Really, if they are going to be any good, they will most likely ALREADY know what Linux is and how it works.
If they don't, really, don't bother them with it. It'll just confuse them.
Really, if they are going to be any good, they will most likely ALREADY know what Linux is and how it works.
That's exactly the approach that makes most people who try Linux give up after a very short time. I personally tried it twice and found any problems I encountered making things work had no simple step by step instructions on how to fix.
Install a distro that has a history or commitment to and contributions to linux, such as opensuse or fedora.
Keep in mind that Mark Shuttleworth's goals are not the same as the community at large. He wants to see a return on his $20 million. It's why he hired Windows apologist Matt Asay instead of someone deeply involved in the linux community.
Forget HTML 5 video. Video is only a small portion of HTML 5, but to hear everyone talk, it's like it's THE core.
It's not. And HTML 5 is not a "fresh start." Far from it. All browsers except IE have been capable of using "super-tag syntax" (where you can define and style your own tag names on the fly) for more than half a decade.
By the format in itself is not. It is 100% proprietary and full of patents.
Unlike H.264, the V8 video format is not a standard. It is 100% proprietary and Google owns some (not all) of the patents that rule the format.
So the going from a STANDARD to a PROPRIETARY video format is not an improvement. It is going from bad to worst.
WebM is not a format but a container that is a ripoff from Matroska (mkv).
Except you got your facts wrong - h.264 is also proprietary. Completely, 100% proprietary. As in over 1,000 patents proprietary, and a patent pool licensing scheme.
Apple now is only $55 million behind in gross revenue, and expected to exceed Microsoft this year.
If current trends continue, by the end of the decade Apple might *have* to buy Microsoft to keep it functioning. The move to "cloud computing" threatens Microsoft's twin cash cows of the desktop and office suite, and Microsoft is no longer seen as the "natural choice" for too many people, who have been exposed to so-called "cloud computing" (client-server) via webmail, webdocs, blogs, failbook and twatter.
The problem is that Microsoft simply doesn't have the resources (in terms of programmers) to continue to compete on all fronts; we're seeing that with the recent string of mobile phone failures (KIN, KIN2, WP7), the inability to get a slimmed-down, "tablet-sized" OS out, their historic failure to post a profit solely on their server OS sales (it's combined with "Tools" - "Developers developers developers" for a reason:-), and their rounds of down-sizing... where are they going to get the manpower to compete with everyone else?
By the end of the decade, Microsoft will be an LBO target, and Wall Street will do what the Justice Department didn't - break up Microsoft. It's already worth more in pieces than as one big unit.
If (and it is a big if) Microsoft was succesful in moving just 50% of its enterprise customers to the cloud, their revenue would go up by approximately 400%.
You left out that they would have to convince enterprises to go with THEIR "clould" solution. Self-hosting your own client/server architecture in a data center is dirt cheap nowadays, and doesn't require a license from Microsoft.
That's assuming no new products, no new releases and no increased penetration. Microsoft is growing in the not-so-low double digits year over year. I don't them as stagnant and the industry itself is growing faster than ever.
The industry is changing. There won't ever be a "Year of the linux desktop", but there WILL be constant erosion, the same as there was never a "Year of the Firefox Web Browser", but Firefox somehow became the standard.
Microsoft's growth has slowed down, while the rest of the industry continues to expand. "A rising tide lifts all boats" explains the current situation.
Consider this - Microsoft's server division has never shown a profit. Kind of hard to compete against superior free offerings. So, Microsoft is shafted with the whole "cloud thing" - if it ignores it, it looks like what it is - stuck in the '90s. If it pushes it, it opens the doors for competitors with lower-cost, better solutions to eat their lunch.
Screw-worms were irradiated so that they would be sterile, mate with screw-worms that weren't sterile, and produce no offspring. This as almost 50 years ago. Theidea of using radiation to interrupt the reproductive vectors is not patentable.
There's a concept called "the anonymity of the crowd" that is legally recognized in several countries, including Canada.
The "we can archive anything we want and make it available to anyone at any future date because we have the technology" mentality is anti-social. Kind of defeats the purpose of social networks, don't you think?
No, they're not supposed to "archive our culture". Only parts of it. Twitter is flotsam. Like platform shoes and disco, there are some things we're better off forgetting.
