Furthermore, go into some of the linux help channels on IRC and help is not something you're likely to get much of the time.
First off - I have to admit that within IT circles, there are those who wrongly assume hording information makes that information valuable (giving out information makes YOU valuable as the source of knowledge). It has to be happening in IRC channels too. But that doesn't mean it is ALWAYS happening.
I, too, occasionally step in to Linux channels on various IRC networks. Usually as a last resort (Google and Google Groups / Usenet tend to unearth far more answers). Quite often there is nobody there to help me with my particular problem - being polite and patient helps. But that is lost on some.
Every time I enter one of these channels, there is always someone who pops in, blurts out a question, and then complains or becomes obnoxious if there are no forthcoming answers. These people seem to be under a mistaken assumption that those who attend such channels owe them answers.
Those who wish to have a guarenteed level of service should install the distro of their choice and promptly purchase a tech support contract (if they didn't get one with a purchase box set, etc).
One final comment. "RTFM" is, in fact, a valid responce... with qualifiers. Those who say "RTFM" should also provide a URL, file path, or at least a document tittle. Those who recieve a proper "RTFM" responce should be willing to read the provided document and learn.
And again - if you don't wish to learn, hire someone to provide tech support.
These terms are identical to those terms that are present within the Tivo service license agreement.
Well, no, they aren't. But lets just say they are for the sake of argument.
Just because an industry decides to go in a certain direction, it doesn't mean it is good for consumers. Alerting consumers to less-than-favorable policies is the first step to putting pressures on companies (and the industry) to change those policies.
Granted, consumers have to give a damn. In most consumer markets, issues like this are lost on the masses of that market. However, PVRs still remain an early-adopter market. Early adopters tend to be more tech-savvy and an issue like this may register to that market.
And you need to pay $5 dollars a month to Transgaming for it.
Just to clarify... it costs $5/mo (min of 3 months) for membership. Membership allows you to download the latest binaries (as many times as you want). Membership also provides tech support and voting for what games should be targeted for future development.
If you cancel your membership, you still have the last binary package you downloaded.
So if I understand your complaint correctly... you would avoid the entire article since 2 out of 23 images (not including banners, etc) depict a shapely female backside form in a thong bikini. This is because such an image meets your definition of "pornography". And futhermore you are repulsed by the idea because you will find these images addictive and damaging to your brain.
You have serious personal control issues.
It might be worth noting that the images might meet the dictionary definition of "pornography" depending on your personal reaction to the image. But they hardly meet the usual type of content associated with the term.
I found the included imagery... imature. But it was very easy to scroll past the two images and pay attention to the real content of the site: a fish aquarium in a computer case.
But hey - I have that kind of self control. Maybe you don't.
As someone who's worked for a Fortune 10 ("enterprise") company, let me assure you of one thing:
Management never consults their IT techies.
Yes and no. I've been in environments when it was a pleasant shock for management to consult their technical help. And I've worked for a major corp with a strong tech-culture and had to help mop up the mess when a non-technical business unit made infrastructure decissions on a technical project.
And if they release the binaries, they can not restrict the person who receives those binaries from re-releasing them. This is what the GPL guarantees. That if you get a copy of the code, either in source or binary form, you can give it away. Which means that per-seat licensing of binary GPL'd code is a violation of the GPL since it prevents the receiver of the code from re-releasing that code.
Can one tell the difference between two binaries compiled at different times / locations if they come from the same source code? In any case, just to be on the up-and-up, someone will take the United Linux provided GPL'd code and compile it. Binaries will be released. Cheapbytes will have an "Untied Linux" offering right next to their "Pink Tie Linux" CD set.
Of course, this is assuming that it all hinges on GPL'd software. Caldera's angle has always been licensing proprietary software with their distribution. THAT can be licensed on a per-seat basis. If that's their angle - will all United Linux players have the same proprietary software?
Notice that Ransom Love's description of United Linux is that of a common code base:
Each distribution will have one common CD that has a common kernel, libraries and installation routine. This base system will be compatible so that independent software vendors can better support Linux with their applications.
It wouldn't be a suprise if, for example, the installer common to all United Linux distros was proprietary. Or if individual distros contained their own software (available for cross-licensing) that were proprietary.
