Is it how the networks operate and how NMAP plays with it? Or is this an NMAP manual? I mean it ain't exactly hard to use. I can't imagine a book on how to use NMAP being more than 50 pages or so...
Of course I haven't read any TFA if there is one...
First, what's your source for this? Some net-news website?
Second, I bought the CPU specifically because I'm not a two-bit lamer. when I say the P4 ALU sucks it isn't because I'm an AMD fanboi like you or whatever, it's because I've benchmarked various designs [G3, Athlon XP-M, AMD64, AMDX2, P4 Prescott and P4 Smithfield] and came to a conclusion.
So yeah, I "supported Intel" in as much as I bought one of their cpu/chipsets just to see what the design can do.
I think we call that "the scientific approach" as opposed to randomly quoting some bs off a website like you have a fucking clue what's going on in the world.
In fact most sites that say there is DRM are around May 26th 2005. The release from Intel on June 5th 2005. Maybe, some rumors got out of hand and people like you helped spread it?
Eitherway it runs my GNU/Linux software just fine. So if there actually is DRM in there it isn't hindering it [the crappy ALU is though].
As an owner of a Pentium D I don't know what you are talking about. It's a 775-pin chip with a i945 [or better] chipset. Nothing that special. It runs x86_64 gentoo linux just fine [as well as all the tools in it], etc...
Maybe you're thinking of... nothing, because you pulled this out of your ass?
Tom
[n.b. the Pentium D does still suck in performance wars against the AMDX2 even with a clock advantage...]
Not disagreeing with the sentiment. I've had to deal with my share of "my god this ain't right" code because for a lot of people simply demonstrating that a function CAN get the right results is enough to call it a day.
The problem is us few folk who actually care to do things right at the start usually get pushed aside from the peeps who want a really quick solution. Of course it usually happens that down the road a proper start ends up saving time and money in the end but management doesn't care about that.
For me the best compliment I get is "it just works". As in people use my libraries [and various programs] and they "just work" as advertised [e.g. documented]. People seem to be surprised that I document stuff too [e.g. I have a manually typed/formated manual in LaTeX as well as doxygen comments] as well.
On my part I do things like make rational design choices [e.g. clear function names, consistent parameter orders, return values, expected behavioural models] because *I* want to use the code. The fact that it helps others [the code is public domain] is purely immaterial.
And I think that's the trick. Most "really crappy" software is written by people who
a) don't know better b) won't be using it themselves in future work [e.g. it works now, I'm done] c) see a)
Like look at things like some kernel modules. They're for the most part horribly written but that's solely because once it works once they think their job is done.
Then you have a host of really buggy pieces of commercial, shareware, freeware and OSS tools that come from people who bite off more than they chew. They come out of college or university without a single successful project under their belts and they assume they have unquestionable knowledge about the nature of the universe.
What's worse is some of these people turn into 50 yr olds with a chip on their shoulders about a golden yesteryear.
If people just wrote code under the working assumption they'd have to see it again one day you'd see more modular, flexible, well documented and thoroughly tested code. Or they're stupid for inventing more work for themselves...
gaim follows the OSS traditional of functional beyond looks. Though with the recent random disconnects I question that.
In general though most "linux tools" [which are usually GNU or OSS tools] are written by users not commercial vendors. They write something as pretty as they need it.
Users expect flashy bullshit because they've been told that that's innovative and "Advanced" and anything else is inferior. This is just like modern gaming. Some games which look really cool *cough* *cough* doom3 *cough* *cough* turn out to be really crappy whereas games like... solitaire have staying power.
I think you missed an important engineering concept known as the "tradeoff". Usually 100% verification of software is just not possible [e.g. prove me your implementation of AES works for EVERY plaintext/key combination]. And bugs are normally not intentional but simply in use cases developers/coders haven't explored.
So while I agree with the sentiment that bug free software is possible this notion that no software [or hardware for that matter] should never have a bug is ludicrous and isn't even reflected by the "real engineers" [e.g. people who build buildings, roads, bridges].
Yeah that's the point. Don't take money to do bad things.
If your employer says "get this ready tommorow or you're fired" you're probably not at a good place anyways. And if enough people held such personal convictions the employer would have no choice.
That said, all too many developers don't do their share of documentation or proper development practices. how many developers write doxygen/javadoc comments? How many developers verify their code? Write use cases at least? etc...
