All the more reason for the design of Perl 6... Dialects!
Now we can have simplified, easy-to-read code that's real Perl, but looks JUST LIKE COBOL/Pet peeve - PERL JAVA RUBY PHP... all OBNOXIOUS!/yes, I know PHP is OK - but it's not the capitalization of the name that annoys me with that language;)
Blip-Verts! Beamed directly into your head, just like in the 80's sci-fi TV series. Somehow, this makes me wonder if Max Headroom is only 20 minutes into the future...
/I wonder when the ads will start killing people at random
Support from Oracle, IMHO, is the standard by which many many companies make their big IT decisions. And from that one point, a lot of other things follow.
Out of the 60-odd telco apps I have to support, about half of them use Oracle as their backing DB, and nothing else. Many will not run on a system without it pre-installed.
Heck, because of Oracle licensing costs, management chose quad-core Intel processors for our newest servers, instead of dual-socket-dual-core AMD systems. And those servers aren't even *running* Oracle. (really, either choice was good, but what struck me was the rationale given by my boss)
Well, the managers here are dense, but not stupid. They remember being burned in the past, and avoid the unknown until they have 101 reasons to change (and not 1 less)
And, yes, Oracle *does* run on all sorts of different distros... but good luck getting support.
We have an in-house Oracle support team and *still* we choose RHEL simply because that is all Oracle will support.
Well, while I tend to go thru the same exact process on every server I deal with, I can see *one* big advantage - Reputation.
The typical PHB has by now recognized RHEL as *the* Linux for servers. Thru good marketing, development, support, and business, RedHat has become the de-facto standard for Linux in the enterprise server market.
Case in point - Not ONE of the enterprise apps I work with is supported on anything BUT RHEL, (or in one case SuSE) HOWEVER, I've tested many of them in the lab with Debian and Ubuntu and found that all work very well... but there's a snowball's chance in hell that management would let me use Debian or Ubuntu. RedHat's reputation as Linux for serious business is entrenched in their minds, and entrenched in the market.
I have a lot of respect and appreciation for RedHat's offerings. I prefer Debian, and in the corporate world, Ubuntu is the only Debian derivitave that has a chance of becoming a contender.
Being a default offering on Dell servers is a golden opportunity to start building the reputation they need. PHBs will see the Ubuntu option on Dell's web-site and after about a thousand times they may begin to wonder if it's something worth investigating.:)
If Canonical produces a systems-management/data-center platform that can compete with offerings available for RedHat, I believe that sysadmins, enterprise software vendors, and even managers will start to take notice. If Ubuntu can garner reputation as an alternative to RHEL, we may start seeing not just hardware support but also software support.
Granted, this is all just a wild dream for me, but let me tell you - if someday Oracle announces support for Ubuntu, it could be a dream come true!
So now that we've got a decent definition of "algorithm", one that's approved by five of the brightest lights in computer science THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS
I'm not saying the fluctuation theory is correct ('cause I know next to nothing about economics) but Asus is a Taiwanese company, so they probably aren't buying their parts with dollars.
Mod parent up... The LifeStraw is brilliant in it's simplicity and economy, and I think it deserves all the media attention we can give it. However, it's clearly made for a different purpose than the Lifesaver Bottle. The LifeStraw is not designed to filter out viruses, since it's filter matrix is only effective to 15 microns, as opposed to the Lifesaver bottle's 15 nanometers. (15 microns == 15,000 nanometers)
Embryonic stem cells however can change into anything, without any modification. They are much easier to work with,... Just to put in some requisite corrections to some popular (mis) understandings...
The clause, 'without any modification' is flat out wrong, applied to either type of stem cell.
I'm not a stem cell researcher myself, but It's my understanding that adult stem (AS) cells are actually easier to work with. In addition they're clearly more readily available. That being said, this is all the bleeding edge of medical and life science and *nothing* is 'easy'
... and as of a couple of years ago they were the only option. I'm assuming what you mean by this statement is that 'they were the only vector for this type of treatment perceived as plausible'? Because, charitably, that's the most truthful interpretation, but still incorrect. Embryonic stem (ES) cells were known to have the potiential for breakthrough treatments at an earlier date than AS cells, but the difficulties in this research quickly led to the need for multiple vectors by which to proceed. AS cells soon became the most useful vector for developing viable treatments, and to date, viable treatments with AS cells outnumber ES cell treatments by far and continue to be safer and more effective.