One final thing to ponder:
9. Will users be able to download free versions of UnitedLinux for non-commercial uses, similar to how Linux is freely available today?
Yes, UnitedLinux sources will be made available for free download as soon as version 1 is released.
This comes from the United Linux FAQ. Expect proprietary code with source. And expect some debate over its license.
All United Linux are saying, like Caldera did, is that the binaries will have per-seat licensing.
Are they? Is this licencing model something that all members of the United Linux front will follow? Or is this Ransom Love stating how Caldera will sell its own version of United Linux?
However, Caldera continues to overlook the reason that RedHat became the de-facto standard. That reason is simple. They wrote cool software and gave it away.
Lets not forget that Redhat was the first strong push for a commercial Linux distribution. Redhat wasn't just for hobbiests and covert server projects. They went after the IT Industry as mainstream product. Hiring leaders in various Linux development projects and funding further development is a bonus (and certainly worthy of praise).
Ransom Love made one good point in the interview. Linux players have to come up with ways to differentiate themselves. This, despite the fact that they all pretty much work with the same pool of software. I have a hard time believing that Redhat wasn't included in the United Linux front because of time constraints. Redhat doesn't need United Linux because Redhat IS the competition.
So how does Caldera and other United Linux players differentiate themselves from the competition (much less each other)? They have to offer something Redhat doesn't. Let's look at some of their points:
Standards - Redhat is already a defacto business standard. There's been talk of the LSB and Redhat has said they would be releasing a distro based on it. Soon. Perhapse sooner now. United Linux might be able to claim a truer standard than Redhat. Time will tell.
Software - same pool of software for both Redhat and United Linux. Free or proprietary.
Support - Caldera (and I suppose other United Linux offerings) has mentioned 12 months of support with their software package. Redhat comes with limited support on the boxed set, but also sells support packages no matter how you got your distribution.
Price - United Linux will be targeted at the enterprise with an enterprise price tag. Redhat is available with enterprise features and price tag. It is available at a desktop price. It is available at a "Pink Tie" price from Cheapbytes. It can be downloaded from any one of a worldwide network of mirrors.
Caldera and its United Linux brethen look like they're running in to the same problem they had before. This tactic provides little differentiation. And if United Linux members hold to the same marketing plan that Ransom Love mentiones - holding on to binaries - they may find themselves at a loss. Imagine the conversation between management and their IT techies.
"Uhhhh. Yea. We've decided to go ahead with this Linux thing. But there is so much choice, we're not sure what to consider. There seems to be two solid players here: Redhat and United Linux. Which one will work?"
"Redhat. I downloaded the latest version last week and put it up on our dev machine. Its been solid - a lot better then the dot-oh release. And I've been running the last release and development updates for the last few months. Its good."
Management nods their heads and goes back to look up support contracts with Redhat.
Caldera bought Webmin and changed its license to BSD (I believe it was free for Linux only, but I forget the exact details). One would think Caldera continued to develop Webmin at that point, but I'm not sure if they released their work back to the public (with Ransom Love's comments in the past, it is really questionable). Redhat certainly didn't write Webmin though.
RPM. What do you suppose that stands for? Not Caldera Package Manager, for sure. Could it be... Redhat?
Well, yea. You can push the distro time-line back quite a ways (my first Linux distro was Slackware and I remember RedHat being something new and novel). But...
RedHat was the first to really push Linux in directions that the IT Industry would expect of a commercial OS product. Glossy packages. Big thick bound books. The full tech support gambit. Certifications. Etc, etc.
Granted - it all wasn't there at day 1 of RedHat. But the rampup time was fairly quick and, at least to my recollection, it was the first push for Linux from the techie desktops and covert server projects to the mainstream. And it had the banner and was in full charge before SuSE and Mandrake jumped in to the fray (not to discredit either).
apple enters the market with a great idea, way ahead of everyone else, then charges an arm and a leg and flops.
The real kicker to this is that the price point they picked was, largely, aribtrary. The industry analysis I've read on this suggests that the actual production cost gave Apple a lot of leeway on price. They picked a price point they thought would market well. They were horribly wrong. D'oh.
