Every time something bad happens tech-wise in a court in the US, this place is crazy with comment of how the US sucks, how horrid the legal system is here, how its just stupid what companies can get away with in court, now a stupid ruling is handed down in a European court and everyone is mum... no one seems upset at the legal system, in fact most people here are defending the decision as a good one, even though when MS tried this stunt in the US system they failed. So much for the Europeans living up to their liberal ideals and standing up for the little guy....
For smaller sites they normally only need 1 server, and RedHat ES will be plenty for those installations. at $350 that is about $700 less than a MS server, and for the support, and the supported apps you get on a RedHat EL box its worth it. and if you're just talking about a little vpn/router box or something, then throw debian/gentoo/mandrake/fedora or suse.. a little firewall router doesn't have to have support for enterprise apps. Little places like this aren't running huge database clusters, or web clusters, or anything like that which is where the big cost is gonna come from if you're running rh9 in a 20 node cluster and now you have to buy 20 licenses of RHAS for 2500 each yeah that hurts.. but that isn't the small branch office, thats the home office, and they're probably already running RHAS anyway.
Don't forget they get 20% of any equity investment in SCO as well (which would include the recently announced 50 million investment by baystar/royal bank of canada) so boies and company have already been paid 10 million.
Don't be stupid. There are plenty of DSL and Wireless providers that allow you to run servers. I maintain about 30 such servers for small businesses. this policy would completely eliminate the ability of these businesses to economically run their own email/web servers. None of these servers send spam, they are not open relays, they are well maintained servers that deserve to be on the net, blocking them would be draconian and stupid.
Sure you can lock windows down, but its impossible to maintain. If you know ahead of time what application every person needs then yeah you can manage it maybe... But in Windows there is basically a switch can install, can't install. So say you lock down windows boxes, then users suddenly can't install fonts, or they can't install some little utility app that they need (because any install in windows needs admin rights). so then you spend your days running around installing fonts for people, or installing acrobat reader, or a million other mindless chores that you've disallowed people to do.
In Linux the control is so much more fine grained, you can lock people out of installing apps to certain directories, you can let them maintain a font directory in their home dir, you can let them install apps to their home dir. Maybe maintain browser plugins in their home dir. This allows things to go much smoother, people can install things that they *need* to get their jobs done, and aren't on the phone every 10 minutes telling you they need font X. Or if you prefer, you can completely lock it down, and people will be on the phone, but you can just sit at your computer, and install anything remotely and poof its up and running, you aren't running up and down the office to each individual pc.
I agree. I feel that this situation is much more akin to the MS Money/Intuit battle. MS tried to buy Intuit because it was the cheaper way of getting a leading Money Management program. They failed in their bid to purchase them, and still Quicken is the defacto standard ahead of MS Money many years after the fact. If MS fails in purchasing Google (they will unless the manage some insane hostile bid), the same story will repeat itself, they are too far behind to develop something that will compete.
Intuit would actually be owned by MS if the regulators had let them. They found it would be anti competitive for MS to buy Intuit otherwise both sides were willing.
Unfortunately if the GPL is invalid that means all that code is governed by copyright, and all the kernel contributors can sue for infringment. At 150,000/infringement, that will quickly eat up even the 50 million SCO just got.
Completely opposite experience for me, I fixed a guys computer the other day who had spoken with an Indian tech over at Dell. His computer was freezing up (windows xp). The tech had him disable all of the services on the computer, and then couldn't figure out why the computer wouldn't connect to the internet. They spent 2 hours on the phone, the tech kept telling him to download new drivers from the internet, and the guy kept telling the tech "I can't because I can't connect anymore" in the end the tech told him he'd just have to reinstall windows, that it was broken beyond repair. Anyway, I turned on the services, found the one that was misbehaving and disabled it (I forget which one it was but it wasn't necessary), fixed beautifully... about 5 minutes.
The worst program I've ever seen is savenow.. It starts like 5 processes on boot (using between 50-75mb of ram and 20-25% cpu), sends all of your browsing habits somewhere else, and pops up porn, and other various ads randomly while using the computer. It is by far the worst spy/ad ware I've ever seen.
Problem with that of course are the side letters and amendments which grant IBM specifically that right to do whatever they want with code developed in house which SCO is convieniently trying to forget about...
The problem still lies in SCO's definition of derivative works. the features they have issue with are NUMA/SMP, a file system, and RCU. If IBM did their development right (I bet they did) and documented things properly they will be able to prove that these features are not derivative of System V (in the rest of the world besides at SCO headquarters derivative means that these new features relied on old System V stuff, or the IBM engineers got the inspiration to create these things based on System V influence).