There should be liabilities for software developers. Otherwise what are they worth if any "monkey" can develop software?
I think I was making a different point. Yes, there is an active GBA, PSP and DS devel scene but my point was moreso that of all the console owners out there the people with the facilities to actually pirate games is a low percentage.
I mean I can rent games at blockbuster for 5$, rip the game to my HD and then use my flashcart to play the game whenever I want. I don't because it's not worth the trouble. What I do use my gba carts for [other than programs I write myself] are things like PocketNES.
But the point is if the game is actually worth the money people will buy it over a using a flash or other method usually because of the hassle [e.g. having to program the cart which can be a problem when you're not at home]. I'd rather just pay the 40$ for the GBA cart if the game is any decent.
And from what I can tell that includes the vast majority of portable console owners.
If people want to go out and manufacture UMDs on their own dime, so be it.
Even in the GBA scene most people don't pirate games despite the fact it's very simple. In fact of all the places I've been *I've* been the only person with a flash cart. All the peeps in airports and on trains I've seen have had legit games.
The homebrew scene is just that, hobbyists. When it comes down to it the vast majority of people still go out and buy games.
My V220 won't boot anymore [never hooked it up to the USB] after I deleted the annoying backgrounds/java games/etc off the phone. Me thinks it deleted something more important... I'd rather have simpler phones that are less likely to screw up in this way.
And of course, there are a million "rogers" booths [my provider] in every mall, corner plaza, etc. Except when you go in there their only mission is to sell you NEW PLANS. They don't care about service or maintenance.
Well, maybe this will work for the rush, but I can imagine 5 years from now all these locations will be closed up after people "already have" cell phones.
Because java is a waste of time and effort? Because the device runs MIPS processors with limited memory? ???
If anything they should open the platform up. Not like people are not going to buy things like GTA PSP or whatever just because a tetris clone exists. It would get more people in contact with the PSP which will drive up the demand for it.
If course you have to think outside the box for that...
I don't get the whole bloging scene anyways. There are a LOT of people out there. Most of which I could not care less for. I mean just because you *can* write doesn't mean I want to read it [and for many the same probably applies to me as well].
I'm not saying blogging is bad or should be stopped. I just don't see the hype over it. I mean the fact that a blog business can make millions in revenue just boggles my mind.
People have to learn what "rhetoric" is. Put some perspective on things.
You totally missed the point. The Esso gasoline works in ANY gasoline car. You have a choice between vendors.
If I'm a working professional I have a choice between an improving but often buggy openoffice, using Office, or nothing. I remember the days of Framemaker, ClarisWorks, etc. They were all fairly competent products that are now... well dead.
You can't sit there and tell me that by having msft bundle windows with EVERY PC made on earth and throwing in free trial copies of Office, Money, etc tools they're not trying to hook more people into using THEIR tools. Put it another way, if Microsoft were a real software company and not trying to ruin the world through de-innovation they'd write their tools for every platform they think they see a sustaining market.
Writing tools to prop up an OS is bit a backwards don't you think? I mean the OS is supposed to support the programs you have to run, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
In the grand scheme of things if the only reason people use Windows is because that's where Office runs that's not exactly a sound market is it not? I mean there is no technical reason why Office can't exist for Linux, BSD, whatever else.
And Office itself is a good form of evil. I mean you buy Office, *you* write the documents but then MSFT has the audacity to claim the file format is proprietary and doesn't document it? Who are they to tell you what you can do with your own files? Of course by time people realized this [e.g. early 2000s] it was far too late. And everyone does the msft-centric thing and blame the newcomer. OpenOffice sucks because it can't open my word documents!...
And in your mind you see MSFT as totally innocent. Well let's put this in context. Travel back in time 10 years. Now convince every major PC manufacturer to stop bundling Windows with their new PCs and give the customer the choice. Linux was alive and kicking then, so were some of the BSDs. I imagine had Linux had more users pre-2000 they would have had more developers and more content, etc.
Um that isn't capitalism. Capitalism [or free market] would say you can use the tool with the product of choice. E.g. you can use that gasoline in your Ford, GM, Toyota or whatever car.
