See, this is exactly the kind of squibble people use to put Linux down. "Yes, Linux can organise digital photos, AND touch them up AND interface with your digital camera, but instead of having one program do it, you have THREE! Linux is not ready for the desktop!". I mean, seriously, if that's the last thing holding Linux back, I say we've arrived already.
I'm sorry, I'm a bit behind the curve here, but what exactly does an app for organising digital photos do? Allow you to put them in different directories, sort them, search them? Does it do anything Konqueror doesn't do by default? Serious question.
You could just standardise on GNOME or KDE and you would pretty much be there. You have a point saying that best-of-breed applications often use different toolkits, but there are usually decent offerings for most things in KDE and GNOME worlds.
...at least according to some posters here. Let's face it, whatever Linux does, it will never be good enough for some people. They'll always find the stupidest things to complain about (look! the windows are a different shade of grey on Linux, the users are confuuuused!) The rest of us will simply enjoy all the things we have and realise that Linux might never be everything to all people, but it is a damn fine desktop for some people right now.
I got into Linux late (1999), because I was scared by the voodoo magic and demon sacrifices I was assured were necessary for such a step. What I found out after a (somewhat tedious) installation, is a KDE 1.1.2 desktop which looked much like Windows, much software that did the basic things, and a completely usable system which replaced windows on my computer from that point on. I had a browser (NS 4.7), a word processor (WP 8), and MP3 player, I was go. Much of the criticism aimed at it was correct, but it was a usable system nonetheless.
Fast forward a few years. We have two killer browser engines, each one kicking the crap out of MS's offering. We have an amazing (let's face it) office suit in Open Office 1.1, which is an excellent solution even for business use. In 1999 you could forget multimedia, now we have the two BEST video players out there, period (MPlayer and XineLib). Burning DVDs? Graphical frontends. Watching DVDs? Check. It's amazing how far we've come, but the same people keep repeating the same silly arguments (the button has the wrong shape! The users will be confused!) based on 4-year old Linux experience.
Linux might never be the ultimate desktop for all users. Hell, I don't think it should be. But it's ready for many users right now. I don't buy the 'average joe' arguments, here's a real example. I have a guest user set up for people who use my computer when I'm gone. I showed my girlfriend where the important programs were and left for work. While I was gone, she browsed the web, wrote emails, played some games, watched DVDs, listented to some of my MP3s. Then she (wait for this!) downloaded the images from her digital camera and transferred them to her portable hard disk and organised them in separate directories, based on the date they were taken. She had never used Linux before. Too difficult my ass.
Linux is ready for many users right now. It might never be ready for the 'typical' users some self-proclaimed experts always bring up in their condescending tone, but maybe it shouldn't be. It's ready for me, thank you very much.
But if he set out to make a better mousetrap without ever seeing yours, then there can be no taint of copying involved even if the basic design is similar since he's looked at mousetraps in the stores for 40 years already. Kind of like calling a copy machine a Xerox or vice versa. But he, knowing there were production shortcuts in most such devices, decided to put ball bearings in the pan and bail pivots? I don't think thats a violation because he clearly did think it out and attempt to make that "better mousetrap".
That would be a clear patent violation. Patents cover ideas, even if you come up with these ideas completely independently. If I came up with a formula for a famous patented antibiotic in my dream, making it would still violate a patent. If I figured out arithmetic coding algorithm, without ever hearing about it, implementing it would still violate the patent. That's the main problem with patents -- they monopolise ideas.
It does make sense in the pharmaceutical industry, where you spend years and millions developing a formula, have to spend years and millions testing a new medicine and getting it approved, and then only have a few years to make back all that money while your patent still lasts. It makes less sense in a field where a programmer sits down one day, thinks up a clever algorithm, and this algorithm then is forbidden for anyone for the next 20 years.
