No, the order is first replace Microsoft Office with Star/OpenOffice. At least in enough places that matter. Then Microsoft Office is forced to read/write OOo native formats. Further, any "stunts" Microsoft tries to play will, because the OOo formats are known, make it rather blatant just where the problem is.
For a given problem in a given context, there should be a cannonical source code, comments included, to solve that problem. The individualistic quirks that depart from the cannonical form are not a good thing. The more programming matures, the more likely identical solutions would become.
Try explaining to a client how you just charged them to add some functionality to something that will be used by others for free.
Good point, but methinks IBM has figured out some of the answer. The $1b IBM dumps into Linux affects IBM only indirectly, yet IBM claims to have more than made the money back. There is no IBM Linux.
Best bet may be to ask them how long they expect to stay in business. Short-term gains that kill the company are not a good idea (except for fly-by-night companies;)
IMNSHO, I've got the following choices: 1) You make do with the package the way it is. 2) You fix the local copy so (for the moment) mine works better. 3) You go to the extra trouble, time, and effort to upload the bug patch.
Choice #3 has the same kind of payout as buying platinum dishpans from Russian serfs.
All companies tend to mean, when they ask if they own it, is if it can ever be taken away from them if they don't pay. Bingo. Not only do they own it (in the sense that no one can take it away from them), but they further own it in the sense that no one can deprive them of the means to have it maintained, enhanced or customized.
There are two meanings to "own". It's mine and you can't have it. It's mine and you can't take it away from me.
Similarly there are two meanings to "security". It's mine and you can't break into it. It's mine and you can't destroy it.
Companies have been destroyed when critical information was lost due to hardware or software failures. I haven't heard of any being more than mildly inconvenienced or embarrased by outsiders cracking their systems. Proprietary file system formats can leave a company with no viable exit strategies.
for some reason our species seems programmed to be fascinated with such things
Survival. Of the species.
Everybody goes "Oh how terrible". A (very) few sometimes, somehow, someway get a bit of an idea of what maybe can be done so it doesn't happen again, or the consequences are maybe not quite so bad. Maybe mankind learns from this debacle. Probably not:-(
SCO literally has nothing to lose here. And that is the problem. That seems to be the way SCO is playing it, but methinks reality will play out rather differently. SCO has engendered enough ill will that even if it wins it will lose. As long as IBM isn't panicked into doing something stupid, IBM (and Linux) win in the long run.
There's the proverbial snowball's chance of getting back to business as usual here. More reason for anyone not to buy them out. There are existing customers with existing service contracts. The good ones will abandon ship* and you're left with the customers and contracts nobody wants. *(Methinks this "cruise" ship has been torpedoed by its own management;)
Am I wrong it thinking that because google is a private company they can do whatever they want with their own service? Short answer, yes. It gets more complicated than this poor old brain can grasp, but goes something like this. The village outcast is allowed to be rude and obnoxious. The village mayor and most of its citizenry are not. The rules are complex and fluid, but along with the trust of the public goes an obligation to honor that trust. Google has come a long way since its beginnings, and is now sufficiently established that an abrupt and capricious change of personality would be a bad thing. Google has of course an extreme amount of lattitude in how it identifies and carries out it mission, but there are limits, even if they're extremely vague.
Right, except that the use of the term editor is not all that unconventional. The primary duty of editors is the selection and placement of content. There might be an editorial page where an editor can give him or herself the role of columnist extraordinaire, but it's not germaine to the duties as editor. Slashdot is primarily a discussion forum with links to news stories of interest, with a few choice words to help start the discussion. In this context an overt bias is expected and actually helps move things along.
Too many students come out of CS courses thinking Java is the only progamming language, and have difficulty moving to whatever the company uses Good grief. What ever happened to the "Teach Pascal, Use Fortran" mentality?
Look at this story...what's really that new or interesting here? This looks like just another opportunity for slashbots and "M$" haters to get their kicks.
You're right. "what's really that new or interesting here?" Microsoft is making yet another attempt to improve security. Nothing new or interesting. (Now if Microsoft were to do something that would make a difference, that would be new and interesting.
Yes I use Microsoft, and yes this is how I get my kicks. When we finally get rid of all the Microsoft stuff, I will no longer be interested in Microsoft bashing. I will admit to being unreasonable. I expect computer systems to work. Whenever they do not, they should be ridiculed.