Imagine if we had instead of Shell, BP, Petro, Esso, etc distributors tied directly to your car make and series. E.g. this is a "ford taurus" gas station. Now imagine Ford got greedy and bought up 1000s upon 1000s of prime locations to put theses stations in. Sure that's capitalism right? They got a surge of investment dollars, spent them ALL and now they own more than their share of spots to put gas stations.
So far so good.
Now you're in your Toyota Echo [or whatever] because it's the car of choice. You like the car because it meets your needs, fits with your ideals, etc, except now you can't fill it up anywhere. You have a choice of dealing with a hardship of finding stations for your car, or give in and buy the "acceptable" car. Now replace car with computer manufacturer and gas station with OS.
Now suppose the tool of choice *is* Office. You can only use Office though with Windows. Meaning to use your tool you have to buy something you don't want. You can put up with the replacements [good or bad, no comment there] but in the end you're likely to just give in and use Windows.
That isn't capitalism because you're not creating a free market for the OS. By making all your tools for one OS you're effectively locking the public into using it. By leveraging that against manufacturers [e.g. Dell, if you sell Linux desktop boxes the price per license will go up 30%] they effectively prevent change on that front as well. And if you think you're better off with this form of "capitalism" you better make sure you're locked into "the right choices". Because you have nowhere to go from there./rant
Why not? We fork over money for others tools [hint: verilog tools and other sorts of compilers].
You're right, there isn't much money in dime-a-dozen winzip style applications... that's because they're all been written and contributed under GPL to the world.
I think that's a good thing. Frees up businesses to solve *real* problems. I mean honestly, what market does WinRAR or WinZIP address? Compression?... wow archive manager in Gnome does a perfect fine job. Or if you're clever CLI tools are readily available that work perfectly as well...
I think you'd find legit professionals would acquire copies legally. I wouldn't mind running it if it worked natively on my amd64 running gentoo;-)
To somehow suggest that as soon as it hits Linux everyone will pirate it, perhaps you think because all Linux users are criminals??? is just plain stupid.
I imagine they wouldn't give away office for Linux so you could target both sides of the camp... that is if they weren't in the business of monopolizing their shit OS.
Keep in mind that Microsoft was once a SOFTWARE business...:-(
That's a very simple and futile attitude. I mean we can't possibly keep down this road where nothing is done because it's proper but just because the *other guy* will cheat as well. It's easy to point out that change will cost time and money and therefore is a bad idea. We could say that about pretty much all fucked up industries [e.g. fast-food as well]. However, why is that a bad thing?
Imagine 50 years from now, when all your computer related products only come from Intel. Boxed only by Dell, having software only from microsoft, playing media only from the RIAA/MPAA, brought to you only by FedEX, serviced remotely only by BellCo DSL, using power from only one source, etc, etc, etc.
Oh sure, it's easier to make money when you run the competition under. As the only supplier you can charge whatever you want and provide any level of quality you want in return. That's so much easier!
Unfortunately society as a whole will suffer when the lack of diversity hits hard. Sure, Dell gets all its CPUs from one source, but it only takes a small dedicated team to destory a couple fabs then you'll see how great it is. Ok, replace "small dedicated team" with natural disaster. Now you have a company who has by virtue of consistent tactics and marketting locked themselves into one supplier for their product.
Not to mention the whole "advancement of science fostered by the competition of multiple vendors" thingy... By having Dell only stick with Intel, Intel doesn't have much need to create new technologies [e.g. Northwood => Prescott was actually a step back in performance vs. power]. The ONLY people this hurts are the public who now are locked into working on some Intel box that consumes way more power and is less efficient then the rightly available competitor.
I mean I actually own a Smithfield [dual-core 64-bit P4] and an AMDX2. The X2 runs at 600Mhz less than the Smithfield but beats it at all computational tasks I use [compiling, bignum math, data compression], uses less power and has better control over the power [the AMDX2 can throttle the voltage and freq back whereas the 2.8Ghz Smithfield can not].
If the Smithfield is Intels way of "innovating" [as was the Prescott] then we can already see a trend of underperforming, wasteful processors in our future.
And really why should Intel improve? They got Dell to put P4-M processor in laptops for crying out loud! Dell will put anything Intel sells into a box. When you have that ability to hit the market quality goes straight out the window./rant
By saying "superpoop pipelines" shows how immature you are about it. Obviously if someone ELSE is suggesting something it must because they are young and inexperienced.
