Yeah, call me crazy and stupid, but the reason I'm doing it is that I *MUST* use the kernel 2.6 now, since 2.4 does not support the onboard SATA controller on my VIA 8237 southbridge.
Getting fedora core 1 to work with the 2.6 kernel was not too hard... the tips on http://www.freax.be/wiki/index.php/Fedora%20core%2 01%20with%20kernel%202.6-test
were helpfull. I am posting from fedora core 1 with 2.6.2 stock kernel. Everything works fine for me.
You know, some of us are trying to do legitimate business on the internet. It's not like we have a friggin dialup account and can just pick someone else. The process of moving a business from one provider to another, especially if the provider is co-hosting your servers, is quite involved and usually involves a contract that can't easily be broken without penalties.
I love the idea of SPEWS- it makes businesses be more responsible for thier actions. What has been bothering me about the corporate world in the last 20 years is the degredation of morality in business (enron, anderson, worldcom, martha stewart, microsoft to mention the most notable). SPEWS is showing that if you have shady partners/agreements with dubious internet providers, you risk your entire company. Thus a reason and cause to look beyond the almighty buck and start a revival of good practices in business once again. Let ISP's who willingly provide spammers with access to the internet be burned to the ground along with those who did business with them (if users refuse to leave or the ISP doesn't change thier policy). A part of business is making responsible decisions. Let it be a costly decision to sign up with an ISP who is not responsive to SPAM.
Why are you telling us? Tell AT&T, Pepsi, Honda, etc. How did Fox and Friends get CBS to pull "The Reagans"?
There is just not enough time in the day or incentive for me to do that. I have no interest in educating thier advertising department. Better for me to just filter them away and vote with my wallet.
For DoubleClick to compete with the targeted advertising on Google, they would either have to build or buy a fairly robust search engine to put advertising on or provide competing pop-ups when visiting a website..
1. double click should not have advertisements that get in the way of the material that a user is viewing.
2. double click should implement various general categories or types of advertisements that a website could say that match thier audience.
3. Websites that use double click are not doing thier audience any service because double click doesn't know shit about good advertising (only that with enough eyeballs someone will be suckered).
4. There is nothing wrong or illegal with searching the internet- that is EXACTLY what search engines DO and if double click feels like doing that then fine.
It's not illegal, but it seems like the least we can do for all the free content these sites give us, even if they do get annoying sometimes.
I do not believe in supporting any bussiness model thats sole purpose is to annoy me. PERIOD. I believe advertising does nobody any good if it is not targeted to the right audience. Most advertising on the web is closer to spam than product placement and if the advertisements didn't distract me while I was reading, I would not have filtered them away. If flash sold a version of its plugin where you could freeze whatever it was doing, I would pay extra for it. As it is, I no longer have flash at all. On a side note, Slashdots advertising is EXCELENT because the adds tend to be about technology (targeted to thier audience) and are placed where they are not distracting from the content (give the advertisers thier voice without having it being "screamed" at visitors). If most websites were more like Slashdot, then adblockers would probably never have become popular.
but instead is the result of endless focus groups and user surveys to determine exactly what grandma actually works most comfortably with!
Actually I don't think that is how MS works. MS gui is an evolution of what they had for win3.1/95 and most gui changes have been mostly cosmetic or coppied from Mac. I personally think that the MS gui is a piece of shit but when people are asked how a gui should work, they say it should work like that of MS but ONLY because that is the way they learned and expect it to work. In essence because most people are too "short sighted" to imagine something better.
Cut to the posts here by people that probably have never seen a Sun box let alone owned/used one and I'm not shocked.
I went to the University at Bufalo back when Sun Machines were everywhere one turned. I now hear that many of those computer rooms today have x86 and Linux and it does not surprise me. Sun hardware is overpriced for what they provide for the average user's tasks and it shows in the fact that Sun boxes (in conservative financial institutions on Wall Street to radical and evershifting R&D facilities on Coleges and research labratories) have been replaced with x86/Linux boxes. Even people who like and know Sun hardware think they are not the best value in many circumstances.
