If the US does move to a standardized electronic voting system proprietry or closed, considering that it is much easier to sue in the US than it is in Germany, I think you would be right in the effect but not in the system.
I'm not so sure. In the US you have an electoral college and in Germany you have direct voting. I'm not sure whether the electoral college system is open to abuse but I think, considering that Gore had more overall votes, that Gore would have won in Germany.
No, of course I'm not, but if there are say rounding errors or floating point errors in the code (this happens to everyone) and there *are* irregularities that get noticed, an independant commision of inquiry will be able to find the error with the help of a lot of coders who have used these tools and worked on the implementation compared to say having to go through an international court in order to get MS, Sun, Oracle or IBM to release some code.
OSS is actually very strong in Germany. If you take a look at the netcraft percentages, it's higher than in the US.
The German government could do worse. A proprietry package would probably do the job as well, especially considering that the actual counting is done by hand (although this does eliminate the possibility of machine error in the actual voting process and of someone cracking a voting line). The reasons behind this are probably economic: MySQL, Tomcat, JBoss on Linux with a web client cost a lot less to implement for all the counting stations than a proprietry solution and Germany has the positive effect of supporting it's own software industry (SuSE) rather than someone else's.
I know that Iran has no copyright laws, so MS doesn't earn a penny there. And although the major OS in the middle east is Windows, Linux is making good breakthroughs there. Companies like Hancom who develop explicitly with international users in mind (Asian, Middle east) are apparently quite popular.
A few (obviuosly biased since I'm typing this in in OSX) points about Apple and OSX and it's relation to OSS.
1. Apple has become very successful over the last few years because they started catering for those consumers who don't like to fight with the computer and who have difficulty comprehending computers. Most of us who have been at this for years with various OS's and computers (WinXXX, Mac OS XX, Linux, BSD , x86, PPC etc) have become used to working out how the things work. We all have that certain contempt for users who have difficulty comprehending how to use a contextual menu, a config file or the labyrinth of MS control panels. Apple addressed this with the iMacs, iBooks and Mac OSX IMO, by providing a simple "dumbed down" UI (and this will go even further with the next release of OSX, which has a "simple finder" option) and by continuing to use single button mice. Until you've seen a friend who uses windows and look at astonishment at you as you use the contextual menu, you won't be able to appreciate this. 2.Apple made a very wise decision to mix it's OS with an "OpenSource" core (Yes I know) and a propietry GUI. It gives Apple plus points with O'Reilly for instance and some possibilities for dvelopers to influence where the OS is going. At the same time Apple remains in control of the OS and GUI and can concentrate efforts and resources where they are needed. 3. Using NeXT's technology was a big bonus, because ObjC is not that much harder than Java and quite a lot easier than C++ (although many will still use C++). 4.Apple does actually sometimes seem to listen to their users (Spring loaded folders coming back) and does actually seem to bring useful innovations (Rendevouz, Ink, Firewire)into an industry which is scared of taking risks. 5.Also very importantly, and this is not brought up that often, Apple doesn't have the reputation of absolute ruthlessness that Microsoft does. Make no mistake, Apple is still a business and will go over the occasional body (Retailers) but compared to MS they are angels. They seem to have realised that brutal EULA'S only make for bad press and bad attitudes. Apple doesn't care if you run PPC Linux next to Mac OSX and doesn't care if you run an MS emulator, because you bought the hardware. 6. Apple's marketing is an order of magnitude better than MS'. Apple almost never brings technical details into the advertising and relies on celver associations. Compare this to the MS OfficeXP campaign where they showed the smart tabs on the shoulder of a naked woman. What were you supposed to think? OfficeXP = built in porn? 7.Apple does however have one extremely week point, and this is the CPU. NO amount of "Myth" marketing makes up for the fact that they are very far behind in terms of processor peformance. Their reliance on a floundering company, Motorola, for the core of their machines is dangerous. There is still no sign of the mythical G5 and nothing has been said about it for the near future. IMO Apple would be better off buying the PPC area from Motorola, but what do I know.
This whole Microsoft trial has given everyone, pro- and anti- Microsoft a bad feeling. The pros because they feel that the world is out to get them and the antis because of all that MS has done to abuse it's position and it's total lack of respect of anyone and anything else. What saddens me is that it seems that MS will never lose any trial because even if they were to be broken up or whatever they would just ignore the judgement, as they have in the past and they would no doubt adapt by by moving all applications into the OS for example. It seems no American government will ever be able to or want to stop them.
