It's astonshing how little technicians know about the inner workings of Windows NT, routinely recommending reinstalls for totally fixable problems after their magic utilities fail. Anyway, it's essentially become a bugger-flipping job and the pay is in line with that.
Several benefits MS gets from that include that non-MS apps and customizations get wiped during the reinstall and have to get added back in manually, if there is time and money for that. It also keeps the skill level low enough that the techs will have no choice but to parrot what MS tells them to parrot, rather than reading or, worst of all, comparing to competing products.
Keeping it as a job on par with burger-flipping keeps out the kind of people who would read or analyse what products -- either open or closed source, from a vendor or the net, or a mixture of all of the above -- and recommending the combination which would best meet the customer's needs and save them the most money. Instead, what you get are lay preachers who help spread the gospel of Bill (and all the urban legends in praise of Bill's engineering prowess, philanthropy, and background) and keep the money trickling in...
Granted there are many benefits in a PowerBook, but I've found that the 12" iBook I had got close to 5 hours per charge for me. 14" probably is pushing it as far as the size requirements, but the 12" is a nice size for travel.
If you want battery life then look at the 14" iBook. It's almost as small as the 12", which makes it an excellent travel computer, but the chasis is large enough to take the next sized battery which pushes 6 hours.
On the same note, realise that the BSA is largely financed by and operates for MS.
Articles like that are probably why MS has been trying to knock off Salon for a while by pouring money into Slate. Now that Bill's wife is on the board for the Washington Post, Slate is now financed by the Washington Post though the staff, editors and policy remain unchanged. The Post is footing the bill for MS' mouthpiece, which by the way is now pretty much the sole source of technology news for NPR. You can figure the odds of NPR now covering any topic which MS would find annoying or sensitive.
One of main advantages of IPv6 is that IPSEC is built in. Presumably that would make eaves dropping (aka wiretapping) much more difficult. Many other regions are moving ahead with IPv6, such as China, Japan, Taiwan, and Korea. Yet, with only a few exceptions, the US is holding back.
There could be many other explanations such as a major vendor *cough*MS*cough* having trouble catching up or the same factors that kept NTSC around or blocked the metric system.
And before any trolls start going on about address space, that is the least important, least relevant factor in IPv6 which provides:
new header format, which means less overhead in routers
new efficient and hierarchical addressing and routing infrastructure
stateless and stateful address configuration == portability, no more DHCP
Built in IPsec == end-to-end encryption
Better support for QOS (Quality of service) in the protocol fields
With the latest MS Office XML license, I don't think there's any chance royalties might be required....
Actually, despite a lot of non-committal grunts, that's not announced yet one way or the other even for current versions of MOOX and its current licenses. Obviously MS knows the licenses are going to be scrutinized carefully so the odds of any gotchas being easy to spot are low. I'd be really careful about the wording in the license anyway.
I wouldn't be surprised in the least if MOOX were dependent on something that MS would insist on royalties for.
For example, in the US, MS has thousands of sw patents. One of these is on XML serialization. If the EU decides to cut of its own economic balls so to speak and suddenly allow US-style sw patents, then MS won't have to hold back on litigation and will be able to sue the living daylights out of anyone using XML serialization. Note: that's anyone using XML serialization, not writing code, not developing software, simply using it is enough to warrant a letter from MS asking for royalties. So yes, technically it might be possible that the specification for MOOX could be available royalty free, but then the laundry list of patents MS has filed do require hefty royalties or concessions. MS could then sue users or opponents into oblivion and, technically, still allow MOOX 'royalty-free'.
It is perfectly legal to download copyrighted music if the copyright owner grants you permission. Even in the narrow context of music, many do. The Grateful Dead, with certain conditions, as do many indie bands. But keep in mind that in all countries that have signed onto the Berne convention, everything is copyrighted even those podcasts you listen to. So each and every blog entry, Usenet post, e-mail, or podcast you download is copyrighted. It's up to the owner to decide if you are allowed to and what you are supposed to do with the material once you have it.
So not only is the blanket statement "if you download copyrighted music, you're commiting a crime" wrong, it's wrong in two ways. Copyright infringement is not even a "crime" it is under civil law. However, if nothing is done by us, that may change for the worse.
