Ummm . . . I guess you're missing the point between "want" and "need". Cave man, I'm sure, wanted a slightly better lifestlye, so he made changes to achieve that goal. He did not necessarily need one (though it would increase his longevity). But being able to store all your DVDs on a single disk is a desire and not a necessity.
So, please spare me your ill-conceived logic. Your analogy really has no bearing to this, and falls flat when challenged.
Do you get by without that now? Then why do you "need" it?
Take for granted you may need it in the future (though screens aren't something that typicall grow in size), but this person is clearly using the present tense.
MS has a program that allows universities to have access to the source code. They've had it for quite some time. I tried to get my school to do it, since I thought it'd be interesting for systems courses, but the request was promptly denied.
Re:getting close to July 4th you know what that me
on
OSCAR 7 is Alive
·
· Score: 1
Seems more like the Event Horizon to me.
"Hell is just a word. The reality is much, much worse" -Dr. Weir
Umm . . . it's common practice for someone to discover a vulnerability and then inform the vendor, allowing it time to produce a patch. It is the responsible thing to do. I'm sure someone will spout out some spam about how 2 months is too long, but most vendors take at least a month anyway. And really, releasing the vulnerability before the patch release might put some pressure on MS to get a patch out faster, but it would probably cause more harm than good. eEye is a respectable company and they've had a good vendor notification track record (same group that discovered and analyzed Code Red).
Walk onto any campus with a decent network connection and I guarantee you will find loads of non-techies that know what DivX is. College kids always find an alternative to spending money.
I clearly recall being a freshman in high school and being only one of a couple kids in my school using Napster because no one knew what an MP3 was. It wasn't long before that changed.
I didn't even bother reading the paper, or any of the rebuttals. But I want to make the point that this is a double-edged sword, and that most pro-Linux things I read take a highly biased POV.
You don't think that this is due to any sort of bias do you? Do you really think that/. would report on the 462 new bugs filed for Mozilla this week (according to bugzilla at least)? Take for granted, not all are security, but surely some are. What about the one (don't think it was fixed until RC2, but I never really cared) that allowed arbitrary file writing that existed in all versions up to and including RC1 or something (which btw sucked for the debian freeze -- i haven't apt upgraded in a week or so, but i had one system still with 0.9 and the other with RC1)
In any case, what you're seeing is an illusion. Hype up IE security flaws (is this even newsworthy -- btw read my post the other day about how/. just keeps posting submissions from the freshmeat link bar), and ignore the Konqueror or Mozilla, or anything non-IE ones.
Whoa there Tex. There is nothing illegal about being a monopoly. Take for granted that they are not a completely innocent company, but I have not seen anything about how they forced WordPerfect or whatever out of the Office market. Face it, they just made a better product, and should not be punished for that. For other things, maybe, but making a better product is not a predatory business practice (and spare me the "they can make better products because they have the OS source!" crap).
Thank you for ever so elegantly illustrating my point. So this is more an anti-Microsoft than a pro-Anything movement. There is something seriously flawed there.
"You can do it your own way, if it's done just how I say." -- James Hetfield
Everyone likes to point the finger at MS, but unless I'm mistaken, there are innumerable other vendors that sell closed-source software. I don't see them being harassed to open up their source or disclose their file formats, or otherwise give up their IP.
If you have a goal, go for it, but don't use some altruistic view as a sugar coating for some quest to overthrow MS (from what I don't know, well more accurately, don't see -- probably because I don't introduce politics into my software usage).
Ok, take for granted that not everyone here goes to Freshmeat everyday (as is always the constant source of bickering when a new kernel is released), but I've seen an ever growing trend where someone just scans down to the SecurityFocus links on Freshmeat, and then posts them here as original stories. Please stop doing that. That is all.
We've obviously have had two very different web coding experiences then. I've used standard markup, that either doesn't display properly, or in some cases at all, across various browsers. And don't even get me going with CSS.
My point is, I wouldn't look to the commercial sector to try and change the browsers it targets (whatever it may be, maybe one day the role will be reversed). The commercial sector will target what the masses are using. I would think the change needs to start with Joe Schmoe's page, and then the commercial sector will eventually catch up to meet the new demands of its customers.
How so? By trying to reach his target audience? Or should he lose customers with the only consolation being that some OSS browser might (but probably won't) somehow benefit from it?
I still disagree. I attend a pretty decent tech school, and we have our fair share of Linux labs (all running SuSe AFAIK), but these are reserved mostly for the systems courses, so there's never a need to do word processing or spreadsheets or what not on them.
