Those bastards at Microsoft! How dare they offer good support for your language (Hebrew) when it is unavailable in the operating system that you want to use. This is just another example of their slimy, underhanded tactics of delivering features that customers want.
Living like this is very hard, and I keep asking myself if maybe I should just give up and be 'one of the crowd'?"
You act like there is some glorious advantage to using a non-Windows OS for reading e-mail and viewing web pages. There is not. If you told me that you were running an ISP, I would caution you against a Windows solution, but for desktop use, BeOS, Linux, BSD, and other alternative operating systems are a pain.
The reason that so many people have standardized on IE, Outlook, and Word is because they are the best in class. I have used Opera 5, Netscape 6, Mozilla, and a handful of other alternative browsers and, frankly, they just don't work as well. Same thing with word processors. Word is the standard because it is the best. StarOffice, Software602, and others are good efforts, but are not up to the quality of Word. I'm not an apologist for Microsoft. I use Windows and curse it on a daily basis. I just haven't found anything better as a desktop OS (and I've tried Solaris 7, BeOS 4.5 and 5, Linux, and FreeBSD).
A typical FTP server does not need a 1.2ghz CPU yet, due to the it's-so-cheap-why-not factor, that is what is being installed far too often. The ghz range CPUs suck power compared to their lower-speed brethren. Another frequent "why not" is RAM. It's cheap, so why not put 512MB in an FTP server? Power consumption comes to mind as one reason. Do servers really need 64MB GeForce 2 3d video accelerators? Usually not, but these power hungry cards are showing up more and more frequently.
Finally, there is simple corporate stupidity at work. There are frequently computer rooms that are cooled by AC -- even in the winter, while surrounding offices are being heated. In many cases, simple ventilation would do wonders to reduce energy usage by allowing the computers to heat the surrounding offices.
I think that it is far too easy to pin the blame on the Internet, but I would like to see some numbers. If we want to save electrical energy, I vote for turning off the lights on Interstate highways and on freeways. Cars have headlights and, an an amateur astronomer, I don't need any more light pollution.
Fair use includes the right to make a tape copy of a DVD so that you can watch it in the bedroom. It includes the right to watch the movie on any player you have, whether a DVD deck, a Windows machine with WinDVD, or a Linux machine with a DeCSS-derived player. It includes the right to make a lower-quality copy on a CDR to take over to your friend's house to play on his PC.
Fair use, as you point out, gives me the right to make a backup copy. But I can also make as many as I want -- so long as I do not resell or otherwise redistribute them. If I want to back it up to hard disk, that's my business and DeCSS gives me that capability.
The problem with corporate entities deciding what I can and cannot copy is that they don't have my interests at heart nor are they interested in protecting my rights. They like the idea of forcing people to buy a DVD and a VHS tape of the same movie to watch in two rooms. They want to make me buy a CD for home use and a cassette for use in my Jeep. And, by preventing me from copying anything, they can insure that I buy them again if I ever damage the copies I have.
You are an idiot. People do have a constitutional right to "fair use" and that is the core of the argument: The DMCA is unconstitutional because it makes exercising a constitutional right illegal.
Your claims about the validity and legality of shrinkwrap licenses are equally unfounded. Show me a history of court cases that have held shrinkwrap licenses to be binding.
HotPenguin just introduced their new 1.3 cubic foot, 700 watt HotPenguin 7.2 microwave oven. It sports an Intel StrongARM SA-1110 CPU, 16MB of flash which stores the Linux 2.0.38 kernel and applications, 8MB of dynamic RAM, and a 10/100 Ethernet port.
Unlike conventional Microwave ovens, the HotPenguin 7.2 has no keypad and is controlled by commands received through Telnet connections via the Ethernet port. All operations are controlled via the "cook" command and the oven includes a complete man page for the command detailing all options, including power level (30%, 50%, 70%, and 100%), cook start and end time (expressed as seconds since 1/1/1970), and beep frequency, interval, and duration to signal that a cooking event has completed.
The retail price of the HotPenquin 7.2 is $950 and there is currently a two to three month order backlog due to stories that appeared on Slashdot.com and other Linux-related web sites.
I have note experienced the port delays nor have the sites that reviewed it. I wonder if it might be related to some incompatability between your ethernet and SMCs. Unfortunately, ethernet does not always plug and play nicely.
I agree that automatically connecting on failure of the cable/DSL would be nice, but what is "failure"? Timeouts? How many? How long? You get the idea.
