This community seems to have a knee-jerk reaction against successful business. I look at the calls for boycott against Redhat and SuSE as being bad precedents of our community fighting those that are putting their money where our mouths are. If some distribution was validated for that kind of role I could see the masses coming out against it as the next great evil.
I believed that current DVD packages such as the Creative Labs DVD encore 6x did the decoding in hardware anyway?
Yah the DXR3 is Hardware as is my DXR2. I end up using a software decoder most of the time anyway since I have a Celeron 400MHz, and the combination of TNT->DXR2->Voodoo yields fuzzy video at my selected resolution (1280x1024). All those passthrough cables are murder.
I'd rather be able to use my existing hardware than buy yet-another-mpeg-decoder card.
I can't see how identifying with an emotionless character driven by pure logic makes anyone smarter. How smart can you be to idolize something that denies your humanity?
On the other hand, Star Wars embraces humanity, all the characters have emotion, even R2D2 and C3PO. They're driven by human motivations that we can identify with, and each story isn't served up with a nicely packaged moral message.
Is emotion or passion so wrong? They're not always pleasant, but I'm kind of attached to them myself...
Remember, your fictitious hero could never share your passion for Star Trek because it's emotional, not logical to sit around the TV wasting your life watching and idolizing ANY fictitious character.
The sort of optimization I'm thinking of here would be along the lines of giving some daemon a hard-coded place in memory, or some similarly evil thing. (I recall hearing that NT did something along these lines; a discussion of it came up on one of the/. Mincraft threads.) Or are Unix derivatives so versatile with kernel tuning parameters and such that a single-purpose OS (ServerBSD, perhaps, or "Servix":) would be unnecessary?
Or, if you optimize it for serving pr0n, you could all it "Cervix":)
I've seen the Pluto systems when I was up in San Jose at the Bell Micro manufacturing facility. Now THAT was truly an impressive hardware layout. I didn't get to see too much, but from what I saw of the mainboard (looked like 20 Adaptec chips in parallel, each running a dedicated SCSI disk), I can't imagine a NIC connection that could keep up with it.
It certainly blew the socks off the RAID that WE were assembling there... ( 3 NCR Tolerant style chips with 6 drives on an ultra-scsi bus per chip)
I feel that the RIAA should be shut down. They make so much money off the artis and the artist.. Well lets see he has a sore butt.
This seems to be a common train of thought with Slashdot readers, and it's one I take issue with.
Let's stop focussing on how much money anyone makes, Bill Gates, the RIAA, or whomever. It's just NOT relevant to anything. I would love for EVERYONE to make a ton of money at what they do.
I think the REAL issue we have is that the RIAA continually tries to impede on other people's rights, just like the REAL complaint we have with Microsoft/Bill Gates is the quality of the product, and industry domination that Microsoft imposes.
Linux advocates definitely have an anti-profit reputation. Let's keep our agenda's striaght and stop fixating on what other people make. It just shows jealousy, not a desire to make things better.
At our work it has. Especially when we were using 4.10. It was crashing all the time.
Even 5 has had it's kinks. Though I suspect the Novell admin isn't too good at what he does. I have a P200 with 128 Megs of RAM doing DHCP, DNS, mail for 150 users,some light file sharing, and my test server for mod_perl programs and database connectivty.
If the hardware is stable, then the only problems I've seen with NetWare is due to admin misconfiguration. NDS across multiple servers can get especially hairy if the time synchronization isn't setup correctly. I'm used to 130 day uptimes...
NDS support in linux is great IMHO. One of the problems I've faced in our network (NetWare, NT, Linux) is finding an economical and efficient way to keep the users managed. NDS everywhere would make me ecstatic.
