You're well on your way to having all the basic human rights that are enjoyed by the rest of the free world!! Pretty soon, you'll have the right to a free and unbiased press, and the freedom to organize!! And after that, who knows?? Perhaps the freedom to practice whatever religion you want??? It's a brave new world for the people of CANADA!!!
Did somebody leave Katz's "think out loud" switch set to "ON" again? The guy posts absolute drivel, again and again, with little or no regard to his own integrity. Why doesn't he just pack it in? What's he waiting for - a big zinger of a post that everyone will like and agree with? News flash, katz - it ain't gonna happen. Nobody respects you anymore. We know that you're a trailing remnant of the dotcom bust, and that you're just trying to ride whatever's left of your popularity into oblivion. Everyone knows that you have very little (if any) knowledge of the techie world, and that you're a complete and total poseur with no remaining media outlets.
CmdrTaco, RobLimo, whoever - if you're reading, pleast - consider what you're doing to the public by allowing this man to continue his charade. We've long since grown tired of his garbage. Now try and salvage what's left of this site's integrity. Just get rid of the guy! That's all it takes. I mean come on...is he some kind of vicious stalker or something? Is he going to feed your dog some poison or kidnap your children if you just turn him away? He doesn't even respond to comments about his own stories!!! He can barely be called an active participant if his only contribution to the editorial staff is one "freshman in high school" analysis of some outdated topic every week.
DO WHAT IS RIGHT, PEOPLE!!! GET RID OF KATZ FOR GOOD!!!
Oh, i disagree fully. The company that I work for has enterprise licensing deals with Corel AND Lotus, to the extent that both companies' word processing apps are available to all internal users. I've used both WordPerfect (Corel) and WordPro (Lotus), and have supported both apps countless times with users. The bottom line is that NEITHER of them is as easy to use or as intutitively designed as Word. While it is true that Word's HTML conversion feature has much to be desired, the fact of the matter is that the users here don't care because it works. They don't look at the code...they just see the end result, and like it.
Most of the users here have requisitioned individual copies of Office 2000 to replace the Corel software that the company has tried to standardize due to its lower cost. Nearly all of them are happy for doing so. I'm one of those people.
The company's going to be ending their agreement with Corel next year in favor of an XP volume license (we're keeping the Lotus apps because Notes is standard here).
I'm not much for Microsoft's way of doing business, but I will NOT deny the fact that their Word format has pervaded and dominated nearly every market possible. Stallman is making a desperate attempt to reverse this, and all i can ask is - what makes him think that his word (no pun intended) will really change the world?
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but it needs to be said. Stallman is a very prominent figure in the Open Source community. However, Stallman is NOT GOD. He's not even a demigod. This editorial gives me the impression that the man has finally convinced himself that he is some sort of Open Source deity, and that all of his "minions" will be the ones that will finally topple the Microsoft Beast(TM). I know he's never been a particularly effective speaker or writer, but it seems to me that the man needs to get off his soapbox for a while. He's starting to remind me of Katz, for christ's sake...
But I digress.
Back on the topic of Microsoft Word...there's a very good reason that Word dominates the market the way it does. I'll spell it out for those who can't see it: Word has no competition. Simple as that. And it's not because Bill Gates personally hired hitmen to wipe out all the competition. And it's not because nobody wants an alternative. It's because the Open Source community hasn't been able to wean itself off of the old Vi/Emacs crap that it's been stuck with for years. Every new word processor that comes out for Linux/Unix looks, feels, and operates a lot like Emacs. Every Open Source attempt at cloning Word has failed miserably because it's not as good as Word...there IS NO OTHER EXCUSE.
I'll elaborate a bit on this point...RMS, like so many other Open Source developers and advocates, is convinced that EVERYONE operates a computer on the same level that he does. He seems to think that EVERYONE using Windows should have at least three years of programming experience in C or something similar. He's convinced that EVERYONE should know how to compile a kernel and maintain his own source code. He's perplexed by the fact that so few people write device drivers for themselves.
