Not sure whether you are serious or sarcastic...however the point that SCO would claim something that is clearly not connected to a Unix kernel is the funny part.
It's about as baseless as some of their other claims.
The article wasn't really pitting Linux against Apple. It merely reported what analysts are saying, and indicated an opinion that basically states that linux may gain more of the desktop market because of the price, even though he'd rather have a spanking new G5 to work on.
It wasn't about what is or isn't with each OS, just stating that a bunch of people who pay attention to such things are saying that within a year there will be more Linux desktops than Mac desktops.
Seriously Mac's are great but to compare them to a solution that costs 1/10th the price for a machine that will perform email/web browsing and simple digital photo manipulation is just silly.
Considering what most people use their PC's for, I think it's totally feasible - especially considering the economic situation in burgeoning markets like south america and asia.
Why can't someone who creates something choose how it is going to be sold? Seems like a basic right to me. Whether or not the way they've chosen to package it is appealing to their customers will all be sorted out by the market.
If people don't like the way it's packaged, or the price, they don't buy it. For crying out loud, it's like Mr Burns blocking out the sun and raising the price of electricity. I'm pretty sure everyone could survive without listening to the latest Linkin Park song.
I also find it interesting that people here seem to know what is written in to those bands contracts with the record companies. And that 12% is much more than they are making otherwise. It may be or it may not be - you really don't know until you've read all the contracts involved. And perhaps it has nothing to do with money. Maybe they want to package the entire album as a single 'work'.
Why do you listen to artists that only come up with a few songs that you like? Seems to me like you haven't found what you like if that's the case.
Because one might like one or two songs and not the others?
Why do you like certain artists from a genre and not ALL the artists from the genre? You clearly have not found a genre you like.
There are lots of 'one hit wonder' bands...I personally would rather download the song and not have the CD and packaging cluttering up my house (and wasting our natural resources).
For the extra dollar of the 'couple of dollars' for the cd single I'll buy a 'B' side song that I like as opposed to what 'the man' wants me to get.
Not sure this should be modded as funny - it's actually quite interesting.
That coupled with the closing statements on how quickyl his should be resolved prett much indicates an anti-SCO stance - much different than earlier articles.
Why not create a media player where you could donate money to an artist.
You don't even need this technology - you could send 'em a check, or paypal, or ebay payments.
You don't even need to create a media player - there are some released under GPL - it would be totally legal for you to use it - even charge for it, just provide the source as per the GPL.
Have artists release music under your plan. If it takes off then no-one will buy music from RIAA artists.
That is free market.
Which law needs to be changed for this to happen? Under current copyright law, could an artist not release his music under a 'send me money if you like it' license?
Once it takes off, you could then arrange a deal with a recording studio and also provide a single address for people to send the money to. Then you could distribute the money - some to the artists, some to the studios in return for their prior services and of course keep some for yourself:)
Should someone have a choice to be able to create music and not have people listen to it for free? Or to require people to pay BEFORE listening? Is there something wrong with that concept? If there was enough quality music that people chose not to pay under this scheme, then said artist would not make any money releasing music under this policy.
If you don't feel the music on CDs is worth paying what they are asking, then don't buy it, and don't break the law by pirating it. Buy independent CDs from the artists for $5. Download artists freely available music. Send them a cheque if you feel like it.
Create the equivalent of the free software movement in music. You don't see Linux zealots pirating MS Windows (they just steal SCO's code---I'M KIDDING) - you see them helping to create an alternative. They (and I) put up with Office apps that weren't a polished as MS Office, while helping to improve them and create a viable alternative.
Instead of trying to justify breaking the law by a lame excuse of helping the economy why not help the people who are willing to play nicely - the independant artists who are scraping a measly material existance because of their love of their music? Then they will have more money to buy new instruments or have more time to devote to their craft because they don't have to work a crappy job to make ends meet because the $200 per weekend they get playing the local bar doesn't cut it. You can make a difference.
The electronic's divisions will not cease to exist without piracy. There are tons of legitimate uses for all those devices - just because YOU wouldn't use them for legal purposes doesn't mean a large portion of the population wouldn't.
You could use your CD burner to record legal music . You could by a video camera to record your next road trip to see one of your favourite bands playing in a small bar in a town 3 hours away, and then burn to a DVD so you could remember the fun you had getting there.
Not that I agree with the statements of Sen Hatch, but it is mindless drivel like this that provides ammunition for the people arguing for DRM etc. The best argument against DRM is that most people are honest so don't burden them with all this crap. Posts like yours certainly dilute that argument!
