The internet was designed to be a research tool, used by accademia. That should never be compramised to suit the needs of businesses.
Don't worry, the intelligentsia will get their own network (Internet2). As long as they're taken care of, they won't particularly care much more about the slack-jawed, dorito-eating, Friends-watching public than the corps do.
Christ, this can't be correct English. "Borland are a business"...? All your base are belong to us, anyone?
Borland IS a business.
Hey Grammar Nazi, could you post summary of when you do and do not pluralize the verbs of singular nouns??
Since when do you automatically assume that:
"MegaCorp", a singular entity
...should be treated as an abbreviation for:
"(the people at) Megacorp", a plural entity?
"Microsoft offer shit products at high prices" <-- factually correct, but sounds grammatically retarded!
"Microsoft offers shit products at high prices" <-- YES, much better!
Hey, I could be wrong, but then again I STILL protest and refuse to use "an" instead of "a" in front of "h" words with unaccented first syllables .
I dunno, maybe I'm just a victim of early seventies army base public schools, but I NEVER recall reading about "an historic event" in my history books, nor all this confused gratuitous pluralization.
And don't get me started on how news-casters pronounce "negotiations".
OK, way off topic. There goes my hard-earned 5 pts of karma.
To paraphrase an admin at our University during a mailing list discussion about Outlook:
"Prior to MS Outlook, if you suggested to ANYONE that a mail client should be able to execute foreign code sent to you through e-mail, they'd have looked at you like you just grew an extra head."
Corporations are not some alien entities competing with us for receptive ear in Washington.
They consist of millions of people like you and me working and waging war on them is like waging war on ourselves.
You're quite wrong about this. Corporations are, in fact, very much like an alien life form. Their environment is the economy, and every day is a battle for survival and supremacy over other corporations.
Corporate officers are, by law, required to uphold the interests of their shareholders - maximize their profit - within the limits of the law. If it were legal and lucrative to sell baby-skin slippers, then by god a struggling corporation somewhere would do it. Then they'd all do it.
They simply HAVE to in order to survive: if a corporation does not take every advantage over its adversaries, its adversaries will, and the first corporation will die.
This is why a STRONG CIVIL SOCIETY is so fundamentally important: it has to establish humane rules by which ALL corporations must compete, so that they are not forced to employ every possible advantage, regardless of how immoral it is, or how badly it hurts non-shareholders.
This isn't as hilarious as it sounds. I'd like to have Evolution for Windows. And once (if?) a groupware back end for Evolution is developed, having clients for mulitple platforms would be great.
Why support C# at all? It is clearly only a M$ attempt to pollute the world of programming languages ! I will never touch it and hope there are more people like me!
Well, I don't intend to use the piece of crap. I'll stick with Java. I'm just glad there's a non-MS option for those hell-bent on using it.
Yes, I know, Java isn't "free", but it does abstract my investment in business logic from the OS and architecture it runs on. Very important. I love Linux, but I wouldn't want to be trapped on that any more than on NT a(well, if I had to choose, of course I'd rather be trapped on Linux).
OK business world: Go install KDE on everybody's desk and watch your business crumble.... Windows is still the only realistic option.
And why, pray tell, do you believe this?
Anyone who's used the Linux desktop environments knows that, beyond some retraining, these desktop environments are suitable for between 90% and 99% of business's needs.
Speaking of.NET, would you trust Microsoft with your data?
Of course not. And the bitch of it is that there are oodles of morons out there that you have transactions with, and THEY will trust MS with THEIR data - which, of course, includes any of your data they happen to have.
I'm sorry but I can't get exciting about this "Company that sells software changes license" - surely there must be something more interesting in the news today?
News from the front of the war for the future of computing is boring?
I think it behooves the Linux community as a whole to stop longing for compatibility with Microsoft... beat out Word... Exchange is a total mess...
Because in the REAL WORLD you have to MIGRTATE USERS who are LOCKED INTO MONOPOLY-WARE.
A Linux-based Exchange-compatible back-end - combined with compatible clients on multiple platforms - would be GREAT. You could just replace the Exchange server without the users ever knowing.
When you're ready to start migrating users to Linux, you can do it gradually, starting with the more adventurous/open-minded/less-cowardly, while still using shared calendars, contact lists, task lists, etc.
Did Mr. Stallman re-define vapourware and we should all be changing our usage? Funny because when I develop in Visual Studio.Net, using C# to the CLR using the.NET Framework, it sure seems real to me.
Interesting - I've wondered what a.NET site developed by someone other than Microsoft looks like.
Could you post a link to one of your.NET websites?
Not talking about the Amnesty report. I'm asking YOU if YOU believe that the overall state of human rights in the United States is comparable to that in China?
Sure, someone who buys into the the Free concept will gladly share modifications and bug fixes with everyone else. But if someone less ethical finds a program that does what they need to do, what's stopping them from altering it so the interface isn't recognizable, adding a few more customizations, and closing the source and claiming it's theirs?