I would speculate that if the school stopped the licensing agreement with MS, the people who use Office now would just find someone with an MSDN or some other pirated copy. Mandating a format is crap. I don't think it would be right for the school to require that files be submitted in some format that would require a student to install a particular variant of office suite software (where is your Free then? -- likewise, I don't condone files needing to be submitted in some.doc or.xls format)
The fact of the matter is, you guys can speculate all you want about how this release will mark the demise of MS Office in the academic setting, but I'll bet you'll find out otherwise. Beyond the file format, people in general just like the look and feel of Office, and if there's no reason other than some political agenda to learn a new software suite, why would most people bother making the switch?
I doubt it. The school provides Office XP et al. because it's what the students want. Last time I tried StarOffice, it was horrendous, so I doubt I'll be planning any sort of migration soon. I leave politics out my software decision. And put bluntly, MS products tend to work for most people. Yeah, maybe they don't support feature X, but they tend to offer a lot more useful features then a lot of the OSS rivals. But it really doesn't matter. Closed minds think alike, and I'll get modded down anyway.
See my other post about the tuition thing. But I guess I'll cross-post the semantics. Basically, my school jacks up about $2K a year. There was no visible variation from this trend from the time before we had the licenses until after we started getting them. So, if it's in the tuition, it's miniscule. But I suppose that's irrelevant because it's MS.
Tuition at my school didn't change (save for the $2K it goes up every year) between the time we didn't offer the free licenses and the time we did. It may still be hidden in the tuition somewhere, but it's pretty miniscule if so.
My school has some sort of agreement with MS, where we get Office XP, Win2k Pro, Office XP Pro, VS 6.0, and VS.Net (amongst other MS software) for free. It's great.
I like the port forwarding features of it too. Since I use a DSL line, and my school only allows the sending of mail from the network, it makes for a nice ad hoc vpn.
Re:LINUX sucks dogs balls on a hot summer's nite
on
United Linux is Here
·
· Score: 1
Statistics are highly subjective, and both of what you say bears credence. The parent's points are completely valid though, and he is correct in that/. would never publish such a story, but they'd publish a similar one about Windows, wholeheartedly.
Re:LINUX sucks dogs balls on a hot summer's nite
on
United Linux is Here
·
· Score: 1
No true. I enjoy hearing the voice of reason from time to time.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm . . . I guess you're missing the point between "want" and "need". Cave man, I'm sure, wanted a slightly better lifestlye, so he made changes to achieve that goal. He did not necessarily need one (though it would increase his longevity). But being able to store all your DVDs on a single disk is a desire and not a necessity.
So, please spare me your ill-conceived logic. Your analogy really has no bearing to this, and falls flat when challenged.
Do you get by without that now? Then why do you "need" it?
Take for granted you may need it in the future (though screens aren't something that typicall grow in size), but this person is clearly using the present tense.
MS has a program that allows universities to have access to the source code. They've had it for quite some time. I tried to get my school to do it, since I thought it'd be interesting for systems courses, but the request was promptly denied.
Seems more like the Event Horizon to me.
"Hell is just a word. The reality is much, much worse"
-Dr. Weir
They could appeal to a federal court which could deem the Iowa law as unconstitutional. Not likely to happen, but it could.
Umm . . . it's common practice for someone to discover a vulnerability and then inform the vendor, allowing it time to produce a patch. It is the responsible thing to do. I'm sure someone will spout out some spam about how 2 months is too long, but most vendors take at least a month anyway. And really, releasing the vulnerability before the patch release might put some pressure on MS to get a patch out faster, but it would probably cause more harm than good. eEye is a respectable company and they've had a good vendor notification track record (same group that discovered and analyzed Code Red).
Oh well. C'est la vie.
Walk onto any campus with a decent network connection and I guarantee you will find loads of non-techies that know what DivX is. College kids always find an alternative to spending money.
I clearly recall being a freshman in high school and being only one of a couple kids in my school using Napster because no one knew what an MP3 was. It wasn't long before that changed.
I didn't even bother reading the paper, or any of the rebuttals. But I want to make the point that this is a double-edged sword, and that most pro-Linux things I read take a highly biased POV.
The Start Guide is pretty cool too. Was this around in any form before, or is this completely new?
You don't think that this is due to any sort of bias do you? Do you really think that /. would report on the 462 new bugs filed for Mozilla this week (according to bugzilla at least)? Take for granted, not all are security, but surely some are. What about the one (don't think it was fixed until RC2, but I never really cared) that allowed arbitrary file writing that existed in all versions up to and including RC1 or something (which btw sucked for the debian freeze -- i haven't apt upgraded in a week or so, but i had one system still with 0.9 and the other with RC1)
/. just keeps posting submissions from the freshmeat link bar), and ignore the Konqueror or Mozilla, or anything non-IE ones.
