Point taken, but it hasn't been on-topic for any story that's been posted since I noticed it, so this seemed like the best chance to bring it up. Ya do what ya can.
There are things like Sunbird and Yagoon but they don't work well with Outlook (i.e. no real integration).
Actually, (it was explained to me that) we get our Outlook licenses for free because we have an Exchange server. If we migrated off Exchange, we'd likely be migrating off Outlook, too, if there was something solid that could take its place. We're a smallish company that doesn't have more than one conference room to reserve and most of our scheduling issues are currently resolved over IM (on our Jabber server - bless you ejabberd!). Maybe KDE4's Kontact will fill the bill.
Since that release was made on 2007-02-05, you could more accurately say that "Linux, of course, has been doing it for months". OpenBSD didn't even really get a strong version of it until 3.8, and that wasn't quite 2 years ago. It sounds like Windows had problems with it as recently as February 2007, but maybe that's fixed now.
This is still fairly cutting-edge stuff. It's not like they just now implemented memory protection for the first time.
CalDAV Group Scheduling Schedule a meeting with colleagues, check availability, and book conference rooms when using iCal with a compatible CalDAV server like iCal Server.
Reserve Rooms and Equipment Reserve meeting rooms and equipment as you create your meeting invitations. If your calendar is administered through a CalDAV server, iCal automatically displays availabilities when you add a room or resource to your meeting.
It sounds like a high-level player finally decided to take on Exchange. My biggest questions: are there Windows programs that support these features via CalDAV, and is there a CalDAV server in FreeBSD's ports?
Imagine buying a drive like this that comes pre-installed with every song ever produced by WEA or EMI or Sony/Columbia. Say, everything from 1925 onward. How much would you pay for such a drive?
My student loan company says I paid roughly $15,000 for it, and it was a do-it-yourself model.
And yet you read and post to it. Does that say more about Slashdot or about you?
Slashdot, specifically that it was worth enduring that jackass because the rest was so good. Besides, the inevitable flamewars in reaction to stories like "George Bush Admits Torturing Kittens" (when the linked article was about farm subsidies or something else totally unrelated) were usually pretty entertaining.
Closed Source is best if you are a software shop trying to make a profit.
I think you misspelled "worst". Writing new closed source software today is suicidal. You don't have the market share or momentum to get people to use your product instead of the inevitable open source version that will come along a few weeks later (assuming your product is worth bothering to copy). You don't have the manpower of large community-driven projects. You don't have access to the enormous pool of open source software that your competitors will be building on instead of writing everything from scratch.
Except for very niche markets, I can't really think of a widely successful new class of software, or of any up-and-coming software powerhouses. Even Google is working on software as a service rather than as a product.
Where's the -1, Bigot moderation when you need it?
Don't worry. You probably won't be downmodded too harshly since you're still a newbie.
Everything you said is probably true, but there's still a huge gap between the G8 countries and west Africa. In any event, small similar countries should be voting for the standards they can actually afford to uphold, in this case OpenDocument. Anything else is a WTF, even if it's completely and obviously explained by short-term bribery.
People won't care that Vista has higher hardware requirements. They will care that it's more secure and more robust. Ask anyone who has overclocked their GPU too much:
Vista is better because it copes with you intentionally damaging your hardware? Unless DRM really means Dumbass Ricer Modifications, I don't think Vista actually does what you think it does.
Nope. I have 640MB (512 + 128) in my kids' 400MHz iMac and that ought to be enough for anybody. My wife's 800MHz iMac has 768 and it runs great. My eMac has 2GB because I run large process like QEMU pretty often, but it hardly ever uses more than 1GB at any other time.
What gets even older than that is the spelling of Microsoft as MS. Stop. It makes you appear laughable.
Of all things to criticize Microsoft for, I can't believe you'd stoop to making fun of them for registering trademarks for MS-DOS, MSDN, and MSN, or for using MSHOME as their default network name.
That's assuming that you were criticizing Microsoft and not the grandparent poster for using the shorthand that Microsoft uses for themselves. That'd be either ignorant or hypocritical, so I'm sure it must be the former.
And if you're talking about limiting the number of people who can access shares concurrently on home systems, that's to guarantee network performance for the client machine (as it's not a server, chances are someone's using it).
How thoughtful of them to decide not to let you choose for yourself.
Honestly, I hope you're re-posting their justifications and didn't really come up with those yourself.
That's the great thing about companies with names like "IP Innovation LLC"....they don't have any products so they can't possibly be infringing on anybody else's junk patents.
Is it wrong to pray for them to accidentally sue RedSquare Linux instead and be dealt with appropriately?
The 13 year old (the future of technology) wanted the gadgets - or rather - the useful yet entertaining and social aspects of Vista - rather than the technology underneath.
My 7 year old daughter (the future of technology that will come after the 13 year old moves on) likes ponies, cats, and sharks. I will not be installing the first or last in my living room, although I gave in on the second.