Your argument could be extended to archiving every person's hard drive "to archive our culture." It doesn't work.
Sure, they could archive a few significant ones, but that's already being done.
And once Americans learn that the Europeans, Canadians, and Asians are all refusing to let Facebook exploit their personal data, they're going to want the same rights. Then things get ugly.
Their user base is not 500 million. You can buy facebook followers for as little as 5 per penny. These are not individual users - they're people with many multiple accounts.
What's pushing facebook now is the echo chamber effect - online marketers see other online marketers pushing facebook and think they have to also, to justify their jobs, even though nobody actually cares about whether someone else clicked "Like", or the faces on their face widget or whatever they call it, or how many followers they have, since the more you have the more written diarrhea you have to wade through.
Have you ever sent out a “tweet” on the popular Twitter social media service? Congratulations: Your 140 characters or less will now be housed in the Library of Congress.
That’s right. Every public tweet, ever, since Twitter’s inception in March 2006, will be archived digitally at the Library of Congress. That’s a LOT of tweets, by the way: Twitter processes more than 50 million tweets every day, with the total numbering in the billions.
Kind of sucks, doesn't it, where that drunken tweet ended up?
Almost half of all Canadians live in one of 10 urban areas. between 420,000 and 4.7 million. Almost 1 in 3 live in the Montreal, Toronto, or Vancouver metropolitan regions. You don't see anywhere near this concentration in the top 3 US metropolitan regions
The equivalent US figures are the New York (~20 million), Los Angeles (15 million) and Chicago (10 million) metropolitan areas, which total 45 million - less than 15% of the population.
The skewing of populations into larger urban areas is more apparent when you look at cities over 250,000. Canada has 17, the US, with almost 10 times the population, 85. about half what you'd expect if the levels of urbanization were comparable.
Slashdot Mirror
Really, if they are going to be any good, they will most likely ALREADY know what Linux is and how it works.
If they don't, really, don't bother them with it. It'll just confuse them.
Really, if they are going to be any good, they will most likely ALREADY know what Linux is and how it works.
That's exactly the approach that makes most people who try Linux give up after a very short time. I personally tried it twice and found any problems I encountered making things work had no simple step by step instructions on how to fix.
Simple two-step fix:
Keep in mind that Mark Shuttleworth's goals are not the same as the community at large. He wants to see a return on his $20 million. It's why he hired Windows apologist Matt Asay instead of someone deeply involved in the linux community.
These are the types who will mostly not graduate beyond "I can admin a server because I know where to point and click" anyways.
Even the simplest of tools, like vi or ssh, are pretty much beyond them.
It's not. And HTML 5 is not a "fresh start." Far from it. All browsers except IE have been capable of using "super-tag syntax" (where you can define and style your own tag names on the fly) for more than half a decade.
By the format in itself is not. It is 100% proprietary and full of patents.
Unlike H.264, the V8 video format is not a standard. It is 100% proprietary and Google owns some (not all) of the patents that rule the format.
So the going from a STANDARD to a PROPRIETARY video format is not an improvement. It is going from bad to worst.
WebM is not a format but a container that is a ripoff from Matroska (mkv).
Except you got your facts wrong - h.264 is also proprietary. Completely, 100% proprietary. As in over 1,000 patents proprietary, and a patent pool licensing scheme.
h.264 is encumbered. h.264 is proprietary.
-- Barbara
If current trends continue, by the end of the decade Apple might *have* to buy Microsoft to keep it functioning. The move to "cloud computing" threatens Microsoft's twin cash cows of the desktop and office suite, and Microsoft is no longer seen as the "natural choice" for too many people, who have been exposed to so-called "cloud computing" (client-server) via webmail, webdocs, blogs, failbook and twatter.
The problem is that Microsoft simply doesn't have the resources (in terms of programmers) to continue to compete on all fronts; we're seeing that with the recent string of mobile phone failures (KIN, KIN2, WP7), the inability to get a slimmed-down, "tablet-sized" OS out, their historic failure to post a profit solely on their server OS sales (it's combined with "Tools" - "Developers developers developers" for a reason :-), and their rounds of down-sizing ... where are they going to get the manpower to compete with everyone else?