I don't intend this as a flame and I'm not really sure where exactly I stand on the subject but if you are speeding, you are breaking the law - not just if you get caught. So why is it wrong to enforce speed limits with new technology?
Now I do think it would really suck if you had a smartcard or something to insert into the ignition to start the car and prove it's you (or a fingerprint scanner or rectum scanner or something) and then have any violations you make be (ie speeding) be automatically detected. But while it would really suck, I don't know that I have any other objections to it. Assuming it is mostly infallible.
This is all theoretical - with technology that we have now I'm sure things can be spoofed etc however assuming it is infallible, what arguments can you make against it?
Ever wanted to know what Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos really thought about the Segway the first time he saw it?
So why did you click on the link if you didn't give a crap what Steve and Jeff thought of it?
The story is a product for consumers to read. If they want to read it they will. If they don't then they won't except for a few who will, and then complain...
you don't get it - none of that matters...what matters is what people are going to be buying SCO stock for tomorrow.
1) I don't have to think SCO has any chance of winning (and I don't), I only need to think that there are a bunch of people (stupid or otherwise) that will pay more tomorrow than I paid today.
2) If they won, the stock price would go up regardless of an appeal.
3) irrelevant
4) irrelevant - I'm not talking a 50 year investment - I'm talking about taking advantage of a unique situation.
5) You are right - I didn't say that it was reliable - I said if I thought (for whatever reason) that I could sell something tomorrow for more than I bought it today,that I would.
6) If an imecile bought SCO stock at 6 last week and sold it at 10 this week, then he/she would be an imbecile with more money than he started with.
Nope, but I would pay $25 dollars for a dollar bill if I was relatively sure I could sell it for $50 tomorrow.
That is what the stock market is about. P/E ratios market cap, growth figures and everything else 'good investing' is about are merely tools to help decide how much that stock will be worth tomorrow (or 5 or 10 or 50 years from now).
If I thought SCO was going to be getting a billions dollars from IBM, you can be sure I'd be buying SCOX no matter what the P/E.
Re:Why can't I get Java working on my RH8 box?
on
Sun's Last Stand
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
..here's the crux of Sun's problem!.
Quick! Does anyone have Scott McNealy's number? I need to call him to let him know that all his companies problems will be solved if he simply gets Java working with Mozilla on this guys linux machine.
He was worried about IBM and Sun and Intel and Microsoft - clearly he should send someone over to install the JRE on Redhat 8.
100 million java enabled cell phones...installation on a browser/OS combo that no-one* uses...hmmm...where to spend your time?
*okay - high percentage of users reading this (myself included), but low percentage of Sun's target market (embedded devices and enterprise applications)
I can't comment on the whole rocket thing, but I can attest to the fact that a compact flash card can survive a trip through the washing machine, including the spin cycle.
The pics that were on it were still there when it was through...didn't put it in the dryer though. Unfortunately the pics were not dirty to begin with, so I can't say whether or not they were cleaned in the whole process.
What kind of G's does a Kenmore produce?
Cheers,
Babyrat
Re:I don't like where this is headed
on
DVRs for Cop Cars
·
· Score: 1
I'm not a cop either...however this can certainly be looked at from the exact opposite way - a suspect says you did something to him and you provide the video that you didn't.
Sounds like it could work both ways.
And regarding:
That's because no one in their right minds would work these jobs with "purer" motivations
I think what you meant to say is that YOU do not have a pure enough motivation to do either of these jobs...I doubt you speak for the entire population of the human race.
I personally know a few teachers who could be doing something else for a lot more money with a lot less BS however they continue to teach because they love it. I consider them to be in their 'right' minds...and sometimes I'm even a little jealous that they are doing something they truly love, even if they are sacrificing other material things to do it.
Slashdot can server the community best right now by being what Slashdot is.
May I respond to the proposal? (okay thanks, I will)
What is Slashdot? News for Nerds? There are already 132 comments posted on this site - I'm guessing most are from the 'Nerds' that were interested enough to read the story (and were nerdy enough to be reading./ to begin with). Most are on topic so the topic must have been interesting enough for them to read, and make comments.
You can pick and choose what topics you'd like to follow and discuss.
Now if Slashdot's motto was 'News regarding only geeky topics for Nerds' then I would certainly agree with your proposal.
But it isn't so I don't.
I kind of like coming here, and then opening other's suggested links in a new tab in Mozilla 1.3
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure whether you are serious or sarcastic...however the point that SCO would claim something that is clearly not connected to a Unix kernel is the funny part.
It's about as baseless as some of their other claims.