I'll concede that ES cells certainly have the most potiential for manipulation, and there are valuable things to be learned about cell development from their study. However, this manipulation is difficult, at best, and from my own research, the resulting treatments are much more difficult to apply to human patients. (Less so where somehow a patient may have his/her own ES cells available, of course, but this is currently a rare occurrence)
God willing, (or science, if you prefer) we will soon have the break-throughs we so desperately desire for the treatment and cure to so many of the diseases you read about in the news. Whether it comes from ES or AS cells, or some other unrelated research doesn't much matter except to those who care more for politics than saving lives.
I will freely disclose that I morally oppose ES cell research when the cells are obtained through IVF, cloning, and abortions, but that is mainly because I morally oppose those procedures. HOWEVER, my beliefs are my own, and I have no problem that other people do not share those beliefs. I only care about the truth and moral and intellectual honesty, both of which tend to be cast aside by ideologues on both sides of this particular issue.
That's actually what I'm doing right now. It works nicely, but I don't want to buy more laptops, remotes and sensors for the other rooms in my house.
I guess what I was getting at (and hence why it's OT) is that I want a simple, affordable, turn-key, set-top device with no local storage that runs MythTV's front-end, or something like it that can communicate with the back-end.
Using an old laptop is still not like using a set-top box, even though a LiveCD makes it closer. I've read that AppleTV can run Myth front end... but getting it on there looks like a nightmare... I shudder to think of upgrades and bugs, etc. I spend more than enough time wrestling with systems at work - I have neither the time nor the patience to deal with hacking at home. (not since having kids, at least)
Of course... if someone's willing to pay me to build this...;)
My preference is to just run the MythTV backend on an Ubuntu server in the basement and the frontend from an old laptop in the living room... for the laptop, using a LiveCD is ideal since I don't have to maintain anything, save for burning another CD for updates (when I feel like it).
Lately, I've started looking at a device called the Neuros OSD... I don't know much about the state of development of the OSS add-ons but if someone gets either the MythTV front-end running on it, or writes a front-end that is compatible with the back-end I'd get one for each TV in the house.
Re:RTFM = Best Evar.. BASIC, etc, etc
on
The Apple II At 30
·
· Score: 1
I have a working Apple//c that, while seldom used any more, I plan on using to introduce my son to programming when he's ready.
I began learning to write code on an Apple IIe and an NCR Decision Mate V, and I firmly believe that the reason I was so engrossed at such an early age was because of the simplicity of those machines! (esp. the Apple... it had COLOR!!!)
I don't have any software for it right now, but I still have my old binders with the 65C02 assembler instruction set and my notes of the peek and poke addresses... every once in a while it's fun to hack out a little game or a stupid little 'screensaver' and let it run...
The NCR-DMV PC had technical manuals, too... but early DOS (and CP/M) and PCs simply weren't nearly as inviting and accessible as those early Apple computers!
Hmmm... not sure about that part. However, I remember seeing my manager playing with it, connected to someone else who was working @ home and that the picture quality was quite decent. Not Hi-Def, but much better than your average webcam. (It's so subjective...) He was also planning to send one to his parents - they recently moved to Florida
I work with some real tech junkies and so I know a couple of people who have this device. They started playing with it and found it was so simple it was perfect for using with family and (gasp) even managers!
Since it uses fairly common standards for everything - video, audio, connection setup and control, they were even able to make operate with a number of different software packages, including some on Linux.
You are spot on. Having worked many years in several types of sales, and also several years in both business and home PC support, I agree 100%.
In a previous thread on this topic I espoused the same idea. To me, it looks like Dell is being smart about this - Being able to buy a system with Linux on the desktop is an excellent offer for people who already know they want it. However, the *only* prudent assumption for everyone else is that Windows is the better offering. (please note, I did *not* say that Windows is the better OS!)
Most customers, if given the chance, will seek out and choose options that save them some money. This is bad for both vendor and customer if they do not understand the relative benefits and/or drawbacks of their choices. Most people out there do not, and rely on the vendor to either make it clear to them, or 'choose' for them.