I dunno, two remote holes in 7 years is pretty good. Actually methinks that would be more impressive than no remote holes in 5 years (or whatever it was). Security is hard and even with a lot of effort is not completely realizable. OpenBSD is Uber-secure. They do not claim to be secure. Oh, and the default installs seem intended for immediate remote administration as opposed to local setup and only then connect to the internet.
"'Microsoft is a long way from its ultimate goal where users can take security for granted in its products" Taking security for granted is how you run into trouble.
"Security Engineering Strategy" [Emphasis added] Better to get your Tactics right before you start daydreaming about Strategy.
Question: Why would you want a private device making requests on a public network? About the same reason you'd drive a private automobile on a public roadway.
what happens when countries with M$ systems are not able to interoperate with OSS systems? Microsoft dries up and blows away. At some point the presumption of which of the systems has to give in to the other shifts balance, and slam. Already, "Always Blame Microsoft" is a surprisingly effective tactic.
Someone else is an independent thinker if you agree with him Gotta disagree. Someone else is an independent thinker if you disagree with him and you still must respect his opinion.
but this is really the last death throes of a dying corporation
Reminds me of a time, long ago when a horse went through a sale barn with a dollar bill attached to its ear (to try raise some interest). The final bid? Ninety-eight cents! Methinks there will be some serious scrutiny of the "management" of SCO.
Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with. From a legal standpoint, contracts end up being far stronger than anything you could do with copyrights. [Emphasis added]
Good one. Microsoft has a problem. It is not my problem, it is Microsoft's problem. Maybe Microsoft can do something about it. Probably not. It's not my problem.
But there are trade offs. You standardize the things that are not worth being different.
Imagine each nut and each bolt engineered precisely and optimally for its specific application. Cheaper and better to round up to the next standard size.
Imagine supplying each household appliance with its optimum voltage and frequency. You do use special circuits for heavy current things like stoves, dryers and air conditioners.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the order is first replace Microsoft Office with Star/OpenOffice. At least in enough places that matter.
Then Microsoft Office is forced to read/write OOo native formats.
Further, any "stunts" Microsoft tries to play will, because the OOo formats are known, make it rather blatant just where the problem is.
For a given problem in a given context, there should be a cannonical source code, comments included, to solve that problem. The individualistic quirks that depart from the cannonical form are not a good thing. The more programming matures, the more likely identical solutions would become.
I am not trolling here, this is a serious question based on example after example
How else do you keep up with the latest viruses, worms and spam?
What is happening here?
People are buying into the illusion.
If people were rational, would Microsoft be running the MSN Butterfly ads?
Try explaining to a client how you just charged them to add some functionality to something that will be used by others for free.
Good point, but methinks IBM has figured out some of the answer. The $1b IBM dumps into Linux affects IBM only indirectly, yet IBM claims to have more than made the money back. There is no IBM Linux.
Best bet may be to ask them how long they expect to stay in business. Short-term gains that kill the company are not a good idea (except for fly-by-night companies;)
Why should any employer/client worry about that?
IMNSHO, I've got the following choices:
1) You make do with the package the way it is.
2) You fix the local copy so (for the moment) mine works better.
3) You go to the extra trouble, time, and effort to upload the bug patch.
Choice #3 has the same kind of payout as buying platinum dishpans from Russian serfs.
All companies tend to mean, when they ask if they own it, is if it can ever be taken away from them if they don't pay.
Bingo.
Not only do they own it (in the sense that no one can take it away from them), but they further own it in the sense that no one can deprive them of the means to have it maintained, enhanced or customized.
There are two meanings to "own".
It's mine and you can't have it.
It's mine and you can't take it away from me.
Similarly there are two meanings to "security".
It's mine and you can't break into it.
It's mine and you can't destroy it.
Companies have been destroyed when critical information was lost due to hardware or software failures. I haven't heard of any being more than mildly inconvenienced or embarrased by outsiders cracking their systems. Proprietary file system formats can leave a company with no viable exit strategies.
for some reason our species seems programmed to be fascinated with such things
:-(
Survival. Of the species.
Everybody goes "Oh how terrible".
A (very) few sometimes, somehow, someway get a bit of an idea of what maybe can be done so it doesn't happen again, or the consequences are maybe not quite so bad. Maybe mankind learns from this debacle. Probably not
SCO literally has nothing to lose here. And that is the problem.
