The real competetion to the Microsoft juggernaut in this sector has gotta be opensource
And it will be. It doesn't help though when people write articles and say things like this:
The open-source world has produced a few free Office-compatible suites, but they, in turn, don't run on either Windows or the Mac OS.
That's just not true! I'm using Open Office at home on Linux, at work on Windows, and I think they have a Mac version coming along. You would think a reporter would do a little research before writing an article like this. It seems he just needed something quick to meet his deadline so he went out and found some half-ass office suite to bash.
Capitalism is about making money. The GPL is about programming for fun and community innovation. They are logical opposites.
Ok, this might be a little difficult for me to articulate, but I'm going to try because I think you're wrong. To borrow from The Future of Ideas by Lawrence Lessig, the world and its resources work on different levels. Things on some levels we share, and things on other levels we do not. An example is roads. We pay for roads through various taxes, but we allow pretty much anyone to use them, regardless of their contribution. And not all roads are public or completely free. Think about shopping malls, private drives, or toll roads. These roads are decidedly different from the normal roads to which we all have free access. The restricted roads, however, are useless without the free roads.
So to bring it back to software, GPL'd stuff is alot like the roads we hold in common. In various ways and to various degrees we support those who directly work to maintain and develop GPL'd software, and for many the existance of it is a boon to making money.
The GPL does not oppose Capitalism, or at least it doesn't need to be seen that way. The GPL strengthens Capitalism, or the form that we use, by making common a great deal of software capital.
Economic theories like capitalism start to fail when we attempt to apply them to computers and software, because many of the "laws" of economics simply do not apply in this realm. We all know what I'm talking about. If I make a copy of your Emacs, you don't have any less Emacs afterward. The GPL is an acknowledgement of that. Therefore, I don't see that the GPL opposes capitalism, it simply works on a different level.
I use Debian, I absolutely love it. I don't think the installation process is that bad, but I should not fail to mention that I didn't get it right the first time I tried it.
Of course, it wasn't the first Linux distro that I installed. I started with Redhat 6.2. I got frusterated with that because I couldn't figure out how to compile a kernel in Redhat, and all of the docs I found that were Redhat specific said don't recompile your kernel unless you ABSOLUTELY know what you're doing.
Then I tried Mandrake, and after using that for awhile I managed to compile my first kernel, but I still wasn't completely happy because I found it hard to configure.
I tried Slackware, and oh did I like that. The config files in/etc were super easy to modify, but the package management system left a little to be desired.
This whole time I was learning, and becoming better at using a Linux OS. I was seeing the different types of packages out there, rpm, tgz, and the one I hadn't used yet, deb. So I had to give debian a try. Like I said, I didn't get it right the first time, although the installation is easier than Slackware. Once I did though, and I discovered apt-get, I was hooked. I now have three machines running woody and one running potato and I'll never switch to anything else.
It's not the distro for beginners. It doesn't have to be. It's a good distro, perhaps the best, and it's not for beginners. There is nothing wrong with that.
IANAL, but I wonder if there is an opportunity for a Class Action case here? Does Yahoo! have the right to do this?
I must say, Yahoo! seems to have gone way downhill in the past year or two. I just don't even go there anymore.
Send lawyers, guns, and money
on
iPod on Windows
·
· Score: 2
Our market just increased tenfold.
That just doesn't sound right. This is not bad for Apple. You know, depending on the status of FireWire for Linux, we should be seeing the nearest sda's as lovely white boxen...
I have nothing against your wife's use of a grammar checker; nevertheless, you may want to buy her a copy of Strunk and White's Elements of Style. It will enrich her.
Careful what you say, David. You may just create a human grammar checker. I think the Marketing Industry has been trying for years to eliminate those.
In all seriousness, Strunk & White is a masterpiece, and one of my favorite books of all time. Unfortunately, if you listen to anything Strunk says in the book, you'll soon find that Word's grammar checker sucks ass. Shortly thereafter you'll be refreshed to find a word processor like Open Office that doesn't insult your intelligence.
Hi,
Thanks for asking for comments, I'd like to submit my pig-headed opinion if I may be so bold.