Software corporations spend BILLIONS of dollars and employ thousands and thousands of programmers to create patentable IP. If you guys had your way, all of this money would be thrown away and the world of software would be thrown back into the stone ages. Face it, guys, the time for patenting software is NOW.
What software patents will ultimately do, is make it illegal for small guys to write software. Right now, all you need is a computer and a good book to start programming, and this is what ultimately gave us GNU, Linux, Apache, and many other goodies. When software is patentable, then any line of code you write might become illegal.
Your analysis is actually spot on - it's about huge software corporations with billions of dollars. Only such companies can afford to create software in a patent-crazy world, because they have a large enough portfolio to defend themselves against litigation. It's about creating a barrier to entry for new competitors and dividing the software market between the big players, without ever having to produce anything innovative at all. Patents are actually counter-productive in this regard.
Why on earth would they want the transistor-level blueprints? Intel is the biggest microprocessor manufacturer in the world and I'm sure they can devise their own logic. Considering the internal differences between AMD's Athlons (on which Opterons are based) and Intel's Pentiums, such blueprints would probably be worthless.
The annoying thing about SuSE is that, although they always put out an amazing distribution, there is always some sort of showstopping glitch that gets through and annoys the hell out of its users.
In 7.3, for example, the SuSE firewall started before eth0, so it didn't work unless you edited the startup scripts by hand. They fixed it in the next version. Now the USB mouse doesn't work, although it worked in all the previous versions. I think that every SuSE version I've tried had some glitch like this (8.2 has some issues with the automounter). Which is annoying because in all other respects, SuSE is a top distribution, and this makes them look like amateurs.
And how is this different from software released under OpenSource?
The difference is that I can take KHTML and port it to another system, like AtheOS or Mac OSX, while I can't take IE and port it to Linux.
I can take Evolution and port it to another system, and I cannot do that with Outlook. So Open Source software benefits everybody, while MS's free giveaways only benefit the people who pay MS money. Quite a difference.
The whole point of these 'free' applications is to lock the users into one proprietary solution, while cashing in elsewhere (windows licenses, Office price etc)
Well, OASIS file format is nearly finished and open for anyone to use. So far, OpenOffice.org, StarOffice and KOffice are set to standardise on it as their native file format. As long as WordPerfect offers a possibility of reading/saving this format flawlessly (which is certainly doable as the format is open), they will score many points in the Free Software community. This would be the real signal that Corel is taking us seriously.
They did not really integrate the file browser and the internet browser into one program. If you are browsing the internet, only the internet engine (HTML) is loaded. If you are browsing your home directory, only the file management component is loaded.
Konqueror is only a shell (some buttons and menus) which loads proper components as needed. It is not a cross between Mozilla, Nautilus and OpenOffice, which loads a behemoth of code each time it is called.
I'm not sure where this widespread opinion comes from, that GNOME = Mac and KDE = Windows? Both are extremely similar in their basic configuration and both can be customised to act basically any way you want them.
I have KDE emulating AfterStep, with a Wharf-like program launcher on the right, a system tray/applet container on the bottom-left and a separate taskbar on the top. No desktop icons, single click for everything, magic window borders and focus-follows-mouse. It feels absolutely unlike Windows and yet it feels unmistakably KDE. I know that many GNOME users customise their environment to be very unique as well. We should promote the customisability of the free DEs, not squeeze them into some shoeboxes which don't even fit.
I actually like OO Impress much more than the other components (I don't like Writer at all). I used it several years ago (still StarOffice 5.2) to do several presentations and I cannot stand PowerPoint since then. Impress is a great piece of software and very intuitive. Making presentations with it is a breeze. Every time I have to do a presentation in PowerPoint nowadays, it turns to be a frustrating experience.
It's true that a company also represents people, but it does so in a much different way: In a democracy, everyone has an equally important vote. In a company, those votes are very very unequal. So a large company ends up being represented by a few top executives and their interests.