It should be trivial for IBM to prove that they thought up say RCU on their own, as an idea/concept and then implimented it in AIX. If they did this with all of these technologies (I bet they did), then these things lose their derivative of SysV status, and SCO hasn't a leg to stand on. Then the only worry we might have is copied code.. but that is becoming increasingly unlikely.
SCO's broad definition of derivative works would mean that any program written for any operating system would then become a derivative work of that operating system if it was included in the base OS. If I write a program for windows and then MS decides they like my program and buy it from me and then include it with windows (think wordpad, hypertrm) then that program suddenly is a derivative of windows? I don't think so, but that is what SCO is saying, basically "because you included this software with our software, regardless of how it was developed, it is now bound by the derivative works clause of our contract". That logic is highly inconsistant with any definition of derivative works I've ever seen.
All EULAs state the same "no warranty..." clause that the GPL does. You think microsoft pays money or is liable when a virus costs you your data? your time? or actual money? No. the law suits would be non-starters just like no one has been able to successfully sue MS for very provable economic loss due to faulty software.
I agree with you, my point of view is this: window 2000 professional costs 300 for the full version. windows xp professional 300 more, thats 600 in 2 years (windows xp came out in 2002, windows 2000 in well 2000). sure you could get an upgrade to windows xp (for 200 bucks), so thats 500 in 2 years for Windows. And you'd be required to buy an xp upgrade for each computer, if you have more than 1 mac OS X is much better. Anyway if you are in the MS world you are spending more for upgrades than in the mac world.
more microsoft false security. When they log in? Most worms I know run as services so even before they log in the virus is scanning the net looking for nodes to infect. This can easily happen between the time the user has booted and when they log in. In the corporate environments I've worked in it is a normal practice to boot, and then go get coffee and come back 10-15 minutes later.. that is more than enough time for the worm to be off and running.
the RIAA is not taking nearly all of the 99 cents, apple doesn't get more than half, but they get like 40 cents per song. They have sold over 14,000,000 songs since april. The article is about the boost in sales that they got releasing on windows. They have sold 1,000,000 songs in 3 days, when they initially released it took 7 days to sell 1,000,000 songs, and they've been averaging 600,000 songs per week, now with windows its quite possible they will sell 2,000,000 songs in a week. Thats almost a million in profits, there is no way the bandwidth cost a million bucks.
Polls are the stupidest things ever, trying to use a poll to cast doubt on an election is ridiculous. My father ran for elected office a couple years ago, I know how stupid polls are. Unless you can read the questions and see exactly what they asked (I mean how the question is worded) Would you vote for X over Y? is very different than Who would you vote for? My father led in every poll ever taken and the last one (2 days before the election) showed him winning by 15%. Yeah he lost by 10%. That is one small example but polls are not to be trusted.
We can believe it because we know that we saved the entire western world 2 times already in the last 100 years. If it weren't for us we'd all be under either Russian, German, or Japanese rule. Instead the US has stepped in at great cost to ourselves to provide the western world with its sovereignty. How the HELL can you be so ungrateful?
Why does Al Qaeda exist? So we should have just left Kuwait in Saddam's hands then? That is why we were over there, which is why bin Laden got all in a tif. If you really think we should become isolationists again, fine I'm all for it. We'll pull all our troops and all of the jobs we create across the world, and it'll suck for us cause our economy will crash, but it will suck more for everyone else. The wars that will occur as soon as our protection is pulled from all the hot spots in the world will kill hundreds of millions (China will invade taiwan, North and South Korea will have at it, Pakistan and India will have a nuclear exchange, Israel will be destroyed, the balkan states will go right back to the bloodbath they were in before, Africa will descend into tribal warfare, south america will be overrun by drug lords). If cuba is such a great place to live how come we have millions of refugees fleeing that country and trying to get into ours? I agree that our attempts at installing democracies in other countries have been pitiful and stupid, I don't think we should be in that business, but trying to say we should play our cards like France is naive and stupid.
When things go wrong no one calls on France or Germany or the UK to try to fix the problem. Ever since WWI every time there is a major dispute/problem/war that we'd rather stay out of, the entire European continent keeps yelling at us that we're not doing our part, until we finally have to go in and solve the problem because no one else will.
If it weren't for us "sticking our nose in other people's business" hell the entire European continent would be Communist, France, germany, italy, spain, UK none of that would exist, it would all be one big USSR.
