I usually don't get involved in OS wars but here goes:
I keep hearing the argument that it is not worth it to write a virus for Linux because of a lower installed base. It seems to me that some Windows zealot would have done it by now just to prove it can be done if it is as easy as they imply.
I always find it interesting to see the number of "It didn't work for me therefore it is fucked" posts. I have been running linux as my primary OS for close to 10 years and have used both GRUB and LILO. Sometimes you actually have to RTFM or use Google to set things up in a non-default way. I am by no means an expert, but I have usually managed to get things working properly.
There were plans in the '70s to build a large telescope close to Osoyoos. The money to build it went into the CFHT in Hawaii. (Probably a better use of the funds.)
BTW, I worked at the radio observatory (DRAO) at White Lake during the '80's. Best job I ever had!
I switched in 1996 and never looked back. I'm currently running Ubuntu and really like it.
My reasons for switching were economic. My hardware was old and slow and I couldn't afford thousands of dollars for the applications I wanted to run. I found I liked the stability and freedom. Upgrades are a snap and I have all the tools I need. I find that the open source apps do what I want them to.
Microsoft is largely irrelevent to me (other than as comic relief).
from "OS/2 Programmer's Guide" (forward by Bill Gates):
"I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating system, and possibly program, of all time. As the successor to DOS, which has over 10,000,000 systems in use, it creates incredible opportunities for everyone involved with PCs."
I loved OS/2. I ran Warp on a 486 with 8M memory and it ran just fine. It also ran windows apps much better than windows did.
Package management is the reason I switched from from Redhat to Debian. Redhat was a great way to learn Linux. However trying to install down loaded RPM's often ended in dependency hell. The last Redhat version I used was 7.0, so the situation may be better now.
I have never had any major problems with Debian. I am currently running unstable and upgrade once or twice a week. The Debian packages seem to be "finer grained" as well, which keeps some of the stuff I don't want off of my system.
You are letting someone else control your emotions. By getting angry, you are giving these people exactly the response they want. Your irrational reation to your emotion put you in a dodgy situation.
I look at it as the difference between reaction and response. Reaction is letting the emotion control you and give the other person control over how you feel. Response is slowing down, thinking about the situation and changing how you feel about it. This allow you to respond to the situation as rationally as possible and with yourself in control.
My first real computer was an Apple II plus. It came with schematics, rom listings and all the information you needed to interface hardware or write software. (A completely open system...) The design was probably the most ellegant (from an engineering point of view) of any system I've looked at. I think Wozniak wanted people to look at his baby and see the art and creativity that went into it.
There is apparently no problem with spending $320 billion per year on defense, which is the equivelent of pouring that money down a rat hole. Spending 1% of that developing capabilities with a real possibility of helping the entire human race is wasteful. I don't understand the logic.
Someone (and hopefully it will be NASA) needs to spend the R&D money to develop the next generation of launch vehicles. It wouldn't take that much compared to what is spent on killing people we disagree with.
Military technology is always at least 10 years behind the cutting edge. The spinoff from space technology should be a little more cutting edge.
Basic research always pays off. Yet universities are selling themselves to corporations to provide what is ecentially R&D because there is no money for basic research.
I think we need to look at what our priorties should be when it come to spending. The US has a military large enough to take on the next 10 countries at the same time. Could not a small part of these resources be spent on the future?
does anyone else find this whole thing incredibly ridiculous. Why should I care about a couple of pirates having a a tiff about a domain name. I think this whole lawsuit thing needs a rethink.
OTOH it does supply a good laugh to see the proletariat arguing about this.
Programmers will fix problems to make their own system work better. If they then release these fixes to the community we all are better off. This is the basis of open source.
So in other words, Saddam was ethical because he followed the standard of behavior for fascist dictators. Microsort is ethical because they follow the standards of behavior for unethical corporations. Please, give me a break!
Remember that even Windows 95/98 were never designed to be networked operating systems except as a sort or add on. They were single user operating systems in the legacy of MSDOS and the previous Windows addons to DOS. Remember that Bill Gates thought the Internet was just a fad.
I don't hate Microsoft. Fixing the inevitable results of people running their software has given me a good living. You will forgive me if I don't use their products myself?