1) It did happen and way more than once 2) Microsoft has to have the same pricing because they are a monopoly and as such not allowed to discriminate in order to drive others out of business 3) Dell and others focus on Windows-base hardware and software because of 1). Why else do you think IBM and HP still recommend Windows 2003 Professional for business after sinking untold billions into Linux? 4) Where is there a room for a market entry? Do you know that OEMs were strictly prohibited from supplying any other OS, lest they lost their Windows licenses?
Yeah, the patent situation with them is very unfortunate:( and I prefer Ogg to MP3 for that reason. On the other hand, they are more open than WMV and WMA and I'll take XVid over WMV any day.
For some reason, your comment about maintaining balance between the people and the industry scared the hell out of me. I always thought that the government should work for the good of the people at all times. The industry is a secondary concern and it's only important if the good of the industry is beneficial to the people. If the industry turns against the people, it should be the duty of the elected government to protect the people. That's why I don't understand the people who cheer for a megacorp instead of their own elected officials (although the EU election is another story...)
If you leave them alone for too long, the corporation will become the government--simply because it's profitable to do so.
You also have access to the Direct3d API so your games can run on your Debian? Surely Microsoft being a megacorp has something to do with its popularity? Or to the Win32 API so that you can run all those apps you need on Linux? Do you use Linux in corporate environment? Surely it wouldn't be a problem if MS protocols were standard and/or documented. Tried interacting with MS Kerberos?
I am not retarted (sic), and I stated that most of the people use Windows for the two stated reasons, not all. From my experience, that is true. Most people either have to use Windows for whatever reason or are stupid/ignorant. I've never met a person who seriously loves the Windows Experience (tm). I've met people who love Macs and Unix, though.
Slashdot readers (tm) support open standards: Ogg Vorbis, MP3, MPEG-4, FLAC. Slashdot readers (tm) are opposed to tying proprietary formats deep into the operating system and discouraging open standards.
Now tell me, what are the Plain and Simple Windows advantages (against any OS, I never mentioned Linux) which aren't directly derived from: - Third party app support (see monopoly) - Third party driver support (see monopoly) - Installed base (see monopoly)
The original case against Microsoft was brought by its competitors because Microsoft used illegal tactics to get rid of them. Look up Netscape, Spyglass, Lotus for a few examples. It is similar to Michael Jordan taking a baseball bat to a basketball game, beating the crap out of all the other players until he's the only one left on the field and scoring a million shots because there's nobody there to challenge him.
An operating system is necessary for using a computer. The same way tyres are necessary for driving a car. Now imagine if Bridgestone had a monopoly on tyres. Imagine if they used this monopoly to have their tyres shipped with every new automobile. Now imagine that they buy a fridge manufacturer. And Boeing. And the rights to Britney Spears' music. Then the price of a car suddenly goes to $1mil, but you get a fridge, Britney Spears' back-catalogue and a Boeing 737-400 for FREE! Airbuss, General Electric, Siemens, Aguilera and company all go bankrupt and you can't afford a car. All sane countries have laws against this kind of shit and it's right that they do.
Winamp, WMP, The GIMP, Zoom player, Opera. All popular Windows app, all look and act differently.
Hardware acceleration has nothing to do with window managers. All XFree window managers have the same underlying hardware acceleration. But you have the option of not loading all the extra overhead (explorer.exe) by using Blackbox. You can't do that in Windows.
Most of the subtle, deeply important technological advances in use in Windows are sadly ripoffs of decade old NextSTEP, Macintosh and Unix concepts. We haven't missed them, we just don't see them as advances.
DirectX is a collection of APIs dealing with everything from sound, graphics and input. SDL + OpenAL + OpenGL can replace this very adequately. People have been making bogus requirements for Linux for years now. We had top-notch 3d gaming on Linux in 1999 (Quake3). We have it now (UT2k4) and we will have it in the future (Doom3). Why on earth would we want to clone DirectX when it's clear that top-of-the-line games could be made 5 years ago? Bogus excuses.