I've been requesting that the allow the modem port to be a PPP server so that I could have dial-in access to the net without paying for another ISP. I could retrieve my e-mail, browse my systems, etc. while I am away from home. They say this one is on the list.
SMC has their Barricade router. It has a four-port switch, a WAN ethernet port to connect to a cable modem or DSL, a serial port to connect to a modem (for connection sharing over modem), and a parallel port so that it can act as a print server. It has a firewall, packet forwarding, and can be fully configured with a web-based interface. It costs about $115 USD delivered to your doorstep. Add the cost of an external modem (if you don't have one) and you are right around $200.
So why would I pay almost $500 for one that cannot share anything but a modem and provides no print server? Because it has Linux in it? The SMC might, too, but they are smart enough not to tell that to every hacker that might be looking for an exploit!
It's so convenient to paint things in black and white. Either management are incurably ignorant, hence nothing will save them, or they are devine oracles, and they already know everything. The ignorant are too stupid to learn, the wise already know everything, therefore learning new things is pointless.
The problem with books like these is that I cannot tell at whom they are aimed. Someone who is an experienced software manager is unlikely to need to an all-encompassing book like XP. It is more likely that they will need focused books on individual subjects like configuration management, needs analysis, and so forth. Nor are they written for the neophyte software manager as they contain far too much for a novice to digest.
There's nothing in your reasoning that precludes it from generalising to all fields, and allowing us to reach the absurd conclusion that noone needs to read.
My reasoning is that people need to read books appropriate to their experience and responsibilities.
I can understand the folly of touting a book or methodology as an instant cure-all, but in the high tech industry, dismissing new ideas because you think that you already "know it all" is hardly a recipe for success.
I agree. What I have found be be fairly useless in my reading are books that attempt to reinvent entire software development methodologies rather than hone skills in focused areas.
Is it CPU speed or I/O throughput that's killing you? Is the hard drive grinding away, or is the CPU operating on a copy of the file in RAM?
The problem with code bloat has to do with CPU mhz bloat. As the average CPU speed climbs and RAM increases, Microsoft feels free to use every spare cycle. Tell executives that they can choose a laptop that runs for 2 hours at 800mhz or one that runs for 8 hours at 300mhz and you will find a lot of 300mhz laptops and a lot of pressure on Microsoft to make things responsive on a 300mhz machine.
The management model that is suitable for development of microwave oven firmware is far different than what is appropriate for development of avionics for passenger airplanes.
On what do you base this claim?
21 years of professional, successful embedded systems development and project management experience. On what do you base your claim that I am wrong?
Most embedded systems people I know would go about the two pretty much the same way. Of course, the functional requirements will be radically different, but the process will be very similar.
Please warn me if you ever get involved in avionics or any other form of embedded systems development where the safety of people is involved. The level of peer review, design review, testing, etc. is orders of magnitude different when working with embedded systems that can affect the people's safety. Tools that you might trust for developing a programmable home thermostat would never pass muster for a heart monitor.
XP Explained suggests that if your manager is clueless, you simply adopt the XP methodology without telling him. You are a professional software programmer, aren't you? Do what you need to do to get the job done right.
So, without the approval of management, everyone in the software group should start arranging meetings with the customer to discuss requirements and implementation? This isn't Oz. The software methodology is normally set from above. Besides, I am not about to go out on a limb to implement a utopian methodology that I do not believe in.
If you managers have any understanding of the software development process, they will probably already have a development model in place that is appropriate for your project(s), customer(s), organization, and budget.
This may come as a shock to you, but that's really not the case.
My two decades plus of experience leads me to believe that you are simply wrong. Get some more years of experience under your belt before making blanket statements like that one.
Quality software cannot be forced into existence by policies. It must be created by talented software engineers that understand what the customer's needs are. These one-size-fits-all books are unrealistic in their view of the programming world. The management model that is suitable for development of microwave oven firmware is far different than what is appropriate for development of avionics for passenger airplanes. Sometimes the customer doesn't have a clue as to what he wants or what software can do. In others, the customer is keenly aware of what can, and should, be done. Some customers want to have very little involvement in the process and others want to be involved on a day-to-day basis. There are budgets to consider, also. It does not do any good to create the worlds finest inventory management program if you bankrupt your company in the process.
The conclusion: If you work for clueless managers, sticking books (like the one reviewed here) under their noses is not going to fix the problem. If you managers have any understanding of the software development process, they will probably already have a development model in place that is appropriate for your project(s), customer(s), organization, and budget.