Apple is doing cool stuff, though. Slick hardware design and OSX has me poking at the Apple display for the first time since... ohhh... Apple II days.
is it me, or do the Shuttle PC's get a lot of free advertising on slashdot. more so than any dell, ibm, etc. equipment.
I must of missed Dell's press release for a barebones, stylish, and quiet compact system suitable for such geeky projects as a mobile LAN party box or multimedia / PVR system. Care to post a link?
Re:This is a wonderful thing..
on
United Linux is Here
·
· Score: 5, Informative
2) This gives everyone more competition. If I remember correctly, SUSE or Mandrake was THE Linux distro to get. Red Hat came along and pushed the bar. Whether or not you like Red Hat or not, they have made a major impact in the Linux world.
I completely agree that competition is good. Standards aren't proven to be good by decree; they must be proven in a trial by fire. They must compete with other ideas and (marketing and politics aside) rise on their own merrits.
However, I think you're a bit off on your distro timeline. I seem to remember RedHat being the first push towards a commercial Linux distro. SUSE came down the line. Mandrake was a test of the Linux fabric - it started pretty much as RedHat with KDE (quickly differentiating itself with its own install apps, diskdrake, and other nifty contributions to the community). But RedHat was there first pushing in to the US market with business components the IT Industry has been used to seeing from a commercial OS vendor.
Here is the simple truth, I was once a tech. I loved learning all the arcane commands and symbols, but I don't have time for that anymore. I need stuff that helps me work faster, better and *simpler*. That is what Windows *does* have in its favor currently. Most things are just a few dialog boxes away and I'm done. I'm waiting for that in Linux and I hope with a decree that they are going after business that they will realize that business isn't interested in the arcane. They want simple, fast solutions to common tasks.
I am still a techie. I came from a Windows world and found myself quickly adapting to Unix when an opportunity presented itself. And I discovered that, for the most part, I preferred Unix. I found a degree of simplicity and power in "man foo.cfg" and "vi foo.cfg" that didn't exist in "clicky-clicky". But there was some learning curve and a suprising amount of philosophical change between the two. It comes to no suprise to me that Unix and Windows admins seem to talk two different languages and come from different cultures. Because they do.
Having said all that... sometimes a GUI is a nice tool to have. HP/UX and Solaris both had config GUIs that were nice to quickly churn out some common admin task (such as adding a couple users). But they were compatible with the old editing flat text files.
Linux offers that now - although different distros tend to favor different admin GUIs.
Ahhh! The 'i' stands for incapacitated! OK. The name makes more sense now.;)
Re:Use copyright to maintain name recognition
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 2
...Transgaming should simple use their copyright on the name WineX...
If I understand the law correctly, copyright does not protect a business or product name. What you're looking for is "trademark". But otherwise, the idea is good. Enforce the trademark and insist derivitive compilations use a name other than "winex".
Re:Transgaming isn't bad.
on
Debian And WineX
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Cool you do that while I play Counter Strike on my box thanks to Transgaming
Cool. You do that. Everyone else will continue to play Counter Strike using WINE like they did well before Transgaming.
Boy it would have sucked if his batteries had just happened to die. Oops, got to go resync before you can be treated.
Of course, he would have had to rely on more traditional methods to track down the info (including his insurance card in his wallet). But in this case all the data was at hand without the searching and phonecalls. Now the battery issue still exists but is rather easy to manage with at least a bit of forethought. It also helps to use a PDA that is as power-efficient as Palm devices are.
Reading on a PDA just plain sucks. The page just isn't big enough.
This is a common enough criticism. To each their own. I find the screen comfortable enough to read with (and the backlight is nice at times - at the expense of battery life). I will actually forget I'm reading from a PDA. But I still like books and am not about to give them up - even if I wish to duplicate my library to electronic form. PDAs may need to improve in this aspect (I wouldn't mind), but I already find it suitable for my use. And so do many others, it seems.
The other use you mention are also easily done with a simple small spiral notebook.
See my other reply. In some ways a spiral notebook will surfice. But paper doesn't quite match the convenience, manageability, searchability, and ease-of-backup offered by a PDA used in the propper manner.
I was an early adopter and I've had three PDA's. A PDA is something you don't realize you don't need until you leave it at home...