What happened to the notion of freedom, so rarely espoused or valued on Slashdot, of freedom from government intervention?
How about freedom from large megacorps shoving crap down our throats because they have a monopoly and are rich? How about freedom to use the internet without a monopolist breaking every known standard just to spoil it for everyone who doesn't feed them money? A government has to intervene when the laws of the country are being broken. Surely you support government intervention in the case of robbers. Why would a multi-billion dollar company be immune from prosecution after they were repeatedly found guilty of breaking laws?
You can easily buy a PC without Windows on it...
Yeah, try a brand-name laptop.
1) People don't choose Microsoft because they have to.
2) People don't choose Microsoft because they're stupid.
On the contrary, most people use Microsoft either because they have to (work policy, came preinstalled, don't know anything else, bank requires it, games require it, Adobe requires it) or because they're stupid.
So instead of supporting state action to help Microsoft's would be competetors, why not support alternatives that really stand a chance at success?
I thought that's what most Slashdotters did? Ever notice how many Linux/BSD/Free Software stories get submitted?
This sounds like a great opportunity to go there and ask them some hard questions. Then the college newspaper editors will have something interesting to report on, not just propaganda. Some questions you could ask them:
1) If you are protecting artists like you claim you are, then how come million-selling performers like TLC and Toni Braxton had to file for bankruptcy in order to get out the financial troubles your loans put them in? (source: Courtney Love's speech in salon.com)
2) How much money does an artist get from each sold CD (tip: 8-12 percent) and what does a breakdown look like (manufacturing costs, band cut, transportation and distribution...)
3) How many CDs does an average artist have to sell to BREAK EVEN on an average RIAA contract (hint: 250 000)
4) If I were to spend 45$ on three CDs of my favourite artist (15$ per CD), how much money would he/she get (about 4.5$). If I downloaded those albums on Kazaa and went instead to a concert (30$) and bought a T-Shirt (15$), how much money would the artist get (my guess is over 20$ cash).
5) If file-swapping is hurting the industry, then how come CD sales are up this year in some parts of the world? What does RIAA do for promotion of 95% of the artists who don't hit MTV anyway?
I'm sure you can come up with some other good ones. Moses Avalon Calculator is a great resource for some more facts. Remember, don't be an ass, ask your questions politely, and wait until he's babbled some bullshit for best impact. Good luck.
Slashdot Mirror
See, this is exactly the kind of squibble people use to put Linux down. "Yes, Linux can organise digital photos, AND touch them up AND interface with your digital camera, but instead of having one program do it, you have THREE! Linux is not ready for the desktop!". I mean, seriously, if that's the last thing holding Linux back, I say we've arrived already.
I'm sorry, I'm a bit behind the curve here, but what exactly does an app for organising digital photos do? Allow you to put them in different directories, sort them, search them? Does it do anything Konqueror doesn't do by default? Serious question.
You could just standardise on GNOME or KDE and you would pretty much be there. You have a point saying that best-of-breed applications often use different toolkits, but there are usually decent offerings for most things in KDE and GNOME worlds.
...at least according to some posters here. Let's face it, whatever Linux does, it will never be good enough for some people. They'll always find the stupidest things to complain about (look! the windows are a different shade of grey on Linux, the users are confuuuused!) The rest of us will simply enjoy all the things we have and realise that Linux might never be everything to all people, but it is a damn fine desktop for some people right now.
I got into Linux late (1999), because I was scared by the voodoo magic and demon sacrifices I was assured were necessary for such a step. What I found out after a (somewhat tedious) installation, is a KDE 1.1.2 desktop which looked much like Windows, much software that did the basic things, and a completely usable system which replaced windows on my computer from that point on. I had a browser (NS 4.7), a word processor (WP 8), and MP3 player, I was go. Much of the criticism aimed at it was correct, but it was a usable system nonetheless.
