Unix has a slew of tools to update thousands of PCs. You can start here to start on the free ones. Of course CA, IBM etc also have proprietary ones too. There are also a bunch of tools like network shell which allow you to write perl scripts to manipulate millions of machines if you got the time and bandwidth. Unix has always been in the forefront of distibuted and remote management.
If you are large company MS will let you yell at them but you gotta be HUGE. Anything under 10K employees and MS will screw you blind if you try to mess with it. Go ahead Mr CIO and yell at MS you'll see how fast a legal team from MS will decend on you to audit your licenses.
If Bill Gates is not responsible for supporting windows why should Linus? Has anybody ever sued Microsoft for faulty software? did they win? Has anybody ever sued MS for lame support? Did they win?
Will microsoft come over to my business like it came over to yours well considering that they don't even return calls I'd say no.
If you are large company you can get support for anything.
TOAST by the postgres people. It enables unlimited row sizes in databases. Nobody has anything like it. I think it's revelutionary. In fact postgres has a ton of features no other database supports like loadable SP languages, user defined operators, a very nice RULE subsystem etc.
Thre would be millions of people who would drop an X based linux in favor of a wingui based linux in a heartbeat especially if MS ported IE and office to it. 70% of slashdot would use it just to use IE.
X is great because it allows you to run remote apps. For simple desktop use though it's overkill and bloated. What the linux community needs to do is one of the following. Either actively promote thin X clients with apps running on a massive server or a new non distributed GUI toolkit.
The former is ideal for corporation seeing to lower TCO the latter is ideal for the home user.
If Apple can get screen PDF to run remotely they will have the best of both worlds. This may be something to look into. I also hear that QNX has done a tremendous job in a non distributed GUI for it's operating system.
In montana however it's crippled the economy. Several large companies had to shut down this summer because their power rates went up so high. Oddly enough it was these same companies who were pushing for deregulation thinking the consumer would get screwed and that they would make out OK. They forgot that the consumers don't get to get screwed for another two years when deregulation hits them. Of course since they got screwed forst they will tell the legislature to redo the law and their lapdogs in the legislature will rewrite the law so that only the consumers will get screwed and not the CEOs.
You make a very good point. Without government intervention the corporations would rape the land and poison the waters and the air. Of course this would stimulate the economoy because people would be forced to buy bottled water and cnacer is very profitable because it's a chronic and long lasting disease.
Yea they better just stick to spending money on $300.00 hammers or $10,000 toilet seats. Let the military suck up the money and what's left over we can give to farmers for not farming, ranchers so we can pay more more for beef and dairy, loggers so that they can cut more of our trees and miners so they can level a few more mountains. The govt has better things to do with our money then to actually deliver a service for most citizens.
The communist news network? Oh man republicans are sure stupid.
Why don't you go blow up a federal building or kill an abortion doctor or drag a black man behind your truck or something. Better yet get some skinhead friends of yours together and gang up a moslem or a fag.
It does not matter anyways. There is no way the US supreme court is going to stand by while a democrat is elected into office. As soon an Bush gets elected at least three will retire and guarantee a republican supreme court for the next 10 to 20 years. Of course you gotta feel sorry for any (democrat, black, gay, moslem, budhist) whose case might happen to go to the supreme court but what the hey that's our judicial system.
Throw a 100 random innocent black people into the judicial system and I bet at least 5 will get the death penalty. We love killing black people in the US (that's why we do it so often).
Both Gore and Bush admit to drug use and yet both support ruining the lives of other people who might want to do drugs. No wonder our judicial system is so screwed up.
I don't favor abondoning any law whatsoever. I am simply pointing out that in this country more people wanted a gore presidency then a bush one.
I am not saying Gore got more votes in florida but that more people intended to vote for him but fucked up, got confused or whatever. Those people too are going to be disappointed. Your argument about the margin of error is a little skewed too.
According to CNN.com gore got 49% of the popular vote and Bush got 48% with 3% going to nader. If you were overly generous and said that one third of the people voting for nader prefered a bush presidency then gore would still be up 3%. This is not an insignifact number and lets face it giving bush 1/3rd of nader voters is fantasy at best.