With your introduction of OS X I think you raised the bar significantly in the quality of PC operating systems. Drawing from Open Source resources, the Mach kernel for example, was a very savvy move and other companies would be wise to consider doing the same. I would buy a Mac just for that operating system. It is very nice.
The drawback is the price and proprietary nature of Apple hardware. I quite honestly believe that a consumer can get a functional Windows computer, that will create a sufficient perception of quality, for about $200-300 less than a Macintosh that they may feel suits their needs. While at the store the consumer might feel s/he has made a wise purchase with a Windows PC, I believe the Macintosh, in most cases, would provide a longer period of satisfaction. I feel this is due to the quality of the MacOS and related software.
With the US vs. Microsoft trial where it is, I believe now is the time for companies that can compete in the OS market to pursue OEM deals with manufacturers like Dell, Gateway, and Sony. Redhat software, for one, has managed to produce a very impressive Linux based operating system in Redhat Linux 7.2. The lack of high quality consumer applications, however, remains a barrier for any Linux OS at this time. This makes it difficult for a PC manufacturer to embrace Linux as a platform on consumer orientated computers.
The opportunity exists for Apple to release OS X on the Intel i386 platform, to directly compete with Microsoft Windows. I have a fair understanding of what an undertaking porting an entire OS from one platform to another is, as I have used Linux on i386 and PPC, and have seen the lag that PPC users experience using the minority platform. Such an effort for Apple, however, would provide a potentially huge return on investment, and would be a very positive move for increasing the value of the company.
While Apple's work in the hardware market is vanguard, the company simply cannot compete with the economies of scale enjoyed in the i386 platform. It is time for Apple to tap into this market. Imagine if MacOS were half as popular as Quicktime on computers across the world. Consumers would win, and Apple would be in the game for years to come.
While I agree that the high end computers are more fun and interesting (from a marketing/sales perspective). The lower cost machines are what is going to make money.
Not sure I agree with you. While I may be wrong, the G4 towers probably make more money for Apple (per unit) than anything. I doubt if they make much of anything on the iMac. It's probably just more of a maintaining market share thing, keeping it a viable platform so software gets released for Macs.
I could be totally wrong, I haven't looked at any numbers, but my gut tells me that the $3500 dual processor G4 tower and the Cinema Display carries a much larger margin for Apple. Not sure how the total sales of these units factors in.
Oh well... I can't afford any of it. I wish I could.
U of Minnesota labs has named machines after cartoon characters. Whenever I needed to ssh in to a lab machine it was taz.itlabs.umn.edu. Very easy to remember, and fun!
The lengths some people will go. Why don't I just hire some people to shot some other people to show guns are bad? Oh, because it's illegal..
Well, not only is murder illegal, but it's wrong. What the kids were doing, and what Greene did was illegal, but the catch, and the difference between murder and sharing music, is that sharing music isn't really wrong. That's why it wasn't so shocking to see a few college kids supposedly downloading a bunch of songs.
That's a big misconception. People view college as trade school, and it isn't. Most International Relations Majors don't go on to do things involving international relations; most history majors don't go on to do things involving history.
Were you referring to that claim? I think the original poster raises a very interseting idea. I majored in Psychology in college. I never had any intention of practicing Psychology in life. I thought it was an interesting subject, I looked at the program and was interested in taking the classes that made up a psychology major. More so than the classes that made up a computer science major.
Now I have a degree and I'm working in computers because I know how. I will take CSci classes and maybe get a minor, but for now I'm happy with my education. My education also gives me a different perspective on my job than what my coworkers provide.
In time I'll get a feel for what I really want to do in life. When that time comes I'll get the training neccessary to do it. Meantime, I'll have a better understanding of the world because I am an educated person. I didn't go to college just to get a better job, after all, I went to become a better person.
The good doktor: The use or non-use of WMA/WMV by less than one percent of the web-browsing market has exactly zero bearing on the "legitimacy" of the format. Please see a doctor about these delusions of grandeur.
And again... I was referring to Linux's share of the web browsing market. Please try to read more carefully next time.
Funny thread I started. If you, "dokter," had read my post more carefully you would have seen how I began my sentence:
It probably won't make any difference,
"It," to clarify, refers to the impact the Linux users of the world would have on the legitimacy of the Windows Media format.