In other words I think this trial is a waste of time. I think it would be better to fight MS's abuse there where one can, i.e. when they make a clear cut illegal licence or EULA and above all for OSS people to continue to improve the UI of Linux and to work towards making applications like OpenOffice and Mozilla better. At the same time it would be wise to continue the personal efforts to show schools and businesses that OSS can be just as good if not better.
Apart from that the one legal measure that would be the most telling would be an audit of MS' code to see where it truly comes from.
I used to own a NeXT cube. It was arguably the best desktop platform I have ever used. Quick, flexible programming and well thought out UI. I agree 100% that Jobs made a very bad decision with his proprietry hardware. His decision was obviously based on his history with Apple and his wish to take over that market or at least muscle in. The same can be said for Gassee and BeOS which also started a highly innovative OS on a proprietry hardware platform. What is IMO highly ironic that both companies then ported their OS's to other platforms when their own hardware didn't sell, NeXT to the PC and BeOS first to the Mac and then to the PC when Apple bought NeXT.
If (always the big IF but interessting all the same) NeXT had developed directly for the PC originally, especially considering that NeXT was introduced around the same time as Windows3.0, NeXT might have taken the market that WindowsNT captured a few years later, considering tha NeXT was a lot more evolved in the GUI and OS level than NT was at the time. NeXT would have had time to develop a large installed user base and applications.
BeOS might also have had more success if they had originally developed for the PC, when one looks at the instability of early NT4 service packs. Going with open source when they were dying as a company would also have done a lot not only for the open source movement but would have provided a developed OS on the PC with a good looking consisitent GUI. But Gassee was perhaps too greedy.
If either of these OS's had gained a foothold in the PC world the market would look undoubtedly very different today. I would argue that NeXT had the chance to establish itself in the market, and could have possibly even done it later if Jobs had not suffered from the same money problem as Gassee: charging too much and little marketing.
Jobs seems to have learned from this though, but unless he does something radical in the CPU area Apple will have mounting problems in marketing. The G5 is nowhere to be seen and Apple cannot change to the x86 platform now. I wonder what Jobs will do?
I read this "The company says it will restrict.Pro to doctors, lawyers or accountants: 'qualified professionals in good standing....pro will be a premium brand, enabling effective, secure communication between professionals and users for the first time in the history of the Internet.'" and the first thing I thought was about all the spam that ends up in the hotmail account I use for registrations etc.
Since when do schools that use Macs use Office:Mac? And does MS include those juicy deals on MS software for MS Mac software too? No? I didn't think so. Most schools that use Macs will have Appleworks on them.
Let's *not* be fair to Microsoft. They wouldn't be to us.
Because then no one will download their software if it is expensive. MS would rightly get the treatment back that they gave to Netscape and others. They really, really deserve it.
Since when did the price of Windows ever reflect in any way on the price of the included applications. MS would be absolutely boneheaded to charge a single cent for any "middleware" stuff like IE, bla bla bla etc. You can be guaranteed that they will be free of charge.
This would simply put MS in a level playing field and treat MS the way it treated Netscape and others.
"What will stop them form making Windows without IE crash every 15 minutes?"
A look at their revenue stream?
The point of the case is that OEMs will be able then to add components of their choosing not Microsofts. If MS makes the OS crash all the time it will simply ruin their reputation and thereby their revenue.
From the article on ZDNet:"But the software giant says it would be technically impossible to offer multiple versions of Windows and would create havoc for consumers and the computer industry."
What are WinME, Win2000 and WinXP then? Ever since Win3.1 and WinNT3.5 MS has been "offering" multiple versions of Windows.
My impression of HP's PC line was that it was always amongst the best ones in terms of quality if not price and performance. My impression of Compaq was that their service was not very good, but expensive and their PC's were not very good quality or cheap but were good performers.
Does this mean that the quality will go down overall for PC's from HP?
I feel for all those that are going to lose their jobs because of this. Bad time to lose your job in this industry.
I don't think that even MS will be able to pressure Peru into buying anything. There are also other factors including publicity. If MS pushes too hard this will start to make international news ("Big American corporation forcing poor South American country to accept it's terms"). MS is hardly popular internationally and this would cause a backlash against it(Remember that there is still a case going on against MS in the EU). MS sometimes shows remarkable stuidity in it's dealings with the press and this would be no exception.
I'm not excatly sure how legal something like this is and what rights MS has to prosecute if the school simply ignores them and only notes PCs runnning windows?
Don't the schools ever bother to contact their lawyers when faced with something like this? Don't any of these people write to their political representatives over issues like this? I was under the impression that in the US you can sue over something like MS "requiring an institution wide commitment". Isn't that criminal in the US? Since when does MS have the right to require *anything* whatsoever. Isn't this in the legue of charging for services not rendered, or goods not sold?
