Colbalt was featured in major story in current Wired. That seems to be the ticket to me. FWIW, we run 3 NTS machines and 5 NTWS machines using a wide variety of apps and don't incur the lack of NT stability issues many allude to on/.
Anyway, to tie all this together and keep it on topic; The problem is how does Microsoft compete with Linux in the server market? The answer is that it doesn't. We know that, but they don't, or at least they are too arrogant to admit it. So instead they come up with a dumb answer to the "Competing with Linux" problem: "Thin" servers running WinCE. Fortunately this is flawed too. They propose a $1500-$2000 solution to a problem that Linux already solves for about $150 worth of hardware. Just from a historical perspective I would note that we "moved" from Novell3.11 to NTS3.0 partially because 1 more Novell client license (from 10 to 11) was going to cost $2,500 (had to buy 25 to get 1). So MS "got it" at that time. I doubt if they will price "thin clients" to compete with the Linux price:-) until broad variaties of application software in use today run on Linux. For instance, we would need the "comfort" of the top 5 tax applications being available for Linux in order to "bet this farm."
Actually I do use ZDNet and CNet and Gilder Technology Reports, and MIT Technology Mag, and a great number of other print and web based sources in addition to Slashdot. While the dynamics of Slashdot (speed of happenings) is unique, there is nevertheless more to the technology world than can be discovered here alone.
Another article pointing out Linux shortcomings in contrast to NT appears in April issue of NT Magazine (print version). The magazine will not post the article to its web site until July. It is authored by:
Mark Russinovich, PhD in computer engineering from Carnegie Mellon University. Russinovich has authored a variety of NT focused articles.
In personal interactions, this means that men must act on the principle of trading the best they can offer with the best that others can offer, which is exactly what the hacker culture does. It is not a "gift culture"
Just a note that the IRS doesn't consider it a "gift culture" either.
From RIAs Tax Coordinator:
J-1010 Barter Income
When a taxpayer receives goods or services from another person in a barter arrangement, the taxpayer realizes gross income equal to the value of the goods and services received. Goods and services received under barter arrangements are taxed regardless of whether the barter arrangement is a direct two-party exchange or a multi-party indirect exchange, such as exchanges using a barter club. For a discussion of direct party-to-party exchanges, see J-1011. For a discussion of when exchanges by members of a barter club result in gross income, see J-1012. For a discussion of when a barter club realizes gross income, see J-1013.
Neither RMS nor ESR does this adequately. RMS essentially requires that developers make only as much as sales clerks, and are funded with a software tax. RMS also thinks developers don't deserve recognition or reward for writing code, yet he paradoxically wants to be recognized for his contributions by having Linuxrenamed "GNU/Linux". (look for "artisan" on the GNU philosophy pages if you don't know what I'm talking about)
ESR has several business models on the nsource.org site, but very few of them make money or developers, only for tech-support, book and t-shirt sellers.
I presume that both RMS and ESR are compensated by somebody for something? And, if so, their high profiles might elevate such compensation? Just curious as to whether they benefit economically from evangelizing.
Anyone participating in forums, whether posting or just lurking, should assume that their visit is being recorded and analyzed in some fashion. Doesn't mean anything untoward will occur. Does mean that the ACs aren't as anonymous as they might assume.
I thought it interesting that "success" was characterized as easy during the Mosaic to Netscape early transition (small) and difficult by the Netscape of recent years (large). To the extent that characterization is correct then the creativity of the individual is now more important than the brand names of corporate structures.
Perhaps one issue is that openness has to "start open" and evolve rather than start proprietary and get itself adopted. For instance, I doubt that releasing the source code to any proprietary web server software will receive contributed code like Apache has.
And perhaps this is just one result of the notion I make (attributed to Negroponte) at:
If Microsoft had never existed, we'd be doing just fine, thank you.
Just for balance, there is currently -0- professional level (including states) tax preparation software available for *nix and almost -0- for Apple. So far, I've used Burroughs (that should put things into context:-); Apple; Unix; MSDOS; Win 3.x to Win98; LanTAStic; Novell; NTWS; NTS; Citrix; MS Terminal Server; and I'm sure we will put Linux somewhere. But, today, I have to deal with Windows or change professions. Not a pleasant fact, but a fact. Beyond ideals, we have to make things work. So although my personal bias was with Unix in the early '80s, and I thought SOS for the Apple III was way cool, I can't make a tax practice work today without MS in the mix.
As I understand it, MS did in fact license the source code for NT to Citrix. As Citrix gained market share, apparently MS retreated (in its source code licensing strategy) and brought that functionality into Terminal Server.
Actually watching Slashdot evolve (I've only been looking for a few weeks) has been a great comfort. I've quit worrying about working on our dinky little site live:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Colbalt was featured in major story in current Wired. That seems to be the ticket to me. FWIW, we run 3 NTS machines and 5 NTWS machines using a wide variety of apps and don't incur the lack of NT stability issues many allude to on /.
