It's laziness, not lack of education
on
BSA IDC FUD
·
· Score: 1
The news.com.com.com story is quoting and summarizing, but not stating any inferred conclusions (or the fact that the study gives no conclusions). It's the laziness of the article's author, I believe, not a lack of understanding that makes it appear he/she agrees. I think the article's just trying to get the facts out without disagreeing with anyone about anything.
My current moust pointer is posessed... but then all my coworkers find the same problem in Windows 2000. Sometimes it moves north by itself, sometimes west. Everyone here seems to just accept it. One coworker freaked when he saw my pointer move east by itself. Apparently that was just crazy.
Let's hope they don't do the same kind of remake as Godzilla. I agree: keep it in the 1930's, much more respectable and appropriate. They should keep that old-fashioned adventurous feeling to it with graphics to make it look real, not take over the show.
Hardware and CPU cycles for servers cost a lot of money. Purposefully burning cycles without actually performing any work will cost the OE customer money.
Frankly, I don't care if MS made my mail program go slower
Are you kidding? Since when does speed and cost not matter? You obviously don't run OE for a big company or you should be fired just for saying that.
That's the supposed goal of Microsoft's Penny Black Project which had a story earlier on/. The idea is to require a small amount of money for each e-mail sent. I don't think I want this to be a requirement that Microsoft implements.
I find that strictly complying with the deployment descriptor standards works perfectly for JBoss. Using the deploy tool from Sun's J2EE SDK everything I've written works perfectly on JBoss. I can't speak for any other servers, but I'm guessing they may add extensions which their developer tools add to the deployment descriptors. As you say, for non-freshman who know better sticking to the standard works.
JBoss is continually downloaded on a massive scale. It's also a very active project. It's obviously being used a lot out there. I'm guessing a lot of people get it to try out J2EE and see what the standard can do for them, then when it comes time to create a production system they go to a vendor like BEA or IBM.
I only used JBoss, nothing from any commercial vendor. I have to agree with its quick adoption of new J2EE features. It's also got a great design. Coding for what you might call an extension, though, shouldn't be such a problem. The core itself is relatively small, and every "service" is plugged into it according to standards. So using those other "services" that are written by the JBoss team should be portable to other serves because those services can go along with it. JBoss's database services, for example, should be able to run on other platforms that conform to the standard. I code strictly to the J2EE standards and I've never found a problem with JBoss's compliance.
All employees of publicly traded companies must inform the company of every stock trade they make. Mutual funds are excluded from the trade list. The SEC requires this to (in theory) prevent insider trading. So the company does know what they own, but executives aren't using this information to judge CIO decisions. (FYI - I'm a software developer at a publicly traded investment firm.)
I agree. I just want to add that the trend's been here for a while, it's just now hitting a larger mass of people and multiple industries. Manufacturing (textiles) has been moving overseas for over a decade. NAFTA helped speed this up with Mexico. Now that mass amounts of our industrial work is done overseas it's moving into more diverse fields, like telephone support and software development. The more expensive we make it to do business here, and the more we lock employers into taking care of employees for their lifetime (unions), the more companies will look overseas.
I use only NT, 2k, and XP because of work. I assume you're referring to 95, 98, and ME because the "workstation" Windows' won't boot to DOS. So they can not be removed from all versions of Windows (at least not with your method).
Again, it's because there's basically no commercial competition to the window manager, GDI, DirectX, scheduler, ODBC subsystem, and file systems. There was competition for web browsers and media players. It was the way they handled those particlar applications (and others) that got them in trouble. Blending other software into the OS monopoly in order to undercut competition is the abuse of monopoly.
It was the initial bundling which causes the problem. The fact that they came as the defaults and at first could not be changed from being the defaults that get them in trouble. At the time of the abuse of monopoly, you could not change the default web browser or media player. Today it's trivial, earlier it wasn't.
The calculator and command prompt can be uninstalled. The Start button itself is not an application, so I won't comment on that. But Explorer, which provides the start button and desktop can be replaced. IE and the Media Player, however, can not be uninstalled. What's next is anything that is integrated which can not be uninstalled yet has competition.
There are many jobs in the NY metro area. What don't you understand about the correlation of immoral practices by Microsoft and being a developer on Windows? Developing software for Windows at my company supports their use of the OS. Using their products means supporting their actions. If I'm against their actions I must not support them by using or developing for their products. And if my moral obligations are more important than money then I'm not at all a moron for quitting.
I'm considering quitting my current job, without another one lined up, because I have a moral dilemma (seriously) developing with Microsoft's products. I feel support of their products is support of their actions, some of which I consider immoral. I was just given my first.NET project to work on, but I'm quickly looking for something elsewhere with Linux or Unix. As a last resort I might just quit within a few weeks and look for something while living off savings for 6 months.