I occasionally decide to not pick up my PDA as I head out the door - or I simply forget. It is those times that I often miss it. I'll need a phone number, or want to jot down a note, or get stuck waiting somewhere when a few passages of a book or a game of Risk would help time pass.
I'm an early adopter and I've had ONE PDA - a Palm Pilot Pro (although I really, really should get something with more memory - and the ability to run modern apps).:)
I have gone from being almost fanatical about having the device at hand and using it at any excuse to almost abandoning it. I've found myself giving up some tasks to a laptop. And I've found that some of those tasks are still better on a PDA. The device has lost its gee-wiz charm where I was SSH-ing in to my desktop just because I could. Now it is a trusted, useful tool that does the appropriate tasks well.
He bought a memo pad, wrote "Nathan's PDA" on it with a Sharpie (a anticapitalist tool in this case), and began jotting down notes in it. I never heard about how great Palm Pilots were after that.
We each use tools that we most feel comfortable with. Even though I like my Pilot, sometimes I'm still using little sticky notes - mainly because I like pen and paper (although I often regret doing so as some tidbit of info is now floating around my desk somewhere). My wife uses a small notepad in much the same way as I use my PDA - notes, contacts, grocery lists, calendar, etc (though she does eye the PDA display at the local tech store).
But there are a few things to consider before we shrug off a PDA as an overpriced notebook. Collecting and storing data is the main strongpoint to a good PDA, but its small amount of computing power pushes it beyond a notebook.
The search function has been great. Sure, you can flip around a notebook looking for a tidbit of data. But my PDA's search is very quick. It makes short work out of hundreds of entries in several different database / formats.
PDA memory tends to outpace a notebook of the same size / convenience. Not only can I add data at wonton abandon, but if I keep up a regiment of syncing with my desktop - that data is backed up on a regular schedule (and can even be input by a much more comfortable keyboard or copy&paste action). Furthermore, that larger capacity allows one to tote around large amounts of data like dictionaries and e-books with no additional inconvenience (try that with your favorite paperback novel and notepad).
There are tasks that computing alone makes possible. I store account information encrypted with 128bit IDEA. I also have a few applications that kill time when the novel just doesn't quite work out (variations of Risk and Reversi to name two).
Sure, not everyone will find a PDA to their liking. And there were certainly simular devices before the PDA (consider Franklin who's pricy organizer products and systems now offer variations that include Franklin PDA applications and a compartment for a PDA). But nonetheless, PDAs are considerably more usefull than their critics often credit them to be.
The PDA form factor allows for much more mobility than a laptop (while a PDA does not offer the right form factor for the same computing tasks as a laptop). This mobility allows data to be with you even when you hadn't planned on it. Picking up the PDA and taking it wherever you go requires, more or less, no thought. A few examples:
A friend of mine was on vacation when his daughter got bitten by a dog. They rushed to the hospital. All his contact and insurance information was at hand in the PDA he always took with him wherever he went.
I often load up an e-book in my PDA. Whenever I'm stuck waiting for something, I have something interesting to read.
Whenever I want to jot down a note on a sticky, I go ahead and use the notepad on my 'ole trusty Pilot. Its amazing how many times I suddenly need a phone number I didn't expect to use again, or a set of switches for a command, or maybe and IP address. If the data was on a sticky note, it would be lost on a desk somewhere or in the trash. A quick search on my Palm digs up the "disposible" information quickly.
Of course, jotting down contact info whenever I find it the first time in the address book has proved invaluable almost as often as the note feature.
I jot items in my HandyShop shopping list as I think of them. When it comes time to run to the store, I don't have that nagging "forgot something" feeling (which often means you're going to remember what you forgot sometimes after returning home).
A PDA is one of those things you don't need until you've got one. Then you can't live without it.
"proprietary, closed technology best bennifits the producers of that technology. "
What is wrong with that ?
Seriously, what is wrong with a company benefiting from a product they have created and are trying to sell ?
There is nothing wrong with a company profiting from its work. A company should be well rewarded when it produces a great product and/or useful service. The problem is when a product/service benefits the vendor at the expense of the customer. Which leads us to our next point...
"And sometimes that bennifit comes at the expense of their customers"
This is what's called a free market.
