Industries like you mentioned are regulated for a reason - safety. As much as we think that computers are life, in the real world, they aren't. If you lose your saved Sims sessions, so what?
Now, if your data has a real value, then you either are:
a power user, who is familiar enough to not need a technician
a power user that needs a tech, but is savvy enough to know who is reputable
a business, with enough of a financial interest to 1) (see above) 2) have a dedicated IT staff
What about cost? If you introduce forced certification, it'll incur a large cost that'll be passed on to consumers
What about enforcement? What if someone performs "illegal" tech work without a cert? What if a cert'ed tech screws up? Will there be government entities to oversee the process and handle complaints? All costs - and unfair, not every user 1) has a computer 2) needs a tech
Tips balance of power - if all techs had to get certed, everyone would focus on Windows - and the issue of "unsupported" systems (like your fav *ix) would get even worse.
Tech support - this involves working on systems, even if you're talking someone through it - will this be subject to cert? You can bet that even fewer will offer free support.
There are plenty more reasons to not force certification, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily bad. Techs/shops can use it to their marketing advantage - like "GM" certified shops can make themselves sound more credible than the "local greasy Joe" shop.
The enforcement of the GPL makes me nervous, as much as big companies like MSFT do. If I have in my GPL app:
for (i=0;i10;i++).....
does that mean I have a legitimate claim?
Of course, it doesn't even have to be the same code. If the code is a derivative of a GPL product, the GPL still applies. So it would be possible to grab some GPL, obfuscate (or just "paraphrase" it), and put it in my closed-source application. This can become quite difficult to prove a violation - if you buy that there are only some many ways to do a thing....
Even then, "creative engineering" (for example, my method of implementing a protocol stack is by its complex nature unique that it couldn't be "accidentally cloned") isn't necessarily a foolproof argument. Source code is the result of our knowledge and experience - so if Alan Cox and Charles Petzold happened to go to MIT at the same time and attend many of the same classes, it could be argued that Charles's duplication of some of AC's kernel work wasn't necessarily proof of copying, but the result of a similar environment!
The version for the PlayStation(R)2 computer entertainment system has been edited to eliminate the topless nudity, while versions for Xbox and Nintendo GameCube' will contain topless nudity.
Where's the value? Now I can run applets? This doesn't hurt MSFT - and has marginal benefit for Sun. MSFT can actually put added pressure on Sun now, to ensure that the Windows version of the JVM works perfectly with whatever features they put into Windows. Added cost for Sun. Additionally, how many Java-based applications do you actually install and run? The majority of the desktop application market is still MFC/Win32/COM/.NET. This is only a moral victory for Sun.
Not to mention that MSFT could probably engineer Windows/IE to run the JVM more slowly, and give the user a "Disable Java" option. Of course, it'd end up back in court - but how long? 2-3 years? Enough time to gain more ubiquity for.NET. Not to mention the additional 6-12 months that MSFT will appeal and maneuver.
Best scenario for MS: they advertise the fact that they have Sun's Java, make it run slow, and put an imprint in the mind of managers everywhere that Java is slow. No matter what the financial costs would be (Bill and Steve: "Fine us for $300 million! Oh please, don't throw us in the briar patch! Oh no!") What matters is the decision that those very same managers make, when they're deciding between Java and.NET (managers aren't programmers, they don't read Slashdot, and they don't give a damn about the politics of McNeely or RMS)
It's not based on J2EE, but both ColdFusion and JRun (both driven by J2EE) have native connectors to talk to Flash via Web Services. For platforms like.NET, it's a $1000 add-on (more than the price of CF MX Pro!)
No kidding. Is the author of the article a complete idiot? I realize that in the world journalism, such traditions as "fact checking" are considered unimportant, but entering "history of secret service" into Google returns www.secretservice.gov/history.shtml as the first result! Then again, it is the Reg, and since they're British, they don't have to know anything about other countries they write about, right? I mean, I can write about the monarchy based on soundbytes off of the evening news, right? We all know that all they do is drink tea and plan their next publicized divorce!
