The key difference is that Verizon is completely rebuilding the infrastructure (and absorbing the capitol costs). It's not already built up. New competition still has access to the existing telco centers to run the lines back to. Verizon is actually selling the much of New England to another, smaller communications company because they do not want to have to run the fiber to rural areas. They would rather that small companies test the profitability and then re-buy it back if it's successful. What's lacking are entrepreneurs with the guts to go broke if enough people do not buy the service.
Or the number of linux users is shrinking as I have paying clients who thought they were going to save money installing Linux dumping it in favor of Windows. I also get the "What about Linux" questions so the awareness is growing but I'm not to sure about the userbase. I think alot more people have played with it though. I wouldn't call them users since they rarely actually use it for anything.
sadly most americans actually think they are supposed to vote for the candidate that panders to their ideas, rather than the candidate that is best representative for their states interests as a whole and the best policy maker. This is what happens when civics classes get dropped from the high school curriculum.
Xandros might not be big player but this move puts them in the same comfort level as Novell. Both versions of linux (regardless of your stand on the patents) are safe from microsoft lawsuits. For commercial purposes, ensuring that the company is worry free is worth something to alot of CIOs. Being able to say "redhat doesn't care if you get sued- use our linux instead" is worth somthing to Novell and Xandros and might be worth something to CIOs. Novell for one isn't selling the "open source" part of linux but the "cheaper than AIX with support" part. Peace of mind is all their customers want. I don't think the problem is Microsoft but software patents and their potential worth. I don't think it will just be Microsoft looking hard at what patents they own are violated by Linux distros.
Nope, version control in general stinks. MS Team foundation server is an attempt to make it easier because Microsoft controls both client and server aspects. I'd say they were marginally successful in making it easier than a seperate version control system. Alot of the problems stem from the fact that version control should be invisible and isn't and many people have different ideas about version control. You mentioned that perforce allowed you to directly make changes to files and later reconcile them. Generally speaking that's a version control nightmare (as it's expected tht you check in and check out copies) and many users do exactly that.
Another thing to think about is that if the FSf ideas are true it means that most corporate lawyers are going to think real hard about allowing any GPLd software into the organization because even if you make an agreement that intends to cover yourself, you can be stuck if the author decides to then change to a viral license like GPL3. Showing folks that they can break your deals by changing license terms seems to be a great way to box your way to irrelevancy. Sun thanks you.
fair enough- if they don't compete with Microsoft then they wouldn't need access to the protocols, since they are only used to connect to microsoft systems.
Free software was in fact the argument used by microsoft to say that there was competition. Free software according to the courts was If you are going to allow that free software is competition (by definition a 0$ cost of entry to the market)then you also have to allow that Microsoft is not a monopolist(there would no longer be the required substantial barrier to effective entry). I think that's how Microsoft is going to game the system. If the EU sets a price, then anything lower than that is, by definition, competitive. If they do not set a price, then microsoft can claim insufficient guidance and stall essentially forever.
I have to agree. There needs to be less focus on syntax and more on methodology. My first introduction to programming was with Karel the robot, a programming tool that uses the pascal syntax but with only 4-5 keywords (If memory serves- pickbeeper, putbeeper,turnleft,move, detectobstruction) with which you learn how to design and debug software. If students understood top down design and the benefits of strong typechecking it really wouldn't matter what language they used since they would have the skills to create quality software. I'm not even concerned with the practicility of the applications created at first since it's the concepts that are getting drowned in syntactic hell
I think that the point of the ACT article is that gpl3 DOES take away your rights. IANAL but in essence it seems to me that GPL3 is trying to make it impossible for anyone that creates GPL3 code to partner with any commercial company. It also seems to say that if I wanted build upon your GPL3d work, I am not allowed protect my intellectual property. It also seems pretty ambiguous, and I think that when GPL3 goes to court (as seems inevitable) it will be decimated becaue of its ambiguity. If GPL3 wants to be successful it needs to remove the nonsense and get back to protecting the 4 freedoms.
You do realize that you've given the number 1 reason that the openoffice format should not be used. If you have to go to back to the application to read the file properly, the "open" format is worthless. I am not saying that the microsoft format is better but at least Word is arguably the number one word processing application and isn't going anywhere soon.
Actually in a democracy it's the voters job to ensure that the government representatives have your best interests in mind. If you live in a "democracy" where the goverment has to do things "in your best interest" it might be in your best interest to start wondering if "democracy" is right for you.
they are considering windows when they take a look at the costs of upgrading the old RS6000 running AIX with a new p5 (and a new version) versus the same (or similar) windows software with similar support. I don't think the adoption rate is huge (unless there is also a staff turnover) but once the x86 hardware is "sold" as a cost saver, it's not a giant leap to consider windows.
This is not true. The consitution was specifically set up not to "grant rights" but to prevent the government from ever being in a position to "grant rights." Sadly this basic civics knowledge isn't even taught anymore. With regard to habeus... "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." Notice that as with most things in the constitution it's what the goverment cannot do. Even sadder is the fact that so many americans think that the goverment is actually supposed to tell you what rights you have.
