The National Reich Church, the German Faith Movement, the tent's of "Positive Christianity"... The National Reich Church did not exist. The German Faith Movement and Positive Christianity were simply reform movements within the Lutheran church. The vast majority of Germans during the Nazi period were part of the German Evangelical Church (which endorsed the Nazis) and the Roman Catholic Church. ALL other religions were small minorities. Martin Luther was virulently anti-Jew and Hitler often directly quoted his anti-Jewish tirades.
Take a look at the program of the National Reich Church. Again, this organization DID NOT EXIST. The telegram you cite was speculative at best, and almost certainly a fake. No original has been found and nobody can find any other references to this organization.
Oh, and only a small percentage of Americans (5% tops) ever owned slaves. And every single one of those slave owners was Christian (there may have been a few Jews) and argued that Christianity supported slavery because it DOES. Read the Bible. St. Paul specifically says that it is acceptable for Christians to own slaves.
pagan Nazism (Hitler and the holocaust) The Nazis weren't pagans. I constantly hear this crap and they simply WERE NOT. What is the supposed "pagan" reason for hating Jews (as opposed to hating ALL competitive religions)? Even if you can argue a handful of SS officers bought into Norse neo-Paganism, the vast majority of Nazis (99%+) were Christians and were anti-Jew in large part because of their Christian faith. Some Christian ministers and priests in Germany encouraged the Holocaust. Far fewer denounced it. Most stayed silent, like the Catholic Church (which most people interpret as an endorsement).
militant Islamism It's hard to get over more than a million killed by militant "Islamism". In the 20th and 21st centuries the US, France, and Britian can easily beat this number. If you want to go back farther the US has killed WAY more people than ANYONE else because of the Native American genocide.
We'll probably never know that. Yes we do, it's bad.
Eventually the Empire _had_ to adopt this new religion, or be weakened from within by it. So you agree that Christianity weakened the Roman Empire (I completely agree), but this wasn't a BAD thing? The Roman Empire was, in many ways, the most progressive government in the ancient world.
And the version of Christianity adopted by and spread by the Roman Empire was RADICALLY different from what early Christians believed, to better conform to pagan Roman sensibilities. You might notice that all of the anti-authoritarianism and ant-government sentiment is sttripped out of Constantine's faith. He basically solved the "Christian problem" by renaming Zeus worship "Christianity". They even used the same temples.
Was Christianity the worst religion possible, in the long run? Clearly not. The Norse religion, for example, was big on human sacrifice.
Well, Confucianism in China, for example, As you point out, this isn't a valid comparison. Confucianism was nowhere near as bad as the Aztec or Hindu faiths, for example, but neither of these were a competitor to Christianity in Europe. Roman paganism, Judaism, the Norse faith, etc. were competitors. Saying that Christianity isn't AS BAD as the worst religions you can name doesn't prove anything.
SCO MS invested in SCO, which was suing Linux vendors. Whether or not you think this is good business practice, it is not advertising and/or marketing.
"Vista Capable" Blame the OEMs. They are the ones that wanted to stick Vista on systems without DirectX 9 support.
Windows Genuine "Advantage" It is an "Advantage" to be able to download updates for your non-pirated copy of Windows.
Fake ROI/TCO models Standard marketing bullshit. The ROI for RedHat and Novell is bullshit too.
Misleading security stats Which ones? It's difficult to compare meaningful security statistics between operating systems with different architectures and patch methodologies. Poor security in Windows is MUCH more of a problem of poor administration than poor design. The overwhelming popularity of Windows also skews security statistics. MS marketing is certainly not going to admit that their product is insecure, and asking them to do so is a little absurd.
235 Patents Again, not marketing.
Zune astroturf sites Apple sets up astroturf sites, so do many other software vendors. And I'd like you to point me to these sites, because I haven't seen them. Zune has a rich user community (like Creative, or Apple) especially given the short time the Zune "2" (the non-sucky one) has been available.
XBox sales figures I'll agree with this one. But all the console manufacturers do it.
XBox failure rates As far as I'm aware, MS hasn't released their internal data on failures. According to people I know in XBOX support, failure was in the 10% range (huge for a consumer electronics device). They fixed the problems on Falcon, about the time Halo came out. This still screws early adopters.
OOOXML and ISO corruption Not marketing.