It is difficult, to be sure, but it is mostly a psychological matter or ideological (Bill Worship).
Just because people are used to the situation, doesn't mean the problem's solved. If you've followed any of the security bulletins for any amount of time you'll notice that trying to keep up with MS' patches, using firewalls, and anti-virus software will only improve your situation a bit. You'll still get hit many ways. e.g. MSIE and Outlook both go through firewalls or they won't work. Instead, moving to software and systems designed for a networked environment is really your only way to reduce maintenance costs, aside from unplugging permanently from the Internet.
Secondly, it's not 1992 any more. Any modern business has thousands,/strong> of documents stored in proprietary formats. Saying "Use OpenOffice and convert it, and pray you never come across a document which is complicated and breaks in the conversion" simply isn't going to fly.
I take it you haven't used different versions of MS Office over the years or tried OpenOffice recently. Moving from one version of MS Office to another, you will lose data or formatting. That applies even to relatively uncomplex spreadsheets and word processing documents. At this point tools like OpenOffice handle older Microsoft formats much better (i.e. more accurately) than MS Office itself. It's certainly much better at restoring MS Office files that have gotten corrupted and can't be opened by MS Office.
You can do batch conversions too, using MS Office.
However, be sure not to fall for the myth of 'rip and replace' Unless you rented your productivity software, you should be able to run both at the same time. That way both are present, first as the new package is phased in, second as the old package is phased out. Again, unless you rent your software you can keep one or two 'recovery' stations around until they wear out just in case they are needed. And, of course, you would have the foresight to retain backup copies of the files in the original format in a read-only archive, just in case.
However, if you're using MS Works for your data, you're still S.O.L., regardless of which other package you choose.
Particularly when you've got accountants who, wanting to do something clever with the financial forecasts, built some honking great thing up out of linking together half a dozen spreadsheets.
Show me the equivalents to:
Adobe Illustrator
Adobe PageMaker
I'll do one better. Here's the real deal and available for non-Windows platforms: Illustrator and PageMaker.
Post the link to the Sage software you are talking about. I'm not familiar with it.
The world hasn't yet fallen into the polar extremes of a choice of MS vs OpenSource, though to hear it from Redmond, you'd think that was the case. There are plenty of options to move off MS without going to Linux or giving up commercial software.
That's the point. Rebuilding PCs shouldn't be necessary. Choose a brand that works. Nuff said.
I mean it should be a technology not a religion. Though if it is so important to choose one specific brand over all others regardless of merit and regardless of the problems and defects, then one has to wonder.
90% or more of business users don't need to hold on to their legacy systems and can easily leave Windows. There are many cost and time effective ways of dealing with the remaining 10%.
If your brand of car had half as many problems as the brand of software in question here, you'd not only never, ever think of buying that brand, and bad mouth it to all friends neighbors colleagues relatives and anyone else you can corner, but you'd probably be all over those lemon laws. Even computer hardware is held to different standards. If a PC maker makes hardware that crashes occasionally, they're subject of a class action suit. What makes Microsoft so excempt? If it's not working, go with another brand. It's how everything else is done.
People going on and on with MS despite all the problems and costs remind me of this one dumb fellow I knew who some my friends worked with. He missed a few days of work because of really bad food poisoning (projectile vomiting and diarhea) which he figure came from the pork entré at a nasty dive none of us would consider eating at. So when he got well, he ate there again, the same dish, just to be sure. Yep. More projectile vomiting and explosive diarhea. Then when he got well again, he ate there again because it tasted good and the waitress was cute. Yep. Yet another round of projectile vomiting and explosive diarhea. IIRC it was another two rounds of that before he learned his lesson about restaurants.
It's been 15 years of different versions of Windows on DOS or Windows on NT (yes it's still the NT kernel) and people still haven't learned their lesson -- and go back again for another helping.
That's a perfect illustration of the problem I was describing.
Networked storage is accessed via ----> the network!
If you can send them a mail you could use the file sever instead faster and more accurately, just drag from one folder to another and drop.
If you have branches in 5 countries, they're going to have local servers anyway. Just set up an extra folder/dropbox/hierarchy for each branch. Each branch can reach the other when it needs to and otherwise keeps stuff local. Usually print sharing is part of the deal: no more inter-branch faxes, just print to the other department's printer or put the document in their drop box and let them print it themselves.
