And its not like ram and cpu cycles are something we ever fully tap out anymore, any extra ram or resources is sitting not being used by anything most likely.
It HAS a standard WM. KDE.If people want to use Gnome, as long as its enough like Windows, its standard. Windows is standard, copy Windows and you have a standard WM. If you want a standard WM, use Gnome or KDE. There you go.
Theres no reason why there can only be ONE standard WM. 2 is better because they compete. 2 is not going to confuse people, because people once had the choice to pick from IE or Netscape.
But enlightenment, has tons of good features, Its very fast, its very stable, Its my favorite.
WMaker has nice features too, but when it comes to usability thats a completely diffrent story. Dont forget the ability to totally customize your interface, nothing compares to E. E even supports the latest features of Xrender, really I think E is cool.
KDE is ok but its too much like Windows.
Gnome is another Windows clone, just not as fancy as KDE.
All of these slim WMs are good for 486s, but on a 1ghz CPU, or even my 400mhz cpu, speed really isnt the issue because its fast enough. Then it comes down to which interface has the most features, and is the easiest to use.
You should be getting paid to write software period, not to sell products. You are a programmer not a salesmen, so what if people share your software, someone is needed to write it in the first place right? Charge people a fee for the service.
You can get paid without selling a product, you just may not become a billionare.
When your parents cook food for you. Are they giving you their food? Or are they sharing it with you?
When you make money and give some of it to someone else, you are SHARING that money.
Bits are like money, not like items. An idea is not an item, you can never run out of it, its like sharing water in the ocean and having to worry about getting arrested for it. And Microsoft tries to sell water in the ocean.
No. Thats the ten commandments. The Laws were made to promote a strong economy and control the people, keep the people in line, organized etc.
The political process is blocking us out, why do you think with almost 100 million people using napster, they couldnt stop a few thousand rich CEOs in the RIAA?
The law is setup based on whoever has the most money.
Exactly I mean if the software was $30, something everyone could afford I'd believe them. But when its $500 and its not worth $500, I'd sooner develop my own photoshop AKA gimp before paying for that.
I am not saying people who make software should not get paid, but when you share something, you already paid for it. Its not like someone broke into the factory and stole the software before it was even sold then sold it on the black market.
That would be morally wrong because its taking profits away from Microsoft.
However, when you buy something and you share it with a friend, you arent taking profits away from Microsoft, your friend obviously doesnt have the money to buy it himself, you are sharing with your friend.
Perhaps if software were cheaper, as in under $30, people would pirate less. Really though, when I have the option to pay $500 or download it from a friend whos rich, what do you think i'll do huh? Especially since i dont have $500.
You see, what Microsoft is trying to do, is on a boat, trying to sell water. Then claim other pirate boats are stealing their water when all the other boats are doing is getting water from the same resources Microsoft is, from the ocean.
So you have a situation where, Microsoft wants to profit on programmers as much as possible, and people try to share, Microsoft snaps at them and says they own it all.
You didnt "TAKE" the software away from anyone or anything. Its still there!!!!
What you did is COPIED it. So stealing doesnt apply unless you "TAKE"
COpying is like taking a pen and paper, seeing a picture on the wall, and copying it. Now you have a copy of that picture.
While yes its illegal to sell your copy of the picture, it shouldnt be illegal to make a copy of it for personal use EVEN if you didnt own the picture.
If you can copy something, then you should be able to own your copy of it.
The LAW is not about whats right. The Law is about the economy and what we know works.
We know capitalism works. We know businesses make alot of money by selling what is essentially free.
However, this is all about the economy, and rich CEOs making billions of dollars off of us. It doesnt really help the people, it helps just a few rich CEOs have a few more million dollars.
So the question is, what is more important? Would the economy survive if it changed? Absolutely. Would CEOs be as rich as they are today? Definately not.
So CEOs dont want to make more average wages, they want to be billionares, and this is only possible if you sell overpriced software for $500.
Its not like developers get paid billions, no, some CEOs and guys in suits do.
Same with the RIAA, So its not about right or wrong, its a matter of, should we be getting this money? or should some rich guys in suits be getting this money?
Developers and Musicians wont be getting this money either way.
