Do you not buy a magazine because it has too many?
on
Why Do You Block Ads?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Why actually; I don't buy magazines; for pretty much that reason. In 1994 I realised that most magazines on the shelf have very little substance to their articles, are 2/3rds filled with ads and cost (at the time) $3.50 to $5 each. Not to mention the fact that the usual story layouts around that point became really bad (this got worse a few years later when they started making ads which blended in with the story to deliberately cause confusion).
I don't mind some advertising, but the amount and intrusiveness of modern advertising is obnoxious enough that I do avoid buying magazines and I have had to take the time to figure out adblock and flashblock.
I never said they were not serious; I said that taking on those specific (and additional) expenditure would be like them throwing money down a well. To put it more diplomatically (and precisely as well): we cannot count on IBM taking up the slack just because they have deep pockets. Their sponsorship has been limited to things which directly benefit (or, in the SCO case, effect) them.
Someone else brought up the example of what happened to the XFree86 project. While I'm not sure how much corporate sponsorship Xorg gets, I think that it's a bit like playing the lottery. It's nice, but it's not something quit your job for before you know you've won.
The OSS community has allowed Red Hat to sponsor several key pieces of Linux infrastructure; that's a fact. We cannot simply blow them off or dismiss them as 'needing us more than we need you'. (though, on the bright side, there isn't too much that Red Hat works on which would hold back the progress of BSD).
That's flat-out asinine. I never said they created it; but they are the ones who are currently the primary maintainers and developers of gcc (and a shitload of other OSS infrastructure as well).
Being able to is not the same as being inclined to; and I seriously doubt that Novell or IBM would be willing to expend the resources and effort that it would take to match Red Hat's current contributions to those OSS projects.
For Redhat, it's the core of their Business Model; for IBM, (an OSS expendature that intense) would be throwing money down a well.
OT Question: when the hell did IBM become the 'good guys' anyways? Does no one remember the reasons that they were so reviled through the 70's, 80's and 90's? Why are they now treated to uncritically?
And Matt, let's tell it like it is: you need us more than we need you.
WRONG. Look at how many FOSS pies Red Hat has their fingers in (gcc and the kernel are two that immediately spring to mind; I know there's quite a few more. Don't they also sponsor glibc development too?). If Redhat stopped sponsoring the OSS projects they do, gcc alone would grind to a halt, and a good number of other projects would be impaired as well.
And any shareholder can have an opinion on what is the best way to run a company. Some hold a very long term view, that by consistently "doing no evil", the company will last a long time and be even more profitable than doing everything they can to maximize profits in the "this quarter" mentality that so many other corporations have.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
Because with one or two exceptions, boycotts never fucking work; that's why.
Particularly in this case; the people who need to join the boycott (jane and joe six pack, the artists) either don't give half a rats' ass or have damned good reasons not to.
Indeed; and I can just imagine google -a publicly traded company with shareholders to answer to- is chomping at the bit to deny itself of the revenue that it would be throwing away by playing petty power games with the RIAA. Of course, Yahoo's record when it comes to standing up for what's right (particularly in china) is also exemplary.
Wake me up when someone comes up with a good idea which is also practical and likely to occur.
I was never that hardcore, but I loved playing with the stuff that came with 4.5; that's where I learned a ton of stuff that eventually developed my interest in computers in general.
I don't know how close this is in functionality to ncd, but you might check out wcd .
Microsoft has had a looooong-standing relationship with Symantec, going back to the days of the Norton Utilities (Peter Norton was a big pusher of MS products back in 1985/86). What makes this so funny is that slashdotters could have predicted this. How?
Because...Microsoft screws over EVERYBODY who has any business dealings with them.
Not surprising, as I understand it, ReactOS uses WINE to handle win32 calls, so any problems with WINE are definately going to show up in ReactOS. Both projects, of course, are still considered 'alpha' software (dispite the fact there are a number of commercial forks of WINE).
The FAT filesystem made its debut in August 1980 with the first version of Tim Paterson's QDOS, the ancestor of Microsoft's PC-DOS and MS-DOS; it was the main difference between QDOS and CP/M, of which QDOS was otherwise mostly a clone.
