The site in question is not doing what we are doing, they have no dynamic content, no web forms, just e-mail addresses.
Yes, but was that in the specs? Or was that something you voluntarily done for your client? If the client's requirement was "a simple Web site showcasing our products and allowing people to contact us", then he's right in pointing out that some things can be done cheaper and faster. You might have implemented scalable multi-processor algorithms for error-checking the text in the Web form, what does he care?
I read that article yesterday. Closer to the second half of the article, did you see that OQO is shipping? Wow, finally off the vaporware list.
The specs of 1 GHz, 256 MB RAM, 20 GB HDD, USB 1.1, 802.11b, XP Pro, 5'' LCD are nice, but $2000 price tag is a bit high for what's supposed to be a PDA killer.
This month's Wired magazine also has Welcome to planet Pixar article. Not so much technical information and rendering issues, as discussion of how the movies are made.
Support for programs cost more than the initial development if the programs weren't designed right to begin with. Programmers should solve problems, not introduce new ones or work-arounds.
And your points is? That the government should just go to the OpenOffice.org Web site and download a copy for each one of its employees, and refuse a tender bid from any company that mentions support, since that would mean the designed software product is of low-quality?
Ask Hans Reiser or any other kernel developer if going open source makes sense.
And let's ask OPEC whether going into oil business makes sense. From the business point of view (making money) Microsoft is a good example of benefits of going closed-source. From the government point of view, whatever does the job in the most efficient way, is the best tool.
The government's goal is to maximize the value for its electorate, not ensure someone has access to OS-level code and drivers.
Open source is a good source of business revenues if you're in a country with cheap labor where you can more or less limitlessly hire support people.
If you're in a country where the labor is more or less expensive, and moreover if your employees are not support people but software engineers, then the financial outlook is questionable. For people and companies not wanting to move into cheap support, but stay in higher-paid research and software development going into open source does not make a whole lot of sense.
The government should care little about the source. They should mandate open standards. If you decide that your document standard will be the OpenOffice Writer XML-based standard, documented and open, then you can use either OpenOffice Writer for that (free) or any closed source utility that will save to desired format, but perhaps offer some other advantages.
From what I've seen before, IBM has trouble making money off software. Microsoft lives by making money off software. IBM's core business is hardware and consulting services, so perhaps that's where the Linux mantra kicks in.
They gave the PC OS market away to Bill Gates. They gave the PC to anyone who wanted to clone it.
They did not give anything to anyone. The PC OS market was supposed to be rocked by that wonderful OS/2 operating system, while Microsoft's DOS was just a toy, just a way to start the hardware sales until the software guys took 2 more years to finish OS/2. OS/2 was so good, that you could run DOS applications from inside the OS/2. Microsoft's was just el cheapo limited edition to have something in the hardware that was ready to ship.
The architecture for the PC was not opened as a give-away, it was in fact, young and feisty programmer Bill Gates explaining the virtues of open standards to IBM, where their machines become infinitely extensible by third-party manufacturers producing all sorts of peripherals for what used to be a closed platform.
How much would a PC cost today if it wasnt for IBM deciding that releasing the PC instead of drag in court for years?
Oh, I don't know, perhaps your local Mac guru will tell you.
Realistically the database schema should be left to the designers of the tool, so that any optimizations and short cuts can be incorporated into the later versions of the tool, but there should be a single XML standard, to which the tools should be able to export-import.
His books are an integral part of Computer Science curriculum at any good university, so it's not like he's pimping some poorly-written fresh-out-of-the-press novels.
Re:I have the PDF of the first 92 pages of the boo
on
More From Tanenbaum
·
· Score: 1
As an embedded developer and consequently involuntary tester of MSPGCC, ImageCraft MSP430 Compiler and IAR Embedded Workbench, I suggest IAR for anyone willing to get into the industry. THe optimizations and functionality, as well as the quality of code generated is far better.
NYT claims the Google PC search competes with Microsoft's. Although Microsoft has never been particularly strong in the area with either Search window in 2000 or that doggie in XP. For me in 1 cases out of 10 the text search (inside the documents, search for specific text) just do not work. There are other vendors that Google will be competing against, not necessarily Microsoft.
