So, if Linux is "more secure, faster and easier to manage", why would any company decide to drop this "cheaper solution" in favor of Microsoft's? Why are they saying that it is secure and actually easier to manage? Why do they think that they will cut costs or be better off with Windows than with the free solution?
Probably because MS gave them huge incentives to do so for the purposes of a nice press release and case study.
Same here. We've have 'na' down for months which means 'no' plus dada for me, and just da for dog. These are consistent sounds, so there's definitely an association in her mind.
Places like Pogo are going to need to improve their warranty and support policies if they want to compete against the big players. The person I replaced bought several boxes from Pogo. One had a DVD drive that croaked, so I submitted a warranty claim online. It took a phone call a couple of weeks later to actually get an acknowledgement. Then, weeks passed, and no replacement drive. They claim their vendor dropped the ball on that, so they were shipping one from stock. So it arrives, and they expect the defective one to be returned at my own cost.
Now, I can get a comparable Athlon 64 from HP these days for less money, but when something breaks, I submit an online request, have the part in hand the next day, and they include a prepaid label for return of the defective part.
And now AT&T is working to get legislation through various state governments that would make it easier for them to enter the TV market. Under the banner of 'fairness' they want the state to remove the franchising rules currently in place for cable operators so that they can just jump in and compete.
How is IP a real engine of national economic growth if your manufacturing, support, and increasingly design are done in India and China? It provides benefits to those with significant ownership interest, but doesn't do much to push the ecomony forward.
Its not just Walmart a lot of US made goods are made in China. I'd love to know how you manage to not buy stuff made in china. You must have no electrical goods in your house at all.
You're right. It's very difficult these days to not buy goods made in China. However, since Wal-Mart's tactics are responsible for forcing manufacturing to China, not supporting their company is a good start.
But the idea of regulating the activities of companies like Google in China seems completely backwards. Why don't we want a US-based company making money by selling things in China, but we'll gladly fork over tons of money to them for their goods? If China, Inc. can continue to make a profit, why should they change their behavior when it comes to human rights?
We _are_ a commercial entity that contributes and provides support for several OS projects. In this situation, we've got people from other companies and academic institutions worldwide needing to spend several hours on the phone. If all of these people were in corporate branch offices, then all of us having a VOIP PBX would be swell, but that's not the case. And even so, in the real world, not all companies are going to fork over the money for the latest PBX tech - those systems tend to hang around for a while.
So, given our situation, either one entity would have to pay the cost of a phone conference, with int'l users having to pay LD rates, or everyone could get together with Skype.
So how about the most trivial of trivial tasks in a company - the secretary picking up the boss calls or having a hunt group that circles the support department looking for someone available?
That, and tie-ins to CRM, etc. are all PBX functions. I don't think anyone here has been advocating dumping the PBX for Skype. Think of Skype as more akin to IM than to a telephone replacement.
Now, if you have a fairly large number of employees using Skype and a limited pipe, then sure, you have a concern.
Today we're going to use Skype to participate in a conference call with a bunch of geographically dispersed developers of an Open Source project. We or another entity could tie up our phone lines and use LD time to set up a conference, or someone could pay WebEx or a telco for it. But this way, it doesn't cost anyone anything but a little bandwidth.
I don't find that scary. I don't think you should either. Of, if you do, the actions of the congressional committees should scare you at least as much.
Except that it's the job of Congress to create the laws. As such, the debates that took place during the creation of the law should be a tool in which to help interpret them. The job of the Executive Branch is to implement and enforce the laws. And the Judicial Branch is then supposed to interpret the laws in the case of conflicts.
By using these signing statements by the President, you are now effectively giving the Executive extra power in the law-making process. The statements themselves aren't really an issue, but when you start filling the courts with judges who consider it a valid point for interpretation, you've got a problem.
I suspect in some ways that they have...a lot more of them have things pierced now than in 1986.
