We may all agree that the law is wrong, but as long as it is not repelled, it does not matter whay we think, a state to justify its existence needs to make that those laws are followed.
This is particularly imortant in a democracy, where it is possible to modify laws if everybody gets off their apathetic/anarchist asses and do something about things.
....*cough* *cough* have a Shuttle computer with Debian or Gentoo. No dual booting (the other OS was erradicated many moons ago), no , sorry, I am lying, dual booting is ther to test other OSS OSes.
Then thos Macintoshes I was administering back then in 1991 were a figment of my imagination.
Back then, as now, people with a clues where using Macs or OS/2 which were technically and from a usability point of view immensely superior to Windows.
In the UNIX side of things Sun was offering OpenView that was pretty good and X already existed.
MS was a success because they understood that software exelency is not all, but you can't make a living out of mediocrity forever, eventually people will realize that the emperoro has no clothes.
Lindows is on its right to choose a generic term in the IT industry (windows) to name their product.
If that happens to coincide with another company's product name, which is not trademarkable because they are using a generic name, then it is not theor fault, but the fault of the first company to fail to choose a name that was defensible under trademark law.
Ventana = window. raton = mouse presionar = to click octeto = byte base de datos = Database memoria = memory PC = computadora personal diskette = floppy disk disco duro = hard disk tarjeta = expansion card pantalla = screen impresora = printer lenguaje de programacion = programing language. leguleyos imbeciles = SCO etc,etc,etc.
I learned computing in Spanish, with many terms translated (sometimes unfortunately, as I think byte should be byte for example, not the horrid octeto).
In such a context they may be a point that Lindows and Windows may be confussing.
in English speaking countries MS has not got a chance in hell to win this one.
Window is a generic term in IT industry before they even came with the idea to embrace and extend it from Apple and Xerox.
In non English speaking countries is a different matter, since the generic term for a window in an IT context(ventana in Spanish for example) is clearly different from the name of the product.
So to enforce the trademark elsewhere but the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Singapore, etc sounds like a hollow victory.
You are calling for the law of the jungle, everybody able to be judge, jury, executor and even accusing part.
I don't want part of such world, even evil people have a right to be protected and respected. Those gurantees for the worst in our societies will ensure that we live with freedom and without fear of unfair prosecutions and retribution.
It was the frontpage history in the newspaper available for free in all mainline train and tube(underground) stations.
Trainloads of people travelling to the financial district in London were reading this (i.e. non geeks, middle managers, etc). MS's reputation is leaving the constraints of geekdom and reachinw the wider world. About time.
.... if we did not have proven records of OSS projects that matter.
So unless you mention and document specific OSS projects that are as lax with security as you are suggesting, I can only assume you are talking in complete ignorance or willfull trollins.
Using illegal or unethical tactics (like taking 6 months to patch something and demanding to "keep it quiet") are not suppossed to be part of making business.
For business to work in the correct way there should be a frame in which if you do something bad (either legally or ethically) youo are pubished in consequence.
Given MS monopolic position and its abuse of that position (as probed in court, don't argue with me about this point) the normal activity or making money is no longer acceptable, since such company should have been called to properly account for their acts long time ago.
Hacker is a nominative use to recognize the technical skills of a computer enthusiast.
Was Bill Gates a hacker? Yes, surely, he obviously could program his way out of trouble.
Now, were his technical skills up to scratch? That is more debatable.
Bill Gates certainly changed the computer world, if the changes have been goo it is left to personal interpretation, but Bill Gates will be remembered as a ruthless businessman (and here give ruthless whatever slant you want, I mean it negatively), not a technical person (how could he, he almost missed the Internet and his companies most successful products have been based on ideas developped elsewhere).
But that surely comes paired with a complete lack of understanding of how the Internet works, which is fine, but in some situations one should listen to the experts and STFU.
Slashdot Mirror
We may all agree that the law is wrong, but as long as it is not repelled, it does not matter whay we think, a state to justify its existence needs to make that those laws are followed.
This is particularly imortant in a democracy, where it is possible to modify laws if everybody gets off their apathetic/anarchist asses and do something about things.
.. making Linux illegal?
They are suing IBM for contract breach and some copyright issues.
Appart form that their foolishness has not harmed anybody else.
....*cough* *cough* have a Shuttle computer with Debian or Gentoo. No dual booting (the other OS was erradicated many moons ago), no , sorry, I am lying, dual booting is ther to test other OSS OSes.
Games? For the road GBA, or a PDA.
At home Gamecube or Playstation.
Forget /. exists. Remove it form your bookmarks, never come back.
Why if you have the solution you pretend that it is up to others to do something about your likes and dislikes?
Then thos Macintoshes I was administering back then in 1991 were a figment of my imagination.
Back then, as now, people with a clues where using Macs or OS/2 which were technically and from a usability point of view immensely superior to Windows.
In the UNIX side of things Sun was offering OpenView that was pretty good and X already existed.
MS was a success because they understood that software exelency is not all, but you can't make a living out of mediocrity forever, eventually people will realize that the emperoro has no clothes.
Think: the height of the walls around the caldera is 3Km.
A football stadium would be barely visible there.
