I had the 6035 as well. The 7035 appears less stable (I never crashed the 6035, but if the 7035 is pausing for thought YOU LET THAT THING TAKE ITS TIME.
Battery life seems to have taken a hit. You park it on the charger every other day at least. Recharges in a jiffy, though.
I'm indifferent to the color.
I bought the dead tree version as way of saying thanks to ESR. It's a great read, though far more qualitative than quantitative.
I thought his treatment of the various personalities (RMS, Linus) was fair, and his notes about where Unix got it ronngg was interesting. Clearly biased, yet not grossly so.
My theory, though, is that all of the "better" aspects are generally lost.
Couple of trivial examples, the idea of having logical and physical file systems highly interchangeable and configurable is irrelevant for most users. The market has said that they want a floppy named "A:\" and a hard drive named "C:\". And bother me not with these 'script' things. Give me icons or give me death. IMHO, the task is not to have the geeks show that the brand of suit in the boardroom is irrelevant. No amount of careful, articulate argumentation can do that. The task is to get the wearers of the suits in the boardroom to think, and I daresay even Zen Master Foo at the end of the book would be hard pressed to accomplish that.
Put another way, Unix and Open Source both assume a sophisticated user, and the market has repeatedly argued otherwise.
I think that usage patterns have more to do with it. I'm not a huge PDA user, or cell phone user, so a combined solution make sense. Go, Kyocera 7135!
However, if you're talking a lot or taking tons of notes, often simultaneously, then one of the other options would make more sense.
Linux has its own problems, including lack of a complete application lineup and concerns over accountability.
There are plenty of office suites, and you can argue over whether they are sufficiently robust.
The second point, accountability, is where managers, in my experience get concerned. While it was great that the company didn't get mugged on licenses, the learning curve for the admins is relatively steep compared to Monopolized Systems that are managed at the crayon level.
Businesses want to know that, in the event of the bus flattening the admin, they can get a replacement, and not here some line like "uhh, I'm a vi user, and my predecessor, apparently an Emacs LISP fetishist, (ran (the (whole (network (with {these (crazy (macros))))))))".
IANAT. In fact, I've reached a state of total agnosticism about platforms, languages, and licenses as a result of/.
Ulitately, I hope the market does, too, in favor of what really matters: standards.
A common misconception is that Jesus spoke of international relations.
He spoke of interpersonal relations.
Thus, what a G.W. Bush might or might not do in the context of 'loving his neighbor' in Crawford, TX needs to be seen as distinct from his actions as POTUS.
Now, I think Jimmy Carter is the most under-rated president in US history. The reason he gets low billing is that he didn't do to Iran at the end of the 70's what the US just did to Afghanistan over 9/11. Because the compassion Jesus preached for dealing with everyone around us, regardless of race, age, political- and sexual orientation simply doesn't apply to acts of war on the international level.
</rant>
Getting back on topic, the article is a joke. Putting stuff in space is ridiculously expensive.
Targeting stuff in space is ridiculously hard.
Thus, a war could potentially start with something out there in the vacuum, but would quickly be pulled down into the vauums in the heads of the leaders on earth.
There is no need to preach pacifism; preach the common sense that war is too expensive.
are in danger if you run an install routine for a Monopoly Supplied operating system. Magically, the partition table is fouled so that 'undesirable' partitions no longer boot.
I'd like to take this moment to hoist a giant middle finger towards the Pacific Northwest and tell somebody that they are #1.
Linux installers tend to be so much more civilized, and GRUB rocks.
Can't decide if that's a bug or a feature.
I guess if they've got SQL Server ported to C#, they can still use it to manage the partition, at the expense of interoperability.
Two benefits for Mr. Softy, though, are the better kernel and the freedom of responsibility for non-MS products running on the OS. In defense of MS (?) it catches a measure of undeserved heat for poor stuff that others have written. Whether or not that outweighs the _deserved_ heat is debatable...
Yeah, but. Speaking of immaterial rights is rather neutral and doesn't carry any positive or negative payload that I could see.
It would quickly acquire such a payload. Meanings in language only remain constant for 'dead' languages like Latin, and you can contrive arguments that Latin's mutable, as well.
Hmmmm...so when Mono is done, and MS Office is written in C#, MS has effectively co-opted the Open Source community for a free port.
That's got to be the most interesting post I've seen on here is quite a while.
HMMM, CPAN seems to argue agains your 'unmanageable' assessment.
My big question is, why don't Open Source projects get a little more pragmatic and collaborate? What if Mono and Parrot joined forces, and became a.Net _and_ Java killer?
Oh wait, we have to spend time on ideology...
Yeah, that helps...somehow...
I wouldn't limit the power of MS to either the Republocrats or the Demicans.
Mono should merge with Parrot. The diversity of open source, which is normally a feature, might have aspects of a liability in the face of monopolistic threats.
Consider the Native Americans. When they got together, they handed Custer his booty. Most of the time, though, they didna do so weel. OTOH, who's got the casinos now?
Pondering it all lately, I've come to the conclusion that the OpenSource/Proprietary argument is a complete waste.