I am shocked and amazed by the arrogance of that company. I wrote a post asking if someday MS would make it a criminal offence to not have a PC in your house with Windows on it. This does seem very close to that sort of behaviour. I would assume that others would be too because it the future of their children that is at stake.
I've been in and out of IT since the mid eighties. At the moment I've been unemployed for a year and my chances of finding a new job in this field are small. I'm thinking of delivering Pizzas
Blaming companies outsourcing their IT work or foreign competitors is not going to help you cope. The companies do that because the sector is struggling and they have to somehow make a profit as well. The IT sector has been extremely lucky until the last couple of years, reporting growth every year. Did anyone bother to think that other industries that were major performers decades ago also went into bad times and laid workers off or outsourced to some cheaper country. IT is simply beoming a mainstream industry, sadly with workers who are technically able to unionise more easily than any other but unwilling to do so for fear of the competition or a myriad other reasons.
The way I see it one has a number of choices: 1.One forgets about the high flying career that one envisaged for oneself, takes a major paycut, but is possibly able to find work. 2.One advances one's studies. It might help if one has an extra qualification. 3.One leaves the IT sector and does something else. 4.One starts one's own business. An option not to taken lightheartedly. 5.One tries to cope with difficulties that one encounters with bosses etc instead of quitting at the first sign of trouble. 6.Consider moving away from the US. I know that Java programmers are wanted here in Europe and the pay is fairly good. If it's good enough for a H1-B it could be good enough for you.
I'm sorry if these things sound banal, but what choice does one have? Somehow one has to cope and survive. Starting unions might help, but it won't make a difference in the short term, and running around blaming others will not get you a job.
If Americans were suddenly to get told to leave the Chech Republic for instance, Prague would suddenly have about 30000 less people.
Low wages are not the only reason those people get Visas. They generally complain less and work more. This attitude of putting the blame on foreign workers will not get *you* your job back. A different attitude to work might.
Slashdot Mirror
If the US does move to a standardized electronic voting system proprietry or closed, considering that it is much easier to sue in the US than it is in Germany, I think you would be right in the effect but not in the system.
I'm not so sure. In the US you have an electoral college and in Germany you have direct voting. I'm not sure whether the electoral college system is open to abuse but I think, considering that Gore had more overall votes, that Gore would have won in Germany.
No, of course I'm not, but if there are say rounding errors or floating point errors in the code (this happens to everyone) and there *are* irregularities that get noticed, an independant commision of inquiry will be able to find the error with the help of a lot of coders who have used these tools and worked on the implementation compared to say having to go through an international court in order to get MS, Sun, Oracle or IBM to release some code.
Considering that SuSE is German (and extremely popular in Germany as well) I would think that it ould be them.
OSS is actually very strong in Germany. If you take a look at the netcraft percentages, it's higher than in the US.
The German government could do worse. A proprietry package would probably do the job as well, especially considering that the actual counting is done by hand (although this does eliminate the possibility of machine error in the actual voting process and of someone cracking a voting line). The reasons behind this are probably economic: MySQL, Tomcat, JBoss on Linux with a web client cost a lot less to implement for all the counting stations than a proprietry solution and Germany has the positive effect of supporting it's own software industry (SuSE) rather than someone else's.
Perhaps because if there is a problem in the election results, people will be able to see where it went wrong unlike with some other companies.
I know that Iran has no copyright laws, so MS doesn't earn a penny there. And although the major OS in the middle east is Windows, Linux is making good breakthroughs there. Companies like Hancom who develop explicitly with international users in mind (Asian, Middle east) are apparently quite popular.
A few (obviuosly biased since I'm typing this in in OSX) points about Apple and OSX and it's relation to OSS.
1. Apple has become very successful over the last few years because they started catering for those consumers who don't like to fight with the computer and who have difficulty comprehending computers. Most of us who have been at this for years with various OS's and computers (WinXXX, Mac OS XX, Linux, BSD , x86, PPC etc) have become used to working out how the things work. We all have that certain contempt for users who have difficulty comprehending how to use a contextual menu, a config file or the labyrinth of MS control panels. Apple addressed this with the iMacs, iBooks and Mac OSX IMO, by providing a simple "dumbed down" UI (and this will go even further with the next release of OSX, which has a "simple finder" option) and by continuing to use single button mice. Until you've seen a friend who uses windows and look at astonishment at you as you use the contextual menu, you won't be able to appreciate this.
