Depending on the amounts involved, they might settle for 1% though. I mean, really, would you rather have $10 million now or try to win the fight with IBM?
Many (not but all) lawyers _are_ like sharks. When they smell blood, instict is to bite. Its part of what makes a good lawyer, and what can make a bad lawyer. These particular lawyers, I have no idea. But the idea that an lawyer would guage the risk, and measure that against 20-1 pay odds, and decide the odds of winning was better than 20-1, thus worth the risk, is not so radical.
Say, I run an important mailing list. A random power failure, severe disk corruption, nobody really knows what works OK and what is broken, week-old backup of data, no system backup, no network, no other computer to move the harddisk, I must work with this broken system. I must get it back up and running with as much of remaining database as possible, possibly fixing any corruption. Is the user support good enough to lead me through such landmine-ridden system?
I am trying to get some support on my Linux boxes, but I don't need it on the internal network. Not everyone needs 100% or 0% service. If the computer at the front desk dies, I have a backup box I throw there until I figure out whats wrong, or replace the box. If the dedicated web server goes down, I will gladly pay anything for help to get it up NOW. If the front desk computer dies, and I don't have a backup computer, well, go to the other computer in the warehouse. If the web server dies at 3AM, I drive there, make a pot of coffee, and either fix it, remount the drives in a backup server, restore backups to the server or a backup server, or get my ass chewed. Our firewall has a backup computer that is preconfigured so I can throw the dead firewall out, plug in the old backup, and have everyone back online in 10 minutes. We run two isolated T1 lines that the firewall can switch back and forth from, from a ssh shell anywhere. A single saleman's computer is not nearly as critical.
Some systems are simply too critical to NOT pay for service. Some are not.
Thats what interests me. I could be wrong, but I think this is a niche market that could mean more inflow of money for OSS.
I think you are quite correct. This is what I have been waiting for, and looking for. I just checked up IPCop, a specialized Linux distro for firewall because I hate having a gig of OS installed for a freaking firewall.
I read a little, and the service they are offering is interesting to me, since I have several RH9 boxes. They do not have the automation like RHN does, or any interface, you just have access to download files for a fee. $5 a month per box, or $60 a year per, the same price as RHN. Its not as good a deal as RHN since it doesn't have the features like scheduled reboots, remote install/uninstall of packages and remote management, but it looks like a fair deal. Easy to have one box download all the patches, and NFS them for the other boxes on your network.
AND it got me interested in their products. I wonder if they make a dedicated DNS server I can run as standalone on a dual ppro 200 with plenty of ram? Or something similar to IPCop. Or dedicated httpd machines. Since I like running different services on different boxes for security and to prevent major outages, I would be willing to pay for good stand alone products.
$300 for a product is much cheaper than the same product for free that took you 15 hours to build, and longer to self support. Even $500. Anyone know what their products cost?
Two words... "internal security". Just because you have a firewall does not stop things from happenning. All it takes is one floppy from home and you are toast.
But we were talking about win98, not internal security. (btw, most boxes have NO cd or floppy drive, on purpose). Internal security is the same for 98 as for nt or linux. I put my knoppix cd in ANY computer that can boot a cd, and I own it, 98 or not. Also, the most important part of internal security is not getting "socially engineered", which again, is not OS specific.
I know every person using every computer, and have for many years. When they do something stupid, their computer "just wont work" for a few days (hint: because I "can't fix it yet"), which keeps them slightly paranoid about doing anything, which makes my job easier. Again, this is not OS specific.
But the main point I made was, and is, that if you need a simple network, and can use a linux firewall for external security (easy enough to non-linux users), and not overly concerned about internal security (like this church, or the my place where everyone has been there for years and its a smaller office), then Windows 98 is a pretty easy network to manage. You can run old versions of Office (cheap to ebay or find used), modern AV, and unlike XP, its fairly small and easy to backup and restore. Almost every mainstream program still being made will still run on Windows 98, although NOT all will run on 95.
Not every network needs a dedicated IT staff. Not every organization needs bullet proof internal security. Some just need 5 to 10 computers to run Peachtree or Quicken, or a contact manager. Or share the internet, in which case, the 'server' running 98 isn't needed at all. After all these years, I have come to the conclusion that smaller and simpler OS's are easier to maintain. Revolutionary, isn't it?
It is almost guarenteed that in two years someone will find an exploit, and exploit you specificly.
Until last weekend, we had several boxes running windows 95, so no, its NOT a death sentence for two reasons:
1. We have the firewall from hell (obviously Linux). FTP isn't even allowed. You can't see the firewall with any type of portscan I have tried, its truly invisible, or as invisible as I can make it. No ping replies, no open ports, no --syn packets, no nothing.
2. Most exploits are written specifically for XP and 2K now. Many won't work at all on 95, even ones that work on 98. Yes, most viruses will still infect 95, but that has nothing to do with how old your OS is, its how old your AV definitions are.
Oh yea, and my Emu APS box i do digital recording on, runs 95 (yes on net, wirelessly). I am not saying its the best thing, to run really old, unsupported OS's, but there is alot more to getting 0wned than just the OS your boxes run.
We wouldn't bother upgrading because they will be moving to a new building with a new network and everything two years, but the fact of the matter is that you can't set up a Windows 98 network, work through all the pain and pathetic Microsoft crap and then leave it alone once it works because it never stays working for long.
Not necessarily. I manage one network of over 15 different 98 boxes, using a 95 file server (really, just reboot every 39 days...) and we have little problem. Then again, I disable all sound, strip all audio codecs out, run them behind a Linux firewall (all have internet access). To be honest, if all you are doing is sharing files and internet access, 98 is easier to use than 2k+, especially with a linux firewall:) Just be sure to increase the connects over 10 in network settings of the win boxes.