Apple ][c with the 80 column card. My first commercial app was deployed on a ][c. (Sigh) the good old days when (in at least one BASIC implementation) you would replace literal number references with concatenated variables because the variables tokenized to fewer bytes then the literal occupied...
maybe more interresting: 'ndex from [131.107.3.76], at 2:42pm ET One of the biggest drawbacks to having a linux only desktop is that there aren't many supported games. This is keeping a lot of people on Win9x whether they like it or not. Are you planning to do anything to promote or facilitate the porting of games to Linux?'
Name: tide76.microsoft.com Address: 131.107.3.76
(but, they are probably not talking officially, but then again, the microsoft guy... I dunno, seems like FUD to me (-; ).
It's not FUD if it's true. If I could get an MS Office replacement that I was happy with, and could play Tribes and some of the other FPS's that I use to destress on Linux, then I'd have an MS free network at home.
Re:Microsoft, Intel, Network Solutions, AOL...
on
DOJ vs NSI
·
· Score: 1
I'm starting to suspect the government is stepping on it's own toes here. It creates a monopoly power in the domain area, and then launches probes when it becomes a monopoly. Well.. Duh. Whacha expect? It's not that the companies are monopolies. It's that they're monopolies that are abusing their power. Microsoft, Intel, and NSI are all providing poor service to the customer, and using their monopoly power to crush competition. I really do not believe we'd be seeing any action taken on any of these organizations if they were providing quality service on a level playing field.
Actually, I think that depends on the audience you're referring to.
I think it's popular with those of us who are technical because of the GPL.
I think it's popular to the general public right now because it's NotMicrosoft.
If it weren't for the rabid, non-critical thinking Bill Gates haters looking for an alternative then none of the non-Microsoft solutions would be enjoying any common popularity right now. I never see Linux REALLY compared to Solaris or AIX in the press, it's compared to NT because that's what the general public is trying to escape from.
My personal belief is that if a non-Microsoft desktop OS is what's desired, then it should be a completely different project from Linux. Linux carries a lot of multi-user, server-oriented, X-windows baggage along with it that I think is non-productive for a desktop machine used to play games and do "desktop" things on. It's not the problem the tool was designed to solve...
We should be keeping a list of Linux's shortcomings. Someday I hope to have a completely linux environment, however Win98 is still on my desktop. My firewalls and home server are all linux based. The right tool for the right job for my needs.
That being said, I've got a LOT of Linux boxes at the office. I've managed to minimize the amount of overpriced poorly performing solutions by implementing them using open standards on Linux.
Not much of a load, but then it's hideously overpowered (Pentium II 400Mhz) for what it does (secondary internal DNS, Intranet web server, public and private SMTP, POP3 for 75 users). Built on cheap clone box hardware. My only issue is eventual disk failure.
Seems like a bad idea to me too. Aside from the numerous security risks that come from using root as a regular account, it implies that the person running this machine is too lazy to even bother creating a non-super account. Or too ignorant to know any better. Either way, it presents a really bad image.
It's just addressed to root. It doesn't mean it's not aliased/forwarded to somewhere else, possibly even to a completely different box. A little sloppy yes, but I think it's a little knee jerk to start worrying about security issues of posting the root email address. Almost every box has it.
I just called nVidia - and I told their receptionist that I HAD checked the website and needed to talk to someone (Dave was my victim) about the driver support.
Don't email. It doesn't take effort to email. SPEND the $ and make a call, or send it in via snail mail. Email has no real impact on the recipient, but taking the time to call and let them know in a friendly supportive way that you like their hardware but that you need the support or you'll have to go somewhere else really has a lot more impact. It's all about confrontation, you'll reach someone much more effectively by actually talking to them and appreciating their position, but holding firm on at least getting a binary driver module. It also takes up their time to have people answer the phones, email can be read and roundfiled in seconds.
Anyway, Dave was supportive (he offered the 2D X-Windows support which I explained was good but that I could do 2D with any old card, I had bought the TNT because it was the best 3D card (whether that's true is irrelevant - it helps to be supportive when we're asking for something)) and clearly unhappy at the prospect of telling me that there was no support for the 3D in Quake yet. He was really wanting to tell me what they had on their agenda but they have not made it public yet so he wasn't at liberty - I told him that I understood and that it was fine, I was willing to wait a little bit, but I wanted to know if the company even planned on addressing the issue. He then told me DEFINITELY and that in a couple of weeks he thought I would be very happy with what the company was doing.
