Huh? I have been trying to connect to SQL server from my linux/apache/php box and just can't seem to find any thing to make this possible. MS also does not make a JDBC driver so I can try and use Java.
If I was using any other database I would have been able to connect just fine.
Anybody who bets their business on SQLserver deserves every headache they get.
"You need to lose your politics, and figure out what is best for the user, before you lose your job. "
What's best for the users (and the university) is not necessarily which software is the easeist to use, nor which software has more features. You have to take into account the long term affects of choosing your software. If you go with MS software you are subjugating your university to the will of just one corporation. You will then jump when MS tells you to jump and beg when they tell you to beg. MS has in the past and will in the future keep rearranging the licenses to fit its profit needs at the expense of yours.
There is also a matter of acedemic freedom. Signing onerous contracts and subjugating the students to bizaare and draconian contracts is not good for the students nor is it good for the university. This is especially bad if your students are being allowed to look at the windows source code as they will have to sign contracts which will not enable them to gain employment with some of the biggest corporations in the world.
Most students like most users use 5 to 10 percent of any productivity suite. Maybe star office "SUCKS ARSE" as you say but it's certainly capable of producing term papers or lab reports. What's best for the students is to analyze their needs accurately and find the cheapest and most free product that can fulfill those needs. Not to force them to pay for expensive bloated software with features they will never use.
Well maybe but...
It's virtually impossible to try every keyboard on the market to see which one fits you. Just a few seconds banging on the key in a store will not tell you anything. You have to live with the keyboard for a day to two at least to know weather it fits you or not. So what are you supposed to do.
Hey I have an idea. Why not ask a few thousand people which use keyboards heavily and see if there is a consensus.
Let's see now... Where can I find a few thousand people who use keyboards heavily.
Absolutely not.
Every business needs to be registered no matter how small. You have to have at least a city business licence to conduct business and then depending on what kind of business you want to register you may have to go to the state level.
Even if the source if Free it would be a herculean effort to port an X game over to the windows or mac platform.
You can not have enough "killer apps" apache is a killer app for linux but windows has exchange, IE, quicken and dozens of other "killer apps" which don't run on other operating systems. These discourage people from switching to other OSes as well as luring them to switch from other OSes. Linux needs it's own arsenal of "must have" software packages that only run on linux (or at least on linux and freebsd). When we have this arsenal we will have incentive for people to switch. Until then there is no other reason then ideology.
It's not that you'd be forcing people to switch they would choose to come over here because the grass is greener.
That is now. When that piece of crap called IE3.o was on the market nobody would choose it over NS3.0 which rocked. Back then MS gave apple a bunch of money and promised they would "continue developing office for the mac" (which is a mafia protection scheme) and Jobs agreed to make IE the default browser on the Mac.
Actually your analogy is not quite correct either. If you lose a part of your body or a conjined twin you could die or be maimed for life. Employees are more like hair or fingernails. Cut them off and new ones grow. Employees are disposable human resources which can be trimmed when needed and re-hired when needed.
"If shareholders could lose more than just their investment, and worse yet, be held criminally liable for behavior over which they had no control, then there would be a terrible disincentive for investing and our financial system would come to a screeching halt"
The incentive to invest would be the returns just like it is now. The main difference would be that the shareholders would keep a closer eye on their corp to make sure it behaves.
furthermore Shareholders do have control over the corporation and it's actions (fi they don't then who does?). If they are negligent in their responsibilities and let their corporation actually cause harm or death they should be held criminally responsible. A corporation is like a dog. If I let my dog out and he bites somebody I can be charged with a crime and my Dog can be taken away and killed by the state. It should be exactly the same with shareholders and their corporations.
Re:Best reply to Mundie yet.
on
GPL FAQ
·
· Score: 2
Well it does not forbid them entirely and it seems to be dependent on the interface.
I don't think you understand what free software means.
Free software does not mean cross platform software. If I wrote a game that ran on linux but not on windows because it used X AND that game was wildly popular people would switch to linux to play the game that their friends were raving about. The game could be GPLed and free. The software license has nothing to do with what platform it runs on.
I think people should write free software but I don't necessary think they should write cross platform software (unless of course it's nothing special). This is especially true if the software is clearly superior to commercial version or is enough of an enticement to lure users into linux.
No I am not kidding. Dispite the IMHO overwhelmingly too many accidents and downright ebrassing fuckups in both the Iraqis and Serbian wars the US military managed to bomb the shit out of hundreds of thousands of people. Sure they fuck up a lot but there is a lot of them and they got a lot of bombs. As my sergeant was fond of saying "throw enough shit on the wall and some of it's gotta stick".
So you mean VC has a viral aspect of it too. It's impossible to create GPLed software using VC and quite possibly it's impossible to create GPLed software for windows.
Well my point is this. Those people who can not afford $15.00 per month for cable would be much better off if broadcast TV was like HBO. I am positive the added cost to everything they bought this month due to advertising budget was more then $15 or $25. Every time they bought Milk they paid for those stupid milk mustache ads, every time they paid for toilet paper they paid more.
