I don't agree with the "piracy boosts sales" theory regarding Windows. Yes, this might have been true in the past. These days, with all the OEM bundling MS manages to achieve, they don't need piracy anymore. For Windows anyway.
Not only that. Biofuels can be produced on each and every country. How many ecological accidents we had in the past 5 years during oil transport ?
It is very easy to take only a piece of the information to prove ANY theory. Unless a study takes every single aspect into account, it is by definition biased. Oh wait ! An oil related study that is biased ? I'm socked.
And it is exactly this kind of thing (not reading before replying) that makes people think slashdot readers are zealots.
Lemme translate it for you, since you seem unable to understand what I wrote.
I never said the GUI makes no difference. Specially considering how many different WMs exist for Linux. My point is, no matter what GUI you choose, or how easy you make it, it will always be more difficult for a Windows user to use Linux than continue using Windows, because IT IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT than what he is used to.
Yes, GUI improvements are very much welcome. Migrating from Windows to Linux can be mad easier than it is today (much easier). But it will NEVER be easier than staying with Windows.
Can the GUI be "improved" to a point where it will be worth the EFFORT of migrating ? Yes, I believe it can. I also believe we are not there yet. But, again, it will never be easier than staying with whatever OS you are used to.
You mean a "web hosting reselling company", right ? Because from what I noticed on your site, you guys are a GoDaddy reseller.
Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with being a reseller. Many resellers provide better support and additional services than the hosting company. But please lets call things by their correct names.
back. Dial-up pretty much was forced away from a per hour rate to a flat $20 fee for unlimited. And the whole industry was moved to a $15-$25 price point.
This is not a good example, since dial-up usage doesn't scale very much. You only have 24 hours/day, and your bandwidth is no more than 56k.
So, you see, if your average user stays connected 3 hours/day, the heavy user will only use 8x time amount. Now, if you consider broadband and your average users transfer 2GB/month, a heavy user will easily transfer 400GB/month. Thats 200 times more. And according to a quick calculation here (could be wrong), it is theoretically possible for a user to use 1.3TB/month on a 4Mbps connection (note: actually bandwidth usage, including protocol overhead etc).
If you consider webhosting, things get even worst. An average user will store 500MB, and transfer 2GB/month (if that). While a heavy user can easily reach 500GB and transfer 2TB/month. In both cases, 1000 times more (or 1024, if you like).
Your answer is a good one, and an argument I heard often.
The flaw in your thinking is that you are only trying to find Linux versions of Windows softwares. But you will also have difficult finding Windows versions of many Linux/Unix softwares. Yes, I know about Cygwin and others, but that is just like telling people to use Wine.
One more point you make is about the time needed to get a Linux workstation up and running. I agree that is true for many of the favorite Linux distributions here on slashdot, but not always true. I have a few clients that use RedHat Enterprise, and the time it takes for them to get a RHEL computer up and running is about the same they take to get a Windows computer up and running.
You do have a point that for the applications (usually pirated) that Joe Sixpack uses are not always so easy to get on Linux (Corel and Photoshop). But them I have to ask what a person that works with Corel and Photoshop all the time want for a Linux computer. They already picked the software, so their options is not limited by the security, capabilities or easy to use of a given OS. They are limited by the OSs supported by the software itself.
This all falls a little off the "easy to use" discussion, like comparing apples and oranges. Lets take a comparative scenario. A Windows and a Linux workstation, both running OpenOffice. Which will be easier to use ? For me, Linux. For most people, Windows, because that is what they are used to.
What is your base for calling that false ? How many people do you know who have been using Linux/Unix (exclusively) for 10+ years, and tried to start using Windows to do the same things they did on Linux ? I have 2 people like that on the same room right now, and they all complained about not being able difficulties.
I always get amazed by this constant discussion of which one is easier to use. The answer for me is and has always been obvious: whichever you are used to.
For a long time Windows user, Linux is just as hard as Windows is for a long time Linux/Unix user.
This has nothing to do with GUI, TUI or whatever. I'm sure most people forgotten, but when "regular/average" users started migrating from DOS to Windows they found it very difficult and confusing.
Doing something different from what you are used to is ALWAYS more difficult. Get over it.
I consider myself a competent paranoia GM due to my own personality. I'm not a great GM, and of those I only ever met 2, and it was a real treat to be killed by them, errr I mean, play with them.