You can./ their telephones WAY more easily than you can their website or email or mailroom. Most companies have very few incoming lines, when they can't do business they'll look for ways to address the problem, and to do so they'll HAVE to publicize some sort of stance that will keep us from calling.
I'd like to see some coordinated./ phone planning so that we can focus our efforts a vendor or two at a time and make them feel the demand.
I ejected Sun summarily from my building for making similiarly outrageous claims about Microsoft.
I'm pissed about it too.
I was Sun's champion in that situation at our company (i.e. I brought them in and was pushing for them), but when they added lies and FUD to their sales pitch I had to show them the door.
Why do you people have a hangup on innovation? I can tell many of you haven't worked in positions where you actually have to produce goods and services to keep the doors open and the paychecks flowing.
I am working like a madman to keep NT out of my serverroom and keep it a Novell/Linux environment. It's not easy. I don't have unlimited resources to write my own PHP3 apps, and I have end users who manage to find all kinds of solutions where Linux is not an option (Our SAP implementation on Windows NT for example, which is why I'm here late tonight).
In the real world, success in business has less to do with innovation and more to do with IMPLEMENTATION. I got started in this profession in 1980 and I remember when every program came with seperate disks of app specific printer and screen drivers, and you sweated every time to hope your printer/video card was supported by that particular app.
I have to hand it to Microsoft for IMPLEMENTING the GUI shell on cheap hardware. I don't care who innovated it. Xerox PARC did that, but they didn't put it on my desktop did they? Apple implemented it too, but only on their overpriced (I started on Apple and never looked back) hardware.
NT is a badly designed system but it works, 95 and 98 are colossal kludges, but they work and they let me (and my clients) get their work done.
Summation: I don't like Microsoft, the predatory part of me respects their success, the programmer in me just wants to cry over the quality of the product, but given that I'm a rational human being I can see the values as WELL as the pitfalls. Screaming zealots never won an argument and never will. Ask yourself if you've ever switched religion because of a Jehovah's Witness knocking on your door. Drop the anti-microsoft attitudes, figure out what they did right, and let's do it BETTER so I can clean the NT out of my server room instead of being forced into shoveling more money into their pockets.
>If a case is translucent (to visible light), then it obviously can't be metal, and if it isn't metal, how can it shield the computer components within from potentially harmful electromagnetic interference? *Not* a good situation for anyone who expects their computer to be behave reliably and predictably. >Oh well, I'm sure it's just another *dumb* trend. They'll learn eventually.
Er that statement makes no sense. The only devices that would suffer would be devices that pick up radiated RF (radios and non-cable TV's for example).
First of all, the computer isn't shielded from itself, so removing the shielding will have NO effect on the computer's reliability.
Second, MANY of us run caseless constantly with no ill effects from RF (or anything else). A bigger concern would be cooling, and you don't need metal cases to cool properly. Translucent plastic will do just fine.
You missed the point - the idea is not to actually cache any pages.
When modem users pull down a large file it takes a long time, and that "heavy" apache process is required for the entire duration they're pulling it down.
By using the squid accelerator, the apache can QUICKLY offload the page to the cache, which then feeds it out to the user at a slower speed with less system load.
My take: We say usenet support works better. Someone tested it. We failed. We need to address that. Usenet sucks anyway - article availability is non-deterministic, and it's relatively slow.
That said -- I do think that Mindcraft's attempt to gain support was a token attempt only.
If we want to keep the reputation as being a better source of support (via usenet) than Microsoft, then our community is at fault for failing to answer or to ask for clarification.