Some of the highlights include the genocide against the native Americans, slavery, and government sanctioned discrimination against those people until very recently, the supply of arms to these very same r'egimes, supplying arms to central America, etc, etc.
The past mistakes of ones ancestors has nothing to do with the present mistakes of others being done now. Hopefully enough ridicule and social condemnation will change the backward ways of the middle east like condemnation worked/works on other cultures like the US and South Africa.
See, both scenarios are very unlikely, but I see no reason why I should trust Sun more than Trolltech.
The key difference is that Sun does not have any control over the Gnome desktop while TrollTech does have control over key parts of KDE. The control that TrollTech has over KDE varies in significance depending upon the reader's software philosophy. If one never uses (or writes) proprietary software then the differences in the GTK/Qt license is minor but if the reader does not mind using proprietary software, then the differences in the licenses could be significant.
TrollTech uses a GPL/TrollTech license which means they can charge arbitrary sums of money (reasonably priced at $1,200 at the moment) to developers for using the Qt libraries in software not compatible with the GPL. Gnome uses GTK (with an LGPL license) which has no restrictions (provided one doesn't actually change the libraries themselves without releasing the changes made to the libraries).
Sun is merely a supporter of GTK/Gnome but Trolltech has control of Qt (and thus to some degree KDE). If Sun turned around and became the Evil Empire, it would have no effect on Gnome software or the Gnome DE but if TrollTech became the Evil Empire, KDE might still be fine but if a user of KDE wanted to use closed source software such as Oracle or various popular Video Games, they might not integrate well due to Oracle and xyz video games and etc needing to use a different gui toolkit [Oracle uses Qt now but I am talking about in an imaginary future, such as imagining in 1998 that Caldera would threaten to sue everyone for using Linux in 2003].
Sun is not relevant to Gnome but TrollTech IS relevant to KDE. So while you might not trust either one, only TrollTech can make life harder for the Linux community.
There's one thing linux needs to play catch up on: installing software after your system is set up. package management (yes, i know, itsn ot hard, but for n00bs its VERY CONFUSING) is a totallly COMPLETELY FOREIGN FRIGGIN CONCEPT to anyone in the windows and mac world...it makes installing software appear to be much harder than it needs to be!
Actually it is deeper than that:
1. Hardware detection is a kludge (kudzu is a good step forward but it does not configure everything right or detect all hardware properly).
2. Desktop Environment is non-standard (how to get desktop icons onto the desktop, no standard gui toolkit and uncertainty of what to expect in each environment).
3. Package Management is unsophisticated (does too much in the background without user input in the location of various files/programs) and again non-standard (rpm, apt-get, whatever Slackware uses, etc...).
These core issues make Linux significantly behind Microsoft XP. Without drastic changes to the way these things are handled, system modification is going to be sub par to the "home user". The problem is that most of linux software have as a user interface configurion files that are best meant to be edited by a human instead of by another program or auto-detecting. People should NOT be expected to configure ANY of the stuff that is commonly needed in a linux system. Two examples:
1. I added an LCD monitor to my parents RedHat machine for Christmass and the monitor barfed saying resolutions could not be used. Had to edit xf86config (or something like it).
2. I added a cd burner to my linux machine recently and it was not detected as a burner. Had to edit grub.conf to say hdc uses ide-scsi. Could not find documentation of what the syntax of defining that should be used in grub (but plenty for lilo) but managed to get the info from someone who also has a cd-burner in there linux machine.
These are just two of the most recent problems I came across in the last two weeks, but there are hundreds more I could easily list. Some of the most basic ones that users commonly come across are:
I) DVD playing in linux.
II) 3D acceleration support for Video cards.
III) Games, Games, Games
IV) Mozilla detecting java/video/sound in system.
V) rpm packages never ask if you want an icon or menu item of installing program.
I could go on but this post was not supposed to be a rant but to point out that Linux is very far behind Windows as a Desktop OS and I am surprised that Linux even has one percent of the desktop when it is such a pain in the ass to do any upgrading or modification of the system (and I am speaking as a Linux user).
Now I know that all the above can be achieved (and I have done most of them) and I know that Windows is not perfect but when I make modifications to my Windows machine, I know that in most cases, it is LESS than a half hour of my time, but on the linux machine, I am happy when it is only a half hour.
