Will never work mainly because people often get stressed, undergo trauma and other general issues that cause brain patterns to change throughout our day to day lives not to mention our lifetime.
Should a traumatic event happen, a users brainwaves generally change... always in the short term and often long term as well. How will a computer be able to tell who we are if our brains are always in a state of flux.
The onyl way they could do this is if they determined a type of 'brainwave DNA' which doesn't change but if different enough to differentiate each of us.
Just a minor correction but if everyone is communicating the same way, it does not make one platform have a stranglehold over the other. It merely means that they all are allowed to freely communicate.
For example, English could be considered an open standard and businesses from all over the world use the english language to communicate with each other regardless of who invented the language.
If English were proprietary and all businesses required it, every company that wanted to conduct business would have to pay a fee to whoever invented english.
Big diff.
Using your above statement within the metaphor, an open english language would not mean that China and Korea would instantly have an advantage in the market place over America (or England), it would just mean they would have equal footing to compete.
95%? With no shell, no file system, scaled back graphics, scaled back tools, tools that won't be shipping, DRM tools that won't ship, security tools that won't ship??? Thats only 5%?
Riiiiiight. Whatever you say. Let me know when reality comes to pay you a visit and shows you how to do percentages.
Ha! Not really. Delivered several products to market with 95% of all functionality working as promnised. Some functionality did not work as promised due to bugs and those are fixed over the next few months.
Their problem is that they start the marketing blitz while it still IS an idea with the idea that they can deliver anything they want... and then they fail. Over and over and over.
Most development processes I know is that a team of people talk the idea over, spec it out, run through basic functionality and are usually 50% through the development process before they even CONSIDER actively marketing the product.
Companies that do what Microsoft do cease to be due to pissing off their customer base who moves on. Microsoft only manages to continue to do this because people have nowhere else to go.
hOW IS THIS 'FLAMEBAIT'? He's 100% correct. Microsoft's motto is 'over promise, under deliver'. And this has always been true for every release they have ever had. Vista being no exception.
You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. Still doesn't make it any less true.
As for the link...? It was about 2 weeks ago on Slashdot, Newsforge and several other tech sites. Do your own research if you want to be educated. Otherwise, feel free to remain ignorant. You seem to like it that way.
and you seem not to understand that Microsoft and Bill Gates admitted to its basic functionallity being built into the kernel. You cannot entirely remove it! You can route around it, you can delete IE, you can delete all DLL's but it still exists! The engine is built into the kernel!
Ok, then feel free to remove it and still have use of file explorer. I'd love to see this. Go ahead? I'll wait.
That and the fact that Microsoft says you are full of shit should be enough to keep your mouth closed for the next 5 minutes.
The fact that Microsoft told the Dept of Justice this, the fact that Bil Gates stated that it was a mistake to build these applications into the kernel and that Vista was going to have them removed from the kernel, the fact that you can send commands directly to the kernel via IE al proves you wrong.
There are people much smarter than you stating just how wrong what you just said is.
When was the last time you were able to buy Windows Media Player in a store? How about online?
Aside from that, have you tried to remove it from the system lately? You can't. You can route around it and divert away buit it's as bundled into the kernel as Internet Exploder is.
As long as them drivers are free and have no limitations on being distributed with a system, there shoukldn't be a problem. Elsewise, leave them out and just download them.
Where did I say Windows had to run everything (i.e. mac software?)
Well to quote you, you stated that Linux would never be able to run...all the commercially available software...
So unless you use a double standard to compare Linux and Windows (which apparently you do), by a similar comparison, Windows doesn't run all commercial software either.
That was the point being made.
So you cannot possibly state that Linux isn't viable because it doesn't run...all the commercially available software... , because no system does. Most systems run the most in demand software or equivalents. As long as you do that, you can appease 80% of the market.
All the easy to use programs like OpenOffice, Firefox, Evolution, GAIM, etc??
Yeah, the consumer would find those so hard to use considering that the interface is so similar to products they alreay use. It may take them days to be able to figure out how to surf the web using Firefox or even send an email in Evolution.
Hell, they wouldn't be able to tie their shoes if Nikes didn't come with instruction manual, A DVD and online support.
And pray tell land lubber, where I find 'AAAAARRRRR' in Meriam Webster's? Me be thinking your a few dubloons short of a treasure chest if ye be thinking that be a word.
These projects have been in use for longer than Microsofts products, are bundled with ALL Linux distros making most Linux distros have equivalent functionallity and even exceeding functionality in some cases.
Now if you want to say the projects are not equivalet due to the lines of code used, thats just plain stupid. Good code take fewer lines whereas bad code can go on forever and ever.