It does not matter that the invididual was a private individual. It does not matter if it was for a private box, commercial box, or for a publication. From what I heard no answer or request for clarification was ever made via usenet. If we're only going to help article writers then we're a lousy source of support.
Don't justify why we failed, accept the hit and produce a solution. I've thought of the knowledgebase solution but I never thought to mention it and see if anyone else is interested. My bad. I would like to see a knowledgebase implemented and I'd like to contribute to it.
GNU doesn't mean Free to end-users. It only means Free to people who are already aware of GNU's mission.
I believe that Stallman has been unable to successfully get public interest in his mission. Now that Linux has been successful, he sees his role being even more overshadowed, and this is his desperate attempt to hitch on.
In the office (I'm a director level manager) I don't ever take credit for anything my team does. They are given credit for everything they do and I make sure they get the credit. I will get my reward in the long run by the reflection of my team.
I think RMS would be better served by having GNU software enjoy Linux/BSD/Hurd's reflections than to make this desperate alienating ploy for free publicity.
GNU/FSF has nothing in their agenda about better or new.
Their only mandate according to their website is free and open.
The suggestions on re-implementing code quite obviously place no emphasis on efficiency or capability, only on implementing functionality in a different manner than the original to avoid legal entanglement. In my view some of the suggestion on how to do so would result in technically/efficency inferior products.
Personally I find RMS's jingoistic tunnel vision repulsive and unrealistic. It taints the valid points he tries to make with me. Every GNU tool has a copyright banner on it, I don't call my Linux boxen X/Linux or apache/linux (even though my webserver would be functionally useless without an HTTP daemon), or whatever. I also don't call it a GNU/Linux, I won't call it a GNU/Linux and frankly I'm so repulsed by Stallman's self-serving anti-freedom hypocrisy that I'd correct anyone I saw doing it in my presence.
Slashdot Mirror
I see one problem with that.
:)
This community seems to have a knee-jerk reaction against successful business. I look at the calls for boycott against Redhat and SuSE as being bad precedents of our community fighting those that are putting their money where our mouths are. If some distribution was validated for that kind of role I could see the masses coming out against it as the next great evil.
I hope it's the vocal zealot minority.
I just wish they weren't so vocal
I believed that current DVD packages such as the Creative Labs DVD encore 6x did the decoding in hardware anyway?
Yah the DXR3 is Hardware as is my DXR2. I end up using a software decoder most of the time anyway since I have a Celeron 400MHz, and the combination of TNT->DXR2->Voodoo yields fuzzy video at my selected resolution (1280x1024). All those passthrough cables are murder.
I'd rather be able to use my existing hardware than buy yet-another-mpeg-decoder card.
I can't see how identifying with an emotionless character driven by pure logic makes anyone smarter. How smart can you be to idolize something that denies your humanity?
On the other hand, Star Wars embraces humanity, all the characters have emotion, even R2D2 and C3PO. They're driven by human motivations that we can identify with, and each story isn't served up with a nicely packaged moral message.
Is emotion or passion so wrong? They're not always pleasant, but I'm kind of attached to them myself...
Remember, your fictitious hero could never share your passion for Star Trek because it's emotional, not logical to sit around the TV wasting your life watching and idolizing ANY fictitious character.
Guess we all know where my preferences lay.
My $.03
The sort of optimization I'm thinking of here would be along the lines of giving some daemon a hard-coded place in memory, or some similarly evil thing. (I recall hearing that NT did something along these lines; a discussion of it came up on one of the /. Mincraft threads.) Or are Unix derivatives so versatile with kernel tuning parameters and such that a single-purpose OS (ServerBSD, perhaps, or "Servix" :) would be unnecessary?
:)
Or, if you optimize it for serving pr0n, you could all it "Cervix"
Sorry -- couldn't resist (LARTing self heavily)
I've seen the Pluto systems when I was up in San Jose at the Bell Micro manufacturing facility. Now THAT was truly an impressive hardware layout. I didn't get to see too much, but from what I saw of the mainboard (looked like 20 Adaptec chips in parallel, each running a dedicated SCSI disk), I can't imagine a NIC connection that could keep up with it.