I agree with RedHat when they said Linux is not ready for the desktop. Sure you can use it but it far from optimal.
I thought they meant words like:
!@#$, @#%$^, and $#%#$%.
Of course the words I posted above are subjectively more or less insulting and I know some would have put on the list things such as @#%#, #@%$^@@$, and %(^#^ but slashdots #$^% lameness filter kicked in and would not let me post too many and so I had to make choices. If you think of a word that I should have added to the list and didn't, you can take a plunger and !@#$ ^$#^^3 while you ^%#$^ yourself (or you can post me a reply listing the ones I missed) but really - who gives a (*&^.
The development team focused mainly on minor technical and legalistic issues like the naming of firebird, code clean up etc.
But they failed completely to incoperate the rising new mark-up technologies like XML-Signature or WebCGM.
If this development continues this year, Mozilla might lose it's technical lead to IE or Opera.
I will bite the Trolls bait:
What the !@#$ are you talking about. One of the reasons the original Netscape code was dropped in favor of starting over was that the original code was a total mess. I should hope Mozilla would not fall into that trap again. Cleaning up code and fixing bugs should be of a higher priority than implementing obscure features only a handfull of people know about. Clean and well working code make it easier to implement new features while also making it easier for new developers to contibute to the project. As soon as those obscure features mentioned above really become desired by a substantial subset of developers/users, I am sure someone will come along and implement it (especially if the current code is laid out well).
I've been hearing the "PCs are cheaper" argument since the early 90's at least. One problem: It's never been true. Sure, you can buy a PC for less than you can buy a Mac. But you cannot buy a PC of *comparable quality* for significantly less.
My fastest computer is an Athlon XP 2000+ and my other one runs at 1 ghz with almost a gig of ram. I have not bought a new computer in four years (since 1999) and I don't ever intend to buy a new computer. In four years I have bought many CPU's, motherboard's, graphics cards, hard drives, monitors, cdroms and etc. I spend about 200-600 dollars a year on computer hardware and software but I never buy a new computer. The advantage of this is that it cost much less to have a great system that matches my needs. Apple might provide alot but much of what is provided may not be usefull to the user and what is REALLY needed might cost a fortune to add. I can easilly upgrade any component in my PC for far less than having to go out and buy a whole new system.
When I build systems for friends and family, I usually put together a decent system for about 600 to a 1000 dollars (including a nice 17" LCD monitor) and I tell them "if there is anything you want to add to this system later, I will be more than happy to do it." I get VERY few calls for system upgrades because most people are happy with what I speced out for them in the first place, but if they need something better later, it is easilly done. Apple can't compete with this flexability or price.
I'm interested in seeing who will win out - the larger company with the market share (but less innovative product), or the innovator with a cheaper, more powerful product. I think intel will win, after observing the linux/windows market competition.
If Linux could run all the programs that MS does, I would say your logic made some sense but the fact is that linux is "johny come lately" when 90% of the desktop was already tied to MS. Linux can't run everything that MS does and it is not realistic for most people to switch all software and everything they know to something completely new. That arguement does not hold true for the AMD/Intel market. What runs on Intel will run just as well on AMD with no change in user experience (often without any knowledge of what chip they are using).
conservatives complaing about the liberal media went out of vogue as soon as fox news grabbed ratings, so your complaint against "liberal" hollywood is outdated and contrived
On the contrary, Fox grabbed ratings, one could argue, because they had no competition when providing a perspective from the right.
And it was precisely because of this non-free status that Mr. Stallman and other free software advocates heavily encouraged the development and use of GNOME over KDE, despite KDE's initial head start.
And yet now we find that GNOME is the choice for UserLinux because it better supports the development of proprietary software on Linux!
Actually it is still the same arguement which is that many in the open source community do not want to be dependant on the "goodwill" of one company alone (even if it is just for others to write "proprietary software"). TrollTech could be bought by Microsoft tommorow and a comercial license for Qt could go up to a $100,000 or more. It is one thing to prefer open source solutions and another to give up control of "comercial" potential. TrollTech controls key elements to "comercial development" on KDE.