The biggest problem in the PTO is that the examiners are apparently not held accountable for issuing patents that are later overturned. Charge each examiner $1000 for every patent they issue that is later overturned and they will exercise a lot more care before granting the patents.
Here's my idea. Instead of the driver just talking on his cell phone or playing a regular boring old video game, the phones could have an interface to a "game helmet." The game helmet would have dual LCD screens for 3D, a surround sound system, and could have acoustic insulation to block out all external light and noises (e.g., car horns, screeching tires, people screaming, etc.) so the driver would not be distracted from his video game.
By selling imaginary items one acquires in the game, it makes it possible for someone with a lot of disposable income (and not much of a life) to gain an unfair advantage over other, possibly more skilled players. It's Sony's online game community. If they feel that such transactions are cheating, they have a right to stop them. Suppose that ping-flooding the server would give a player an advantage. Would Sony have a right to try to petition the players' ISPs to stop the ping flooding?
I'd like to see Sony countersue and claim that the people buying and selling the imaginary items have reduced the value of Sony's property by creating unfair advantages that reduce the enjoyment of the game for many players, thus cutting back on sales and online participation.
If I thought that any of the people involved in this idiotic lawsuit had any chance of getting laid, I'd be calling for them to be sterilized now before they could breed. Fortunately, that is a non-issue.
P.S. Yes, I know that Verant and "others" were to be named in the suit, but I just mentioned Sony in the interest of brevity.
Tech workers are the first to preach advancements despite anything, but all of a sudden when it's their precious programming jobs that might be threatened, the tune changes!
I don't charge my clients for software development and then wave the free software flag around Slashdot. Many free software advocates are happy to earn a very comfortable living writing software, but they don't want to pay for the software that they rely on. Hypocrites.
Then there is the huge community of freeloaders, many of whom don't even program (is this you?). This is, by far, the largest and most vocal group within the free software movement. They don't write device drivers, applications, kernels, or anything. They just want to download the work of others and not pay for it. Why don't you tell your plumber, accountant, electrician, or mechanic that you want them to work for free?
Since when is free software an 'advancement'? It's not like it has some inherent technical advantage over commercial software. Linux is not capable of some revolutionary thing that can't be done with Solaris, QNX, or even Windows 2000. Comparing open-source software to alternative fuels and factory automation is idiotic. Open source software is not going to save the environment. It won't result in drastic increases in productivity. It's not some great stride forward. In the late '70s, the vast majority of personal computer software was open source and free. It was developed by hobbyists. Then an entire industry grew up that employed millions of people in high-paying jobs. Why should those tech workers push for something that may put them out of work just so that leeches like you can get your software for free?
Re:Stormix down, but not out - read the fine print
on
Stormix Bankruptcy
·
· Score: 2
I know how bankruptcies work and and why they make sense. What bothers me is the terminology of "protecting" the company against the creditors. We have become a country that views bankruptcy as just another form of financial planning. The shame has gone out of filing for bankruptcy. Rather than it being a last-resort, companies hire accountants and attorneys to accelerate the process and maximize the amount
Everyone wants to think of the creditors as being a bunch of rich venture capitalists. In many cases, the creditors are small businesses that have extended credit. They are office supply stores, office furniture stores, mom & pop copier sales companies, electricians, and so forth. They are the ones that need protection.
I have seen how bankruptcies are often handled. The financially-troubled company gets the courts to step in and creditors are paid pennies on the dollar -- while the company executives keep earning 6-figure salaries.
Hurrah! Finally another software engineer with enough economic sense to recognize that he'll need a new profession if all software becomes free! I have no desire to become an installation support phone operator and I think that the Linux model is quickly pushing people in that direction.
Having a closed source model is not inherently bad. In most cases, it is the only way to get the talent you need to create a truly top-quality product. While there are some brilliant people in the Linux community, there are a lot of programmer wannabes who have contributed unreliable, poorly engineered software that seems to become part of every distribution.
Another bogus argument that I hear is that there is a great value to having the source code to the products that your company relies on. One word: bullshit! Companies do not stay profitable by screwing around with open-source software packages. A company is a lot better off having a closed-source software product with vendor support.
Thank you for calling Acme Plumbing Supply. We are sorry, but there is no one to take your call right now because they are all modifying GNUventory, our inventory control software. Please leave you number at the sound of the beep and someone will get back to you -- after the next build.
I did not mean to imply that Stormix was substandard. Having never run it, I would not know. When I said "second tier", I was referring to its share of the market, third-party support and books, press attention and reviews, etc.