It certainly blew the socks off the RAID that WE were assembling there... ( 3 NCR Tolerant style chips with 6 drives on an ultra-scsi bus per chip)
I feel that the RIAA should be shut down. They make so much money off the artis and the artist.. Well lets see he has a sore butt.
This seems to be a common train of thought with Slashdot readers, and it's one I take issue with.
Let's stop focussing on how much money anyone makes, Bill Gates, the RIAA, or whomever. It's just NOT relevant to anything. I would love for EVERYONE to make a ton of money at what they do.
I think the REAL issue we have is that the RIAA continually tries to impede on other people's rights, just like the REAL complaint we have with Microsoft/Bill Gates is the quality of the product, and industry domination that Microsoft imposes.
Linux advocates definitely have an anti-profit reputation. Let's keep our agenda's striaght and stop fixating on what other people make. It just shows jealousy, not a desire to make things better.
My $.03
At our work it has. Especially when we were using 4.10. It was crashing all the time.
,some light file sharing, and my test server for mod_perl programs and database connectivty.
Even 5 has had it's kinks. Though I suspect the Novell admin isn't too good at what he does. I have a P200 with 128 Megs of RAM doing DHCP, DNS, mail for 150 users
If the hardware is stable, then the only problems I've seen with NetWare is due to admin misconfiguration. NDS across multiple servers can get especially hairy if the time synchronization isn't setup correctly. I'm used to 130 day uptimes...
NDS support in linux is great IMHO. One of the problems I've faced in our network (NetWare, NT, Linux) is finding an economical and efficient way to keep the users managed. NDS everywhere would make me ecstatic.
The Lisa was bloatware.
Apple ][c with the 80 column card.
My first commercial app was deployed on a ][c. (Sigh) the good old days when (in at least one BASIC implementation) you would replace literal number references with concatenated variables because the variables tokenized to fewer bytes then the literal occupied...
(sigh)(smile)
maybe more interresting:
'ndex from [131.107.3.76], at 2:42pm ET
One of the biggest drawbacks to having a linux only desktop is that there aren't many supported games. This is keeping a lot of people on Win9x whether they like it or not. Are you planning to do anything to promote or facilitate the porting of games to Linux?'
Name: tide76.microsoft.com
Address: 131.107.3.76
(but, they are probably not talking officially,
but then again, the microsoft guy... I dunno, seems like FUD to me (-; ).
It's not FUD if it's true. If I could get an MS Office replacement that I was happy with, and could play Tribes and some of the other FPS's that I use to destress on Linux, then I'd have an MS free network at home.
I'm starting to suspect the government is stepping on it's own toes here. It creates a monopoly power in the domain area, and then launches probes when it becomes a monopoly. Well.. Duh. Whacha expect? It's not that the companies are monopolies. It's that they're monopolies that are abusing their power. Microsoft, Intel, and NSI are all providing poor service to the customer, and using their monopoly power to crush competition. I really do not believe we'd be seeing any action taken on any of these organizations if they were providing quality service on a level playing field.
Actually, I think that depends on the audience you're referring to.
I think it's popular with those of us who are technical because of the GPL.
I think it's popular to the general public right now because it's NotMicrosoft.
If it weren't for the rabid, non-critical thinking Bill Gates haters looking for an alternative then none of the non-Microsoft solutions would be enjoying any common popularity right now. I never see Linux REALLY compared to Solaris or AIX in the press, it's compared to NT because that's what the general public is trying to escape from.
My personal belief is that if a non-Microsoft desktop OS is what's desired, then it should be a completely different project from Linux. Linux carries a lot of multi-user, server-oriented, X-windows baggage along with it that I think is non-productive for a desktop machine used to play games and do "desktop" things on. It's not the problem the tool was designed to solve...