The difference is that you cna use the same bandwidth for alot more channels since it's a digital signal. If they wanted to add 100 more providers the FCC MIGHT step in. When it's about reducing bandwidth usage, in theory the FCC should be obligated to use the spectrum as optimally as possible, meaning that they should be obligated to say yes to a merger. They should be overseeing the airwaves not ensuring "competition".
It's worse than that. These people think you can put science to a vote (and they think that an actual piece of science is a voting process)! They simply want to shut the "nonscientists"(the ones that actually want you to prove your theory) up. These folks think if they can get a consensus, and really really believe, they can turn off the gravity and fly around the room. Its tough to really, really believe if some jackass keeps telling you that you'll hit the ground when you jump off that chair. If you do hit the ground its gonna be all his fault. What else can be said? Eppur si muove...
Mod parent up. Most of the folks that go to college for a degree of any kind are only going for the check box. Engineering students are no exception. Sadly it's not until graduation that they find out how unprepared they are for a career in the real world. The ones that actually enjoy engineering usually have a job in it before they go to college. Sometimes they even know more than the professors that are teaching the classes. I think that college should be for the academic/thinker types. I don't think that can happen until the high schools start stepping up and getting students prepared for a career rather than how to get into college.
Let me get this straight. After 200+ pages of supporting evidence the conclusion is that it doesn't matter what software they use, government workers are working as slowly as humanly possible? Yup, this is definitely an academic study.
I can see how a thin,portable, paper quality display would be useful. I don't see how trying to come up with a paper replacement is usefull. Of all the recyclable products, paper is the one that is most easily recycled product. I'd rather see work done to come up with a more easily recycled plastic.
I think that the quality of education is exactly what the issue is that the educational establishment simply refuses to discuss. The NEA (et al.) have no interest in raising the educational bar because all of a sudden the failure rates of students would go up and the only one to blame for that would be the teachers. The gradual decline in quality of education is a direct result of attempting to ensure a certain percentage of students always pass, regardless of what knowledge is imparted. If the educational quality was what it was even 30 years ago, the dropout rate would be irrelevant. If after approx. 9 years of quality education you still think it's a good idea to quit, I say bye-bye. 4 more years of education aren't going to change that mind.
Slashdot Mirror
The key difference is that Verizon is completely rebuilding the infrastructure (and absorbing the capitol costs). It's not already built up. New competition still has access to the existing telco centers to run the lines back to. Verizon is actually selling the much of New England to another, smaller communications company because they do not want to have to run the fiber to rural areas. They would rather that small companies test the profitability and then re-buy it back if it's successful. What's lacking are entrepreneurs with the guts to go broke if enough people do not buy the service.
Or the number of linux users is shrinking as I have paying clients who thought they were going to save money installing Linux dumping it in favor of Windows. I also get the "What about Linux" questions so the awareness is growing but I'm not to sure about the userbase. I think alot more people have played with it though. I wouldn't call them users since they rarely actually use it for anything.
Joe's Coalition of Tiny Phone and Internet Startups can now run their own fiber on the same pole however, something that they could not previously do.
Absolutly right which is why this vote was no more than a token since NH IDs already comply with Real ID.
sadly most americans actually think they are supposed to vote for the candidate that panders to their ideas, rather than the candidate that is best representative for their states interests as a whole and the best policy maker. This is what happens when civics classes get dropped from the high school curriculum.
Xandros might not be big player but this move puts them in the same comfort level as Novell. Both versions of linux (regardless of your stand on the patents) are safe from microsoft lawsuits. For commercial purposes, ensuring that the company is worry free is worth something to alot of CIOs. Being able to say "redhat doesn't care if you get sued- use our linux instead" is worth somthing to Novell and Xandros and might be worth something to CIOs. Novell for one isn't selling the "open source" part of linux but the "cheaper than AIX with support" part. Peace of mind is all their customers want. I don't think the problem is Microsoft but software patents and their potential worth. I don't think it will just be Microsoft looking hard at what patents they own are violated by Linux distros.
Nope, version control in general stinks. MS Team foundation server is an attempt to make it easier because Microsoft controls both client and server aspects. I'd say they were marginally successful in making it easier than a seperate version control system. Alot of the problems stem from the fact that version control should be invisible and isn't and many people have different ideas about version control. You mentioned that perforce allowed you to directly make changes to files and later reconcile them. Generally speaking that's a version control nightmare (as it's expected tht you check in and check out copies) and many users do exactly that.
Another thing to think about is that if the FSf ideas are true it means that most corporate lawyers are going to think real hard about allowing any GPLd software into the organization because even if you make an agreement that intends to cover yourself, you can be stuck if the author decides to then change to a viral license like GPL3. Showing folks that they can break your deals by changing license terms seems to be a great way to box your way to irrelevancy. Sun thanks you.
fair enough- if they don't compete with Microsoft then they wouldn't need access to the protocols, since they are only used to connect to microsoft systems.