If Dell sits on 24hr worth of supply MAYBE THAT ISNT A GOOD IDEA?
They're effectively selling the same set of laptops year in and year out [e.g. the 600m, 700m haven't changed in months]. So if they can't budget resources after this many years it's because they suck.
And the whole point is if people like Dell, HP and Gateway [and IBM and Apple and...] gave them a fair fighting chance then they could buy new fabs and up production. Will it be immediately up to the level Intel can pump out? Fuck no. But that's the whole point of progress, it isn't free and the end results can often be very good.
Of course, this requires people who can see the larger picture and not just this quarters revenue figures...
It's one thing to call people like me "young turk" or other stereotypical negative behavioural types but then to sit there yourself and only concern yourself with what's going on within the next week, to base AN ENTIRE INDUSTRY ON THIS, is just plain stupid. There is only so long you can run a business day to day before it falls flat.
I suspect the REAL reasons why Dell is staying with Intel has more to do with the $$$ then production.
Yeah, you don't want to pay for taxes in Cleveland... but I'm sure when you visit you want the roads to be accessible, the police to protect/serve you, the hospitals to be available, etc...
I agree that there is a limit to where taxes can go responsibly but a county isn't exactly a large space... Unless you're a hermit you're likely to visit other counties near where you live... almost like... within your state.
I have no problem paying provincial taxes if it means when I go downtown or even to the country [e.g. Smith falls] that the roads are paved, there are tolls at every corner, etc...
Now, I do have a problem paying taxes so Quebec can get another subsidized failure of a business. I don't care if it creates jobs locally, if the business is a flop [e.g. air canada, bombardier, etc...] it should just die... but that's another story:-)
Slashdot Mirror
How do you write a book on NMAP?
Is it how the networks operate and how NMAP plays with it? Or is this an NMAP manual? I mean it ain't exactly hard to use. I can't imagine a book on how to use NMAP being more than 50 pages or so...
Of course I haven't read any TFA if there is one...
Tom
First, what's your source for this? Some net-news website?
Second, I bought the CPU specifically because I'm not a two-bit lamer. when I say the P4 ALU sucks it isn't because I'm an AMD fanboi like you or whatever, it's because I've benchmarked various designs [G3, Athlon XP-M, AMD64, AMDX2, P4 Prescott and P4 Smithfield] and came to a conclusion.
So yeah, I "supported Intel" in as much as I bought one of their cpu/chipsets just to see what the design can do.
I think we call that "the scientific approach" as opposed to randomly quoting some bs off a website like you have a fucking clue what's going on in the world.
Tom
well it runs gentoo linux just fine. DRM or not. That's the first I've heard of it too. In particular a google search turns up
Intel says there is no DRM.
In fact most sites that say there is DRM are around May 26th 2005. The release from Intel on June 5th 2005. Maybe, some rumors got out of hand and people like you helped spread it?
Eitherway it runs my GNU/Linux software just fine. So if there actually is DRM in there it isn't hindering it [the crappy ALU is though].
Tom
As an owner of a Pentium D I don't know what you are talking about. It's a 775-pin chip with a i945 [or better] chipset. Nothing that special. It runs x86_64 gentoo linux just fine [as well as all the tools in it], etc...
... nothing, because you pulled this out of your ass?
Maybe you're thinking of
Tom
[n.b. the Pentium D does still suck in performance wars against the AMDX2 even with a clock advantage...]
As someone who has seen CNNs "blogspot" ...
BEST RANT EVER.
I mean serious since when are blogs a good source of official news?
Tom
Tell that to my v220 that somehow got smoked.
You know what works well for a cell phone? Proper software development made possible by not budgeting engineer time on frivolous BULLSHIT features.
Tom
Not disagreeing with the sentiment. I've had to deal with my share of "my god this ain't right" code because for a lot of people simply demonstrating that a function CAN get the right results is enough to call it a day.
The problem is us few folk who actually care to do things right at the start usually get pushed aside from the peeps who want a really quick solution. Of course it usually happens that down the road a proper start ends up saving time and money in the end but management doesn't care about that.
For me the best compliment I get is "it just works". As in people use my libraries [and various programs] and they "just work" as advertised [e.g. documented]. People seem to be surprised that I document stuff too [e.g. I have a manually typed/formated manual in LaTeX as well as doxygen comments] as well.