The biggest hassle, to me, is all the windows updates, the AV updates, etc. but those are the same for ANY flavor of Windows. If you use the newest verions of TweakUI, you can disable every option in the control panel, so they can't screw it up:) Then just go into Regedit, search and delete "NoControlPanel" key, ignore warnings, and reset after you are done changing the controls.
I also find that using the Linux router as a DNS server, and routing hotmail.com, etc. to 127.0.0.1 helps with the viruses... Had one person who kept getting viruses, so they have no control panel access, and their DNS server is "localhost" so if it isn't in their hosts file, they don't go there, and they are not smart enough to know what a hosts file is.
So 98 isn't THAT bad for a very simple network (20 boxes), and easier than a real server based network for simple needs, IMHO.
oh wait, I see you said 16,590th and not 16,591st. I have no idea how many are tied for 16,590th place. Go to setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu and crunch the numbers and see for yourself. I have been stuck in the top.347% percentile for quite some time, don't really pay much attention to the actual "places".:D
With all the shit with SCO, GPL this and that, and what's free and what's not, I can only think that BSD would become more popular.
You really raise a good point. I am trying to move from Windows to Linux, but the whole GPL "issue" raises concerns. I don't do any real programming myself, but I do USE programs and it seems that several companies are hesitant to develop for Linux, partially because of the GPL.
The GPL itself is pretty straight forward and easy to understand once you get past the idea that it is very different from the typical EULA, but all the ramifications are not always evident.
I am trying BSD as well, but the lack of a good installer is a problem. So is the fact that it is much harder to make changes if you are used to Linux and Windows, and the many easy config tools. I know BSD has several but I haven't found as much info on the web for BSD. I also know BSD is a superior OS to Windows, and in large part, to Linux (even Linus has been quoted that his biggest mistake was not using a Mach kernel). No flames please, its just a fact.
Now that RedHat has abandoned the desktop (and I had several years into learning it) BSD starts looking better and better. Maybe if IBM and Novell get SuSe more accessible, it will be a decent alternative, but the GPL issues still remain.
First of all, the obligatory link: setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu is the home for the seti at home project. They have pretty good info on what their policy is for disclosure. Keep in mind, this is berkeley, the owners of BSD. They are pretty generous with their data;) There is a good deal to read there, some of it is even interesting.
Second, the obligatory dick comparison, using my current Seti@home status: Results Received 9383 Total CPU Time 12.808 years Your rank out of 4784019 total users is: 16591st place. The number of users who have this rank: 5 You have completed more work units than 99.653% of our users.
I have been participating for quite some time now, 4.49 years:D It runs on over 20 workstations and about 5 servers of mine now. Its a worthwhile project, especially since all you do is run a screensaver for windows/unix/linux/bsd or daemon for nt/*nix. And no, its not open source, I know, so don't bother bitching about that fact.
Think about it, they could promote the fact that they have a free office suite that is compatable with Microsoft Office.
Although the article did not mention it, I have seen in several other articles many references to Star Office being a standard part of the Java Desktop. I had gathered from these other articles that this was part of the selling points, "Buy our OS, get a free desktop suite for less than the cost of either from MS".
It seems to me that Sun wouldn't care why you bought it for the OS or for Star Office, as long as you bought it. As someone who has used Star Office 5.2 and 6, (and OO), I think they have a good thing going as long as they bundle them together. As someone who just spent the last two weeks upgrading MS OS's and accounting software on over 15 boxes, anything that wasn't MS would be nice:)
All that said, you sell a lot of computers in the consumer market the same way you sell lots of consoles: by having games ready to play on them. Obviously MS has this cornered, and Linux has the best chance of gaining ground in gaming on the desktop, since most online games already have Linux server daemons, so developers are not ignorant of Linux. Even a few decent games are native Linux now, right out of the box.
And with Russia so close to Finland, I would guess russian isn't complete gobbledygook to him either.
Thats one hell of an assumption. Mexico and Canada are right next to the US, but most Americans don't speak Spanish or French. I understand someone who is German understanding some Flemish (Belgium) but there are more than a few languages spoken in Russia alone.
Thats kinda like how everyone assumes that in Brazil, they speak spanish, because most of the countries around them speak spanish. But they don't. And while there are SOME similarities in Portugese and Spanish, I can assure you that most of my Portugese speaking friends don't speak Spanish.
Oh yea, and Russia is right next to the USA, as well. Parts of Russia are actually just NORTH of parts of Alaska. But I don't speak any Russian dialects.
Obligatory Simpson Quote: Spanish and Italian are the same language. (Mr. X episode).
They hadn't been damaged financially from MS' actions, since they didn't own DR-DOS at that time.
So everytime a company is sold, the new owners lose the right to enforce prior violations against the company? You think that would be a good idea?
One example of how this is not a good thing: Company A writes a cool software package that lets you send full motion video over a 2400 baud connection. They poured all their money into it, and sell it for $99. Bill Gates steals the source, violates the copyrights and makes an illegal clone of it and gives it away with Windows 2004.5, which becomes a smash hit because its "free" when you purchase the $199 Windows upgrade. Company A is broke because they poured all the funds into developing that new app, and sales are slow because Bill Gates version is "free". Company B buys them out because they have plenty of money, love the product, and feel they recover damages from Bill Gates in a court of law. Company B feels that Company A still has great value and is an asset, and would be realizing it, if not for someone stealing the product.
So you are saying Company B should not be able to sue Bill Gates? That is just plain silly. When you buy a company, you get its liabilities and assets. The company still exists as the same entity, only the ownership is changed.
There is still a large wage differential between the former DDR lander (states) and the rest. Dresden has not only been in the chip business (Infineon is also there), it has also been the home to some high precision instrument manufacture and research centres.