Customers, above all, want to be satisfied with their purchase. Satisfaction is a relative term. Let me explain... People do not like to get angry at themselves - if a customer is presented with a choice and selects an option that they do not understand, a significant number of these customers will get angry at the vendor. They will demand satisfaction at the vendor's expense. I personally know this to be the case.
Most people will NOT understand that Ubuntu is significantly different from Windows - but they WILL understand saving $50. $50 is a tank of gas, or a nice dinner for two around here. That's how customers think, and I'll bet Dell knows that (Apple sure does!)
Well, while Canonical's approach *seems* to be working, I personally am skeptical of the long-term maintainability of all these projects. Granted, they've got money right now and they might as well spend it developing and advancing Linux... but can they make their efforts profitable?
RedHat has managed to pull this off... but they had to take their previously more diverse product offerings and pare them down to just serve the applications/server market - since everything else was simply not profitable.
What will become of the non-profitable Ubuntu projects after the money runs out?
I want Ubuntu to succeed in a big way - I'm an admitted Debian fanatic, and despite the flame-wars over Ubuntu's 'encroachment' (for lack of a better word) I believe Ubuntu can be the vehicle to get Debian-based systems as widely accepted as RHEL. Mark Shuttleworth has, so far, put his money where his mouth is... and it looks like other people's money is beginning to pay attention (does that make any sense??)
OK, I'm just putting this out there as food for thought - I haven't thought it as fully through as I would like... any ideas?
You mean the copy of WinDVD that came with my motherboard is *illegal*?? Oh NOOOOOOOES!
OH... you mean the currently available FOSS DVD codecs. Yes, those *are* illegal. I guess it's time to bite the bullet and hire/create a company to sell a DVD player app for Linux... Now, I'm not too knowledgeable about the whole issue, but it's one of licensing, right? Perhaps... people will have to *pay* for the license for the DVD software? It's probably still cheaper than having to buy the software *and* Windows on top of it.
As for the other video codecs... I understand. I doubt MSFT or AAPL will be willing to license or port. But as long as we can get the basics... DVDs, MP3's (yes, licensing there, too), etc...
I think that would satisfy, oh, maybe my parents... my aunt... my sister, and millions of other completely *non-technical* people who somehow managed to figure out how to open their laptop's DVD drives and miraculously *knew* to put those shiny discs on the spindle! (My dad actually sometimes calls the laptop a DVD player)
Well, to be fair, I should have specified that I meant that statement only for open source drivers (and related software... gPhoto or GnomeBaker for example)
Various glitches in the config and updating udev need to be prevented, as well as clobbering the network config during a package update of stuff like NetworkManager (happens occasionally)
NOW... as far as the closed source drivers... it's not a simple solution - it would further complicate the already difficult task of contunuously updating and integrating an ever-changing kernel, windowing system, and all sorts of APIs and bug work-arounds. I do not expect nVidia or ATI or even Creative to give a whole lot of support... but *maybe* there is the potiential to get their attention if the money starts flowing.
A comprehensive integration and testing partnership could be set up, and only the hardware *fully certified* to work with the current Ubuntu release would be put into these Dell boxen. The peripheral manufacturer would be bound by contract to maintain supported, certified drivers for each Ubuntu release for, say, 3 years.
I know it's a bit of a stretch, but Dell is a 800lb gorilla in the PC and accessory sales world and everybody wants a piece of the pie.
I agree. Knowing you're getting something Linux compatible is definitely a boon.
However, if Dell sells these systems *cheaper* than the Windows systems then lots (not the majority, but plenty) of people may select the Ubuntu OS just to save a few bucks. I would be somewhat surprised if they did, though - all that crap-ware offsets the cost of windows.
well, the risk to Dell isn't all that great, financially. From a public-image perspective, I doubt it's much of a problem. The real risk I see is to mass-market acceptance and adoption of Linux in general... this is our (yes, I'm a Linux developer, enterprise apps, mostly) big chance to show the world what we've got, and that we can do it as well, or better than MSFT, at least for the consumers who try it.
If scads of people buy this and have nothing but grief, they'll tell everybody how much Linux sux and it'll affect future opportunities for some time to come.
