Would the phone company get paid for the calls? Yes.
Is the infrastructure they provide already covered by a monthly fee? Yes.
In all honesty, I can't see what would be bad about one sharing with neighbours a phone line with the exception that the phone company could not plan loads and stuff like that.
Depending on the industry the company is working in, there could be regulatory mandates that could clearly state that you should keep your backups for an X number of years.
Some companies can't just stablish a policy to delete stuff to avoid nasty incidents later because they are lagaly prevented to do so.
In the UK as far as I can tell PalmOS devices have as much shelf space in the big chains as WinCE stuff and the UK is home to a quarterly Palm magazine (which until last year was run almost add free, a clear indication of the amount of following the platform has).
Unless you have two or three reputable sources to back up your comments it seems like wild speculation (either way, I can't swear that what you are saying is not the case).
Although in geenral I tend to agrre with you, one should always remember Netscape: Netscape was sinonymous with browsing and browsing is what popularized the Internet. There was a time when nobody in his right mind would have though that Netscape will become aalmost an irrelevance (I think they are ready to fight back, but it took them almost to disapear to do so).
One should not underestimate the power of monopolic companies that have the muscle to comercialize subsidized crap to get rid of competitors.
Palm are in a hole because Microsoft are producing a pocket computer while Palm are producing a single purpose appliance.
Let me see:
-I can play chess (and around 10 more games).
-I can check the underground routes in 20 different cities.
-Appointments.
-To do list.
-Low res color digital camera.
-Scientific calculator.
-Birthday reminder.
-Password manager.
-Phone book.
-Currency converter.
-Forth interpreter.
-Email.
-I can write quick, small memos.
-Palmasutra.
Single purpose appliance. Your definition of "single purpose appliance" must be quite amusing.
Like which ones? I would be willing to drop my old Pentium 166 for one of these things. I don't want to spend to much on it, that is why I used an old machine (first I tried SmoothWall, did not like it, I am working with Mandrake firewall now).
Are you saying that the BSA has any evidence that all these people are pirating software?
DO you know what it would cost to keep a bureaucracy that could keep accurate track of this?
It all smells extremely fishy. If they have evidence they don't need to ask for compliance, they should go to the courts directly (it is like if I am robed and I give thet thief a chance to bring back my things. Hell no, the most basic common sense says you go to the police.Period).
Or is that the BSA has no evidence at all and knows it would lost all cases if they were to sue?
Hardware: same hardware (this could be argued, Linux solution could be run in cheaper hardware becauss the options exist to do so, for the sake of argument lets say both solutions use the same hardware).
Software: depends. For a start OS and Office Suite it costs nothing in Linux. You can moan, scream and pull your hair: what is available in Linux is more than enugh for teaching basic skills, let your company in youf first job pay for your proper introduction to the wonderful world of MS computing.
If you need computers to run an application that works only in Windows well, tough luck, you have no choice and your choice is gone. But we are teaching computing skills right? Programming, working with images, Office Suites. All that is available in Linux. So,assuming that applications exist in Linux and Windows, you can't beat Linux in price.
Operations: you have one guy that has to administer the computer infrastructure, a guy that either knows nothing or very little about computers (if he/she know a lot about computers, this becomes mooth point: a proficient administrator can do either solution, so no differences there). Can you seriously claim WIndows is easier to administer than Linux? Then all those books by droves about "Making windows easy" and "windows for dummies" are completely unnecesary, aren't they?
I am sorry, but I fail to see why a generaly cash starved school with a clue would use MS products (or commercial products for that matter) at all. No advantages at all: one becomes hostage to MS policies and anti-piracy orgnizations raids and licensing hikes for very little benefit, if any.
... and the rest will just copy it. And if they manage to control everything, will it become ilegal to make your own music and give it for free in electronic format?
I know I will do it if the situation gets worsening. They are promoting a very angry group of people that will eventualy get more invonved in fighthing their ways to increase their revenue. Their are going to loose sales.