Interestingly, the filesystem idea was taken from how the stand-alone version of Microsoft BASIC had been managing diskettes since 1976. In May 1979, a year before deciding to write QDOS, Tim Paterson helped Microsoft's Bob O'Rear to port their language onto the new 8086 hardware his company was about to put on the market.
I have used reactos, and I can tell you it's still quite a long ways from being ready to use as a power user's day-to-day desktop; forget someone who is migrating from windows.
They've made some great strides, no doubt about it; but it's still alpha software. My advice is to wait a couple of years.
Someone who owns a house an hour's drive away from where they work (such as people who work in Phoenix and live in the outlying suburbs) can't realistically either give up driving, give up their homes or take transit (in many outlying cities there is no transit. And this situation is more common than you might think.
The combination of high feul prices and people buying newly built homes far from where they work is a pretty common mix here in Arizona; and I don't think Az is alone in it. I think it will be interesting to see how this effects the housing boom.
So, does he throw fifty dollar bills to the crowd during this silloquy or does he throw hundreds? and after he's made his speech does he don a red suit and ride off into the night sky on a sleigh pulled by raindeer?
Any time you want to drop the fan boy fantasies and join the rest of us here on Terra Firma you're more than welcome to do so.;)
Close. Not 'when will it be', but rather 'what is it going to take to get there'. I'm afraid one of the other posters nailed the answer: as long as there's 'something' on TV (cops, survivor, rasslin'; whatever), things will remain just as they are.
...then 99 out of 100 americans are going to believe it. And what that means is that with FOX solidly opposing it, the adoption of Open Source and Free Software is doomed in America. Time to get your visas, folks.
Redhat is the target OS of most corporations (as I pointed out), this is the advantage that Redhat has over OpenBSD. Any worthwhile features that this develops will eventually trickle down to the niche distros such as slackware and gentoo; so this initiative is a Good Thing.
As far as stealing users from windows; So Freaking What? The important thing is that people discover there are alternatives to using Windows and hopefully also discover the advantages of Free Software along the way.
Major corporations (such as oracle) target Linux; specifically RedHat. With RedHat, you gain all of the applications that already work with Linux plus security enhancements. With OpenBSD, even though they have a decent amount of applications, they have nowhere near the variety that Linux has, so that gives Redhat an edge.
Slashdot Mirror
Why actually; I don't buy magazines; for pretty much that reason. In 1994 I realised that most magazines on the shelf have very little substance to their articles, are 2/3rds filled with ads and cost (at the time) $3.50 to $5 each. Not to mention the fact that the usual story layouts around that point became really bad (this got worse a few years later when they started making ads which blended in with the story to deliberately cause confusion).
I don't mind some advertising, but the amount and intrusiveness of modern advertising is obnoxious enough that I do avoid buying magazines and I have had to take the time to figure out adblock and flashblock.
I never said they were not serious; I said that taking on those specific (and additional) expenditure would be like them throwing money down a well. To put it more diplomatically (and precisely as well): we cannot count on IBM taking up the slack just because they have deep pockets. Their sponsorship has been limited to things which directly benefit (or, in the SCO case, effect) them.
Someone else brought up the example of what happened to the XFree86 project. While I'm not sure how much corporate sponsorship Xorg gets, I think that it's a bit like playing the lottery. It's nice, but it's not something quit your job for before you know you've won.
The OSS community has allowed Red Hat to sponsor several key pieces of Linux infrastructure; that's a fact. We cannot simply blow them off or dismiss them as 'needing us more than we need you'. (though, on the bright side, there isn't too much that Red Hat works on which would hold back the progress of BSD).
That's flat-out asinine. I never said they created it; but they are the ones who are currently the primary maintainers and developers of gcc (and a shitload of other OSS infrastructure as well).
Being able to is not the same as being inclined to; and I seriously doubt that Novell or IBM would be willing to expend the resources and effort that it would take to match Red Hat's current contributions to those OSS projects.
For Redhat, it's the core of their Business Model; for IBM, (an OSS expendature that intense) would be throwing money down a well.