But really who really cares about the poor in the first place. This is America land of the Dubya. Between the Liberterians, Republicans, and the rest of the corporatist politicians the poor don't count for a pile of crap. They can't buy anything anyway so who cares if they watch TV or not.
Well it's widely acknowledged that visical sold a lot of apple IIs. If you have a killer app that everone wants but it only runs on linux or only runs on free software you would get people to switch just to use that software. The ricky part of course is to get that software in the first place.
Well that and a large, well equipped, well trained standing army (not to mention a stockpile of nuclear weapons to wipe out any continent we want). Look how badly we bitchslapped the Iraqis. You think anybody wants cruise missiles raining down on their cities?
I would think that it would depend on how tightly the two were integrated. Clearly the intent of the GPL is that if you use GPL software to build your product and you distribute it then you have to GPL your stuff. If you are building a COM object because you want to circumvent the license then a court might find against you. According to the FAQ it will be up to a judge to decide what constitutes extension and integration.
There is nothing wrong with improving the wording of your contract as the legal and technological landscape changes. I would rather have this situation then to have a useless license that is obselete because someone invented a new technology.
Re:Best reply to Mundie yet.
on
GPL FAQ
·
· Score: 2
"You know why? Because if developers point out to their bosses that linking to GPL'd libraries in any way forces them to release their code under GPL, they'll stop using it. (see the FAQ) "
Well that was the original intent of the GPL no?
If you are not willing to release your code under the GPL don't go near it. Write your own code or use other code. I think most people who write GPLed software do so because they don't want companies to profit from their code.
"So even though the VC runtimes aren't "a major component of the operating system", because they are distributed seperately, according to this I can still use them. "
When you bought VC you got the right to distribute these runtimes royalty free. It's up to as the copyright holder to dictate the terms of their use.
"But if I register it with COM+ and run it in a seperate process, then it's OK?"
A tougher call. I think the intent of the fork and exec was to pipe to other stand alone programs. RMS did not intend to hold you to the GPL if you did shell and executed a program and then capture the results. My take is that a COM object is not really a stand alone program and therefore might not fit under description. It's a close call though.
As in most legal disputes intent plays a major role. The intent of the copyright holder and the intent of the supposed violator will be a huge factor when the case goes to court.
Slashdot Mirror
"That's right, it's democracy"
When I was going to school my professor explaine dthe difference between a democracy and a republic this way.
A lynching is a perfect example of a democracy. You have 10 people for lynching and one against.
Huh? I have been trying to connect to SQL server from my linux/apache/php box and just can't seem to find any thing to make this possible. MS also does not make a JDBC driver so I can try and use Java.
If I was using any other database I would have been able to connect just fine.
Anybody who bets their business on SQLserver deserves every headache they get.
"You need to lose your politics, and figure out what is best for the user, before you lose your job. "
What's best for the users (and the university) is not necessarily which software is the easeist to use, nor which software has more features. You have to take into account the long term affects of choosing your software. If you go with MS software you are subjugating your university to the will of just one corporation. You will then jump when MS tells you to jump and beg when they tell you to beg. MS has in the past and will in the future keep rearranging the licenses to fit its profit needs at the expense of yours.
There is also a matter of acedemic freedom. Signing onerous contracts and subjugating the students to bizaare and draconian contracts is not good for the students nor is it good for the university. This is especially bad if your students are being allowed to look at the windows source code as they will have to sign contracts which will not enable them to gain employment with some of the biggest corporations in the world.
Most students like most users use 5 to 10 percent of any productivity suite. Maybe star office "SUCKS ARSE" as you say but it's certainly capable of producing term papers or lab reports. What's best for the students is to analyze their needs accurately and find the cheapest and most free product that can fulfill those needs. Not to force them to pay for expensive bloated software with features they will never use.
Well maybe but...
It's virtually impossible to try every keyboard on the market to see which one fits you. Just a few seconds banging on the key in a store will not tell you anything. You have to live with the keyboard for a day to two at least to know weather it fits you or not. So what are you supposed to do.
Hey I have an idea. Why not ask a few thousand people which use keyboards heavily and see if there is a consensus.
Let's see now... Where can I find a few thousand people who use keyboards heavily.
Absolutely not.
Every business needs to be registered no matter how small. You have to have at least a city business licence to conduct business and then depending on what kind of business you want to register you may have to go to the state level.
Even if the source if Free it would be a herculean effort to port an X game over to the windows or mac platform.
You can not have enough "killer apps" apache is a killer app for linux but windows has exchange, IE, quicken and dozens of other "killer apps" which don't run on other operating systems. These discourage people from switching to other OSes as well as luring them to switch from other OSes. Linux needs it's own arsenal of "must have" software packages that only run on linux (or at least on linux and freebsd). When we have this arsenal we will have incentive for people to switch. Until then there is no other reason then ideology.
It's not that you'd be forcing people to switch they would choose to come over here because the grass is greener.
