Then why did a bunch of SCO guys buy stock when it was down to like $7.50? The pump and dump thing doesn't play out half the time. But it's been repeated so much on Slashdot that it's suddenly become "fact" now, another unproven meme that's tossed around as evidence in an argument.
BayStar wanted to pull their investment because they didn't think SCO was investing enough resources in the IP lawsuits, and wanted them to all but entirely ditch their Unix "business."
That's not why BayStar pulled their investment.
As far as the IP lawsuits, the spokesman merely said SCO's business model should be centered on IP licensing and enforcement--just like any other company that owns valuable IP.
That's why the media companies can BITE ME. Every dog has his day and ours is today.
You're an ass. If you ever get a job (I can tell you're a college student), I'll be sure to tell you your company can bite me when your hard work is put online for easy piracy instead of people--gasp--paying you for the fruits of your labor.
After all, because you think someone is squeezing nickels out of you, that means the copyright magically transfers to the eMule network, right?
If you're going to accuse the companies of being evil, you can't go around illegally pirating shit and expect anyone to take you seriously. You're one of the first retards to jump up when a company violates the copyright of the GPL, I'm sure.
What is it about the concept of competition that you don't understand?
What is it about the concept of a unified standard do you not understand? How will commercial vendors ever feel safe coding for a moving target that consists of at least five widget toolkits, two competing desktop environments, and several different package managers?
With one binary installation/uninstallation API for the desktop, you could safely install and uninstall applications, complete with Autoplay CD installers.
Or do you just think that the best way forwards for society is by supporting monopolies such as Micros
Monopolies aren't illegal, so I support whatever is the best idea. Although I find it amusing one must take an extremist view one way or the other in your eyes--either I'm all for endless choice no matter how detrimental, or I'm all for one evil monopoly controlling everything.
Sorry, I just want one, sane, unified desktop with a sane API in the vein of.NET and Cocoa, so we can get away from this ugly KDE/GNOME->Window manager->XFree86 hodgepodge mess. Hell, getting off of X alone would be worth it. These guys know how to look forward and not back.
You're right, P2P applications are certainly available for the Mac. However, fortunately for Apple, most of the general public aren't aware of this, and so see iTunes as their main source for downloading music.
He already proved you wrong about P2P app availability. Now we're supposed to take your next declaration of what the "general public" is aware of?
Stop pirating the fuck out of every artists' music on P2P networks for one. We kinda have to show that there's a demand for it.
A lot of execs are probably scared to death of online music stores precisely because so many users use online services to rip them off and pirate everybody's music. No wonder they're hesitant...if people were simply honest and showed an interest in being legal, you'd have what you wanted.
1) It was a truely refreshing outlook on a distribution 2) It is source based 3) I was free from being unwitting pawn in the software binary release freedom debate
Thank goodness FreeBSD began the ideas behind Portage. People have been using BSD's ports tree for years and years.
I actually prefer Portage, though...would be nice if it was ported to BSD
no one said integrating a web browswer into the desktop was evil.
Yes, they did. Everyone bitched endlessly about the "pointless" integration of the web browser and file browser. How it slowed things down. How it makes things unstable.
Then along comes KDE which takes seconds to load my Home folder. Suddenly, history is revised and "nobody complained" when Windows 98 did it (I guess the fact Windows 98 did it is some sort of persuasive proof that it should be done in the first place).
Pretty soon, nobody will have complained about taskbars and start menus either...even though they did. But as soon as KDE/GNOME adopts it, bam, it's suddenly an okay idea that Microsoft popularized...not a bad idea that got too popular for its own good.
Isn't it strange that everyone bitched about the lack of necessity for IE to be integrated into the shell of Windows 98, then went right out and redid it for KDE without a second thought? I never understood what a filesystem browser had to do with the program that renders my HTML for me. It's like people just accept it because Windows 98 did it--meanwhile bitching about the non-innovation of Windows 98 and Microsoft.
Don't get me started on taskbars and start menus, two things that don't belong ANYWHERE near a Linux desktop yet somehow got adopted as well "just because."
It's a funny joke, but to be honest, political opinions are different from functional tasks. You can standardize tasks--it's how society has progressed technologically.
Strange how any study posted remotely negative toward Linux is torn apart by Slashdotters, but any IBM or VA sponsored study that glorifies Linux is held up as "proof" and never, ever questioned.
I still remember that "Linux Most Breached OS on the Net" study, and all the dancing people did to avoid the study's conclusion.
I'm not so insecure that a fault in my OS is a chink in my ego. If a study says something bad about my OS, big fucking deal...I acknowledge it and patch or configure around the problem. I mean, it just doesn't piss me off the way it pisses off other people. Maybe it's just me. Same with console wars and whatever other religious debates take place...
Hooray, another pointless Clippy joke that illustrates Slashdotters haven't used a version of Office later than '97 (just like BSOD jokes).
I've never seen Clippy on any of my Office installations. I only ever saw him on the Office installations in college, which used 2000. It was just a matter of right-clicking and telling him to "Hide." Never saw him again.