Boycott any company that uses the forementioned products until they stop supporting human rights violations. Your broadband provider using Cisco switches? Too bad. Give up your connection in the name of human rights.
Yeah right. Geeks (myself included) are will to spout of rhetoric all day, as long as it doesn't affect us. Reminds me of folks that discuss the homeless problem, but are unwilling to leave the safety of their SUV to hand out meals.
It's obvious that Microsoft is trying to adopt the business philosophies of Linux-based companies in order to better compete with Linux. The idea of losing millions with a slim chance of attaining profitability in the distant future is something that companies like VA Software, Lineo, etc have been very good at.
It sounds like you base your decision of what to learn based upon the market and what gives you the most marketable skills.
Everyone knows that the folks on Slashdot ignore these concepts; it's all about the "geekiness" and the politics of the technology at hand. I mean, most folks here look up to Richard Stallman, whose driving philosophy is, "If it isn't free, don't use it - rewrite it from the ground up!"
For what it matters, I think J2EE or.NET is where it's at - not necessarily the best technologies, but definitely the most employable ones.
Your Windows solution is running on Windows 3.1. Good luck getting support for it. If you are willing to pay for a whole new development cycle, you reinvented it for Windows 95. Good luck getting support for it. Ditto your upgrade to NT4, which also required all new hardware.
I think you're losing your place. Are you looking at it from the perspective of the developer, or the consumer? "pay for a whole new development cycle" implies that you have access to the source code.
Even so, your assuming that upgrades are required. (Talk about buying into MSFT philosophy!) In most cases, Win3.1 software will run on later version of Windows. If not then that's something you consider when you upgrade your OS. (Unless you're a Microserf and assume that you *have* to upgrade your OS)
A company like this, that only makes money through litigation and theft, and as bad as 100 Microsofts. Yet, the US pours millions into suing MSFT, and this post only gets like 25% of the responses of a subpar posting with "Microsoft" in the title. Sad.
No shit. A Linux distribution with a Microsoft marketing machine - something more than long-bearded geeks, who understand that superior code != business success, and who spend more time doing marketing research than spanking their monkey to images of JRR Tolkien. Imagine the possibilities.
I don't think a chart that shows that their stock has dropped really says anything. Of course, if you compare it to the S&P, Dow, Nasdaq, and MSFT, it definitely has done much worse. Hell, VA Software (Slashdot's parent) and RedHat has even outperformed SUNW - which is really sad.
I'm an idiot. Tomorrow morning is Saturday. (Started working as an independent consultant out of my home, and I have no clue what day it is anymore - geesh)
You can badly disrupt buisness, but it's perfectly legal.:)
No, I think it's called a Denial of Service attack - illegal.
Of course, that does raise an interesting point - is a denial of service attack that much different than a sitin? Does it depend on motive? (if M$ pointed 10,000 machines at Slashdot or RedHat.com, I'm sure people would bitch, but vice versa in the name of "fighting the system", is it right?) Does the first amendment (right of the people peaceably to assemble) apply? Could make for some interesting precedence if DoS attacks become protected under the constitution. Of course, that would also give Microsoft everything they need to crush all competition.
What's that? Java has to be compiled; I don't know of a "scripting engine" for it. Note that JavaScript and Java aren't the same language. JavaScript is as much Java as C# is.
Then emagine 1,000 people, the server will be useless and may crash.
I doubt it. A true Slashdotting, perhaps. Even then, I doubt it. These are the people that run Hotmail - I think they no how to deal with traffic (security issues, no, but traffic, yes)
Are you sure about that? The story posted on Slashdot at 3:35, at which point it jumped about 3/4 of a point very quickly. About 3:42 or so, it dropped by about 1/2 a point, then rebounded by about a 1/3 of a point by closing. The price at posting of this article was about 52.55, and it closed at 53.00. (easier to see at the large intraday chart)
Slashdot Mirror
Now, if your data has a real value, then you either are:
What about cost? If you introduce forced certification, it'll incur a large cost that'll be passed on to consumers
What about enforcement? What if someone performs "illegal" tech work without a cert? What if a cert'ed tech screws up? Will there be government entities to oversee the process and handle complaints? All costs - and unfair, not every user 1) has a computer 2) needs a tech
Tips balance of power - if all techs had to get certed, everyone would focus on Windows - and the issue of "unsupported" systems (like your fav *ix) would get even worse.