Well, you're right. Their license does not prohibit modification, it prohibits redistribution. On your own server, it's up to you what you do with the code. Hence the entire ecosphere of Movable Type plugins and what not.
But at any point their license could add the clause against reverse engineering. And they would draw the line between reverse engineering and modifying, where modifying would include just adding your own functionality, but reverse engineering would include getting access to paid features.
I am just saying that there's no point in hiding and trying to trick the system, when you have a competitive tool like WordPress with the license like GPL, where you have absolutely no worries as for what shit will be pulled off tomorrow.
I am not sure how that changes anything I said above, or why someone's motivation for developing a product should make an influence when I download it.
You were just saying that you were considering developing an export-import tool. I pointed out that such tool was available, although import-export was not its original purpose.
I am not discouraging your intent, just my 2 cents that with free alternatives available, the product might not be as sellable.
I don't see a problem with SixApart deciding to charge for MovableType. Taking away certain features that have been free before seems like a dumb decision, but what do I know, it might work out for them. This is not such a big deal as a lot of people portray it to be.
Basically, anyone running MovableType right now has several options:
Pay up for commercial 3.0 license if you fall under new categories that require payments.
Stay with 2.6.x, which won't require anything on your part (unless some exploits are discovered)
I've developed and ran sites based on MT, pMachine and WordPress, the site in signature is completely WordPress-based and you can read my impressions in WordPress Testimonials section. I find pMachine the easiest to use, MT the most powerful and WordPress the most attractive with licensing terms and least likely to pull shit like that.
Hopefully this decision by SixApart will move more bloggers and developers into WordPress, which would accelerate improvement. I mean, realistically, MT is not that much better, and even though Wordpress can be rough if you don't know PHP or not willing to play with the code, they seem to be progressing at good speed right now.
That violates their copyright, license and probably a bunch of other stuff. Unless you plan to run the hacked version on 127.0.0.1 all the time, it's not too hard for SixApart to find your site, double-check the customer list and then send you cease-and-desist.
This is not an open source vs. closed source issue. You get the source whether you pay or whether you download, you just don't get the re-distrubution rights.
MovableType is written in Perl, so you do get all the sources. Ironically, since it's written in Perl, MovableType can be considered a closed-source package, since who the hell wants to parse someone else's Perl code.
It's called w.bloggar, and you can import all your posts from MovableType via XML-RPC, change the destination and publish it to the WordPress via XML-RPC.
Now, if you have 500 entries, it's probably not worth wasting your time, but for most of the people out there MT blogs are their hobby, and people enhoy screwing around with various features.
Sales does not mean profits. Even though the sales of WiFi products more than tripled in 2003, the revenue growth of the market wasn't as good. Which means one thing - together with high demand the prices are falling down dramatically, and by now the WiFi equipment is heavily commoditized and thus outsourced to Chinese/Taiwanese/Indonesian manufacturers, which in the hardware world generally means no one else is expecting to make any money off of it (the same for Ethernet network cards, CD-Rs and other products).
The market will grow (in fact there are 700K WiFi networks right now, and much more are expected), but the margin range is just not there - I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of the year the WiFi prices hit such a rock bottom, that some manufacturers will in fact lose money.
Apple is doing very nice - 20.2% of the 802.11g market, the first-mover advantage, and leading in revenues, outrunning even Cisco (according to Business Week). But (a) we still have to find out what the profit margins are on Apple WLAN equipment and whether SteveJ got his R&D expenses back by now, and (b) Apple is one company that is uncapable of fighting price wars. Pitch Apple against a Chinese clone factory pushing millions of WiFi access points and networks cards at half the prices, and market share is eroded. Unless Apple finds some way to lock up consumers into buying its products (easy to do with Powerbooks, not so easy with Airport access point buyers), they won't do well either in this market.
No, I remember having my home laptop with The Bat! on it and then lending it to a friend and being able to completely lock the mail app and Bat archives. It's been too long ago, since then I switched to Outlook at office, my personal server at home, and now Gmail.
SecureBat is more encryption and more security related to e-mail transfer and authentication, not e-mail storage.
If you buy yourself a copy and let everyone else stick to outlook, the app won't open until the proper password is supplied. The mail folder itself is meanwhile encrypted (I think, but let me double check).