Maybe that's part of the problem: There are so many distros that many are not getting the attention that they deserve. That, in and of itself, may point to the need to thin the herd.
Re:Stormix down, but not out - read the fine print
on
Stormix Bankruptcy
·
· Score: 2
They are just seeking protection from their creditors.
What a sick notion. You make it sound like the creditors are evil, greedy attackers rather than the people and institutions that trusted Stormix and loaned them money. What would you think if you lent someone money and they went to court to try to keep from repaying you? Would you view the court as a "protector"?
In the early 1900s, there were dozens, if not hundreds, of U.S. automobile manufacturers. As the market for cars became larger and competition between brands became greater, that number shrunk to the few that we have today. Brands that were weaker because of price, engineering, or marketing, went belly-up. I think that we are seeing the same thing in the Linux distro market. The big players (RedHat, Mandrake, SUSE, etc.) are still solid while the 2nd and 3rd tier distributions are starting to fade away.
While competition in the marketplace is a good thing, confusion is not. A customer deciding which OS to use has two current choices from Microsoft (Me and 2000). If he is a home user, he gets Me and if he is a business user, he gets 2000 (or so says Microsoft). This same customer is faced with a confusing array of Linux distros, each claiming to be the best. SUSE, RedHat, Mandrake, Corel, Caldera, TurboLinux, Debian, Slackware, and Storm Linux all spring to mind. And there are many more. Unfortunately, these distributions are not all compatible with one another. Someone familiar with Mandrake might struggle with Debian, for instance, and not be able to find utilities and applications that he has come to rely on. Installing a sound card on RedHat is not done in the same was as installing one on Caldera. This type of problem frustrates and confuses end users.
While my sympathies go out to the employees and creditors of Stormix, I think that this is a natural solidifying of a market and is a sign that Linux is becoming a mainstream product.
It'll have an impact, all right. I'm sure laughing their asses off at your naivete has really brightened up this rainy day for them.
You are in need of a history lesson. Originally, the predominent PC compression format was the ARC format created by System Enhancement Associates (SEA). Phil Katz (PKWare) released PKARC, which created and manipulated ARC files. He was sued by SEA and, in a settlement, was allowed to release one last version with the ARC format which was called PKPAK. After that, PKWare had to develop its own format for future versions. This lawsuit turned out to be a horrible mistake on SEA's part. PKware placed their new ZIP format in the public domain, and BBS (Bulletin Board System) sysops and users touched off a massive boycott of the ARC format, killing it (and System Enhancement Associates) off.
Slashdot Mirror
Living like this is very hard, and I keep asking myself if maybe I should just give up and be 'one of the crowd'?"
You act like there is some glorious advantage to using a non-Windows OS for reading e-mail and viewing web pages. There is not. If you told me that you were running an ISP, I would caution you against a Windows solution, but for desktop use, BeOS, Linux, BSD, and other alternative operating systems are a pain.
The reason that so many people have standardized on IE, Outlook, and Word is because they are the best in class. I have used Opera 5, Netscape 6, Mozilla, and a handful of other alternative browsers and, frankly, they just don't work as well. Same thing with word processors. Word is the standard because it is the best. StarOffice, Software602, and others are good efforts, but are not up to the quality of Word. I'm not an apologist for Microsoft. I use Windows and curse it on a daily basis. I just haven't found anything better as a desktop OS (and I've tried Solaris 7, BeOS 4.5 and 5, Linux, and FreeBSD).
Finally, there is simple corporate stupidity at work. There are frequently computer rooms that are cooled by AC -- even in the winter, while surrounding offices are being heated. In many cases, simple ventilation would do wonders to reduce energy usage by allowing the computers to heat the surrounding offices.
I think that it is far too easy to pin the blame on the Internet, but I would like to see some numbers. If we want to save electrical energy, I vote for turning off the lights on Interstate highways and on freeways. Cars have headlights and, an an amateur astronomer, I don't need any more light pollution.
Fair use, as you point out, gives me the right to make a backup copy. But I can also make as many as I want -- so long as I do not resell or otherwise redistribute them. If I want to back it up to hard disk, that's my business and DeCSS gives me that capability.
The problem with corporate entities deciding what I can and cannot copy is that they don't have my interests at heart nor are they interested in protecting my rights. They like the idea of forcing people to buy a DVD and a VHS tape of the same movie to watch in two rooms. They want to make me buy a CD for home use and a cassette for use in my Jeep. And, by preventing me from copying anything, they can insure that I buy them again if I ever damage the copies I have.