The last time I saw a major commercial offering of linux for home users was Walmart's Lindows-based systems about 5 years ago. It did not go well. I know a few people who bought them and all wiped their drives and installed Windows within a few months.
BUT... 4 years is a long time... I personally think Linux is 95% ready and both Ubuntu and SuSe are leading the charge to cover the gap. (I haven't even looked at Mandriva tho)
Of course... I'm about to purchase two new machines for friends who A. Need new computers and B. Are really frustrated with Windows.
I gave one an Edgy Eft Live CD and the other a Feisty Fawn Live CD to see if they felt they could use Linux instead... *both* had the same, very minor, complaints - Websites with Flash and Java don't work (drop-dead easy to fix, esp. in Feisty) and they felt it was kinda slow, running from the CD (duh) Of course, the sad part is that their Windows installations were actually *slower* because of poor maintenance.
If Dell does it right and includes Flash, Java, DVD-playback and other common video codecs, and charges the same as or less than the Windows-based systems, I'll jump. I'm assuming that proper driver support is a given.
Granted, this also puts a challenge to Canonical - STOP BREAKING DRIVERS!!! Every new release seems to have a spate of driver-compatibility regressions. I know this is due to the nature of upstream maintenance vs. distro maintenance, but it's time for them to step up to the plate and make it a non-issue.
Again - all players will have to do it right for this to be a win-win.
It used to be the case that one needed at least a working prototype demonstrating the techniques and/or technologies being described in the patent application.
I know I'm just being a pedantic hair-splitter, but I'm all for patents being granted for a working prototype that hasn't been 'brought to market'.
My example is this:
You come up with a brilliant idea for a new technology. You spend your life savings to build a working prototype and apply for the patent. If the requirement is that the item must be on the market then you just may get screwed... You may want to mass-produce this thing, but you need somebody to invest in that, and do the marketing and actually build a business to get your invention on the market.
All the big boys have to do stonewall you long enough for the application to expire.
If a patent is granted for simply having a working prototype, then at least it's yours until *someone* decides that sharing the riches won't be so bad.
I think the current problem is that patents are being handed out for *concepts* that have not been demonstrated in a concrete form.
Granted, I'm just some guy working for a major softswitch-based telco and we build a lot of our own solutions...
Slashdot Mirror
All the more reason for the design of Perl 6... Dialects!
/Pet peeve - PERL JAVA RUBY PHP... all OBNOXIOUS! /yes, I know PHP is OK - but it's not the capitalization of the name that annoys me with that language ;)
Now we can have simplified, easy-to-read code that's real Perl, but looks JUST LIKE COBOL
Blip-Verts! Beamed directly into your head, just like in the 80's sci-fi TV series. Somehow, this makes me wonder if Max Headroom is only 20 minutes into the future...
/I wonder when the ads will start killing people at random
If they name the systems in that facility the MAGI, I think it's time I move a few hundred miles inland.
Support from Oracle, IMHO, is the standard by which many many companies make their big IT decisions. And from that one point, a lot of other things follow.
Out of the 60-odd telco apps I have to support, about half of them use Oracle as their backing DB, and nothing else. Many will not run on a system without it pre-installed.
Heck, because of Oracle licensing costs, management chose quad-core Intel processors for our newest servers, instead of dual-socket-dual-core AMD systems. And those servers aren't even *running* Oracle. (really, either choice was good, but what struck me was the rationale given by my boss)
Well, the managers here are dense, but not stupid. They remember being burned in the past, and avoid the unknown until they have 101 reasons to change (and not 1 less)
And, yes, Oracle *does* run on all sorts of different distros... but good luck getting support.
We have an in-house Oracle support team and *still* we choose RHEL simply because that is all Oracle will support.
Well, while I tend to go thru the same exact process on every server I deal with, I can see *one* big advantage - Reputation.
:)
The typical PHB has by now recognized RHEL as *the* Linux for servers. Thru good marketing, development, support, and business, RedHat has become the de-facto standard for Linux in the enterprise server market.
Case in point - Not ONE of the enterprise apps I work with is supported on anything BUT RHEL, (or in one case SuSE) HOWEVER, I've tested many of them in the lab with Debian and Ubuntu and found that all work very well... but there's a snowball's chance in hell that management would let me use Debian or Ubuntu. RedHat's reputation as Linux for serious business is entrenched in their minds, and entrenched in the market.
