is the case. IE is crap in comparison to either of the others mentioned. So when people talk about "demand" or "market demand" they are not talking about demand in the english use of the word at all. They are talking about usage figures not how much one product is valued/wanted/desired over another. If the "market" was on equal standing the situation would be very different.
So, what I mean when I say there is no "demand" for MS products is that no one really likes them. No one really wants them. And if there was something that was not harder for them to deal with and they had a real choice they would abandon MS gleefuly and rapidly.
I'm actually quite sick of the pro-anti-Microsoft war and don't particularly care much about it, but that isn't going to make me abandon the truth of things. MS is a bag of worms, Linux was developed from a terminal emulator and shows it, UNIX (although my favourite) is thirty year old concepts overlaid with patches and extensions usually badly implemented. It is _all_ crap. Live with it.
Anyway, it will all pass. MS has most likely had its day in the Sun. It's optimal strategy for long term survival now would be to fund say, twenty guys to work on Hurd (and maybe another 20 for EROS too). To stay ahead and set directions, to truly open just about everything except the UI. In the end it is only the UI - the user experience - that is important. So, right now, MS has sufficent resources to fund as much of the OSS movement as it wants. If it (MS) funded say 1/3 of the current OSS developers, how could it not stay in front? Wouldn't worldviews suddenly change?
The fact that you did not understand what I said does not make me the idiot.
MS is a criminal because a US court said it was a criminal. (Again, who is the idiot?)
I'll agree with you. I happen to think Linux sucks too and don't use it and I recommend against its use. Mind you, I think far worse of MS O/S's and certainly wouldn't use any of that crap. So you missed your target by making false assumptions (except that you didn't make an ass out of me, just yourself).
Now if there are any US Linux users out there, I point out to you that you have a perfect opportunity to sue as you have just been publicly accused of theft of IP. Why not show this "fellow" how big an idiot he actually is...
And the BSD'ers consider that any enforcement is ungentlemanly and uneccessary between friends.
Besides, no one has considered the flip side of the coin. taking code and not giving it back, well it has it's consequences in direct proportion the magnitude of the offence. Frex, MS appropriateed BSDs networking code and thus allowed Windows on the Internet. Look at the conswquences. If they had had to write the TCP/IP stack from scratch, they would have a much better grasp of network security and would doubless have a far better (but probably less capable) operating system for sale.
They may have gained huge profit but at what cost to reputation. When the tide does turn, it will turn with a roar. Having your customers hate your guts is very unfortunate.
Debian has NO PLACE in a shop that needs to get things done.
Ok, people will think this is a troll but it isn't intended that way. This might sound like blasphemy, but I am not sure that any linux solution has a place in a commercial site. Why? Because software packages can be obtained from anywhere, often in binary form and people just assume that they are fine and safe to use with no back doors. Rather foolish really.
With say, FreeBSD, all the packages come from one source that is checked. With OpenBSD there are not so many packages but they are even more exhaustively checked.
Nothing much wrong with Linux technically, but security wise, well, the best you can say is that it is infinitely better than Microsoft solutions.
Well now I have been politically incorrect, I guess my karma will be destroyed...
Imported Cane Toads are a problem in Australia. It was recently reported that some wild life and domestic dogs had learnt to have a quick "chew" and get off on the venom without (lethally) poisoning themselves. Apparently it annoys the hell out of the toads.
Some animals will do almost anything to get high....
Slashdot Mirror
But with the current number of wireless laptops around...
I can easily see a city running as it should networked by the laptops within it. Exactly what the Internet was designed for - or a general case of what i was designed for, error correcting, sporadic contact, resilient).
There are already 'price' parameters that can be set for routing. All it needs is a little software and configuration, not that much really.
TCP/IP stack
I have mine sitting in the box next to me yet to be unwrapped, 20, 2gig. And I bought the thing to replace a Dual CPU G5 PowerMac with 3.5 gig which I use to play WoW and not much else nowadays (and that is why I never metamoderate any more). Thanks for making me sure I made the right choice!
Worked out of the box (server and reciever) for me until Iand was considerably faster than the Airport I replaced it with when my last PC box died.
I would have thought that the days of Tor and onion routing would have made such shenannigans futile. Mind you, we don't want them to know that. Let them think they are in control.
I prefer to conact my GF with hardware not software.
I think the occasional bug is forgivable, but relesing it without an uninstall facility? If they truly did this it is a bit think....
Jeeze... Insightful, overrated? It was humour for God's sake....
Some people have been claiming otherwise recently. I though I read it on /.
Well, using GPL fonts in a document means the document has to be open, does it not?
(1) You have already invaded. When out government was considering asking you to remove your military bases, you turned over our government. We are only allowed governments you will let us have.
(2) Our courts did indeed, reject your crap. DeCSS was legal to use and the availability of region-free players was made mandatory. In response you 'bought' our officials with a 'free trade' agreement that screwed us even worse.
Yes, you are to blame.
Hmmm.... That doesn't look like an IsNot patent to me. Read the whole thing and then re read the last paragraph. Thats a patent for a BASIC IDE. Looks like it attempts to patent software development...
Thank you. But I was only using IE as an example.
Usage and Demand Oh boy. Now I FULLY understand your position on the bluriness of usage and demand. 90 percent of people use IE because it's in front of them. But to see logic in your comments above then, you would have to assume that people want to use IE and not take advantage of the user experience.. This is where I disagree. I believe people use IE not only the fact that it's right in front of them, but that its part of the user experience. So when people want a specific user experience and are willing to pay for it, that is what I would call demand.
Thing is, it doesn't just apply to IE but to the whole situation that MS is in. Basicly, People use MS software because it is already there. Not because they demand is or even choose it. In the examples of where they do actually choose some MS goods it it is often for the sake of consistency.