One of the reasons we build some units in the US is the gap, Germans make MORE than US citizens for our tasks, lower skill, highly repetitive. The German companies we hire to manufacture are farming it out to Muldavia or such, where labor is cheap (again, low tech, highly repetitive).
My experience is that on the mid/lower skill level, Germans make more than the US worker, although it is not likely they get to take it home after taxes.
'And, as always, you can delete your Yahoo! account altogether at any time, for any reason, by going to the deletion page.' I deleted my Yahoo account a month ago. I guess they are lying, because I'm still getting their SPAM."
you must not have read the simple solution to the problem you are complaining of.
"To stop receiving emails regarding your deleted account, just log in and change your preferences to reflect this..."
If you care about security, you wouldn't be using Debian at all.
God damn right, you would be using Windows instead. Besides, its easy to just click on "windows update" and download all those updates each and every week, and install them one by one, and reboot after each install. Unless you need to update from remote, in which case you are out of luck, or maybe you can use autoupdate, since those updates are safe and never break software. Or unless the vulnerability is the IE browser, then you can't trust it to get the updates. Or unless your system is already infected or owned, since Windows makes it virtually impossible to do a full backup, and they instead recommend you simply reinstall windows, reactivate the product, reinstall all your applications then backup your data files from backups, instead of doing a simple RESTORE from a shell off a knoppix cd. Or unless the problem is a backdoor or trojan which is kind of hard to see in the processes, unless you have cygwin installed. Other than those small things that probably affects no one, its super easy to patch windows instead of that fucking untrustworthy Debian piece of shit.
(for those of you in Rio Linda, the above is sarcasm)
As I recall, it wasn't that many years ago that you needed big iron to do worthwhile graphics work.
Actually, before the mac, the vast majority of graphics work for publications was done on a color table, not on a computer. They were called "color strippers".
Still, you should not dismiss the moral dimensions of open source software. Morality is, after all, most important in the "real world" of which you speak.
But the "morality" is not the primary consideration of why I choose software. I get paid to make the company money, not to make them feel good about being less productive.
Most of us who use Linux do so despite the fact that we can afford to buy closed source software like Photoshop (which I still use, on occasion.)
As I have made clear on many occasions, I am a Linux user, since the RedHat 4.x days. I have many Linux boxes now, mainly servers. But my graphics stations run Windows (used to run Mac) and my admin boxes run Windows because replacing the accounting software I run on Windows and paid $500 for, will cost over $17,000 on Linux. I spent a few months working on that problem, and that was the best I could find that fit our needs.
Why should the necessity of using Windows for certain purposes preclude the safety and convenience of using Linux for everything else?
The real question is: Why should a philosophical "good feeling" make me spend tens of thousands of dollars in software, and another tens of thousands of dollars in productivity?
Here in the real world, we buy the best tool for the job. Again, when everything is equal, I do pick Linux. In many instances, Linux is the obvious best choice, others, it is not. But I don't go to work to push a software philosophy so I can feel "warm and fuzzy". I go to work to make shit loads of money for the company, and a nice wad for myself.
If I had an employee who install Linux on the system for philosophical reasons, even though it would cost tens of thousands of dollars more, and the only benefit was how we could feel really nice about it, I would fire his ass in two seconds. I expect no less from myself as an employee.
Keep in mind, this tens of thousands of dollars in expenses that gained us nothing in profits doesn't come out of the bosses pocket, it comes out of the employees. This would result in laying someone off to compensate. Switching to ANY operating system for philosophical reasons is more than irresponsible, it is capitalistic suicide.
Since probably fewer than 1 in 10,000 users require CMYK graphics capability and Quark, this hardly seems a valid argument against the Linux desktop.
No, its a perfectly valid reason for ME, which was the issue. Why I can't switch. and more than 10,000 people use Quark. Even more use the CMYK features of Photoshop.
Take a look at your newspaper. All those ads. All magazines. All brocures, fliers and hand bills. All catalogs. Even the junk mail you get. You need CMYK and a program to assemble it. Quark is just what I use. There is no alternative in Linux. We are talking about well over 100,000 users and probably closer to 5x that amount that use it part time, not 10,000. It is a big deal.
She doesn't have much interest in computers, but finally my sister gave her an old Pentium 120 system she had laying around, and asked me to set it up for our mother. I finally decided to install Win98 on it, because it didn't have the power for a modern Linux distro, and because she expressed an interest in taking computer literacy classes at the local college, and those kind of classes use Windows exclusively.
It was worth the $700+ I spent at Dell to get her a decent system (2.0 celeron, 256mb ram, 40gb, 17") with a system restore disk that I can pop in and restore the whole system. For most people it is easier to use Windows, and the money spent was cheaper than the time I would have to spend using Linux for her.
Like I said, I like and use Linux, but I am not enough of a zealot that I just blindly will tell people to use it when I don't think its in their best interest. Just blindly saying "linux" to all situations may sound all sweat and GPLish, but those of us in the real world are much less influenced by the warm fuzzy feeling of using GPL, and more impressed by using the right OS for the job. Often it is Linux (98% on the server side) but often it is Windows. Still. Its not advocacy, its practicality.
As I remember it fox keep moving the show from night to night. Sometimes showing it sometimes not, it really didn't make a log of sense. It was one of those shows that you couldn't depend it being on.
Kinda like the problem with Futurama. Odd times of the year for its season, seldom shown during football season. 7:00 sunday is tough because sports always preempt it. And yes, the ratings were not there, perhaps because we never knew if it was really going to be on or not.
The patent claims were the first thing that caught my attention. However, I thought that if you have a patent on something, then you must put the patent number clearly on the product. Microsoft haven't listed the relevant patents - so how can you know whether you need to license the patents or not?
