Now all the guys sitting on stockpiles of plutonium will just shrug with a confused look, not knowing what to do with it anymore. Seriously, who exactly are they trying to stop here?
That sounds a bit far fetched. I think it's rather for PR reasons -- computer enthusiasts may not be a majority of Windows users, but they're hardly few to be neglected and might have made even more noise if the license was kept as-is.
I'd recommend against going on about these "corporate versions" as that will just confuse people into believing they work like the infamous Windows XP "Corporate Editions" (which is often warez-speak to refer to the Volume License Key edition of Windows XP Professional). The reasons for this nitpicking of mine are:
- Windows Vista won't share Windows XP's Volume Licensing model. In Vista, instead of VLK's, there are MAK's and the difference is not just in the name. - There'll be a Windows Vista Business Edition and a Windows Vista Enterprise Edition and these have quite varying features.
So "business aka corporate version" isn't really telling much about what version you're talking about.
I'm not sure which of their three shared source licenses it's released under, but it should be one or more (sometimes they dual-license stuff, as with the Windows Template Library) of the three listed here. I think the article just called them "shared source" so I can't tell from that one anyway.
Seriously, I'm sure this may not be under exactly a GPL license but rather a MS derivative. Nevertheless it can prove very useful for a large number of embedded device developers. Heck, I've been more impressed by developing for their late Windows CE operating systems than doing the same for Windows XP.:-P Windows CE 6 seem to be an OS that can truly do a heck of a lot of things for the hardware it's running on, and I'll be damned if it isn't a more impressive craftmanship than Vista...
And imagine the taxes in a couple of decades if nothing would be done about it, if the situation worsen according to the studies. With increased costs to society, there will be increased costs to the individual, as the society is founded upon them.
I agree and I have to wonder why Slashdot has this recent flux of Second Life news. I don't really known anyone who use and like it. Compared to World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, and the likes, it's nothing.
- Reason 1 is largely subjective and not an "issue" IMO. I don't think it's worse for example. The icons clearly tell what they do and are simple in their designs, often also kept similar to the Firefox 1.x counterparts to ease the transition. There are no signs that Firefox 3.0 will improve on this matter either; designers generally don't revert UI's. Firefox 2.0 supports skins for those who want something else.
- Reason 2: "potentially cause privacy risks"? Tell me again when it's proven they can and/or they do, and not when it's just speculation. Is it even speculation based on the behavior of the anti-phishing system or just fearmongering?
- Reason 3: Subjective and depends on a user's definition of "important". Could be related to failure to adapt to UI improvements, what do I know. I still find what I'm looking for there easily. This feels like a complaint from the same kind of people that still prefer to use the Mozilla Suite. Keep using the Firefox 1.5 then, but don't expect anything here to radically be reverted in Firefox 3.0. I still don't get why the article summary speaks of waiting for Firefox 3.0 like it's the coming Messiah.
- Reason 4: Yes, as usual with new large releases. This will most likely happen with Firefox 3.0. It was a "deal breaker" with Firefox 1.5 too; just get over it already.
- Reason 5: Point to where the memory leaks of hundreds of MB's or whatever is in the code and we'll talk. Maybe it's just the author not understanding how memory de/allocation, page caching, and e.g. Task Manager reports memory work. Firefox 3.0 is supposed to be more memory conservative, and maybe fix "leaks", but leaks aren't the primary cause of this problem. Firefox 2.0 has many actual leaks fixed over 1.5.
- Reason 6-8: These are among the few complaints I feel is warranted, as it could relate to actual regressions.
IE 7 isn't a mandatory update -- not yet at least.
That makes these statistics pretty interesting, because when these statistics were collected, neither IE 6 nor Firefox 1.x had either of their respective update services (Windows vs Firefox's update-on-launch thing) active, so the results shouldn't have been skewed. The only skewing I can see is that Firefox's users are generally more technically minded and more likely to care for their browser to be updated.
Your quote calls Wikipedia "open source", not a kind of "communal Maoism".
You believe the most successful FOSS project are ran in a different way than Wikipedia.
I don't see how these two makes Wikipedia not be able to be called an open source project, and I'm sure most are talking about the Wikipedia GFDL license when talking of Wikipedia as a resource. In my opinion, there is no requirement of a project's "success" or how "self-selected" groups have powers to ban accounts to make a project "open source". The former is project management politics, the latter is the content license.
One problem that I've seen happen even in previous featured articles (voted as the best of the best on Wikepedia) is a sort of quality rot where a good article is slowly having nonsense, bias, or unsourced material added to it over time. Not quickly enough in one big edit that people have their alarms trigger, but slowly, perhaps making it look like it's new material that'll get fixed up better in time, only that it isn't. The average quality of the article starts to worse and at one point the article is even voted to have a cancelled featured article status with a preview showing it was shorter, more condensed, lacking some new information, but more to the point and having a higher average quality before.
So even if some professor or other expert on a subject would edit an article, people on its Talk page would agree it's great addition, perhaps thanking the user, that's far from a guarantee the material will have its quality preserved in the future, and not due to vandals, but due to average people without as much of a clue but trying to do good, sometimes missing out on sources etc, editing the article to have a worsened quality.