2.Apple made a very wise decision to mix it's OS with an "OpenSource" core (Yes I know) and a propietry GUI. It gives Apple plus points with O'Reilly for instance and some possibilities for dvelopers to influence where the OS is going. At the same time Apple remains in control of the OS and GUI and can concentrate efforts and resources where they are needed.
3. Using NeXT's technology was a big bonus, because ObjC is not that much harder than Java and quite a lot easier than C++ (although many will still use C++).
4.Apple does actually sometimes seem to listen to their users (Spring loaded folders coming back) and does actually seem to bring useful innovations (Rendevouz, Ink, Firewire)into an industry which is scared of taking risks.
5.Also very importantly, and this is not brought up that often, Apple doesn't have the reputation of absolute ruthlessness that Microsoft does. Make no mistake, Apple is still a business and will go over the occasional body (Retailers) but compared to MS they are angels. They seem to have realised that brutal EULA'S only make for bad press and bad attitudes. Apple doesn't care if you run PPC Linux next to Mac OSX and doesn't care if you run an MS emulator, because you bought the hardware.
6. Apple's marketing is an order of magnitude better than MS'. Apple almost never brings technical details into the advertising and relies on celver associations. Compare this to the MS OfficeXP campaign where they showed the smart tabs on the shoulder of a naked woman. What were you supposed to think? OfficeXP = built in porn?
7.Apple does however have one extremely week point, and this is the CPU. NO amount of "Myth" marketing makes up for the fact that they are very far behind in terms of processor peformance. Their reliance on a floundering company, Motorola, for the core of their machines is dangerous. There is still no sign of the mythical G5 and nothing has been said about it for the near future. IMO Apple would be better off buying the PPC area from Motorola, but what do I know.
This whole Microsoft trial has given everyone, pro- and anti- Microsoft a bad feeling. The pros because they feel that the world is out to get them and the antis because of all that MS has done to abuse it's position and it's total lack of respect of anyone and anything else. What saddens me is that it seems that MS will never lose any trial because even if they were to be broken up or whatever they would just ignore the judgement, as they have in the past and they would no doubt adapt by by moving all applications into the OS for example. It seems no American government will ever be able to or want to stop them.
In other words I think this trial is a waste of time. I think it would be better to fight MS's abuse there where one can, i.e. when they make a clear cut illegal licence or EULA and above all for OSS people to continue to improve the UI of Linux and to work towards making applications like OpenOffice and Mozilla better. At the same time it would be wise to continue the personal efforts to show schools and businesses that OSS can be just as good if not better.
Apart from that the one legal measure that would be the most telling would be an audit of MS' code to see where it truly comes from.
I used to own a NeXT cube. It was arguably the best desktop platform I have ever used. Quick, flexible programming and well thought out UI. I agree 100% that Jobs made a very bad decision with his proprietry hardware. His decision was obviously based on his history with Apple and his wish to take over that market or at least muscle in. The same can be said for Gassee and BeOS which also started a highly innovative OS on a proprietry hardware platform. What is IMO highly ironic that both companies then ported their OS's to other platforms when their own hardware didn't sell, NeXT to the PC and BeOS first to the Mac and then to the PC when Apple bought NeXT.
If (always the big IF but interessting all the same) NeXT had developed directly for the PC originally, especially considering that NeXT was introduced around the same time as Windows3.0, NeXT might have taken the market that WindowsNT captured a few years later, considering tha NeXT was a lot more evolved in the GUI and OS level than NT was at the time. NeXT would have had time to develop a large installed user base and applications.
BeOS might also have had more success if they had originally developed for the PC, when one looks at the instability of early NT4 service packs. Going with open source when they were dying as a company would also have done a lot not only for the open source movement but would have provided a developed OS on the PC with a good looking consisitent GUI. But Gassee was perhaps too greedy.
If either of these OS's had gained a foothold in the PC world the market would look undoubtedly very different today. I would argue that NeXT had the chance to establish itself in the market, and could have possibly even done it later if Jobs had not suffered from the same money problem as Gassee: charging too much and little marketing.
Jobs seems to have learned from this though, but unless he does something radical in the CPU area Apple will have mounting problems in marketing. The G5 is nowhere to be seen and Apple cannot change to the x86 platform now. I wonder what Jobs will do?
I read this "The company says it will restrict .Pro to doctors, lawyers or accountants: 'qualified professionals in good standing ... .pro will be a premium brand, enabling effective, secure communication between professionals and users for the first time in the history of the Internet.'" and the first thing I thought was about all the spam that ends up in the hotmail account I use for registrations etc.
because his boss drives a BMW.