I have a lot of respect and appreciation for RedHat's offerings. I prefer Debian, and in the corporate world, Ubuntu is the only Debian derivitave that has a chance of becoming a contender.
Being a default offering on Dell servers is a golden opportunity to start building the reputation they need. PHBs will see the Ubuntu option on Dell's web-site and after about a thousand times they may begin to wonder if it's something worth investigating.
If Canonical produces a systems-management/data-center platform that can compete with offerings available for RedHat, I believe that sysadmins, enterprise software vendors, and even managers will start to take notice. If Ubuntu can garner reputation as an alternative to RHEL, we may start seeing not just hardware support but also software support.
Granted, this is all just a wild dream for me, but let me tell you - if someday Oracle announces support for Ubuntu, it could be a dream come true!
I'm not saying the fluctuation theory is correct ('cause I know next to nothing about economics) but Asus is a Taiwanese company, so they probably aren't buying their parts with dollars.
Mod parent up... The LifeStraw is brilliant in it's simplicity and economy, and I think it deserves all the media attention we can give it. However, it's clearly made for a different purpose than the Lifesaver Bottle. The LifeStraw is not designed to filter out viruses, since it's filter matrix is only effective to 15 microns, as opposed to the Lifesaver bottle's 15 nanometers. (15 microns == 15,000 nanometers)
The clause, 'without any modification' is flat out wrong, applied to either type of stem cell.
I'm not a stem cell researcher myself, but It's my understanding that adult stem (AS) cells are actually easier to work with. In addition they're clearly more readily available. That being said, this is all the bleeding edge of medical and life science and *nothing* is 'easy'
... and as of a couple of years ago they were the only option. I'm assuming what you mean by this statement is that 'they were the only vector for this type of treatment perceived as plausible'? Because, charitably, that's the most truthful interpretation, but still incorrect. Embryonic stem (ES) cells were known to have the potiential for breakthrough treatments at an earlier date than AS cells, but the difficulties in this research quickly led to the need for multiple vectors by which to proceed. AS cells soon became the most useful vector for developing viable treatments, and to date, viable treatments with AS cells outnumber ES cell treatments by far and continue to be safer and more effective.I'll concede that ES cells certainly have the most potiential for manipulation, and there are valuable things to be learned about cell development from their study. However, this manipulation is difficult, at best, and from my own research, the resulting treatments are much more difficult to apply to human patients. (Less so where somehow a patient may have his/her own ES cells available, of course, but this is currently a rare occurrence)
God willing, (or science, if you prefer) we will soon have the break-throughs we so desperately desire for the treatment and cure to so many of the diseases you read about in the news. Whether it comes from ES or AS cells, or some other unrelated research doesn't much matter except to those who care more for politics than saving lives.
I will freely disclose that I morally oppose ES cell research when the cells are obtained through IVF, cloning, and abortions, but that is mainly because I morally oppose those procedures. HOWEVER, my beliefs are my own, and I have no problem that other people do not share those beliefs. I only care about the truth and moral and intellectual honesty, both of which tend to be cast aside by ideologues on both sides of this particular issue.
That's actually what I'm doing right now. It works nicely, but I don't want to buy more laptops, remotes and sensors for the other rooms in my house.
;)
I guess what I was getting at (and hence why it's OT) is that I want a simple, affordable, turn-key, set-top device with no local storage that runs MythTV's front-end, or something like it that can communicate with the back-end.
Using an old laptop is still not like using a set-top box, even though a LiveCD makes it closer. I've read that AppleTV can run Myth front end... but getting it on there looks like a nightmare... I shudder to think of upgrades and bugs, etc. I spend more than enough time wrestling with systems at work - I have neither the time nor the patience to deal with hacking at home. (not since having kids, at least)
Of course... if someone's willing to pay me to build this...
My preference is to just run the MythTV backend on an Ubuntu server in the basement and the frontend from an old laptop in the living room... for the laptop, using a LiveCD is ideal since I don't have to maintain anything, save for burning another CD for updates (when I feel like it).
Lately, I've started looking at a device called the Neuros OSD... I don't know much about the state of development of the OSS add-ons but if someone gets either the MythTV front-end running on it, or writes a front-end that is compatible with the back-end I'd get one for each TV in the house.