Tech support - this involves working on systems, even if you're talking someone through it - will this be subject to cert? You can bet that even fewer will offer free support.
There are plenty more reasons to not force certification, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily bad. Techs/shops can use it to their marketing advantage - like "GM" certified shops can make themselves sound more credible than the "local greasy Joe" shop.
Not in today's world - if your ubiquitous, the courts can force you to include anything. For example, Microsoft is forced to include Sun's Java.
The enforcement of the GPL makes me nervous, as much as big companies like MSFT do. If I have in my GPL app:
.....
for (i=0;i10;i++)
does that mean I have a legitimate claim?
Of course, it doesn't even have to be the same code. If the code is a derivative of a GPL product, the GPL still applies. So it would be possible to grab some GPL, obfuscate (or just "paraphrase" it), and put it in my closed-source application. This can become quite difficult to prove a violation - if you buy that there are only some many ways to do a thing....
Even then, "creative engineering" (for example, my method of implementing a protocol stack is by its complex nature unique that it couldn't be "accidentally cloned") isn't necessarily a foolproof argument. Source code is the result of our knowledge and experience - so if Alan Cox and Charles Petzold happened to go to MIT at the same time and attend many of the same classes, it could be argued that Charles's duplication of some of AC's kernel work wasn't necessarily proof of copying, but the result of a similar environment!
Funny enough, the first month that they split out the NT's (NT4/2000/XP), XP had 4x the popularity of Linux, and XP wasn't even out yet!
Just get a check card - works the same. If you're really paranoid, open up a new bank account, with a small amount.
Couldn't you just set up a Linux box as a router and plug the XBox into a hub? Don't know what the performance would be like, but it should work.
Where's the value? Now I can run applets? This doesn't hurt MSFT - and has marginal benefit for Sun. MSFT can actually put added pressure on Sun now, to ensure that the Windows version of the JVM works perfectly with whatever features they put into Windows. Added cost for Sun. Additionally, how many Java-based applications do you actually install and run? The majority of the desktop application market is still MFC/Win32/COM/.NET. This is only a moral victory for Sun.
.NET. Not to mention the additional 6-12 months that MSFT will appeal and maneuver.
.NET (managers aren't programmers, they don't read Slashdot, and they don't give a damn about the politics of McNeely or RMS)
Not to mention that MSFT could probably engineer Windows/IE to run the JVM more slowly, and give the user a "Disable Java" option. Of course, it'd end up back in court - but how long? 2-3 years? Enough time to gain more ubiquity for
Best scenario for MS: they advertise the fact that they have Sun's Java, make it run slow, and put an imprint in the mind of managers everywhere that Java is slow. No matter what the financial costs would be (Bill and Steve: "Fine us for $300 million! Oh please, don't throw us in the briar patch! Oh no!") What matters is the decision that those very same managers make, when they're deciding between Java and
It's not based on J2EE, but both ColdFusion and JRun (both driven by J2EE) have native connectors to talk to Flash via Web Services. For platforms like .NET, it's a $1000 add-on (more than the price of CF MX Pro!)
No kidding. Is the author of the article a complete idiot? I realize that in the world journalism, such traditions as "fact checking" are considered unimportant, but entering "history of secret service" into Google returns www.secretservice.gov/history.shtml as the first result! Then again, it is the Reg, and since they're British, they don't have to know anything about other countries they write about, right? I mean, I can write about the monarchy based on soundbytes off of the evening news, right? We all know that all they do is drink tea and plan their next publicized divorce!
Boycott any company that uses the forementioned products until they stop supporting human rights violations. Your broadband provider using Cisco switches? Too bad. Give up your connection in the name of human rights.