The sad, sad truth is that VERY FEW PEOPLE share Mr. Stallman's expertise. In fact, I would be VERY comfortable saying that at least 95% of computer users do not have even close to the same level of expertise. Moreover, it's safe to say that at least 80% of computer users have NEVER EVEN HEARD of Open Source. That's why Word isn't going to disappear. That's why HR execs are going to continually ask you for a Word-formatted resume. That's why Word documents aren't going to magically go away.
My editorial advice to Stallman: if you don't want to get any more Word documents in your e-mail, design something better. When your superior alternative to MS Word is available, make sure it's free, and that the world knows it. And make sure it's FULLY compatible, so that we can convert all of those pesky.DOCs that we have sitting around. When you can do that, you can get back on your soapbox and rant away, because then you might have a few more people listening.
...given the position that you're already in, I really don't think a degree will give you any advantage. You've already got plenty of practical real-world experience (THE most important factor), and additional merits to help back that up. A degree really isn't worth anything unless you're just trying to get in the door. In most cases, a degree is a somewhat-acceptable "substitute" for experience - which you are not lacking.
It seems to me that you're already "over the hump" in terms of getting into the industry, and that ANY degree, be it a BS or MS, isn't going to be worth the effort.
You're not the first to point this out - i should have mentioned the Netvista series in my original post.
You're right - they are black, but they still aren't very pretty - or widely available. Remember, i'm talking about typical, anybody-can-find-it-at-Best-Buy kind of available. If i recall correctly, IBM only sold the NetVistas through catalogs (tigerdirect and the like) and factory-direct. And maybe through Radio Shack, although i doubt it (they're partnered with Compaq now).
Those Netvistas were IBM's first actual attempt at hanging with the other major players, and all i can say is that they failed miserably. They're substandard computers stuffed inside an ugly black box. Not much consumer appeal there.
you missed the point - intellistation PRO computers (emphasis on PRO fully intended) are not your typical, consumer-level PC's. And they really aren't that nice looking.
Re:There's a very good REASON why IBM isn't winnin
on
IBM To Leave The Desktop?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You're right - most cases look VERY stupid next to a nice G4 tower - but you have to consider the advantage that Apple has in that arena - they can redesign hardware around a case without too many difficulties. The reverse is also true - they can design new, interesting cases around their hardware. They can do these things because they control the entire manufacturing process (well, most of it). Compaq, HP, Dell, and the other PC vendors don't really have this advantage. Their goal is to make cheap PC's that look good. To keep them cheap, they can't do too much dicking around with the case, because they might end up having to redesign hardware. And then the additional cost comes in, immediately placing them behind the competition. Apple doesn't have this type of competition in the traditional sense. People who buy Apple desktops are looking to buy an Apple desktop - and only one vendor makes Apple desktops. PC buyers have a number of vendors to choose from, all of whom are trying to undercut the others' prices. So the best they can do is sell a slightly-glitzed-up ATX case that looks a little better to "most people." Anything more would be overkill (at least to their marketing departments).
There's a very good REASON why IBM isn't winning..
on
IBM To Leave The Desktop?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
IBM is, for some ungodly reason, stuck on manufacturing the UGLIEST desktop computers that the world has ever seen!! They seriously need to take a hint from Dell, HP, Compaq, and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Apple - all of them have made NICE LOOKING consumer-level PC's. While it is true that IBM has never shown any slack in pumping out good quality computers, one must remember that the average consumer is more interested in something that looks good. PC's with rounded, curvy, colorful (or black or silver) exteriors are leading the market, and the other manufacturers out there are capitalizing on this. IBM, on the other hand, hasn't released a decent looking PC since the first Aptiva line back in 1994. Everything since then has been big, clunky, boxy, and generally ugly - and the sales figures have reflected that trend. Even the Thinkpads, as good as they might be, are horribly ugly machines!!