I don't feel that we are "world policemen" without anyone asking. Should we just get completely out of the Israel/Palestine dispute then (already tried that one, and the European community had a shit fit)? Move all our troops out of South Korea and just leave it for the North to conquer? Just sit back and let al queda drive some more planes into our buildings? Wait til Iran has nukes and let them drop them on us (because that is where they will drop them, not on pakistan or india or in Europe, but here in the US)?
The problem with most of the world is that they can sit back and say "just reduce your forces and you'll be fine" because no one else is the target the way we are. France doesn't understand what it is to have people blindly hate them because of their religion. Germany doesn't either, they can all just sit on the sidelines and critize america because they don't have to worry about the consequences.
Unfortunately that won't help. When America tries to sit back and let problems go by the wayside then everyone screams at us that we should be doing more to solve the problems, except then as soon as we do everyone resents us and hates us more. We are in a catch 22 and I don't see any way out.
It is because we are the most hated that I'm paranoid. Nothing we do will help, believe me the whole world hates and distrusts us and there is nothing we can do about it. I spent 2 years living and serving people in Venezuela, learned the language myself didn't ask anyone for money, lived off of savings I had accumulated prior to going. I just worked 14 hour days every day trying to make life better for them. The people there thought I was there as a spy, trying to find out more ways to put them in submission to the great USA. The whole world is so skeptical of us there is nothing we can do to fix it. If we try to be generous they think we have some ulterior motive, that through our giving we are just chaining them to some rock to keep them bound forever. The whole world sees us this way and I don't see any way out of it, using our 2/3 of a trillion will just make people distrust us more.
I doubt we would ever try that, more likely is China will decide to stop trading with us. Give them 10 years to establish their economy and then we will be enslaved by them. They already own the panama canal, they could cripple us at any time they wished. Now that they can take over in space too, well its game over. Thanks clinton for letting them have out nuclear secrets, and all sorts of other secrets (as well as letting them get the panama canal from us..) With all of our tech jobs going over there, its only a matter of a couple years before they are light years ahead of us technologically, they probably already are getting close to us, and then its bye bye USA, they'll let us work for them for very cheap, and if we disagree they'll close the panama canal to our ships, nuke us, and it will all be over.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time something bad happens tech-wise in a court in the US, this place is crazy with comment of how the US sucks, how horrid the legal system is here, how its just stupid what companies can get away with in court, now a stupid ruling is handed down in a European court and everyone is mum... no one seems upset at the legal system, in fact most people here are defending the decision as a good one, even though when MS tried this stunt in the US system they failed. So much for the Europeans living up to their liberal ideals and standing up for the little guy....
For smaller sites they normally only need 1 server, and RedHat ES will be plenty for those installations. at $350 that is about $700 less than a MS server, and for the support, and the supported apps you get on a RedHat EL box its worth it. and if you're just talking about a little vpn/router box or something, then throw debian/gentoo/mandrake/fedora or suse.. a little firewall router doesn't have to have support for enterprise apps. Little places like this aren't running huge database clusters, or web clusters, or anything like that which is where the big cost is gonna come from if you're running rh9 in a 20 node cluster and now you have to buy 20 licenses of RHAS for 2500 each yeah that hurts.. but that isn't the small branch office, thats the home office, and they're probably already running RHAS anyway.
Don't forget they get 20% of any equity investment in SCO as well (which would include the recently announced 50 million investment by baystar/royal bank of canada) so boies and company have already been paid 10 million.
Don't be stupid.
There are plenty of DSL and Wireless providers that allow you to run servers. I maintain about 30 such servers for small businesses. this policy would completely eliminate the ability of these businesses to economically run their own email/web servers. None of these servers send spam, they are not open relays, they are well maintained servers that deserve to be on the net, blocking them would be draconian and stupid.
Sorry but you can do that on windows as well.
Sure you can lock windows down, but its impossible to maintain. If you know ahead of time what application every person needs then yeah you can manage it maybe... But in Windows there is basically a switch can install, can't install. So say you lock down windows boxes, then users suddenly can't install fonts, or they can't install some little utility app that they need (because any install in windows needs admin rights). so then you spend your days running around installing fonts for people, or installing acrobat reader, or a million other mindless chores that you've disallowed people to do.
In Linux the control is so much more fine grained, you can lock people out of installing apps to certain directories, you can let them maintain a font directory in their home dir, you can let them install apps to their home dir. Maybe maintain browser plugins in their home dir. This allows things to go much smoother, people can install things that they *need* to get their jobs done, and aren't on the phone every 10 minutes telling you they need font X. Or if you prefer, you can completely lock it down, and people will be on the phone, but you can just sit at your computer, and install anything remotely and poof its up and running, you aren't running up and down the office to each individual pc.