Fast forward a few years. We have two killer browser engines, each one kicking the crap out of MS's offering. We have an amazing (let's face it) office suit in Open Office 1.1, which is an excellent solution even for business use. In 1999 you could forget multimedia, now we have the two BEST video players out there, period (MPlayer and XineLib). Burning DVDs? Graphical frontends. Watching DVDs? Check. It's amazing how far we've come, but the same people keep repeating the same silly arguments (the button has the wrong shape! The users will be confused!) based on 4-year old Linux experience.
Linux might never be the ultimate desktop for all users. Hell, I don't think it should be. But it's ready for many users right now. I don't buy the 'average joe' arguments, here's a real example. I have a guest user set up for people who use my computer when I'm gone. I showed my girlfriend where the important programs were and left for work. While I was gone, she browsed the web, wrote emails, played some games, watched DVDs, listented to some of my MP3s. Then she (wait for this!) downloaded the images from her digital camera and transferred them to her portable hard disk and organised them in separate directories, based on the date they were taken. She had never used Linux before. Too difficult my ass.
Linux is ready for many users right now. It might never be ready for the 'typical' users some self-proclaimed experts always bring up in their condescending tone, but maybe it shouldn't be. It's ready for me, thank you very much.
But if he set out to make a better mousetrap without ever seeing yours, then there can be no taint of copying involved even if the basic design is similar since he's looked at mousetraps in the stores for 40 years already. Kind of like calling a copy machine a Xerox or vice versa. But he, knowing there were production shortcuts in most such devices, decided to put ball bearings in the pan and bail pivots? I don't think thats a violation because he clearly did think it out and attempt to make that "better mousetrap".
That would be a clear patent violation. Patents cover ideas, even if you come up with these ideas completely independently. If I came up with a formula for a famous patented antibiotic in my dream, making it would still violate a patent. If I figured out arithmetic coding algorithm, without ever hearing about it, implementing it would still violate the patent. That's the main problem with patents -- they monopolise ideas.
It does make sense in the pharmaceutical industry, where you spend years and millions developing a formula, have to spend years and millions testing a new medicine and getting it approved, and then only have a few years to make back all that money while your patent still lasts. It makes less sense in a field where a programmer sits down one day, thinks up a clever algorithm, and this algorithm then is forbidden for anyone for the next 20 years.
Software corporations spend BILLIONS of dollars and employ thousands and thousands of programmers to create patentable IP. If you guys had your way, all of this money would be thrown away and the world of software would be thrown back into the stone ages. Face it, guys, the time for patenting software is NOW.
What software patents will ultimately do, is make it illegal for small guys to write software. Right now, all you need is a computer and a good book to start programming, and this is what ultimately gave us GNU, Linux, Apache, and many other goodies. When software is patentable, then any line of code you write might become illegal.
Your analysis is actually spot on - it's about huge software corporations with billions of dollars. Only such companies can afford to create software in a patent-crazy world, because they have a large enough portfolio to defend themselves against litigation. It's about creating a barrier to entry for new competitors and dividing the software market between the big players, without ever having to produce anything innovative at all. Patents are actually counter-productive in this regard.
Why on earth would they want the transistor-level blueprints? Intel is the biggest microprocessor manufacturer in the world and I'm sure they can devise their own logic. Considering the internal differences between AMD's Athlons (on which Opterons are based) and Intel's Pentiums, such blueprints would probably be worthless.
The annoying thing about SuSE is that, although they always put out an amazing distribution, there is always some sort of showstopping glitch that gets through and annoys the hell out of its users.
In 7.3, for example, the SuSE firewall started before eth0, so it didn't work unless you edited the startup scripts by hand. They fixed it in the next version. Now the USB mouse doesn't work, although it worked in all the previous versions. I think that every SuSE version I've tried had some glitch like this (8.2 has some issues with the automounter). Which is annoying because in all other respects, SuSE is a top distribution, and this makes them look like amateurs.
And how is this different from software released under OpenSource?