As Wikipedia is now maturing in many articles and it's less and less about creating articles for notable subjects compared to before, I think this is starting to be a new growing problem Wikipedia will face. Not the threat of vandals (Wikipedia is on the other hand increasingly efficient against those now with bots having a very high ratio of accurate vandal reverts, semi-protections etc), but the threat of their average user. With articles having an increasingly better quality, this is a logical problem to follow too; there are less and less people around the world that will be able to maintain an article's quality, but still want to contribute.
Agreed; they're mostly going for extreme sounding things, not after how "yucky" things can be. There are plenty of regular jobs that doesn't sound too fun to me, just take a doctor doing prostate exams on random middle-aged men for example.
Yeah, that's what I thought too, but it's still a bit confusing as IE 7 is a downloadable standalone product like any other from their FTP servers. If you install IE 7 on Windows XP, you can even uninstall it if you wish. Hardly inseparable, and they don't even try to make it look like it really.
I agree. Why are Slashdot folks, and why is IT in general, so negative and pessimistic? What happened to the great American "can do" attitude and the entrepreneurial spirit that made Silicon Valley so great? Do you think the attitude and values you display today improve upon the innovation of the past or anchor down progress and keep the status quo?
Paranoia, pessimism, and social anxiety are all common traits among geeks and there's probably some fancy psychological explanation behind it. It's also a common hurdle for them in getting girls. Others than similarly minded rarely like any of these traits in their partner.
This translator wouldn't help in written communication, and perhaps not even over telephone due to the crappy input quality. So the severe limitations that would imply in at least business relations would be so bad that you'd still need to know the language.
This could be nice for the occasional trips to other countries or if you have some friends/relatives in another country where you for that sake don't want to learn their language. But in both these cases, you usually don't know their language today either and just try with your English (regardless if having that as your native language or not).
Slashdot Mirror
No, but they are no signs that has been presented that they alone are setting off the balance.
Now all the guys sitting on stockpiles of plutonium will just shrug with a confused look, not knowing what to do with it anymore.
Seriously, who exactly are they trying to stop here?
That sounds a bit far fetched. I think it's rather for PR reasons -- computer enthusiasts may not be a majority of Windows users, but they're hardly few to be neglected and might have made even more noise if the license was kept as-is.
I'd recommend against going on about these "corporate versions" as that will just confuse people into believing they work like the infamous Windows XP "Corporate Editions" (which is often warez-speak to refer to the Volume License Key edition of Windows XP Professional). The reasons for this nitpicking of mine are:
- Windows Vista won't share Windows XP's Volume Licensing model. In Vista, instead of VLK's, there are MAK's and the difference is not just in the name.
- There'll be a Windows Vista Business Edition and a Windows Vista Enterprise Edition and these have quite varying features.
So "business aka corporate version" isn't really telling much about what version you're talking about.
I'll have to start recommending this solution of yours that never has any problems.
I'm not sure which of their three shared source licenses it's released under, but it should be one or more (sometimes they dual-license stuff, as with the Windows Template Library) of the three listed here. I think the article just called them "shared source" so I can't tell from that one anyway.
Seriously, I'm sure this may not be under exactly a GPL license but rather a MS derivative. Nevertheless it can prove very useful for a large number of embedded device developers. Heck, I've been more impressed by developing for their late Windows CE operating systems than doing the same for Windows XP. :-P Windows CE 6 seem to be an OS that can truly do a heck of a lot of things for the hardware it's running on, and I'll be damned if it isn't a more impressive craftmanship than Vista...
If Lego become any more expensive than they already are due to this, they could just as well start making these bricks in solid gold. :-p
Umm... With the current situation including that in Iraq, how so?
Yes, he has done a lot of work trying to combat terrorrism, but was he successful?
What is the current terrorist threat to the US, and how has the liberty laws in US changed since GWB gained his power?
And imagine the taxes in a couple of decades if nothing would be done about it, if the situation worsen according to the studies.
With increased costs to society, there will be increased costs to the individual, as the society is founded upon them.
I agree and I have to wonder why Slashdot has this recent flux of Second Life news. I don't really known anyone who use and like it. Compared to World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, and the likes, it's nothing.
- Reason 1 is largely subjective and not an "issue" IMO. I don't think it's worse for example. The icons clearly tell what they do and are simple in their designs, often also kept similar to the Firefox 1.x counterparts to ease the transition. There are no signs that Firefox 3.0 will improve on this matter either; designers generally don't revert UI's. Firefox 2.0 supports skins for those who want something else.
- Reason 2: "potentially cause privacy risks"? Tell me again when it's proven they can and/or they do, and not when it's just speculation. Is it even speculation based on the behavior of the anti-phishing system or just fearmongering?
- Reason 3: Subjective and depends on a user's definition of "important". Could be related to failure to adapt to UI improvements, what do I know. I still find what I'm looking for there easily. This feels like a complaint from the same kind of people that still prefer to use the Mozilla Suite. Keep using the Firefox 1.5 then, but don't expect anything here to radically be reverted in Firefox 3.0. I still don't get why the article summary speaks of waiting for Firefox 3.0 like it's the coming Messiah.
