Skeptical about the source of the article...
on
Compaq Shifts Focus
·
· Score: 1
I'd be interested to know if other companies have experienced a similar slowdown that would suggest a "death of the PC" outlook that Compaq seems to be touting. Remember, Microsoft is an MSNBC affiliate, so any stories that talk about the death of the PC and stress the importance of services actually play right into the hands of their.NET strategy, not to mention marginalizing the PC entertainment market into going towards their gaming platform.
Yeah, I know that sounds paranoid, but corporate influence affecting journalism isn't a new thing. Burston Marstellar did it with environmental-based journalism on a national level up here in Canada, and MSNBC has long been a pro-MS news source... remember, this is the same place that had an editorial saying that MS wasn't a monopoly (great timing there, too, because the editorial came out about a week before the Findings of Fact:).
Let's talk about the real victim of this, the Karma Whore. I was shaking, FREAKING OUT I tell you. I would have slipped into shock and potentially a coma if my roommate hadn't come in, saw and diagnosed the problem immediately, and wrote a "+1 Interesting" on a post-it note and stuck it to my forehead.
That bought me Sunday. If you guys had been down any longer I'd have been running around the streets naked. Please, please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, get some redundancy.
As it is, the only way that Red Hat can compete is on price points. They will have to price RHDB so low that it will be akin to giving it away. Under $1000 for an enterprise-wide license.
Er... considering you can get a RedHat distribution and PostgreSQL right now for free, I don't think they're going to be looking at this as a direct revenue generator. Heck, PostgreSQL is server-ready pretty much out of the box with RH distros these days.
Chances are it'll be for value-adding, kind of what Microsoft did by including a web browser with the OS. Love the web browser? Need the os. In this case, love RHDB? Need RH.
Yes sir, we folks at Red Hat, known for the Red Hat Linux Distribution, RHCEs and enterprise-level solutions, are now packing with every forthcoming Red Hat distribution a Red Hat configured database solution for low- to middle-tier database needs. The RHDB will be specially customized for Red Hat systems, which are put out by Red Hat, the most prominent Linux distribution on the market today.
You laugh, because it seems obvious here, but I remember taking a look over at a Microsoft story on MSNBC, and found no less than 75 instances of Microsoft branding, using "Microsoft" or "MS" or "Windows". And this was for one story, on one web page.
Any new avenue that Red Hat can use to drop its own name is an opportunity to solidify mindshare. Entering the database arena with a core product that won't embarass them is a no-brainer. They've even got GTK+ experts in-house that can make the thing look pretty.
This could be a SERIOUS hit to MS Access and SQL server. And with Postgresql functionality built straight into php, the whole MS-IIS-ACCESS/SQLS-ASP combination can be easily matched in terms of quality, performance and reliability by Linux-Apache-RedhatDB-PHP combination, totally surpassed in terms of cost, and only lagging behind a little bit in the gui department. From a marketing standpoint, it makes the solution LOOK more cohesive (even if it isn't), and that's always been the selling point of going with an MS solution -- smart move by RedHat. And with the GPL on their hands, we can trust them not to be sluggish and proprietary in terms of responding to the community's needs -- good move for us.
It is their legal right to contact you and I don't think that should change.
Well, isn't there a saying that your right to swing your fist ends at my face. If I've decided that spam causes me undo hardship (bandwidth costs, lost time, unwanted x-rated material), then I ought to be able to recognize my right not to get it. You can do this with junkmail, why can't we do it with junk email?
It'll end up being a judgement call as to whether or not the email sent was spam, but if you coordinated efforts you could probably prove that you were being spammed instead of contacted specifically for something to do with you as an individual.
Can't really fault them for wanting to add licensing restrictions of their own. From an advocacy standpoint, what we really need to focus on is the following counter-FUD:
Is this SDK better than anything that free software offers? Can this SDK offer anything that free software doesn't?
Are we able to differentiate between MS's use of the word "viral" and the common stigma of the word "virus" in a way that the average joe office manager can understand? Are we prepared to make this distinction whenever possible?
Can we use this restriction against MS somehow? For instance, not allowing users of the SDK to incorporate LGPL libraries, for instance, doesn't make much sense on the surface, and could restrict the user from using stuff that (a) doesn't infect their own programs with the GPL, (b) cut off a user from great potential resources such as (fill in your favourite LGPL stuff here).