The difference is that I can take KHTML and port it to another system, like AtheOS or Mac OSX, while I can't take IE and port it to Linux.
I can take Evolution and port it to another system, and I cannot do that with Outlook. So Open Source software benefits everybody, while MS's free giveaways only benefit the people who pay MS money. Quite a difference.
The whole point of these 'free' applications is to lock the users into one proprietary solution, while cashing in elsewhere (windows licenses, Office price etc)
Wouldn't it be great if this XML format they mention were in fact the OASIS format. If not, then why not?
Well, OASIS file format is nearly finished and open for anyone to use. So far, OpenOffice.org, StarOffice and KOffice are set to standardise on it as their native file format. As long as WordPerfect offers a possibility of reading/saving this format flawlessly (which is certainly doable as the format is open), they will score many points in the Free Software community. This would be the real signal that Corel is taking us seriously.
They did not really integrate the file browser and the internet browser into one program. If you are browsing the internet, only the internet engine (HTML) is loaded. If you are browsing your home directory, only the file management component is loaded.
Konqueror is only a shell (some buttons and menus) which loads proper components as needed. It is not a cross between Mozilla, Nautilus and OpenOffice, which loads a behemoth of code each time it is called.
It is very easy to set up Konqueror to do exactly that, if you want it to do nothing but file management.
I'm not sure where this widespread opinion comes from, that GNOME = Mac and KDE = Windows? Both are extremely similar in their basic configuration and both can be customised to act basically any way you want them.
I have KDE emulating AfterStep, with a Wharf-like program launcher on the right, a system tray/applet container on the bottom-left and a separate taskbar on the top. No desktop icons, single click for everything, magic window borders and focus-follows-mouse. It feels absolutely unlike Windows and yet it feels unmistakably KDE. I know that many GNOME users customise their environment to be very unique as well. We should promote the customisability of the free DEs, not squeeze them into some shoeboxes which don't even fit.
Maybe not now, but soon. The KOffice component Kexi is going to fill this niche.
I actually like OO Impress much more than the other components (I don't like Writer at all). I used it several years ago (still StarOffice 5.2) to do several presentations and I cannot stand PowerPoint since then. Impress is a great piece of software and very intuitive. Making presentations with it is a breeze. Every time I have to do a presentation in PowerPoint nowadays, it turns to be a frustrating experience.
It's true that a company also represents people, but it does so in a much different way: In a democracy, everyone has an equally important vote. In a company, those votes are very very unequal. So a large company ends up being represented by a few top executives and their interests.
1) It did happen and way more than once
2) Microsoft has to have the same pricing because they are a monopoly and as such not allowed to discriminate in order to drive others out of business
3) Dell and others focus on Windows-base hardware and software because of 1). Why else do you think IBM and HP still recommend Windows 2003 Professional for business after sinking untold billions into Linux?
4) Where is there a room for a market entry? Do you know that OEMs were strictly prohibited from supplying any other OS, lest they lost their Windows licenses?
Yeah, the patent situation with them is very unfortunate :( and I prefer Ogg to MP3 for that reason. On the other hand, they are more open than WMV and WMA and I'll take XVid over WMV any day.
For some reason, your comment about maintaining balance between the people and the industry scared the hell out of me. I always thought that the government should work for the good of the people at all times. The industry is a secondary concern and it's only important if the good of the industry is beneficial to the people. If the industry turns against the people, it should be the duty of the elected government to protect the people. That's why I don't understand the people who cheer for a megacorp instead of their own elected officials (although the EU election is another story...)
:(
If you leave them alone for too long, the corporation will become the government--simply because it's profitable to do so.
It's true. And this is called fascism
You also have access to the Direct3d API so your games can run on your Debian? Surely Microsoft being a megacorp has something to do with its popularity? Or to the Win32 API so that you can run all those apps you need on Linux? Do you use Linux in corporate environment? Surely it wouldn't be a problem if MS protocols were standard and/or documented. Tried interacting with MS Kerberos?