The patent number may be in the license agreement itself, which is likely. There are two different ways to license the software. The "open" methods, which means you are free to do nothing with the information, or if you want to develop software using the information, which would surely require non-GPL-able (?) restrictions and probably the exchange of $$.
I am guessing, but its an educated guess. Theoretically, you are supposed to read the license before you use the product, including the click-through license, which no one reads or they wouldn't click through.
My grandmother is 70 and isn't able to use windows. So, uh what's this granny test supposed to tell you?
It means you are a terrible grandson for not buying her a computer and helping her learn! Go to your room!:p
But seriously, I bought Mom a new Dell system last Christmas, and she had never sit in front of a computer. She is 67, so same age group. I live 1300 miles away, but my sister lives there in town and helped her. (ok, honestly, my sister was not too damn happy with me for a few months for that one) It took 2 weeks to get her using it regularly (thanks to some Casino games, hehe) and within 6 months, she had a cable modem and emails me more crap every day that I ever want to get. Of course, I just shut up and read them because I don't want to discourage her. I started her on AOL, which she quit using after 6 months and the cable modem was installed. Maybe in a year she could use Linux, but she wouldn't because she knows Windows and doesn't care what OS it is, she just wants to send me pictures of dancing politicians and old people jokes.
You raise a good point (in spite of bad moderation) about the last 4 years. KDE has mainly managed to get more bloated recently, although I still prefer it over Gnome. I am looking at a different market segment though, the company with 20 or less employees. After all, this is the largest section of the business world in the US, and the fastest growing. Because we farm out most of our manufacturing to a company we partially own, it is really a different company, so the guys I work for would fit in this mold.
We don't have an inhouse IT dept (except me) or development team (except me) and I *technically* run the Marketing Dept., which consists of primarily ME. Having to wear many hats means I need a distro that I can install out of the box and at least be CLOSE to what I need. I am betting that in the near future, there will be MORE linux distros rather than fewer, and they will be more specialized. Knoppix, ironically, seems like a great business distro, just based on the default settings. I have considered learning how to roll my own knoppix that uses some different configuration settings, and automatically uses our server for all client files. This would mean just pressing new CDs for systems that had no HD or floppy, and everything else was on the server side. Thought about is very different than taking the time to learn how, however.
Its not that Linux is BAD on the desktop, its just that stock distro installs are less usefull than Windows, and if I save $100 per workstation using Linux, but it takes $150 in my time and training, then it isn't a good investment. Again, Linux will get there, and I am ready for it, but its just not there right now.
Part of my problem is the years I spent learning RedHat's particular brand of Linux, to be abandoned by them recently. Yes, RedHat has traditionally been a great distro for lazy asses like me, but that is just how it is for some of us. I am now looking at other distros, such as Knoppix or Debian, which are actually better suited for the desktop anyway. This all takes time though. When all is said and done, I *MUST* use what is best for the company if I am to be a decent employee, and because of the time involved in a company our size, Windows is still the correct answer for at least a year, whether I like it or not.
It is annoying that Gimp doesn't do CMYK, but why can't you manipulate all your images in Gimp as RGB, then use ImageMagick to convert to CMYK? Admittedly it's more of a hassle, but it's not the end of the world. It's worked for me.
Good question, but two reasons: One, when doing CMYK, as you know, you need true color matching. Converting this way is far from perfect since RGB to CMYK is more art than science. Two, again, the goal is productivity, and this is less productive than my current method. Unless changing offers at least similar productivity, I can't justify it to the PHB who pays me to do the work, or to myself who has enough self respect to do the right thing for him. (Boss is actually fairly cool)
People I've worked with are happy to accept PDF that I produce using LaTeX
Again, productivity is a major issue. I still use Quark 4.03 even tho 6 is out because I *know* 4.03 and there is no new features I need. I love learning new stuff, but there has to be a reason to take the time. Usually, the fun of it is reason enough but learning 4 color prepress is a necessary evil, not fun. Learning how to link Heyu, Bluelava and a bunch of x10 modules for a home automation system, well, now THAT is fun. PDF is gaining in popularity in the printing business, but again, it is a proprietary system, and I would rather not have to master PDF production until the gains in productivity justify it. I just installed Open Office on windows for testing of converting other formats into PDF, so I am in the process of testing it. Until then, I still have to get the job done.
Your suggestions are valid, but not applicable to me in my particular situation, at this time. I am one of those guys who loves Linux, and hates the way MS does business, but I am *not* one who chooses my tools soley on philosophical ideals. I prefer Linux on the server NOT because MS is evil, but because I can modify the source, configure the system to be minimalistic, thus optimized, and simply do more in a Linux environment. It is simply a better OS on the server.
I prefer MS on the desktop (although Linux is catching up) because it is easier to use. Yes, its a pain with updates, AV, security, but it is still easier and it has a more consistant interface for client tasks. If all things were equal, THEN I could afford to choose Linux for philosophical reasons.
I am patient. I do believe that Linux will catch up with MS on the desktop, and I do look forward to that day for several reasons. It means that I will be able to have a highly productive work environment. It means admin'ing other stations will be easier. It means more choice, and being able to mix MS/Linux/Mac according to the task at hand. It also means that MS may have to clean up its act, and become a better corporate citizen.
IBM was pretty much a shitty corporate citizen in the late 70s and 80s. They locked customers in to a proprietary system, charged too much for support, and locked out other vendors. Then the feds came in with anti-trust suits and IBM lost, and had to make some choices. Fortunately for all of us, they chose to become a better corporate citizen, and I support them, love their products, and appreciate their contributions. I would be plenty happy if MS could make the same transition.
Slashdot Mirror
Depending on the amounts involved, they might settle for 1% though. I mean, really, would you rather have $10 million now or try to win the fight with IBM?