Absolute Truth is that you have two distinct audiences. We could as well argue that public libraries will kill bookstores, or public universities are bad for business.
We can argue that the business practices of either side are unethical/un-American,
We can argue the technical merits of threads vs. processes,
We can argue about whether software should elevate or incarcerate the user,
But where is it all going?
The XP article could have benefitted from more time. I run XP Pro with an admin account like root, and my normal, unprivileged user account.
*nix seems way ahead there--you log in as a mere mortal and light off a terminal for root requirements as needed.
Redmond seems to justify upgrades by putting YABMOW (Yet Another Bewildering Maze Of Windows) atop the configuration information.
I suppose with semi-literate admins, that makes sense. Yet one has to wonder if using text-based configuration files instead of a god-forsaken binary registry *might* be a better way.
I did agree with the XP article about going Mozilla.
I'll go it one better: with a FAT32 partition (affetionately labeled DMZ) between my XP and RH9, I light off Mozilla mail under either OS and point to the same folders, which is kinda handy.
If anyone can figure out how to point the Palm desktop and JPilot to the same files on a logical DMZ, that would be most casual .
Concur with link essay.
In two words, the argument is "resource leveling".
Specifically, business is a pile of cash, and these viruses spread the money around in the form of security jobs.
Unfortunately, you've flattened you pile of cash, and productive things you could have done simply go wanting.
Widening the scale, M$ itself is a right colossal pile of cash, and the rest of the world is tired of heaping money thereon.
How many more episodes of "Virus of the Week" does Redmond think it can stand?
Never understood this argument.
I can see keeping Mr. Softy for user desktops--I deem the likelihood of _any_ open source office suite offering the level of integration you get with MSOffice anytime soon to be less than great.
But for server-side products, why pay the MS tax?
The "you're a socialist for not playing along with my platform lock-in" sounds like a sheer whining to me.
Plenty of business models involve a loss-leader, which is what this is, from a personal standpoint.
I daresay RMS isn't starving; he just isn't shackled with a large company for his effort.
Slashdot Mirror
I had the 6035 as well. The 7035 appears less stable (I never crashed the 6035, but if the 7035 is pausing for thought YOU LET THAT THING TAKE ITS TIME.
Battery life seems to have taken a hit. You park it on the charger every other day at least. Recharges in a jiffy, though.
I'm indifferent to the color.
Yeah, I stumbled onto web version, too.
I bought the dead tree version as way of saying thanks to ESR. It's a great read, though far more qualitative than quantitative.
I thought his treatment of the various personalities (RMS, Linus) was fair, and his notes about where Unix got it ronngg was interesting. Clearly biased, yet not grossly so.
My theory, though, is that all of the "better" aspects are generally lost.
Couple of trivial examples, the idea of having logical and physical file systems highly interchangeable and configurable is irrelevant for most users. The market has said that they want a floppy named "A:\" and a hard drive named "C:\". And bother me not with these 'script' things. Give me icons or give me death.
IMHO, the task is not to have the geeks show that the brand of suit in the boardroom is irrelevant. No amount of careful, articulate argumentation can do that. The task is to get the wearers of the suits in the boardroom to think, and I daresay even Zen Master Foo at the end of the book would be hard pressed to accomplish that.
Put another way, Unix and Open Source both assume a sophisticated user, and the market has repeatedly argued otherwise.
Possibly the sheep enjoy the shearing?
I think that usage patterns have more to do with it. I'm not a huge PDA user, or cell phone user, so a combined solution make sense. Go, Kyocera 7135!
However, if you're talking a lot or taking tons of notes, often simultaneously, then one of the other options would make more sense.
The second point, accountability, is where managers, in my experience get concerned. While it was great that the company didn't get mugged on licenses, the learning curve for the admins is relatively steep compared to Monopolized Systems that are managed at the crayon level.
Businesses want to know that, in the event of the bus flattening the admin, they can get a replacement, and not here some line like "uhh, I'm a vi user, and my predecessor, apparently an Emacs LISP fetishist, (ran (the (whole (network (with {these (crazy (macros))))))))".
IANAT. In fact, I've reached a state of total agnosticism about platforms, languages, and licenses as a result of
Ulitately, I hope the market does, too, in favor of what really matters: standards.
This is clearly a hoax. Redmond OSs don't do pipes, named or otherwise. How would you pipe one icon into another one?
yeah: <insert cool ASCII logo blocked by lameness filter here>, yeah.
A common misconception is that Jesus spoke of international relations.
He spoke of interpersonal relations.
Thus, what a G.W. Bush might or might not do in the context of 'loving his neighbor' in Crawford, TX needs to be seen as distinct from his actions as POTUS.
Now, I think Jimmy Carter is the most under-rated president in US history. The reason he gets low billing is that he didn't do to Iran at the end of the 70's what the US just did to Afghanistan over 9/11. Because the compassion Jesus preached for dealing with everyone around us, regardless of race, age, political- and sexual orientation simply doesn't apply to acts of war on the international level.