Can we take MS's attempts at creating confusion and use them against MS? For instance, the SDL is an LGPL library that incorporates some DirectX stuff. Does this mean that you're not allowed to use aids such as the SDL that help make DirectX easier to use, even if no proprietary code gets infected with the GPL with the use?
Where can we ask tons of questions like, "I really like Windows and I also really like Apache. This SDK licensing seems to suggest that I can't do Apache development for the Windows platform. Why is that? Why are you limiting developers this way?"
From the article, she says that they update the index every 28 days. That sort of smacks of a non-database-like structure, you think? If they wre using a database-like structure, then they'd be able to update it more regularly, no?
Anybody have an inkling of a clue of the data structure that Google uses (or probably uses) to store all its words? I was just thinking that maybe it was some sort of balanced binary tree with each node containing a word, two pointers to the next two words further down the tree, and the root of a linked list of all the pages that word is contained in? I know binary search trees are supposed to be fast, but I was wondering if that'd be good enough for something with probably hundreds of thousands of words?
I'm assuming they're not using some sort of sql LIKE "%searchword%", I can't imagine any kind of cluster that could speed that process up, although I don't really know all that much about the process or what the main benefits of clustering are.
Anyway, hugely sorry for the offtopic post, it's just something that's been on the brain lately...
Their core product is software that you can download yourself at no cost. You don't even have to pay a cent to help them keep their servers running.
All controversies aside, they've made important contributions both in terms of gcc and the rpm. Both of these bits of software are also available at no cost to its users.
They've built a core product that other companies unabashedly rip off to make their own products, most notably Mandrake. These other companies can get their hands on this source for free.
They've focused their efforts on software that is still in its infancy (less than a decade old) and doesn't have as its main selling points the sorts of things that Joe Average (or even Joe Above Average) worries about on their home desktops (MS Office compatibility, games, fast Internet browsing). It's getting better, but it's still software for geeks.
And they're still in the black. Their business practices violate almost every notion that we've come to accept as granted in order for a software house to make a profit, and they've wandered into an industry dominated by several different longstanding companies, and THEY'RE STILL MAKING A PROFIT!
Losing a core developer to what is basically politics is bad. It's bad for GNOME's image, it's bad for recruitment of other programmers, it's bad for those corporations who are trying to help out... it's bad only so many levels. When politics takes over, what you end up with is a hierarchy, whether you like it or not, where the folks at the top usually end up becoming stagnant in trying to deal with the damage, and the folks on the bottom are turned over so consistently there's little chance at continuity over time.
It's time for Miguel to show some leadership and fix this thing. If Martin was the problem, then his resignation is probably its own solution. Unfortunately, Havoc's swift attempt at putting a bandaid on the development-by-committee process seems to suggest that the problem is deeper, and that problem needs to be addressed and patched quicker than an emacs bugfix. KDE's already taken the lead in the X environment, and competition is only a good thing when everyone's up for it. Chances are everyone in the group knows deep down who or what the problem is, but the more the GNOME foundation builds itself into a bureaucracy, the harder it is going to be to fix these things without lawsuits -- anybody who's been involved in any sort of volunteer-driven collective that has a respectable operating budget knows exactly what I'm talking about.
We had a guy in our pro college who GPLed every last one of his submitted projects. Thank God. I sleep much better at night knowing that the school won't rip off the source to his Visual Basic hangman project and make a fortune off it.
I wish I were joking. He GPLed everything. It was all I could do to keep from switching to FreeBSD just to piss him off on licensing issues.
I suppose this'll get modded down for missing the point, but I just don't get it. Insecure transactions have nothing to do with the type of currency, it has to do with impersonating the person who has the money, doesn't it? What makes this any more secure than me trying to push a currency of XXX?
Re:Just a matter of time...
on
Protein Music
·
· Score: 1
I'll do you one better...
How long before DNA gets labelled as a copyright-circumvention device?
Now we'll finally get to find out what the Slashdot community think about these issues! I swear, I've been around here for over a couple of years and nobody seems willing to put forward an opinion on either. About time, editors!
