If a company's success was defined by publicity, as you seem to indicate, then maybe Lindows would have a snowball's chance in hell.
Of course in the grown-up world, success is typically defined by market share. And that's one thing that Robertson, in all of his childish name-game wisdom, doesn't get. And that tells me that he's not the person that will steer Lindows to ANY success, ever. The best thing they could do is sack him and try to start over with a professional at the helm.
This "copyright infringement != stealing" pissing contest is nothing but an attempt to distract readers from the fact that WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THIS, IT'S STILL WRONG!
If you are going to try to justify copyright infringement, fine. But repeatedly pointing out that copyright infringement is not the same as stealing is not an intellectually adequate argument against enforcing copyright law.
Why people would be less inclined to look at an OS called "Linspire" than one called "Lindows"? I think you know the answer to that one. The problem with strawman arguments like yours is that they don't tend to hold together very well.
And while you're at it, do explain to me how ordering Lindows to change their name to something less similar to Microsoft's OS prevent people from taking an interest in competing products.
It's not as simple as just the similarity between the words "Lindows" and "Windows". We're talking about 2 competing products, designed to meet the same customer need, boasting many of the same features. We're also talking about one product with high brand recognition, vs. another simply trying to profit off of the other's brand recognition.
Nevermind whether or not Microsoft owns the rights to the word "windows". It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Lindows was trying to profit off of the popular Windows name. If you don't see that, you are only fooling yourself.
Joe Sixpack goes to Wal-mart to buy an OS upgrade for his computer. He sees "Windows" for $300, and next to it is "Lindows" for (say) $50.
Now Joe Sixpack isn't a stupid man, but he's not familiar with the various OSes available to him. Joe assumes that "Lindows" must just be a lower-cost version of "Windows" (because he simply doesn't have the knowledge to make the right distinction) and is essentially tricked into buying "Lindows" when what he needs is "Windows".
It's easy to dismiss less experienced computer users as "stupid" or "illiterate", but that just tells me you're not willing to confront/admit the real, valid issue at hand here.
This whole story reminded me of an angry child, lashing out at a parent who'd caught him with his hand in the cookie jar. Microsoft rightly (IMHO) went after them when they were called "Lindows" (deliberately deceptive), and all Lindows could respond with was a childish runaround that only succeeded in wasting the courts' time.
Oh, and how does one pronounce "Lin---s" anyway? The first thing Linspire should do to improve their chances is sack their brat of a CEO.
"I don't recall the US constitution saying anything about the right to advertise... "
I also don't recall the US constitution saying anything about the right to download copyrighted works either, but that doesn't seem stop people here from claiming it as a constitutional right.
I would agree that the intent is there, but at least in this user's opinion, most Linux development is done in the spirit of keeping up with/improving on the latest Microsoft offering.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't call that "innovation".
And that's not meant to be a knock against Linux; just an observation that a lot of Linux supporters won't face up to, IMHO.
There are communications monitoring tools that law enforcement has (at least at the federal level) that do not require a warrant for their use. Would the use of such a tool to monitor someone in Connecticut constitute a violation of state law?
If employees are worried that their communications are being monitored, then perhaps they shouldn't be conducting personal communications on company time/resources.
Apparently unless one party is in law enforcement. Do laws like this one apply to communication tracking systems used by law enforcement WITHOUT A WARRANT?
...an operation that cost six million dollars in the '70s would probably run you about $70 Million today. Not sure that's a real viable option for us common folk yet.
Not sure if this was the same thing, but I read a little while ago about a tiny device implanted into the brain (and maybe afflicted organs/appendages?) that could mimic nerve impulses and possibly be used to cure (or at least treat) spinal injuries and neurological diseases like Parkinsons. Anyone know if this is that same thing?
...are for rank amateurs, and there's no two ways about it! They are inelegant and clumsy languages that are only used by unsophisticated, lazy, self-titled "developers" who don't understand Unix as well as they would have us or their employers believe.
There is nothing, and i do mean NOTHING that a real Unix professional can do with Python or Perl that he or she can't do with awk, sed, and grep.
Any argument to the contrary would not only expose your own inadequacies as a Unix programmer, but would also perpetuate the myth that, as Microsoft also argues, bloated, "feature-rich" languages are ideal for business application. I submit that such an argument would be itself an attack on the very concept of open source software.