</rant>
Getting back on topic, the article is a joke. Putting stuff in space is ridiculously expensive.
Targeting stuff in space is ridiculously hard.
Thus, a war could potentially start with something out there in the vacuum, but would quickly be pulled down into the vauums in the heads of the leaders on earth.
There is no need to preach pacifism; preach the common sense that war is too expensive.
are in danger if you run an install routine for a Monopoly Supplied operating system. Magically, the partition table is fouled so that 'undesirable' partitions no longer boot.
I'd like to take this moment to hoist a giant middle finger towards the Pacific Northwest and tell somebody that they are #1.
Linux installers tend to be so much more civilized, and GRUB rocks.
BSD underpinnings
Well-done GUI
MS Office, for those lovely proprietary file formats.
Next time I'm in the market, I'll be shopping hard for a MAC.
Can't decide if that's a bug or a feature.
I guess if they've got SQL Server ported to C#, they can still use it to manage the partition, at the expense of interoperability.
Two benefits for Mr. Softy, though, are the better kernel and the freedom of responsibility for non-MS products running on the OS. In defense of MS (?) it catches a measure of undeserved heat for poor stuff that others have written. Whether or not that outweighs the _deserved_ heat is debatable...
Yeah, but.
Speaking of immaterial rights is rather neutral and doesn't carry any positive or negative payload that I could see.
It would quickly acquire such a payload. Meanings in language only remain constant for 'dead' languages like Latin, and you can contrive arguments that Latin's mutable, as well.
Hmmmm...so when Mono is done, and MS Office is written in C#, MS has effectively co-opted the Open Source community for a free port.
That's got to be the most interesting post I've seen on here is quite a while.
HMMM, CPAN seems to argue agains your 'unmanageable' assessment. .Net _and_ Java killer?
My big question is, why don't Open Source projects get a little more pragmatic and collaborate? What if Mono and Parrot joined forces, and became a
Oh wait, we have to spend time on ideology...
Yeah, that helps...somehow...
I wouldn't limit the power of MS to either the Republocrats or the Demicans.
Mono should merge with Parrot. The diversity of open source, which is normally a feature, might have aspects of a liability in the face of monopolistic threats.
Consider the Native Americans. When they got together, they handed Custer his booty. Most of the time, though, they didna do so weel. OTOH, who's got the casinos now?
Dewd:
You came to the rongg place, you were looking for thoughtful, objective dialogue.
R,
C
...two big challenges: ... ... ...
1.
2.
3.
<insert cheap shot here> or perhaps you expect the Spanish Inquisition?
Pondering it all lately, I've come to the conclusion that the OpenSource/Proprietary argument is a complete waste.
Absolute Truth is that you have two distinct audiences. We could as well argue that public libraries will kill bookstores, or public universities are bad for business.
We can argue that the business practices of either side are unethical/un-American,
We can argue the technical merits of threads vs. processes,
We can argue about whether software should elevate or incarcerate the user,
But where is it all going?
The XP article could have benefitted from more time. I run XP Pro with an admin account like root, and my normal, unprivileged user account.
*nix seems way ahead there--you log in as a mere mortal and light off a terminal for root requirements as needed.
Redmond seems to justify upgrades by putting YABMOW (Yet Another Bewildering Maze Of Windows) atop the configuration information.
I suppose with semi-literate admins, that makes sense. Yet one has to wonder if using text-based configuration files instead of a god-forsaken binary registry *might* be a better way.
I did agree with the XP article about going Mozilla.
I'll go it one better: with a FAT32 partition (affetionately labeled DMZ) between my XP and RH9, I light off Mozilla mail under either OS and point to the same folders, which is kinda handy.
If anyone can figure out how to point the Palm desktop and JPilot to the same files on a logical DMZ, that would be most casual
.
A useful first post. An hour later, it's still lonely. Why?
What do you mean?
The amount of MSFT in the portfolios of the decision makers?
Surely the decision will be made purely on technical merit...
Apache 2.x: when, why not now?
Concur with link essay.
In two words, the argument is "resource leveling".
Specifically, business is a pile of cash, and these viruses spread the money around in the form of security jobs.
Unfortunately, you've flattened you pile of cash, and productive things you could have done simply go wanting.
Widening the scale, M$ itself is a right colossal pile of cash, and the rest of the world is tired of heaping money thereon.
How many more episodes of "Virus of the Week" does Redmond think it can stand?
Never understood this argument.
I can see keeping Mr. Softy for user desktops--I deem the likelihood of _any_ open source office suite offering the level of integration you get with MSOffice anytime soon to be less than great.
But for server-side products, why pay the MS tax?
The "you're a socialist for not playing along with my platform lock-in" sounds like a sheer whining to me.
Plenty of business models involve a loss-leader, which is what this is, from a personal standpoint.
I daresay RMS isn't starving; he just isn't shackled with a large company for his effort.
.era llits yeht fi wonk t'noD .sdrawkcab etirw ot deniart eb ot desu stsilaicepS snoitarepO ynaN SU
See the discussion in comp.lang.c++.moderated over in google groups.