I vaguely recall someone doing research on using solenoids to run the valves. I think the problem was with getting the solenoids to run fast enough. I thought it would be a cool idea to be able to change valve timing on the fly and have the whole thing controlled by a computer.
I like your idea of co-op ISP's. The way to take power back from the big boys is by getting together with like minded people and pulling the business out from under them. I grew up in the Peoples Republic of Saskatchewan where co-ops were very popular. I still do all my banking at a credit union and use co-ops when ever possible.
As to how to learn how to do it: You sound like a reasonably intelligent fellow. Read some books, set up a couple of Linux boxes on a network and play with them. Start out with the basics of system administration and work your way up. I would suggest using Debian. I can be a little more frustrating to a newby but has excellent online documentation. A good website to start with would be www.aboutdebian.com.
The only way to learn this stuff is by doing it. Read some books, put into practice what you read. Check out some of the relevent news groups. The elitist assholes who tell you "If you have to ask you don't need to know," had to ask at some point.
Sorry about the rant. Computers are not hard, they are just complicated. Any reasonably intelligent person who is willing to put the time in can learn how to do this stuff.
This is a very good point. We are currently implementing a Linux terminal server system for public access internet at our library. Cost was one factor, but other factors were more important. These included licencing issues, stability, ease of administration, and support issues.
By using this solution we are not forced to buy new hardware when Microsoft ends support for the OS's we are using. We can end the software upgrade/hardware upgrade spiral, and use our resources for our core functions.
It appears to me that what this law is trying to do is to create an open market. Because of Microsoft's huge presence and aggressive posture in the software marketplace, laws like this are necessary to bring open source solutions to the attention of the purchasers.
In a truly open market open source has many advantages over closed source. However, open source cannot compete against the massive amounts of cash Microsoft is able to put into their marketing (propoganda) campaigns.
Slashdot Mirror
I usually don't get involved in OS wars but here goes:
I keep hearing the argument that it is not worth it to write a virus for Linux because of a lower installed base. It seems to me that some Windows zealot would have done it by now just to prove it can be done if it is as easy as they imply.
This leads me to believe that either:
A: Windows zealots can't code
or
B: Linux is much more secure than Windows
I always find it interesting to see the number of "It didn't work for me therefore it is fucked" posts. I have been running linux as my primary OS for close to 10 years and have used both GRUB and LILO. Sometimes you actually have to RTFM or use Google to set things up in a non-default way. I am by no means an expert, but I have usually managed to get things working properly.
There were plans in the '70s to build a large telescope close to Osoyoos. The money to build it went into the CFHT in Hawaii. (Probably a better use of the funds.)
BTW, I worked at the radio observatory (DRAO) at White Lake during the '80's. Best job I ever had!
I switched in 1996 and never looked back. I'm currently running Ubuntu and really like it.
My reasons for switching were economic. My hardware was old and slow and I couldn't afford thousands of dollars for the applications I wanted to run. I found I liked the stability and freedom. Upgrades are a snap and I have all the tools I need. I find that the open source apps do what I want them to.
Microsoft is largely irrelevent to me (other than as comic relief).
Actually you need U235 or plutonium 239. You cannot get a critical mass of U238.
Good point.
The Fifth Estate caught Bill O'Reilly quoting a nonexsitant publication to prove how powerful he was.
Package management is the reason I switched from from Redhat to Debian. Redhat was a great way to learn Linux. However trying to install down loaded RPM's often ended in dependency hell. The last Redhat version I used was 7.0, so the situation may be better now.
I have never had any major problems with Debian. I am currently running unstable and upgrade once or twice a week. The Debian packages seem to be "finer grained" as well, which keeps some of the stuff I don't want off of my system.
My thoughts on your post.
You are letting someone else control your emotions. By getting angry, you are giving these people exactly the response they want. Your irrational reation to your emotion put you in a dodgy situation.
I look at it as the difference between reaction and response. Reaction is letting the emotion control you and give the other person control over how you feel. Response is slowing down, thinking about the situation and changing how you feel about it. This allow you to respond to the situation as rationally as possible and with yourself in control.
Cool, a meta top 10 list!
My first real computer was an Apple II plus. It came with schematics, rom listings and all the information you needed to interface hardware or write software. (A completely open system...) The design was probably the most ellegant (from an engineering point of view) of any system I've looked at. I think Wozniak wanted people to look at his baby and see the art and creativity that went into it.