The only problems occur if you are trying to use a server running MS Windows as the file server. That task has to be handled by something professional grade like Samba, Netware or AFS.
I've set up networked storage for many people and more than a handful of units. I've also had to show many people how to use their already installed, full power networked storage which even had it's own icon or folder on their desktop.
The only obstacles I can think of from the user perspective are that it must be too easy. People somehow feel they are doing more work if it's harder than just dropping a file into a folder. Or it could be the old metaphor that the whole world's a nail if all you have is a hammer. Maybe the mail client is the only tool that they're familiar with.
Setting up networked storage with an organized and relevant hierarchy of user and group folders complete with public folders and dropboxes will save your company big time. I've done it before. If you're not already doing it here's how:
Spend a little time each day to find out what tasks involve document sharing and with whom. Identify the early adopters. Set up what you think will work and try to use it your self for a week and match it with your ongoing information gathering. Based on that ask theoretical questions to the early adopters and adjust your model. Have the early adopters try a limited pilot along side whatever they're doing now. Adjust your model, lather, rinse, repeat. When the pilot is looking good, then try a larger pilot in one of the early adopters' departments parallel to whatever they're currently doing. Adjust your model, lather, rinse, repeat. Then when it looks good, work out a schedule with the other departments for them to try it. Once they're comfortable, have them phase out use of the old method. After a few months, you could even disable the old method.
If you need ideas for a basic structure, each person, project and department gets its own home folder. Each home folder gets a dropbox (auth users can insert but not read or anything else), a public folder (auth users can read but nothing else) a shared folder (to which they can authorize others to read, writer, etc.) and every thing else is private.
Assign read, write, edit, and other privileges to groups not individuals. An individual gets privileges through his group (which only he is the member). That makes maintenance easier and helps you be able to test out new configurations or transfer responsibilities as people change roles.
That sounds like a lot, but it's not though some techs may not like the social hacking needed to find out how people are really working (not just how they say they are). And it will either save work, increase productivity or both.
Slashdot has become very main stream, so it's probably good bet that is was a fairly clueless user who made that snide comment. Many actually do not know better. For them e-mail is the only way to send anything at all.
Most don't have access to network storage, web space or other sane ways of transfering files. Most of those that do, don't know how or even know that they do have access. So they end up trying to abuse e-mail with binary attachments instead or resorting to sneakernet for file transfer. Shops running MS in place of some real server OS actually capable of providing networked storage usually are the worst off, because even if networked storage is there on paper, in practice it doesn't work. For it to work the management has to have the foresight to stick with Netware or move to Samba or AFS or something else without a high-pressure sales team.
Binary e-mail attachments should be filtered out at the server level. There's just no excuse for them and their removal would go a long way in getting rid of most Microsoft worms and viruses. I guess the euphamistic term would be 'computer' malware, not Microsoft worms and viruses.
I can't believe Bill Gates' comments regarding the sub $100 laptop. It just proves that all his donations to charity from his huge coffers don't really come from his geniune desire to help people in need, but rather to glorify himself.
Or, just maybe, he thinks fightng AIDS among Africa's orphaned kids fills a tad more urgent need than MITS phantom $100 laptop.
Don't be ridiculous. If 'fighting AIDS' were so important, then he'd be dumping money into preventative measures rather than promoting expensive corrective solutions which do nothing to stem the cause of AIDS, or for that matter, even the spread of AIDS. Further more, these ineffective and expensive methods drain a lot of matching funding out of local regions and pump it all back into the large pharmas that Gate's is heavily invested in.
It probably burns him up to have spent hundreds of millions on PR and have Negroponte steal his limelight with virtually no budget (relatively speaking). Furthermore, it's not just that the open source and open standards on $100 laptop helps break people out of Microsoft's grip, it's also that the publicity breaks the general public out of the mindset of "One Microsoft Way" Simply put, he's probably quite afraid that the public will remember or learn that there are other software and data formats than those provided exclusively by Redmond.
Rebuilding PCs shouldn't be necessary even in a networked environment:
If your applications or operating system can't operate securely in a networked environment with or without a firewall then it shouldn't be using TCP/IP anyway: A virus is only harmless data, unless your system is designed to run it on sight.