'Cause checking it out via google maps/earct could be kinda neat :)
I *so* want a link!
I have a working Apple //c that, while seldom used any more, I plan on using to introduce my son to programming when he's ready.
I began learning to write code on an Apple IIe and an NCR Decision Mate V, and I firmly believe that the reason I was so engrossed at such an early age was because of the simplicity of those machines! (esp. the Apple... it had COLOR!!!)
I don't have any software for it right now, but I still have my old binders with the 65C02 assembler instruction set and my notes of the peek and poke addresses... every once in a while it's fun to hack out a little game or a stupid little 'screensaver' and let it run...
The NCR-DMV PC had technical manuals, too... but early DOS (and CP/M) and PCs simply weren't nearly as inviting and accessible as those early Apple computers!
Cheers to the Apple II!
Hmmm... not sure about that part. However, I remember seeing my manager playing with it, connected to someone else who was working @ home and that the picture quality was quite decent. Not Hi-Def, but much better than your average webcam. (It's so subjective...) He was also planning to send one to his parents - they recently moved to Florida
I work with some real tech junkies and so I know a couple of people who have this device. They started playing with it and found it was so simple it was perfect for using with family and (gasp) even managers!
Since it uses fairly common standards for everything - video, audio, connection setup and control, they were even able to make operate with a number of different software packages, including some on Linux.
You are spot on. Having worked many years in several types of sales, and also several years in both business and home PC support, I agree 100%.
In a previous thread on this topic I espoused the same idea. To me, it looks like Dell is being smart about this - Being able to buy a system with Linux on the desktop is an excellent offer for people who already know they want it. However, the *only* prudent assumption for everyone else is that Windows is the better offering. (please note, I did *not* say that Windows is the better OS!)
Most customers, if given the chance, will seek out and choose options that save them some money. This is bad for both vendor and customer if they do not understand the relative benefits and/or drawbacks of their choices. Most people out there do not, and rely on the vendor to either make it clear to them, or 'choose' for them.
Customers, above all, want to be satisfied with their purchase. Satisfaction is a relative term. Let me explain... People do not like to get angry at themselves - if a customer is presented with a choice and selects an option that they do not understand, a significant number of these customers will get angry at the vendor. They will demand satisfaction at the vendor's expense. I personally know this to be the case.
Most people will NOT understand that Ubuntu is significantly different from Windows - but they WILL understand saving $50. $50 is a tank of gas, or a nice dinner for two around here. That's how customers think, and I'll bet Dell knows that (Apple sure does!)
Well, while Canonical's approach *seems* to be working, I personally am skeptical of the long-term maintainability of all these projects. Granted, they've got money right now and they might as well spend it developing and advancing Linux... but can they make their efforts profitable?
RedHat has managed to pull this off... but they had to take their previously more diverse product offerings and pare them down to just serve the applications/server market - since everything else was simply not profitable.
What will become of the non-profitable Ubuntu projects after the money runs out?
I want Ubuntu to succeed in a big way - I'm an admitted Debian fanatic, and despite the flame-wars over Ubuntu's 'encroachment' (for lack of a better word) I believe Ubuntu can be the vehicle to get Debian-based systems as widely accepted as RHEL. Mark Shuttleworth has, so far, put his money where his mouth is... and it looks like other people's money is beginning to pay attention (does that make any sense??)
OK, I'm just putting this out there as food for thought - I haven't thought it as fully through as I would like... any ideas?
You mean the copy of WinDVD that came with my motherboard is *illegal*?? Oh NOOOOOOOES!
OH... you mean the currently available FOSS DVD codecs. Yes, those *are* illegal. I guess it's time to bite the bullet and hire/create a company to sell a DVD player app for Linux... Now, I'm not too knowledgeable about the whole issue, but it's one of licensing, right? Perhaps... people will have to *pay* for the license for the DVD software? It's probably still cheaper than having to buy the software *and* Windows on top of it.
As for the other video codecs... I understand. I doubt MSFT or AAPL will be willing to license or port. But as long as we can get the basics... DVDs, MP3's (yes, licensing there, too), etc...