Many (not but all) lawyers _are_ like sharks. When they smell blood, instict is to bite. Its part of what makes a good lawyer, and what can make a bad lawyer. These particular lawyers, I have no idea. But the idea that an lawyer would guage the risk, and measure that against 20-1 pay odds, and decide the odds of winning was better than 20-1, thus worth the risk, is not so radical.
5. Lawyer says "ok, we'll take 1% since it is better than fighting it out in court".
:)
1% instead of 20%? And the lawyers would say "it is better than fighting it out in the court"?
What color is the sky in your world?
Say, I run an important mailing list. A random power failure, severe disk corruption, nobody really knows what works OK and what is broken, week-old backup of data, no system backup, no network, no other computer to move the harddisk, I must work with this broken system. I must get it back up and running with as much of remaining database as possible, possibly fixing any corruption. Is the user support good enough to lead me through such landmine-ridden system?
I am trying to get some support on my Linux boxes, but I don't need it on the internal network. Not everyone needs 100% or 0% service. If the computer at the front desk dies, I have a backup box I throw there until I figure out whats wrong, or replace the box. If the dedicated web server goes down, I will gladly pay anything for help to get it up NOW. If the front desk computer dies, and I don't have a backup computer, well, go to the other computer in the warehouse. If the web server dies at 3AM, I drive there, make a pot of coffee, and either fix it, remount the drives in a backup server, restore backups to the server or a backup server, or get my ass chewed. Our firewall has a backup computer that is preconfigured so I can throw the dead firewall out, plug in the old backup, and have everyone back online in 10 minutes. We run two isolated T1 lines that the firewall can switch back and forth from, from a ssh shell anywhere. A single saleman's computer is not nearly as critical.
Some systems are simply too critical to NOT pay for service. Some are not.
Thats what interests me. I could be wrong, but I think this is a niche market that could mean more inflow of money for OSS.
I think you are quite correct. This is what I have been waiting for, and looking for. I just checked up IPCop, a specialized Linux distro for firewall because I hate having a gig of OS installed for a freaking firewall.
I read a little, and the service they are offering is interesting to me, since I have several RH9 boxes. They do not have the automation like RHN does, or any interface, you just have access to download files for a fee. $5 a month per box, or $60 a year per, the same price as RHN. Its not as good a deal as RHN since it doesn't have the features like scheduled reboots, remote install/uninstall of packages and remote management, but it looks like a fair deal. Easy to have one box download all the patches, and NFS them for the other boxes on your network.
AND it got me interested in their products. I wonder if they make a dedicated DNS server I can run as standalone on a dual ppro 200 with plenty of ram? Or something similar to IPCop. Or dedicated httpd machines. Since I like running different services on different boxes for security and to prevent major outages, I would be willing to pay for good stand alone products.
$300 for a product is much cheaper than the same product for free that took you 15 hours to build, and longer to self support. Even $500. Anyone know what their products cost?
Two words... "internal security". Just because you have a firewall does not stop things from happenning. All it takes is one floppy from home and you are toast.
But we were talking about win98, not internal security. (btw, most boxes have NO cd or floppy drive, on purpose). Internal security is the same for 98 as for nt or linux. I put my knoppix cd in ANY computer that can boot a cd, and I own it, 98 or not. Also, the most important part of internal security is not getting "socially engineered", which again, is not OS specific.
I know every person using every computer, and have for many years. When they do something stupid, their computer "just wont work" for a few days (hint: because I "can't fix it yet"), which keeps them slightly paranoid about doing anything, which makes my job easier. Again, this is not OS specific.
But the main point I made was, and is, that if you need a simple network, and can use a linux firewall for external security (easy enough to non-linux users), and not overly concerned about internal security (like this church, or the my place where everyone has been there for years and its a smaller office), then Windows 98 is a pretty easy network to manage. You can run old versions of Office (cheap to ebay or find used), modern AV, and unlike XP, its fairly small and easy to backup and restore. Almost every mainstream program still being made will still run on Windows 98, although NOT all will run on 95.
Not every network needs a dedicated IT staff. Not every organization needs bullet proof internal security. Some just need 5 to 10 computers to run Peachtree or Quicken, or a contact manager. Or share the internet, in which case, the 'server' running 98 isn't needed at all. After all these years, I have come to the conclusion that smaller and simpler OS's are easier to maintain. Revolutionary, isn't it?
It is almost guarenteed that in two years someone will find an exploit, and exploit you specificly.
Until last weekend, we had several boxes running windows 95, so no, its NOT a death sentence for two reasons:
1. We have the firewall from hell (obviously Linux). FTP isn't even allowed. You can't see the firewall with any type of portscan I have tried, its truly invisible, or as invisible as I can make it. No ping replies, no open ports, no --syn packets, no nothing.
2. Most exploits are written specifically for XP and 2K now. Many won't work at all on 95, even ones that work on 98. Yes, most viruses will still infect 95, but that has nothing to do with how old your OS is, its how old your AV definitions are.
Oh yea, and my Emu APS box i do digital recording on, runs 95 (yes on net, wirelessly). I am not saying its the best thing, to run really old, unsupported OS's, but there is alot more to getting 0wned than just the OS your boxes run.
We wouldn't bother upgrading because they will be moving to a new building with a new network and everything two years, but the fact of the matter is that you can't set up a Windows 98 network, work through all the pain and pathetic Microsoft crap and then leave it alone once it works because it never stays working for long.
:) Just be sure to increase the connects over 10 in network settings of the win boxes.
:) Then just go into Regedit, search and delete "NoControlPanel" key, ignore warnings, and reset after you are done changing the controls.