There was a time when the client was always right.
The reason the banks were nationalixed in 1982 was twofold: certainly the goverment was looking for a suitable scapegoat for all its shortcomings in handling the economy. But Mexican banks were notorious for lacking the most basic business skills that any bank should have (i.e. take care of the bottom line) and they made a bad situation worst facilitating the exit of money from Mexico in disproportionate amounts (which forced the devaluation of the Mexican peso). Once the banks were nationalized the country entered a period of relative stability that would last until 1994 in which the banks, that had been returned to private ownership, were marred by bad debts (and in many cases by outright criminal dealings. Several former new bankers are in jail or hiding from the Mexican justice accussed of all kind of "white collar" crimes).
Even Citibank, a very respectable American bank, had dealings with Raul Salinas de Gortari, convicted for all kind of different crimes (and brother of former president Carlos Salinas). In US congressional hearings it was demonstrated beyond any doubt that Citibank's procedures were lax, to be polite, when dealing with funds of dubious origin, all this with banks back in private hands.
The previous posting gives the impression that Banks were somehow harrassed by the bad commie Mexican goverment which, IMVHO, was not the case. Bankers have probed to be even more corrupt than politicians in Mexico (no small feat).
FWIW, I believe that now the Banco de Mexico (the Mexican "Fed") is independent from the Finance minsiter and they fix interest rates without consulting with the goverment to ensure politics do not taint technical economic decissions.
Yes, he is. He has posted numerous times very interesting articles.
His MS bias and unconscious hate of Open Source(which in conjunction the calls objectivity) shows often but at least he is open about it and everybody knows his background.
By the way, he his the son of the current president of a big country (it should take you 5 minutes to find which one).
Windows+Office: several hundred dollars to write a letter once in a while, or my CV or whatever.
Linux+Abiword: 10 dollars (cheap Debian CD distro, including posting and handling) to write a letter once in a while, or my CV or whatever.
Now, convince me: why I should use MS software?
I don't need to pay: all what I need is free and open, so even if the Abiword team decides to call it a day and stop development that does not mean all my documents all of the sudden become all crap and then I need to upgrade or else.
Cars' steering wheels are also free when you buy a car. Lets remove them.
Nah, bad example.
A MS car would have somehow linked the stero system to the car's engine, so if you remove the stereo system the car would not start.Needless to say the MS stereo plays only copy protected, MS sanctioned square CDs and the only way to use another stereo is to install it somewhere else in the car. Much better analogy.
As for preserving the ecosystem, it's not like there's much there to lose, unless you really like sand.
This is a mistaken conception, precisely because desertic ecosystems are so harsh the forms of life there are rarer and worth preserving as much as species in the rain forest (or even worthier of preservation for their uniqueness).
When one goes into the desert without the respect and knowledge required one can cause damage that could last for many years to come.
If your users can open unchecked attachments with a double click of the mouse then your policies are lax and need fixing. Insulting the very people that you are suppossed to help is the worst policy I can imagine.
The IT professional is there to serve other people, not to make fun at their expense. Users should be able to do damage to themselves only after they go through enough steps to ensure it was done completely and knowingky in purpose.
In the days before seat belts we should have blamed reckless drivers for crashing their cars and breaking their neck while driving their cars at 10mph....
We should also blame the idiots that die in buildings without fire exits (they should have known it was dangerous to work there, right?)
Or perhaps those people in Chernobyl should be blamed for the horrific birth defects of their children. They should have known that to live in proximitity (all of Ukraine in this case) to a nuclear plant was dangerous and avoided by all means.
The policy should be: not runnable attachments are allowed in any email. Summary elimination with a polite communication to the offender.
If you need a legit document or attachment of any kind you either get it as plain text in the body of the email or you request that the document is sent to a company email address were somebody that knows what he/she is doing deals with attachments.