On my part I do things like make rational design choices [e.g. clear function names, consistent parameter orders, return values, expected behavioural models] because *I* want to use the code. The fact that it helps others [the code is public domain] is purely immaterial.
And I think that's the trick. Most "really crappy" software is written by people who
a) don't know better
b) won't be using it themselves in future work [e.g. it works now, I'm done]
c) see a)
Like look at things like some kernel modules. They're for the most part horribly written but that's solely because once it works once they think their job is done.
Then you have a host of really buggy pieces of commercial, shareware, freeware and OSS tools that come from people who bite off more than they chew. They come out of college or university without a single successful project under their belts and they assume they have unquestionable knowledge about the nature of the universe.
What's worse is some of these people turn into 50 yr olds with a chip on their shoulders about a golden yesteryear.
If people just wrote code under the working assumption they'd have to see it again one day you'd see more modular, flexible, well documented and thoroughly tested code. Or they're stupid for inventing more work for themselves...
Tom
gaim follows the OSS traditional of functional beyond looks. Though with the recent random disconnects I question that.
... solitaire have staying power.
In general though most "linux tools" [which are usually GNU or OSS tools] are written by users not commercial vendors. They write something as pretty as they need it.
Users expect flashy bullshit because they've been told that that's innovative and "Advanced" and anything else is inferior. This is just like modern gaming. Some games which look really cool *cough* *cough* doom3 *cough* *cough* turn out to be really crappy whereas games like
Imagine that.
Tom
I think you missed an important engineering concept known as the "tradeoff". Usually 100% verification of software is just not possible [e.g. prove me your implementation of AES works for EVERY plaintext/key combination]. And bugs are normally not intentional but simply in use cases developers/coders haven't explored.
So while I agree with the sentiment that bug free software is possible this notion that no software [or hardware for that matter] should never have a bug is ludicrous and isn't even reflected by the "real engineers" [e.g. people who build buildings, roads, bridges].
Tom
Yeah that's the point. Don't take money to do bad things.
If your employer says "get this ready tommorow or you're fired" you're probably not at a good place anyways. And if enough people held such personal convictions the employer would have no choice.
That said, all too many developers don't do their share of documentation or proper development practices. how many developers write doxygen/javadoc comments? How many developers verify their code? Write use cases at least? etc...
There should be liabilities for software developers. Otherwise what are they worth if any "monkey" can develop software?
Tom
I think I was making a different point. Yes, there is an active GBA, PSP and DS devel scene but my point was moreso that of all the console owners out there the people with the facilities to actually pirate games is a low percentage.
I mean I can rent games at blockbuster for 5$, rip the game to my HD and then use my flashcart to play the game whenever I want. I don't because it's not worth the trouble. What I do use my gba carts for [other than programs I write myself] are things like PocketNES.
But the point is if the game is actually worth the money people will buy it over a using a flash or other method usually because of the hassle [e.g. having to program the cart which can be a problem when you're not at home]. I'd rather just pay the 40$ for the GBA cart if the game is any decent.
And from what I can tell that includes the vast majority of portable console owners.
Tom
Tom
If people want to go out and manufacture UMDs on their own dime, so be it.
Even in the GBA scene most people don't pirate games despite the fact it's very simple. In fact of all the places I've been *I've* been the only person with a flash cart. All the peeps in airports and on trains I've seen have had legit games.
The homebrew scene is just that, hobbyists. When it comes down to it the vast majority of people still go out and buy games.
Tom
Yeah like screwing up the phone.
My V220 won't boot anymore [never hooked it up to the USB] after I deleted the annoying backgrounds/java games/etc off the phone. Me thinks it deleted something more important... I'd rather have simpler phones that are less likely to screw up in this way.
And of course, there are a million "rogers" booths [my provider] in every mall, corner plaza, etc. Except when you go in there their only mission is to sell you NEW PLANS. They don't care about service or maintenance.
Well, maybe this will work for the rush, but I can imagine 5 years from now all these locations will be closed up after people "already have" cell phones.
Tom
Because java is a waste of time and effort? Because the device runs MIPS processors with limited memory? ???
If anything they should open the platform up. Not like people are not going to buy things like GTA PSP or whatever just because a tetris clone exists. It would get more people in contact with the PSP which will drive up the demand for it.
If course you have to think outside the box for that...