But seriously, the out of date stuff would be some information on HIV, STDs, drugs, breast implants, etc. My fear is that without books like this for education, we're going to turn into a nation of the kids from South Park: "I have to find the clitoris" and licking the living room carpet to be lesbians.
This is the same administration that claimed it needed medical records of women who had abortions in order to defend an anti-abortion law in court. And of course one that feels it can tap phones in violation of federal law. The think tanks that define the current Republican agenda are scary as hell.
Know what's scarier? Every bill Bush has signed into law has included "signing notes" where he writes comments about the law, which are frequently the administration's interpretation of it. They then hope to use that language to support their actions later. And Alito is a big supporter of these notes being legitimate. Welcome to a world where the President holds all the power....
Yes, and in this day of the Right's push for abstinence-only education, we're raising a generation of people who don't know a thing. Of course, even before this, sex ed was pretty lame.
I remember as a pre-teen, my then nursing student sister bought my other sister a book called It's Your Body - A Woman's Guide to Gynecology. I frequently swiped it out of curiousity, and learned a great deal, as it thoroughly covered both male and female anatomy, birth control, STDs, etc. including many clinical pictures that will make you scared of STDs forever. When my daughter is old enough, she'll either get this book or something comparable.
A quick look at Amazon shows the book is still out there, but the last revision is 1986, so it's certainly a bit dated in some information.
I mean, I thought he had better taste than that. I've been a Crimson fan for quite some time. I know folks who have studied under Fripp. He strikes me in the third person as very un-windows-user-ish.
Perhaps, but I suspect Fripp saw it as a challenge. You know, Discipline and all that.
I'm wondering if you got that impression from the fact that he despises the major labels? He absolutely hates them for their business practices, but he does actually respect copyrights to the extent that any artist who releases an album on his label retains all right to the song, vs. the standard industry practice.
KC is also very strict about not allowing any recording of their shows.
OK...I screwed up on that. It's merely the rollover rate, not rollover fatality rate.
The fact of the matter is that most rollovers are single-vehicle crashes. It's largely driver behavior that determines whether a particular vehicle will actually roll. The risk of rollover can be actively mitigated by the driver, much like the risk of injury is mitigated by wearing a seat belt and putting the kids in a child seat.
Not certain about that. Probably not, as the problem with most autos is that they have a very low nose, which creates serious leg injuries. Vans and such typically have a taller, flatter nose, which doesn't produce the same kind of injury.
See the changes in the Jaguar XK and newer BMWs to see how the regs are forcing new designs.
Right now, SUV's are excempt from current fuel efficiency laws (that are not very good in the first place, mind you), they are excempt from bumper laws (making SUV's lousy and expensive to fix in even the smallest parking lot accident) and there are no laws governing roll-overs (only tests).
No, they aren't exempt from fuel efficiency laws. Rather, they tend to fall into the truck category for CAFE standards.
As for bumpers, have you seen the various reports that the insurance companies put out regarding bumper repair costs from low-speed crashes? Most car designs are very poor in this respect, as not only do you need to replace a bumper cover, but many other pieces of the car body aren't really protected.
Do you really want a law governing roll-overs? Federal regs have a funny way of doing unexpected things. Remember the truck CAFE standards I mentioned above? Because of the way the regs are, Chrysler gets to claim the PT Cruiser as part of its truck fleet. (The PT Cruiser convertible, OTOH, is part of the car fleet because of the reduction in cargo space.) Besides, the rollover ratings currently provided by NHTSA don't tell you much about real world situations. And one of the cars deemed least likely to rollover actually has one of the highest rollover fatality rates: the Corvette.
Slashdot Mirror
So, if Linux is "more secure, faster and easier to manage", why would any company decide to drop this "cheaper solution" in favor of Microsoft's? Why are they saying that it is secure and actually easier to manage? Why do they think that they will cut costs or be better off with Windows than with the free solution?
Probably because MS gave them huge incentives to do so for the purposes of a nice press release and case study.
