The article says they are going to power the comm gear with a Volkswagon Diesel engine and supplemental Solar Cells. Where are they planning to get the oxygen to support running an internal combustion engine at 60,000 feet? I would think that even with compound turbocharging you would be hard pressed to make the power you need, a supercharger would be its own power drainer.
I ran a small consulting business for five years. We did training and also systems integration mostly for law firms.
The setup I used both internally and for customers was to use roaming profiles in NT with the user's home directory residing on the file server. I would set up the office applications to default save into the home directory or a folder under the home directory. I would also set up a "Company" directory where company files were saved. The structure of the company directory would vary based on the customer.
To really get your point across "Upgrade" a couple of PCs with no warning. If the user has not circumvented the environment they just login and have all their stuff - which is the big benefit. After the first couple of users everyone gets with the program quickly.
Then you can just back up your server which you should be doing anyway.
I would look at the feasability of losing the bus and carrying a number of notebook computers with wireless networking. It doesn't give you the actual classroom space but that should be easy to arrange in rural communities - town halls, school cafeterias etc. Terrain becaomes a non-issue as you can carry the ruggedized box of notebooks in whatever make sense. If actual internet access is not available you could provide your own server with cached/mirrored sites for the demonstrations - this would also keep people from going to inappropriate sites.
Hate to double post but it occurs to me that Shared Source could be a killer for Microsoft too. Imagine the fun if anything approaching a significant fragment of GPLed code shows up in the source that Microsoft "shares." Then the FUD becomes true but only for them.
Shared source another tool to kill open source?
on
Mundie Responds
·
· Score: 2
Does anyone remember the concept of "dirty" developers - those that had been exposed to the source code of a competing product - and "clean" developers - those that had been insulated from the source code? So called "clean" developers would work from a set of specifications only, to insure that no intellectual property was inadvertently lifted. With Microsoft "sharing" source code but maintaining all copyright and willing to vigorously defend their intellectual property, what is the risk to open source developers? It seems to me that if an open source developer views any Microsoft source code and then incorporates any similar code or even functionality, he has opened himself up to a Microsoft lawsuit. So is it possible that Shared Source is no more than a strategy to pollute the open source community with proprietary source code?
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Slashdot Mirror
The article says they are going to power the comm gear with a Volkswagon Diesel engine and supplemental Solar Cells. Where are they planning to get the oxygen to support running an internal combustion engine at 60,000 feet? I would think that even with compound turbocharging you would be hard pressed to make the power you need, a supercharger would be its own power drainer.
According to the T-Mobile website it will sync. This looks like just the ticket for my next phone.
I ran a small consulting business for five years. We did training and also systems integration mostly for law firms.
The setup I used both internally and for customers was to use roaming profiles in NT with the user's home directory residing on the file server. I would set up the office applications to default save into the home directory or a folder under the home directory. I would also set up a "Company" directory where company files were saved. The structure of the company directory would vary based on the customer.
To really get your point across "Upgrade" a couple of PCs with no warning. If the user has not circumvented the environment they just login and have all their stuff - which is the big benefit. After the first couple of users everyone gets with the program quickly.
Then you can just back up your server which you should be doing anyway.
I would look at the feasability of losing the bus and carrying a number of notebook computers with wireless networking. It doesn't give you the actual classroom space but that should be easy to arrange in rural communities - town halls, school cafeterias etc. Terrain becaomes a non-issue as you can carry the ruggedized box of notebooks in whatever make sense. If actual internet access is not available you could provide your own server with cached/mirrored sites for the demonstrations - this would also keep people from going to inappropriate sites.
Hate to double post but it occurs to me that Shared Source could be a killer for Microsoft too. Imagine the fun if anything approaching a significant fragment of GPLed code shows up in the source that Microsoft "shares." Then the FUD becomes true but only for them.
Does anyone remember the concept of "dirty" developers - those that had been exposed to the source code of a competing product - and "clean" developers - those that had been insulated from the source code? So called "clean" developers would work from a set of specifications only, to insure that no intellectual property was inadvertently lifted. With Microsoft "sharing" source code but maintaining all copyright and willing to vigorously defend their intellectual property, what is the risk to open source developers? It seems to me that if an open source developer views any Microsoft source code and then incorporates any similar code or even functionality, he has opened himself up to a Microsoft lawsuit. So is it possible that Shared Source is no more than a strategy to pollute the open source community with proprietary source code? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.