People can make their own calls and select software that will benefit them - free or not.
The only "industry" where it can be expected that profit comes at the expense of the customer is that of thieves and con-men. Laws aside, it is also a "free market" when it comes to falling for a scam. The best way to avoid this is information; being educated in the issues enough to realize when something is truly of benefit to oneself and ones employer. Buyer beware.
For a free market to work, choice must exist. And part of that choice is an informed consumer. The IT consumer should know the real performance of products and issues around the infrastructure (from software to protocols to data formats) they are considering. Fortunately for the consumer, there has been an impressive push toward open architecture; a push that benefits the consumer with more choice and competition. Unfortunately, these issues are often mared by non-arguments over zealotry and profit.
In the end, consumers will make their own choices. We can only hope that these choices will reward businesses that provide truly valuable technology and not simply a method to corral customers in to an inexcapable cycle of guaranteed future earnings.
...you might need to offend some GPL/FSF zealot's idea of how you should operate your computer.
Its a good point. In today's environment, one often has to make trade offs with what technology works the best. However, the concern for Freedom shouldn't be only the concern of zealots.
The IT industry is full of examples; proprietary, closed technology best bennifits the producers of that technology. And sometimes that bennifit comes at the expense of their customers - those who are using / implementing that technology. Which... oddly enough... affects the cost of that infrastructure.
Freedom is not simply about cost. It is about end users and businesses being able to choose solutions that best fit their needs. And the ability to change and shift that infrastructure as needed. This task is only complicated when a vendor's business-plan-driven incompatability has to be accounted for.
It is still pretty common to find that one's infrastructure will consist of Free and proprietary solutions. But it is still a very good idea to be aware of which are which and what limitations are involved with each.
I would hazard a guess because it is the "Desktop Professional". This package is targeted at the business. After all, how many home users do you know that need Evolution connector so they can interact with an Exchange server?
StarOffice's new pricing structure is plainly aimed at the corporate environment. Charging something for the package sets off less alarms within business culture (where "free" spooks horses). The features (functionality and various collections of data) available in StarOffice but not OpenOffice also have more value to businesses than your average techie/home user (although I'm sure the OO folk would welcome some Free clipart).
While OpenOffice is darn good, and also available via Ximian, StarOffice is a better fit for the Desktop Professional market.
this is why capitalism/the free market is not the most efficient way to advance technology.
Actually, no. Its got less to do with capitalism, socialism, and government agencies than it does the cost of infrastructure and infrastructure design.
For example, lets look at South Africa and its telecommunications infrastructure. The phone company is a government agency. Traditional phone service is antiquated, expensive, and tends to take months to have installed. Private enterprise entered the area with mobile phone service. Now, mobile phones are very common and land-line service is very rare.
Now that I think about it... I'm curious as to the makeup of the Japanese infrastructure. Is it a more advanced infrastructure because of the popular culture demand for new technology? Or is it because these newer networks are standard throughout much of the rest of the world? Or is there another reason?
Slashdot Mirror
First off - I have to admit that within IT circles, there are those who wrongly assume hording information makes that information valuable (giving out information makes YOU valuable as the source of knowledge). It has to be happening in IRC channels too. But that doesn't mean it is ALWAYS happening.
I, too, occasionally step in to Linux channels on various IRC networks. Usually as a last resort (Google and Google Groups / Usenet tend to unearth far more answers). Quite often there is nobody there to help me with my particular problem - being polite and patient helps. But that is lost on some.
Every time I enter one of these channels, there is always someone who pops in, blurts out a question, and then complains or becomes obnoxious if there are no forthcoming answers. These people seem to be under a mistaken assumption that those who attend such channels owe them answers.
Those who wish to have a guarenteed level of service should install the distro of their choice and promptly purchase a tech support contract (if they didn't get one with a purchase box set, etc).
One final comment. "RTFM" is, in fact, a valid responce... with qualifiers. Those who say "RTFM" should also provide a URL, file path, or at least a document tittle. Those who recieve a proper "RTFM" responce should be willing to read the provided document and learn.
And again - if you don't wish to learn, hire someone to provide tech support.
Well, no, they aren't. But lets just say they are for the sake of argument.