Subverting OLPC (multiple lies) I have no idea what this means. Microsoft is offering an operating system for the OLPC, developed at their own expense and sold AT A LOSS, for $3 per laptop (the $3 doesn't cover the cost of the SD card which the OS will ship on). They didn't shoot all the Linux developers in the head. Apparently the folks at OLPC decided that Microsoft's solution was BETTER (or as good) and they're using it. I haven't used MS' port, but I've used the OLPC and IMHO the current operating system has a few good features (like the mesh networking) but generally sucks.
Yahoo! Mail was better at the time and remains better. GMail is free and integrates with the (popular) iGoogle home page and search engine well, that's why people use it. The lack of folders is retarded and EVERYONE complains about it. Yahoo! Mail costs money. If Yahoo! Mail was free that's what everyone would be using. I use GMail because I'm too cheap to pay for Yahoo!. If I cared more about my webmail I'd pay for it.
Yes, there are really people that take "Jedi" seriously as a religion. Jedi, as a concept, are very similar to to Taoist masters whom Lucas was consciously emulating. "The Force" (at least in the initial 3 films) is basically fictionalized, approachable, Taoism. The big difference is Lucas' interpretation of the Light Side/Dark Side being oppositional, as opposed to Yin/Yang which is complementary.
I'm sure Chinese Taoists might consider this comparison offensive. In the same way Christians might consider the idea that Neon Genesis Evangelion accurately portrays their religion offensive.
None of the large pharmaceutical companies spends more on R&D than they do on marketing. Some, like Pfizer spend almost double. Most of their "new" products are just small variations on existing drugs that require little new research or testing. Viagra, Levitra, Cialis, etc. are all virtually identical. So are most statins, etc. They've pushed medical doctors into prescribing psychopharmaceuticals (like Zoloft) even though they are not psychiatrists and have absolutely no expertise. Only licensed psychiatrists should be handing out psychopharmaceuticals, and even then only when combined with talk therapy.
Pharmaceutical companies engage in some of the most shady marketing practices you've ever heard of. They hire ex-cheerleaders and ex-models to give doctors sexual favors and cash in exchange for pushing products. This is so widespread it's considered the "standard" marketing approach for new prescription drugs. They have unethical and misleading TV ads for prescription drugs. Remember when such advertising was BANNED in the US (as it is in other, sane, industrialized nations)? I sure do. Back then pharmaceutical companies spent less than 1/3 what they do now on marketing. Big pharma lobbied Congress into allowing this crap.
Just in case people didn't understand, the GOAL here is not to make general P2P downloads easier for their customers but to suck up some of their customers' bandwidth to use for the coming IP video distribution system. So if you have "digital cable", part of your bandwidth will always be used for P2P to distribute the latest episode of "Lost" to other Comcast customers.
Here's the thing: by law, the labels generally have to pay mechanical royalties of at least $0.08 per download -- more if the song has a separate lyricist and composer. This does not include royalties paid to the performer. So, the royalties paid out can be $0.16 or higher. If you're paying out > $0.10 per track by law and selling those tracks for $0.10 or less, it's just simply not possible to make up the difference in volume. It's a money-losing proposition. It's actually now $0.091. Do you actually think the artists get $0.091 per song? They don't. The contracts they are forced to sign by the major labels require them to settle for a FRACTION of that royalty, between 10-80% of that $0.091. So on the low end (all NEW artists) the artists are only getting $0.0091 per track, less than a penny.
I know I got modded down, but my experience has been that most of the people that like Sugar have never used it. Nor do I understand the attack on Microsoft. If MS is willing to provide an operating system with more functionality (better foreign language support strikes me as a big deal) at low cost ($3 is pretty cheap), why is this "bad" other than Linux fanboyism? Why hasn't Redhat, Novell, Canonical, etc. stepped up with a Linux distribution?
Do you really think that the share price is going to to $33 on it's own anytime soon? And if so, can you make a good argument for this windfall? What does Yahoo! have on the horizon that would create this massive jump in share price? The correct answer is: nothing. Yahoo! is going down in flames. Since Yang seems determined to wreck it I expect that the Yahoo! brand will be bought in the next 2 years, all or almost all of Yahoo!'s employees will be laid off.
Who does this benefit except for Google and Jerry Yang's ego?