Get a desktop in your car's booth.
Honestly with so much rubish the portability is completely lost.
.. if you can google for it?.
While you are at it, look for "neologism" as well.
Lindows is on its right to choose a generic term in the IT industry (windows) to name their product.
If that happens to coincide with another company's product name, which is not trademarkable because they are using a generic name, then it is not theor fault, but the fault of the first company to fail to choose a name that was defensible under trademark law.
You are completely off base.
And that is that the word "windows" alone is a generic term in its context (i.e. IT industry) and thus not trademarkable.
So Winblows,WindowsCraze, EvilWindows, TrueWindows, MiniWindows and so on are not infringing in the beast of Redmond's trademark: "Microsoft Windows".
Neither is Lindows, at least in english speaking countries.
Ventana = window.
raton = mouse
presionar = to click
octeto = byte
base de datos = Database
memoria = memory
PC = computadora personal
diskette = floppy disk
disco duro = hard disk
tarjeta = expansion card
pantalla = screen
impresora = printer
lenguaje de programacion = programing language.
leguleyos imbeciles = SCO
etc,etc,etc.
I learned computing in Spanish, with many terms translated (sometimes unfortunately, as I think byte should be byte for example, not the horrid octeto).
In such a context they may be a point that Lindows and Windows may be confussing.
in English speaking countries MS has not got a chance in hell to win this one.
Window is a generic term in IT industry before they even came with the idea to embrace and extend it from Apple and Xerox.
In non English speaking countries is a different matter, since the generic term for a window in an IT context(ventana in Spanish for example) is clearly different from the name of the product.
So to enforce the trademark elsewhere but the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Singapore, etc sounds like a hollow victory.
MS: just suck it up and get on with it!
You are calling for the law of the jungle, everybody able to be judge, jury, executor and even accusing part.
I don't want part of such world, even evil people have a right to be protected and respected. Those gurantees for the worst in our societies will ensure that we live with freedom and without fear of unfair prosecutions and retribution.
For the life of mine, I can't come with a different sentence.
Are they litigious? Well, I think I don't need to answer that one.
Are they bastards? Lets see:
- fraudulent; having a misleading appearance
- A person, especially one who is held to be mean or disagreeable
So what is exactly your point?
THE BBC claims are still unsubstantiated, no matter how much we may rant on this site.
Your lawyers harrasing people that exposes your security flaws.
Please go ahead and do it, the SCO stuff is slowing down and we need more circus.
... I will still prefer OSS.
Why? Because I value my freedom to manage my own software infrastructure.
If there is no choice but closed source, we are screwed.
If there are good enough OSS alternatives, they will get my attention.
You ought to love them, really.
What do you think that network of hobbists and enthussiasts is for?
And do you think companies like Red Hat, SUSE and now Sun and IBM would support such practice?
No, the answer is that OSS doe not bundle unnecessarily different pieces of software with each other for non technical reasons.
OSS is mor modular and thus easier to debug and patch.
Enough.
It was the frontpage history in the newspaper available for free in all mainline train and tube(underground) stations.
Trainloads of people travelling to the financial district in London were reading this (i.e. non geeks, middle managers, etc). MS's reputation is leaving the constraints of geekdom and reachinw the wider world. About time.
.... if we did not have proven records of OSS projects that matter.
So unless you mention and document specific OSS projects that are as lax with security as you are suggesting, I can only assume you are talking in complete ignorance or willfull trollins.
Using illegal or unethical tactics (like taking 6 months to patch something and demanding to "keep it quiet") are not suppossed to be part of making business.
For business to work in the correct way there should be a frame in which if you do something bad (either legally or ethically) youo are pubished in consequence.
Given MS monopolic position and its abuse of that position (as probed in court, don't argue with me about this point) the normal activity or making money is no longer acceptable, since such company should have been called to properly account for their acts long time ago.
Hacker is a nominative use to recognize the technical skills of a computer enthusiast.
Was Bill Gates a hacker? Yes, surely, he obviously could program his way out of trouble.
Now, were his technical skills up to scratch? That is more debatable.
Bill Gates certainly changed the computer world, if the changes have been goo it is left to personal interpretation, but Bill Gates will be remembered as a ruthless businessman (and here give ruthless whatever slant you want, I mean it negatively), not a technical person (how could he, he almost missed the Internet and his companies most successful products have been based on ideas developped elsewhere).
Some Radio Shack branded machine at my uncle's place, it had BASCI in which I programmed a few games.
The in the Uni we had a Burroughs multiuser system.
Around this time I worked equally in the Burroughs and the first PCs in Mexico City.
My first job was in a UNISYS A-12.
My second job was with Sun (SunOS 3.x, funnily enough our secretaries used Macs).
So there, you are pressuming too much.
But that surely comes paired with a complete lack of understanding of how the Internet works, which is fine, but in some situations one should listen to the experts and STFU.
The moment it is painted in the plane or ship it is public.
With electronic advancements that is kind of unnecessary, honestly, what reason there is to paint in big bright letters this kind of information?
It is not insightful, it is trool, stupid.
robots.txt is a polite request not to do something.
Of course rogue people will not even notice this or will use it to their advantage.