Maybe cos there was no evidence? A criminal is somebody who is charged with a crime, tried and then found guilty. Not somebody you don't like.
I thank god every day I live in a country that still pretends to have laws. If people like you ran this country I am sure I and most of my friends would be killed or jailed just for disagreeing with you. Thre are plenty of places on this planet where having an opionion or expressing it is deadly and from the looks of it we are on our way to becoming one of them. I figure you guys will go after gays first because they are a really small minority and not too likely to put up a fight but I think the jews and the moslems might put up a hellatious battle. Me I will be observing from another country when the blood starts to spill.
Your point about Perot is correct. If he had not run Clinton would not have won. Bush is in the exact same category. I will happily grant you that a small minority of the Nader voters would have voted for Bush but I (and most political analysts) think that the majority of those votes would have gone to Gore.
As for florida I disagree. Even Buchanan conceded that the people in Palm Beach county mistakenly voted for him when they meant to vote for Gore. I think everybody agrees on this. Considering that these votes were not cast properly it would be fair to say that people of Florida also liked Gore more then Bush (close granted). Also consider that hand recounts were never done in Miami-Dade. Although the margin in that county was close it's not unreasonable to expect that Gore might have picked up a few votes there. Gore would have definately picked up a bunch of votes if Palm Beach had finished the hand count.
No matter how you add it up More people in florida wanted a Gore presidency unfortunately a bunch of votes got thrown away and a bunch more were not counted.
Margin of error or not you can't dispute the fact more people voted for Gore then Bush nationwide and that more people intended to vote for Gore in Florida.
Why stop there though? It's costing us 40K weather the guy killed a cop or held up a 7-11. If the reson for killing is to save money then you should not make any distinction at all about the crime they commited. A guy in jail because he beat up his wife is costing you the same as a guy who raped your daughter right?
To your list of people I would definately add wife beaters, drunk drivers, and executives or corporations who have killed many people though.
Once again even Buchanan concedes that he got an unreasonable amount of votes in palm beach county and that most of the people who voted for him actually meant to vote for Gore.
My point is this. It's clear that these people most likely meant to vote to Gore. If they had not mispunched or gotten confused or whatever Gore would have won by a good margin. Bush won but most people did not want him to win.
Wow calling for the assination of the president and the vice president. We are slipping into a banana republic faster then I ever imagined. We can now look forward to Military coups and rioting on the streets what fun.
BTW Hillary beat Lazio and she would kick Bush's ass pretty danmed hard too. Clintons have a record of kicking Bush ass.
The hand counts were done under the glare of media, democratic observers and republican observers. They were televised, contested argued over in court and every night on television. It is totally irresposible for anybody to suggest that under this much scrutiny people commited voter fraud by counting ballots wrongly or manufacturing votes.
Itf that's true then the republican overseers were irresposible, stupid, or incompetent. It was their job to make sure no fraud occured.
If you are going to accuse voter fraud be specific. Name names, times places people who commit voter fraud belong in jail and it's a serious accusation to make.
Because they don't have to. They have the right to ask for manual recounts in the counties they want. It's up to the Bush team to ask for manual recounts in the counties they want. The Democrats are not under any obligation to do the work of the Bush campaign.
A more important question is. What good is asking for a manual recount if the time limit on doing one is so short as to make it impossible? What good is having the right to call for a manual recount if the result of the manual recount are thrown out?
"First, we don't have a "popular vote". The so-called "popular vote" is really just the sum of each state's votes."
Nevertheless it's fair to say that more people wanted a Gore presidency then a Bush one. This is a close election and if your popularity falls in the margin of error then so be it.
Also consider that roughly 3% of the country voted for Nader. It's definately fair to say most people in this country definately did not want a Bush presidency. If you think of it that way you also fall outside the margin of error. I think it's a safe bet to say most nader voters would prefer a Gore presidency to a Bush one.
So are you saying that Gore had no right to ask for manual recounts?
If he has a right to ask for manual recounts was he obligated to ask for a statewide one or did he have the pick and choose?
Why didn't bush ask for a manual recount of other counties didn't he have that right?
What good is amanual recount if a) it does not get done on time b) it does not "count"
Was it Gores fault that the recounts did not get done on time?