This is FILE SHARING. You can listen to propoganda by rich elite CEO types who want to manipulate your mind by calling you a theif, a pirate, and all kinds of other words to make you feel like a criminal. But really what you are doing is sharing whats yours.
You see, information once released has no owner, you can try to restrict who has access to it, but its not the type of thing that can ever truely be controlled, its impossible.
Corperations know this, but they just want to maximize profits.
When you take a file that you in theory should own but are really renting, you copy it, and give it to a friend. Nothing has been taken away from anyone so its not stealing. No one has been robbed, You still have your software. The only diffrence now is your friend has it too.
You decided to SHARE your software.
Theres no stealing going on here.
A pirate is a person who sees a boat, and literally takes everything useful from the boat, and adds it to their own. That is stealing.
But if a pirate went to another boat, sat down and looked at everything, and built exact copies of it on their own boat afterwards. This is sharing.
When boats were made, were there laws saying "You cannot copy our boat, if you do you are a pirate and we will kill you"
No, Pirates had the same boat technology that they copied from everyone else, everyone shared information. Its been like this for thousands of years until recently.
Now if you share information you go to jail, not because its wrong because sharing helps many people, you go to jail because some rich CEO wont be able to buy a new card or another house.
So WE benifit from sharing at the cost of RICH CEOs.
According to most peoples morals, sharing is a GOOD thing. Right? In fact its promoted.
Now the law says, Sharing is BAD. So you have a situation where some people follow their morals, and some people follow the law.
People who are patriotic, who will die / kill to protect the law (you know, like police, marines, etc) they follow the law at all times even if the law isnt all that moral.
Some people however, would die/kill to protect their morals. Alot of people believe sharing is whats right.
These two sides are fighting, if they keep it up it could start an entire revolution here. People have options, chance the law so the law fits everyone (I dont know if thats possible) or arrest one of these groups of people.
It seems the patriotic capitalist types have more power (through money) than the people who wish to follow the moral code of sharing, however the people who wish to share outnumber the people who wish to follow the law.
You have a bad situation. Because you cannot stop the people, but the people with money have alot of power and will harrass the people.
What developer do you know who actually earns a living developing by themselves?
And if you do, whos going to pirate your software? People pirate stuff like photoshop and 3d studio max because theres an insane pricetag. People dont have to pirate your software which costs $5. I'd pay $5 for some good software but i sure as hell am not going to pay $500. So this has no effect on the small people, its big companies who overcharge and then claim pirates all would have had $500 to buy their over priced software.
Theres a diffrence between right and wrong. Its WRONG to steal. However its RIGHT to share. Piracy is right, but its illegal.
I know everyone here may be confused by what I said, but honestly sharing is supposed to be a good thing, its RIGHT to share software with your friend whos too poor to buy it. So to stop piracy, bringing up moral issues just makes people support piracy MORE!
The only way to stop Piracy is to raid all pirates, and thats too expensive. So you have a situation where, People are going to pirate software, the best thing you can do is make it so its easier to buy software from a store, than to pirate it off the net (huge long download, or buy it from a store) and there shouldnt be $500 software because no one in their right mind will buy it. IF software were $10-$20 then I'm sure most people would buy software like most people buy games. But when software like photoshop is $500, and you NEED photoshop, well, you are going to sit for 3 days downloading a 500+ meg ISO before paying $500.
IT comes down to this, make money off of convience, not off of the product itself, its easier for me to go to a store and buy a CD, than to download it, burn it, etc etc. I'd pay to have it all done for me. I'll pay $10 and if its really good software, maybe $20, even $30, but theres no way I'm paying over $50 for any software nevermind $500.
To stop piracy, lower prices, and offer good enough deals so that its easier to buy than to pirate.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is expensive. People want cheap. Think cheap not diffrent.
Taiwan makes their own stuff and sells it to their own. A global economy just cant work
it could be running from windows
Ok now why the hell did you post that msg on slashdot!!!!! 5000 people and you've just raised the odds by putting it on slashdot?!?!?!?!?!
Ok well I'm not happy about that because now theres almost no chance of me winning.
Interesting!
Some have photographic memories and some dont. These statistics you talk about dont take everything into account.
And its not like ram and cpu cycles are something we ever fully tap out anymore, any extra ram or resources is sitting not being used by anything most likely.