- Reason 4: Yes, as usual with new large releases. This will most likely happen with Firefox 3.0. It was a "deal breaker" with Firefox 1.5 too; just get over it already.
- Reason 5: Point to where the memory leaks of hundreds of MB's or whatever is in the code and we'll talk. Maybe it's just the author not understanding how memory de/allocation, page caching, and e.g. Task Manager reports memory work. Firefox 3.0 is supposed to be more memory conservative, and maybe fix "leaks", but leaks aren't the primary cause of this problem. Firefox 2.0 has many actual leaks fixed over 1.5.
- Reason 6-8: These are among the few complaints I feel is warranted, as it could relate to actual regressions.
- Reason 9: How did it worsen?
IE 7 isn't a mandatory update -- not yet at least.
That makes these statistics pretty interesting, because when these statistics were collected, neither IE 6 nor Firefox 1.x had either of their respective update services (Windows vs Firefox's update-on-launch thing) active, so the results shouldn't have been skewed. The only skewing I can see is that Firefox's users are generally more technically minded and more likely to care for their browser to be updated.
Your quote calls Wikipedia "open source", not a kind of "communal Maoism".
You believe the most successful FOSS project are ran in a different way than Wikipedia.
I don't see how these two makes Wikipedia not be able to be called an open source project, and I'm sure most are talking about the Wikipedia GFDL license when talking of Wikipedia as a resource. In my opinion, there is no requirement of a project's "success" or how "self-selected" groups have powers to ban accounts to make a project "open source". The former is project management politics, the latter is the content license.
One problem that I've seen happen even in previous featured articles (voted as the best of the best on Wikepedia) is a sort of quality rot where a good article is slowly having nonsense, bias, or unsourced material added to it over time. Not quickly enough in one big edit that people have their alarms trigger, but slowly, perhaps making it look like it's new material that'll get fixed up better in time, only that it isn't. The average quality of the article starts to worse and at one point the article is even voted to have a cancelled featured article status with a preview showing it was shorter, more condensed, lacking some new information, but more to the point and having a higher average quality before.
So even if some professor or other expert on a subject would edit an article, people on its Talk page would agree it's great addition, perhaps thanking the user, that's far from a guarantee the material will have its quality preserved in the future, and not due to vandals, but due to average people without as much of a clue but trying to do good, sometimes missing out on sources etc, editing the article to have a worsened quality.
As Wikipedia is now maturing in many articles and it's less and less about creating articles for notable subjects compared to before, I think this is starting to be a new growing problem Wikipedia will face. Not the threat of vandals (Wikipedia is on the other hand increasingly efficient against those now with bots having a very high ratio of accurate vandal reverts, semi-protections etc), but the threat of their average user. With articles having an increasingly better quality, this is a logical problem to follow too; there are less and less people around the world that will be able to maintain an article's quality, but still want to contribute.
Here she's sitting between two other geeks that looks to be slightly confused by the situation:_ Small.jpg
http://www.prabu.us/wp-content/Fabio_Joanna_prabu
Please don't confuse the leftmost man named Fabio there with the model of the same name.
Agreed; they're mostly going for extreme sounding things, not after how "yucky" things can be. There are plenty of regular jobs that doesn't sound too fun to me, just take a doctor doing prostate exams on random middle-aged men for example.
Yeah, that's what I thought too, but it's still a bit confusing as IE 7 is a downloadable standalone product like any other from their FTP servers. If you install IE 7 on Windows XP, you can even uninstall it if you wish. Hardly inseparable, and they don't even try to make it look like it really.
Seems like someone blew their cover this time. And here we all thought it was Microsoft...
A lot of security fixes released over the years.
I agree. Why are Slashdot folks, and why is IT in general, so negative and pessimistic? What happened to the great American "can do" attitude and the entrepreneurial spirit that made Silicon Valley so great? Do you think the attitude and values you display today improve upon the innovation of the past or anchor down progress and keep the status quo?
Paranoia, pessimism, and social anxiety are all common traits among geeks and there's probably some fancy psychological explanation behind it. It's also a common hurdle for them in getting girls. Others than similarly minded rarely like any of these traits in their partner.
This translator wouldn't help in written communication, and perhaps not even over telephone due to the crappy input quality. So the severe limitations that would imply in at least business relations would be so bad that you'd still need to know the language.
This could be nice for the occasional trips to other countries or if you have some friends/relatives in another country where you for that sake don't want to learn their language. But in both these cases, you usually don't know their language today either and just try with your English (regardless if having that as your native language or not).
Well, it do give you pretty good bragging rights over the fools on NASA doing Earth-Mars communications! (latency = ~3 minutes)
Sorry, but I don't understand that comment? :-/
Living in the future compared to which modernized country exactly?
Which European country has 70% income taxes!?
30% of my income goes to taxes, and I thought Sweden was having among, if not the highest in the world.