The article wasn't really pitting Linux against Apple. It merely reported what analysts are saying, and indicated an opinion that basically states that linux may gain more of the desktop market because of the price, even though he'd rather have a spanking new G5 to work on.
It wasn't about what is or isn't with each OS, just stating that a bunch of people who pay attention to such things are saying that within a year there will be more Linux desktops than Mac desktops.
Seriously Mac's are great but to compare them to a solution that costs 1/10th the price for a machine that will perform email/web browsing and simple digital photo manipulation is just silly.
Considering what most people use their PC's for, I think it's totally feasible - especially considering the economic situation in burgeoning markets like south america and asia.
Why can't someone who creates something choose how it is going to be sold? Seems like a basic right to me. Whether or not the way they've chosen to package it is appealing to their customers will all be sorted out by the market.
If people don't like the way it's packaged, or the price, they don't buy it. For crying out loud, it's like Mr Burns blocking out the sun and raising the price of electricity. I'm pretty sure everyone could survive without listening to the latest Linkin Park song.
I also find it interesting that people here seem to know what is written in to those bands contracts with the record companies. And that 12% is much more than they are making otherwise. It may be or it may not be - you really don't know until you've read all the contracts involved. And perhaps it has nothing to do with money. Maybe they want to package the entire album as a single 'work'.
Why do you listen to artists that only come up with a few songs that you like? Seems to me like you haven't found what you like if that's the case.
Because one might like one or two songs and not the others?
Why do you like certain artists from a genre and not ALL the artists from the genre? You clearly have not found a genre you like.
There are lots of 'one hit wonder' bands...I personally would rather download the song and not have the CD and packaging cluttering up my house (and wasting our natural resources).
For the extra dollar of the 'couple of dollars' for the cd single I'll buy a 'B' side song that I like as opposed to what 'the man' wants me to get.
I respect UPS more than some atheletes too. In fact, I prefer them over FedEx.
Sorry couldn't resist...
Not sure this should be modded as funny - it's actually quite interesting.
That coupled with the closing statements on how quickyl his should be resolved prett much indicates an anti-SCO stance - much different than earlier articles.
You talk about the free market.
:)
Why not create a media player where you could donate money to an artist.
You don't even need this technology - you could send 'em a check, or paypal, or ebay payments.
You don't even need to create a media player - there are some released under GPL - it would be totally legal for you to use it - even charge for it, just provide the source as per the GPL.
Have artists release music under your plan. If it takes off then no-one will buy music from RIAA artists.
That is free market.
Which law needs to be changed for this to happen? Under current copyright law, could an artist not release his music under a 'send me money if you like it' license?
Once it takes off, you could then arrange a deal with a recording studio and also provide a single address for people to send the money to. Then you could distribute the money - some to the artists, some to the studios in return for their prior services and of course keep some for yourself
Should someone have a choice to be able to create music and not have people listen to it for free? Or to require people to pay BEFORE listening? Is there something wrong with that concept? If there was enough quality music that people chose not to pay under this scheme, then said artist would not make any money releasing music under this policy.
Gotta love the free market in action!
actually he technically wouldn't be stealing the cable because it was paid for by the previous owner.
Why protect a dead indusry?
Why break the law?
If you don't feel the music on CDs is worth paying what they are asking, then don't buy it, and don't break the law by pirating it. Buy independent CDs from the artists for $5. Download artists freely available music. Send them a cheque if you feel like it.
Create the equivalent of the free software movement in music. You don't see Linux zealots pirating MS Windows (they just steal SCO's code---I'M KIDDING) - you see them helping to create an alternative. They (and I) put up with Office apps that weren't a polished as MS Office, while helping to improve them and create a viable alternative.
Instead of trying to justify breaking the law by a lame excuse of helping the economy why not help the people who are willing to play nicely - the independant artists who are scraping a measly material existance because of their love of their music? Then they will have more money to buy new instruments or have more time to devote to their craft because they don't have to work a crappy job to make ends meet because the $200 per weekend they get playing the local bar doesn't cut it. You can make a difference.
The electronic's divisions will not cease to exist without piracy. There are tons of legitimate uses for all those devices - just because YOU wouldn't use them for legal purposes doesn't mean a large portion of the population wouldn't.
You could use your CD burner to record legal music . You could by a video camera to record your next road trip to see one of your favourite bands playing in a small bar in a town 3 hours away, and then burn to a DVD so you could remember the fun you had getting there.
Not that I agree with the statements of Sen Hatch, but it is mindless drivel like this that provides ammunition for the people arguing for DRM etc. The best argument against DRM is that most people are honest so don't burden them with all this crap. Posts like yours certainly dilute that argument!