Just because an industry decides to go in a certain direction, it doesn't mean it is good for consumers. Alerting consumers to less-than-favorable policies is the first step to putting pressures on companies (and the industry) to change those policies.
Granted, consumers have to give a damn. In most consumer markets, issues like this are lost on the masses of that market. However, PVRs still remain an early-adopter market. Early adopters tend to be more tech-savvy and an issue like this may register to that market.
Just to clarify... it costs $5/mo (min of 3 months) for membership. Membership allows you to download the latest binaries (as many times as you want). Membership also provides tech support and voting for what games should be targeted for future development.
If you cancel your membership, you still have the last binary package you downloaded.
You have serious personal control issues.
It might be worth noting that the images might meet the dictionary definition of "pornography" depending on your personal reaction to the image. But they hardly meet the usual type of content associated with the term.
I found the included imagery... imature. But it was very easy to scroll past the two images and pay attention to the real content of the site: a fish aquarium in a computer case.
But hey - I have that kind of self control. Maybe you don't.
Yes and no. I've been in environments when it was a pleasant shock for management to consult their technical help. And I've worked for a major corp with a strong tech-culture and had to help mop up the mess when a non-technical business unit made infrastructure decissions on a technical project.
Can one tell the difference between two binaries compiled at different times / locations if they come from the same source code? In any case, just to be on the up-and-up, someone will take the United Linux provided GPL'd code and compile it. Binaries will be released. Cheapbytes will have an "Untied Linux" offering right next to their "Pink Tie Linux" CD set.
Of course, this is assuming that it all hinges on GPL'd software. Caldera's angle has always been licensing proprietary software with their distribution. THAT can be licensed on a per-seat basis. If that's their angle - will all United Linux players have the same proprietary software?
Notice that Ransom Love's description of United Linux is that of a common code base:
It wouldn't be a suprise if, for example, the installer common to all United Linux distros was proprietary. Or if individual distros contained their own software (available for cross-licensing) that were proprietary.
One final thing to ponder:
This comes from the United Linux FAQ. Expect proprietary code with source. And expect some debate over its license.
Are they? Is this licencing model something that all members of the United Linux front will follow? Or is this Ransom Love stating how Caldera will sell its own version of United Linux?
Lets not forget that Redhat was the first strong push for a commercial Linux distribution. Redhat wasn't just for hobbiests and covert server projects. They went after the IT Industry as mainstream product. Hiring leaders in various Linux development projects and funding further development is a bonus (and certainly worthy of praise).
Ransom Love made one good point in the interview. Linux players have to come up with ways to differentiate themselves. This, despite the fact that they all pretty much work with the same pool of software. I have a hard time believing that Redhat wasn't included in the United Linux front because of time constraints. Redhat doesn't need United Linux because Redhat IS the competition.
So how does Caldera and other United Linux players differentiate themselves from the competition (much less each other)? They have to offer something Redhat doesn't. Let's look at some of their points:
Caldera and its United Linux brethen look like they're running in to the same problem they had before. This tactic provides little differentiation. And if United Linux members hold to the same marketing plan that Ransom Love mentiones - holding on to binaries - they may find themselves at a loss. Imagine the conversation between management and their IT techies.
"Uhhhh. Yea. We've decided to go ahead with this Linux thing. But there is so much choice, we're not sure what to consider. There seems to be two solid players here: Redhat and United Linux. Which one will work?"
"Redhat. I downloaded the latest version last week and put it up on our dev machine. Its been solid - a lot better then the dot-oh release. And I've been running the last release and development updates for the last few months. Its good."
Management nods their heads and goes back to look up support contracts with Redhat.
RPM. What do you suppose that stands for? Not Caldera Package Manager, for sure. Could it be... Redhat?
Or they're simply creating a market for Cheapbytes' new offering right next to "Pink Tie Linux" - "Untied Linux".
I would expect the president of Hormel's PR department to wax nostalgic and gush about how tastey pink processed meat products are too.
RedHat was the first to really push Linux in directions that the IT Industry would expect of a commercial OS product. Glossy packages. Big thick bound books. The full tech support gambit. Certifications. Etc, etc.