So, in other words, Icahn was right. The management at Moto is busily running their company into the ground and using their cash reserves to give bonuses and golden parachutes to themselves. Sitting on billions in cash *is* irresponsible to the shareholders. Apparently management wanted to hold on to that money to for giveaways to their friends (that what those weird acquisitions are about). Moto will lose massive marketshare in the next two years, which will kill shareholder value.
So, in other words, he got his money by engaging in standard business practices.
Virtually every major software company has done this crap, many of them worse. Sun, Apple, Adobe, Oracle... pick a vendor and I can come up with some illegal or "unethical" conduct. So what? They are not vilified the way Bill Gates and Microsoft are. Apple, for example, has done EXACTLY the same things
Monopoly abuse (what other players can you use with iTunes?)
Running competitors into the ground (what happened to the Apple clone vendors?)
Raw hypocrisy ("Intel is evil!")
Flat-out fraud ("iTunes will only work on MacOS!")
Yeah, that's exactly what Linux needs. Another window manager that's completely different from the others and uses incompatible toolsets. That will TOTALLY encourage gui development for Linux.
This point is summarily dismissed, because we have already established that you are lying about your experience.
Again, don't take my word for it. Read any survey of the Fortune 1000. Hell, read any general business survey. The main complaint about Exchange is cost, not ease-of-use.
This is a plugin for Funambol, a different product. Is there any kind of bundling of Citadel with Funambol?
Built-in support for XMPP (Jabber) protocol.
Is there a recommended client list?
Where are the anti-virus plugins?
I was talking about AV other than ClamAV, which doesn't work.
Baked into the basic system at the most basic levels. This question implies that you haven't spent more than 30 seconds evaluating it.
I wasn't able to find any "live" document collaboration. Sure there were public rooms, that presumably can contain documents, but that's not the same thing. And apparently you can only access that content through the web client. Is any of this wrong?
Berkeley DB supports databases up to 256 TB with hot backup. I can't imagine how you could possibly consider that something other than a "real database." Exchange can't come anywhere near that.
Filemaker and Access can create huge databases, so what? The trick is maintaining data integrity. Assuming you can separate out the DB and mailserver this probably isn't that bad a problem though. And the Exchange database is standard SQL, you can use anything that talks SQL as a backend. I've used Oracle and DB2 as backends. You don't get more robust than DB2.
How do I cluster Citadel? Using the tools built into the base system.
I do not understand this. Do you mean Heartbeat?
Ask on the support forum and a number of people will answer.
That's not what I asked. What I asked was "Where can I hire a consultant that will do all this for me?" The answer is apparently "nowhere", which was my point. I suspect I could find a consultant here in Cupertino, but that's it. I can throw a rock in any large city and hit an Exchange consultant.
There is of course the Web interface, as well as WebDAV support, and there is an application-specific protocol that several clients make use of.
So the Web interface can use WebDAV to transfer mail? The "Citadel protocol" looks a lot like NNTP and doesn't seem that difficult to implement. What clients do you have using it, any windows clients? I think this is definitely the way to go, given the limitations of IMAP.
Your questions are ill-researched if you were looking for me to come up empty. You clearly have not spent enough time evaluating either product.
Sorry, if learning anything about Citadel involves installing it in a live environment and running it for months you're going to have a tough sell. I have installed Citadel on CentOS a while back. I had lots of problems that weren't handled in the documentation. I've read every single page of the web site at this point. I couldn't find any information about Heartbeat, Jabber or Funambol on the web site. I wonder what you expect me to do if this isn't enough research.
Based on my reading, in order to get the features of Exchange I would have to:
1) GUESS how much hardware I need to drive the entire system and buy 2 off-the-shelf Dell servers. 2) Carefully choose my Linux distribution praying all the bits I need will work correctly with the distribution I've chosen. 3) Install Linux. 4) Install and configure Heartbeat. 5) Install and somehow configure Tomcat. 6) Install Berkeley DB and a bunch of libraries. 7) Install and configure OpenLDAP (I think). 8) Install Funambol. 9) A whole crapload of text configuration. I'm cutting this short here. 10) Now you have to fiddle with clients.
That was one of the reasons why Blizzard chose OpenGL rather than DirectX Blizzard has been developing games for a LONG time, like ID. They made this decision back in the early 1990s, back when MS didn't having the desktop gaming dominance they have now and Direct3D was as dramatically superior to OpenGL as it is now. Instead they developed in-house tools for 3D graphics, sound, etc. (again like ID) that were MUCH more portable than DirectX. This decision means that it's relatively easy to release Mac and Linux ports for their games, despite the fact there is little money to be made in doing so.