I do not believe I am deluded. This lack of insight on my part indicates that I am not fully ready for any kind of psychological treatment, were any in order. I do understand the minority status of the Linux market, but, while on the subject, I feel the statistics to which you are referring fall somewhat short in accurately representing the size of the Linux user base. I believe it is more like 5% of desktop users that are using Linux. I think, in a lot of cases, Windows users are counted twice as they have their home computer and a computer at work. That is 2 Windows computers but only 1 user.
Of course, it is about 5% of the vote that determines who wins most elections. I believe it unwise for anyone to disregard even such a small number.
Maybe I'm being silly, but is this really neccessary? I'm sure it will sell. I work in Government, particularly law enforcement, and the purchasing decisions are made totally backwards. Recently, all of the agents (cops) in our department got new laptops. It was considered important that they be able to transport these things so that they can be more flexible or dynamic or something... Anyway, the guy in charge of ordering bought the Dell "desktop replacement" laptop, which weighs about 8 pounds! The result? We have a bunch of overpriced desktops with LCD displays and laptop keyboards. The agents never take them ANYWHERE.
To get back on topic, I can see how this is going to be a "It's more expensive, so it must be better," or, a, "Finally, I can get the computing power that I need in a laptop!" I've had a Pentium III 850 for almost a year now and I just can't see how that isn't going to be sufficient processing power to drive my applications for a long time. Up until a few weeks ago I was using a PII 300 at work, and it was great with Windows 2000 and office XP.
The gist of my comment: In 90% (or more) of the instances customers who buy these machines will not need the processing power that is provided by the advanced cooling. My problem is when it's public sector buyers that are misinformed and willing to spend public dollars on gimmicky stuff.
Wait, never mind, maybe you do need that Pentium 4 to do email...sorry!
You mention Novell. I can think of one thing that I've had to deal with, but I'm sure there are many others.
When we install Office XP on our systems we have to disable file caching in the Novell client, otherwise users won't be able to save their files after they've modified them. This is a really weird bug and were it not for Google we would have never solved it.
We're all convinced that it was a plot by MS to diminish the percieved quality of Novell. btw, our organization is currently migrating to active directory from NDS. Too bad for Novell. No $40,000 for them this June.
This is probably pointed out somewhere else, I didn't take the time to look...
You gentlemen are confusing criminal law with civil law. A criminal in US court enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. In civil court, a simple proponderence of evidence is neccessary. If the plaintiff can make it look like the defendent did them wrong, then they win. They don't have to prove it by dusting for prints or anything.
A company accused of pirating software is taken to civil court. The plaintiff, in many cases the BSA I would imagine, must represent themselves. In criminal court however, the state (city, county, state, federal, whatever) prosecutes the case, and the victim of the crime is not required to pay the fees associated with going to court.
Unless you're defending a drug cartel or something like that, criminal court is usually not very lucritive for a lawyer. Civil court, however, is very lucritive, and lawyers who practice in civil law are usually the ones who create the scumbag image.
That's a pretty apt comment, I must say. Whenever I try to float any kind of Linux idea across the suits in my office they look at me like I'm suggesting building computers out of Legos. If it doesn't say Compaq on it, they won't buy it.
The funny thing is, we've had so many problems with our mega-buck Compaq setup perhaps a Mindstorm/Beowulf cluster is exactly what we need!
I really think that the market is going to be ready for something like this to materialize in a few years. If AOL did buy RH I think you would see a lot of GUI work (that wouldn't be GPL) go on top of the rest of the OS. I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being an i386 version of Mac OSX (similar, at least). Technically and aesthetically I think OSX beats Windows, imagine if it or something like it ran on cheap PC hardware...
It would be cool. But I'd still be a Debian man...
Slashdot Mirror
The real competetion to the Microsoft juggernaut in this sector has gotta be opensource
And it will be. It doesn't help though when people write articles and say things like this:
The open-source world has produced a few free Office-compatible suites, but they, in turn, don't run on either Windows or the Mac OS.
That's just not true! I'm using Open Office at home on Linux, at work on Windows, and I think they have a Mac version coming along. You would think a reporter would do a little research before writing an article like this. It seems he just needed something quick to meet his deadline so he went out and found some half-ass office suite to bash.