Of course I am personally biassed because I believe that "he who writes the code, chooses the license" and for that reason alone, KDE leaves a distaste in my mouth.
There is no way that people who live on a dollar a day are going to be able to shell out hundreds of dollars every year for proprietary, closed-source software, and software companies are foolish to worry about it.
If they can afford the hardware then they can probably afford the software. The idea that people are only living on a dollar a day in china is ludicrous. The poorest countries in the world make about 200-300 usd dollars a month (if they are working) and most of those people DO NOT HAVE COMPUTERS. Those that do have computers are probably making an average US citezen's salary (or better).
It's very disappointing to see technology always reduced to whizz-bang figures that are in fact meaningless. What about the impact on our society? What about the capability for good and for bad? What do "good" and "bad" mean, anyhow? How do I know I even exist? What does "I" even mean?
I will provide the answers to the important and serious questions posed above; for I believe in providing light where thier is darkness...
What about the impact on our society? Nothing. It's just a computer dude!
What about the capability for good and for bad? Nothing. It's just a computer dude!
What do "good" and "bad" mean, anyhow? I just HOPE you are not expecting a computer to help you answer THAT question!
How do I know I even exist? I don't know if you exist but if I was to take a guess, you probably don't.
What does "I" even mean? "You" probably don't "need" an "answer" to this one since "you" probably don't "exist" anyway so the "answer" to "I" should not "bother" "you".
Now with this new knowledge of morality and metaphysics, go spread the answers amongst the masses.
If I am correct in believing him schizo-effective, then this may well explain his lawsuits. He doesn't understand the industry, and his split with reality makes it impossible for him to make rational decisions in response.
I think there is a simpler explanation for Darl and that is that he is a psychopath. The typical psychopath has no conscience that bothers them when they do something bad (aka guilt) and so are able to do many unconcionable actions to obtain thier personal objectives. Doesn't that sound more like McBride than any of the other diagnoses?
It's the principle of the thing, for one. It's Orwellian. Secondly, Time readers searching the archives of Time will never find the article; it is now un-printed, nonexistent. And thirdly, how many other writings are being "un-printed" that are not favorable to the King?
If I own a website (and I do) I feel that I can publish/delete anything I want on my site. TIME.com is not part of the public domain; it is the sole property of TIME Magazine. If they want to pull something from thier website then that is for them to decide. The internet has tons of holes AND ALWAYS DID. Websites get torn down and new ones get put in thier place. Content is ever shifting and changing. Tons of data is lost every year as websites delete,change and go away but the good news is that more data is being acumulated on the internet than deleted.
We like to keep all of our satallite locations seperated by Firewalls, but as we started moving to W2K3 we found out Microsoft won't support our infrastrucure with internal firewalls...
I highly doubt that this is true. A firewall blocks ports and that is all. You need some ports open for certain services to work (like port 80 for web browsing). You don't need to get rid of the firewall- just open the ports that are needed for the services you want to use.
For every advertising a$$hole like you who NEEDs to kiss Adobe's a$$ and suck down Photoshop, there are a thousand or more people who just want to be able to modify some snapshots. GIMP ain't Photoshop by a long ways, but then again, there are about 3 guys who wrote most of the GIMP code, while Adobe has 300 or more supporting Photoshop (when they aren't out abusing the DMCA by suing Russian developers). Adobe is evil, and you contribute to that. Think on that one you professional a$$hole.
I think your attitude is wrong. "the professional" explained that Gimp is not good enouph to replace Photoshop because time and convenience is money and he is right. One may wish for this to not be true but it is. You should be berating the "average joe" who pirates Photoshop instead of using the Gimp ("average joe" certainly don't need Photoshop and could do quite well with the Gimp). The user who needs to do things fast and efficiently with graphics to earn a living should not be concerned about Photshop like price tags for thier tools.
Try supporting a multi-thousand desktop environment. You really really DON'T want users customising and modifying their desktop environment.....