If all of the above is not possible, immediate deinstallation of Outlook should follow (there are many email programs that are not stupid, failing all run Pine. Yes, Pine) or being kind to MS, upgrade to their latest offering that seems to have some common sense security default settings (I don't know about this, I stopped to use their crapware email programs long time ago)..
End users have tools that are no suited for secure computing. Don't blame them if they get burned once and again.
The people to blame is firstly System Administrators that if they were worth their salary would get rid of Exchange, Outlook and all the rest. Failing that they would put a draconian filter to drop all attachments (Have you got a file to send me? Mail it in a diskette/Zip disk/CD-R so I can scan it prior to allow it in the network. This is the stupid but responsible SysAdmin alternative).
Second to blame is MS: if they say Windows (and by extension computing) is easy, well, then one would expect that untrained people will not bring down corporate networks? *Right*?
would do nothing to most people running Linux that know why there is a root account and normal users account
Had you said something like:
rm -rf ~/*
then that would be more credible.
That user would be punished badly, but anybody with some UNIX dribling is more aware about security and less likely to blindly run whatever is put down from the Internet.
We are glad that after more than 6 years in the Internet arena MS is realizing how crappy it is to allow things like this to happen.
Better late than ever I guess.
Your argument is toughtless by the way. Things considered harmful will come with obvious ways of securing them and all kinds of warnings. I don;t see any of those in MS products, and that is not the fault of inexperienced users (that believe all the happy about how easy computing is using MS stuff).
You can't have it both ways: if you as a company pretend that computing is easy with your products, inexperienced users should not be able to shoot themselves in the foot.
Slashdot Mirror
Would the phone company get paid for the calls? Yes.
Is the infrastructure they provide already covered by a monthly fee? Yes.
In all honesty, I can't see what would be bad about one sharing with neighbours a phone line with the exception that the phone company could not plan loads and stuff like that.
Depending on the industry the company is working in, there could be regulatory mandates that could clearly state that you should keep your backups for an X number of years.
Some companies can't just stablish a policy to delete stuff to avoid nasty incidents later because they are lagaly prevented to do so.
geeks are not suppossed to reinvent the wheel.
In the UK as far as I can tell PalmOS devices have as much shelf space in the big chains as WinCE stuff and the UK is home to a quarterly Palm magazine (which until last year was run almost add free, a clear indication of the amount of following the platform has).
Unless you have two or three reputable sources to back up your comments it seems like wild speculation (either way, I can't swear that what you are saying is not the case).
Although in geenral I tend to agrre with you, one should always remember Netscape: Netscape was sinonymous with browsing and browsing is what popularized the Internet. There was a time when nobody in his right mind would have though that Netscape will become aalmost an irrelevance (I think they are ready to fight back, but it took them almost to disapear to do so).
One should not underestimate the power of monopolic companies that have the muscle to comercialize subsidized crap to get rid of competitors.
Palm are in a hole because Microsoft are producing a pocket computer while Palm are producing a single purpose appliance.
Let me see:
-I can play chess (and around 10 more games).
-I can check the underground routes in 20 different cities.
-Appointments.
-To do list.
-Low res color digital camera.
-Scientific calculator.
-Birthday reminder.
-Password manager.
-Phone book.
-Currency converter.
-Forth interpreter.
-Email.
-I can write quick, small memos.
-Palmasutra.
Single purpose appliance. Your definition of "single purpose appliance" must be quite amusing.
Like which ones? I would be willing to drop my old Pentium 166 for one of these things. I don't want to spend to much on it, that is why I used an old machine (first I tried SmoothWall, did not like it, I am working with Mandrake firewall now).
Are you saying that the BSA has any evidence that all these people are pirating software?
DO you know what it would cost to keep a bureaucracy that could keep accurate track of this?
It all smells extremely fishy. If they have evidence they don't need to ask for compliance, they should go to the courts directly (it is like if I am robed and I give thet thief a chance to bring back my things. Hell no, the most basic common sense says you go to the police.Period).