But it is not only good GMs that are hard to find. It is hard to find good paranoia players too. I'm sure you know what I mean. The kind of person that will not start crying when his PC is killed (for the 6th time), but who also won't just do stupid things because he doesn't care about the PC.
Maybe that is why Paranoia is not so popular. It is hard to be a paranoia GM, and it is also "hard" to be a paranoia player. On the other hand, playing those "rules-mongrel" RPGs is much easier, and maybe this is why WotC focus so much on rules: it makes for better sales figures.
If you think Aftermath is bad, try MERP one of these days.
I for one think Paranoia is one of the best systems, since the "knowing the rules is treason" pretty much covers the GM so he can do whatever he likes.
Microsoft really can't stand being second to anybody in any field...
Ok, I'm as much as a Microsoft hater as the next/. guy, but c'mon. Microsoft is second (or 3rd) to a lot of other companies on a lot of fields.
The point here is that Microsoft is (correctly) worried about fighting a war on 2 fronts. This is Marketing 101. It is actually cheaper for Microsoft to buy one of them, and to try and fight both.
MS buying Yahoo will be bad for us all. As was said before, it reduces competition and the pressure for improving. However, it would be very good for Microsoft, if they can buy it, and if they can make it work which, based on the past, I'm not sure they can.
Since I have used a Nokia 6230 (USB and BT) and also a E62 to connect my Linux notebook to the internet (using GPRS/EDGE), I don't see why you can't connect your N95 to do the same.
As another commenter pointed out, you can't use the design and form-factor of a harmless device when packaging an extremely dangerous device, because you will confuse and possibly harm people unintentionally.
There is a new fad around criminals in my country that is called "flash kidnapping" (loose translation). They grab you, put a gun in your head, and drive you around to several ATM machines.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't agree with the "piracy boosts sales" theory regarding Windows.
Yes, this might have been true in the past. These days, with all the OEM bundling MS manages to achieve, they don't need piracy anymore. For Windows anyway.
Actually, you are correct. They will not convict you of piracy: they will convict you for violating the DMCA. Well, if you live in the USA anyway.
Not only that. Biofuels can be produced on each and every country. How many ecological accidents we had in the past 5 years during oil transport ?
It is very easy to take only a piece of the information to prove ANY theory. Unless a study takes every single aspect into account, it is by definition biased. Oh wait ! An oil related study that is biased ? I'm socked.
And it is exactly this kind of thing (not reading before replying) that makes people think slashdot readers are zealots.
Lemme translate it for you, since you seem unable to understand what I wrote.
I never said the GUI makes no difference. Specially considering how many different WMs exist for Linux. My point is, no matter what GUI you choose, or how easy you make it, it will always be more difficult for a Windows user to use Linux than continue using Windows, because IT IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT than what he is used to.
Yes, GUI improvements are very much welcome. Migrating from Windows to Linux can be mad easier than it is today (much easier). But it will NEVER be easier than staying with Windows.
Can the GUI be "improved" to a point where it will be worth the EFFORT of migrating ? Yes, I believe it can. I also believe we are not there yet. But, again, it will never be easier than staying with whatever OS you are used to.
As if we needed yet another reason to have a firewall on our networks.
You mean a "web hosting reselling company", right ? Because from what I noticed on your site, you guys are a GoDaddy reseller.
Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with being a reseller. Many resellers provide better support and additional services than the hosting company. But please lets call things by their correct names.
This is not a good example, since dial-up usage doesn't scale very much. You only have 24 hours/day, and your bandwidth is no more than 56k.
So, you see, if your average user stays connected 3 hours/day, the heavy user will only use 8x time amount. Now, if you consider broadband and your average users transfer 2GB/month, a heavy user will easily transfer 400GB/month. Thats 200 times more. And according to a quick calculation here (could be wrong), it is theoretically possible for a user to use 1.3TB/month on a 4Mbps connection (note: actually bandwidth usage, including protocol overhead etc).
If you consider webhosting, things get even worst. An average user will store 500MB, and transfer 2GB/month (if that). While a heavy user can easily reach 500GB and transfer 2TB/month. In both cases, 1000 times more (or 1024, if you like).
Unlimited can easily become a real nightmare.
Depends who is trying. For me, it would be much easier on Linux. For someone who has used Windows all his life, Windows would be easier.
Your answer is a good one, and an argument I heard often.