For the record, I always customise my desktop, its appearance, and do naughty things like installing my own web browser instead of using the corporate standard. Which is why I always argue that development boxes (which I use) shouldn't have the same constraints that standard users boxes have. Double-standards, etc:)
You just answered your own question. If somebody knows how to hack the.fvwrm file, he doesn't need you and you don't have to worry about training and all the other BS you listed. For the same reason why you screw around with your system is the reason why he screws around with his (along with most programmers/admins/techies of the world) because tech support goes no further than the tip of ones fingers.
However if you work in an environment with mission critical apps that cannot fail, you can't just simply "patch your systems". You must test, test and retest.
Start thinking of us that operate in the real world. Cocky statements like "We've had plenty of warning about this, so it's only the criminally unprepared that will be hit right" sound outright stupid. The patch was released last Wednesday. To coordinate business departments, users and techincal staff along with testing requirements doesn't happen overnight.
Actually any system that cannot fail should NOT be on a MS platform. The history of security,stability and predictability is just not good enough on any MS product. Mission critical is the realm of Mainframe, Unix (which includes Linux as a Unix clone), Vax and even OS/2 in its day. As much as I think win2000 was a huge leap forward for Microsoft, I would never entrust it with my life and I find it funny that many corporations do so.
Slashdot Mirror
Getting fedora core 1 to work with the 2.6 kernel was not too hard... the tips on http://www.freax.be/wiki/index.php/Fedora%20core%2 01%20with%20kernel%202.6-test
were helpfull. I am posting from fedora core 1 with 2.6.2 stock kernel. Everything works fine for me.
I love the idea of SPEWS- it makes businesses be more responsible for thier actions. What has been bothering me about the corporate world in the last 20 years is the degredation of morality in business (enron, anderson, worldcom, martha stewart, microsoft to mention the most notable). SPEWS is showing that if you have shady partners/agreements with dubious internet providers, you risk your entire company. Thus a reason and cause to look beyond the almighty buck and start a revival of good practices in business once again. Let ISP's who willingly provide spammers with access to the internet be burned to the ground along with those who did business with them (if users refuse to leave or the ISP doesn't change thier policy). A part of business is making responsible decisions. Let it be a costly decision to sign up with an ISP who is not responsive to SPAM.
There is just not enough time in the day or incentive for me to do that. I have no interest in educating thier advertising department. Better for me to just filter them away and vote with my wallet.
1. double click should not have advertisements that get in the way of the material that a user is viewing.
2. double click should implement various general categories or types of advertisements that a website could say that match thier audience.
3. Websites that use double click are not doing thier audience any service because double click doesn't know shit about good advertising (only that with enough eyeballs someone will be suckered).
4. There is nothing wrong or illegal with searching the internet- that is EXACTLY what search engines DO and if double click feels like doing that then fine.
I do not believe in supporting any bussiness model thats sole purpose is to annoy me. PERIOD. I believe advertising does nobody any good if it is not targeted to the right audience. Most advertising on the web is closer to spam than product placement and if the advertisements didn't distract me while I was reading, I would not have filtered them away. If flash sold a version of its plugin where you could freeze whatever it was doing, I would pay extra for it. As it is, I no longer have flash at all. On a side note, Slashdots advertising is EXCELENT because the adds tend to be about technology (targeted to thier audience) and are placed where they are not distracting from the content (give the advertisers thier voice without having it being "screamed" at visitors). If most websites were more like Slashdot, then adblockers would probably never have become popular.
Actually I don't think that is how MS works. MS gui is an evolution of what they had for win3.1/95 and most gui changes have been mostly cosmetic or coppied from Mac. I personally think that the MS gui is a piece of shit but when people are asked how a gui should work, they say it should work like that of MS but ONLY because that is the way they learned and expect it to work. In essence because most people are too "short sighted" to imagine something better.
I went to the University at Bufalo back when Sun Machines were everywhere one turned. I now hear that many of those computer rooms today have x86 and Linux and it does not surprise me. Sun hardware is overpriced for what they provide for the average user's tasks and it shows in the fact that Sun boxes (in conservative financial institutions on Wall Street to radical and evershifting R&D facilities on Coleges and research labratories) have been replaced with x86/Linux boxes. Even people who like and know Sun hardware think they are not the best value in many circumstances.