Corporate IT has become testing ground for MS unfinished products based on half-baked designs, resulting in
Gates going down in history as the one who made bad engineering acceptable.
Given Microsoft's record in the security area, it's absolutely bizarre that anyone still even considers buying from them. It must be like a cult or something.
What the article seems to be saying is that MS is throwing in the towel and admitting they're out of their league.
Every version and variant of OOo I've tried to use to read Word for Mac documents prior to 6.0 fails miserably. This would be trivial except for the fact that Word 6 was received so poorly by the Mac community that most Mac users never switched until the OS X version came out.
I remember that. A lot of computer labs with Macs back then had a site license for MS Word 5.x and tried to force students to use 6 when it came out. But MS Word 6 for Macintosh blew chunks so bad that students were contantly finding ways to re-install 5.x and finally the admins acquiesced and restored 5.x to the loadset.
I was unable to find a bug report on the bug list requesting the ability to import those files. Though that may be my inability to use the database. Have you tried filing a description of the problem ? If it's not on the list of things to do, it can't be addressed. However, realize that this would mean reverse engineering the old MS formats. MS, despite court orders from courts on both sides of the Atlantic, has not turned over any documentation for its file formats. So it's not a clear cut task.
So until Quicken or MYOB support something other that MS software
Actually Quicken is available for OS X and has been for some time. And since OS X is basically BSD, it's a much smaller move to port to Linux when Intuit decides that the time is right to do so.
So there's nothing in that regard keeping small businesses on Windows, unless they happen to like the extra mainenance.
On the other hand I strongly recommend to people to use OOo at home and with the ever increaseing compatability that OOo has with MS formats, this is not a bad option.
It's also useful for recovering corrupted MS Office files, which you will get eventually. One thing that people tend to forget is that you can install OOo along side MS Office or anything else you may already have. The 'rip and replace' theme is just a bunch of scare mongering from Redmond. Having both means you can swap between them as you like or even just keep one in reserve in case of problems.
OpenDocument is definitely the way to go, especially for spreadsheets. Being a zipped XML file means that you can massage large data sets alternately with a comfortable gui or with home grown perl/python/ruby/whatever scripts.
The formats then become a problem. Since you are already in a posix-oriented shop, you could steer people to Gnumeric, Koffice's Kspread, or OpenOffice/StarSuite's Calc. The latest versions are quite polished and most definitely "people ready".
Since the spread sheets are being used for analysis you get an added advantage being able to easily parse the data with other programs and scripts. OpenDocument is basically zipped XML and, unlike one high profile competitor, is fully documented and can be used without restrictions. Sorry for plugging something as esoteric as a data format, but being able to mix and match between an off the shelf spreadsheet applications and homemade scripts with the same data files has been something long overdue.
Still, whenever I see somebody in a suit, I assume that they've spent time and energy on their appearance that would be better spent on their work. And, conversely, if somebody wants me to conform to a dress code, I assume that they care more about appearance than performance.
Hence this joke from around 1991 on rec.humor.funny about the UniSuit
It seemed as if every bundled package in windows (Outlook express, MSIE, WMP, IIS) had a backdoor to be used by blackhats to mess around with our PC's.
That not only create a whole market for add-ons and other after market corrective tools, but also keeps MS shops far too busy in crisis mode putting out fires to check out competing software.
That's a big disincentive for MS to spend extra time or effort to fix, especially since competitors would receive the most benefit. There are also other interests which stand to gain from MS inaction: not just organized crime benefit from the holes, but also law enforcement and intelligence collection.
Try going back 10, 20 years before the MS plauge and check out the huge quantity and range of companies advertising in every issue. Nowadays, it's down to a handful and that probably gives them more influence, both directly and indirectly, than is healthy or reasonable.
Advertising burns through cash in dot-com style. Cutting the ads back or completely away, would save a big chunk of the budget and allow the company to either reinvest the surplus back into the company, or undercut their competitors on price, or more likely just funnel the surplus in to the pockets of the management. Whichever way, or combination, ads aren't needed as much as MBAs like to think they are. Above a certain quantity or outside a certain time/place/demographic, it's just a waste of company money.
Anybody operating on GoDaddy's scale is doing their own support. Open source beats closed source hands down if you're doing your own support and it's not as if parked domains are a particularly demanding application.