Granted - it all wasn't there at day 1 of RedHat. But the rampup time was fairly quick and, at least to my recollection, it was the first push for Linux from the techie desktops and covert server projects to the mainstream. And it had the banner and was in full charge before SuSE and Mandrake jumped in to the fray (not to discredit either).
The real kicker to this is that the price point they picked was, largely, aribtrary. The industry analysis I've read on this suggests that the actual production cost gave Apple a lot of leeway on price. They picked a price point they thought would market well. They were horribly wrong. D'oh.
Apple is doing cool stuff, though. Slick hardware design and OSX has me poking at the Apple display for the first time since... ohhh... Apple II days.
I must of missed Dell's press release for a barebones, stylish, and quiet compact system suitable for such geeky projects as a mobile LAN party box or multimedia / PVR system. Care to post a link?
I completely agree that competition is good. Standards aren't proven to be good by decree; they must be proven in a trial by fire. They must compete with other ideas and (marketing and politics aside) rise on their own merrits.
However, I think you're a bit off on your distro timeline. I seem to remember RedHat being the first push towards a commercial Linux distro. SUSE came down the line. Mandrake was a test of the Linux fabric - it started pretty much as RedHat with KDE (quickly differentiating itself with its own install apps, diskdrake, and other nifty contributions to the community). But RedHat was there first pushing in to the US market with business components the IT Industry has been used to seeing from a commercial OS vendor.
I am still a techie. I came from a Windows world and found myself quickly adapting to Unix when an opportunity presented itself. And I discovered that, for the most part, I preferred Unix. I found a degree of simplicity and power in "man foo.cfg" and "vi foo.cfg" that didn't exist in "clicky-clicky". But there was some learning curve and a suprising amount of philosophical change between the two. It comes to no suprise to me that Unix and Windows admins seem to talk two different languages and come from different cultures. Because they do.
Having said all that... sometimes a GUI is a nice tool to have. HP/UX and Solaris both had config GUIs that were nice to quickly churn out some common admin task (such as adding a couple users). But they were compatible with the old editing flat text files.
Linux offers that now - although different distros tend to favor different admin GUIs.
Ahhh! The 'i' stands for incapacitated! OK. The name makes more sense now.
If I understand the law correctly, copyright does not protect a business or product name. What you're looking for is "trademark". But otherwise, the idea is good. Enforce the trademark and insist derivitive compilations use a name other than "winex".
Cool. You do that. Everyone else will continue to play Counter Strike using WINE like they did well before Transgaming.
Of course, he would have had to rely on more traditional methods to track down the info (including his insurance card in his wallet). But in this case all the data was at hand without the searching and phonecalls. Now the battery issue still exists but is rather easy to manage with at least a bit of forethought. It also helps to use a PDA that is as power-efficient as Palm devices are.
This is a common enough criticism. To each their own. I find the screen comfortable enough to read with (and the backlight is nice at times - at the expense of battery life). I will actually forget I'm reading from a PDA. But I still like books and am not about to give them up - even if I wish to duplicate my library to electronic form. PDAs may need to improve in this aspect (I wouldn't mind), but I already find it suitable for my use. And so do many others, it seems.
See my other reply. In some ways a spiral notebook will surfice. But paper doesn't quite match the convenience, manageability, searchability, and ease-of-backup offered by a PDA used in the propper manner.
I occasionally decide to not pick up my PDA as I head out the door - or I simply forget. It is those times that I often miss it. I'll need a phone number, or want to jot down a note, or get stuck waiting somewhere when a few passages of a book or a game of Risk would help time pass.
I'm an early adopter and I've had ONE PDA - a Palm Pilot Pro (although I really, really should get something with more memory - and the ability to run modern apps).
I have gone from being almost fanatical about having the device at hand and using it at any excuse to almost abandoning it. I've found myself giving up some tasks to a laptop. And I've found that some of those tasks are still better on a PDA. The device has lost its gee-wiz charm where I was SSH-ing in to my desktop just because I could. Now it is a trusted, useful tool that does the appropriate tasks well.
We each use tools that we most feel comfortable with. Even though I like my Pilot, sometimes I'm still using little sticky notes - mainly because I like pen and paper (although I often regret doing so as some tidbit of info is now floating around my desk somewhere). My wife uses a small notepad in much the same way as I use my PDA - notes, contacts, grocery lists, calendar, etc (though she does eye the PDA display at the local tech store).