Your claims about the validity and legality of shrinkwrap licenses are equally unfounded. Show me a history of court cases that have held shrinkwrap licenses to be binding.
Troll.
Unlike conventional Microwave ovens, the HotPenguin 7.2 has no keypad and is controlled by commands received through Telnet connections via the Ethernet port. All operations are controlled via the "cook" command and the oven includes a complete man page for the command detailing all options, including power level (30%, 50%, 70%, and 100%), cook start and end time (expressed as seconds since 1/1/1970), and beep frequency, interval, and duration to signal that a cooking event has completed.
The retail price of the HotPenquin 7.2 is $950 and there is currently a two to three month order backlog due to stories that appeared on Slashdot.com and other Linux-related web sites.
I agree that automatically connecting on failure of the cable/DSL would be nice, but what is "failure"? Timeouts? How many? How long? You get the idea.
I've been requesting that the allow the modem port to be a PPP server so that I could have dial-in access to the net without paying for another ISP. I could retrieve my e-mail, browse my systems, etc. while I am away from home. They say this one is on the list.
So why would I pay almost $500 for one that cannot share anything but a modem and provides no print server? Because it has Linux in it? The SMC might, too, but they are smart enough not to tell that to every hacker that might be looking for an exploit!
The problem with books like these is that I cannot tell at whom they are aimed. Someone who is an experienced software manager is unlikely to need to an all-encompassing book like XP. It is more likely that they will need focused books on individual subjects like configuration management, needs analysis, and so forth. Nor are they written for the neophyte software manager as they contain far too much for a novice to digest.
There's nothing in your reasoning that precludes it from generalising to all fields, and allowing us to reach the absurd conclusion that noone needs to read.
My reasoning is that people need to read books appropriate to their experience and responsibilities.
I can understand the folly of touting a book or methodology as an instant cure-all, but in the high tech industry, dismissing new ideas because you think that you already "know it all" is hardly a recipe for success.
I agree. What I have found be be fairly useless in my reading are books that attempt to reinvent entire software development methodologies rather than hone skills in focused areas.
Peace.
That's what is called an "ad hominem" attack and I have better things to do than get involved in something that is already turning far too personal.
Thank you for responding to my original post and have a good day.
The problem with code bloat has to do with CPU mhz bloat. As the average CPU speed climbs and RAM increases, Microsoft feels free to use every spare cycle. Tell executives that they can choose a laptop that runs for 2 hours at 800mhz or one that runs for 8 hours at 300mhz and you will find a lot of 300mhz laptops and a lot of pressure on Microsoft to make things responsive on a 300mhz machine.
On what do you base this claim?
21 years of professional, successful embedded systems development and project management experience. On what do you base your claim that I am wrong?
Most embedded systems people I know would go about the two pretty much the same way. Of course, the functional requirements will be radically different, but the process will be very similar.
Please warn me if you ever get involved in avionics or any other form of embedded systems development where the safety of people is involved. The level of peer review, design review, testing, etc. is orders of magnitude different when working with embedded systems that can affect the people's safety. Tools that you might trust for developing a programmable home thermostat would never pass muster for a heart monitor.
XP Explained suggests that if your manager is clueless, you simply adopt the XP methodology without telling him. You are a professional software programmer, aren't you? Do what you need to do to get the job done right.
So, without the approval of management, everyone in the software group should start arranging meetings with the customer to discuss requirements and implementation? This isn't Oz. The software methodology is normally set from above. Besides, I am not about to go out on a limb to implement a utopian methodology that I do not believe in.
If you managers have any understanding of the software development process, they will probably already have a development model in place that is appropriate for your project(s), customer(s), organization, and budget.
This may come as a shock to you, but that's really not the case.
My two decades plus of experience leads me to believe that you are simply wrong. Get some more years of experience under your belt before making blanket statements like that one.
The conclusion: If you work for clueless managers, sticking books (like the one reviewed here) under their noses is not going to fix the problem. If you managers have any understanding of the software development process, they will probably already have a development model in place that is appropriate for your project(s), customer(s), organization, and budget.
Oops... Acoustic insulation isn't designed to block out light. That's the problem with trying to post too fast...
I'd like to see Sony countersue and claim that the people buying and selling the imaginary items have reduced the value of Sony's property by creating unfair advantages that reduce the enjoyment of the game for many players, thus cutting back on sales and online participation.
If I thought that any of the people involved in this idiotic lawsuit had any chance of getting laid, I'd be calling for them to be sterilized now before they could breed. Fortunately, that is a non-issue.