I think the difference between OSS and proprietary software is this:
I find propietarty software restricted to what the developer originally had in mind.
With OSS someone has almost always included the feature that I would realy realy like that package to do.
Sorry abour the bad typing: I'm on my tenth bottle of beer.
There is apparently no problem with spending $320 billion per year on defense, which is the equivelent of pouring that money down a rat hole. Spending 1% of that developing capabilities with a real possibility of helping the entire human race is wasteful. I don't understand the logic.
Someone (and hopefully it will be NASA) needs to spend the R&D money to develop the next generation of launch vehicles. It wouldn't take that much compared to what is spent on killing people we disagree with.
Military technology is always at least 10 years behind the cutting edge. The spinoff from space technology should be a little more cutting edge.
Basic research always pays off. Yet universities are selling themselves to corporations to provide what is ecentially R&D because there is no money for basic research.
I think we need to look at what our priorties should be when it come to spending. The US has a military large enough to take on the next 10 countries at the same time. Could not a small part of these resources be spent on the future?
does anyone else find this whole thing incredibly ridiculous. Why should I care about a couple of pirates having a a tiff about a domain name. I think this whole lawsuit thing needs a rethink.
OTOH it does supply a good laugh to see the proletariat arguing about this.
It was DOS 6 and your right, it sucked, as did almost everything about DOS 6.
Programmers will fix problems to make their own system work better. If they then release these fixes to the community we all are better off. This is the basis of open source.
Look up ... look way up ... and I'll call Rusty.
Appologies to those who didn't grow up with CBC in the sixties.
Sweet!
So in other words, Saddam was ethical because he followed the standard of behavior for fascist dictators. Microsort is ethical because they follow the standards of behavior for unethical corporations. Please, give me a break!
Remember that even Windows 95/98 were never designed to be networked operating systems except as a sort or add on. They were single user operating systems in the legacy of MSDOS and the previous Windows addons to DOS. Remember that Bill Gates thought the Internet was just a fad.
I don't hate Microsoft. Fixing the inevitable results of people running their software has given me a good living. You will forgive me if I don't use their products myself?
I vaguely recall someone doing research on using solenoids to run the valves. I think the problem was with getting the solenoids to run fast enough. I thought it would be a cool idea to be able to change valve timing on the fly and have the whole thing controlled by a computer.
I like your idea of co-op ISP's. The way to take power back from the big boys is by getting together with like minded people and pulling the business out from under them. I grew up in the Peoples Republic of Saskatchewan where co-ops were very popular. I still do all my banking at a credit union and use co-ops when ever possible.
As to how to learn how to do it: You sound like a reasonably intelligent fellow. Read some books, set up a couple of Linux boxes on a network and play with them. Start out with the basics of system administration and work your way up. I would suggest using Debian. I can be a little more frustrating to a newby but has excellent online documentation. A good website to start with would be www.aboutdebian.com.
The only way to learn this stuff is by doing it. Read some books, put into practice what you read. Check out some of the relevent news groups. The elitist assholes who tell you "If you have to ask you don't need to know," had to ask at some point.
Sorry about the rant. Computers are not hard, they are just complicated. Any reasonably intelligent person who is willing to put the time in can learn how to do this stuff.
It seems counter-evolutionary to be giving large amounts of money to stupid people. Maybe we should rethink this whole law suite thing...
This is a very good point. We are currently implementing a Linux terminal server system for public access internet at our library. Cost was one factor, but other factors were more important.
These included licencing issues, stability, ease of administration, and support issues.
By using this solution we are not forced to buy new hardware when Microsoft ends support for the OS's we are using. We can end the software upgrade/hardware upgrade spiral, and use our resources for our core functions.
It appears to me that what this law is trying to do is to create an open market. Because of Microsoft's huge presence and aggressive posture in the software marketplace, laws like this are necessary to bring open source solutions to the attention of the purchasers.
In a truly open market open source has many advantages over closed source. However, open source cannot compete against the massive amounts of cash Microsoft is able to put into their marketing (propoganda) campaigns.
Just a thought. Would this be useful to oganizations such as libraries in the US who wish to keep patron records secure from the FBI etc.?