I am not retarted (sic), and I stated that most of the people use Windows for the two stated reasons, not all. From my experience, that is true. Most people either have to use Windows for whatever reason or are stupid/ignorant. I've never met a person who seriously loves the Windows Experience (tm). I've met people who love Macs and Unix, though.
Slashdot readers (tm) support open standards: Ogg Vorbis, MP3, MPEG-4, FLAC. Slashdot readers (tm) are opposed to tying proprietary formats deep into the operating system and discouraging open standards.
Now tell me, what are the Plain and Simple Windows advantages (against any OS, I never mentioned Linux) which aren't directly derived from:
- Third party app support (see monopoly)
- Third party driver support (see monopoly)
- Installed base (see monopoly)
The original case against Microsoft was brought by its competitors because Microsoft used illegal tactics to get rid of them. Look up Netscape, Spyglass, Lotus for a few examples. It is similar to Michael Jordan taking a baseball bat to a basketball game, beating the crap out of all the other players until he's the only one left on the field and scoring a million shots because there's nobody there to challenge him.
An operating system is necessary for using a computer. The same way tyres are necessary for driving a car. Now imagine if Bridgestone had a monopoly on tyres. Imagine if they used this monopoly to have their tyres shipped with every new automobile. Now imagine that they buy a fridge manufacturer. And Boeing. And the rights to Britney Spears' music. Then the price of a car suddenly goes to $1mil, but you get a fridge, Britney Spears' back-catalogue and a Boeing 737-400 for FREE! Airbuss, General Electric, Siemens, Aguilera and company all go bankrupt and you can't afford a car. All sane countries have laws against this kind of shit and it's right that they do.
Winamp, WMP, The GIMP, Zoom player, Opera. All popular Windows app, all look and act differently.
Hardware acceleration has nothing to do with window managers. All XFree window managers have the same underlying hardware acceleration. But you have the option of not loading all the extra overhead (explorer.exe) by using Blackbox. You can't do that in Windows.
Most of the subtle, deeply important technological advances in use in Windows are sadly ripoffs of decade old NextSTEP, Macintosh and Unix concepts. We haven't missed them, we just don't see them as advances.
DirectX is a collection of APIs dealing with everything from sound, graphics and input. SDL + OpenAL + OpenGL can replace this very adequately. People have been making bogus requirements for Linux for years now. We had top-notch 3d gaming on Linux in 1999 (Quake3). We have it now (UT2k4) and we will have it in the future (Doom3). Why on earth would we want to clone DirectX when it's clear that top-of-the-line games could be made 5 years ago? Bogus excuses.
This sounds like a great opportunity to go there and ask them some hard questions. Then the college newspaper editors will have something interesting to report on, not just propaganda. Some questions you could ask them:
1) If you are protecting artists like you claim you are, then how come million-selling performers like TLC and Toni Braxton had to file for bankruptcy in order to get out the financial troubles your loans put them in? (source: Courtney Love's speech in salon.com)
2) How much money does an artist get from each sold CD (tip: 8-12 percent) and what does a breakdown look like (manufacturing costs, band cut, transportation and distribution...)
3) How many CDs does an average artist have to sell to BREAK EVEN on an average RIAA contract (hint: 250 000)
4) If I were to spend 45$ on three CDs of my favourite artist (15$ per CD), how much money would he/she get (about 4.5$). If I downloaded those albums on Kazaa and went instead to a concert (30$) and bought a T-Shirt (15$), how much money would the artist get (my guess is over 20$ cash).
5) If file-swapping is hurting the industry, then how come CD sales are up this year in some parts of the world? What does RIAA do for promotion of 95% of the artists who don't hit MTV anyway?
I'm sure you can come up with some other good ones. Moses Avalon Calculator is a great resource for some more facts. Remember, don't be an ass, ask your questions politely, and wait until he's babbled some bullshit for best impact. Good luck.