...but also everyone behind him/her. Doesn't sound as if they've thought very hard about what such a traffic light would actually do. Of course, when was the last time that something originating from California made practical sense?
And what, praytell, makes open-source so much more secure?
You'll come back with something along the lines of "people can look at the code and find vulnerabilities".
But who is going to painstakingly inspect every line of code in every piece of open-source software he/she comes across? How can we trust that they will fix an exploit they find rather than use it themselves?
As embarassing as this is for Cisco, they have people who do nothing but test code. The fact that they let this one pass doesn't take away from the fact that closed-source software by and large undergoes far more thorough testing than open-source, and that's where I'm putting my money until you can prove to me that I should trust the commune over the corporation.
From configuring one existing OS (Linux) to imitate another (Windows) to a name that is at best a cheap knockoff of the Microsoft product, and at worst is intentionally deceptive, Lindows.com has yet to demonstrate a single gram of creativity.
"Let's get the US Government's budget under control and regain the ability to pay for the things we've promised"
...WE haven't promised anything. Politicians looking to coerce votes make these promises on our behalf. Personally, I think a scientific expedition has far more potential to benefit humanity as whole than a bankrupt taxpayer-funded wealth-redistribution ponzi scheme.
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt.45 and a.38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
"Why is it bad if a company tries to make money? If you don't like the damned free service, use another!"
Microsoft is just trying to make money too. So why then do people around here believe Microsoft is EVIL, when they have the choice to simply use something else (like LINUX).
Thank you for helping me illustrate Slashdot duplicity. Around here, some companies with dubious policies that make money are good, but certain other companies with dubious policies that make money are bad.
Like I said yesterday, it's time people stopped thinking of Google as a purely benevolent, community-oriented provider of goodness, and started to think of them as a company out to make money (especially with the impending IPO).
We don't give Microsoft a free pass, and it's time we stopped giving Google the benefit of the doubt. This whole GMail thing REEKS of privacy abuse potential.
"wireless devices, which obviously are not connected to a plug."
With the author pointing out subtle technical details like that, wouldn't this article be more appropriate for a more electronics-savvy audience than Slashdot?
"Can you explain why people living below the poverty line -- who have no tax liability due to our graduated tax system -- still cannot get by without government assistance?"
It's pretty simple, really. Many poor people simply don't live within their means. They waste money on things like satellite TV/digital cable, broadband Internet access, overpriced vehicles, and rack up thousands in credit card debt, and then have the stones to claim that they need taxpayer assistance for their daily sustinance. Of course, they have a very poor role model in the government, which has a similar track record when it comes to responsible spending.
"I expect the customary "they are poor because they're lazy" response, but maybe I'll be surprised."
That's one reason, but not for the majority of poor people.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course in the grown-up world, success is typically defined by market share. And that's one thing that Robertson, in all of his childish name-game wisdom, doesn't get. And that tells me that he's not the person that will steer Lindows to ANY success, ever. The best thing they could do is sack him and try to start over with a professional at the helm.
If you are going to try to justify copyright infringement, fine. But repeatedly pointing out that copyright infringement is not the same as stealing is not an intellectually adequate argument against enforcing copyright law.
And while you're at it, do explain to me how ordering Lindows to change their name to something less similar to Microsoft's OS prevent people from taking an interest in competing products.
Nevermind whether or not Microsoft owns the rights to the word "windows". It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Lindows was trying to profit off of the popular Windows name. If you don't see that, you are only fooling yourself.
Joe Sixpack goes to Wal-mart to buy an OS upgrade for his computer. He sees "Windows" for $300, and next to it is "Lindows" for (say) $50.
Now Joe Sixpack isn't a stupid man, but he's not familiar with the various OSes available to him. Joe assumes that "Lindows" must just be a lower-cost version of "Windows" (because he simply doesn't have the knowledge to make the right distinction) and is essentially tricked into buying "Lindows" when what he needs is "Windows".
It's easy to dismiss less experienced computer users as "stupid" or "illiterate", but that just tells me you're not willing to confront/admit the real, valid issue at hand here.