They would become so if they were to try to shoehorn something as inapplicable as Windows into that role.
"everyone" == anyone even using IT for more than three years. Brand recognition cuts both ways. Make a good product and provide good service and that will be your reputation. Fuck things up and that will be your reputation. Either way a company earns its reputation and MS has earned its for being dishoness and unethical and for providing poor service and shoddy products.
Regardless of the reputation, the point is that it is the company itself making these claims. Anyone or any company blowing their own horn is always going to be taken with a grain of salt, even if they have a good reputation.
...
2) Ireland does what its told to by MS and others
This is also why Ireland was behind the EU attempt to introduce software patents.
...
And speaking of software patents, the EU is soliciting input on 'reform' of how it handles patents.
"Views are sought on the patent system in Europe, and what changes if any are needed to improve innovation and competitiveness, growth and employment in the knowledge-based economy.
The theme of 'harmonization' has already been used in previous recent attempts to
bring sw patents into Europe.
Soliciting ideas of how the current EU patent system can be 'improved' will in all likelihood serve as an additional invitation for
pro-sw patent lobbies to bring up the topic.
If only their voice is heard,
then the outcome of any decisions based on that input is not likely to be
useful for anyone planning to use a computer in the EU. sw patents create problems for more than just developers, though the developers are likely to feel the pain first.
Many of the MS apologists posting here are forgetting that the original post is asking about refurbishing PCs for use in charity. While there are many other reasons why Windows and MS products would be undesirable in this context and many pedagogical reasons why it is not necessary or not relevant, the bottom line is that nowadays Windows licenses are not transferable:
Let's refine that. Some are transferable. Some aren't. But without a lot of leg work investigating the provenance of the software and acquiring the official proof of purchase certificates, any and all MS cruft - even the cruft which is supposed to be transferable - will count as being illegally installed.
To reiterate, without the official proof of purchase certificates from MS, the MS software counts as being illegal.
That puts the charity receiving the machines in as much or worse of a bad space than the n00b who put MS on the refurbished machines in the first place.
Did the machines come with the proof of purchase certificates? No? Then that forces a decision to either spend time looking for them or use software which will not lead into legal difficulties.
It's simple return on investment, in this case it's time being invested. Time spent tracking down licenses that doesn't result in acquiring a physical, official proof of purchase certificate is wasted as far as the end result goes. That's time that could have been spent refurbishing more computers or teaching others to do so or teaching others to use them.
The computers make their own mesh network whenever there are two or more near each other. That could work more or less like Fidonet as far as transfering data. However, there's probably going to be a major propagation delay.
One way around that would be to set up a mobile server with several wireless base stations and mount it on whatever reliable vehicle makes regular runs through the area. The post bus, library's bookmobile, health care workers, or others who make regular rounds could carry the server. Major uploads and downloads could be facilitated this way. There was a very successful project called OAUNET in Africa which sent such a bus around and used UUCP. Something like that could be used to supplement the mesh network.
Who cares what Gates says? He was wrong about the WWW, the Internet, and many other major trends, too. His utterances should be restricted to the political or business section of newspapers not waste space in information technology publications.
Slashdot Mirror
Keeping it as a job on par with burger-flipping keeps out the kind of people who would read or analyse what products -- either open or closed source, from a vendor or the net, or a mixture of all of the above -- and recommending the combination which would best meet the customer's needs and save them the most money. Instead, what you get are lay preachers who help spread the gospel of Bill (and all the urban legends in praise of Bill's engineering prowess, philanthropy, and background) and keep the money trickling in...
Granted there are many benefits in a PowerBook, but I've found that the 12" iBook I had got close to 5 hours per charge for me. 14" probably is pushing it as far as the size requirements, but the 12" is a nice size for travel.
If you want battery life then look at the 14" iBook. It's almost as small as the 12", which makes it an excellent travel computer, but the chasis is large enough to take the next sized battery which pushes 6 hours.
Articles like that are probably why MS has been trying to knock off Salon for a while by pouring money into Slate. Now that Bill's wife is on the board for the Washington Post, Slate is now financed by the Washington Post though the staff, editors and policy remain unchanged. The Post is footing the bill for MS' mouthpiece, which by the way is now pretty much the sole source of technology news for NPR. You can figure the odds of NPR now covering any topic which MS would find annoying or sensitive.
