I think you're being a little hard on Microsoft (whom I am not a big fan of and generally don't use their products.) While MS always seems to be holding the gun as the one coming up with the knock-off, it is a fact of life that in every industry a new product is either covered in patents (which have their own evils) or quickly reproduced.
In fashion, it goes like this: 1) Armani/Gucci/whomever releases new jeans that are actually worn to the point of looking stained. 2) Next year, Levi's adds this to their lineup as their most expensive sort of jeans. 3) A year after that, you buy them at Wal-Mart from brands you've never heard of in sizes Gucci wouldn't be caught dead making.
In food it goes like this: A few months ago I was turned onto a food called the Portugeuse Muffin. No idea how it relates to Portugal, but it's become very popular. Made by a company out of Boston and hard to find. Not a few weeks ago I noticed Trader Joes was carrying their own version. And if it sells, I have not doubt that the Thomas Corperation, long established monopoly of the muffin business, will release their own, squashing the small Boston bakery under their unkind heel.
Innovation only lasts so long. MS wants an iPod killer? Maybe. What about Creative? They want one pretty bad themselves.
It seems like a lawsuit like this would take years and SCO doesn't have that much money. The big question is, "Did they raise enough hell for Microsoft to purchase 'additional licenses' that extend the time SCO can keep suing everything Linux?"
I don't think so, but MS has a lot of money to burn...
I wasn't going to mod my PS/2, but then last Christmas my grandmother did it for me. It was so easy, she said, why not. But honestly, I don't use it to pirate games; I actually just use it to rip CDs and put the songs on the internet. I didn't intend to end up being a criminal, but you wouldn't believe how the chicks have responded. It's better than owning a Harley.
But Bray's point does have me a little concerned: If companies start to go out of business because of my pirating, I won't have as much stuff around to pirate. It'll be just like that Mad Max movie where everyone has to fight over a single oil refinery because no one knows how to build them anymore.
That's depressing. Can't we just pretend that people are buying less games because of a sinking economy, rising unemployment, and lowered consumer confidence based on the fact that practically everyone in America knows someone who is out of work and wonders if they shouldn't save their money in case it happens to them?
Oh, and I hope SCO doesn't lose their lawsuit; I've got a lot of my pirate attitude tied up in running illegal software.
Since SCO licenses are reallly expensive, why not create a small--and relatively inexpensive--company that will assist you in your move off of SCO and/or help you install Linux in a way that doesn't violate any of SCO's IP?
The web site seems very thin; merely an idea someone is trying to promote. They mention they don't even have a working model. And don't say they even intend to build one.
I totally want one of these now, but these guys don't even seem to have a real foothold beyond a patten and a bit of research.
I agree that the two items are basically unrelated; I suspect Timothy was just trying to glom two stories together he felt were similar, even though many of us do not.
No point in dragging him across the coals, though.
I know there's a lot of cynicism out there this being just smoke to get M$ to lower their price--quite frankly, that's still a vicotory for Linux. But I think if a company like this wanted to adopt Linux on the desktop, they probably want to look at a company like Redmond Linux because they've gone really far out of their way to make something windows-like.
This is less of a win than getting everyone on Gnome or KDE, but it's a good argument for a low-cost switchover: little-to-no retraining (better cut-and-paste, also).
Really, just saving money and adding flexibility. Scanning film is tremendously expensive, so if you are adding digital effects and you start and end digital, you're saving a bundle. Digital cameras are less expensive to run and require less accessories and folks to do so. Film prints cost between 3 to 5 grand each to make, and if you're opening on 2500 screens, you'll need well over a thousand of them.
The last bit interests me the most because it would give a leader-loss for production companies to sponsor digital projector installations. Sadly, things are too chaotic in that industry to do so.
I'll be curious to see what power rises to bring digital to theaters. Unfortunately-- because of the nature of the beast--when they do arrive they will need a very slick and encompassing business plan ala Blockbuster or Starbucks.
I agree with what most say about not worrying about the new licensing scemes from M$. You don't need to retreat from what you already have and you don't need to upgrade at this point. Vague threats of more cost later are ficticious: your OS and applications will last the life of your PC and new PC's come with new software.
If your Office is outdated (and this would only be in the regard the M$ keeps changing the file format so you would have to have a more recent copy to read external documents created on more recent systems), you can use StarOffice or OpenOffice to open (and convert, if you like) more recent formats. It works very well.
There's no need to be worried or really do anything just cause M$ is trying to stir up a panic. It's really M$ panicing about lost revenues.