Mac gamers make up about 3% of Blizzard customers. They wouldn't miss much.
Nobody claimed Nazis were smart. They evidently thought some part of Jew-ness, either common racial ancestors of many or some corrupting nature of the religion or culture, was genetic. Who do you think they got this idea from? Jews themselves!
If they really thought it was just the religion they'd have been happy to leave anyone alive if they'd merely publicly renounce their religion and leave that community. Little known fact: They did. There were "ex-Jews" in Hitler's cabinet. Service in the military and rejection of Judaism got you out of the concentration camps (or you were never sent). There was division among the Nazi Party as to whether Jews were an "evil race" or they just promoted an evil philosophy and some Jews joined the Nazi Party under this reasoning. Though their position was never stable, the "evil race" people got the upper hand by the end of the war and many "ex-Jews" ended up in concentration camps.
I think it's not as much the actions (religion) they dislike, as that they merely dislike Jews (racially - because Hitler said so, based on centuries of fear-mongering) and figure the religion/culture is a handy way of identifying these people. It all depends on what strain of Nazi philosophy you're talking about. Many Nazis argued that Jews, communists, homosexuals, etc. promoted evil philosophies but were not "racially evil". It clearly is the religion/culture they didn't like, it's just that some MISIDENTIFIED it as "race". Modern neo-Nazis are divided, some (largely pro-Holocaust neo-Nazis) agree with Jews as a race. Others (Holocaust rejectionists or revisionists) tend to take the "evil religion" angle.
That's my primary point of dissension. I see no reason to believe one is less wrong than the other. Common sense? I hope you're never in the legislature.
In what way did delivery of the USB stack as a set of system extensions make it non-native? Each USB device had a separate vendor-supplied extension. There was a USB mouse extension, a USB floppy extension, etc, None of these were written by Apple. This contrasted sharply with Windows and Linux. I never had a problem getting a USB mouse or a USB floppy to work in either of these operating systems in 1999, and the iMac was supposed to be the "USB everything" desktop.
Maybe the problem was with your company. Sounds to me like you collectively wanted your hands held through even the most trivial of details and threw a hissy fit when it didn't happen. Trivial details like:
Me: "We ran across this undocumented error code during debugging. What does it mean?"
Apple Tech Support: "That error code doesn't exist."
Me: "Uh, yeah it does. I'm looking at it right now."
Apple Tech Support: "It doesn't exist. It must be coming from another app on the system."
Me: "No, it's definitely coming from the Finder."
Apple Tech Support: "Sorry, it doesn't exist."
I mean, if you'd lifted a finger to investigate you'd have found all the documentation (poor though it may have been back then) and the SDK included with EVERY @#*($# OFFICIAL RELEASE OF MAC OS X EVER SHIPPED. (Including the developer previews and public betas which predated the shipping 10.0.) You never had to pay extra, genius. We had to pay for printed documentation that, insanely, had stuff that wasn't in the online documentation. We had to pay separately for the OS9 and OSX developer programs. I also remember that we had to pay Apple for some software, I thought it was the SDK but it was probably an IDE or something like that. Still, crappy support. A sharp contrast from Microsoft and SGI, and to a lesser extent HP. Sun also sucked (I'm talking 1999 here).
Nowadays, I don't know. The other day I went to the Apple store in Palo Alto to exchange my niece's iPod Nano that had a busted headphone jack and the salesperson there was INCREDIBLY condescending, acting as if he was doing a favor by honoring the manufacturer's warranty. This experience has not endeared me to Apple any further. I also hate iTunes, which is the main reason I own a Creative Zen instead of an iPod.
$1 a track is a ripoff. $0.05 is reasonable. I know EXACTLY what is involved in this distribution and I know that pricing is totally doable. $0.10 if they're greedy. And for that I'd expect absolutely perfect quality rips off the studio masters in FLAC and a variety of other formats of my choice. DRM-free of course. I'd also expect an account system that would allow me to redownload any track I had ever purchased an unlimted number of times. I'd expect a social networking system that would use the aforementioned account allowing me to share my track lists and let my friends listen to to download music in my collection and make suggestions, etc.