We should be keeping a list of Linux's shortcomings. Someday I hope to have a completely linux environment, however Win98 is still on my desktop. My firewalls and home server are all linux based. The right tool for the right job for my needs.
/root]# uptime
That being said, I've got a LOT of Linux boxes at the office. I've managed to minimize the amount of overpriced poorly performing solutions by implementing them using open standards on Linux.
Oh, and my mail server uptime is
[root@gateway
7:13pm up 143 days, 16:08, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.01, 0.00
Not much of a load, but then it's hideously overpowered (Pentium II 400Mhz) for what it does (secondary internal DNS, Intranet web server, public and private SMTP, POP3 for 75 users). Built on cheap clone box hardware. My only issue is eventual disk failure.
Seems like a bad idea to me too. Aside from the numerous security risks that come from using root as a regular account, it implies that the person running this machine is too lazy to even bother creating a non-super account. Or too ignorant to know any better. Either way, it presents a really bad image.
It's just addressed to root. It doesn't mean it's not aliased/forwarded to somewhere else, possibly even to a completely different box. A little sloppy yes, but I think it's a little knee jerk to start worrying about security issues of posting the root email address. Almost every box has it.
I just called nVidia - and I told their receptionist that I HAD checked the website and needed to talk to someone (Dave was my victim) about the driver support.
./ their telephones WAY more easily than you can their website or email or mailroom. Most companies have very few incoming lines, when they can't do business they'll look for ways to address the problem, and to do so they'll HAVE to publicize some sort of stance that will keep us from calling.
./ phone planning so that we can focus our efforts a vendor or two at a time and make them feel the demand.
Don't email. It doesn't take effort to email. SPEND the $ and make a call, or send it in via snail mail. Email has no real impact on the recipient, but taking the time to call and let them know in a friendly supportive way that you like their hardware but that you need the support or you'll have to go somewhere else really has a lot more impact. It's all about confrontation, you'll reach someone much more effectively by actually talking to them and appreciating their position, but holding firm on at least getting a binary driver module. It also takes up their time to have people answer the phones, email can be read and roundfiled in seconds.
Anyway, Dave was supportive (he offered the 2D X-Windows support which I explained was good but that I could do 2D with any old card, I had bought the TNT because it was the best 3D card (whether that's true is irrelevant - it helps to be supportive when we're asking for something)) and clearly unhappy at the prospect of telling me that there was no support for the 3D in Quake yet. He was really wanting to tell me what they had on their agenda but they have not made it public yet so he wasn't at liberty - I told him that I understood and that it was fine, I was willing to wait a little bit, but I wanted to know if the company even planned on addressing the issue. He then told me DEFINITELY and that in a couple of weeks he thought I would be very happy with what the company was doing.
You can
I'd like to see some coordinated
My $.03 (inflation)
I ejected Sun summarily from my building for making similiarly outrageous claims about Microsoft.
I'm pissed about it too.
I was Sun's champion in that situation at our company (i.e. I brought them in and was pushing for them), but when they added lies and FUD to their sales pitch I had to show them the door.
Why do you people have a hangup on innovation? I can tell many of you haven't worked in positions where you actually have to produce goods and services to keep the doors open and the paychecks flowing.
I am working like a madman to keep NT out of my serverroom and keep it a Novell/Linux environment. It's not easy. I don't have unlimited resources to write my own PHP3 apps, and I have end users who manage to find all kinds of solutions where Linux is not an option (Our SAP implementation on Windows NT for example, which is why I'm here late tonight).
In the real world, success in business has less to do with innovation and more to do with IMPLEMENTATION. I got started in this profession in 1980 and I remember when every program came with seperate disks of app specific printer and screen drivers, and you sweated every time to hope your printer/video card was supported by that particular app.
I have to hand it to Microsoft for IMPLEMENTING the GUI shell on cheap hardware. I don't care who innovated it. Xerox PARC did that, but they didn't put it on my desktop did they? Apple implemented it too, but only on their overpriced (I started on Apple and never looked back) hardware.
