You are completely incorrect in regards to what Centos is doing and how they do it. Red Hat makes their source code to Enterprise linux versions availabel to anyone. The only things not open source are their trademarks and images. Download yourself if you like.
http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/
As for the GPL well version 3 has a section that clarifies this
10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.
Even under GPL 2 the hassle involved in trying to avoid making your source generally available is more hassle then it's worth as there is simply no way to prevent your source code from becoming generally available.
Their increasing profitability even during a recession would provide the evidence. Also in the article Mr. Hobbs NEVER says they are concerned about future profitability. He says the are analyzing trends and concerned about "fairness" So long story short, Hobbs completely supports my argument, and you have to put words in his mouth to attempt to support your argument.
I keep hearing these kind of arguments but reality shows us that contrary to these claims that use of GPL code is growing.
The fact is that companies are used to licensing code and complying with the GPL is trivial compared with many of the other licensing steps that the average company has to comply with.
And if you scratch under the surface there are many more where that came from. Like a bug where Thunderbird wouldn't respect the users preferences in regards to the default text choice in filters. Meaning Thunderbird can not filter forward a mail in plain text. The bug was open for years and only recently was it even addressed.
And here is what the author thinks of updating taken from his own blog
"I can't justify putting any time into creating another draft unless I'm going to earn something back."
http://www.wayner.org/node/55
I'd say this fits exactly the phrase, "Publish or perish." The author in this case has clearly chosen to perish.
All the evidence I've seen shows that d.) is entirely possible.
Time Warner Cable has been making large profits already with the current system and their is no evidence that there is a bandwidth crunch. In fact all the evidence points to bandwidth caps having little or nothing to do with network management and everything to do with a cash grab. Best of all the COO of Time Warner Cable Lendell Hobbs agrees with me.
"Mr. Hobbs tried to strike a balance, saying that while the company is concerned about the cost to maintain its broadband network, investors should not be worried. He said it was "absolutely not" true that Time Warner's profits were being squeezed by the cost of heavy broadband users.
"If you are getting feedback that there is an immediate problem, nothing could be further from the truth," he said."
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/time-warner-cable-profits-on-broadband-are-great-and-will-grow-because-of-caps/
Yeah Baen has really done it right. And their free program lead directly to me making purchases from them. In fact the only digital book purchases I have ever made.
They weren't an optional part of the install unless you used avg_free_stf_*.exe/REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSurf/REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSearch
As far as I could tell even selecting custom installation in the default didn't give you an easy way to disable link scanner. Disabling it from the AVG menu didn't actually stop link scanner from loading and running in the background. It also had the side affect of putting up a warning icon and a messages that said your computer may be unsafe or some such nonsense.
In this case I think a bit of condemnation towards AVG was richly deserved and hardly a knee jerk reaction. And actually they did try to crash the internet. That's what the uproar was all about.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML
You are completely incorrect in regards to what Centos is doing and how they do it. Red Hat makes their source code to Enterprise linux versions availabel to anyone. The only things not open source are their trademarks and images. Download yourself if you like. http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/ As for the GPL well version 3 has a section that clarifies this 10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients. Even under GPL 2 the hassle involved in trying to avoid making your source generally available is more hassle then it's worth as there is simply no way to prevent your source code from becoming generally available.
He did say fully featured. None of those are fully featured in chrome as of yet and currently most of them can't be made fully featured.
Their increasing profitability even during a recession would provide the evidence. Also in the article Mr. Hobbs NEVER says they are concerned about future profitability. He says the are analyzing trends and concerned about "fairness" So long story short, Hobbs completely supports my argument, and you have to put words in his mouth to attempt to support your argument.
Exactly. All the discussions about TV are only relevant if you ignore the fact the Cooperative time-shifting is cheap and easy.
The major ISP's seem to disagree with you. Time Warner's COO Landel Hobbs has said himself that heavy users pose no threat to their profits. "If you are getting feedback that there is an immediate problem, nothing could be further from the truth," http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/time-warner-cable-profits-on-broadband-are-great-and-will-grow-because-of-caps/ Time Warner just reported a 30% increase in earnings http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704302304575213750225569156.html On top of that their bandwidth costs have been steadily decreasing. Seems pretty viable to me
A good place to start is the problematic extensions page http://kb.mozillazine.org/Problematic_extensions
I keep hearing these kind of arguments but reality shows us that contrary to these claims that use of GPL code is growing. The fact is that companies are used to licensing code and complying with the GPL is trivial compared with many of the other licensing steps that the average company has to comply with.
Correct, not about displacement. Big blocks have a greater distance between the cylinders.
It's a small block
And if you scratch under the surface there are many more where that came from. Like a bug where Thunderbird wouldn't respect the users preferences in regards to the default text choice in filters. Meaning Thunderbird can not filter forward a mail in plain text. The bug was open for years and only recently was it even addressed.
Yeah damn those Compaq guys...err Psystar
Allowing any and all devices to run willy nilly on the network would be certain death, even for the best-laid network.
That's the same thing AT&T said to Carterphone back in the day. The more things change...
And here is what the author thinks of updating taken from his own blog "I can't justify putting any time into creating another draft unless I'm going to earn something back." http://www.wayner.org/node/55 I'd say this fits exactly the phrase, "Publish or perish." The author in this case has clearly chosen to perish.
Nermetes Research is nothing more than an ISP funded thinktank. So the results they've come up with took no study. So let's follow the cash trail Nermetes Research http://internetinnovation.org/community/members http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/suckered-by-astroturf_b_73483.html
Collect your $50 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/suckered-by-astroturf_b_73483.html
All the evidence I've seen shows that d.) is entirely possible. Time Warner Cable has been making large profits already with the current system and their is no evidence that there is a bandwidth crunch. In fact all the evidence points to bandwidth caps having little or nothing to do with network management and everything to do with a cash grab. Best of all the COO of Time Warner Cable Lendell Hobbs agrees with me. "Mr. Hobbs tried to strike a balance, saying that while the company is concerned about the cost to maintain its broadband network, investors should not be worried. He said it was "absolutely not" true that Time Warner's profits were being squeezed by the cost of heavy broadband users. "If you are getting feedback that there is an immediate problem, nothing could be further from the truth," he said." http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/time-warner-cable-profits-on-broadband-are-great-and-will-grow-because-of-caps/
IE isn't necessary for FTP. The FTP command works just fine.
Speculative story with no facts shoots down throw away quote in blog. yawn
I know Wired has long since jumped the shark, but with this one they landed in the tank.
Yeah Baen has really done it right. And their free program lead directly to me making purchases from them. In fact the only digital book purchases I have ever made.
I would recommend they name the OS something other than CherryOS
They weren't an optional part of the install unless you used avg_free_stf_*.exe /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSurf /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSearch
As far as I could tell even selecting custom installation in the default didn't give you an easy way to disable link scanner. Disabling it from the AVG menu didn't actually stop link scanner from loading and running in the background. It also had the side affect of putting up a warning icon and a messages that said your computer may be unsafe or some such nonsense.
In this case I think a bit of condemnation towards AVG was richly deserved and hardly a knee jerk reaction. And actually they did try to crash the internet. That's what the uproar was all about.
In my experience NX has always blown away VNC in performance. VNC isn't in the same league performance wise.
Come on mods Why is this modded troll. The parent has concisely given the other side of the story with Blizzard.