This is not what i"m getting now. I'm getting $1 a track poorly-encoded MP3s (or AACs, iTunes is the worst) made from CD rips on inferior equipment operated by monkeys. I could do much better myself at home, and have. This is the main reason why I still buy music on CD. When the online music stores can't compete with P2P on QUALITY there is something seriously wrong.
I asked why we found it necessary to compare the immorality of two acts. To assess guilt. Someone who steals a car should receive more punishment than someone who steals a candy bar. In a grand way, such punishment is meted out by society in general. People who are especially immoral are (and should be) shunned by society. Obviously people need to assess relative immorality to determine who to shun. You should condemn Bob for beating his wife but you shouldn't condemn Jim (as much) for parking in handicapped spots when he's not handicapped.
I want to know why one act is considered less wrong than the other. I thought I was clear about that. Murder means that you are dead. There is no "recovery" from death. Rape, no matter how tragic it may be, does not take you permanently out of the picture. You're still alive and you can still recover and do stuff, like breathing. Consequently rape is "less wrong" than murder and deserves less serious punishment. Personally, I wouldn't necessarily object to the death penalty for rape in some cases.
Uplink, Defcon, and Darwinia, the most prominent games on their current list are all Windows ports. Macs suck for gaming, but they're in better shape than Linux.
does 'the next generation' of Swedish voters assume they will be working for free making movies for everyone? or do they want to continue a system where foreigners (Americans mostly) do all the work making stuff, where the swedes just get to take it all for free whilst sat on their ass? Two answers:
1) Yes. It's good for the Swedes isn't it? Why shouldn't they act in their own self-interest?
2) The Swedes are way ahead of the curve on content distribution. Bittorent, or another very similar P2P protocol, is the future of ALL content distribution because it's the most efficient. Media companies are whining about a fundamentally superior technology (gee, when has THAT ever happened?). Media companies want to charge higher prices for inferior quality media on the Internet, that's why piracy has taken off in a big way. They could end it in a week but they're too greedy.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and only a small percentage of Americans (5% tops) ever owned slaves. And every single one of those slave owners was Christian (there may have been a few Jews) and argued that Christianity supported slavery because it DOES. Read the Bible. St. Paul specifically says that it is acceptable for Christians to own slaves.
And the version of Christianity adopted by and spread by the Roman Empire was RADICALLY different from what early Christians believed, to better conform to pagan Roman sensibilities. You might notice that all of the anti-authoritarianism and ant-government sentiment is sttripped out of Constantine's faith. He basically solved the "Christian problem" by renaming Zeus worship "Christianity". They even used the same temples. Was Christianity the worst religion possible, in the long run? Clearly not. The Norse religion, for example, was big on human sacrifice. Well, Confucianism in China, for example, As you point out, this isn't a valid comparison. Confucianism was nowhere near as bad as the Aztec or Hindu faiths, for example, but neither of these were a competitor to Christianity in Europe. Roman paganism, Judaism, the Norse faith, etc. were competitors. Saying that Christianity isn't AS BAD as the worst religions you can name doesn't prove anything.
Yahoo! Mail was better at the time and remains better. GMail is free and integrates with the (popular) iGoogle home page and search engine well, that's why people use it. The lack of folders is retarded and EVERYONE complains about it. Yahoo! Mail costs money. If Yahoo! Mail was free that's what everyone would be using. I use GMail because I'm too cheap to pay for Yahoo!. If I cared more about my webmail I'd pay for it.
Yes, there are really people that take "Jedi" seriously as a religion. Jedi, as a concept, are very similar to to Taoist masters whom Lucas was consciously emulating. "The Force" (at least in the initial 3 films) is basically fictionalized, approachable, Taoism. The big difference is Lucas' interpretation of the Light Side/Dark Side being oppositional, as opposed to Yin/Yang which is complementary.
I'm sure Chinese Taoists might consider this comparison offensive. In the same way Christians might consider the idea that Neon Genesis Evangelion accurately portrays their religion offensive.
None of the large pharmaceutical companies spends more on R&D than they do on marketing. Some, like Pfizer spend almost double. Most of their "new" products are just small variations on existing drugs that require little new research or testing. Viagra, Levitra, Cialis, etc. are all virtually identical. So are most statins, etc. They've pushed medical doctors into prescribing psychopharmaceuticals (like Zoloft) even though they are not psychiatrists and have absolutely no expertise. Only licensed psychiatrists should be handing out psychopharmaceuticals, and even then only when combined with talk therapy.