Slashdot Mirror
The site in question is not doing what we are doing, they have no dynamic content, no web forms, just e-mail addresses.
Yes, but was that in the specs? Or was that something you voluntarily done for your client? If the client's requirement was "a simple Web site showcasing our products and allowing people to contact us", then he's right in pointing out that some things can be done cheaper and faster. You might have implemented scalable multi-processor algorithms for error-checking the text in the Web form, what does he care?
I read that article yesterday. Closer to the second half of the article, did you see that OQO is shipping ? Wow, finally off the vaporware list.
The specs of 1 GHz, 256 MB RAM, 20 GB HDD, USB 1.1, 802.11b, XP Pro, 5'' LCD are nice, but $2000 price tag is a bit high for what's supposed to be a PDA killer.
This month's Wired magazine also has Welcome to planet Pixar article. Not so much technical information and rendering issues, as discussion of how the movies are made.
Support for programs cost more than the initial development if the programs weren't designed right to begin with. Programmers should solve problems, not introduce new ones or work-arounds.
And your points is? That the government should just go to the OpenOffice.org Web site and download a copy for each one of its employees, and refuse a tender bid from any company that mentions support, since that would mean the designed software product is of low-quality?
Ask Hans Reiser or any other kernel developer if going open source makes sense.
And let's ask OPEC whether going into oil business makes sense. From the business point of view (making money) Microsoft is a good example of benefits of going closed-source. From the government point of view, whatever does the job in the most efficient way, is the best tool.
The government's goal is to maximize the value for its electorate, not ensure someone has access to OS-level code and drivers.
Open source is a good source of business revenues if you're in a country with cheap labor where you can more or less limitlessly hire support people.
If you're in a country where the labor is more or less expensive, and moreover if your employees are not support people but software engineers, then the financial outlook is questionable. For people and companies not wanting to move into cheap support, but stay in higher-paid research and software development going into open source does not make a whole lot of sense.
The government should care little about the source. They should mandate open standards. If you decide that your document standard will be the OpenOffice Writer XML-based standard, documented and open, then you can use either OpenOffice Writer for that (free) or any closed source utility that will save to desired format, but perhaps offer some other advantages.
From what I've seen before, IBM has trouble making money off software. Microsoft lives by making money off software. IBM's core business is hardware and consulting services, so perhaps that's where the Linux mantra kicks in.
They gave the PC OS market away to Bill Gates. They gave the PC to anyone who wanted to clone it.
They did not give anything to anyone. The PC OS market was supposed to be rocked by that wonderful OS/2 operating system, while Microsoft's DOS was just a toy, just a way to start the hardware sales until the software guys took 2 more years to finish OS/2. OS/2 was so good, that you could run DOS applications from inside the OS/2. Microsoft's was just el cheapo limited edition to have something in the hardware that was ready to ship.
The architecture for the PC was not opened as a give-away, it was in fact, young and feisty programmer Bill Gates explaining the virtues of open standards to IBM, where their machines become infinitely extensible by third-party manufacturers producing all sorts of peripherals for what used to be a closed platform.
How much would a PC cost today if it wasnt for IBM deciding that releasing the PC instead of drag in court for years?
Oh, I don't know, perhaps your local Mac guru will tell you.
Realistically the database schema should be left to the designers of the tool, so that any optimizations and short cuts can be incorporated into the later versions of the tool, but there should be a single XML standard, to which the tools should be able to export-import.
O'Reilly publishing has listing of all Linux commands, at least those that are expected to behave in a conformist way from distro to distro.
His books are an integral part of Computer Science curriculum at any good university, so it's not like he's pimping some poorly-written fresh-out-of-the-press novels.
mm, any possibility of getting that masterpiece?
As an embedded developer and consequently involuntary tester of MSPGCC, ImageCraft MSP430 Compiler and IAR Embedded Workbench, I suggest IAR for anyone willing to get into the industry. THe optimizations and functionality, as well as the quality of code generated is far better.
X1 seems to be the most popular one out there.
DiskMeta, they had this project in beta for a while, the Windows product went into relese just last week, the site says
DT Search, I remember their ads in bunch of computer magazines, although have never used them myself.