Tom
I don't get the whole bloging scene anyways. There are a LOT of people out there. Most of which I could not care less for. I mean just because you *can* write doesn't mean I want to read it [and for many the same probably applies to me as well].
I'm not saying blogging is bad or should be stopped. I just don't see the hype over it. I mean the fact that a blog business can make millions in revenue just boggles my mind.
People have to learn what "rhetoric" is. Put some perspective on things.
Tom
Improve it? I dunno about you but I can find my emails pretty quickly with their search function. I can create and send emails just as easily.
Sure their interface looks nice but is it actually any easier or more productive? Probably not.
More != Better.
Tom
You totally missed the point. The Esso gasoline works in ANY gasoline car. You have a choice between vendors.
... well dead.
...
If I'm a working professional I have a choice between an improving but often buggy openoffice, using Office, or nothing. I remember the days of Framemaker, ClarisWorks, etc. They were all fairly competent products that are now
You can't sit there and tell me that by having msft bundle windows with EVERY PC made on earth and throwing in free trial copies of Office, Money, etc tools they're not trying to hook more people into using THEIR tools. Put it another way, if Microsoft were a real software company and not trying to ruin the world through de-innovation they'd write their tools for every platform they think they see a sustaining market.
Writing tools to prop up an OS is bit a backwards don't you think? I mean the OS is supposed to support the programs you have to run, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
In the grand scheme of things if the only reason people use Windows is because that's where Office runs that's not exactly a sound market is it not? I mean there is no technical reason why Office can't exist for Linux, BSD, whatever else.
And Office itself is a good form of evil. I mean you buy Office, *you* write the documents but then MSFT has the audacity to claim the file format is proprietary and doesn't document it? Who are they to tell you what you can do with your own files? Of course by time people realized this [e.g. early 2000s] it was far too late. And everyone does the msft-centric thing and blame the newcomer. OpenOffice sucks because it can't open my word documents!
And in your mind you see MSFT as totally innocent. Well let's put this in context. Travel back in time 10 years. Now convince every major PC manufacturer to stop bundling Windows with their new PCs and give the customer the choice. Linux was alive and kicking then, so were some of the BSDs. I imagine had Linux had more users pre-2000 they would have had more developers and more content, etc.
Tom
Um that isn't capitalism. Capitalism [or free market] would say you can use the tool with the product of choice. E.g. you can use that gasoline in your Ford, GM, Toyota or whatever car.
/rant
Imagine if we had instead of Shell, BP, Petro, Esso, etc distributors tied directly to your car make and series. E.g. this is a "ford taurus" gas station. Now imagine Ford got greedy and bought up 1000s upon 1000s of prime locations to put theses stations in. Sure that's capitalism right? They got a surge of investment dollars, spent them ALL and now they own more than their share of spots to put gas stations.
So far so good.
Now you're in your Toyota Echo [or whatever] because it's the car of choice. You like the car because it meets your needs, fits with your ideals, etc, except now you can't fill it up anywhere. You have a choice of dealing with a hardship of finding stations for your car, or give in and buy the "acceptable" car. Now replace car with computer manufacturer and gas station with OS.
Now suppose the tool of choice *is* Office. You can only use Office though with Windows. Meaning to use your tool you have to buy something you don't want. You can put up with the replacements [good or bad, no comment there] but in the end you're likely to just give in and use Windows.
That isn't capitalism because you're not creating a free market for the OS. By making all your tools for one OS you're effectively locking the public into using it. By leveraging that against manufacturers [e.g. Dell, if you sell Linux desktop boxes the price per license will go up 30%] they effectively prevent change on that front as well. And if you think you're better off with this form of "capitalism" you better make sure you're locked into "the right choices". Because you have nowhere to go from there.
Why not? We fork over money for others tools [hint: verilog tools and other sorts of compilers].
... that's because they're all been written and contributed under GPL to the world.
... wow archive manager in Gnome does a perfect fine job. Or if you're clever CLI tools are readily available that work perfectly as well...
You're right, there isn't much money in dime-a-dozen winzip style applications
I think that's a good thing. Frees up businesses to solve *real* problems. I mean honestly, what market does WinRAR or WinZIP address? Compression?
Tom
I think you'd find legit professionals would acquire copies legally. I wouldn't mind running it if it worked natively on my amd64 running gentoo ;-)
To somehow suggest that as soon as it hits Linux everyone will pirate it, perhaps you think because all Linux users are criminals??? is just plain stupid.