There could be many other explanations such as a major vendor *cough*MS*cough* having trouble catching up or the same factors that kept NTSC around or blocked the metric system.
And before any trolls start going on about address space, that is the least important, least relevant factor in IPv6 which provides:
For example, in the US, MS has thousands of sw patents. One of these is on XML serialization. If the EU decides to cut of its own economic balls so to speak and suddenly allow US-style sw patents, then MS won't have to hold back on litigation and will be able to sue the living daylights out of anyone using XML serialization. Note: that's anyone using XML serialization, not writing code, not developing software, simply using it is enough to warrant a letter from MS asking for royalties. So yes, technically it might be possible that the specification for MOOX could be available royalty free, but then the laundry list of patents MS has filed do require hefty royalties or concessions. MS could then sue users or opponents into oblivion and, technically, still allow MOOX 'royalty-free'.
It is perfectly legal to download copyrighted music if the copyright owner grants you permission. Even in the narrow context of music, many do. The Grateful Dead, with certain conditions, as do many indie bands. But keep in mind that in all countries that have signed onto the Berne convention, everything is copyrighted even those podcasts you listen to. So each and every blog entry, Usenet post, e-mail, or podcast you download is copyrighted. It's up to the owner to decide if you are allowed to and what you are supposed to do with the material once you have it.
So not only is the blanket statement "if you download copyrighted music, you're commiting a crime" wrong, it's wrong in two ways. Copyright infringement is not even a "crime" it is under civil law. However, if nothing is done by us, that may change for the worse.
It is difficult, to be sure, but it is mostly a psychological matter or ideological (Bill Worship).
Just because people are used to the situation, doesn't mean the problem's solved. If you've followed any of the security bulletins for any amount of time you'll notice that trying to keep up with MS' patches, using firewalls, and anti-virus software will only improve your situation a bit. You'll still get hit many ways. e.g. MSIE and Outlook both go through firewalls or they won't work. Instead, moving to software and systems designed for a networked environment is really your only way to reduce maintenance costs, aside from unplugging permanently from the Internet.
I take it you haven't used different versions of MS Office over the years or tried OpenOffice recently. Moving from one version of MS Office to another, you will lose data or formatting. That applies even to relatively uncomplex spreadsheets and word processing documents. At this point tools like OpenOffice handle older Microsoft formats much better (i.e. more accurately) than MS Office itself. It's certainly much better at restoring MS Office files that have gotten corrupted and can't be opened by MS Office. You can do batch conversions too, using MS Office.However, be sure not to fall for the myth of 'rip and replace' Unless you rented your productivity software, you should be able to run both at the same time. That way both are present, first as the new package is phased in, second as the old package is phased out. Again, unless you rent your software you can keep one or two 'recovery' stations around until they wear out just in case they are needed. And, of course, you would have the foresight to retain backup copies of the files in the original format in a read-only archive, just in case.
However, if you're using MS Works for your data, you're still S.O.L., regardless of which other package you choose.
I'll do one better. Here's the real deal and available for non-Windows platforms: Illustrator and PageMaker. Post the link to the Sage software you are talking about. I'm not familiar with it. The world hasn't yet fallen into the polar extremes of a choice of MS vs OpenSource, though to hear it from Redmond, you'd think that was the case. There are plenty of options to move off MS without going to Linux or giving up commercial software.I mean it should be a technology not a religion. Though if it is so important to choose one specific brand over all others regardless of merit and regardless of the problems and defects, then one has to wonder.
90% or more of business users don't need to hold on to their legacy systems and can easily leave Windows. There are many cost and time effective ways of dealing with the remaining 10%.
If your brand of car had half as many problems as the brand of software in question here, you'd not only never, ever think of buying that brand, and bad mouth it to all friends neighbors colleagues relatives and anyone else you can corner, but you'd probably be all over those lemon laws. Even computer hardware is held to different standards. If a PC maker makes hardware that crashes occasionally, they're subject of a class action suit. What makes Microsoft so excempt? If it's not working, go with another brand. It's how everything else is done.