Every engineer knows that to build a better mousetrap, you don't make it more complex... you simplify.
Linux and those open source applications are engineering marvels in simplification in the fact that they compete and beat standard models and are still more secure and stable.
Below are the answers to your obviously rhetorical question...
1. Apache, Linux, MySQL, Postgres, Sendmail, OpenExchange, SugarCRM,etc etc. The list goes on and on 2. Apache, Linux, MySQL, Postgres, Sendmail, OpenExchange, SugarCRM, etc etc. They were even recently recognized for it in a government research document stated that 24 hours was an average and that they even get patched faster on some systems. 3. According to the same government document, hardly ever. Pathces on open source projects general reduce the numbers of bugs in code (rather than increasing them *cough*microsoft*cough*
It's not herculean to do it right the first time and continue to do it right. It's called doing your job.
Most open source projects of equivalent size get patched in 24 hours. Do they have more money? no. Do they have more resources? According to Microsoft, thats another no.
So how is it that programmers working for free developing a product for free can patch fatser than a multimillion dollar company with hundreds of highly paid developers?
Incorrect. A monopoly implies that no new vendors could even enter the market. If you are the first selling a product, new vendors can easily enter the market still. Once you have achieve a certain size that new vendors cannot enter the market and all other vendors have been put out of business (or have an insignificant market share), you are thus a monopoly and can be tried in court.
A monopoly is illegal because it impedes a free market. By making it so that new vendors cannot enter the market and so that their are no other vendors but yourself, you impede a free market.
LOL! This proves that even the ignorant read slashdot. Wow.
And proves yet again why liberals deserves the title. Look up the definition sometime as to what you have been calling us. You'll be surprised to know it's a compliment.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Will never work mainly because people often get stressed, undergo trauma and other general issues that cause brain patterns to change throughout our day to day lives not to mention our lifetime.
Should a traumatic event happen, a users brainwaves generally change... always in the short term and often long term as well. How will a computer be able to tell who we are if our brains are always in a state of flux.
The onyl way they could do this is if they determined a type of 'brainwave DNA' which doesn't change but if different enough to differentiate each of us.
Just a minor correction but if everyone is communicating the same way, it does not make one platform have a stranglehold over the other. It merely means that they all are allowed to freely communicate.
For example, English could be considered an open standard and businesses from all over the world use the english language to communicate with each other regardless of who invented the language.
If English were proprietary and all businesses required it, every company that wanted to conduct business would have to pay a fee to whoever invented english.
Big diff.
Using your above statement within the metaphor, an open english language would not mean that China and Korea would instantly have an advantage in the market place over America (or England), it would just mean they would have equal footing to compete.
95%? With no shell, no file system, scaled back graphics, scaled back tools, tools that won't be shipping, DRM tools that won't ship, security tools that won't ship??? Thats only 5%?
Riiiiiight. Whatever you say. Let me know when reality comes to pay you a visit and shows you how to do percentages.
Ha! Not really. Delivered several products to market with 95% of all functionality working as promnised. Some functionality did not work as promised due to bugs and those are fixed over the next few months.
Their problem is that they start the marketing blitz while it still IS an idea with the idea that they can deliver anything they want... and then they fail. Over and over and over.
Most development processes I know is that a team of people talk the idea over, spec it out, run through basic functionality and are usually 50% through the development process before they even CONSIDER actively marketing the product.
Companies that do what Microsoft do cease to be due to pissing off their customer base who moves on. Microsoft only manages to continue to do this because people have nowhere else to go.
hOW IS THIS 'FLAMEBAIT'? He's 100% correct. Microsoft's motto is 'over promise, under deliver'. And this has always been true for every release they have ever had. Vista being no exception.
You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. Still doesn't make it any less true.
As for the link...? It was about 2 weeks ago on Slashdot, Newsforge and several other tech sites. Do your own research if you want to be educated. Otherwise, feel free to remain ignorant. You seem to like it that way.
and you seem not to understand that Microsoft and Bill Gates admitted to its basic functionallity being built into the kernel. You cannot entirely remove it! You can route around it, you can delete IE, you can delete all DLL's but it still exists! The engine is built into the kernel!
If Bill Gates says this, why would you doubt him?
Ok, then feel free to remove it and still have use of file explorer. I'd love to see this. Go ahead? I'll wait.
That and the fact that Microsoft says you are full of shit should be enough to keep your mouth closed for the next 5 minutes.
The fact that Microsoft told the Dept of Justice this, the fact that Bil Gates stated that it was a mistake to build these applications into the kernel and that Vista was going to have them removed from the kernel, the fact that you can send commands directly to the kernel via IE al proves you wrong.