I thought Bush "trusted people" did he really mean that he trusted machines? Each machine recount gave different results (the first recount added thousands of votes to gores column) why was this if the machines are so accurate?
Bush got into Yale with a C average yet he does not believe in affirmative Action. The man was a drunk till the age of 40 for gods sake. You think that if his father wasn't the president he would have been accepted to Yale and Harvard let alone graduate?
Bush won because the hand counts did not go on. There were numerous machine counts each with a different number (which ought to be a clue as to how accurate they are) but as far as I know only one county actually got done with the hand counts. Miami Dade gave up and palm beach never finished.
Also keep in mind that Bush won because there were a few thousand votes for Buchanan that even Buchanan says were meant for Gore. he won the election but it's clear the people of florida wanted gore.
Bush also won because 29 thousand people voted for nader. Sure some of these people would have stayed home and some might have voted for Bush but surely if Nader wasn't running Bush would have lost by a landslide.
Of course Bush also did not get the popular vote. Nationwide more people wanted a Gore presidency then a Bush presidency and so today a mojority of the country is disapointed.
IT is definately accurate to to say that the will of the people was that Gore be the president.
A few other facts. The Gore Camp does not have the power to disqaulify any votes let alone the overseas ballots. That is up to the politicians in Florida. They were lobbied heavily by both sides and choose not to. Please get your facts straight.
The hand counts were conducted with both republican and democratic observers and the repulicans alleged every night on the talk shows that this was a fraudlent and unfair system. Now they claim that there was no fraud and evertything is hunky dory. Funny how the tune changes when the counts go your way.
Bush trusts machines more then he trusts the people of florida.
My governor (Marc Racicot or Montana) went to florida and told them how to run their elections. Would some politician from Florida please consider coming to montana in the next election cycle and accuse us of commiting fraud and of being incompetent please I bet the people of montana would love that!.
Slashdot Mirror
Unix has a slew of tools to update thousands of PCs. You can start here to start on the free ones. Of course CA, IBM etc also have proprietary ones too. There are also a bunch of tools like network shell which allow you to write perl scripts to manipulate millions of machines if you got the time and bandwidth. Unix has always been in the forefront of distibuted and remote management.
If you are large company MS will let you yell at them but you gotta be HUGE. Anything under 10K employees and MS will screw you blind if you try to mess with it. Go ahead Mr CIO and yell at MS you'll see how fast a legal team from MS will decend on you to audit your licenses.
If Bill Gates is not responsible for supporting windows why should Linus? Has anybody ever sued Microsoft for faulty software? did they win? Has anybody ever sued MS for lame support? Did they win?
Will microsoft come over to my business like it came over to yours well considering that they don't even return calls I'd say no.
If you are large company you can get support for anything.
TOAST by the postgres people. It enables unlimited row sizes in databases. Nobody has anything like it. I think it's revelutionary. In fact postgres has a ton of features no other database supports like loadable SP languages, user defined operators, a very nice RULE subsystem etc.
Thre would be millions of people who would drop an X based linux in favor of a wingui based linux in a heartbeat especially if MS ported IE and office to it. 70% of slashdot would use it just to use IE.
X is great because it allows you to run remote apps. For simple desktop use though it's overkill and bloated. What the linux community needs to do is one of the following. Either actively promote thin X clients with apps running on a massive server or a new non distributed GUI toolkit.
The former is ideal for corporation seeing to lower TCO the latter is ideal for the home user.
If Apple can get screen PDF to run remotely they will have the best of both worlds. This may be something to look into. I also hear that QNX has done a tremendous job in a non distributed GUI for it's operating system.
Ever see uptime figures on an IBM mainframe?
In montana however it's crippled the economy. Several large companies had to shut down this summer because their power rates went up so high. Oddly enough it was these same companies who were pushing for deregulation thinking the consumer would get screwed and that they would make out OK. They forgot that the consumers don't get to get screwed for another two years when deregulation hits them. Of course since they got screwed forst they will tell the legislature to redo the law and their lapdogs in the legislature will rewrite the law so that only the consumers will get screwed and not the CEOs.