I think that would satisfy, oh, maybe my parents... my aunt... my sister, and millions of other completely *non-technical* people who somehow managed to figure out how to open their laptop's DVD drives and miraculously *knew* to put those shiny discs on the spindle! (My dad actually sometimes calls the laptop a DVD player)
Well, to be fair, I should have specified that I meant that statement only for open source drivers (and related software... gPhoto or GnomeBaker for example)
Various glitches in the config and updating udev need to be prevented, as well as clobbering the network config during a package update of stuff like NetworkManager (happens occasionally)
NOW... as far as the closed source drivers... it's not a simple solution - it would further complicate the already difficult task of contunuously updating and integrating an ever-changing kernel, windowing system, and all sorts of APIs and bug work-arounds. I do not expect nVidia or ATI or even Creative to give a whole lot of support... but *maybe* there is the potiential to get their attention if the money starts flowing.
A comprehensive integration and testing partnership could be set up, and only the hardware *fully certified* to work with the current Ubuntu release would be put into these Dell boxen. The peripheral manufacturer would be bound by contract to maintain supported, certified drivers for each Ubuntu release for, say, 3 years.
I know it's a bit of a stretch, but Dell is a 800lb gorilla in the PC and accessory sales world and everybody wants a piece of the pie.
I agree. Knowing you're getting something Linux compatible is definitely a boon.
However, if Dell sells these systems *cheaper* than the Windows systems then lots (not the majority, but plenty) of people may select the Ubuntu OS just to save a few bucks. I would be somewhat surprised if they did, though - all that crap-ware offsets the cost of windows.
well, the risk to Dell isn't all that great, financially. From a public-image perspective, I doubt it's much of a problem. The real risk I see is to mass-market acceptance and adoption of Linux in general... this is our (yes, I'm a Linux developer, enterprise apps, mostly) big chance to show the world what we've got, and that we can do it as well, or better than MSFT, at least for the consumers who try it.
If scads of people buy this and have nothing but grief, they'll tell everybody how much Linux sux and it'll affect future opportunities for some time to come.
The last time I saw a major commercial offering of linux for home users was Walmart's Lindows-based systems about 5 years ago. It did not go well. I know a few people who bought them and all wiped their drives and installed Windows within a few months.
BUT... 4 years is a long time... I personally think Linux is 95% ready and both Ubuntu and SuSe are leading the charge to cover the gap. (I haven't even looked at Mandriva tho)
Bingo.
Of course... I'm about to purchase two new machines for friends who A. Need new computers and B. Are really frustrated with Windows.
I gave one an Edgy Eft Live CD and the other a Feisty Fawn Live CD to see if they felt they could use Linux instead... *both* had the same, very minor, complaints - Websites with Flash and Java don't work (drop-dead easy to fix, esp. in Feisty) and they felt it was kinda slow, running from the CD (duh) Of course, the sad part is that their Windows installations were actually *slower* because of poor maintenance.
If Dell does it right and includes Flash, Java, DVD-playback and other common video codecs, and charges the same as or less than the Windows-based systems, I'll jump. I'm assuming that proper driver support is a given.
Granted, this also puts a challenge to Canonical - STOP BREAKING DRIVERS!!! Every new release seems to have a spate of driver-compatibility regressions. I know this is due to the nature of upstream maintenance vs. distro maintenance, but it's time for them to step up to the plate and make it a non-issue.
Again - all players will have to do it right for this to be a win-win.
It used to be the case that one needed at least a working prototype demonstrating the techniques and/or technologies being described in the patent application.
I know I'm just being a pedantic hair-splitter, but I'm all for patents being granted for a working prototype that hasn't been 'brought to market'.
My example is this:
You come up with a brilliant idea for a new technology. You spend your life savings to build a working prototype and apply for the patent. If the requirement is that the item must be on the market then you just may get screwed... You may want to mass-produce this thing, but you need somebody to invest in that, and do the marketing and actually build a business to get your invention on the market.
All the big boys have to do stonewall you long enough for the application to expire.
If a patent is granted for simply having a working prototype, then at least it's yours until *someone* decides that sharing the riches won't be so bad.
I think the current problem is that patents are being handed out for *concepts* that have not been demonstrated in a concrete form.
Granted, I'm just some guy working for a major softswitch-based telco and we build a lot of our own solutions...