Have you even seen StarOffice 6.0? My company has been running on it since Beta and got the release version a few weeks ago (on Windows).
It's very nice. StarOffice is nice for the support, Open Office could be a bit more of a hassle. But no one is even going to notice the switch to StarOffice from MS Office --even when dealing with other companies still using MS Office.
I would also make the ten-hour trek to do a weekend install-fest if the schools were interested. With enough people it would be easy.
And while it might be a small amount of money for MS, the money and the publicity would hurt them. Especially since the perceived approval of MS is definately going to have an effect on the outcome of the anti-trust suit. The timing is perfect to get some good press on the subject.
I would head up from S.F. for a weekend to do this. I wouldn't really need any greater motivation than to be invited by the school system. I think about 200 people could easily meet all of the school systems needs in about two days (this includes specialty apps).
I've been reading more and more about MS strong-arming schools over licenses and I truly believe it only has to blow up in their face once for them to stop.
So the question becomes, would these schools even take the Linux plunge?
Oh, we could also pester Sun for a Star Office donation so all older Office documents could be read. I'm sure they'd jump at the publicity.
To answer the question of what a Mac would be used for, the answer is quite a lot. Most cluster-based stuff is homegrown applications, which can be written for OSX as easily as most OSes. But beyond that, there is actually a huge call for rendering farms for programs such as After Effects and Maya that film companies use to create films (more importantly, the films I actually want to see, the ones where things fling through space and explode, not the ones where things are passed around a coffee table while people discuss important issues of sexual politics).
I know Linux just had a big win with Dreamworks, but Macs are huge in F/X industry. And if clustering brings new avenues to cheaper special effects, that means more special effects. And that is just good.
As for it being easier then Linux, it probably is. No point in crying about it, let's get a Beuwolf-out-of-the-box solution. I agree that Macs aren't customizable enough to my taste, but this doesn't mean there can't be a default configuration of BW that would work immediately and could be tweaked later.
Remember it works because we all want to believe the best. I think it's rather encouraging in America that while we've been attacked, we still search for the best in human nature.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're being a little hard on Microsoft (whom I am not a big fan of and generally don't use their products.) While MS always seems to be holding the gun as the one coming up with the knock-off, it is a fact of life that in every industry a new product is either covered in patents (which have their own evils) or quickly reproduced.
In fashion, it goes like this:
1) Armani/Gucci/whomever releases new jeans that are actually worn to the point of looking stained.
2) Next year, Levi's adds this to their lineup as their most expensive sort of jeans.
3) A year after that, you buy them at Wal-Mart from brands you've never heard of in sizes Gucci wouldn't be caught dead making.
In food it goes like this:
A few months ago I was turned onto a food called the Portugeuse Muffin. No idea how it relates to Portugal, but it's become very popular. Made by a company out of Boston and hard to find. Not a few weeks ago I noticed Trader Joes was carrying their own version. And if it sells, I have not doubt that the Thomas Corperation, long established monopoly of the muffin business, will release their own, squashing the small Boston bakery under their unkind heel.
Innovation only lasts so long. MS wants an iPod killer? Maybe. What about Creative? They want one pretty bad themselves.
I'm really curious what will come of that saber duel!
It seems like a lawsuit like this would take years and SCO doesn't have that much money. The big question is, "Did they raise enough hell for Microsoft to purchase 'additional licenses' that extend the time SCO can keep suing everything Linux?"
I don't think so, but MS has a lot of money to burn...
Would this be a precident for OPEC going after people who modified cars to run on Bio-Diesel?
I wasn't going to mod my PS/2, but then last Christmas my grandmother did it for me. It was so easy, she said, why not. But honestly, I don't use it to pirate games; I actually just use it to rip CDs and put the songs on the internet. I didn't intend to end up being a criminal, but you wouldn't believe how the chicks have responded. It's better than owning a Harley.
But Bray's point does have me a little concerned: If companies start to go out of business because of my pirating, I won't have as much stuff around to pirate. It'll be just like that Mad Max movie where everyone has to fight over a single oil refinery because no one knows how to build them anymore.
That's depressing. Can't we just pretend that people are buying less games because of a sinking economy, rising unemployment, and lowered consumer confidence based on the fact that practically everyone in America knows someone who is out of work and wonders if they shouldn't save their money in case it happens to them?
Oh, and I hope SCO doesn't lose their lawsuit; I've got a lot of my pirate attitude tied up in running illegal software.
Since SCO licenses are reallly expensive, why not create a small--and relatively inexpensive--company that will assist you in your move off of SCO and/or help you install Linux in a way that doesn't violate any of SCO's IP?