P.S. Yes, I know that Verant and "others" were to be named in the suit, but I just mentioned Sony in the interest of brevity.
I don't charge my clients for software development and then wave the free software flag around Slashdot. Many free software advocates are happy to earn a very comfortable living writing software, but they don't want to pay for the software that they rely on. Hypocrites.
Then there is the huge community of freeloaders, many of whom don't even program (is this you?). This is, by far, the largest and most vocal group within the free software movement. They don't write device drivers, applications, kernels, or anything. They just want to download the work of others and not pay for it. Why don't you tell your plumber, accountant, electrician, or mechanic that you want them to work for free?
Since when is free software an 'advancement'? It's not like it has some inherent technical advantage over commercial software. Linux is not capable of some revolutionary thing that can't be done with Solaris, QNX, or even Windows 2000. Comparing open-source software to alternative fuels and factory automation is idiotic. Open source software is not going to save the environment. It won't result in drastic increases in productivity. It's not some great stride forward. In the late '70s, the vast majority of personal computer software was open source and free. It was developed by hobbyists. Then an entire industry grew up that employed millions of people in high-paying jobs. Why should those tech workers push for something that may put them out of work just so that leeches like you can get your software for free?
Everyone wants to think of the creditors as being a bunch of rich venture capitalists. In many cases, the creditors are small businesses that have extended credit. They are office supply stores, office furniture stores, mom & pop copier sales companies, electricians, and so forth. They are the ones that need protection.
I have seen how bankruptcies are often handled. The financially-troubled company gets the courts to step in and creditors are paid pennies on the dollar -- while the company executives keep earning 6-figure salaries.
Having a closed source model is not inherently bad. In most cases, it is the only way to get the talent you need to create a truly top-quality product. While there are some brilliant people in the Linux community, there are a lot of programmer wannabes who have contributed unreliable, poorly engineered software that seems to become part of every distribution.
Another bogus argument that I hear is that there is a great value to having the source code to the products that your company relies on. One word: bullshit! Companies do not stay profitable by screwing around with open-source software packages. A company is a lot better off having a closed-source software product with vendor support.
Thank you for calling Acme Plumbing Supply. We are sorry, but there is no one to take your call right now because they are all modifying GNUventory, our inventory control software. Please leave you number at the sound of the beep and someone will get back to you -- after the next build.
Absurd.
I did not mean to imply that Stormix was substandard. Having never run it, I would not know. When I said "second tier", I was referring to its share of the market, third-party support and books, press attention and reviews, etc.
Maybe that's part of the problem: There are so many distros that many are not getting the attention that they deserve. That, in and of itself, may point to the need to thin the herd.
What a sick notion. You make it sound like the creditors are evil, greedy attackers rather than the people and institutions that trusted Stormix and loaned them money. What would you think if you lent someone money and they went to court to try to keep from repaying you? Would you view the court as a "protector"?
While competition in the marketplace is a good thing, confusion is not. A customer deciding which OS to use has two current choices from Microsoft (Me and 2000). If he is a home user, he gets Me and if he is a business user, he gets 2000 (or so says Microsoft). This same customer is faced with a confusing array of Linux distros, each claiming to be the best. SUSE, RedHat, Mandrake, Corel, Caldera, TurboLinux, Debian, Slackware, and Storm Linux all spring to mind. And there are many more. Unfortunately, these distributions are not all compatible with one another. Someone familiar with Mandrake might struggle with Debian, for instance, and not be able to find utilities and applications that he has come to rely on. Installing a sound card on RedHat is not done in the same was as installing one on Caldera. This type of problem frustrates and confuses end users.
While my sympathies go out to the employees and creditors of Stormix, I think that this is a natural solidifying of a market and is a sign that Linux is becoming a mainstream product.
You are in need of a history lesson. Originally, the predominent PC compression format was the ARC format created by System Enhancement Associates (SEA). Phil Katz (PKWare) released PKARC, which created and manipulated ARC files. He was sued by SEA and, in a settlement, was allowed to release one last version with the ARC format which was called PKPAK. After that, PKWare had to develop its own format for future versions. This lawsuit turned out to be a horrible mistake on SEA's part. PKware placed their new ZIP format in the public domain, and BBS (Bulletin Board System) sysops and users touched off a massive boycott of the ARC format, killing it (and System Enhancement Associates) off.
You don't feel so smug anymore, do you?
I do, and I thank you!
Oh, I really like your anti-spam page. Keep up the good fight!