Or is that the BSA has no evidence at all and knows it would lost all cases if they were to sue?
Lets see:
,assuming that applications exist in Linux and Windows, you can't beat Linux in price.
Hardware: same hardware (this could be argued, Linux solution could be run in cheaper hardware becauss the options exist to do so, for the sake of argument lets say both solutions use the same hardware).
Software: depends. For a start OS and Office Suite it costs nothing in Linux. You can moan, scream and pull your hair: what is available in Linux is more than enugh for teaching basic skills, let your company in youf first job pay for your proper introduction to the wonderful world of MS computing.
If you need computers to run an application that works only in Windows well, tough luck, you have no choice and your choice is gone. But we are teaching computing skills right? Programming, working with images, Office Suites. All that is available in Linux. So
Operations: you have one guy that has to administer the computer infrastructure, a guy that either knows nothing or very little about computers (if he/she know a lot about computers, this becomes mooth point: a proficient administrator can do either solution, so no differences there). Can you seriously claim WIndows is easier to administer than Linux? Then all those books by droves about "Making windows easy" and "windows for dummies" are completely unnecesary, aren't they?
I am sorry, but I fail to see why a generaly cash starved school with a clue would use MS products (or commercial products for that matter) at all. No advantages at all: one becomes hostage to MS policies and anti-piracy orgnizations raids and licensing hikes for very little benefit, if any.
So it is only them (the biggest hope of MS continuing making a profit) that are affected.
Then it is fine, those corporate bastards.
... and the rest will just copy it. And if they manage to control everything, will it become ilegal to make your own music and give it for free in electronic format?
I know I will do it if the situation gets worsening. They are promoting a very angry group of people that will eventualy get more invonved in fighthing their ways to increase their revenue. Their are going to loose sales.
There was a time when the client was always right.
I thought that any written work released into the "Public Domain" has all the advantages you mentioned.
Why to invent licensing (or should it be copyright?) methods that as far as I can tell are lready defined and achieve the same ends?
No? Bad. IN the "Real World[tm]" there are people that make a living of documenting the mes^H^H^Hprograms other people leave behind.
The reason the banks were nationalixed in 1982 was twofold: certainly the goverment was looking for a suitable scapegoat for all its shortcomings in handling the economy. But Mexican banks were notorious for lacking the most basic business skills that any bank should have (i.e. take care of the bottom line) and they made a bad situation worst facilitating the exit of money from Mexico in disproportionate amounts (which forced the devaluation of the Mexican peso). Once the banks were nationalized the country entered a period of relative stability that would last until 1994 in which the banks, that had been returned to private ownership, were marred by bad debts (and in many cases by outright criminal dealings. Several former new bankers are in jail or hiding from the Mexican justice accussed of all kind of "white collar" crimes).
Even Citibank, a very respectable American bank, had dealings with Raul Salinas de Gortari, convicted for all kind of different crimes (and brother of former president Carlos Salinas). In US congressional hearings it was demonstrated beyond any doubt that Citibank's procedures were lax, to be polite, when dealing with funds of dubious origin, all this with banks back in private hands.
The previous posting gives the impression that Banks were somehow harrassed by the bad commie Mexican goverment which, IMVHO, was not the case. Bankers have probed to be even more corrupt than politicians in Mexico (no small feat).
FWIW, I believe that now the Banco de Mexico (the Mexican "Fed") is independent from the Finance minsiter and they fix interest rates without consulting with the goverment to ensure politics do not taint technical economic decissions.
MS is demanding that information like this is not made available to the general public.
Sun and IBM go and patch their systems as fast as they can.
You tell me who deserves bashing.
Yes, he is. He has posted numerous times very interesting articles.
His MS bias and unconscious hate of Open Source(which in conjunction the calls objectivity) shows often but at least he is open about it and everybody knows his background.