NT is a badly designed system but it works, 95 and 98 are colossal kludges, but they work and they let me (and my clients) get their work done.
Summation: I don't like Microsoft, the predatory part of me respects their success, the programmer in me just wants to cry over the quality of the product, but given that I'm a rational human being I can see the values as WELL as the pitfalls. Screaming zealots never won an argument and never will. Ask yourself if you've ever switched religion because of a Jehovah's Witness knocking on your door. Drop the anti-microsoft attitudes, figure out what they did right, and let's do it BETTER so I can clean the NT out of my server room instead of being forced into shoveling more money into their pockets.
URG - back to work...
>If a case is translucent (to visible light), then it obviously can't be metal, and if it isn't metal, how can it shield the computer components within from potentially harmful electromagnetic interference? *Not* a good situation for anyone who expects their computer to be behave reliably and predictably.
>Oh well, I'm sure it's just another *dumb* trend. They'll learn eventually.
Er that statement makes no sense. The only devices that would suffer would be devices that pick up radiated RF (radios and non-cable TV's for example).
First of all, the computer isn't shielded from itself, so removing the shielding will have NO effect on the computer's reliability.
Second, MANY of us run caseless constantly with no ill effects from RF (or anything else). A bigger concern would be cooling, and you don't need metal cases to cool properly. Translucent plastic will do just fine.
You missed the point - the idea is not to actually cache any pages.
When modem users pull down a large file it takes a long time, and that "heavy" apache process is required for the entire duration they're pulling it down.
By using the squid accelerator, the apache can QUICKLY offload the page to the cache, which then feeds it out to the user at a slower speed with less system load.
My take: We say usenet support works better. Someone tested it. We failed. We need to address that. Usenet sucks anyway - article availability is non-deterministic, and it's relatively slow.
That said -- I do think that Mindcraft's attempt to gain support was a token attempt only.
If we want to keep the reputation as being a better source of support (via usenet) than Microsoft, then our community is at fault for failing to answer or to ask for clarification.
It does not matter that the invididual was a private individual. It does not matter if it was for a private box, commercial box, or for a publication. From what I heard no answer or request for clarification was ever made via usenet. If we're only going to help article writers then we're a lousy source of support.
Don't justify why we failed, accept the hit and produce a solution. I've thought of the knowledgebase solution but I never thought to mention it and see if anyone else is interested. My bad. I would like to see a knowledgebase implemented and I'd like to contribute to it.
Then let him call it "Free Linux"
GNU doesn't mean Free to end-users. It only means Free to people who are already aware of GNU's mission.
I believe that Stallman has been unable to successfully get public interest in his mission. Now that Linux has been successful, he sees his role being even more overshadowed, and this is his desperate attempt to hitch on.
In the office (I'm a director level manager) I don't ever take credit for anything my team does. They are given credit for everything they do and I make sure they get the credit. I will get my reward in the long run by the reflection of my team.
I think RMS would be better served by having GNU software enjoy Linux/BSD/Hurd's reflections than to make this desperate alienating ploy for free publicity.
GNU/FSF has nothing in their agenda about better or new.
Their only mandate according to their website is free and open.
The suggestions on re-implementing code quite obviously place no emphasis on efficiency or capability, only on implementing functionality in a different manner than the original to avoid legal entanglement. In my view some of the suggestion on how to do so would result in technically/efficency inferior products.
Personally I find RMS's jingoistic tunnel vision repulsive and unrealistic. It taints the valid points he tries to make with me. Every GNU tool has a copyright banner on it, I don't call my Linux boxen X/Linux or apache/linux (even though my webserver would be functionally useless without an HTTP daemon), or whatever. I also don't call it a GNU/Linux, I won't call it a GNU/Linux and frankly I'm so repulsed by Stallman's self-serving anti-freedom hypocrisy that I'd correct anyone I saw doing it in my presence.