I agree. I feel that this situation is much more akin to the MS Money/Intuit battle. MS tried to buy Intuit because it was the cheaper way of getting a leading Money Management program. They failed in their bid to purchase them, and still Quicken is the defacto standard ahead of MS Money many years after the fact. If MS fails in purchasing Google (they will unless the manage some insane hostile bid), the same story will repeat itself, they are too far behind to develop something that will compete.
Intuit would actually be owned by MS if the regulators had let them. They found it would be anti competitive for MS to buy Intuit otherwise both sides were willing.
Unfortunately if the GPL is invalid that means all that code is governed by copyright, and all the kernel contributors can sue for infringment. At 150,000/infringement, that will quickly eat up even the 50 million SCO just got.
Completely opposite experience for me,
I fixed a guys computer the other day who had spoken with an Indian tech over at Dell. His computer was freezing up (windows xp). The tech had him disable all of the services on the computer, and then couldn't figure out why the computer wouldn't connect to the internet. They spent 2 hours on the phone, the tech kept telling him to download new drivers from the internet, and the guy kept telling the tech "I can't because I can't connect anymore" in the end the tech told him he'd just have to reinstall windows, that it was broken beyond repair. Anyway, I turned on the services, found the one that was misbehaving and disabled it (I forget which one it was but it wasn't necessary), fixed beautifully... about 5 minutes.
The worst program I've ever seen is savenow..
It starts like 5 processes on boot (using between 50-75mb of ram and 20-25% cpu), sends all of your browsing habits somewhere else, and pops up porn, and other various ads randomly while using the computer. It is by far the worst spy/ad ware I've ever seen.
Problem with that of course are the side letters and amendments which grant IBM specifically that right to do whatever they want with code developed in house which SCO is convieniently trying to forget about...
The problem still lies in SCO's definition of derivative works. the features they have issue with are NUMA/SMP, a file system, and RCU. If IBM did their development right (I bet they did) and documented things properly they will be able to prove that these features are not derivative of System V (in the rest of the world besides at SCO headquarters derivative means that these new features relied on old System V stuff, or the IBM engineers got the inspiration to create these things based on System V influence).
It should be trivial for IBM to prove that they thought up say RCU on their own, as an idea/concept and then implimented it in AIX. If they did this with all of these technologies (I bet they did), then these things lose their derivative of SysV status, and SCO hasn't a leg to stand on. Then the only worry we might have is copied code.. but that is becoming increasingly unlikely.
SCO's broad definition of derivative works would mean that any program written for any operating system would then become a derivative work of that operating system if it was included in the base OS. If I write a program for windows and then MS decides they like my program and buy it from me and then include it with windows (think wordpad, hypertrm) then that program suddenly is a derivative of windows? I don't think so, but that is what SCO is saying, basically "because you included this software with our software, regardless of how it was developed, it is now bound by the derivative works clause of our contract". That logic is highly inconsistant with any definition of derivative works I've ever seen.
All EULAs state the same "no warranty..." clause that the GPL does. You think microsoft pays money or is liable when a virus costs you your data? your time? or actual money? No. the law suits would be non-starters just like no one has been able to successfully sue MS for very provable economic loss due to faulty software.
I agree with you,
my point of view is this:
window 2000 professional costs 300 for the full version.
windows xp professional 300 more, thats 600 in 2 years (windows xp came out in 2002, windows 2000 in well 2000). sure you could get an upgrade to windows xp (for 200 bucks), so thats 500 in 2 years for Windows. And you'd be required to buy an xp upgrade for each computer, if you have more than 1 mac OS X is much better. Anyway if you are in the MS world you are spending more for upgrades than in the mac world.
more microsoft false security. When they log in?
Most worms I know run as services so even before they log in the virus is scanning the net looking for nodes to infect. This can easily happen between the time the user has booted and when they log in. In the corporate environments I've worked in it is a normal practice to boot, and then go get coffee and come back 10-15 minutes later.. that is more than enough time for the worm to be off and running.
Thats my point, bandwidth is cheap there is no way that apple is blowing all of its revenue on bandwidth for the iTMS.
the RIAA is not taking nearly all of the 99 cents, apple doesn't get more than half, but they get like 40 cents per song. They have sold over 14,000,000 songs since april. The article is about the boost in sales that they got releasing on windows. They have sold 1,000,000 songs in 3 days, when they initially released it took 7 days to sell 1,000,000 songs, and they've been averaging 600,000 songs per week, now with windows its quite possible they will sell 2,000,000 songs in a week. Thats almost a million in profits, there is no way the bandwidth cost a million bucks.