Mr Disspain has written to the Internet's governing body, the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, requesting his organisation be recognised as the peak Internet body in Australia, not Mr Elz.
Anyone know where the governing body sits on this issue?
Make sure she doesn't browse at -1. That alone will keep her clear of much racist humour, incorrect claims to "Frist Prost", and that unfortunate fellow whom we all wish would stop bending over.
I suppose some would consider Slashdot to be its own library of MS public relations exposure, but I really think we really need to make a chronicle of all the ways that Microsoft has handled the Linux OS.
Methods they have used so far:
Mockery (Ballmer)
Misdirection (this study)
Defamation (Alchinn)
Conspiracy (Hallowe'en papers)
Divide and Conquer (recent attack on GPL)
Rhetoric (that "truth about linux" article they had at microsoft.com for a while)
Hypocrisy ("How can we be a monopoly with this wonderful Linux thing going on?")
We should compile all this stuff and put it in a central location so that we can refer to it at a later time. I bet it wouldn't take long for all the inconsistencies in their arguments to fall apart, and it would make for great debate fodder.
Who cares if it gets used as a snooping tool? Most workplaces have agreements that don't allow you to use work email for personal use anyway, so if you agree to those terms, isn't any means the employer uses to enforce it also fair game?
The computers, network, servers etc. all belong to them in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I know that sounds paranoid, but corporate influence affecting journalism isn't a new thing. Burston Marstellar did it with environmental-based journalism on a national level up here in Canada, and MSNBC has long been a pro-MS news source... remember, this is the same place that had an editorial saying that MS wasn't a monopoly (great timing there, too, because the editorial came out about a week before the Findings of Fact :).
That bought me Sunday. If you guys had been down any longer I'd have been running around the streets naked. Please, please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, get some redundancy.
Er... considering you can get a RedHat distribution and PostgreSQL right now for free, I don't think they're going to be looking at this as a direct revenue generator. Heck, PostgreSQL is server-ready pretty much out of the box with RH distros these days.
Chances are it'll be for value-adding, kind of what Microsoft did by including a web browser with the OS. Love the web browser? Need the os. In this case, love RHDB? Need RH.
Yes sir, we folks at Red Hat, known for the Red Hat Linux Distribution, RHCEs and enterprise-level solutions, are now packing with every forthcoming Red Hat distribution a Red Hat configured database solution for low- to middle-tier database needs. The RHDB will be specially customized for Red Hat systems, which are put out by Red Hat, the most prominent Linux distribution on the market today.
You laugh, because it seems obvious here, but I remember taking a look over at a Microsoft story on MSNBC, and found no less than 75 instances of Microsoft branding, using "Microsoft" or "MS" or "Windows". And this was for one story, on one web page.
Any new avenue that Red Hat can use to drop its own name is an opportunity to solidify mindshare. Entering the database arena with a core product that won't embarass them is a no-brainer. They've even got GTK+ experts in-house that can make the thing look pretty.
This could be a SERIOUS hit to MS Access and SQL server. And with Postgresql functionality built straight into php, the whole MS-IIS-ACCESS/SQLS-ASP combination can be easily matched in terms of quality, performance and reliability by Linux-Apache-RedhatDB-PHP combination, totally surpassed in terms of cost, and only lagging behind a little bit in the gui department. From a marketing standpoint, it makes the solution LOOK more cohesive (even if it isn't), and that's always been the selling point of going with an MS solution -- smart move by RedHat. And with the GPL on their hands, we can trust them not to be sluggish and proprietary in terms of responding to the community's needs -- good move for us.
Well, isn't there a saying that your right to swing your fist ends at my face. If I've decided that spam causes me undo hardship (bandwidth costs, lost time, unwanted x-rated material), then I ought to be able to recognize my right not to get it. You can do this with junkmail, why can't we do it with junk email?
It'll end up being a judgement call as to whether or not the email sent was spam, but if you coordinated efforts you could probably prove that you were being spammed instead of contacted specifically for something to do with you as an individual.
Is this SDK better than anything that free software offers? Can this SDK offer anything that free software doesn't?
Are we able to differentiate between MS's use of the word "viral" and the common stigma of the word "virus" in a way that the average joe office manager can understand? Are we prepared to make this distinction whenever possible?