If you've got an open position for a linux developer in the NY metro area, please contact me.
That's a very good point for a few reasons. When MS releases security fixes, it's often included in "service packs." Those service packs have both general bug fixes and security fixes, possibly in the same DLLs. So one consideration they would have to make is releasing security fixes separately from other updates to the DLL, so an older insecure version could be overwritten. The other problem is how will the system know that the secure DLL must overwrite the insecure version. It could be built in, just not detailed in the news article. Maybe they would break their own rules and release security fixes without updating the version number. That's the easy way around it I guess. In fact, maybe this would promote use of updated DLLs without updated version numbers by vendors, just to get around it for whatever reason. It's a complicated issue that could make things far worse or far better in the end.
"It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM," the suit said.
I can't speak for its validity, but it's an interesting claim. They seem to be saying linux couldn't have grown up so fast in the last few years without their patents which are over a decade old (AFAIK). It couldn't be only because there is such a large community and many great new ideas coming into play recently, at least at the enterprise level they're referring to. We know their argument is almost definitely bogus, but I wonder how it'll play out in court.
If Microsoft radically changes how things work for developers--and if it isn't for the better, just different--then developers are going be thrown into a turmoil and have hard choices to make.
They already did this with.NET. My company, for example, immediately chose to terminate all future VB development and move to.NET. What they ignored were complaints from some of us that it's a huge paradigm shift, basically the same as it would have been going from VB to Java, but no one listened. The head tech guy reads ".NET is great!" from MS's web sites, forces everyone in the company to go to it, and now they're realizing what a huge change they're being forced to make.
But the moral of the story is that even though it's a huge shift, they did it anyway. When MS says "jump," many people ask "how high, Bill?"
I just started the site MS Versus for exactly this purpose. I've put in some opinionated artlces, but I'm trying to include as many direct facts as possible. Everyone feel free to log in and contribute!
Blatent shameless plug: I just added a link to this linuxworld article from my new site - MS Versus. I'm putting together a very broad comparison, covering as many bases as possible, of MS and alternatives. Contributions are welcome.
Slashdot Mirror
The news.com.com.com story is quoting and summarizing, but not stating any inferred conclusions (or the fact that the study gives no conclusions). It's the laziness of the article's author, I believe, not a lack of understanding that makes it appear he/she agrees. I think the article's just trying to get the facts out without disagreeing with anyone about anything.
My current moust pointer is posessed... but then all my coworkers find the same problem in Windows 2000. Sometimes it moves north by itself, sometimes west. Everyone here seems to just accept it. One coworker freaked when he saw my pointer move east by itself. Apparently that was just crazy.
Let's hope they don't do the same kind of remake as Godzilla. I agree: keep it in the 1930's, much more respectable and appropriate. They should keep that old-fashioned adventurous feeling to it with graphics to make it look real, not take over the show.
"safe havens" for criminals
Us non-criminals can't have a safe haven either? Thanks.
It's also a hardship for sending one e-mail to all 10,000 of my employees.
Hardware and CPU cycles for servers cost a lot of money. Purposefully burning cycles without actually performing any work will cost the OE customer money.
Frankly, I don't care if MS made my mail program go slower
Are you kidding? Since when does speed and cost not matter? You obviously don't run OE for a big company or you should be fired just for saying that.
That's the supposed goal of Microsoft's Penny Black Project which had a story earlier on /. The idea is to require a small amount of money for each e-mail sent. I don't think I want this to be a requirement that Microsoft implements.
I find that strictly complying with the deployment descriptor standards works perfectly for JBoss. Using the deploy tool from Sun's J2EE SDK everything I've written works perfectly on JBoss. I can't speak for any other servers, but I'm guessing they may add extensions which their developer tools add to the deployment descriptors. As you say, for non-freshman who know better sticking to the standard works.
JBoss is continually downloaded on a massive scale. It's also a very active project. It's obviously being used a lot out there. I'm guessing a lot of people get it to try out J2EE and see what the standard can do for them, then when it comes time to create a production system they go to a vendor like BEA or IBM.
I only used JBoss, nothing from any commercial vendor. I have to agree with its quick adoption of new J2EE features. It's also got a great design. Coding for what you might call an extension, though, shouldn't be such a problem. The core itself is relatively small, and every "service" is plugged into it according to standards. So using those other "services" that are written by the JBoss team should be portable to other serves because those services can go along with it. JBoss's database services, for example, should be able to run on other platforms that conform to the standard. I code strictly to the J2EE standards and I've never found a problem with JBoss's compliance.