Meanwhile, OpenOffice has that godawful light bulb that pops up every 30 seconds when any little event happens. How the fsck do you turn that off?! Grr.
Longhorn always been targetted for late 2005/early 2006. People who still refer to Longhorn as "vaporware"--even with the PDC build and endless technology demos--are buying into a mindless hatred for all things Microsoft and ignoring the real existence of the technology that will be coming out and permeating everywhere.
Sorry, Longhorn is not vaporware, and there has never been a release date delay because there never was a release date. And, yes,.NET will change things. It's why they're completely replacing Win32 with it. I have a feeling you haven't really examined the Longhorn tech all that much and have only read some marketing hype that you subsequently dismissed. Surprise, surprise, companies market their products as the greatest things ever. But Longhorn is actually a real overhaul of Windows, from the display technology to the filesystem technology to the runtime libraries and more.
Miguel is smart in recognizing the inevitability of Longhorn...Slashdotters want to dismiss Longhorn because deep down they know it will arrive and take over.
At the time of Windows 95, nobody could seriously say that MAC OS was not far better - stable, superior UI etc.
Uh, yeah they could. MacOS really started to suck for a while there. They spent that whole decade trying to rewrite that OS--finally doing so when Jobs came back with the Next tech.
I hate to break it to you, but most people find Linux even less intuitive. Cell B5? Most people have trouble getting a mousewheel to work, much less installing software or setting up a printer.
.NET uses published standards. Heck, using the Common Language Specification, any compiler can create the intermediate code used by the.NET Runtime. Want Python.NET? Someone's already working on it.
Mono isn't a waste of time--it's a waste of time to do anything else, because nothing else has gone anywhere. Programming for QT and GTK and wxWidgets and whatever else is a waste of time. Programming for two entire desktop environments is a waste of time. For crying out loud, Linux is still at 1% of usage on Google Zeitgeist. At one point do you say, "Hmm, well these other things haven't worked...let's try this."
Slashdot Mirror
Then why did a bunch of SCO guys buy stock when it was down to like $7.50? The pump and dump thing doesn't play out half the time. But it's been repeated so much on Slashdot that it's suddenly become "fact" now, another unproven meme that's tossed around as evidence in an argument.
BayStar wanted to pull their investment because they didn't think SCO was investing enough resources in the IP lawsuits, and wanted them to all but entirely ditch their Unix "business."
That's not why BayStar pulled their investment.
As far as the IP lawsuits, the spokesman merely said SCO's business model should be centered on IP licensing and enforcement--just like any other company that owns valuable IP.
It's just like with Windows. But then people don't blame the admin in those instances.
That's why the media companies can BITE ME. Every dog has his day and ours is today.
You're an ass. If you ever get a job (I can tell you're a college student), I'll be sure to tell you your company can bite me when your hard work is put online for easy piracy instead of people--gasp--paying you for the fruits of your labor.
After all, because you think someone is squeezing nickels out of you, that means the copyright magically transfers to the eMule network, right?
If you're going to accuse the companies of being evil, you can't go around illegally pirating shit and expect anyone to take you seriously. You're one of the first retards to jump up when a company violates the copyright of the GPL, I'm sure.
What is it about the concept of competition that you don't understand?
.NET and Cocoa, so we can get away from this ugly KDE/GNOME->Window manager->XFree86 hodgepodge mess. Hell, getting off of X alone would be worth it. These guys know how to look forward and not back.
What is it about the concept of a unified standard do you not understand? How will commercial vendors ever feel safe coding for a moving target that consists of at least five widget toolkits, two competing desktop environments, and several different package managers?
With one binary installation/uninstallation API for the desktop, you could safely install and uninstall applications, complete with Autoplay CD installers.
Or do you just think that the best way forwards for society is by supporting monopolies such as Micros
Monopolies aren't illegal, so I support whatever is the best idea. Although I find it amusing one must take an extremist view one way or the other in your eyes--either I'm all for endless choice no matter how detrimental, or I'm all for one evil monopoly controlling everything.
Sorry, I just want one, sane, unified desktop with a sane API in the vein of
You're right, P2P applications are certainly available for the Mac. However, fortunately for Apple, most of the general public aren't aware of this, and so see iTunes as their main source for downloading music.
He already proved you wrong about P2P app availability. Now we're supposed to take your next declaration of what the "general public" is aware of?
How can we get them to go in that direction?
Stop pirating the fuck out of every artists' music on P2P networks for one. We kinda have to show that there's a demand for it.
A lot of execs are probably scared to death of online music stores precisely because so many users use online services to rip them off and pirate everybody's music. No wonder they're hesitant...if people were simply honest and showed an interest in being legal, you'd have what you wanted.
1) It was a truely refreshing outlook on a distribution
2) It is source based
3) I was free from being unwitting pawn in the software binary release freedom debate
Thank goodness FreeBSD began the ideas behind Portage. People have been using BSD's ports tree for years and years.
I actually prefer Portage, though...would be nice if it was ported to BSD
Come on...that made me spit my soda.
Instead of the Mozilla Foundation, why the hell isn't the GNOME Foundation meeting the KDE Foundation?
no one said integrating a web browswer into the desktop was evil.