Same here. We've have 'na' down for months which means 'no' plus dada for me, and just da for dog. These are consistent sounds, so there's definitely an association in her mind.
That noise you heard was the joke going right over your head...
Places like Pogo are going to need to improve their warranty and support policies if they want to compete against the big players. The person I replaced bought several boxes from Pogo. One had a DVD drive that croaked, so I submitted a warranty claim online. It took a phone call a couple of weeks later to actually get an acknowledgement. Then, weeks passed, and no replacement drive. They claim their vendor dropped the ball on that, so they were shipping one from stock. So it arrives, and they expect the defective one to be returned at my own cost.
Now, I can get a comparable Athlon 64 from HP these days for less money, but when something breaks, I submit an online request, have the part in hand the next day, and they include a prepaid label for return of the defective part.
Why do I need the extra cost and stress?
And now AT&T is working to get legislation through various state governments that would make it easier for them to enter the TV market. Under the banner of 'fairness' they want the state to remove the franchising rules currently in place for cable operators so that they can just jump in and compete.
How is IP a real engine of national economic growth if your manufacturing, support, and increasingly design are done in India and China? It provides benefits to those with significant ownership interest, but doesn't do much to push the ecomony forward.
It was very kind of the newspaper to reprint the Lenovo press release verbatim....
I wonder if they'll get any backlash for requiring them to use a product from a Chinese company though.
The info in TFA far predates the Danish cartoon situation.
Its not just Walmart a lot of US made goods are made in China. I'd love to know how you manage to not buy stuff made in china. You must have no electrical goods in your house at all.
You're right. It's very difficult these days to not buy goods made in China. However, since Wal-Mart's tactics are responsible for forcing manufacturing to China, not supporting their company is a good start.
But the idea of regulating the activities of companies like Google in China seems completely backwards. Why don't we want a US-based company making money by selling things in China, but we'll gladly fork over tons of money to them for their goods? If China, Inc. can continue to make a profit, why should they change their behavior when it comes to human rights?
And IBM/Lenovo is already taking orders on their CoreDuo Thinkpads too.
We _are_ a commercial entity that contributes and provides support for several OS projects. In this situation, we've got people from other companies and academic institutions worldwide needing to spend several hours on the phone. If all of these people were in corporate branch offices, then all of us having a VOIP PBX would be swell, but that's not the case. And even so, in the real world, not all companies are going to fork over the money for the latest PBX tech - those systems tend to hang around for a while.
So, given our situation, either one entity would have to pay the cost of a phone conference, with int'l users having to pay LD rates, or everyone could get together with Skype.
Those also appear to be a different kind of shrimp. Sea Monkeys are brine shrimp.
So how about the most trivial of trivial tasks in a company - the secretary picking up the boss calls or having a hunt group that circles the support department looking for someone available?
That, and tie-ins to CRM, etc. are all PBX functions. I don't think anyone here has been advocating dumping the PBX for Skype. Think of Skype as more akin to IM than to a telephone replacement.
Now, if you have a fairly large number of employees using Skype and a limited pipe, then sure, you have a concern.
Today we're going to use Skype to participate in a conference call with a bunch of geographically dispersed developers of an Open Source project. We or another entity could tie up our phone lines and use LD time to set up a conference, or someone could pay WebEx or a telco for it. But this way, it doesn't cost anyone anything but a little bandwidth.
Considering brine shrimp only have a lifespan of about a year, this sounds, er, fishy.
So Fox News acts like a drug to the right-wingers. Crafty way to get ratings.
I don't find that scary. I don't think you should either. Of, if you do, the actions of the congressional committees should scare you at least as much.
Except that it's the job of Congress to create the laws. As such, the debates that took place during the creation of the law should be a tool in which to help interpret them. The job of the Executive Branch is to implement and enforce the laws. And the Judicial Branch is then supposed to interpret the laws in the case of conflicts.
By using these signing statements by the President, you are now effectively giving the Executive extra power in the law-making process. The statements themselves aren't really an issue, but when you start filling the courts with judges who consider it a valid point for interpretation, you've got a problem.