Yeah right. Geeks (myself included) are will to spout of rhetoric all day, as long as it doesn't affect us. Reminds me of folks that discuss the homeless problem, but are unwilling to leave the safety of their SUV to hand out meals.
my cat was standing on my wireless router.
It's obvious that Microsoft is trying to adopt the business philosophies of Linux-based companies in order to better compete with Linux. The idea of losing millions with a slim chance of attaining profitability in the distant future is something that companies like VA Software, Lineo, etc have been very good at.
It sounds like you base your decision of what to learn based upon the market and what gives you the most marketable skills.
.NET is where it's at - not necessarily the best technologies, but definitely the most employable ones.
Everyone knows that the folks on Slashdot ignore these concepts; it's all about the "geekiness" and the politics of the technology at hand. I mean, most folks here look up to Richard Stallman, whose driving philosophy is, "If it isn't free, don't use it - rewrite it from the ground up!"
For what it matters, I think J2EE or
Your Windows solution is running on Windows 3.1. Good luck getting support for it. If you are willing to pay for a whole new development cycle, you reinvented it for Windows 95. Good luck getting support for it. Ditto your upgrade to NT4, which also required all new hardware.
I think you're losing your place. Are you looking at it from the perspective of the developer, or the consumer? "pay for a whole new development cycle" implies that you have access to the source code.
Even so, your assuming that upgrades are required. (Talk about buying into MSFT philosophy!) In most cases, Win3.1 software will run on later version of Windows. If not then that's something you consider when you upgrade your OS. (Unless you're a Microserf and assume that you *have* to upgrade your OS)
So Transmeta's window of opportunity is an American energy crisis. Yeah, that's a business plan. Talk about partying like it's 1999.
A company like this, that only makes money through litigation and theft, and as bad as 100 Microsofts. Yet, the US pours millions into suing MSFT, and this post only gets like 25% of the responses of a subpar posting with "Microsoft" in the title. Sad.
I thought Slashdot loved the idea of litigating companies out of business. Seems like an attempt at such made for some headlines lately.
No shit. A Linux distribution with a Microsoft marketing machine - something more than long-bearded geeks, who understand that superior code != business success, and who spend more time doing marketing research than spanking their monkey to images of JRR Tolkien. Imagine the possibilities.
I don't think a chart that shows that their stock has dropped really says anything. Of course, if you compare it to the S&P, Dow, Nasdaq, and MSFT, it definitely has done much worse. Hell, VA Software (Slashdot's parent) and RedHat has even outperformed SUNW - which is really sad.
I'm an idiot. Tomorrow morning is Saturday. (Started working as an independent consultant out of my home, and I have no clue what day it is anymore - geesh)
You can badly disrupt buisness, but it's perfectly legal. :)
No, I think it's called a Denial of Service attack - illegal.
Of course, that does raise an interesting point - is a denial of service attack that much different than a sitin? Does it depend on motive? (if M$ pointed 10,000 machines at Slashdot or RedHat.com, I'm sure people would bitch, but vice versa in the name of "fighting the system", is it right?) Does the first amendment (right of the people peaceably to assemble) apply? Could make for some interesting precedence if DoS attacks become protected under the constitution. Of course, that would also give Microsoft everything they need to crush all competition.
simple JAVA script
What's that? Java has to be compiled; I don't know of a "scripting engine" for it. Note that JavaScript and Java aren't the same language. JavaScript is as much Java as C# is.
Then emagine 1,000 people, the server will be useless and may crash.
I doubt it. A true Slashdotting, perhaps. Even then, I doubt it. These are the people that run Hotmail - I think they no how to deal with traffic (security issues, no, but traffic, yes)
Gotta love the irony
Are you sure about that? The story posted on Slashdot at 3:35, at which point it jumped about 3/4 of a point very quickly. About 3:42 or so, it dropped by about 1/2 a point, then rebounded by about a 1/3 of a point by closing. The price at posting of this article was about 52.55, and it closed at 53.00. (easier to see at the large intraday chart)