The past mistakes of ones ancestors has nothing to do with the present mistakes of others being done now. Hopefully enough ridicule and social condemnation will change the backward ways of the middle east like condemnation worked/works on other cultures like the US and South Africa.
TrollTech uses a GPL/TrollTech license which means they can charge arbitrary sums of money (reasonably priced at $1,200 at the moment) to developers for using the Qt libraries in software not compatible with the GPL. Gnome uses GTK (with an LGPL license) which has no restrictions (provided one doesn't actually change the libraries themselves without releasing the changes made to the libraries).
Sun is merely a supporter of GTK/Gnome but Trolltech has control of Qt (and thus to some degree KDE). If Sun turned around and became the Evil Empire, it would have no effect on Gnome software or the Gnome DE but if TrollTech became the Evil Empire, KDE might still be fine but if a user of KDE wanted to use closed source software such as Oracle or various popular Video Games, they might not integrate well due to Oracle and xyz video games and etc needing to use a different gui toolkit [Oracle uses Qt now but I am talking about in an imaginary future, such as imagining in 1998 that Caldera would threaten to sue everyone for using Linux in 2003].
Sun is not relevant to Gnome but TrollTech IS relevant to KDE. So while you might not trust either one, only TrollTech can make life harder for the Linux community.
Actually it is deeper than that:
These core issues make Linux significantly behind Microsoft XP. Without drastic changes to the way these things are handled, system modification is going to be sub par to the "home user". The problem is that most of linux software have as a user interface configurion files that are best meant to be edited by a human instead of by another program or auto-detecting. People should NOT be expected to configure ANY of the stuff that is commonly needed in a linux system. Two examples:These are just two of the most recent problems I came across in the last two weeks, but there are hundreds more I could easily list. Some of the most basic ones that users commonly come across are:
I could go on but this post was not supposed to be a rant but to point out that Linux is very far behind Windows as a Desktop OS and I am surprised that Linux even has one percent of the desktop when it is such a pain in the ass to do any upgrading or modification of the system (and I am speaking as a Linux user).Now I know that all the above can be achieved (and I have done most of them) and I know that Windows is not perfect but when I make modifications to my Windows machine, I know that in most cases, it is LESS than a half hour of my time, but on the linux machine, I am happy when it is only a half hour.
I agree with RedHat when they said Linux is not ready for the desktop. Sure you can use it but it far from optimal.
I thought they meant words like: !@#$, @#%$^, and $#%#$%.
Of course the words I posted above are subjectively more or less insulting and I know some would have put on the list things such as @#%#, #@%$^@@$, and %(^#^ but slashdots #$^% lameness filter kicked in and would not let me post too many and so I had to make choices. If you think of a word that I should have added to the list and didn't, you can take a plunger and !@#$ ^$#^^3 while you ^%#$^ yourself (or you can post me a reply listing the ones I missed) but really - who gives a (*&^.
I will bite the Trolls bait:
What the !@#$ are you talking about. One of the reasons the original Netscape code was dropped in favor of starting over was that the original code was a total mess. I should hope Mozilla would not fall into that trap again. Cleaning up code and fixing bugs should be of a higher priority than implementing obscure features only a handfull of people know about. Clean and well working code make it easier to implement new features while also making it easier for new developers to contibute to the project. As soon as those obscure features mentioned above really become desired by a substantial subset of developers/users, I am sure someone will come along and implement it (especially if the current code is laid out well).
My fastest computer is an Athlon XP 2000+ and my other one runs at 1 ghz with almost a gig of ram. I have not bought a new computer in four years (since 1999) and I don't ever intend to buy a new computer. In four years I have bought many CPU's, motherboard's, graphics cards, hard drives, monitors, cdroms and etc. I spend about 200-600 dollars a year on computer hardware and software but I never buy a new computer. The advantage of this is that it cost much less to have a great system that matches my needs. Apple might provide alot but much of what is provided may not be usefull to the user and what is REALLY needed might cost a fortune to add. I can easilly upgrade any component in my PC for far less than having to go out and buy a whole new system. When I build systems for friends and family, I usually put together a decent system for about 600 to a 1000 dollars (including a nice 17" LCD monitor) and I tell them "if there is anything you want to add to this system later, I will be more than happy to do it." I get VERY few calls for system upgrades because most people are happy with what I speced out for them in the first place, but if they need something better later, it is easilly done. Apple can't compete with this flexability or price.