Pharmaceutical companies engage in some of the most shady marketing practices you've ever heard of. They hire ex-cheerleaders and ex-models to give doctors sexual favors and cash in exchange for pushing products. This is so widespread it's considered the "standard" marketing approach for new prescription drugs. They have unethical and misleading TV ads for prescription drugs. Remember when such advertising was BANNED in the US (as it is in other, sane, industrialized nations)? I sure do. Back then pharmaceutical companies spent less than 1/3 what they do now on marketing. Big pharma lobbied Congress into allowing this crap.
Just in case people didn't understand, the GOAL here is not to make general P2P downloads easier for their customers but to suck up some of their customers' bandwidth to use for the coming IP video distribution system. So if you have "digital cable", part of your bandwidth will always be used for P2P to distribute the latest episode of "Lost" to other Comcast customers.
I know I got modded down, but my experience has been that most of the people that like Sugar have never used it. Nor do I understand the attack on Microsoft. If MS is willing to provide an operating system with more functionality (better foreign language support strikes me as a big deal) at low cost ($3 is pretty cheap), why is this "bad" other than Linux fanboyism? Why hasn't Redhat, Novell, Canonical, etc. stepped up with a Linux distribution?
Do you really think that the share price is going to to $33 on it's own anytime soon? And if so, can you make a good argument for this windfall? What does Yahoo! have on the horizon that would create this massive jump in share price? The correct answer is: nothing. Yahoo! is going down in flames. Since Yang seems determined to wreck it I expect that the Yahoo! brand will be bought in the next 2 years, all or almost all of Yahoo!'s employees will be laid off.
Who does this benefit except for Google and Jerry Yang's ego?
So, in other words, Icahn was right. The management at Moto is busily running their company into the ground and using their cash reserves to give bonuses and golden parachutes to themselves. Sitting on billions in cash *is* irresponsible to the shareholders. Apparently management wanted to hold on to that money to for giveaways to their friends (that what those weird acquisitions are about). Moto will lose massive marketshare in the next two years, which will kill shareholder value.
Virtually every major software company has done this crap, many of them worse. Sun, Apple, Adobe, Oracle... pick a vendor and I can come up with some illegal or "unethical" conduct. So what? They are not vilified the way Bill Gates and Microsoft are. Apple, for example, has done EXACTLY the same things
Yeah, that's exactly what Linux needs. Another window manager that's completely different from the others and uses incompatible toolsets. That will TOTALLY encourage gui development for Linux.
Doesn't Windows run on the OLPC? I don't get this. I take this more as "We're abandoning Sugar because it sucks".
This point is summarily dismissed, because we have already established that you are lying about your experience.
Again, don't take my word for it. Read any survey of the Fortune 1000. Hell, read any general business survey. The main complaint about Exchange is cost, not ease-of-use.
Here: http://bionicmessage.net/index.php?q=node/11
This is a plugin for Funambol, a different product. Is there any kind of bundling of Citadel with Funambol?
Built-in support for XMPP (Jabber) protocol.
Is there a recommended client list?
Where are the anti-virus plugins?
I was talking about AV other than ClamAV, which doesn't work.
Baked into the basic system at the most basic levels. This question implies that you haven't spent more than 30 seconds evaluating it.
I wasn't able to find any "live" document collaboration. Sure there were public rooms, that presumably can contain documents, but that's not the same thing. And apparently you can only access that content through the web client. Is any of this wrong?
Berkeley DB supports databases up to 256 TB with hot backup. I can't imagine how you could possibly consider that something other than a "real database." Exchange can't come anywhere near that.
Filemaker and Access can create huge databases, so what? The trick is maintaining data integrity. Assuming you can separate out the DB and mailserver this probably isn't that bad a problem though. And the Exchange database is standard SQL, you can use anything that talks SQL as a backend. I've used Oracle and DB2 as backends. You don't get more robust than DB2.
How do I cluster Citadel? Using the tools built into the base system.
I do not understand this. Do you mean Heartbeat?
Ask on the support forum and a number of people will answer.
That's not what I asked. What I asked was "Where can I hire a consultant that will do all this for me?" The answer is apparently "nowhere", which was my point. I suspect I could find a consultant here in Cupertino, but that's it. I can throw a rock in any large city and hit an Exchange consultant.