Does MS have any relationship with standover men?
Since when do schools that use Macs use Office:Mac? And does MS include those juicy deals on MS software for MS Mac software too? No? I didn't think so. Most schools that use Macs will have Appleworks on them.
Let's *not* be fair to Microsoft. They wouldn't be to us.
Because then no one will download their software if it is expensive. MS would rightly get the treatment back that they gave to Netscape and others. They really, really deserve it.
Since when did the price of Windows ever reflect in any way on the price of the included applications. MS would be absolutely boneheaded to charge a single cent for any "middleware" stuff like IE, bla bla bla etc. You can be guaranteed that they will be free of charge.
This would simply put MS in a level playing field and treat MS the way it treated Netscape and others.
Not MS. This is an MS decision and MS would just do as it always has and forward them to the OEM.
"What will stop them form making Windows without IE crash every 15 minutes?"
A look at their revenue stream?
The point of the case is that OEMs will be able then to add components of their choosing not Microsofts. If MS makes the OS crash all the time it will simply ruin their reputation and thereby their revenue.
From the article on ZDNet:"But the software giant says it would be technically impossible to offer multiple versions of Windows and would create havoc for consumers and the computer industry."
What are WinME, Win2000 and WinXP then? Ever since Win3.1 and WinNT3.5 MS has been "offering" multiple versions of Windows.
My impression of HP's PC line was that it was always amongst the best ones in terms of quality if not price and performance. My impression of Compaq was that their service was not very good, but expensive and their PC's were not very good quality or cheap but were good performers.
Does this mean that the quality will go down overall for PC's from HP?
I feel for all those that are going to lose their jobs because of this. Bad time to lose your job in this industry.
I don't think that even MS will be able to pressure Peru into buying anything. There are also other factors including publicity. If MS pushes too hard this will start to make international news ("Big American corporation forcing poor South American country to accept it's terms"). MS is hardly popular internationally and this would cause a backlash against it(Remember that there is still a case going on against MS in the EU). MS sometimes shows remarkable stuidity in it's dealings with the press and this would be no exception.
I'm not excatly sure how legal something like this is and what rights MS has to prosecute if the school simply ignores them and only notes PCs runnning windows?
Don't the schools ever bother to contact their lawyers when faced with something like this? Don't any of these people write to their political representatives over issues like this? I was under the impression that in the US you can sue over something like MS "requiring an institution wide commitment". Isn't that criminal in the US? Since when does MS have the right to require *anything* whatsoever. Isn't this in the legue of charging for services not rendered, or goods not sold?
I am shocked and amazed by the arrogance of that company. I wrote a post asking if someday MS would make it a criminal offence to not have a PC in your house with Windows on it. This does seem very close to that sort of behaviour. I would assume that others would be too because it the future of their children that is at stake.
Can anyone tell me why the this parent isn't at 0 or -1 for posting a link to microsoft and teeling us not to rely on the news services?
I've been in and out of IT since the mid eighties. At the moment I've been unemployed for a year and my chances of finding a new job in this field are small. I'm thinking of delivering Pizzas
Blaming companies outsourcing their IT work or foreign competitors is not going to help you cope. The companies do that because the sector is struggling and they have to somehow make a profit as well. The IT sector has been extremely lucky until the last couple of years, reporting growth every year. Did anyone bother to think that other industries that were major performers decades ago also went into bad times and laid workers off or outsourced to some cheaper country. IT is simply beoming a mainstream industry, sadly with workers who are technically able to unionise more easily than any other but unwilling to do so for fear of the competition or a myriad other reasons.
The way I see it one has a number of choices:
1.One forgets about the high flying career that one envisaged for oneself, takes a major paycut, but is possibly able to find work.
2.One advances one's studies. It might help if one has an extra qualification.
3.One leaves the IT sector and does something else.
4.One starts one's own business. An option not to taken lightheartedly.
5.One tries to cope with difficulties that one encounters with bosses etc instead of quitting at the first sign of trouble.
6.Consider moving away from the US. I know that Java programmers are wanted here in Europe and the pay is fairly good. If it's good enough for a H1-B it could be good enough for you.
I'm sorry if these things sound banal, but what choice does one have? Somehow one has to cope and survive. Starting unions might help, but it won't make a difference in the short term, and running around blaming others will not get you a job.
If Americans were suddenly to get told to leave the Chech Republic for instance, Prague would suddenly have about 30000 less people.
Low wages are not the only reason those people get Visas. They generally complain less and work more. This attitude of putting the blame on foreign workers will not get *you* your job back. A different attitude to work might.