Personally, I don't care what version number they use. It's Debian, and that's all that matters.
Capitalism is about making money. The GPL is about programming for fun and community innovation. They are logical opposites.
Ok, this might be a little difficult for me to articulate, but I'm going to try because I think you're wrong. To borrow from The Future of Ideas by Lawrence Lessig, the world and its resources work on different levels. Things on some levels we share, and things on other levels we do not. An example is roads. We pay for roads through various taxes, but we allow pretty much anyone to use them, regardless of their contribution. And not all roads are public or completely free. Think about shopping malls, private drives, or toll roads. These roads are decidedly different from the normal roads to which we all have free access. The restricted roads, however, are useless without the free roads.
So to bring it back to software, GPL'd stuff is alot like the roads we hold in common. In various ways and to various degrees we support those who directly work to maintain and develop GPL'd software, and for many the existance of it is a boon to making money.
The GPL does not oppose Capitalism, or at least it doesn't need to be seen that way. The GPL strengthens Capitalism, or the form that we use, by making common a great deal of software capital.
Economic theories like capitalism start to fail when we attempt to apply them to computers and software, because many of the "laws" of economics simply do not apply in this realm. We all know what I'm talking about. If I make a copy of your Emacs, you don't have any less Emacs afterward. The GPL is an acknowledgement of that. Therefore, I don't see that the GPL opposes capitalism, it simply works on a different level.
I use Debian, I absolutely love it. I don't think the installation process is that bad, but I should not fail to mention that I didn't get it right the first time I tried it.
Of course, it wasn't the first Linux distro that I installed. I started with Redhat 6.2. I got frusterated with that because I couldn't figure out how to compile a kernel in Redhat, and all of the docs I found that were Redhat specific said don't recompile your kernel unless you ABSOLUTELY know what you're doing.
Then I tried Mandrake, and after using that for awhile I managed to compile my first kernel, but I still wasn't completely happy because I found it hard to configure.
I tried Slackware, and oh did I like that. The config files in /etc were super easy to modify, but the package management system left a little to be desired.
This whole time I was learning, and becoming better at using a Linux OS. I was seeing the different types of packages out there, rpm, tgz, and the one I hadn't used yet, deb. So I had to give debian a try. Like I said, I didn't get it right the first time, although the installation is easier than Slackware. Once I did though, and I discovered apt-get, I was hooked. I now have three machines running woody and one running potato and I'll never switch to anything else.
It's not the distro for beginners. It doesn't have to be. It's a good distro, perhaps the best, and it's not for beginners. There is nothing wrong with that.
IANAL, but I wonder if there is an opportunity for a Class Action case here? Does Yahoo! have the right to do this?
I must say, Yahoo! seems to have gone way downhill in the past year or two. I just don't even go there anymore.
Our market just increased tenfold.
That just doesn't sound right. This is not bad for Apple. You know, depending on the status of FireWire for Linux, we should be seeing the nearest sda's as lovely white boxen...
I have nothing against your wife's use of a grammar checker; nevertheless, you may want to buy her a copy of Strunk and White's Elements of Style. It will enrich her.
Careful what you say, David. You may just create a human grammar checker. I think the Marketing Industry has been trying for years to eliminate those.
In all seriousness, Strunk & White is a masterpiece, and one of my favorite books of all time. Unfortunately, if you listen to anything Strunk says in the book, you'll soon find that Word's grammar checker sucks ass. Shortly thereafter you'll be refreshed to find a word processor like Open Office that doesn't insult your intelligence.
Hi,
Thanks for asking for comments, I'd like to submit my pig-headed opinion if I may be so bold.
With your introduction of OS X I think you raised the bar significantly in the quality of PC operating systems. Drawing from Open Source resources, the Mach kernel for example, was a very savvy move and other companies would be wise to consider doing the same. I would buy a Mac just for that operating system. It is very nice.
The drawback is the price and proprietary nature of Apple hardware. I quite honestly believe that a consumer can get a functional Windows computer, that will create a sufficient perception of quality, for about $200-300 less than a Macintosh that they may feel suits their needs. While at the store the consumer might feel s/he has made a wise purchase with a Windows PC, I believe the Macintosh, in most cases, would provide a longer period of satisfaction. I feel this is due to the quality of the MacOS and related software.