Heh...good one.. :)
I suspect in some ways that they have...a lot more of them have things pierced now than in 1986.
But seriously, the out of date stuff would be some information on HIV, STDs, drugs, breast implants, etc. My fear is that without books like this for education, we're going to turn into a nation of the kids from South Park: "I have to find the clitoris" and licking the living room carpet to be lesbians.
This is the same administration that claimed it needed medical records of women who had abortions in order to defend an anti-abortion law in court. And of course one that feels it can tap phones in violation of federal law. The think tanks that define the current Republican agenda are scary as hell.
Know what's scarier? Every bill Bush has signed into law has included "signing notes" where he writes comments about the law, which are frequently the administration's interpretation of it. They then hope to use that language to support their actions later. And Alito is a big supporter of these notes being legitimate. Welcome to a world where the President holds all the power....
Yes, and in this day of the Right's push for abstinence-only education, we're raising a generation of people who don't know a thing. Of course, even before this, sex ed was pretty lame.
I remember as a pre-teen, my then nursing student sister bought my other sister a book called It's Your Body - A Woman's Guide to Gynecology. I frequently swiped it out of curiousity, and learned a great deal, as it thoroughly covered both male and female anatomy, birth control, STDs, etc. including many clinical pictures that will make you scared of STDs forever. When my daughter is old enough, she'll either get this book or something comparable.
A quick look at Amazon shows the book is still out there, but the last revision is 1986, so it's certainly a bit dated in some information.
I mean, I thought he had better taste than that. I've been a Crimson fan for quite some time. I know folks who have studied under Fripp. He strikes me in the third person as very un-windows-user-ish.
Perhaps, but I suspect Fripp saw it as a challenge. You know, Discipline and all that.
I'm wondering if you got that impression from the fact that he despises the major labels? He absolutely hates them for their business practices, but he does actually respect copyrights to the extent that any artist who releases an album on his label retains all right to the song, vs. the standard industry practice.
KC is also very strict about not allowing any recording of their shows.
Excellent. Wish I had mod points today....
Just need Elephant Talk to play for any chat program too.
OK...I screwed up on that. It's merely the rollover rate, not rollover fatality rate.
The fact of the matter is that most rollovers are single-vehicle crashes. It's largely driver behavior that determines whether a particular vehicle will actually roll. The risk of rollover can be actively mitigated by the driver, much like the risk of injury is mitigated by wearing a seat belt and putting the kids in a child seat.
No, only black vans... ;-)
Not certain about that. Probably not, as the problem with most autos is that they have a very low nose, which creates serious leg injuries. Vans and such typically have a taller, flatter nose, which doesn't produce the same kind of injury.
See the changes in the Jaguar XK and newer BMWs to see how the regs are forcing new designs.
Right now, SUV's are excempt from current fuel efficiency laws (that are not very good in the first place, mind you), they are excempt from bumper laws (making SUV's lousy and expensive to fix in even the smallest parking lot accident) and there are no laws governing roll-overs (only tests).
No, they aren't exempt from fuel efficiency laws. Rather, they tend to fall into the truck category for CAFE standards.
As for bumpers, have you seen the various reports that the insurance companies put out regarding bumper repair costs from low-speed crashes? Most car designs are very poor in this respect, as not only do you need to replace a bumper cover, but many other pieces of the car body aren't really protected.
Do you really want a law governing roll-overs? Federal regs have a funny way of doing unexpected things. Remember the truck CAFE standards I mentioned above? Because of the way the regs are, Chrysler gets to claim the PT Cruiser as part of its truck fleet. (The PT Cruiser convertible, OTOH, is part of the car fleet because of the reduction in cargo space.) Besides, the rollover ratings currently provided by NHTSA don't tell you much about real world situations. And one of the cars deemed least likely to rollover actually has one of the highest rollover fatality rates: the Corvette.