Not necessarily. I manage one network of over 15 different 98 boxes, using a 95 file server (really, just reboot every 39 days...) and we have little problem. Then again, I disable all sound, strip all audio codecs out, run them behind a Linux firewall (all have internet access). To be honest, if all you are doing is sharing files and internet access, 98 is easier to use than 2k+, especially with a linux firewall
The biggest hassle, to me, is all the windows updates, the AV updates, etc. but those are the same for ANY flavor of Windows. If you use the newest verions of TweakUI, you can disable every option in the control panel, so they can't screw it up
I also find that using the Linux router as a DNS server, and routing hotmail.com, etc. to 127.0.0.1 helps with the viruses... Had one person who kept getting viruses, so they have no control panel access, and their DNS server is "localhost" so if it isn't in their hosts file, they don't go there, and they are not smart enough to know what a hosts file is.
So 98 isn't THAT bad for a very simple network (20 boxes), and easier than a real server based network for simple needs, IMHO.
oh wait, I see you said 16,590th and not 16,591st. I have no idea how many are tied for 16,590th place. Go to setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu and crunch the numbers and see for yourself. I have been stuck in the top .347% percentile for quite some time, don't really pay much attention to the actual "places". :D
Uhh... are there 4 users who tie for 16,590th place?
yes. out of almost 4.8 million.
With all the shit with SCO, GPL this and that, and what's free and what's not, I can only think that BSD would become more popular.
You really raise a good point. I am trying to move from Windows to Linux, but the whole GPL "issue" raises concerns. I don't do any real programming myself, but I do USE programs and it seems that several companies are hesitant to develop for Linux, partially because of the GPL.
The GPL itself is pretty straight forward and easy to understand once you get past the idea that it is very different from the typical EULA, but all the ramifications are not always evident.
I am trying BSD as well, but the lack of a good installer is a problem. So is the fact that it is much harder to make changes if you are used to Linux and Windows, and the many easy config tools. I know BSD has several but I haven't found as much info on the web for BSD. I also know BSD is a superior OS to Windows, and in large part, to Linux (even Linus has been quoted that his biggest mistake was not using a Mach kernel). No flames please, its just a fact.
Now that RedHat has abandoned the desktop (and I had several years into learning it) BSD starts looking better and better. Maybe if IBM and Novell get SuSe more accessible, it will be a decent alternative, but the GPL issues still remain.
First of all, the obligatory link: setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu is the home for the seti at home project. They have pretty good info on what their policy is for disclosure. Keep in mind, this is berkeley, the owners of BSD. They are pretty generous with their data ;) There is a good deal to read there, some of it is even interesting.
:D It runs on over 20 workstations and about 5 servers of mine now. Its a worthwhile project, especially since all you do is run a screensaver for windows/unix/linux/bsd or daemon for nt/*nix. And no, its not open source, I know, so don't bother bitching about that fact.
Second, the obligatory dick comparison, using my current Seti@home status:
Results Received 9383
Total CPU Time 12.808 years
Your rank out of 4784019 total users is: 16591st place.
The number of users who have this rank: 5
You have completed more work units than 99.653% of our users.
I have been participating for quite some time now, 4.49 years
Think about it, they could promote the fact that they have a free office suite that is compatable with Microsoft Office.
:)
Although the article did not mention it, I have seen in several other articles many references to Star Office being a standard part of the Java Desktop. I had gathered from these other articles that this was part of the selling points, "Buy our OS, get a free desktop suite for less than the cost of either from MS".
It seems to me that Sun wouldn't care why you bought it for the OS or for Star Office, as long as you bought it. As someone who has used Star Office 5.2 and 6, (and OO), I think they have a good thing going as long as they bundle them together. As someone who just spent the last two weeks upgrading MS OS's and accounting software on over 15 boxes, anything that wasn't MS would be nice
All that said, you sell a lot of computers in the consumer market the same way you sell lots of consoles: by having games ready to play on them. Obviously MS has this cornered, and Linux has the best chance of gaining ground in gaming on the desktop, since most online games already have Linux server daemons, so developers are not ignorant of Linux. Even a few decent games are native Linux now, right out of the box.
And with Russia so close to Finland, I would guess russian isn't complete gobbledygook to him either.
Thats one hell of an assumption. Mexico and Canada are right next to the US, but most Americans don't speak Spanish or French. I understand someone who is German understanding some Flemish (Belgium) but there are more than a few languages spoken in Russia alone.
Thats kinda like how everyone assumes that in Brazil, they speak spanish, because most of the countries around them speak spanish. But they don't. And while there are SOME similarities in Portugese and Spanish, I can assure you that most of my Portugese speaking friends don't speak Spanish.
Oh yea, and Russia is right next to the USA, as well. Parts of Russia are actually just NORTH of parts of Alaska. But I don't speak any Russian dialects.
Obligatory Simpson Quote: Spanish and Italian are the same language. (Mr. X episode).
They hadn't been damaged financially from MS' actions, since they didn't own DR-DOS at that time.
So everytime a company is sold, the new owners lose the right to enforce prior violations against the company? You think that would be a good idea?
One example of how this is not a good thing: Company A writes a cool software package that lets you send full motion video over a 2400 baud connection. They poured all their money into it, and sell it for $99. Bill Gates steals the source, violates the copyrights and makes an illegal clone of it and gives it away with Windows 2004.5, which becomes a smash hit because its "free" when you purchase the $199 Windows upgrade. Company A is broke because they poured all the funds into developing that new app, and sales are slow because Bill Gates version is "free". Company B buys them out because they have plenty of money, love the product, and feel they recover damages from Bill Gates in a court of law. Company B feels that Company A still has great value and is an asset, and would be realizing it, if not for someone stealing the product.
So you are saying Company B should not be able to sue Bill Gates? That is just plain silly. When you buy a company, you get its liabilities and assets. The company still exists as the same entity, only the ownership is changed.
There is still a large wage differential between the former DDR lander (states) and the rest. Dresden has not only been in the chip business (Infineon is also there), it has also been the home to some high precision instrument manufacture and research centres.
