Wow. Are you wrong. First off, the price of an OS + office suite is not zero. The price of a complicated, difficult to install, esoteric, very difficult to learn OS & office suite is zero. The price of an OS that works OUT OF THE BOX is several hundred dollars. If you were comparing apples and apples, then MS would already have stopped selling their software. But, they are not perfect substitutes, and most intelligent, rational people know that. They are not even close to perfect substitutes.
And in the end, I think that that's what pisses off OSS zealots such as yourself. You guys literally can't even *give away* your software. People (like myself) would rather pay hundreds of dollars for Windows. You ever heard, "I wouldn't do that even if you paid me?" Well, millions of people wouldn't touch Linux even if you paid them. Literally. Ouch.
Actually, I'm a big fan of 20 year old hardware, where it can be used. I find solid state electronics from the 1970's to be absoutely reliable. But I tend to agree, consumer level electronics, by and large, are garbage unless you're willing to shop somewhere other than Circuit Shitty or Worst Buy.
As far as computer components go, they've been garbage for years. Everything past the old IBM XT's have been plastic disposable junk, btu for good reason. Most people upgrade so quickly, there's no reason to make good, lasting components. As far as computer stuff, I buy the cheapest I can find, and just throw it out every so often.
I know one place where it's being used already...
on
Tornado in a Can
·
· Score: 2
A certain group of superfriends, no wait, superdudes, no wait, Mystery Men, have already used it against Cassanova Frankenstein. It seemed to work pretty damn well against him. Completely non-lethal. It was actually invented by Dr. Heller. I wonder if Dr. Heller has a patent on it, or if he's been too busy with "the ladies"...?
That's just semantics. Every component of a product costs the seller something, whether they made it in house or nto is irrelevant. When you buy an HP computer, you buy the whole package from HP. Period. That's it. You don't buy the individual pieces. Besides, do you honestly think that Mac physically manufactures every component? You think that they have a hard drive fabrication plant somewhere with a big Apple logo on the front? No way. You buy a Mac and try getting a refund on the hard drive and you'll be laughed right out of the store.
Cat 4 works just fine. I stream MP3's, swap massive files, etc. Most people who buy Cat 5 are just suckers because they don't understand how networking works, and what real bandwidth flow rates are. I've never been able to "max out" my Cat 4 cable.
Nope. I've got at least 3 500' Cat 4 cables running along the floor of my house, and a few in my store right now. Works great. Fast, dirt fucking cheap, and no security problems.
Broadband. You can't listen to shit with 56K analog, and the vast majority of all Net users don't have anything coming even close to an uncapped, unlimited high speed pipe. I would have gladly paid for it when I had a job that had broadband. Hell, I used quite a bit of streaming audio when I worked (mainly launch.com), but as soon as I got home, fuck it. They were waaay too early. Something like this will fly in about 10 years when broadband is more ubiquitous then it is now.
What you fail to realize is that you probably do not make up a very large section of the market at all. And while I'm sure that LiquidAudio would have absolutely loved to have you, WookieOnTheRun, as a customer, I honestly doubt that any company is going to fail or succeed based on whether or not you are a paying customer.
While not absolute, I think it's safe to say that Linux users are much more web-savvy than the average Windows user.
Also, much more likely to be too young to have a credit card, or simply too poor. Linux users makes a *terrible* market to sell virtually anything to. Like an earlier poster said, OSS users expect free.
I think it's time for OSS users to understand that not everything can be free all the time. It doesn't work. It's not universal. Not by a long shot.
anticompetitive practices are THE REASON someone can't use available fiber and start a low-cost high-bandwidth carrier
Actually, you couldn't use the unused fiber because you don't *own* it. You seem to forget, there is such a thing as private property, and private property owners can do whatever the hell they want with their property, including not use it. There's no reason that somebody else with deep pockets can't lay their own fiber.
And as far as deregulation, it works for me. My business' telephone lines are completely handled by a small local company, and I pay a good bit less than I would with Ma Bell.
But let me re-iterate. That fiber is privately owned. You cannot commandeer fiber any more than you can comandeer any other private property that's not being used by the owner. It's called theft. If the gov't were to "nationalize" it, it wouldn't be any better than any other Socialist/Communist country that steals private property from its citizens.
OK, you obviously didn't read the article... Most of the fiber is owned by companies that simply don't exist any more.
Huge bandwidth seems fair.