That seems to be the way SCO is playing it, but methinks reality will play out rather differently. SCO has engendered enough ill will that even if it wins it will lose. As long as IBM isn't panicked into doing something stupid, IBM (and Linux) win in the long run.
There's the proverbial snowball's chance of getting back to business as usual here.
More reason for anyone not to buy them out. There are existing customers with existing service contracts. The good ones will abandon ship* and you're left with the customers and contracts nobody wants.
*(Methinks this "cruise" ship has been torpedoed by its own management;)
Am I wrong it thinking that because google is a private company they can do whatever they want with their own service?
Short answer, yes. It gets more complicated than this poor old brain can grasp, but goes something like this. The village outcast is allowed to be rude and obnoxious. The village mayor and most of its citizenry are not. The rules are complex and fluid, but along with the trust of the public goes an obligation to honor that trust. Google has come a long way since its beginnings, and is now sufficiently established that an abrupt and capricious change of personality would be a bad thing. Google has of course an extreme amount of lattitude in how it identifies and carries out it mission, but there are limits, even if they're extremely vague.
Right. Google is under no obligation to give any aid or comfort of any form to anyone abusing their system.
Right, except that the use of the term editor is not all that unconventional.
The primary duty of editors is the selection and placement of content. There might be an editorial page where an editor can give him or herself the role of columnist extraordinaire, but it's not germaine to the duties as editor.
Slashdot is primarily a discussion forum with links to news stories of interest, with a few choice words to help start the discussion. In this context an overt bias is expected and actually helps move things along.
Too many students come out of CS courses thinking Java is the only progamming language, and have difficulty moving to whatever the company uses
Good grief. What ever happened to the "Teach Pascal, Use Fortran" mentality?
Look at this story...what's really that new or interesting here? This looks like just another opportunity for slashbots and "M$" haters to get their kicks.
You're right. "what's really that new or interesting here?" Microsoft is making yet another attempt to improve security. Nothing new or interesting. (Now if Microsoft were to do something that would make a difference, that would be new and interesting.
Yes I use Microsoft, and yes this is how I get my kicks. When we finally get rid of all the Microsoft stuff, I will no longer be interested in Microsoft bashing. I will admit to being unreasonable. I expect computer systems to work. Whenever they do not, they should be ridiculed.
I dunno, two remote holes in 7 years is pretty good.
Actually methinks that would be more impressive than no remote holes in 5 years (or whatever it was). Security is hard and even with a lot of effort is not completely realizable. OpenBSD is Uber-secure. They do not claim to be secure. Oh, and the default installs seem intended for immediate remote administration as opposed to local setup and only then connect to the internet.
Whatever. It won't be their last.
"'Microsoft is a long way from its ultimate goal where users can take security for granted in its products"
Taking security for granted is how you run into trouble.
"Security Engineering Strategy" [Emphasis added]
Better to get your Tactics right before you start daydreaming about Strategy.
Question: Why would you want a private device making requests on a public network?
About the same reason you'd drive a private automobile on a public roadway.
what happens when countries with M$ systems are not able to interoperate with OSS systems?
Microsoft dries up and blows away.
At some point the presumption of which of the systems has to give in to the other shifts balance, and slam. Already, "Always Blame Microsoft" is a surprisingly effective tactic.
Someone else is an independent thinker if you agree with him
Gotta disagree. Someone else is an independent thinker if you disagree with him and you still must respect his opinion.
but this is really the last death throes of a dying corporation
Reminds me of a time, long ago when a horse went through a sale barn with a dollar bill attached to its ear (to try raise some interest). The final bid? Ninety-eight cents! Methinks there will be some serious scrutiny of the "management" of SCO.
Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with. From a legal standpoint, contracts end up being far stronger than anything you could do with copyrights. [Emphasis added]
SCO Customers. Take note.
No, the plural of virus is Microsoft.
Good one.
Microsoft has a problem.
It is not my problem, it is Microsoft's problem.
Maybe Microsoft can do something about it. Probably not.
It's not my problem.
"Escape from Redmond"
Stay tuned to Slashdot for the next episode.
But there are trade offs.
You standardize the things that are not worth being different.
Imagine each nut and each bolt engineered precisely and optimally for its specific application. Cheaper and better to round up to the next standard size.
Imagine supplying each household appliance with its optimum voltage and frequency. You do use special circuits for heavy current things like stoves, dryers and air conditioners.