One of the reasons we build some units in the US is the gap, Germans make MORE than US citizens for our tasks, lower skill, highly repetitive. The German companies we hire to manufacture are farming it out to Muldavia or such, where labor is cheap (again, low tech, highly repetitive).
My experience is that on the mid/lower skill level, Germans make more than the US worker, although it is not likely they get to take it home after taxes.
'And, as always, you can delete your Yahoo! account altogether at any time, for any reason, by going to the deletion page.' I deleted my Yahoo account a month ago. I guess they are lying, because I'm still getting their SPAM."
you must not have read the simple solution to the problem you are complaining of.
"To stop receiving emails regarding your deleted account, just log in and change your preferences to reflect this..."
If you care about security, you wouldn't be using Debian at all.
God damn right, you would be using Windows instead. Besides, its easy to just click on "windows update" and download all those updates each and every week, and install them one by one, and reboot after each install. Unless you need to update from remote, in which case you are out of luck, or maybe you can use autoupdate, since those updates are safe and never break software. Or unless the vulnerability is the IE browser, then you can't trust it to get the updates. Or unless your system is already infected or owned, since Windows makes it virtually impossible to do a full backup, and they instead recommend you simply reinstall windows, reactivate the product, reinstall all your applications then backup your data files from backups, instead of doing a simple RESTORE from a shell off a knoppix cd. Or unless the problem is a backdoor or trojan which is kind of hard to see in the processes, unless you have cygwin installed. Other than those small things that probably affects no one, its super easy to patch windows instead of that fucking untrustworthy Debian piece of shit.
(for those of you in Rio Linda, the above is sarcasm)
I can't install it...apt isn't working
Not sure if you were joking or serious, but I got a good laugh out if it anyway.
As I recall, it wasn't that many years ago that you needed big iron to do worthwhile graphics work.
Actually, before the mac, the vast majority of graphics work for publications was done on a color table, not on a computer. They were called "color strippers".
Still, you should not dismiss the moral dimensions of open source software. Morality is, after all, most important in the "real world" of which you speak.
But the "morality" is not the primary consideration of why I choose software. I get paid to make the company money, not to make them feel good about being less productive.
Most of us who use Linux do so despite the fact that we can afford to buy closed source software like Photoshop (which I still use, on occasion.)
As I have made clear on many occasions, I am a Linux user, since the RedHat 4.x days. I have many Linux boxes now, mainly servers. But my graphics stations run Windows (used to run Mac) and my admin boxes run Windows because replacing the accounting software I run on Windows and paid $500 for, will cost over $17,000 on Linux. I spent a few months working on that problem, and that was the best I could find that fit our needs.
Why should the necessity of using Windows for certain purposes preclude the safety and convenience of using Linux for everything else?
The real question is: Why should a philosophical "good feeling" make me spend tens of thousands of dollars in software, and another tens of thousands of dollars in productivity?
Here in the real world, we buy the best tool for the job. Again, when everything is equal, I do pick Linux. In many instances, Linux is the obvious best choice, others, it is not. But I don't go to work to push a software philosophy so I can feel "warm and fuzzy". I go to work to make shit loads of money for the company, and a nice wad for myself.
If I had an employee who install Linux on the system for philosophical reasons, even though it would cost tens of thousands of dollars more, and the only benefit was how we could feel really nice about it, I would fire his ass in two seconds. I expect no less from myself as an employee.
Keep in mind, this tens of thousands of dollars in expenses that gained us nothing in profits doesn't come out of the bosses pocket, it comes out of the employees. This would result in laying someone off to compensate. Switching to ANY operating system for philosophical reasons is more than irresponsible, it is capitalistic suicide.
Since probably fewer than 1 in 10,000 users require CMYK graphics capability and Quark, this hardly seems a valid argument against the Linux desktop.
No, its a perfectly valid reason for ME, which was the issue. Why I can't switch. and more than 10,000 people use Quark. Even more use the CMYK features of Photoshop.
Take a look at your newspaper. All those ads. All magazines. All brocures, fliers and hand bills. All catalogs. Even the junk mail you get. You need CMYK and a program to assemble it. Quark is just what I use. There is no alternative in Linux. We are talking about well over 100,000 users and probably closer to 5x that amount that use it part time, not 10,000. It is a big deal.
She doesn't have much interest in computers, but finally my sister gave her an old Pentium 120 system she had laying around, and asked me to set it up for our mother. I finally decided to install Win98 on it, because it didn't have the power for a modern Linux distro, and because she expressed an interest in taking computer literacy classes at the local college, and those kind of classes use Windows exclusively.
It was worth the $700+ I spent at Dell to get her a decent system (2.0 celeron, 256mb ram, 40gb, 17") with a system restore disk that I can pop in and restore the whole system. For most people it is easier to use Windows, and the money spent was cheaper than the time I would have to spend using Linux for her.
Like I said, I like and use Linux, but I am not enough of a zealot that I just blindly will tell people to use it when I don't think its in their best interest. Just blindly saying "linux" to all situations may sound all sweat and GPLish, but those of us in the real world are much less influenced by the warm fuzzy feeling of using GPL, and more impressed by using the right OS for the job. Often it is Linux (98% on the server side) but often it is Windows. Still. Its not advocacy, its practicality.
As I remember it fox keep moving the show from night to night. Sometimes showing it sometimes not, it really didn't make a log of sense. It was one of those shows that you couldn't depend it being on.
Kinda like the problem with Futurama. Odd times of the year for its season, seldom shown during football season. 7:00 sunday is tough because sports always preempt it. And yes, the ratings were not there, perhaps because we never knew if it was really going to be on or not.