Wow. You know what's not fair?... I haven't had power in a week due to an ice storm. Life ain't fair, fucko. Deal with it.
You wanna make a mint? Go borrow a few hundred million dollars to buy fiber and start your own company. Until then, shut the hell up about "anticompetitive" practices.
I'm so incredibly sick and tired about people whining about "this company ought to do that becaise I think it's a good idea" or "this company is evil because of this". Jesus Christ. That's why this country is so great. If you see a place where a company is making a stupid decision and isn't earning money from it, then you have every right to jump in and tackle it yourself. In other words, put up or shut up.
If MS has done any research, and I'm sure they have, they know that this will very seriously impact Linux in a negative way. Not too many currect OSS developers are gonna continue to develop just to line the pockets of MS, who just repackages and sells their product as their own. Already IBM and Oracle are profiting from their work. I can't believe that many developers will continue once MS starts profiting from them too. I quite honestly think that the whole OSS idealology will fall apart.
It's already been tried. Several companies have come and gone trying to sell distributed computing. The secret is: there's no market for it! None! It's been tried and has failed. Any company that needs serious crunch power already has it within their own organization. Hell, shitty little Intel chips can do much more than the average PC user will ever need 'em to do. Universities occasionally need more power for esoteric physics problems, but they can't afford to pay. Hell, even SETI@Home couldn't even get enough data in fast enough to be processed. I can't imagine that there's that much demand out there for something like this, if any.
Well, your car is technical as hell. I hope that you read the user's manual and wiring specs cover to cover before you put the key in the ignition. And, I hope that you completely understand how your air conditioning unit works before you ever flipped a switch.
This is a completely bogus argument. The whole point in having high technology is to make people's lives easier, not more difficult. Attitudes like yours is why Linux is still, by and large, just for techno-geek hobbyists. I don't care how W2K works. I just want it to work. Period. No dicking around with obscure commands. No hours and hours just to set it up, or configure it. I install it. It works. That's all I need to know. Maybe if Linux ever worked that well, it would become just as popular, too.
Well, I have no idea how much more they're gonna cost, but I'll take any bet that prices of NIC with wireless is gonna be more than those without. That's a cost I don't need. Right now, if I were to build my own machine, I'd buy a motherboard withotu onboard video and slap in some old ISA video card I have laying around and save a hundred bucks.
As far as wireless, setting it up isn't any easier. If there's any software configuration (and there's not much anymore in W2K), it would be identical to set up peripherals.
As far as security goes, doing something to open up security jsut to force me to lock it down tighter is a real bad idea. There's always the chance that it doesn't get locked down perfectly, plus, I don't care how well it's locked down, security is absolutely going to be better with real wires than going wireless.
Other than CPU's, this means that I probably won't be buying any Intel chipped products. I'd much rather pay less for a non-wireless product than pay extra for a feature I'm not going to be using any time in the near future. To me a network card is a network card. I get the absolute cheapest I can find for most applications.
This is definitely one case in which the prosperity of third party companies should be secondary to the economic benefits that'll be afforded by ubiquitous Wi-Fi-enabled devices.
What kind of economic benefits? The only thing that'll change for me is that I'll have to pay more for a NIC every time I buy one, whether or not I use wireless (which I don't). And I'll also have to spend more money on securing every single one. How is wireless going to help my business earn more money, exactly? Sounds like it'll do nothing but cost me money which I need.
to mandate that all computers be wireless enabled in five years... get the industry moving in the right direction.
No, we fucking don't. It's not the gov't job to mandate technology changes unless it benefits people as a whole. And even then, it's questionable. I'm perfectly happy paying $10 for a cheap-o NIC. I have no use for wireless whatsoever. I don't want to have to pay $50 for a NIC just because the gov't mandates it.
That's insulting as hell to compare people who've been through war with fat, pasty, overindulgent, wealthy people who play video games. Insulting as hell.
You're talking about using their servers for a service. If course you're gonna have to pay. Just because you didn't pay in the past doesn't mean that you won't have to later. You're not entitled to use their servers for free. I use Quickbooks daily, and I can press print and drop a PO or an invoice on a fax machine just fine. I can also export and email 'em if I really, really want to. You're paying for the convenience of using their service. Nobody said you *had* to use their service at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. Are you wrong. First off, the price of an OS + office suite is not zero. The price of a complicated, difficult to install, esoteric, very difficult to learn OS & office suite is zero. The price of an OS that works OUT OF THE BOX is several hundred dollars. If you were comparing apples and apples, then MS would already have stopped selling their software. But, they are not perfect substitutes, and most intelligent, rational people know that. They are not even close to perfect substitutes.