Can we use this restriction against MS somehow? For instance, not allowing users of the SDK to incorporate LGPL libraries, for instance, doesn't make much sense on the surface, and could restrict the user from using stuff that (a) doesn't infect their own programs with the GPL, (b) cut off a user from great potential resources such as (fill in your favourite LGPL stuff here).
Can we take MS's attempts at creating confusion and use them against MS? For instance, the SDL is an LGPL library that incorporates some DirectX stuff. Does this mean that you're not allowed to use aids such as the SDL that help make DirectX easier to use, even if no proprietary code gets infected with the GPL with the use?
Where can we ask tons of questions like, "I really like Windows and I also really like Apache. This SDK licensing seems to suggest that I can't do Apache development for the Windows platform. Why is that? Why are you limiting developers this way?"
Erosion is faster than playing chess by post. Jesus, tectonic shifts are a formula-1 race compared to playing chess by post.
Ah. Gotcha.
From the article, she says that they update the index every 28 days. That sort of smacks of a non-database-like structure, you think? If they wre using a database-like structure, then they'd be able to update it more regularly, no?
Okay, this is so off-topic it's not even funny.
Anybody have an inkling of a clue of the data structure that Google uses (or probably uses) to store all its words? I was just thinking that maybe it was some sort of balanced binary tree with each node containing a word, two pointers to the next two words further down the tree, and the root of a linked list of all the pages that word is contained in? I know binary search trees are supposed to be fast, but I was wondering if that'd be good enough for something with probably hundreds of thousands of words?
I'm assuming they're not using some sort of sql LIKE "%searchword%", I can't imagine any kind of cluster that could speed that process up, although I don't really know all that much about the process or what the main benefits of clustering are.
Anyway, hugely sorry for the offtopic post, it's just something that's been on the brain lately...
And they're still in the black. Their business practices violate almost every notion that we've come to accept as granted in order for a software house to make a profit, and they've wandered into an industry dominated by several different longstanding companies, and THEY'RE STILL MAKING A PROFIT!
This is so cool.
It's time for Miguel to show some leadership and fix this thing. If Martin was the problem, then his resignation is probably its own solution. Unfortunately, Havoc's swift attempt at putting a bandaid on the development-by-committee process seems to suggest that the problem is deeper, and that problem needs to be addressed and patched quicker than an emacs bugfix. KDE's already taken the lead in the X environment, and competition is only a good thing when everyone's up for it. Chances are everyone in the group knows deep down who or what the problem is, but the more the GNOME foundation builds itself into a bureaucracy, the harder it is going to be to fix these things without lawsuits -- anybody who's been involved in any sort of volunteer-driven collective that has a respectable operating budget knows exactly what I'm talking about.
Read the article a little too quickly and got excited about posting the moonestates thing. Never mind.
...they can have a place to live. About 20 pounds gets you an acre.
(Just wait until after they buy before telling them it's not QUITE like Diablo...)
I wish I were joking. He GPLed everything. It was all I could do to keep from switching to FreeBSD just to piss him off on licensing issues.
I suppose this'll get modded down for missing the point, but I just don't get it. Insecure transactions have nothing to do with the type of currency, it has to do with impersonating the person who has the money, doesn't it? What makes this any more secure than me trying to push a currency of XXX?
How long before DNA gets labelled as a copyright-circumvention device?
CowboyNeal is left out of consecutive polls.
Now we'll finally get to find out what the Slashdot community think about these issues! I swear, I've been around here for over a couple of years and nobody seems willing to put forward an opinion on either. About time, editors!
(Here endeth the sarcasm...)
Anyone know where the governing body sits on this issue?
Make sure she doesn't browse at -1. That alone will keep her clear of much racist humour, incorrect claims to "Frist Prost", and that unfortunate fellow whom we all wish would stop bending over.
Methods they have used so far:
We should compile all this stuff and put it in a central location so that we can refer to it at a later time. I bet it wouldn't take long for all the inconsistencies in their arguments to fall apart, and it would make for great debate fodder.
The computers, network, servers etc. all belong to them in the first place.
Just wondering why the OpenOffice people aren't stated as being involved in this.