There is of course the Web interface, as well as WebDAV support, and there is an application-specific protocol that several clients make use of.
So the Web interface can use WebDAV to transfer mail? The "Citadel protocol" looks a lot like NNTP and doesn't seem that difficult to implement. What clients do you have using it, any windows clients? I think this is definitely the way to go, given the limitations of IMAP.
Your questions are ill-researched if you were looking for me to come up empty. You clearly have not spent enough time evaluating either product.
Sorry, if learning anything about Citadel involves installing it in a live environment and running it for months you're going to have a tough sell. I have installed Citadel on CentOS a while back. I had lots of problems that weren't handled in the documentation. I've read every single page of the web site at this point. I couldn't find any information about Heartbeat, Jabber or Funambol on the web site. I wonder what you expect me to do if this isn't enough research.
Based on my reading, in order to get the features of Exchange I would have to:
1) GUESS how much hardware I need to drive the entire system and buy 2 off-the-shelf Dell servers.
2) Carefully choose my Linux distribution praying all the bits I need will work correctly with the distribution I've chosen.
3) Install Linux.
4) Install and configure Heartbeat.
5) Install and somehow configure Tomcat.
6) Install Berkeley DB and a bunch of libraries.
7) Install and configure OpenLDAP (I think).
8) Install Funambol.
9) A whole crapload of text configuration. I'm cutting this short here.
10) Now you have to fiddle with clients.
As opposed
Mac gamers make up about 3% of Blizzard customers. They wouldn't miss much.
Me: "We ran across this undocumented error code during debugging. What does it mean?"
Apple Tech Support: "That error code doesn't exist."
Me: "Uh, yeah it does. I'm looking at it right now."
Apple Tech Support: "It doesn't exist. It must be coming from another app on the system."
Me: "No, it's definitely coming from the Finder."
Apple Tech Support: "Sorry, it doesn't exist." I mean, if you'd lifted a finger to investigate you'd have found all the documentation (poor though it may have been back then) and the SDK included with EVERY @#*($# OFFICIAL RELEASE OF MAC OS X EVER SHIPPED. (Including the developer previews and public betas which predated the shipping 10.0.) You never had to pay extra, genius. We had to pay for printed documentation that, insanely, had stuff that wasn't in the online documentation. We had to pay separately for the OS9 and OSX developer programs. I also remember that we had to pay Apple for some software, I thought it was the SDK but it was probably an IDE or something like that. Still, crappy support. A sharp contrast from Microsoft and SGI, and to a lesser extent HP. Sun also sucked (I'm talking 1999 here).
Nowadays, I don't know. The other day I went to the Apple store in Palo Alto to exchange my niece's iPod Nano that had a busted headphone jack and the salesperson there was INCREDIBLY condescending, acting as if he was doing a favor by honoring the manufacturer's warranty. This experience has not endeared me to Apple any further. I also hate iTunes, which is the main reason I own a Creative Zen instead of an iPod.
$1 a track is a ripoff. $0.05 is reasonable. I know EXACTLY what is involved in this distribution and I know that pricing is totally doable. $0.10 if they're greedy. And for that I'd expect absolutely perfect quality rips off the studio masters in FLAC and a variety of other formats of my choice. DRM-free of course. I'd also expect an account system that would allow me to redownload any track I had ever purchased an unlimted number of times. I'd expect a social networking system that would use the aforementioned account allowing me to share my track lists and let my friends listen to to download music in my collection and make suggestions, etc.
This is not what i"m getting now. I'm getting $1 a track poorly-encoded MP3s (or AACs, iTunes is the worst) made from CD rips on inferior equipment operated by monkeys. I could do much better myself at home, and have. This is the main reason why I still buy music on CD. When the online music stores can't compete with P2P on QUALITY there is something seriously wrong.
Uplink, Defcon, and Darwinia, the most prominent games on their current list are all Windows ports. Macs suck for gaming, but they're in better shape than Linux.
1) Yes. It's good for the Swedes isn't it? Why shouldn't they act in their own self-interest?
2) The Swedes are way ahead of the curve on content distribution. Bittorent, or another very similar P2P protocol, is the future of ALL content distribution because it's the most efficient. Media companies are whining about a fundamentally superior technology (gee, when has THAT ever happened?). Media companies want to charge higher prices for inferior quality media on the Internet, that's why piracy has taken off in a big way. They could end it in a week but they're too greedy.