And in the end, I think that that's what pisses off OSS zealots such as yourself. You guys literally can't even *give away* your software. People (like myself) would rather pay hundreds of dollars for Windows. You ever heard, "I wouldn't do that even if you paid me?" Well, millions of people wouldn't touch Linux even if you paid them. Literally. Ouch.
Anyone know when a linux distro is gonna be available for these things?
Yeah, I'll agree there. The AT's were solid, both literally and figuratively, too. Very reliable machines.
According to Consumer Reports, Sony actually makes some of the most unreliable garbage out there. You've gotten lucky.
Actually, I'm a big fan of 20 year old hardware, where it can be used. I find solid state electronics from the 1970's to be absoutely reliable. But I tend to agree, consumer level electronics, by and large, are garbage unless you're willing to shop somewhere other than Circuit Shitty or Worst Buy.
As far as computer components go, they've been garbage for years. Everything past the old IBM XT's have been plastic disposable junk, btu for good reason. Most people upgrade so quickly, there's no reason to make good, lasting components. As far as computer stuff, I buy the cheapest I can find, and just throw it out every so often.
A certain group of superfriends, no wait, superdudes, no wait, Mystery Men, have already used it against Cassanova Frankenstein. It seemed to work pretty damn well against him. Completely non-lethal. It was actually invented by Dr. Heller. I wonder if Dr. Heller has a patent on it, or if he's been too busy with "the ladies"...?
That's just semantics. Every component of a product costs the seller something, whether they made it in house or nto is irrelevant. When you buy an HP computer, you buy the whole package from HP. Period. That's it. You don't buy the individual pieces. Besides, do you honestly think that Mac physically manufactures every component? You think that they have a hard drive fabrication plant somewhere with a big Apple logo on the front? No way. You buy a Mac and try getting a refund on the hard drive and you'll be laughed right out of the store.
Excellent Troll!
1. If their "package" included any of those OS's, I *would* be asking for a refund. None of those are of any use to me.
2. MS being a monopoly isn't relevant here.
Cat 4 works just fine. I stream MP3's, swap massive files, etc. Most people who buy Cat 5 are just suckers because they don't understand how networking works, and what real bandwidth flow rates are. I've never been able to "max out" my Cat 4 cable.
Nope. I've got at least 3 500' Cat 4 cables running along the floor of my house, and a few in my store right now. Works great. Fast, dirt fucking cheap, and no security problems.
Broadband. You can't listen to shit with 56K analog, and the vast majority of all Net users don't have anything coming even close to an uncapped, unlimited high speed pipe. I would have gladly paid for it when I had a job that had broadband. Hell, I used quite a bit of streaming audio when I worked (mainly launch.com), but as soon as I got home, fuck it. They were waaay too early. Something like this will fly in about 10 years when broadband is more ubiquitous then it is now.
What you fail to realize is that you probably do not make up a very large section of the market at all. And while I'm sure that LiquidAudio would have absolutely loved to have you, WookieOnTheRun, as a customer, I honestly doubt that any company is going to fail or succeed based on whether or not you are a paying customer.
While not absolute, I think it's safe to say that Linux users are much more web-savvy than the average Windows user.
Also, much more likely to be too young to have a credit card, or simply too poor. Linux users makes a *terrible* market to sell virtually anything to. Like an earlier poster said, OSS users expect free.
I think it's time for OSS users to understand that not everything can be free all the time. It doesn't work. It's not universal. Not by a long shot.
anticompetitive practices are THE REASON someone can't use available fiber and start a low-cost high-bandwidth carrier
Actually, you couldn't use the unused fiber because you don't *own* it. You seem to forget, there is such a thing as private property, and private property owners can do whatever the hell they want with their property, including not use it. There's no reason that somebody else with deep pockets can't lay their own fiber.
And as far as deregulation, it works for me. My business' telephone lines are completely handled by a small local company, and I pay a good bit less than I would with Ma Bell.
But let me re-iterate. That fiber is privately owned. You cannot commandeer fiber any more than you can comandeer any other private property that's not being used by the owner. It's called theft. If the gov't were to "nationalize" it, it wouldn't be any better than any other Socialist/Communist country that steals private property from its citizens.
OK, you obviously didn't read the article... Most of the fiber is owned by companies that simply don't exist any more.