You make a very good point. Without government intervention the corporations would rape the land and poison the waters and the air. Of course this would stimulate the economoy because people would be forced to buy bottled water and cnacer is very profitable because it's a chronic and long lasting disease.
Yea they better just stick to spending money on $300.00 hammers or $10,000 toilet seats. Let the military suck up the money and what's left over we can give to farmers for not farming, ranchers so we can pay more more for beef and dairy, loggers so that they can cut more of our trees and miners so they can level a few more mountains. The govt has better things to do with our money then to actually deliver a service for most citizens.
Amen bro.
States rights is an antiquated concept derived to form a union. The union exists now and the whole reason for states rights is gone.
The communist news network? Oh man republicans are sure stupid.
Why don't you go blow up a federal building or kill an abortion doctor or drag a black man behind your truck or something. Better yet get some skinhead friends of yours together and gang up a moslem or a fag.
It does not matter anyways. There is no way the US supreme court is going to stand by while a democrat is elected into office. As soon an Bush gets elected at least three will retire and guarantee a republican supreme court for the next 10 to 20 years. Of course you gotta feel sorry for any (democrat, black, gay, moslem, budhist) whose case might happen to go to the supreme court but what the hey that's our judicial system.
Throw a 100 random innocent black people into the judicial system and I bet at least 5 will get the death penalty. We love killing black people in the US (that's why we do it so often).
Both Gore and Bush admit to drug use and yet both support ruining the lives of other people who might want to do drugs. No wonder our judicial system is so screwed up.
I don't favor abondoning any law whatsoever. I am simply pointing out that in this country more people wanted a gore presidency then a bush one.
I am not saying Gore got more votes in florida but that more people intended to vote for him but fucked up, got confused or whatever. Those people too are going to be disappointed. Your argument about the margin of error is a little skewed too.
According to CNN.com gore got 49% of the popular vote and Bush got 48% with 3% going to nader. If you were overly generous and said that one third of the people voting for nader prefered a bush presidency then gore would still be up 3%. This is not an insignifact number and lets face it giving bush 1/3rd of nader voters is fantasy at best.
Maybe cos there was no evidence? A criminal is somebody who is charged with a crime, tried and then found guilty. Not somebody you don't like.
I thank god every day I live in a country that still pretends to have laws. If people like you ran this country I am sure I and most of my friends would be killed or jailed just for disagreeing with you. Thre are plenty of places on this planet where having an opionion or expressing it is deadly and from the looks of it we are on our way to becoming one of them. I figure you guys will go after gays first because they are a really small minority and not too likely to put up a fight but I think the jews and the moslems might put up a hellatious battle. Me I will be observing from another country when the blood starts to spill.
Your point about Perot is correct. If he had not run Clinton would not have won. Bush is in the exact same category. I will happily grant you that a small minority of the Nader voters would have voted for Bush but I (and most political analysts) think that the majority of those votes would have gone to Gore.
As for florida I disagree. Even Buchanan conceded that the people in Palm Beach county mistakenly voted for him when they meant to vote for Gore. I think everybody agrees on this. Considering that these votes were not cast properly it would be fair to say that people of Florida also liked Gore more then Bush (close granted). Also consider that hand recounts were never done in Miami-Dade. Although the margin in that county was close it's not unreasonable to expect that Gore might have picked up a few votes there. Gore would have definately picked up a bunch of votes if Palm Beach had finished the hand count.
No matter how you add it up More people in florida wanted a Gore presidency unfortunately a bunch of votes got thrown away and a bunch more were not counted.
Margin of error or not you can't dispute the fact more people voted for Gore then Bush nationwide and that more people intended to vote for Gore in Florida.
Why stop there though? It's costing us 40K weather the guy killed a cop or held up a 7-11. If the reson for killing is to save money then you should not make any distinction at all about the crime they commited. A guy in jail because he beat up his wife is costing you the same as a guy who raped your daughter right?
To your list of people I would definately add wife beaters, drunk drivers, and executives or corporations who have killed many people though.
Once again even Buchanan concedes that he got an unreasonable amount of votes in palm beach county and that most of the people who voted for him actually meant to vote for Gore.