There are people much smarter than you stating just how wrong what you just said is.
Yes but not every media player comes with an OS.
When was the last time you were able to buy Windows Media Player in a store? How about online?
Aside from that, have you tried to remove it from the system lately? You can't. You can route around it and divert away buit it's as bundled into the kernel as Internet Exploder is.
Wait... Windows wasn't written in Visual Basic??
Ok... now lets see Bill Gates issue his own patch. The clocks ticking Bill. :)
As long as them drivers are free and have no limitations on being distributed with a system, there shoukldn't be a problem. Elsewise, leave them out and just download them.
Where did I say Windows had to run everything (i.e. mac software?)
...all the commercially available software...
...all the commercially available software... , because no system does. Most systems run the most in demand software or equivalents. As long as you do that, you can appease 80% of the market.
Well to quote you, you stated that Linux would never be able to run
So unless you use a double standard to compare Linux and Windows (which apparently you do), by a similar comparison, Windows doesn't run all commercial software either.
That was the point being made.
So you cannot possibly state that Linux isn't viable because it doesn't run
Hence it is a viable option.
There simply are not viable linux choices for all the commercially available software that people buy out there.
By this statement, even Windows doesn't compete. It can't run Mac Software. And oddly enough, thats a bigger concern to most Mac users.
Honestly, I got my 65 yr old mom using Linux and she can't tell the difference.
For the vast majority of average users, they'd never really notice. All they want is to be able to use the computer the same way they could before.
If not being able to play games was an issue, Macs would never sell.
All the easy to use programs like OpenOffice, Firefox, Evolution, GAIM, etc??
Yeah, the consumer would find those so hard to use considering that the interface is so similar to products they alreay use. It may take them days to be able to figure out how to surf the web using Firefox or even send an email in Evolution.
Hell, they wouldn't be able to tie their shoes if Nikes didn't come with instruction manual, A DVD and online support.
And pray tell land lubber, where I find 'AAAAARRRRR' in Meriam Webster's? Me be thinking your a few dubloons short of a treasure chest if ye be thinking that be a word.
Wait, you mean if I pirate it, I won;t ever have to have my resources hogged by pointless eye candy.
I only have three words for you then... SHIVER ME TIMBERS!!!
AAAARRRRRR!
These projects have been in use for longer than Microsofts products, are bundled with ALL Linux distros making most Linux distros have equivalent functionallity and even exceeding functionality in some cases.
Now if you want to say the projects are not equivalet due to the lines of code used, thats just plain stupid. Good code take fewer lines whereas bad code can go on forever and ever.
Every engineer knows that to build a better mousetrap, you don't make it more complex... you simplify.
Linux and those open source applications are engineering marvels in simplification in the fact that they compete and beat standard models and are still more secure and stable.
Below are the answers to your obviously rhetorical question...
1. Apache, Linux, MySQL, Postgres, Sendmail, OpenExchange, SugarCRM,etc etc. The list goes on and on
2. Apache, Linux, MySQL, Postgres, Sendmail, OpenExchange, SugarCRM, etc etc. They were even recently recognized for it in a government research document stated that 24 hours was an average and that they even get patched faster on some systems.
3. According to the same government document, hardly ever. Pathces on open source projects general reduce the numbers of bugs in code (rather than increasing them *cough*microsoft*cough*
It's not herculean to do it right the first time and continue to do it right. It's called doing your job.
Most open source projects of equivalent size get patched in 24 hours. Do they have more money? no. Do they have more resources? According to Microsoft, thats another no.
So how is it that programmers working for free developing a product for free can patch fatser than a multimillion dollar company with hundreds of highly paid developers?
That's the ongoing question.
Incorrect. A monopoly implies that no new vendors could even enter the market. If you are the first selling a product, new vendors can easily enter the market still. Once you have achieve a certain size that new vendors cannot enter the market and all other vendors have been put out of business (or have an insignificant market share), you are thus a monopoly and can be tried in court.
A monopoly is illegal because it impedes a free market. By making it so that new vendors cannot enter the market and so that their are no other vendors but yourself, you impede a free market.
It's free as in soul.
Like Linus Torvalds is so cute. I wonder if he wears boxen or briefs?
LOL! This proves that even the ignorant read slashdot. Wow.
:)
And proves yet again why liberals deserves the title. Look up the definition sometime as to what you have been calling us. You'll be surprised to know it's a compliment.
And remember who brought the anti-trust case against them while who dropped it.
Classic republican response. Select only the facts you want to see while ignoring the rest.