Huge bandwidth seems fair.
Wow. You know what's not fair?... I haven't had power in a week due to an ice storm. Life ain't fair, fucko. Deal with it.
You wanna make a mint? Go borrow a few hundred million dollars to buy fiber and start your own company. Until then, shut the hell up about "anticompetitive" practices.
I'm so incredibly sick and tired about people whining about "this company ought to do that becaise I think it's a good idea" or "this company is evil because of this". Jesus Christ. That's why this country is so great. If you see a place where a company is making a stupid decision and isn't earning money from it, then you have every right to jump in and tackle it yourself. In other words, put up or shut up.
If MS has done any research, and I'm sure they have, they know that this will very seriously impact Linux in a negative way. Not too many currect OSS developers are gonna continue to develop just to line the pockets of MS, who just repackages and sells their product as their own. Already IBM and Oracle are profiting from their work. I can't believe that many developers will continue once MS starts profiting from them too. I quite honestly think that the whole OSS idealology will fall apart.
It's already been tried. Several companies have come and gone trying to sell distributed computing. The secret is: there's no market for it! None! It's been tried and has failed. Any company that needs serious crunch power already has it within their own organization. Hell, shitty little Intel chips can do much more than the average PC user will ever need 'em to do. Universities occasionally need more power for esoteric physics problems, but they can't afford to pay. Hell, even SETI@Home couldn't even get enough data in fast enough to be processed. I can't imagine that there's that much demand out there for something like this, if any.
Well, your car is technical as hell. I hope that you read the user's manual and wiring specs cover to cover before you put the key in the ignition. And, I hope that you completely understand how your air conditioning unit works before you ever flipped a switch.
This is a completely bogus argument. The whole point in having high technology is to make people's lives easier, not more difficult. Attitudes like yours is why Linux is still, by and large, just for techno-geek hobbyists. I don't care how W2K works. I just want it to work. Period. No dicking around with obscure commands. No hours and hours just to set it up, or configure it. I install it. It works. That's all I need to know. Maybe if Linux ever worked that well, it would become just as popular, too.
Plus it makes you look cool to your friends when ur flying though the command line:)
Unless any of your friends happen to be female. Then it makes you look like a complete dweeb.
Well, I have no idea how much more they're gonna cost, but I'll take any bet that prices of NIC with wireless is gonna be more than those without. That's a cost I don't need. Right now, if I were to build my own machine, I'd buy a motherboard withotu onboard video and slap in some old ISA video card I have laying around and save a hundred bucks.
As far as wireless, setting it up isn't any easier. If there's any software configuration (and there's not much anymore in W2K), it would be identical to set up peripherals.
As far as security goes, doing something to open up security jsut to force me to lock it down tighter is a real bad idea. There's always the chance that it doesn't get locked down perfectly, plus, I don't care how well it's locked down, security is absolutely going to be better with real wires than going wireless.
Other than CPU's, this means that I probably won't be buying any Intel chipped products. I'd much rather pay less for a non-wireless product than pay extra for a feature I'm not going to be using any time in the near future. To me a network card is a network card. I get the absolute cheapest I can find for most applications.
This is definitely one case in which the prosperity of third party companies should be secondary to the economic benefits that'll be afforded by ubiquitous Wi-Fi-enabled devices.
What kind of economic benefits? The only thing that'll change for me is that I'll have to pay more for a NIC every time I buy one, whether or not I use wireless (which I don't). And I'll also have to spend more money on securing every single one. How is wireless going to help my business earn more money, exactly? Sounds like it'll do nothing but cost me money which I need.
to mandate that all computers be wireless enabled in five years... get the industry moving in the right direction.
No, we fucking don't. It's not the gov't job to mandate technology changes unless it benefits people as a whole. And even then, it's questionable. I'm perfectly happy paying $10 for a cheap-o NIC. I have no use for wireless whatsoever. I don't want to have to pay $50 for a NIC just because the gov't mandates it.
That's insulting as hell to compare people who've been through war with fat, pasty, overindulgent, wealthy people who play video games. Insulting as hell.
You're talking about using their servers for a service. If course you're gonna have to pay. Just because you didn't pay in the past doesn't mean that you won't have to later. You're not entitled to use their servers for free. I use Quickbooks daily, and I can press print and drop a PO or an invoice on a fax machine just fine. I can also export and email 'em if I really, really want to. You're paying for the convenience of using their service. Nobody said you *had* to use their service at all.