It HAS a standard WM. KDE.If people want to use Gnome, as long as its enough like Windows, its standard. Windows is standard, copy Windows and you have a standard WM. If you want a standard WM, use Gnome or KDE. There you go.
Theres no reason why there can only be ONE standard WM. 2 is better because they compete. 2 is not going to confuse people, because people once had the choice to pick from IE or Netscape.
KDE isnt all that quick thats why i dont use it.
But enlightenment, has tons of good features, Its very fast, its very stable, Its my favorite.
WMaker has nice features too, but when it comes to usability thats a completely diffrent story. Dont forget the ability to totally customize your interface, nothing compares to E. E even supports the latest features of Xrender, really I think E is cool.
KDE is ok but its too much like Windows.
Gnome is another Windows clone, just not as fancy as KDE.
All of these slim WMs are good for 486s, but on a 1ghz CPU, or even my 400mhz cpu, speed really isnt the issue because its fast enough. Then it comes down to which interface has the most features, and is the easiest to use.
Because they are kids. They cant pay for it so its either get free software or have none.
Then we wouldnt need rich CEOs, and mega corperations, we'd just have small groups of programmers working in small teams getting all the money.
Which in my opinion is how it should be, we dont need a middleman.
You should be getting paid to write software period, not to sell products. You are a programmer not a salesmen, so what if people share your software, someone is needed to write it in the first place right? Charge people a fee for the service.
You can get paid without selling a product, you just may not become a billionare.
When your parents cook food for you. Are they giving you their food? Or are they sharing it with you?
When you make money and give some of it to someone else, you are SHARING that money.
Bits are like money, not like items. An idea is not an item, you can never run out of it, its like sharing water in the ocean and having to worry about getting arrested for it. And Microsoft tries to sell water in the ocean.
No. Thats the ten commandments. The Laws were made to promote a strong economy and control the people, keep the people in line, organized etc.
The political process is blocking us out, why do you think with almost 100 million people using napster, they couldnt stop a few thousand rich CEOs in the RIAA?
The law is setup based on whoever has the most money.
If you give something and now you dont have it, hows that any diffrent than your friend stealing it?
Ok, copying is more like taking a sandwitch and breaking it in half. Or sharing your wealth with others.
Thats sharing.
Exactly I mean if the software was $30, something everyone could afford I'd believe them. But when its $500 and its not worth $500, I'd sooner develop my own photoshop AKA gimp before paying for that.
Once you release information you have no control
I am not saying people who make software should not get paid, but when you share something, you already paid for it. Its not like someone broke into the factory and stole the software before it was even sold then sold it on the black market.
That would be morally wrong because its taking profits away from Microsoft.
However, when you buy something and you share it with a friend, you arent taking profits away from Microsoft, your friend obviously doesnt have the money to buy it himself, you are sharing with your friend.
Perhaps if software were cheaper, as in under $30, people would pirate less. Really though, when I have the option to pay $500 or download it from a friend whos rich, what do you think i'll do huh? Especially since i dont have $500.
You see, what Microsoft is trying to do, is on a boat, trying to sell water. Then claim other pirate boats are stealing their water when all the other boats are doing is getting water from the same resources Microsoft is, from the ocean.
So you have a situation where, Microsoft wants to profit on programmers as much as possible, and people try to share, Microsoft snaps at them and says they own it all.
Thats wrong in my opinion.
You didnt "TAKE" the software away from anyone or anything. Its still there!!!!
What you did is COPIED it. So stealing doesnt apply unless you "TAKE"
COpying is like taking a pen and paper, seeing a picture on the wall, and copying it. Now you have a copy of that picture.
While yes its illegal to sell your copy of the picture, it shouldnt be illegal to make a copy of it for personal use EVEN if you didnt own the picture.
If you can copy something, then you should be able to own your copy of it.
The LAW is not about whats right. The Law is about the economy and what we know works.
We know capitalism works. We know businesses make alot of money by selling what is essentially free.
However, this is all about the economy, and rich CEOs making billions of dollars off of us. It doesnt really help the people, it helps just a few rich CEOs have a few more million dollars.
So the question is, what is more important? Would the economy survive if it changed? Absolutely. Would CEOs be as rich as they are today? Definately not.
So CEOs dont want to make more average wages, they want to be billionares, and this is only possible if you sell overpriced software for $500.