Yes, they did. Everyone bitched endlessly about the "pointless" integration of the web browser and file browser. How it slowed things down. How it makes things unstable.
Then along comes KDE which takes seconds to load my Home folder. Suddenly, history is revised and "nobody complained" when Windows 98 did it (I guess the fact Windows 98 did it is some sort of persuasive proof that it should be done in the first place).
Pretty soon, nobody will have complained about taskbars and start menus either...even though they did. But as soon as KDE/GNOME adopts it, bam, it's suddenly an okay idea that Microsoft popularized...not a bad idea that got too popular for its own good.
Why is a list of random Google search results for "Avalon" get modded up?
Here's an actual informative Google search about Avalon:
"msdn avalon"
Amazing what you can accomplish by actually searching correctly.
Isn't it strange that everyone bitched about the lack of necessity for IE to be integrated into the shell of Windows 98, then went right out and redid it for KDE without a second thought? I never understood what a filesystem browser had to do with the program that renders my HTML for me. It's like people just accept it because Windows 98 did it--meanwhile bitching about the non-innovation of Windows 98 and Microsoft.
Don't get me started on taskbars and start menus, two things that don't belong ANYWHERE near a Linux desktop yet somehow got adopted as well "just because."
It's a funny joke, but to be honest, political opinions are different from functional tasks. You can standardize tasks--it's how society has progressed technologically.
After all, anything bad about Linux is a lie, right?
And anything good is truth?
Strange how any study posted remotely negative toward Linux is torn apart by Slashdotters, but any IBM or VA sponsored study that glorifies Linux is held up as "proof" and never, ever questioned.
I still remember that "Linux Most Breached OS on the Net" study, and all the dancing people did to avoid the study's conclusion.
I'm not so insecure that a fault in my OS is a chink in my ego. If a study says something bad about my OS, big fucking deal...I acknowledge it and patch or configure around the problem. I mean, it just doesn't piss me off the way it pisses off other people. Maybe it's just me. Same with console wars and whatever other religious debates take place...
Hooray, another pointless Clippy joke that illustrates Slashdotters haven't used a version of Office later than '97 (just like BSOD jokes).
I've never seen Clippy on any of my Office installations. I only ever saw him on the Office installations in college, which used 2000. It was just a matter of right-clicking and telling him to "Hide." Never saw him again.
Meanwhile, OpenOffice has that godawful light bulb that pops up every 30 seconds when any little event happens. How the fsck do you turn that off?! Grr.
Since the 2000 versions (which is the earliest version of Office I ever used), all I ever did was right-click on it and click "Hide." Gone for good.
Of course, since XP Clippy isn't even on by default. I always forget he exists until some Slashdotters mentions him.
Longhorn always been targetted for late 2005/early 2006. People who still refer to Longhorn as "vaporware"--even with the PDC build and endless technology demos--are buying into a mindless hatred for all things Microsoft and ignoring the real existence of the technology that will be coming out and permeating everywhere.
.NET will change things. It's why they're completely replacing Win32 with it. I have a feeling you haven't really examined the Longhorn tech all that much and have only read some marketing hype that you subsequently dismissed. Surprise, surprise, companies market their products as the greatest things ever. But Longhorn is actually a real overhaul of Windows, from the display technology to the filesystem technology to the runtime libraries and more.
Sorry, Longhorn is not vaporware, and there has never been a release date delay because there never was a release date. And, yes,
Miguel is smart in recognizing the inevitability of Longhorn...Slashdotters want to dismiss Longhorn because deep down they know it will arrive and take over.
At the time of Windows 95, nobody could seriously say that MAC OS was not far better - stable, superior UI etc.
Uh, yeah they could. MacOS really started to suck for a while there. They spent that whole decade trying to rewrite that OS--finally doing so when Jobs came back with the Next tech.
Haha...some Slashdotter always replies with "use this along with this sandwiched between this using the already existing this."
Microsoft is integrating all this into a seamless development platform. The hodgepodge you mentioned won't be adopted by the masses.
I hate to break it to you, but most people find Linux even less intuitive. Cell B5? Most people have trouble getting a mousewheel to work, much less installing software or setting up a printer.
That's true...if Microsoft can get it right.
Hence it taking years to develop Longhorn. But I'm sure certain ignorant Slashdotters will keep calling it "vaporware."
.NET uses published standards. Heck, using the Common Language Specification, any compiler can create the intermediate code used by the .NET Runtime. Want Python.NET? Someone's already working on it.
Mono isn't a waste of time--it's a waste of time to do anything else, because nothing else has gone anywhere. Programming for QT and GTK and wxWidgets and whatever else is a waste of time. Programming for two entire desktop environments is a waste of time. For crying out loud, Linux is still at 1% of usage on Google Zeitgeist. At one point do you say, "Hmm, well these other things haven't worked...let's try this."
Which means Linux will need to reverse engineer in support. Again.
Why? NTFS isn't changing one bit. WinFS is a layer on top of NTFS for APIs to use. The filesystem will still be intact.