While it is not emulation, the point is that niether chip is being shown for thier true potential.
If Linux could run all the programs that MS does, I would say your logic made some sense but the fact is that linux is "johny come lately" when 90% of the desktop was already tied to MS. Linux can't run everything that MS does and it is not realistic for most people to switch all software and everything they know to something completely new. That arguement does not hold true for the AMD/Intel market. What runs on Intel will run just as well on AMD with no change in user experience (often without any knowledge of what chip they are using).
On the contrary, Fox grabbed ratings, one could argue, because they had no competition when providing a perspective from the right.
Actually it is still the same arguement which is that many in the open source community do not want to be dependant on the "goodwill" of one company alone (even if it is just for others to write "proprietary software"). TrollTech could be bought by Microsoft tommorow and a comercial license for Qt could go up to a $100,000 or more. It is one thing to prefer open source solutions and another to give up control of "comercial" potential. TrollTech controls key elements to "comercial development" on KDE.
Of course I am personally biassed because I believe that "he who writes the code, chooses the license" and for that reason alone, KDE leaves a distaste in my mouth.
If they can afford the hardware then they can probably afford the software. The idea that people are only living on a dollar a day in china is ludicrous. The poorest countries in the world make about 200-300 usd dollars a month (if they are working) and most of those people DO NOT HAVE COMPUTERS. Those that do have computers are probably making an average US citezen's salary (or better).
I will provide the answers to the important and serious questions posed above; for I believe in providing light where thier is darkness...
What about the impact on our society? Nothing. It's just a computer dude!
What about the capability for good and for bad? Nothing. It's just a computer dude!
What do "good" and "bad" mean, anyhow? I just HOPE you are not expecting a computer to help you answer THAT question!
How do I know I even exist? I don't know if you exist but if I was to take a guess, you probably don't.
What does "I" even mean? "You" probably don't "need" an "answer" to this one since "you" probably don't "exist" anyway so the "answer" to "I" should not "bother" "you".
Now with this new knowledge of morality and metaphysics, go spread the answers amongst the masses.
I think there is a simpler explanation for Darl and that is that he is a psychopath. The typical psychopath has no conscience that bothers them when they do something bad (aka guilt) and so are able to do many unconcionable actions to obtain thier personal objectives. Doesn't that sound more like McBride than any of the other diagnoses?
If I own a website (and I do) I feel that I can publish/delete anything I want on my site. TIME.com is not part of the public domain; it is the sole property of TIME Magazine. If they want to pull something from thier website then that is for them to decide. The internet has tons of holes AND ALWAYS DID. Websites get torn down and new ones get put in thier place. Content is ever shifting and changing. Tons of data is lost every year as websites delete,change and go away but the good news is that more data is being acumulated on the internet than deleted.
I highly doubt that this is true. A firewall blocks ports and that is all. You need some ports open for certain services to work (like port 80 for web browsing). You don't need to get rid of the firewall- just open the ports that are needed for the services you want to use.
I think your attitude is wrong. "the professional" explained that Gimp is not good enouph to replace Photoshop because time and convenience is money and he is right. One may wish for this to not be true but it is. You should be berating the "average joe" who pirates Photoshop instead of using the Gimp ("average joe" certainly don't need Photoshop and could do quite well with the Gimp). The user who needs to do things fast and efficiently with graphics to earn a living should not be concerned about Photshop like price tags for thier tools.
Actually any system that cannot fail should NOT be on a MS platform. The history of security,stability and predictability is just not good enough on any MS product. Mission critical is the realm of Mainframe, Unix (which includes Linux as a Unix clone), Vax and even OS/2 in its day. As much as I think win2000 was a huge leap forward for Microsoft, I would never entrust it with my life and I find it funny that many corporations do so.