OT Question: when the hell did IBM become the 'good guys' anyways? Does no one remember the reasons that they were so reviled through the 70's, 80's and 90's? Why are they now treated to uncritically?
WRONG.
Look at how many FOSS pies Red Hat has their fingers in (gcc and the kernel are two that immediately spring to mind; I know there's quite a few more. Don't they also sponsor glibc development too?).
If Redhat stopped sponsoring the OSS projects they do, gcc alone would grind to a halt, and a good number of other projects would be impaired as well.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.
Because with one or two exceptions, boycotts never fucking work; that's why.
Particularly in this case; the people who need to join the boycott (jane and joe six pack, the artists) either don't give half a rats' ass or have damned good reasons not to.
Indeed; and I can just imagine google -a publicly traded company with shareholders to answer to- is chomping at the bit to deny itself of the revenue that it would be throwing away by playing petty power games with the RIAA. Of course, Yahoo's record when it comes to standing up for what's right (particularly in china) is also exemplary.
Wake me up when someone comes up with a good idea which is also practical and likely to occur.
I was never that hardcore, but I loved playing with the stuff that came with 4.5; that's where I learned a ton of stuff that eventually developed my interest in computers in general.
I don't know how close this is in functionality to ncd, but you might check out wcd .
Microsoft has had a looooong-standing relationship with Symantec, going back to the days of the Norton Utilities (Peter Norton was a big pusher of MS products back in 1985/86). What makes this so funny is that slashdotters could have predicted this. How?
Because...Microsoft screws over EVERYBODY who has any business dealings with them.
Everybody
Not surprising, as I understand it, ReactOS uses WINE to handle win32 calls, so any problems with WINE are definately going to show up in ReactOS. Both projects, of course, are still considered 'alpha' software (dispite the fact there are a number of commercial forks of WINE).
I have used reactos, and I can tell you it's still quite a long ways from being ready to use as a power user's day-to-day desktop; forget someone who is migrating from windows.
They've made some great strides, no doubt about it; but it's still alpha software. My advice is to wait a couple of years.
Also, there's Ghastly's Ghastly Comic [DNSFW] which was inspired by Sexy Losers.
Where are you getting those numbers from? Link, please?
Someone who owns a house an hour's drive away from where they work (such as people who work in Phoenix and live in the outlying suburbs) can't realistically either give up driving, give up their homes or take transit (in many outlying cities there is no transit. And this situation is more common than you might think.
The combination of high feul prices and people buying newly built homes far from where they work is a pretty common mix here in Arizona; and I don't think Az is alone in it. I think it will be interesting to see how this effects the housing boom.
What would be the right 'road' to go down? (assuming that because of job or where you live cutting out driving altogether is unrealistic).
So, does he throw fifty dollar bills to the crowd during this silloquy or does he throw hundreds? and after he's made his speech does he don a red suit and ride off into the night sky on a sleigh pulled by raindeer?
;)
Any time you want to drop the fan boy fantasies and join the rest of us here on Terra Firma you're more than welcome to do so.
of course.
Close. Not 'when will it be', but rather 'what is it going to take to get there'. I'm afraid one of the other posters nailed the answer: as long as there's 'something' on TV (cops, survivor, rasslin'; whatever), things will remain just as they are.
What is it going to take to get people to be so pissed off they're motivated to make the changes necessary to get our rights back?
...then 99 out of 100 americans are going to believe it. And what that means is that with FOX solidly opposing it, the adoption of Open Source and Free Software is doomed in America. Time to get your visas, folks.
Wait. Are you saying we have any left?!?!?
Redhat is the target OS of most corporations (as I pointed out), this is the advantage that Redhat has over OpenBSD. Any worthwhile features that this develops will eventually trickle down to the niche distros such as slackware and gentoo; so this initiative is a Good Thing.
As far as stealing users from windows; So Freaking What? The important thing is that people discover there are alternatives to using Windows and hopefully also discover the advantages of Free Software along the way.
Major corporations (such as oracle) target Linux; specifically RedHat. With RedHat, you gain all of the applications that already work with Linux plus security enhancements. With OpenBSD, even though they have a decent amount of applications, they have nowhere near the variety that Linux has, so that gives Redhat an edge.