The flaw in your thinking is that you are only trying to find Linux versions of Windows softwares. But you will also have difficult finding Windows versions of many Linux/Unix softwares. Yes, I know about Cygwin and others, but that is just like telling people to use Wine.
One more point you make is about the time needed to get a Linux workstation up and running. I agree that is true for many of the favorite Linux distributions here on slashdot, but not always true. I have a few clients that use RedHat Enterprise, and the time it takes for them to get a RHEL computer up and running is about the same they take to get a Windows computer up and running.
You do have a point that for the applications (usually pirated) that Joe Sixpack uses are not always so easy to get on Linux (Corel and Photoshop). But them I have to ask what a person that works with Corel and Photoshop all the time want for a Linux computer. They already picked the software, so their options is not limited by the security, capabilities or easy to use of a given OS. They are limited by the OSs supported by the software itself.
This all falls a little off the "easy to use" discussion, like comparing apples and oranges. Lets take a comparative scenario. A Windows and a Linux workstation, both running OpenOffice. Which will be easier to use ? For me, Linux. For most people, Windows, because that is what they are used to.
What is your base for calling that false ? How many people do you know who have been using Linux/Unix (exclusively) for 10+ years, and tried to start using Windows to do the same things they did on Linux ? I have 2 people like that on the same room right now, and they all complained about not being able difficulties.
I always get amazed by this constant discussion of which one is easier to use. The answer for me is and has always been obvious: whichever you are used to.
For a long time Windows user, Linux is just as hard as Windows is for a long time Linux/Unix user.
This has nothing to do with GUI, TUI or whatever. I'm sure most people forgotten, but when "regular/average" users started migrating from DOS to Windows they found it very difficult and confusing.
Doing something different from what you are used to is ALWAYS more difficult. Get over it.
I hear you.
I consider myself a competent paranoia GM due to my own personality. I'm not a great GM, and of those I only ever met 2, and it was a real treat to be killed by them, errr I mean, play with them.
But it is not only good GMs that are hard to find. It is hard to find good paranoia players too. I'm sure you know what I mean. The kind of person that will not start crying when his PC is killed (for the 6th time), but who also won't just do stupid things because he doesn't care about the PC.
Maybe that is why Paranoia is not so popular. It is hard to be a paranoia GM, and it is also "hard" to be a paranoia player. On the other hand, playing those "rules-mongrel" RPGs is much easier, and maybe this is why WotC focus so much on rules: it makes for better sales figures.
Do you mind ? We are entitled to all the gloating we can get out of this.
If you think Aftermath is bad, try MERP one of these days.
I for one think Paranoia is one of the best systems, since the "knowing the rules is treason" pretty much covers the GM so he can do whatever he likes.
Ok, I'm as much as a Microsoft hater as the next
The point here is that Microsoft is (correctly) worried about fighting a war on 2 fronts. This is Marketing 101. It is actually cheaper for Microsoft to buy one of them, and to try and fight both.
MS buying Yahoo will be bad for us all. As was said before, it reduces competition and the pressure for improving. However, it would be very good for Microsoft, if they can buy it, and if they can make it work which, based on the past, I'm not sure they can.
Obrigatory UserFriendly reference
There is probably some study that people are more likely to watch the ads (commercials?) if they are alone or in small groups.
The is the only reason I can think of for the NFL to try this kind of maneuver, since Super Ball is all about advertising.
Why ? Aren't "greygoo" and "predprey" good enough ?
If you are using the USB cable (much more complicated, I don't recommend), check http://www.gnokii.org/.
If you are using bluetooth (much more simple), take a look at http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/How_to_setup_Bluetooth.
These places should get you started. You might still need to configure something on your phone, but the real tricks are on the above addresses.
Or a sledgehammer.
Since I have used a Nokia 6230 (USB and BT) and also a E62 to connect my Linux notebook to the internet (using GPRS/EDGE), I don't see why you can't connect your N95 to do the same.
Humm, please correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't getting rid of domain tasting pretty much stops NSI from doing this front running scheme ?
Unintentionally ? Since when ?
Please remember that, in latin (original, archaic, whatever), a V sounds like an U for us moderns geeks.
So try:
VIRINE NON SUMUS DEVO SUMUS
That could be translated to something like "Are we not men? We are Devo."
I'm not an expert on latin, but the phrasing does look weird to me.
There is a new fad around criminals in my country that is called "flash kidnapping" (loose translation). They grab you, put a gun in your head, and drive you around to several ATM machines.