Anyway, to tie all this together and keep it on topic; The problem is how does Microsoft compete with Linux in the server market? The answer is that it doesn't. We know that, but they don't, or at least they are too arrogant to admit it. So instead they come up with a dumb answer to the "Competing with Linux" problem: "Thin" servers running WinCE. Fortunately this is flawed too. They propose a $1500-$2000 solution to a problem that Linux already solves for about $150 worth of hardware. Just from a historical perspective I would note that we "moved" from Novell3.11 to NTS3.0 partially because 1 more Novell client license (from 10 to 11) was going to cost $2,500 (had to buy 25 to get 1). So MS "got it" at that time. I doubt if they will price "thin clients" to compete with the Linux price :-) until broad variaties of application software in use today run on Linux. For instance, we would need the "comfort" of the top 5 tax applications being available for Linux in order to "bet this farm."
Actually I do use ZDNet and CNet and Gilder Technology Reports, and MIT Technology Mag, and a great number of other print and web based sources in addition to Slashdot. While the dynamics of Slashdot (speed of happenings) is unique, there is nevertheless more to the technology world than can be discovered here alone.
managed to report with reference to /. but without links. CNet often does include links in stories.
Another article pointing out Linux shortcomings in contrast to NT appears in April issue of NT Magazine (print version). The magazine will not post the article to its web site until July. It is authored by:
Mark Russinovich, PhD in computer engineering from Carnegie Mellon University. Russinovich has authored a variety of NT focused articles.
mark@systinternals.com
http://www.sysinternals.com
There are some similarities in the articles. Russinovich indicates Linux will continue to evolve and these shortcomings will disappear.
In personal interactions, this means that men must act on the principle of trading the best they can offer with the best that others can offer, which is exactly what the hacker culture does. It is not a "gift culture"
Just a note that the IRS doesn't consider it a "gift culture" either.
From RIAs Tax Coordinator:
J-1010 Barter Income
When a taxpayer receives goods or services from another person in a barter arrangement, the taxpayer realizes gross income equal to the value of the goods and services received. Goods and services received under barter arrangements are taxed regardless of whether the barter arrangement is a direct two-party exchange or a multi-party indirect exchange, such as exchanges using a barter club. For a discussion of direct party-to-party exchanges, see J-1011. For a discussion of when exchanges by members of a barter club result in gross income, see J-1012. For a discussion of when a barter club realizes gross income, see J-1013.
Neither RMS nor ESR does this adequately. RMS essentially requires that developers make only as much as sales clerks, and are funded with a software tax. RMS also thinks developers don't deserve recognition or reward for writing code, yet he paradoxically wants to be recognized for his contributions by having Linuxrenamed "GNU/Linux". (look for "artisan" on the GNU philosophy pages if you don't know what I'm talking about)
ESR has several business models on the nsource.org site, but very few of them make money or developers, only for tech-support, book and t-shirt sellers.
I presume that both RMS and ESR are compensated by somebody for something? And, if so, their high profiles might elevate such compensation? Just curious as to whether they benefit economically from evangelizing.
Anyone participating in forums, whether posting or just lurking, should assume that their visit is being recorded and analyzed in some fashion. Doesn't mean anything untoward will occur. Does mean that the ACs aren't as anonymous as they might assume.
I thought it interesting that "success" was characterized as easy during the Mosaic to Netscape early transition (small) and difficult by the Netscape of recent years (large). To the extent that characterization is correct then the creativity of the individual is now more important than the brand names of corporate structures.
e lf.html
Perhaps one issue is that openness has to "start open" and evolve rather than start proprietary and get itself adopted. For instance, I doubt that releasing the source code to any proprietary web server software will receive contributed code like Apache has.
And perhaps this is just one result of the notion I make (attributed to Negroponte) at:
http://www.taxtechcpa.com/Perspectives/DigitalS
If Microsoft had never existed, we'd be doing just fine, thank you.
:-); Apple; Unix; MSDOS; Win 3.x to Win98; LanTAStic; Novell; NTWS; NTS; Citrix; MS Terminal Server; and I'm sure we will put Linux somewhere. But, today, I have to deal with Windows or change professions. Not a pleasant fact, but a fact. Beyond ideals, we have to make things work. So although my personal bias was with Unix in the early '80s, and I thought SOS for the Apple III was way cool, I can't make a tax practice work today without MS in the mix.
Just for balance, there is currently -0- professional level (including states) tax preparation software available for *nix and almost -0- for Apple. So far, I've used Burroughs (that should put things into context
As I understand it, MS did in fact license the source code for NT to Citrix. As Citrix gained market share, apparently MS retreated (in its source code licensing strategy) and brought that functionality into Terminal Server.
Actually watching Slashdot evolve (I've only been looking for a few weeks) has been a great comfort. I've quit worrying about working on our dinky little site live :-)
Hmmmm, let's see. If domain name is "property" that would mean I get capital gain rate (20%) when someone pays a mill or so for mine :-)