The patent claims were the first thing that caught my attention. However, I thought that if you have a patent on something, then you must put the patent number clearly on the product. Microsoft haven't listed the relevant patents - so how can you know whether you need to license the patents or not?
The patent number may be in the license agreement itself, which is likely. There are two different ways to license the software. The "open" methods, which means you are free to do nothing with the information, or if you want to develop software using the information, which would surely require non-GPL-able (?) restrictions and probably the exchange of $$.
I am guessing, but its an educated guess. Theoretically, you are supposed to read the license before you use the product, including the click-through license, which no one reads or they wouldn't click through.
My grandmother is 70 and isn't able to use windows. So, uh what's this granny test supposed to tell you?
:p
It means you are a terrible grandson for not buying her a computer and helping her learn! Go to your room!
But seriously, I bought Mom a new Dell system last Christmas, and she had never sit in front of a computer. She is 67, so same age group. I live 1300 miles away, but my sister lives there in town and helped her. (ok, honestly, my sister was not too damn happy with me for a few months for that one) It took 2 weeks to get her using it regularly (thanks to some Casino games, hehe) and within 6 months, she had a cable modem and emails me more crap every day that I ever want to get. Of course, I just shut up and read them because I don't want to discourage her. I started her on AOL, which she quit using after 6 months and the cable modem was installed. Maybe in a year she could use Linux, but she wouldn't because she knows Windows and doesn't care what OS it is, she just wants to send me pictures of dancing politicians and old people jokes.
You raise a good point (in spite of bad moderation) about the last 4 years. KDE has mainly managed to get more bloated recently, although I still prefer it over Gnome. I am looking at a different market segment though, the company with 20 or less employees. After all, this is the largest section of the business world in the US, and the fastest growing. Because we farm out most of our manufacturing to a company we partially own, it is really a different company, so the guys I work for would fit in this mold.
We don't have an inhouse IT dept (except me) or development team (except me) and I *technically* run the Marketing Dept., which consists of primarily ME. Having to wear many hats means I need a distro that I can install out of the box and at least be CLOSE to what I need. I am betting that in the near future, there will be MORE linux distros rather than fewer, and they will be more specialized. Knoppix, ironically, seems like a great business distro, just based on the default settings. I have considered learning how to roll my own knoppix that uses some different configuration settings, and automatically uses our server for all client files. This would mean just pressing new CDs for systems that had no HD or floppy, and everything else was on the server side. Thought about is very different than taking the time to learn how, however.
Its not that Linux is BAD on the desktop, its just that stock distro installs are less usefull than Windows, and if I save $100 per workstation using Linux, but it takes $150 in my time and training, then it isn't a good investment. Again, Linux will get there, and I am ready for it, but its just not there right now.
Part of my problem is the years I spent learning RedHat's particular brand of Linux, to be abandoned by them recently. Yes, RedHat has traditionally been a great distro for lazy asses like me, but that is just how it is for some of us. I am now looking at other distros, such as Knoppix or Debian, which are actually better suited for the desktop anyway. This all takes time though. When all is said and done, I *MUST* use what is best for the company if I am to be a decent employee, and because of the time involved in a company our size, Windows is still the correct answer for at least a year, whether I like it or not.
It is annoying that Gimp doesn't do CMYK, but why can't you manipulate all your images in Gimp as RGB, then use ImageMagick to convert to CMYK? Admittedly it's more of a hassle, but it's not the end of the world. It's worked for me.
Good question, but two reasons: One, when doing CMYK, as you know, you need true color matching. Converting this way is far from perfect since RGB to CMYK is more art than science. Two, again, the goal is productivity, and this is less productive than my current method. Unless changing offers at least similar productivity, I can't justify it to the PHB who pays me to do the work, or to myself who has enough self respect to do the right thing for him. (Boss is actually fairly cool)
People I've worked with are happy to accept PDF that I produce using LaTeX
Again, productivity is a major issue. I still use Quark 4.03 even tho 6 is out because I *know* 4.03 and there is no new features I need. I love learning new stuff, but there has to be a reason to take the time. Usually, the fun of it is reason enough but learning 4 color prepress is a necessary evil, not fun. Learning how to link Heyu, Bluelava and a bunch of x10 modules for a home automation system, well, now THAT is fun. PDF is gaining in popularity in the printing business, but again, it is a proprietary system, and I would rather not have to master PDF production until the gains in productivity justify it. I just installed Open Office on windows for testing of converting other formats into PDF, so I am in the process of testing it. Until then, I still have to get the job done.
Your suggestions are valid, but not applicable to me in my particular situation, at this time. I am one of those guys who loves Linux, and hates the way MS does business, but I am *not* one who chooses my tools soley on philosophical ideals. I prefer Linux on the server NOT because MS is evil, but because I can modify the source, configure the system to be minimalistic, thus optimized, and simply do more in a Linux environment. It is simply a better OS on the server.
I prefer MS on the desktop (although Linux is catching up) because it is easier to use. Yes, its a pain with updates, AV, security, but it is still easier and it has a more consistant interface for client tasks. If all things were equal, THEN I could afford to choose Linux for philosophical reasons.
I am patient. I do believe that Linux will catch up with MS on the desktop, and I do look forward to that day for several reasons. It means that I will be able to have a highly productive work environment. It means admin'ing other stations will be easier. It means more choice, and being able to mix MS/Linux/Mac according to the task at hand. It also means that MS may have to clean up its act, and become a better corporate citizen.
IBM was pretty much a shitty corporate citizen in the late 70s and 80s. They locked customers in to a proprietary system, charged too much for support, and locked out other vendors. Then the feds came in with anti-trust suits and IBM lost, and had to make some choices. Fortunately for all of us, they chose to become a better corporate citizen, and I support them, love their products, and appreciate their contributions. I would be plenty happy if MS could make the same transition.