Seems like there's a fortune to be made there.
Let's hope Google responds by getting into the Office business. Love to see them do a makeover on Open Office with their own brand name!
The web site seems very thin; merely an idea someone is trying to promote. They mention they don't even have a working model. And don't say they even intend to build one.
I totally want one of these now, but these guys don't even seem to have a real foothold beyond a patten and a bit of research.
I agree that the two items are basically unrelated; I suspect Timothy was just trying to glom two stories together he felt were similar, even though many of us do not.
No point in dragging him across the coals, though.
I guess that about sums it up.
I know there's a lot of cynicism out there this being just smoke to get M$ to lower their price--quite frankly, that's still a vicotory for Linux. But I think if a company like this wanted to adopt Linux on the desktop, they probably want to look at a company like Redmond Linux because they've gone really far out of their way to make something windows-like.
This is less of a win than getting everyone on Gnome or KDE, but it's a good argument for a low-cost switchover: little-to-no retraining (better cut-and-paste, also).
Really, just saving money and adding flexibility. Scanning film is tremendously expensive, so if you are adding digital effects and you start and end digital, you're saving a bundle. Digital cameras are less expensive to run and require less accessories and folks to do so. Film prints cost between 3 to 5 grand each to make, and if you're opening on 2500 screens, you'll need well over a thousand of them.
The last bit interests me the most because it would give a leader-loss for production companies to sponsor digital projector installations. Sadly, things are too chaotic in that industry to do so.
I'll be curious to see what power rises to bring digital to theaters. Unfortunately-- because of the nature of the beast--when they do arrive they will need a very slick and encompassing business plan ala Blockbuster or Starbucks.
I agree with what most say about not worrying about the new licensing scemes from M$. You don't need to retreat from what you already have and you don't need to upgrade at this point. Vague threats of more cost later are ficticious: your OS and applications will last the life of your PC and new PC's come with new software.
If your Office is outdated (and this would only be in the regard the M$ keeps changing the file format so you would have to have a more recent copy to read external documents created on more recent systems), you can use StarOffice or OpenOffice to open (and convert, if you like) more recent formats. It works very well.
There's no need to be worried or really do anything just cause M$ is trying to stir up a panic. It's really M$ panicing about lost revenues.
*yawn*
Have you even seen StarOffice 6.0? My company has been running on it since Beta and got the release version a few weeks ago (on Windows).
It's very nice. StarOffice is nice for the support, Open Office could be a bit more of a hassle. But no one is even going to notice the switch to StarOffice from MS Office --even when dealing with other companies still using MS Office.
I would also make the ten-hour trek to do a weekend install-fest if the schools were interested. With enough people it would be easy.
And while it might be a small amount of money for MS, the money and the publicity would hurt them. Especially since the perceived approval of MS is definately going to have an effect on the outcome of the anti-trust suit. The timing is perfect to get some good press on the subject.
It would be a terrible opportunity to miss.
I would head up from S.F. for a weekend to do this. I wouldn't really need any greater motivation than to be invited by the school system. I think about 200 people could easily meet all of the school systems needs in about two days (this includes specialty apps).
I've been reading more and more about MS strong-arming schools over licenses and I truly believe it only has to blow up in their face once for them to stop.
So the question becomes, would these schools even take the Linux plunge?
Oh, we could also pester Sun for a Star Office donation so all older Office documents could be read. I'm sure they'd jump at the publicity.
To answer the question of what a Mac would be used for, the answer is quite a lot. Most cluster-based stuff is homegrown applications, which can be written for OSX as easily as most OSes. But beyond that, there is actually a huge call for rendering farms for programs such as After Effects and Maya that film companies use to create films (more importantly, the films I actually want to see, the ones where things fling through space and explode, not the ones where things are passed around a coffee table while people discuss important issues of sexual politics).
I know Linux just had a big win with Dreamworks, but Macs are huge in F/X industry. And if clustering brings new avenues to cheaper special effects, that means more special effects. And that is just good.
As for it being easier then Linux, it probably is. No point in crying about it, let's get a Beuwolf-out-of-the-box solution. I agree that Macs aren't customizable enough to my taste, but this doesn't mean there can't be a default configuration of BW that would work immediately and could be tweaked later.
Remember it works because we all want to believe the best. I think it's rather encouraging in America that while we've been attacked, we still search for the best in human nature.
Was a movie originally, wasn't it? Seven earth-sized planets except for a 'rag-tag' fleet I think are blown up.