Even high-end systems use swap space, because it allows for swapping out parts of memory that isn't called, freeing up that memory for things like disk cache, which does have a positive effect.
What he said. I'm 184MB into swap on a mostly-idle system with 120MB free out of 1280MB installed. That's a good thing because that old data isn't competing for RAM with new processes.
Slashdot Mirror
Point taken, but it hasn't been on-topic for any story that's been posted since I noticed it, so this seemed like the best chance to bring it up. Ya do what ya can.
I'll give you that, but PaX was never accepted into the mainline kernel. That's what I was using as my criterion for "supported by Linux".
Actually, (it was explained to me that) we get our Outlook licenses for free because we have an Exchange server. If we migrated off Exchange, we'd likely be migrating off Outlook, too, if there was something solid that could take its place. We're a smallish company that doesn't have more than one conference room to reserve and most of our scheduling issues are currently resolved over IM (on our Jabber server - bless you ejabberd!). Maybe KDE4's Kontact will fill the bill.
From your Wikipedia link:
Since that release was made on 2007-02-05, you could more accurately say that "Linux, of course, has been doing it for months". OpenBSD didn't even really get a strong version of it until 3.8, and that wasn't quite 2 years ago. It sounds like Windows had problems with it as recently as February 2007, but maybe that's fixed now.
This is still fairly cutting-edge stuff. It's not like they just now implemented memory protection for the first time.
To give you closeted folk an excuse to talk about your feelings in public.
From the changelog:
It sounds like a high-level player finally decided to take on Exchange. My biggest questions: are there Windows programs that support these features via CalDAV, and is there a CalDAV server in FreeBSD's ports?
My student loan company says I paid roughly $15,000 for it, and it was a do-it-yourself model.
Ignore that. Discussion2 seemingly reparented your post to one about "whatever happened to Michael", and that's that I thought I was responding to.
Slashdot, specifically that it was worth enduring that jackass because the rest was so good. Besides, the inevitable flamewars in reaction to stories like "George Bush Admits Torturing Kittens" (when the linked article was about farm subsidies or something else totally unrelated) were usually pretty entertaining.
Your devastating rhetorical skills have demolished my position, and I respectfully concede the debate.
That's not a girl, and I will not be tricked into scrolling down again.
Visio. Powerpoint. Nero. QuarkXPress. Acrobat. The only reason those don't sound at least as dumb is that you're used to them.
I think you misspelled "worst". Writing new closed source software today is suicidal. You don't have the market share or momentum to get people to use your product instead of the inevitable open source version that will come along a few weeks later (assuming your product is worth bothering to copy). You don't have the manpower of large community-driven projects. You don't have access to the enormous pool of open source software that your competitors will be building on instead of writing everything from scratch.
Except for very niche markets, I can't really think of a widely successful new class of software, or of any up-and-coming software powerhouses. Even Google is working on software as a service rather than as a product.
I see that your browser lacks support for the <sarcasm> tag.
Don't worry. You probably won't be downmodded too harshly since you're still a newbie.
Everything you said is probably true, but there's still a huge gap between the G8 countries and west Africa. In any event, small similar countries should be voting for the standards they can actually afford to uphold, in this case OpenDocument. Anything else is a WTF, even if it's completely and obviously explained by short-term bribery.
Vista is better because it copes with you intentionally damaging your hardware? Unless DRM really means Dumbass Ricer Modifications, I don't think Vista actually does what you think it does.
I think the WTF is that the Ivory Coast, in Africa, is involved in this at all.
Nope. I have 640MB (512 + 128) in my kids' 400MHz iMac and that ought to be enough for anybody. My wife's 800MHz iMac has 768 and it runs great. My eMac has 2GB because I run large process like QEMU pretty often, but it hardly ever uses more than 1GB at any other time.
I'd suppose that the biggest difference is that Leopard is generally recognized as an upgrade.
Of all things to criticize Microsoft for, I can't believe you'd stoop to making fun of them for registering trademarks for MS-DOS, MSDN, and MSN, or for using MSHOME as their default network name.
That's assuming that you were criticizing Microsoft and not the grandparent poster for using the shorthand that Microsoft uses for themselves. That'd be either ignorant or hypocritical, so I'm sure it must be the former.
How thoughtful of them to decide not to let you choose for yourself.
Honestly, I hope you're re-posting their justifications and didn't really come up with those yourself.
Is it wrong to pray for them to accidentally sue RedSquare Linux instead and be dealt with appropriately?
My 7 year old daughter (the future of technology that will come after the 13 year old moves on) likes ponies, cats, and sharks. I will not be installing the first or last in my living room, although I gave in on the second.
The mother also has a B.S. in Industrial Engineering. I don't think this is the stereotypical clueless soccer mom.
What he said. I'm 184MB into swap on a mostly-idle system with 120MB free out of 1280MB installed. That's a good thing because that old data isn't competing for RAM with new processes.