My point is this. It's clear that these people most likely meant to vote to Gore. If they had not mispunched or gotten confused or whatever Gore would have won by a good margin. Bush won but most people did not want him to win.
Wow calling for the assination of the president and the vice president. We are slipping into a banana republic faster then I ever imagined. We can now look forward to Military coups and rioting on the streets what fun.
BTW Hillary beat Lazio and she would kick Bush's ass pretty danmed hard too. Clintons have a record of kicking Bush ass.
The hand counts were done under the glare of media, democratic observers and republican observers. They were televised, contested argued over in court and every night on television. It is totally irresposible for anybody to suggest that under this much scrutiny people commited voter fraud by counting ballots wrongly or manufacturing votes.
Itf that's true then the republican overseers were irresposible, stupid, or incompetent. It was their job to make sure no fraud occured.
If you are going to accuse voter fraud be specific. Name names, times places people who commit voter fraud belong in jail and it's a serious accusation to make.
Because they don't have to. They have the right to ask for manual recounts in the counties they want. It's up to the Bush team to ask for manual recounts in the counties they want. The Democrats are not under any obligation to do the work of the Bush campaign.
A more important question is. What good is asking for a manual recount if the time limit on doing one is so short as to make it impossible? What good is having the right to call for a manual recount if the result of the manual recount are thrown out?
"First, we don't have a "popular vote". The so-called "popular vote" is really just the sum of each state's votes."
Nevertheless it's fair to say that more people wanted a Gore presidency then a Bush one. This is a close election and if your popularity falls in the margin of error then so be it.
Also consider that roughly 3% of the country voted for Nader. It's definately fair to say most people in this country definately did not want a Bush presidency. If you think of it that way you also fall outside the margin of error. I think it's a safe bet to say most nader voters would prefer a Gore presidency to a Bush one.
So are you saying that Gore had no right to ask for manual recounts?
If he has a right to ask for manual recounts was he obligated to ask for a statewide one or did he have the pick and choose?
Why didn't bush ask for a manual recount of other counties didn't he have that right?
What good is amanual recount if a) it does not get done on time b) it does not "count"
Was it Gores fault that the recounts did not get done on time?
I thought Bush "trusted people" did he really mean that he trusted machines? Each machine recount gave different results (the first recount added thousands of votes to gores column) why was this if the machines are so accurate?
Hard to believe there are people like you in the world.
So why don't we do every prisoner a favor and kill them? I mean why be nice only a small percentage and let everybody else suffer? Is that fair?
Bush got into Yale with a C average yet he does not believe in affirmative Action. The man was a drunk till the age of 40 for gods sake. You think that if his father wasn't the president he would have been accepted to Yale and Harvard let alone graduate?
Bush won because the hand counts did not go on. There were numerous machine counts each with a different number (which ought to be a clue as to how accurate they are) but as far as I know only one county actually got done with the hand counts. Miami Dade gave up and palm beach never finished.
Also keep in mind that Bush won because there were a few thousand votes for Buchanan that even Buchanan says were meant for Gore. he won the election but it's clear the people of florida wanted gore.
Bush also won because 29 thousand people voted for nader. Sure some of these people would have stayed home and some might have voted for Bush but surely if Nader wasn't running Bush would have lost by a landslide.
Of course Bush also did not get the popular vote. Nationwide more people wanted a Gore presidency then a Bush presidency and so today a mojority of the country is disapointed.
IT is definately accurate to to say that the will of the people was that Gore be the president.
A few other facts. The Gore Camp does not have the power to disqaulify any votes let alone the overseas ballots. That is up to the politicians in Florida. They were lobbied heavily by both sides and choose not to. Please get your facts straight.
The hand counts were conducted with both republican and democratic observers and the repulicans alleged every night on the talk shows that this was a fraudlent and unfair system. Now they claim that there was no fraud and evertything is hunky dory. Funny how the tune changes when the counts go your way.
Bush trusts machines more then he trusts the people of florida.
My governor (Marc Racicot or Montana) went to florida and told them how to run their elections. Would some politician from Florida please consider coming to montana in the next election cycle and accuse us of commiting fraud and of being incompetent please I bet the people of montana would love that!.