Oh, and how does one pronounce "Lin---s" anyway? The first thing Linspire should do to improve their chances is sack their brat of a CEO.
I also don't recall the US constitution saying anything about the right to download copyrighted works either, but that doesn't seem stop people here from claiming it as a constitutional right.
AMEN! So now when are Slashdotters going to stop defending copyright infringement as a constitutional rights issue?
Maybe it's just me, but I can't call that "innovation".
And that's not meant to be a knock against Linux; just an observation that a lot of Linux supporters won't face up to, IMHO.
There are communications monitoring tools that law enforcement has (at least at the federal level) that do not require a warrant for their use. Would the use of such a tool to monitor someone in Connecticut constitute a violation of state law?
If employees are worried that their communications are being monitored, then perhaps they shouldn't be conducting personal communications on company time/resources.
Apparently unless one party is in law enforcement. Do laws like this one apply to communication tracking systems used by law enforcement WITHOUT A WARRANT?
...an operation that cost six million dollars in the '70s would probably run you about $70 Million today. Not sure that's a real viable option for us common folk yet.
Not sure if this was the same thing, but I read a little while ago about a tiny device implanted into the brain (and maybe afflicted organs/appendages?) that could mimic nerve impulses and possibly be used to cure (or at least treat) spinal injuries and neurological diseases like Parkinsons. Anyone know if this is that same thing?
...are for rank amateurs, and there's no two ways about it! They are inelegant and clumsy languages that are only used by unsophisticated, lazy, self-titled "developers" who don't understand Unix as well as they would have us or their employers believe.
There is nothing, and i do mean NOTHING that a real Unix professional can do with Python or Perl that he or she can't do with awk, sed, and grep.
Any argument to the contrary would not only expose your own inadequacies as a Unix programmer, but would also perpetuate the myth that, as Microsoft also argues, bloated, "feature-rich" languages are ideal for business application. I submit that such an argument would be itself an attack on the very concept of open source software.
...but also everyone behind him/her. Doesn't sound as if they've thought very hard about what such a traffic light would actually do. Of course, when was the last time that something originating from California made practical sense?
You'll come back with something along the lines of "people can look at the code and find vulnerabilities".
But who is going to painstakingly inspect every line of code in every piece of open-source software he/she comes across? How can we trust that they will fix an exploit they find rather than use it themselves?
As embarassing as this is for Cisco, they have people who do nothing but test code. The fact that they let this one pass doesn't take away from the fact that closed-source software by and large undergoes far more thorough testing than open-source, and that's where I'm putting my money until you can prove to me that I should trust the commune over the corporation.
From configuring one existing OS (Linux) to imitate another (Windows) to a name that is at best a cheap knockoff of the Microsoft product, and at worst is intentionally deceptive, Lindows.com has yet to demonstrate a single gram of creativity.
...WE haven't promised anything. Politicians looking to coerce votes make these promises on our behalf. Personally, I think a scientific expedition has far more potential to benefit humanity as whole than a bankrupt taxpayer-funded wealth-redistribution ponzi scheme.
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
Microsoft is just trying to make money too. So why then do people around here believe Microsoft is EVIL, when they have the choice to simply use something else (like LINUX).
Thank you for helping me illustrate Slashdot duplicity. Around here, some companies with dubious policies that make money are good, but certain other companies with dubious policies that make money are bad.
We don't give Microsoft a free pass, and it's time we stopped giving Google the benefit of the doubt. This whole GMail thing REEKS of privacy abuse potential.
With the author pointing out subtle technical details like that, wouldn't this article be more appropriate for a more electronics-savvy audience than Slashdot?
It's pretty simple, really. Many poor people simply don't live within their means. They waste money on things like satellite TV/digital cable, broadband Internet access, overpriced vehicles, and rack up thousands in credit card debt, and then have the stones to claim that they need taxpayer assistance for their daily sustinance. Of course, they have a very poor role model in the government, which has a similar track record when it comes to responsible spending.
"I expect the customary "they are poor because they're lazy" response, but maybe I'll be surprised."
That's one reason, but not for the majority of poor people.
If by "MS fanboy" you mean someone who points out a double standard for MS vs. other companies, then yes I guess that makes me an MS fanboy.