Polls are the stupidest things ever, trying to use a poll to cast doubt on an election is ridiculous. My father ran for elected office a couple years ago, I know how stupid polls are. Unless you can read the questions and see exactly what they asked (I mean how the question is worded) Would you vote for X over Y? is very different than Who would you vote for? My father led in every poll ever taken and the last one (2 days before the election) showed him winning by 15%. Yeah he lost by 10%. That is one small example but polls are not to be trusted.
We can believe it because we know that we saved the entire western world 2 times already in the last 100 years. If it weren't for us we'd all be under either Russian, German, or Japanese rule. Instead the US has stepped in at great cost to ourselves to provide the western world with its sovereignty. How the HELL can you be so ungrateful?
Ok, so the US is getting blamed for something the British did?
How does that work?
Why does Al Qaeda exist? So we should have just left Kuwait in Saddam's hands then? That is why we were over there, which is why bin Laden got all in a tif. If you really think we should become isolationists again, fine I'm all for it. We'll pull all our troops and all of the jobs we create across the world, and it'll suck for us cause our economy will crash, but it will suck more for everyone else. The wars that will occur as soon as our protection is pulled from all the hot spots in the world will kill hundreds of millions (China will invade taiwan, North and South Korea will have at it, Pakistan and India will have a nuclear exchange, Israel will be destroyed, the balkan states will go right back to the bloodbath they were in before, Africa will descend into tribal warfare, south america will be overrun by drug lords). If cuba is such a great place to live how come we have millions of refugees fleeing that country and trying to get into ours? I agree that our attempts at installing democracies in other countries have been pitiful and stupid, I don't think we should be in that business, but trying to say we should play our cards like France is naive and stupid.
When things go wrong no one calls on France or Germany or the UK to try to fix the problem. Ever since WWI every time there is a major dispute/problem/war that we'd rather stay out of, the entire European continent keeps yelling at us that we're not doing our part, until we finally have to go in and solve the problem because no one else will.
If it weren't for us "sticking our nose in other people's business" hell the entire European continent would be Communist, France, germany, italy, spain, UK none of that would exist, it would all be one big USSR.
I don't feel that we are "world policemen" without anyone asking. Should we just get completely out of the Israel/Palestine dispute then (already tried that one, and the European community had a shit fit)? Move all our troops out of South Korea and just leave it for the North to conquer? Just sit back and let al queda drive some more planes into our buildings? Wait til Iran has nukes and let them drop them on us (because that is where they will drop them, not on pakistan or india or in Europe, but here in the US)?
The problem with most of the world is that they can sit back and say "just reduce your forces and you'll be fine" because no one else is the target the way we are. France doesn't understand what it is to have people blindly hate them because of their religion. Germany doesn't either, they can all just sit on the sidelines and critize america because they don't have to worry about the consequences.
Unfortunately that won't help. When America tries to sit back and let problems go by the wayside then everyone screams at us that we should be doing more to solve the problems, except then as soon as we do everyone resents us and hates us more. We are in a catch 22 and I don't see any way out.
It is because we are the most hated that I'm paranoid. Nothing we do will help, believe me the whole world hates and distrusts us and there is nothing we can do about it. I spent 2 years living and serving people in Venezuela, learned the language myself didn't ask anyone for money, lived off of savings I had accumulated prior to going. I just worked 14 hour days every day trying to make life better for them. The people there thought I was there as a spy, trying to find out more ways to put them in submission to the great USA. The whole world is so skeptical of us there is nothing we can do to fix it. If we try to be generous they think we have some ulterior motive, that through our giving we are just chaining them to some rock to keep them bound forever. The whole world sees us this way and I don't see any way out of it, using our 2/3 of a trillion will just make people distrust us more.
I doubt we would ever try that,
more likely is China will decide to stop trading with us. Give them 10 years to establish their economy and then we will be enslaved by them. They already own the panama canal, they could cripple us at any time they wished. Now that they can take over in space too, well its game over. Thanks clinton for letting them have out nuclear secrets, and all sorts of other secrets (as well as letting them get the panama canal from us..) With all of our tech jobs going over there, its only a matter of a couple years before they are light years ahead of us technologically, they probably already are getting close to us, and then its bye bye USA, they'll let us work for them for very cheap, and if we disagree they'll close the panama canal to our ships, nuke us, and it will all be over.