Free software was in fact the argument used by microsoft to say that there was competition. Free software according to the courts was If you are going to allow that free software is competition (by definition a 0$ cost of entry to the market)then you also have to allow that Microsoft is not a monopolist(there would no longer be the required substantial barrier to effective entry). I think that's how Microsoft is going to game the system. If the EU sets a price, then anything lower than that is, by definition, competitive. If they do not set a price, then microsoft can claim insufficient guidance and stall essentially forever.
I have to agree. There needs to be less focus on syntax and more on methodology. My first introduction to programming was with Karel the robot, a programming tool that uses the pascal syntax but with only 4-5 keywords (If memory serves- pickbeeper, putbeeper,turnleft,move, detectobstruction) with which you learn how to design and debug software. If students understood top down design and the benefits of strong typechecking it really wouldn't matter what language they used since they would have the skills to create quality software. I'm not even concerned with the practicility of the applications created at first since it's the concepts that are getting drowned in syntactic hell
I think that the point of the ACT article is that gpl3 DOES take away your rights. IANAL but in essence it seems to me that GPL3 is trying to make it impossible for anyone that creates GPL3 code to partner with any commercial company. It also seems to say that if I wanted build upon your GPL3d work, I am not allowed protect my intellectual property. It also seems pretty ambiguous, and I think that when GPL3 goes to court (as seems inevitable) it will be decimated becaue of its ambiguity. If GPL3 wants to be successful it needs to remove the nonsense and get back to protecting the 4 freedoms.
You do realize that you've given the number 1 reason that the openoffice format should not be used. If you have to go to back to the application to read the file properly, the "open" format is worthless. I am not saying that the microsoft format is better but at least Word is arguably the number one word processing application and isn't going anywhere soon.
It's greenhouse gas emissions from the rovers!
Actually in a democracy it's the voters job to ensure that the government representatives have your best interests in mind. If you live in a "democracy" where the goverment has to do things "in your best interest" it might be in your best interest to start wondering if "democracy" is right for you.
I would have written a long response about exactly why this is just bunk but this guy already said what needed to be said:
- development/?p=32
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/programming-and
they are considering windows when they take a look at the costs of upgrading the old RS6000 running AIX with a new p5 (and a new version) versus the same (or similar) windows software with similar support. I don't think the adoption rate is huge (unless there is also a staff turnover) but once the x86 hardware is "sold" as a cost saver, it's not a giant leap to consider windows.
This is not true. The consitution was specifically set up not to "grant rights" but to prevent the government from ever being in a position to "grant rights." Sadly this basic civics knowledge isn't even taught anymore. With regard to habeus... "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." Notice that as with most things in the constitution it's what the goverment cannot do. Even sadder is the fact that so many americans think that the goverment is actually supposed to tell you what rights you have.
The difference is that you cna use the same bandwidth for alot more channels since it's a digital signal. If they wanted to add 100 more providers the FCC MIGHT step in. When it's about reducing bandwidth usage, in theory the FCC should be obligated to use the spectrum as optimally as possible, meaning that they should be obligated to say yes to a merger. They should be overseeing the airwaves not ensuring "competition".
The difference is that SPP diables your OS 3 days after changing out your hardware. Crippleware only affects your apps
It's worse than that. These people think you can put science to a vote (and they think that an actual piece of science is a voting process)! They simply want to shut the "nonscientists"(the ones that actually want you to prove your theory) up. These folks think if they can get a consensus, and really really believe, they can turn off the gravity and fly around the room. Its tough to really, really believe if some jackass keeps telling you that you'll hit the ground when you jump off that chair. If you do hit the ground its gonna be all his fault. What else can be said? Eppur si muove...
Mod parent up. Most of the folks that go to college for a degree of any kind are only going for the check box. Engineering students are no exception. Sadly it's not until graduation that they find out how unprepared they are for a career in the real world. The ones that actually enjoy engineering usually have a job in it before they go to college. Sometimes they even know more than the professors that are teaching the classes. I think that college should be for the academic/thinker types. I don't think that can happen until the high schools start stepping up and getting students prepared for a career rather than how to get into college.
Let me get this straight. After 200+ pages of supporting evidence the conclusion is that it doesn't matter what software they use, government workers are working as slowly as humanly possible? Yup, this is definitely an academic study.
I can see how a thin ,portable, paper quality display would be useful. I don't see how trying to come up with a paper replacement is usefull. Of all the recyclable products, paper is the one that is most easily recycled product. I'd rather see work done to come up with a more easily recycled plastic.
I think that the quality of education is exactly what the issue is that the educational establishment simply refuses to discuss. The NEA (et al.) have no interest in raising the educational bar because all of a sudden the failure rates of students would go up and the only one to blame for that would be the teachers. The gradual decline in quality of education is a direct result of attempting to ensure a certain percentage of students always pass, regardless of what knowledge is imparted. If the educational quality was what it was even 30 years ago, the dropout rate would be irrelevant. If after approx. 9 years of quality education you still think it's a good idea to quit, I say bye-bye. 4 more years of education aren't going to change that mind.