But there are a few things to consider before we shrug off a PDA as an overpriced notebook. Collecting and storing data is the main strongpoint to a good PDA, but its small amount of computing power pushes it beyond a notebook.
The search function has been great. Sure, you can flip around a notebook looking for a tidbit of data. But my PDA's search is very quick. It makes short work out of hundreds of entries in several different database / formats.
PDA memory tends to outpace a notebook of the same size / convenience. Not only can I add data at wonton abandon, but if I keep up a regiment of syncing with my desktop - that data is backed up on a regular schedule (and can even be input by a much more comfortable keyboard or copy&paste action). Furthermore, that larger capacity allows one to tote around large amounts of data like dictionaries and e-books with no additional inconvenience (try that with your favorite paperback novel and notepad).
There are tasks that computing alone makes possible. I store account information encrypted with 128bit IDEA. I also have a few applications that kill time when the novel just doesn't quite work out (variations of Risk and Reversi to name two).
Sure, not everyone will find a PDA to their liking. And there were certainly simular devices before the PDA (consider Franklin who's pricy organizer products and systems now offer variations that include Franklin PDA applications and a compartment for a PDA). But nonetheless, PDAs are considerably more usefull than their critics often credit them to be.
A PDA is one of those things you don't need until you've got one. Then you can't live without it.
There is nothing wrong with a company profiting from its work. A company should be well rewarded when it produces a great product and/or useful service. The problem is when a product/service benefits the vendor at the expense of the customer. Which leads us to our next point...
The only "industry" where it can be expected that profit comes at the expense of the customer is that of thieves and con-men. Laws aside, it is also a "free market" when it comes to falling for a scam. The best way to avoid this is information; being educated in the issues enough to realize when something is truly of benefit to oneself and ones employer. Buyer beware.
For a free market to work, choice must exist. And part of that choice is an informed consumer. The IT consumer should know the real performance of products and issues around the infrastructure (from software to protocols to data formats) they are considering. Fortunately for the consumer, there has been an impressive push toward open architecture; a push that benefits the consumer with more choice and competition. Unfortunately, these issues are often mared by non-arguments over zealotry and profit.
In the end, consumers will make their own choices. We can only hope that these choices will reward businesses that provide truly valuable technology and not simply a method to corral customers in to an inexcapable cycle of guaranteed future earnings.
Its a good point. In today's environment, one often has to make trade offs with what technology works the best. However, the concern for Freedom shouldn't be only the concern of zealots.
The IT industry is full of examples; proprietary, closed technology best bennifits the producers of that technology. And sometimes that bennifit comes at the expense of their customers - those who are using / implementing that technology. Which... oddly enough... affects the cost of that infrastructure.
Freedom is not simply about cost. It is about end users and businesses being able to choose solutions that best fit their needs. And the ability to change and shift that infrastructure as needed. This task is only complicated when a vendor's business-plan-driven incompatability has to be accounted for.
It is still pretty common to find that one's infrastructure will consist of Free and proprietary solutions. But it is still a very good idea to be aware of which are which and what limitations are involved with each.
StarOffice's new pricing structure is plainly aimed at the corporate environment. Charging something for the package sets off less alarms within business culture (where "free" spooks horses). The features (functionality and various collections of data) available in StarOffice but not OpenOffice also have more value to businesses than your average techie/home user (although I'm sure the OO folk would welcome some Free clipart).
While OpenOffice is darn good, and also available via Ximian, StarOffice is a better fit for the Desktop Professional market.
Actually, no. Its got less to do with capitalism, socialism, and government agencies than it does the cost of infrastructure and infrastructure design.
For example, lets look at South Africa and its telecommunications infrastructure. The phone company is a government agency. Traditional phone service is antiquated, expensive, and tends to take months to have installed. Private enterprise entered the area with mobile phone service. Now, mobile phones are very common and land-line service is very rare.
Now that I think about it... I'm curious as to the makeup of the Japanese infrastructure. Is it a more advanced infrastructure because of the popular culture demand for new technology? Or is it because these newer networks are standard throughout much of the rest of the world? Or is there another reason?