1 picture plus 1 lawsuit
All employees of publicly traded companies must inform the company of every stock trade they make. Mutual funds are excluded from the trade list. The SEC requires this to (in theory) prevent insider trading. So the company does know what they own, but executives aren't using this information to judge CIO decisions. (FYI - I'm a software developer at a publicly traded investment firm.)
I agree. I just want to add that the trend's been here for a while, it's just now hitting a larger mass of people and multiple industries. Manufacturing (textiles) has been moving overseas for over a decade. NAFTA helped speed this up with Mexico. Now that mass amounts of our industrial work is done overseas it's moving into more diverse fields, like telephone support and software development. The more expensive we make it to do business here, and the more we lock employers into taking care of employees for their lifetime (unions), the more companies will look overseas.
I use only NT, 2k, and XP because of work. I assume you're referring to 95, 98, and ME because the "workstation" Windows' won't boot to DOS. So they can not be removed from all versions of Windows (at least not with your method).
Again, it's because there's basically no commercial competition to the window manager, GDI, DirectX, scheduler, ODBC subsystem, and file systems. There was competition for web browsers and media players. It was the way they handled those particlar applications (and others) that got them in trouble. Blending other software into the OS monopoly in order to undercut competition is the abuse of monopoly.
It was the initial bundling which causes the problem. The fact that they came as the defaults and at first could not be changed from being the defaults that get them in trouble. At the time of the abuse of monopoly, you could not change the default web browser or media player. Today it's trivial, earlier it wasn't.
The calculator and command prompt can be uninstalled. The Start button itself is not an application, so I won't comment on that. But Explorer, which provides the start button and desktop can be replaced. IE and the Media Player, however, can not be uninstalled. What's next is anything that is integrated which can not be uninstalled yet has competition.
The political and other non-technical aspects of this are covered in The Future Of Ideas by Lawrence Lessig. Good read.
There are many jobs in the NY metro area. What don't you understand about the correlation of immoral practices by Microsoft and being a developer on Windows? Developing software for Windows at my company supports their use of the OS. Using their products means supporting their actions. If I'm against their actions I must not support them by using or developing for their products. And if my moral obligations are more important than money then I'm not at all a moron for quitting.
I'm considering quitting my current job, without another one lined up, because I have a moral dilemma (seriously) developing with Microsoft's products. I feel support of their products is support of their actions, some of which I consider immoral. I was just given my first .NET project to work on, but I'm quickly looking for something elsewhere with Linux or Unix. As a last resort I might just quit within a few weeks and look for something while living off savings for 6 months.
If you've got an open position for a linux developer in the NY metro area, please contact me.
That's a very good point for a few reasons. When MS releases security fixes, it's often included in "service packs." Those service packs have both general bug fixes and security fixes, possibly in the same DLLs. So one consideration they would have to make is releasing security fixes separately from other updates to the DLL, so an older insecure version could be overwritten. The other problem is how will the system know that the secure DLL must overwrite the insecure version. It could be built in, just not detailed in the news article. Maybe they would break their own rules and release security fixes without updating the version number. That's the easy way around it I guess. In fact, maybe this would promote use of updated DLLs without updated version numbers by vendors, just to get around it for whatever reason. It's a complicated issue that could make things far worse or far better in the end.
"It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM," the suit said.
I can't speak for its validity, but it's an interesting claim. They seem to be saying linux couldn't have grown up so fast in the last few years without their patents which are over a decade old (AFAIK). It couldn't be only because there is such a large community and many great new ideas coming into play recently, at least at the enterprise level they're referring to. We know their argument is almost definitely bogus, but I wonder how it'll play out in court.
If Microsoft radically changes how things work for developers--and if it isn't for the better, just different--then developers are going be thrown into a turmoil and have hard choices to make.
.NET. My company, for example, immediately chose to terminate all future VB development and move to .NET. What they ignored were complaints from some of us that it's a huge paradigm shift, basically the same as it would have been going from VB to Java, but no one listened. The head tech guy reads ".NET is great!" from MS's web sites, forces everyone in the company to go to it, and now they're realizing what a huge change they're being forced to make.
They already did this with
But the moral of the story is that even though it's a huge shift, they did it anyway. When MS says "jump," many people ask "how high, Bill?"
I just started the site MS Versus for exactly this purpose. I've put in some opinionated artlces, but I'm trying to include as many direct facts as possible. Everyone feel free to log in and contribute!
Blatent shameless plug: I just added a link to this linuxworld article from my new site - MS Versus. I'm putting together a very broad comparison, covering as many bases as possible, of MS and alternatives. Contributions are welcome.