People going on and on with MS despite all the problems and costs remind me of this one dumb fellow I knew who some my friends worked with. He missed a few days of work because of really bad food poisoning (projectile vomiting and diarhea) which he figure came from the pork entré at a nasty dive none of us would consider eating at. So when he got well, he ate there again, the same dish, just to be sure. Yep. More projectile vomiting and explosive diarhea. Then when he got well again, he ate there again because it tasted good and the waitress was cute. Yep. Yet another round of projectile vomiting and explosive diarhea. IIRC it was another two rounds of that before he learned his lesson about restaurants.
It's been 15 years of different versions of Windows on DOS or Windows on NT (yes it's still the NT kernel) and people still haven't learned their lesson -- and go back again for another helping.
Networked storage is accessed via ----> the network! If you can send them a mail you could use the file sever instead faster and more accurately, just drag from one folder to another and drop.
If you have branches in 5 countries, they're going to have local servers anyway. Just set up an extra folder/dropbox/hierarchy for each branch. Each branch can reach the other when it needs to and otherwise keeps stuff local. Usually print sharing is part of the deal: no more inter-branch faxes, just print to the other department's printer or put the document in their drop box and let them print it themselves. The only problems occur if you are trying to use a server running MS Windows as the file server. That task has to be handled by something professional grade like Samba, Netware or AFS.
I've set up networked storage for many people and more than a handful of units. I've also had to show many people how to use their already installed, full power networked storage which even had it's own icon or folder on their desktop. The only obstacles I can think of from the user perspective are that it must be too easy. People somehow feel they are doing more work if it's harder than just dropping a file into a folder. Or it could be the old metaphor that the whole world's a nail if all you have is a hammer. Maybe the mail client is the only tool that they're familiar with.
Setting up networked storage with an organized and relevant hierarchy of user and group folders complete with public folders and dropboxes will save your company big time. I've done it before. If you're not already doing it here's how:
Spend a little time each day to find out what tasks involve document sharing and with whom. Identify the early adopters. Set up what you think will work and try to use it your self for a week and match it with your ongoing information gathering. Based on that ask theoretical questions to the early adopters and adjust your model. Have the early adopters try a limited pilot along side whatever they're doing now. Adjust your model, lather, rinse, repeat. When the pilot is looking good, then try a larger pilot in one of the early adopters' departments parallel to whatever they're currently doing. Adjust your model, lather, rinse, repeat. Then when it looks good, work out a schedule with the other departments for them to try it. Once they're comfortable, have them phase out use of the old method. After a few months, you could even disable the old method.
If you need ideas for a basic structure, each person, project and department gets its own home folder. Each home folder gets a dropbox (auth users can insert but not read or anything else), a public folder (auth users can read but nothing else) a shared folder (to which they can authorize others to read, writer, etc.) and every thing else is private.
Assign read, write, edit, and other privileges to groups not individuals. An individual gets privileges through his group (which only he is the member). That makes maintenance easier and helps you be able to test out new configurations or transfer responsibilities as people change roles.
That sounds like a lot, but it's not though some techs may not like the social hacking needed to find out how people are really working (not just how they say they are). And it will either save work, increase productivity or both.
Most don't have access to network storage, web space or other sane ways of transfering files. Most of those that do, don't know how or even know that they do have access. So they end up trying to abuse e-mail with binary attachments instead or resorting to sneakernet for file transfer. Shops running MS in place of some real server OS actually capable of providing networked storage usually are the worst off, because even if networked storage is there on paper, in practice it doesn't work. For it to work the management has to have the foresight to stick with Netware or move to Samba or AFS or something else without a high-pressure sales team.
Binary e-mail attachments should be filtered out at the server level. There's just no excuse for them and their removal would go a long way in getting rid of most Microsoft worms and viruses. I guess the euphamistic term would be 'computer' malware, not Microsoft worms and viruses.
The reality is more likely that he's not about charity at all and just using it for political leverage and public relations image.
It probably burns him up to have spent hundreds of millions on PR and have Negroponte steal his limelight with virtually no budget (relatively speaking). Furthermore, it's not just that the open source and open standards on $100 laptop helps break people out of Microsoft's grip, it's also that the publicity breaks the general public out of the mindset of "One Microsoft Way" Simply put, he's probably quite afraid that the public will remember or learn that there are other software and data formats than those provided exclusively by Redmond.