With the US vs. Microsoft trial where it is, I believe now is the time for companies that can compete in the OS market to pursue OEM deals with manufacturers like Dell, Gateway, and Sony. Redhat software, for one, has managed to produce a very impressive Linux based operating system in Redhat Linux 7.2. The lack of high quality consumer applications, however, remains a barrier for any Linux OS at this time. This makes it difficult for a PC manufacturer to embrace Linux as a platform on consumer orientated computers.
The opportunity exists for Apple to release OS X on the Intel i386 platform, to directly compete with Microsoft Windows. I have a fair understanding of what an undertaking porting an entire OS from one platform to another is, as I have used Linux on i386 and PPC, and have seen the lag that PPC users experience using the minority platform. Such an effort for Apple, however, would provide a potentially huge return on investment, and would be a very positive move for increasing the value of the company.
While Apple's work in the hardware market is vanguard, the company simply cannot compete with the economies of scale enjoyed in the i386 platform. It is time for Apple to tap into this market. Imagine if MacOS were half as popular as Quicktime on computers across the world. Consumers would win, and Apple would be in the game for years to come.
Thanks for your time,
While I agree that the high end computers are more fun and interesting (from a marketing/sales perspective). The lower cost machines are what is going to make money.
Not sure I agree with you. While I may be wrong, the G4 towers probably make more money for Apple (per unit) than anything. I doubt if they make much of anything on the iMac. It's probably just more of a maintaining market share thing, keeping it a viable platform so software gets released for Macs.
I could be totally wrong, I haven't looked at any numbers, but my gut tells me that the $3500 dual processor G4 tower and the Cinema Display carries a much larger margin for Apple. Not sure how the total sales of these units factors in.
Oh well... I can't afford any of it. I wish I could.
The heat incinerated herds of reindeer and charred tens of thousands of evergreens across hundreds of square moles.
How do we know they were square? They could have been very hip. Just because a mole is russian, doesn't mean he's uncool.
I wish people would learn.
U of Minnesota labs has named machines after cartoon characters. Whenever I needed to ssh in to a lab machine it was taz.itlabs.umn.edu. Very easy to remember, and fun!
I suppose we're supposed to assume this is some evil plot by Microsoft to surveil on all of us.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Everybody knows it's only the government that does that kind of thing.
However, seeing as the DOJ seems to be M$'s bitch, does that make M$ part of the "government?"
The lengths some people will go. Why don't I just hire some people to shot some other people to show guns are bad? Oh, because it's illegal..
Well, not only is murder illegal, but it's wrong. What the kids were doing, and what Greene did was illegal, but the catch, and the difference between murder and sharing music, is that sharing music isn't really wrong. That's why it wasn't so shocking to see a few college kids supposedly downloading a bunch of songs.
In my freshman year, I was using a pirated copy of Office 97 on a pirated copy of Windows 98.
In my senior year, I was using Star Office 5.2 on Redhat 7.0.
I guess I'm not pirating software anymore, but I'm certainly not paying for it either!
That's a big misconception. People view college as trade school, and it isn't. Most International Relations Majors don't go on to do things involving international relations; most history majors don't go on to do things involving history.
Were you referring to that claim? I think the original poster raises a very interseting idea. I majored in Psychology in college. I never had any intention of practicing Psychology in life. I thought it was an interesting subject, I looked at the program and was interested in taking the classes that made up a psychology major. More so than the classes that made up a computer science major.
Now I have a degree and I'm working in computers because I know how. I will take CSci classes and maybe get a minor, but for now I'm happy with my education. My education also gives me a different perspective on my job than what my coworkers provide.
In time I'll get a feel for what I really want to do in life. When that time comes I'll get the training neccessary to do it. Meantime, I'll have a better understanding of the world because I am an educated person. I didn't go to college just to get a better job, after all, I went to become a better person.
Or, as it's known where I work, it's the CKI, or "Chair to Keyboard Interface."
The good doktor:
The use or non-use of WMA/WMV by less than one percent of the web-browsing market has exactly zero bearing on the "legitimacy" of the format. Please see a doctor about these delusions of grandeur.