In any case, what you're seeing is an illusion. Hype up IE security flaws (is this even newsworthy -- btw read my post the other day about how
Whoa there Tex. There is nothing illegal about being a monopoly. Take for granted that they are not a completely innocent company, but I have not seen anything about how they forced WordPerfect or whatever out of the Office market. Face it, they just made a better product, and should not be punished for that. For other things, maybe, but making a better product is not a predatory business practice (and spare me the "they can make better products because they have the OS source!" crap).
Thank you for ever so elegantly illustrating my point. So this is more an anti-Microsoft than a pro-Anything movement. There is something seriously flawed there.
"You can do it your own way, if it's done just how I say." -- James Hetfield
Everyone likes to point the finger at MS, but unless I'm mistaken, there are innumerable other vendors that sell closed-source software. I don't see them being harassed to open up their source or disclose their file formats, or otherwise give up their IP.
If you have a goal, go for it, but don't use some altruistic view as a sugar coating for some quest to overthrow MS (from what I don't know, well more accurately, don't see -- probably because I don't introduce politics into my software usage).
Ok, take for granted that not everyone here goes to Freshmeat everyday (as is always the constant source of bickering when a new kernel is released), but I've seen an ever growing trend where someone just scans down to the SecurityFocus links on Freshmeat, and then posts them here as original stories. Please stop doing that. That is all.
We've obviously have had two very different web coding experiences then. I've used standard markup, that either doesn't display properly, or in some cases at all, across various browsers. And don't even get me going with CSS.
My point is, I wouldn't look to the commercial sector to try and change the browsers it targets (whatever it may be, maybe one day the role will be reversed). The commercial sector will target what the masses are using. I would think the change needs to start with Joe Schmoe's page, and then the commercial sector will eventually catch up to meet the new demands of its customers.
How so? By trying to reach his target audience? Or should he lose customers with the only consolation being that some OSS browser might (but probably won't) somehow benefit from it?
It must be nice in your world.
The 14.4kbps is probably more painful now than it was before because in general web pages are more bloated now.
I still disagree. I attend a pretty decent tech school, and we have our fair share of Linux labs (all running SuSe AFAIK), but these are reserved mostly for the systems courses, so there's never a need to do word processing or spreadsheets or what not on them.
.doc or .xls format)
I would speculate that if the school stopped the licensing agreement with MS, the people who use Office now would just find someone with an MSDN or some other pirated copy. Mandating a format is crap. I don't think it would be right for the school to require that files be submitted in some format that would require a student to install a particular variant of office suite software (where is your Free then? -- likewise, I don't condone files needing to be submitted in some
The fact of the matter is, you guys can speculate all you want about how this release will mark the demise of MS Office in the academic setting, but I'll bet you'll find out otherwise. Beyond the file format, people in general just like the look and feel of Office, and if there's no reason other than some political agenda to learn a new software suite, why would most people bother making the switch?
I doubt it. The school provides Office XP et al. because it's what the students want. Last time I tried StarOffice, it was horrendous, so I doubt I'll be planning any sort of migration soon. I leave politics out my software decision. And put bluntly, MS products tend to work for most people. Yeah, maybe they don't support feature X, but they tend to offer a lot more useful features then a lot of the OSS rivals. But it really doesn't matter. Closed minds think alike, and I'll get modded down anyway.
See my other post about the tuition thing. But I guess I'll cross-post the semantics. Basically, my school jacks up about $2K a year. There was no visible variation from this trend from the time before we had the licenses until after we started getting them. So, if it's in the tuition, it's miniscule. But I suppose that's irrelevant because it's MS.
Tuition at my school didn't change (save for the $2K it goes up every year) between the time we didn't offer the free licenses and the time we did. It may still be hidden in the tuition somewhere, but it's pretty miniscule if so.
My school has some sort of agreement with MS, where we get Office XP, Win2k Pro, Office XP Pro, VS 6.0, and VS.Net (amongst other MS software) for free. It's great.
I like the port forwarding features of it too. Since I use a DSL line, and my school only allows the sending of mail from the network, it makes for a nice ad hoc vpn.
Statistics are highly subjective, and both of what you say bears credence. The parent's points are completely valid though, and he is correct in that /. would never publish such a story, but they'd publish a similar one about Windows, wholeheartedly.
No true. I enjoy hearing the voice of reason from time to time.