That is now. When that piece of crap called IE3.o was on the market nobody would choose it over NS3.0 which rocked. Back then MS gave apple a bunch of money and promised they would "continue developing office for the mac" (which is a mafia protection scheme) and Jobs agreed to make IE the default browser on the Mac.
Really go read about it.
Pack your bags then. All companies and all corporations require licensing which has to be approved by a state agency.
What made you think you could start a company without getting permission?
Actually your analogy is not quite correct either. If you lose a part of your body or a conjined twin you could die or be maimed for life. Employees are more like hair or fingernails. Cut them off and new ones grow. Employees are disposable human resources which can be trimmed when needed and re-hired when needed.
"If shareholders could lose more than just their investment, and worse yet, be held criminally liable for behavior over which they had no control, then there would be a terrible disincentive for investing and our financial system would come to a screeching halt"
The incentive to invest would be the returns just like it is now. The main difference would be that the shareholders would keep a closer eye on their corp to make sure it behaves.
furthermore Shareholders do have control over the corporation and it's actions (fi they don't then who does?). If they are negligent in their responsibilities and let their corporation actually cause harm or death they should be held criminally responsible. A corporation is like a dog. If I let my dog out and he bites somebody I can be charged with a crime and my Dog can be taken away and killed by the state. It should be exactly the same with shareholders and their corporations.
Well it does not forbid them entirely and it seems to be dependent on the interface.
Nevertheless the hicks and the cheeseheads don't like to be called as such.
I don't think you understand what free software means.
Free software does not mean cross platform software. If I wrote a game that ran on linux but not on windows because it used X AND that game was wildly popular people would switch to linux to play the game that their friends were raving about. The game could be GPLed and free. The software license has nothing to do with what platform it runs on.
I think people should write free software but I don't necessary think they should write cross platform software (unless of course it's nothing special). This is especially true if the software is clearly superior to commercial version or is enough of an enticement to lure users into linux.
No I am not kidding. Dispite the IMHO overwhelmingly too many accidents and downright ebrassing fuckups in both the Iraqis and Serbian wars the US military managed to bomb the shit out of hundreds of thousands of people. Sure they fuck up a lot but there is a lot of them and they got a lot of bombs. As my sergeant was fond of saying "throw enough shit on the wall and some of it's gotta stick".
Didn't apple agree to make IE the default browser on macs for a fistful of dollars and a promise from MS to keep office for Mac?
are you sure that's true? It seems like it ought to be doable from my reading of the GPL. Do you have any links that talk about this?
So you mean VC has a viral aspect of it too. It's impossible to create GPLed software using VC and quite possibly it's impossible to create GPLed software for windows.
Well my point is this. Those people who can not afford $15.00 per month for cable would be much better off if broadcast TV was like HBO. I am positive the added cost to everything they bought this month due to advertising budget was more then $15 or $25. Every time they bought Milk they paid for those stupid milk mustache ads, every time they paid for toilet paper they paid more.
But really who really cares about the poor in the first place. This is America land of the Dubya. Between the Liberterians, Republicans, and the rest of the corporatist politicians the poor don't count for a pile of crap. They can't buy anything anyway so who cares if they watch TV or not.
Well it's widely acknowledged that visical sold a lot of apple IIs. If you have a killer app that everone wants but it only runs on linux or only runs on free software you would get people to switch just to use that software. The ricky part of course is to get that software in the first place.
Well maybe not actually racist but it's like calling people from wisconsin cheeseheads or calling people from the south hicks.
Well that and a large, well equipped, well trained standing army (not to mention a stockpile of nuclear weapons to wipe out any continent we want). Look how badly we bitchslapped the Iraqis. You think anybody wants cruise missiles raining down on their cities?
I would think that it would depend on how tightly the two were integrated. Clearly the intent of the GPL is that if you use GPL software to build your product and you distribute it then you have to GPL your stuff. If you are building a COM object because you want to circumvent the license then a court might find against you. According to the FAQ it will be up to a judge to decide what constitutes extension and integration.
There is nothing wrong with improving the wording of your contract as the legal and technological landscape changes. I would rather have this situation then to have a useless license that is obselete because someone invented a new technology.
"You know why? Because if developers point out to their bosses that linking to GPL'd libraries in any way forces them to release their code under GPL, they'll stop using it. (see the FAQ) "
Well that was the original intent of the GPL no?
If you are not willing to release your code under the GPL don't go near it. Write your own code or use other code. I think most people who write GPLed software do so because they don't want companies to profit from their code.
"So even though the VC runtimes aren't "a major component of the operating system", because they are distributed seperately, according to this I can still use them. "
When you bought VC you got the right to distribute these runtimes royalty free. It's up to as the copyright holder to dictate the terms of their use.
"But if I register it with COM+ and run it in a seperate process, then it's OK?"
A tougher call. I think the intent of the fork and exec was to pipe to other stand alone programs. RMS did not intend to hold you to the GPL if you did shell and executed a program and then capture the results. My take is that a COM object is not really a stand alone program and therefore might not fit under description. It's a close call though.
As in most legal disputes intent plays a major role. The intent of the copyright holder and the intent of the supposed violator will be a huge factor when the case goes to court.