And again...
I was referring to Linux's share of the web browsing market. Please try to read more carefully next time.
Funny thread I started. If you, "dokter," had read my post more carefully you would have seen how I began my sentence:
It probably won't make any difference,
"It," to clarify, refers to the impact the Linux users of the world would have on the legitimacy of the Windows Media format.
I do not believe I am deluded. This lack of insight on my part indicates that I am not fully ready for any kind of psychological treatment, were any in order. I do understand the minority status of the Linux market, but, while on the subject, I feel the statistics to which you are referring fall somewhat short in accurately representing the size of the Linux user base. I believe it is more like 5% of desktop users that are using Linux. I think, in a lot of cases, Windows users are counted twice as they have their home computer and a computer at work. That is 2 Windows computers but only 1 user.
Of course, it is about 5% of the vote that determines who wins most elections. I believe it unwise for anyone to disregard even such a small number.
It probably won't make any difference, but doesn't this, in a way, legitimize the wma format?
Maybe I'm being silly, but is this really neccessary? I'm sure it will sell. I work in Government, particularly law enforcement, and the purchasing decisions are made totally backwards. Recently, all of the agents (cops) in our department got new laptops. It was considered important that they be able to transport these things so that they can be more flexible or dynamic or something... Anyway, the guy in charge of ordering bought the Dell "desktop replacement" laptop, which weighs about 8 pounds! The result? We have a bunch of overpriced desktops with LCD displays and laptop keyboards. The agents never take them ANYWHERE.
To get back on topic, I can see how this is going to be a "It's more expensive, so it must be better," or, a, "Finally, I can get the computing power that I need in a laptop!" I've had a Pentium III 850 for almost a year now and I just can't see how that isn't going to be sufficient processing power to drive my applications for a long time. Up until a few weeks ago I was using a PII 300 at work, and it was great with Windows 2000 and office XP.
The gist of my comment: In 90% (or more) of the instances customers who buy these machines will not need the processing power that is provided by the advanced cooling. My problem is when it's public sector buyers that are misinformed and willing to spend public dollars on gimmicky stuff.
Wait, never mind, maybe you do need that Pentium 4 to do email...sorry!
Right!
Oh, wait, this one isn't about computers.. hehe.
You mention Novell. I can think of one thing that I've had to deal with, but I'm sure there are many others.
When we install Office XP on our systems we have to disable file caching in the Novell client, otherwise users won't be able to save their files after they've modified them. This is a really weird bug and were it not for Google we would have never solved it.
We're all convinced that it was a plot by MS to diminish the percieved quality of Novell. btw, our organization is currently migrating to active directory from NDS. Too bad for Novell. No $40,000 for them this June.
This is probably pointed out somewhere else, I didn't take the time to look...
You gentlemen are confusing criminal law with civil law. A criminal in US court enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. In civil court, a simple proponderence of evidence is neccessary. If the plaintiff can make it look like the defendent did them wrong, then they win. They don't have to prove it by dusting for prints or anything.
A company accused of pirating software is taken to civil court. The plaintiff, in many cases the BSA I would imagine, must represent themselves. In criminal court however, the state (city, county, state, federal, whatever) prosecutes the case, and the victim of the crime is not required to pay the fees associated with going to court.
Unless you're defending a drug cartel or something like that, criminal court is usually not very lucritive for a lawyer. Civil court, however, is very lucritive, and lawyers who practice in civil law are usually the ones who create the scumbag image.
That's a pretty apt comment, I must say. Whenever I try to float any kind of Linux idea across the suits in my office they look at me like I'm suggesting building computers out of Legos. If it doesn't say Compaq on it, they won't buy it.
The funny thing is, we've had so many problems with our mega-buck Compaq setup perhaps a Mindstorm/Beowulf cluster is exactly what we need!
I really think that the market is going to be ready for something like this to materialize in a few years. If AOL did buy RH I think you would see a lot of GUI work (that wouldn't be GPL) go on top of the rest of the OS. I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being an i386 version of Mac OSX (similar, at least). Technically and aesthetically I think OSX beats Windows, imagine if it or something like it ran on cheap PC hardware...
It would be cool. But I'd still be a Debian man...
Yeah right. They have not.