By the end of the decade, Microsoft will be an LBO target, and Wall Street will do what the Justice Department didn't - break up Microsoft. It's already worth more in pieces than as one big unit.
I guess they use spell-check instead of actually reading the submissions :-)
If (and it is a big if) Microsoft was succesful in moving just 50% of its enterprise customers to the cloud, their revenue would go up by approximately 400%.
You left out that they would have to convince enterprises to go with THEIR "clould" solution. Self-hosting your own client/server architecture in a data center is dirt cheap nowadays, and doesn't require a license from Microsoft.
That's assuming no new products, no new releases and no increased penetration. Microsoft is growing in the not-so-low double digits year over year. I don't them as stagnant and the industry itself is growing faster than ever.
The industry is changing. There won't ever be a "Year of the linux desktop", but there WILL be constant erosion, the same as there was never a "Year of the Firefox Web Browser", but Firefox somehow became the standard.
Microsoft's growth has slowed down, while the rest of the industry continues to expand. "A rising tide lifts all boats" explains the current situation.
Consider this - Microsoft's server division has never shown a profit. Kind of hard to compete against superior free offerings. So, Microsoft is shafted with the whole "cloud thing" - if it ignores it, it looks like what it is - stuck in the '90s. If it pushes it, it opens the doors for competitors with lower-cost, better solutions to eat their lunch.
That will add whole new meanings to being stung by a MS update.
Until the mosquitos switch to "Open-Sores" ...
It's called sickle-cell anemia - and the disease *is* worse than the cure.
Screw-worms were irradiated so that they would be sterile, mate with screw-worms that weren't sterile, and produce no offspring. This as almost 50 years ago. Theidea of using radiation to interrupt the reproductive vectors is not patentable.
They will still have gains overall if they go longer than peak efficiency.
MySpace has developers? What do they do?!
Spend all day keeping their facebook statuses up to date.
Spend all day keeping their linkedin profiles up to date.
FTFY
It was the Gentilly reactor in Quebec. Made the local papers (pre-internet).
The "we can archive anything we want and make it available to anyone at any future date because we have the technology" mentality is anti-social. Kind of defeats the purpose of social networks, don't you think?
And I'm far better at it than you'll ever be :-)
, as you continue to argue correlation equals causation. That's a typical fallacy perpetrated by someone who doesn't understand basic statistics.
... and your falling back on that tired old saying, without presenting ANY evidence to the contrary, is also BS.
Don't bother trying to troll a troll, moron.
Your argument could be extended to archiving every person's hard drive "to archive our culture." It doesn't work.
Sure, they could archive a few significant ones, but that's already being done.
I was a bit shocked myself. Archiving groklaw.net is one thing - but Twitter? That's got to meet the definition of government waste.
And once Americans learn that the Europeans, Canadians, and Asians are all refusing to let Facebook exploit their personal data, they're going to want the same rights. Then things get ugly.
What's pushing facebook now is the echo chamber effect - online marketers see other online marketers pushing facebook and think they have to also, to justify their jobs, even though nobody actually cares about whether someone else clicked "Like", or the faces on their face widget or whatever they call it, or how many followers they have, since the more you have the more written diarrhea you have to wade through.
Have you ever sent out a “tweet” on the popular Twitter social media service? Congratulations: Your 140 characters or less will now be housed in the Library of Congress.
That’s right. Every public tweet, ever, since Twitter’s inception in March 2006, will be archived digitally at the Library of Congress. That’s a LOT of tweets, by the way: Twitter processes more than 50 million tweets every day, with the total numbering in the billions.
Kind of sucks, doesn't it, where that drunken tweet ended up?
-- Barbara
In other words, Facebook is a webified Usenet with update notification via that old-skool email system :-)
Anyone remember Please Rob Me?
Other murder rates (baseball bat, pipe, poison) are comparable.
So guns are the problem.
Also gun ownership rates are per capita, you moron.
The equivalent US figures are the New York (~20 million), Los Angeles (15 million) and Chicago (10 million) metropolitan areas, which total 45 million - less than 15% of the population.
The skewing of populations into larger urban areas is more apparent when you look at cities over 250,000. Canada has 17, the US, with almost 10 times the population, 85. about half what you'd expect if the levels of urbanization were comparable.