Corporate IT has become testing ground for MS unfinished products based on half-baked designs, resulting in Gates going down in history as the one who made bad engineering acceptable. Given Microsoft's record in the security area, it's absolutely bizarre that anyone still even considers buying from them. It must be like a cult or something.
What the article seems to be saying is that MS is throwing in the towel and admitting they're out of their league.
I was unable to find a bug report on the bug list requesting the ability to import those files. Though that may be my inability to use the database. Have you tried filing a description of the problem ? If it's not on the list of things to do, it can't be addressed. However, realize that this would mean reverse engineering the old MS formats. MS, despite court orders from courts on both sides of the Atlantic, has not turned over any documentation for its file formats. So it's not a clear cut task.
So there's nothing in that regard keeping small businesses on Windows, unless they happen to like the extra mainenance.
It's also useful for recovering corrupted MS Office files, which you will get eventually. One thing that people tend to forget is that you can install OOo along side MS Office or anything else you may already have. The 'rip and replace' theme is just a bunch of scare mongering from Redmond. Having both means you can swap between them as you like or even just keep one in reserve in case of problems.OpenDocument is definitely the way to go, especially for spreadsheets. Being a zipped XML file means that you can massage large data sets alternately with a comfortable gui or with home grown perl/python/ruby/whatever scripts.
Since the spread sheets are being used for analysis you get an added advantage being able to easily parse the data with other programs and scripts. OpenDocument is basically zipped XML and, unlike one high profile competitor, is fully documented and can be used without restrictions. Sorry for plugging something as esoteric as a data format, but being able to mix and match between an off the shelf spreadsheet applications and homemade scripts with the same data files has been something long overdue.
That's a big disincentive for MS to spend extra time or effort to fix, especially since competitors would receive the most benefit. There are also other interests which stand to gain from MS inaction: not just organized crime benefit from the holes, but also law enforcement and intelligence collection.
Try going back 10, 20 years before the MS plauge and check out the huge quantity and range of companies advertising in every issue. Nowadays, it's down to a handful and that probably gives them more influence, both directly and indirectly, than is healthy or reasonable.
Advertising burns through cash in dot-com style. Cutting the ads back or completely away, would save a big chunk of the budget and allow the company to either reinvest the surplus back into the company, or undercut their competitors on price, or more likely just funnel the surplus in to the pockets of the management. Whichever way, or combination, ads aren't needed as much as MBAs like to think they are. Above a certain quantity or outside a certain time/place/demographic, it's just a waste of company money.
Regardless of the reputation, the point is that it is the company itself making these claims. Anyone or any company blowing their own horn is always going to be taken with a grain of salt, even if they have a good reputation.
If only their voice is heard, then the outcome of any decisions based on that input is not likely to be useful for anyone planning to use a computer in the EU. sw patents create problems for more than just developers, though the developers are likely to feel the pain first.
Let's refine that. Some are transferable. Some aren't. But without a lot of leg work investigating the provenance of the software and acquiring the official proof of purchase certificates, any and all MS cruft - even the cruft which is supposed to be transferable - will count as being illegally installed. To reiterate, without the official proof of purchase certificates from MS, the MS software counts as being illegal. That puts the charity receiving the machines in as much or worse of a bad space than the n00b who put MS on the refurbished machines in the first place.
Did the machines come with the proof of purchase certificates? No? Then that forces a decision to either spend time looking for them or use software which will not lead into legal difficulties.
It's simple return on investment, in this case it's time being invested. Time spent tracking down licenses that doesn't result in acquiring a physical, official proof of purchase certificate is wasted as far as the end result goes. That's time that could have been spent refurbishing more computers or teaching others to do so or teaching others to use them.
One way around that would be to set up a mobile server with several wireless base stations and mount it on whatever reliable vehicle makes regular runs through the area. The post bus, library's bookmobile, health care workers, or others who make regular rounds could carry the server. Major uploads and downloads could be facilitated this way. There was a very successful project called OAUNET in Africa which sent such a bus around and used UUCP. Something like that could be used to supplement the mesh network.
Who cares what Gates says? He was wrong about the WWW, the Internet, and many other major trends, too. His utterances should be restricted to the political or business section of newspapers not waste space in information technology publications.