If Sun is the other mystery Licensee, why do you assume it is to take a stab at Linux?
SCO: Give us a couple million dollars or we'll sue.
SUN: Hmmm couple million dollars now, or a couple million to lawyers...and a chance for damages...her ya go.
Does EVERYTHING have to be a conspiracy against Linux?
I don't intend this as a flame and I'm not really sure where exactly I stand on the subject but if you are speeding, you are breaking the law - not just if you get caught. So why is it wrong to enforce speed limits with new technology?
Now I do think it would really suck if you had a smartcard or something to insert into the ignition to start the car and prove it's you (or a fingerprint scanner or rectum scanner or something) and then have any violations you make be (ie speeding) be automatically detected. But while it would really suck, I don't know that I have any other objections to it. Assuming it is mostly infallible.
This is all theoretical - with technology that we have now I'm sure things can be spoofed etc however assuming it is infallible, what arguments can you make against it?
Ever wanted to know what Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos really thought about the Segway the first time he saw it?
So why did you click on the link if you didn't give a crap what Steve and Jeff thought of it?
The story is a product for consumers to read. If they want to read it they will. If they don't then they won't except for a few who will, and then complain...
I'm serious too!
you don't get it - none of that matters...what matters is what people are going to be buying SCO stock for tomorrow.
1)
I don't have to think SCO has any chance of winning (and I don't), I only need to think that there are a bunch of people (stupid or otherwise) that will pay more tomorrow than I paid today.
2) If they won, the stock price would go up regardless of an appeal.
3) irrelevant
4) irrelevant - I'm not talking a 50 year investment - I'm talking about taking advantage of a unique situation.
5) You are right - I didn't say that it was reliable - I said if I thought (for whatever reason) that I could sell something tomorrow for more than I bought it today,that I would.
6) If an imecile bought SCO stock at 6 last week and sold it at 10 this week, then he/she would be an imbecile with more money than he started with.
Nope, but I would pay $25 dollars for a dollar bill if I was relatively sure I could sell it for $50 tomorrow.
That is what the stock market is about. P/E ratios market cap, growth figures and everything else 'good investing' is about are merely tools to help decide how much that stock will be worth tomorrow (or 5 or 10 or 50 years from now).
If I thought SCO was going to be getting a billions dollars from IBM, you can be sure I'd be buying SCOX no matter what the P/E.
Quick! Does anyone have Scott McNealy's number? I need to call him to let him know that all his companies problems will be solved if he simply gets Java working with Mozilla on this guys linux machine.
He was worried about IBM and Sun and Intel and Microsoft - clearly he should send someone over to install the JRE on Redhat 8.
100 million java enabled cell phones...installation on a browser/OS combo that no-one* uses...hmmm...where to spend your time?
*okay - high percentage of users reading this (myself included), but low percentage of Sun's target market (embedded devices and enterprise applications)
The pics that were on it were still there when it was through...didn't put it in the dryer though. Unfortunately the pics were not dirty to begin with, so I can't say whether or not they were cleaned in the whole process.
What kind of G's does a Kenmore produce?
Cheers,
Babyrat
I'm not a cop either...however this can certainly be looked at from the exact opposite way - a suspect says you did something to him and you provide the video that you didn't.
Sounds like it could work both ways.
And regarding:
That's because no one in their right minds would work these jobs with "purer" motivations
I think what you meant to say is that YOU do not have a pure enough motivation to do either of these jobs...I doubt you speak for the entire population of the human race.
I personally know a few teachers who could be doing something else for a lot more money with a lot less BS however they continue to teach because they love it. I consider them to be in their 'right' minds...and sometimes I'm even a little jealous that they are doing something they truly love, even if they are sacrificing other material things to do it.
It's like making love in a canoe!
(except some of the microbrews, of course)
Slashdot can server the community best right now by being what Slashdot is.
May I respond to the proposal? (okay thanks, I will)
What is Slashdot? News for Nerds? There are already 132 comments posted on this site - I'm guessing most are from the 'Nerds' that were interested enough to read the story (and were nerdy enough to be reading ./ to begin with). Most are on topic so the topic must have been interesting enough for them to read, and make comments.
You can pick and choose what topics you'd like to follow and discuss.
Now if Slashdot's motto was 'News regarding only geeky topics for Nerds' then I would certainly agree with your proposal.
But it isn't so I don't.
I kind of like coming here, and then opening other's suggested links in a new tab in Mozilla 1.3
Ummm 6 feet under??