Its not like developers get paid billions, no, some CEOs and guys in suits do.
Same with the RIAA, So its not about right or wrong, its a matter of, should we be getting this money? or should some rich guys in suits be getting this money?
Developers and Musicians wont be getting this money either way.
This is FILE SHARING. You can listen to propoganda by rich elite CEO types who want to manipulate your mind by calling you a theif, a pirate, and all kinds of other words to make you feel like a criminal. But really what you are doing is sharing whats yours.
You see, information once released has no owner, you can try to restrict who has access to it, but its not the type of thing that can ever truely be controlled, its impossible.
Corperations know this, but they just want to maximize profits.
When you take a file that you in theory should own but are really renting, you copy it, and give it to a friend. Nothing has been taken away from anyone so its not stealing. No one has been robbed, You still have your software. The only diffrence now is your friend has it too.
You decided to SHARE your software.
Theres no stealing going on here.
A pirate is a person who sees a boat, and literally takes everything useful from the boat, and adds it to their own. That is stealing.
But if a pirate went to another boat, sat down and looked at everything, and built exact copies of it on their own boat afterwards. This is sharing.
When boats were made, were there laws saying "You cannot copy our boat, if you do you are a pirate and we will kill you"
No, Pirates had the same boat technology that they copied from everyone else, everyone shared information. Its been like this for thousands of years until recently.
Now if you share information you go to jail, not because its wrong because sharing helps many people, you go to jail because some rich CEO wont be able to buy a new card or another house.
So WE benifit from sharing at the cost of RICH CEOs.
According to most peoples morals, sharing is a GOOD thing. Right? In fact its promoted.
Now the law says, Sharing is BAD. So you have a situation where some people follow their morals, and some people follow the law.
People who are patriotic, who will die / kill to protect the law (you know, like police, marines, etc) they follow the law at all times even if the law isnt all that moral.
Some people however, would die/kill to protect their morals. Alot of people believe sharing is whats right.
These two sides are fighting, if they keep it up it could start an entire revolution here. People have options, chance the law so the law fits everyone (I dont know if thats possible) or arrest one of these groups of people.
It seems the patriotic capitalist types have more power (through money) than the people who wish to follow the moral code of sharing, however the people who wish to share outnumber the people who wish to follow the law.
You have a bad situation. Because you cannot stop the people, but the people with money have alot of power and will harrass the people.
But whats right, may not be the same as whats legal.
The law says Piracy is illegal. Do you want to follow the law? or your morals?
Alot of people would rather die than lose their morals, and alot of people would kill to protect the law.
What you have is, the moral person vs the patriot capitalist.
What developer do you know who actually earns a living developing by themselves?
And if you do, whos going to pirate your software? People pirate stuff like photoshop and 3d studio max because theres an insane pricetag. People dont have to pirate your software which costs $5. I'd pay $5 for some good software but i sure as hell am not going to pay $500. So this has no effect on the small people, its big companies who overcharge and then claim pirates all would have had $500 to buy their over priced software.
Theres a diffrence between right and wrong. Its WRONG to steal. However its RIGHT to share. Piracy is right, but its illegal.
I know everyone here may be confused by what I said, but honestly sharing is supposed to be a good thing, its RIGHT to share software with your friend whos too poor to buy it. So to stop piracy, bringing up moral issues just makes people support piracy MORE!
The only way to stop Piracy is to raid all pirates, and thats too expensive. So you have a situation where, People are going to pirate software, the best thing you can do is make it so its easier to buy software from a store, than to pirate it off the net (huge long download, or buy it from a store) and there shouldnt be $500 software because no one in their right mind will buy it. IF software were $10-$20 then I'm sure most people would buy software like most people buy games. But when software like photoshop is $500, and you NEED photoshop, well, you are going to sit for 3 days downloading a 500+ meg ISO before paying $500.
IT comes down to this, make money off of convience, not off of the product itself, its easier for me to go to a store and buy a CD, than to download it, burn it, etc etc. I'd pay to have it all done for me. I'll pay $10 and if its really good software, maybe $20, even $30, but theres no way I'm paying over $50 for any software nevermind $500.
To stop piracy, lower prices, and offer good enough deals so that its easier to buy than to pirate.