What you just said is complete nonsense to anyone who has listened to him. What's said in public, to the morons, is entirely different to what's said in private, to the power brokers.
That goes for Bush too, btw.
Don't bother listening to what they say. Watch what they do...
You need to take into account how spineless conniving and selfserving these slimeballs are before you can interpret what they say. Indeed. "We want to hold suspects for 90 days without trial? What? No? OK, well, 42 days then."
"This plan is not about Microsoft, it's about ensuring the perpetual availability of data without any obstacles." Yeah... and he contradicted himself with his second breath. Microsoft want to be the gatekeeper to your data. That's incompatible with "data without any obstacles."
That the answers in Yahoo Answers were mostly created by hormonal twelve year olds and as such are complete utter bollocks.
Get this. The person choosing the "best" answer is the same person who doesn't have a fucking clue and had to ask the question in the first place. I have no idea who thought that was a good idea, but I think they should get a medal for "The most ironic contribution to world knowledge".
Instead of suing for everything, we could just make a law to prevent this.
Filing suit is part of the process of enforcing certain already-existing laws. He's a socialist. They believe that you can never have too many laws.
Will your ISP censor or alter your web experience at will?
What an innovative way to get me to switch to their biggest competitor. It's like anti-marketing, a novel approach to business.
they also think that they are doing a great thing for the world and are helping out the misguided unwashed masses by unleashing their work upon the world. They are deluded pompous bastards, make no mistake. I can't imagine what their lawyers and marketing people must be like. good grief So that's where people with the busybody gene go.
For Linux to win in the SME space, it has to be the default option on supplied hardware. The SMEs simply don't switch OSs, they don't choose. They take what they're given because they don't have the in house experience to do otherwise. They buy what's in the catalogue.
As low priced linux only hardware becomes more common it may well take over, but I think the best option will be in dedicated hardware like NAS devices.
You have it almost exactly backwards. Speaking from bitter experience.
Their costs towards their IT infrastructure simply aren't large enough to worry about license costs. Microsoft already have this market. SMEs simply buy PCs with windows already installed, and use SBS on the back end. Their savings from Linux are in the thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions. It isn't worth their while to switch. Especially given the fact they can't afford to hire competent admins and so are stuck with whomever is locally available.
Large companies on the other hand, are a completely different kettle of fish. They can save millions by making use of Linux, and that's exactly what they do. The CTO or CIO's may or may not be aware of it but pretty much every large company out there has Linux just about everywhere from file servers to RDBMS servers to web application servers. They can afford to hire competent admins who can run Linux as well as their other Unix systems and who understand the mathematics of I.T. systems.
The market for Linux is not SMEs. I've been there and tried to sell it. The real market for Linux is on the big end. Multinationals, governments etc. They can save vast sums.
Wait until man can't pay off the debt due to disastrous interest rates, and invoke the default clauses such as taking ownership of his business, and diverting the fish to a Western market, No... You simply offer him a bigger loan and continue milking his effort for the rest of his life. This is by the way how our entire monetary system works in the west. 95% of the money in the US comes from loans. They can't be paid off and require larger loans every year.
Rice can be stolen and then resold on an international market for money. Or it can feed a bunch of "rebels" who were forced off their farms by dumped EU and US rice.
He does indeed have a point. What the Africans need is trade and to do that they need a decent infrastructure to move stuff and to do that they need a government which gives a shit.
Such viruses may be responsible for the Cambrian Explosion. Or maybe... The big change at the Cambrian was a mutation which allowed the creation of shells and bones.
Slashdot Mirror
That'll have to be first. Not impossible to do, but given the state of the IT infrastructures I've seen unlikely for a while.
You burn them, or at least the ones which you're unlikely to read again.
Or if that offends you, set them free...
That goes for Bush too, btw.
Don't bother listening to what they say. Watch what they do...
Is that you can't flame moronic little fuckwits who ask shite questions or give shite answers. That's what made Usenet useful.
That the answers in Yahoo Answers were mostly created by hormonal twelve year olds and as such are complete utter bollocks.
Get this. The person choosing the "best" answer is the same person who doesn't have a fucking clue and had to ask the question in the first place. I have no idea who thought that was a good idea, but I think they should get a medal for "The most ironic contribution to world knowledge".
For Linux to win in the SME space, it has to be the default option on supplied hardware. The SMEs simply don't switch OSs, they don't choose. They take what they're given because they don't have the in house experience to do otherwise. They buy what's in the catalogue.
As low priced linux only hardware becomes more common it may well take over, but I think the best option will be in dedicated hardware like NAS devices.
It's subsidising food which cause there to be starving people in the world.
You have it almost exactly backwards. Speaking from bitter experience.
Their costs towards their IT infrastructure simply aren't large enough to worry about license costs. Microsoft already have this market. SMEs simply buy PCs with windows already installed, and use SBS on the back end. Their savings from Linux are in the thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions. It isn't worth their while to switch. Especially given the fact they can't afford to hire competent admins and so are stuck with whomever is locally available.
Large companies on the other hand, are a completely different kettle of fish. They can save millions by making use of Linux, and that's exactly what they do. The CTO or CIO's may or may not be aware of it but pretty much every large company out there has Linux just about everywhere from file servers to RDBMS servers to web application servers. They can afford to hire competent admins who can run Linux as well as their other Unix systems and who understand the mathematics of I.T. systems.
The market for Linux is not SMEs. I've been there and tried to sell it. The real market for Linux is on the big end. Multinationals, governments etc. They can save vast sums.
Invest in "Developing world" or "Global Emerging Markets" mutual funds, OEICs or Unit Trusts.
You make money. They get jobs.
He does indeed have a point. What the Africans need is trade and to do that they need a decent infrastructure to move stuff and to do that they need a government which gives a shit.
So, why do you keep giving it to them?
It's the job of the nurses to make sure they get all the utensils back out.
But isn't this almost the definition of stupidity?