I suppose a thing to note here might be the degree of user satisfaction in an Apple user and a XP user. I can't recall anyone I know who doesn't bitch about windows (in the workplace or out of it).a I certainly cannot see anyone demanding it.
"And if there was something that was not harder for them to deal with and they had a real choice they would abandon MS gleefuly and rapidly." Well actually I would have to agree with part of the statement here. If there was something that was easier to maintainand provide business sense, then that would be enough for me to consider switching. I would like to you define what a "real " choice is, as I believe that MS is not blocking you in choosing a browser. I don't think anybody will be gleeful in moving many users from one piece of software to another when your job is on the line though ;)
OK. We have to be careful to distinguis between bussiness and home here though. A real choice is an even choice. Now if you got a couple of PC's, one with a nice well set up Unix (in which I include GNU/Linux) and another with XP. Put them on a showroom floor. Let all the customers know nothing about computers of the MS/OSS debates. Even hide the price tags. Do you really think the choice would be 90/10? I just can't see it.
I'm hanging off getting a new PC because I have to buy it with XP on it (unless I buy an Apple). I'm actually seriously thinking about the Apple (it may be Apple that kills Linux, not MS) as I bought one for a daughter and am much impressed. With GNU utilities, I don't lose any capability. FWIW, I think the current Apple OS/X is the best of a bad lot. But truthfully, I don't think there is much "deman" out there for anything you can buy or get for free. The quality is abyssmal.
If you want to see something people would 'demand' or at least be happy with, we need to look at hardware first. The only thing worse than Windows is the machinery it runs on.
The thing in contention here is "demand". Now, OK, frex; IE has 90% of the market, Firefox less than 10%. A conventional view says that IE is in considerable more demand than Firefox (or Opera). Now, allright, I can accept that, but I don't agree with it. The bottom line is that no one (or very few) actually want IE but they have it and don't want another browser enough to learn how to download and install (or are not permitted to... or...). Given that you had to choose and download a browser would the ratio of 90/8/2 (IE/Firefox/Opera) be the same? I sincerely and very strongly doubt that that is the case. IE is crap in comparison to either of the others mentioned. So when people talk about "demand" or "market demand" they are not talking about demand in the english use of the word at all. They are talking about usage figures not how much one product is valued/wanted/desired over another. If the "market" was on equal standing the situation would be very different.
So, what I mean when I say there is no "demand" for MS products is that no one really likes them. No one really wants them. And if there was something that was not harder for them to deal with and they had a real choice they would abandon MS gleefuly and rapidly.
I'm actually quite sick of the pro-anti-Microsoft war and don't particularly care much about it, but that isn't going to make me abandon the truth of things. MS is a bag of worms, Linux was developed from a terminal emulator and shows it, UNIX (although my favourite) is thirty year old concepts overlaid with patches and extensions usually badly implemented. It is _all_ crap. Live with it.
Anyway, it will all pass. MS has most likely had its day in the Sun. It's optimal strategy for long term survival now would be to fund say, twenty guys to work on Hurd (and maybe another 20 for EROS too). To stay ahead and set directions, to truly open just about everything except the UI. In the end it is only the UI - the user experience - that is important. So, right now, MS has sufficent resources to fund as much of the OSS movement as it wants. If it (MS) funded say 1/3 of the current OSS developers, how could it not stay in front? Wouldn't worldviews suddenly change?
MS is a criminal because a US court said it was a criminal. (Again, who is the idiot?)
I'll agree with you. I happen to think Linux sucks too and don't use it and I recommend against its use. Mind you, I think far worse of MS O/S's and certainly wouldn't use any of that crap. So you missed your target by making false assumptions (except that you didn't make an ass out of me, just yourself).
Now if there are any US Linux users out there, I point out to you that you have a perfect opportunity to sue as you have just been publicly accused of theft of IP. Why not show this "fellow" how big an idiot he actually is...
The fact that they have criminally conspired and engineered a monopoly and work to keep it that way.
There is no "demand" for MS products. In fact they are barely tolerated by the users. Even that grants them (MS) more than they should get.
Would it really have mattered which onw they used? The issue is that they didn't write it and consequently didn't know how to handle it.
Besides, no one has considered the flip side of the coin. taking code and not giving it back, well it has it's consequences in direct proportion the magnitude of the offence. Frex, MS appropriateed BSDs networking code and thus allowed Windows on the Internet. Look at the conswquences. If they had had to write the TCP/IP stack from scratch, they would have a much better grasp of network security and would doubless have a far better (but probably less capable) operating system for sale.
They may have gained huge profit but at what cost to reputation. When the tide does turn, it will turn with a roar. Having your customers hate your guts is very unfortunate.
Troll or typically ignorant Republican? Stupid either way....
You would lose your money (and I'mn not even a Linux user).
Ok, people will think this is a troll but it isn't intended that way. This might sound like blasphemy, but I am not sure that any linux solution has a place in a commercial site. Why? Because software packages can be obtained from anywhere, often in binary form and people just assume that they are fine and safe to use with no back doors. Rather foolish really.
With say, FreeBSD, all the packages come from one source that is checked. With OpenBSD there are not so many packages but they are even more exhaustively checked.
Nothing much wrong with Linux technically, but security wise, well, the best you can say is that it is infinitely better than Microsoft solutions.
Well now I have been politically incorrect, I guess my karma will be destroyed...
Your rationale for using Debian is fine. However if that is your rationale, then why are you not using FreeBSD? It would give you added security too.
What accomplishment for VMS does your post/quote show? None as far as I can see...
Guess you're in for a history lesson, too.
Maybe. But you are going to have to learn to read before you can take a 'history' lesson.
FWIW, it isn't history to me, just part of my life's experience.
Some animals will do almost anything to get high....