Because it will be unable to compete with the open source versions?
Because if this closed version does have any "neat" features, the highly skilled Free-philosophy coders will simply reverse-engineer its interface and write an open source implementation that will immediately make the closed-source one irrelevant?
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry, the intelligentsia will get their own network (Internet2). As long as they're taken care of, they won't particularly care much more about the slack-jawed, dorito-eating, Friends-watching public than the corps do.
Yes, yes, I see it - let it go, OK??!
Christ, this can't be correct English. "Borland are a business" ...? All your base are belong to us, anyone?
Borland IS a business.
Hey Grammar Nazi, could you post summary of when you do and do not pluralize the verbs of singular nouns??
Since when do you automatically assume that:
"MegaCorp", a singular entity
"Microsoft offer shit products at high prices" <-- factually correct, but sounds grammatically retarded!
"Microsoft offers shit products at high prices" <-- YES, much better!
Hey, I could be wrong, but then again I STILL protest and refuse to use "an" instead of "a" in front of "h" words with unaccented first syllables .
I dunno, maybe I'm just a victim of early seventies army base public schools, but I NEVER recall reading about "an historic event" in my history books, nor all this confused gratuitous pluralization.
And don't get me started on how news-casters pronounce "negotiations".
OK, way off topic. There goes my hard-earned 5 pts of karma.
So you don't think the cross-platform capabilities merit an extra hundred bucks?
Sell one of your applications to a Linux user and send the $100 to Borland for chrissakes ya cheap bastard.
It's a floor wax and a delicious dessert topping!
You're quite wrong about this. Corporations are, in fact, very much like an alien life form. Their environment is the economy, and every day is a battle for survival and supremacy over other corporations.
Corporate officers are, by law, required to uphold the interests of their shareholders - maximize their profit - within the limits of the law. If it were legal and lucrative to sell baby-skin slippers, then by god a struggling corporation somewhere would do it. Then they'd all do it.
They simply HAVE to in order to survive: if a corporation does not take every advantage over its adversaries, its adversaries will, and the first corporation will die.
This is why a STRONG CIVIL SOCIETY is so fundamentally important: it has to establish humane rules by which ALL corporations must compete, so that they are not forced to employ every possible advantage, regardless of how immoral it is, or how badly it hurts non-shareholders.
This isn't as hilarious as it sounds. I'd like to have Evolution for Windows. And once (if?) a groupware back end for Evolution is developed, having clients for mulitple platforms would be great.
And the way you prove encryption is weak is by having independent third parties try to break that encryption.
Which is a violation of the DMCA.
There's a catch here somewhere, and I'm not sure what its number is, but...
IP laywers on the left side of the gallows, media corp execs on the right.
We'll need a more scalable solution for the mindless masses who let it happen.
IBM and Sun must feel fucked by the Linux / OSS community right about now.
this whole Slashdot crowd is way too much into anal.
Well, I don't intend to use the piece of crap. I'll stick with Java. I'm just glad there's a non-MS option for those hell-bent on using it.
Yes, I know, Java isn't "free", but it does abstract my investment in business logic from the OS and architecture it runs on. Very important. I love Linux, but I wouldn't want to be trapped on that any more than on NT a(well, if I had to choose, of course I'd rather be trapped on Linux).
I like being able to move my apps around.
Can you give me the source of this quote?
And why, pray tell, do you believe this?
Anyone who's used the Linux desktop environments knows that, beyond some retraining, these desktop environments are suitable for between 90% and 99% of business's needs.
Of course not. And the bitch of it is that there are oodles of morons out there that you have transactions with, and THEY will trust MS with THEIR data - which, of course, includes any of your data they happen to have.
News from the front of the war for the future of computing is boring?
What business are you in?
Maybe because this is open source, and a .NET clone project would attract developers who are not interested in coding desktop environments?
Because in the REAL WORLD you have to MIGRTATE USERS who are LOCKED INTO MONOPOLY-WARE.
A Linux-based Exchange-compatible back-end - combined with compatible clients on multiple platforms - would be GREAT. You could just replace the Exchange server without the users ever knowing.
When you're ready to start migrating users to Linux, you can do it gradually, starting with the more adventurous/open-minded/less-cowardly, while still using shared calendars, contact lists, task lists, etc.
gno it's gnot!
Interesting - I've wondered what a .NET site developed by someone other than Microsoft looks like.
Could you post a link to one of your .NET websites?
Thanks.
Only after refreshing the page is it displayed in black on white.
Not talking about the Amnesty report. I'm asking YOU if YOU believe that the overall state of human rights in the United States is comparable to that in China?
That we have a more highly evolved sense of sarcasm?
Because it will be unable to compete with the open source versions?
Because if this closed version does have any "neat" features, the highly skilled Free-philosophy coders will simply reverse-engineer its interface and write an open source implementation that will immediately make the closed-source one irrelevant?
For starters.