By the way, he his the son of the current president of a big country (it should take you 5 minutes to find which one).
Windows+Office: several hundred dollars to write a letter once in a while, or my CV or whatever.
Linux+Abiword: 10 dollars (cheap Debian CD distro, including posting and handling) to write a letter once in a while, or my CV or whatever.
Now, convince me: why I should use MS software?
I don't need to pay: all what I need is free and open, so even if the Abiword team decides to call it a day and stop development that does not mean all my documents all of the sudden become all crap and then I need to upgrade or else.
Cars' steering wheels are also free when you buy a car. Lets remove them.
Nah, bad example.
A MS car would have somehow linked the stero system to the car's engine, so if you remove the stereo system the car would not start.Needless to say the MS stereo plays only copy protected, MS sanctioned square CDs and the only way to use another stereo is to install it somewhere else in the car. Much better analogy.
This is a mistaken conception, precisely because desertic ecosystems are so harsh the forms of life there are rarer and worth preserving as much as species in the rain forest (or even worthier of preservation for their uniqueness). When one goes into the desert without the respect and knowledge required one can cause damage that could last for many years to come.
If your users can open unchecked attachments with a double click of the mouse then your policies are lax and need fixing. Insulting the very people that you are suppossed to help is the worst policy I can imagine.
The IT professional is there to serve other people, not to make fun at their expense. Users should be able to do damage to themselves only after they go through enough steps to ensure it was done completely and knowingky in purpose.
In the days before seat belts we should have blamed reckless drivers for crashing their cars and breaking their neck while driving their cars at 10mph....
We should also blame the idiots that die in buildings without fire exits (they should have known it was dangerous to work there, right?)
Or perhaps those people in Chernobyl should be blamed for the horrific birth defects of their children. They should have known that to live in proximitity (all of Ukraine in this case) to a nuclear plant was dangerous and avoided by all means.
The policy should be: not runnable attachments are allowed in any email. Summary elimination with a polite communication to the offender.
If you need a legit document or attachment of any kind you either get it as plain text in the body of the email or you request that the document is sent to a company email address were somebody that knows what he/she is doing deals with attachments.
If all of the above is not possible, immediate deinstallation of Outlook should follow (there are many email programs that are not stupid, failing all run Pine. Yes, Pine) or being kind to MS, upgrade to their latest offering that seems to have some common sense security default settings (I don't know about this, I stopped to use their crapware email programs long time ago)..
End users have tools that are no suited for secure computing. Don't blame them if they get burned once and again.
The people to blame is firstly System Administrators that if they were worth their salary would get rid of Exchange, Outlook and all the rest. Failing that they would put a draconian filter to drop all attachments (Have you got a file to send me? Mail it in a diskette/Zip disk/CD-R so I can scan it prior to allow it in the network. This is the stupid but responsible SysAdmin alternative).
Second to blame is MS: if they say Windows (and by extension computing) is easy, well, then one would expect that untrained people will not bring down corporate networks? *Right*?
Your
/*
#!/bin/sh
rm -rf
would do nothing to most people running Linux that know why there is a root account and normal users account
Had you said something like:
rm -rf ~/*
then that would be more credible.
That user would be punished badly, but anybody with some UNIX dribling is more aware about security and less likely to blindly run whatever is put down from the Internet.
We are glad that after more than 6 years in the Internet arena MS is realizing how crappy it is to allow things like this to happen.
Better late than ever I guess.
Your argument is toughtless by the way. Things considered harmful will come with obvious ways of securing them and all kinds of warnings. I don;t see any of those in MS products, and that is not the fault of inexperienced users (that believe all the happy about how easy computing is using MS stuff).
You can't have it both ways: if you as a company pretend that computing is easy with your products, inexperienced users should not be able to shoot themselves in the foot.
Dump it now for goodness sake.
Get yourself something that does not allow you to happily double click attachments to run them.