EFS, found it on download.com, supports MS Office and PDF as well as other formats.
Yahoo search for bulk e-mail
Google search for bulk e-mail
clickety clickety on sponsored links
Well, you're right. Their license does not prohibit modification, it prohibits redistribution. On your own server, it's up to you what you do with the code. Hence the entire ecosphere of Movable Type plugins and what not.
But at any point their license could add the clause against reverse engineering. And they would draw the line between reverse engineering and modifying, where modifying would include just adding your own functionality, but reverse engineering would include getting access to paid features.
I am just saying that there's no point in hiding and trying to trick the system, when you have a competitive tool like WordPress with the license like GPL, where you have absolutely no worries as for what shit will be pulled off tomorrow.
I am not sure how that changes anything I said above, or why someone's motivation for developing a product should make an influence when I download it.
You were just saying that you were considering developing an export-import tool. I pointed out that such tool was available, although import-export was not its original purpose.
I am not discouraging your intent, just my 2 cents that with free alternatives available, the product might not be as sellable.
Basically, anyone running MovableType right now has several options:
I've developed and ran sites based on MT, pMachine and WordPress, the site in signature is completely WordPress-based and you can read my impressions in WordPress Testimonials section. I find pMachine the easiest to use, MT the most powerful and WordPress the most attractive with licensing terms and least likely to pull shit like that.
Hopefully this decision by SixApart will move more bloggers and developers into WordPress, which would accelerate improvement. I mean, realistically, MT is not that much better, and even though Wordpress can be rough if you don't know PHP or not willing to play with the code, they seem to be progressing at good speed right now.
That violates their copyright, license and probably a bunch of other stuff. Unless you plan to run the hacked version on 127.0.0.1 all the time, it's not too hard for SixApart to find your site, double-check the customer list and then send you cease-and-desist.
Hack this, instead.
This is not an open source vs. closed source issue. You get the source whether you pay or whether you download, you just don't get the re-distrubution rights.
MovableType is written in Perl, so you do get all the sources. Ironically, since it's written in Perl, MovableType can be considered a closed-source package, since who the hell wants to parse someone else's Perl code.
It's called w.bloggar, and you can import all your posts from MovableType via XML-RPC, change the destination and publish it to the WordPress via XML-RPC.
Now, if you have 500 entries, it's probably not worth wasting your time, but for most of the people out there MT blogs are their hobby, and people enhoy screwing around with various features.
My money's in CDs...
How's that AOL investement working out for you?
Sales does not mean profits. Even though the sales of WiFi products more than tripled in 2003, the revenue growth of the market wasn't as good. Which means one thing - together with high demand the prices are falling down dramatically, and by now the WiFi equipment is heavily commoditized and thus outsourced to Chinese/Taiwanese/Indonesian manufacturers, which in the hardware world generally means no one else is expecting to make any money off of it (the same for Ethernet network cards, CD-Rs and other products).
The market will grow (in fact there are 700K WiFi networks right now, and much more are expected), but the margin range is just not there - I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of the year the WiFi prices hit such a rock bottom, that some manufacturers will in fact lose money.
Apple is doing very nice - 20.2% of the 802.11g market, the first-mover advantage, and leading in revenues, outrunning even Cisco (according to Business Week). But (a) we still have to find out what the profit margins are on Apple WLAN equipment and whether SteveJ got his R&D expenses back by now, and (b) Apple is one company that is uncapable of fighting price wars. Pitch Apple against a Chinese clone factory pushing millions of WiFi access points and networks cards at half the prices, and market share is eroded. Unless Apple finds some way to lock up consumers into buying its products (easy to do with Powerbooks, not so easy with Airport access point buyers), they won't do well either in this market.
No, I remember having my home laptop with The Bat! on it and then lending it to a friend and being able to completely lock the mail app and Bat archives. It's been too long ago, since then I switched to Outlook at office, my personal server at home, and now Gmail.
SecureBat is more encryption and more security related to e-mail transfer and authentication, not e-mail storage.
The Bat
If you buy yourself a copy and let everyone else stick to outlook, the app won't open until the proper password is supplied. The mail folder itself is meanwhile encrypted (I think, but let me double check).
Orwellian in the sense that all animals are equal, but some are more equal.