Tom
Because they could be omnipresent?
... :-(
I imagine they wouldn't give away office for Linux so you could target both sides of the camp... that is if they weren't in the business of monopolizing their shit OS.
Keep in mind that Microsoft was once a SOFTWARE business
Tom
That's a very simple and futile attitude. I mean we can't possibly keep down this road where nothing is done because it's proper but just because the *other guy* will cheat as well. It's easy to point out that change will cost time and money and therefore is a bad idea. We could say that about pretty much all fucked up industries [e.g. fast-food as well]. However, why is that a bad thing?
/rant
Imagine 50 years from now, when all your computer related products only come from Intel. Boxed only by Dell, having software only from microsoft, playing media only from the RIAA/MPAA, brought to you only by FedEX, serviced remotely only by BellCo DSL, using power from only one source, etc, etc, etc.
Oh sure, it's easier to make money when you run the competition under. As the only supplier you can charge whatever you want and provide any level of quality you want in return. That's so much easier!
Unfortunately society as a whole will suffer when the lack of diversity hits hard. Sure, Dell gets all its CPUs from one source, but it only takes a small dedicated team to destory a couple fabs then you'll see how great it is. Ok, replace "small dedicated team" with natural disaster. Now you have a company who has by virtue of consistent tactics and marketting locked themselves into one supplier for their product.
Not to mention the whole "advancement of science fostered by the competition of multiple vendors" thingy... By having Dell only stick with Intel, Intel doesn't have much need to create new technologies [e.g. Northwood => Prescott was actually a step back in performance vs. power]. The ONLY people this hurts are the public who now are locked into working on some Intel box that consumes way more power and is less efficient then the rightly available competitor.
I mean I actually own a Smithfield [dual-core 64-bit P4] and an AMDX2. The X2 runs at 600Mhz less than the Smithfield but beats it at all computational tasks I use [compiling, bignum math, data compression], uses less power and has better control over the power [the AMDX2 can throttle the voltage and freq back whereas the 2.8Ghz Smithfield can not].
If the Smithfield is Intels way of "innovating" [as was the Prescott] then we can already see a trend of underperforming, wasteful processors in our future.
And really why should Intel improve? They got Dell to put P4-M processor in laptops for crying out loud! Dell will put anything Intel sells into a box. When you have that ability to hit the market quality goes straight out the window.
Tom
By saying "superpoop pipelines" shows how immature you are about it. Obviously if someone ELSE is suggesting something it must because they are young and inexperienced.
...] gave them a fair fighting chance then they could buy new fabs and up production. Will it be immediately up to the level Intel can pump out? Fuck no. But that's the whole point of progress, it isn't free and the end results can often be very good.
If Dell sits on 24hr worth of supply MAYBE THAT ISNT A GOOD IDEA?
They're effectively selling the same set of laptops year in and year out [e.g. the 600m, 700m haven't changed in months]. So if they can't budget resources after this many years it's because they suck.
And the whole point is if people like Dell, HP and Gateway [and IBM and Apple and
Of course, this requires people who can see the larger picture and not just this quarters revenue figures...
It's one thing to call people like me "young turk" or other stereotypical negative behavioural types but then to sit there yourself and only concern yourself with what's going on within the next week, to base AN ENTIRE INDUSTRY ON THIS, is just plain stupid. There is only so long you can run a business day to day before it falls flat.
I suspect the REAL reasons why Dell is staying with Intel has more to do with the $$$ then production.
Tom
Move?
Yeah, you don't want to pay for taxes in Cleveland ... but I'm sure when you visit you want the roads to be accessible, the police to protect/serve you, the hospitals to be available, etc...
... almost like ... within your state.
:-)
I agree that there is a limit to where taxes can go responsibly but a county isn't exactly a large space... Unless you're a hermit you're likely to visit other counties near where you live
I have no problem paying provincial taxes if it means when I go downtown or even to the country [e.g. Smith falls] that the roads are paved, there are tolls at every corner, etc...
Now, I do have a problem paying taxes so Quebec can get another subsidized failure of a business. I don't care if it creates jobs locally, if the business is a flop [e.g. air canada, bombardier, etc...] it should just die... but that's another story
Tom