All i can say to IBM is that it's their own fault that they aren't selling anything. ANY armchair analyst can see that they weren't trying hard enough to stay in contention with the other manufacturers, and because of that, they lost. Sorry, IBM - sucks to be you.
you're completely off the subject. we're not dicussing morality here...we're discussing the facts. Your idea of what is moral or immoral means nothing to microsoft's investors. The fact of the matter is that Microsoft published a white paper detailing what they believe are the features of embedded XP that make it a better product than any embedded Linux distribution. If embedded Linux distributors disagree, fine. Let them disagree. But to accuse microsoft of "blatantly lying" about its product or the competing product would be to part with reason. That IS how business works...in order to compete, a company must show consumers (and in this case, developers) why their product is superior. If they don't, then the other company wins.
I'm very sorry that these bad bad people happen to disagree with you and mr. marx, but hey - that's life.
no, i think that WAS the point. I read the whole white paper, and all the corresponding articles, including the responses from Lineo and others. The white paper does NOT blatantly lie about anything. It points out a number of features of embedded XP that are either not present in Linux or are not as good. That's called marketing. Of course the truth is stretched at some points, and of course MS is trying to make Linux look bad. THAT'S FUCKING MARKETING!!!!!! That is how customers are won and lost!!! What is MS supposed to do, release a white paper that says "Linux is every bit as good as our embedded solution." They might as well say "don't buy XP!!" That is not how business works, my friend. The world is not the Linux-centric commune that all of you daydreaming hippies want so badly. It's never going to be that way. There's always going to be competition, and most of the time, some company is going to dominate that competition.
But i digress. My point is, if you want to say that MS actually lied in its whitepaper, you show me one point in that press release, and give me some facts to prove that it is an outright lie. Then you can say that MS is in the wrong. Until then, MS is merely competing.
I am talking about the same system of quality control here, but let's be realistic...we're talking about actual EXECUTABLE PROCESSES (since that's what trojans are) that are slipping through here. Not some obscure, nearly impossible-to-find directory traversal hack. Believe me, something like this would have been found.
and yes, that concern HAS been addressed already. Repeatedly. Too many times in too many discussions. We're all well aware of the blunders from Redmond. We don't need you to keep telling us how bad they suck. Besides, everybodymakesmistakessometimes. So please spare us the typical zealotry.
I have a LOT of trouble believing that such things could have happened. Any reputable software vendor has a system of quality control that would make it nearly impossible for these things to slip through to the end user. Even at Microsoft (insert your favorite joke about IE here). So unless a very large number of MS employees are al Quaeda members, it seems impossible for this to have happened.
Could you have been any LESS enthusiastic about that blurb? What, have your hopes for "armageddon courtesy of your pals at Microsoft" been obliterated? Sorry to hear it.
Anyway, this is a really good indication on the part of MS...perhaps an indicator of more initiative on these problems in the future. I definitely think that this is the type of thing that they need to continue if they wish to salvage their reputation at all...
I've read materials somewhat akin to this in the past, and they all seem to boil down to the "if you stand back far enough, it looks like order..." argument. But they always seem to overlook that inescapable fact of probability - if you look at ANYTHING on a large enough scale, you'll begin to see some order. Kind of like the "infinite monkeys/infinite typewriters" adage. That is, if you put an infinite number of monkeys in front of an infinite number of typewriters, at least one of those monkeys is going to type the complete works of Shakespeare. Sounds stupid at first, but in reality, it's absolutely true. Infinite scope leads to infinite odds in favor of what you're looking for (or not looking for).
By the way, did anyone else notice that this review sounded more like a school book report than an actual review? The guy who submitted spent an awful lot of time pointing out stupid "technical errors" (they weren't errors, by the way) to really lend any plausibility to his review. Just a thought.
fair enough -- I'll wait for more evidence before arguing this point any further.
However, you seem to be avoiding the other concerns that I and the other readers here have expressed - in regards to IP tracking, unlimited editor moderation, and discrimination. Would you care to respond to those allegations?
All i can say to that is EXACTLY. I am of the opinion that Slashdot's "upper brass" (if they can legitimately be given that title) has made themselves IMMENSELY liable for ALL comments posted on their site, because of the fact that there ARE situations on this site to which "censorship" is the only term that can be applied. Modding to -2 is an example. While the comment still "exists" in the database, there is no indication that would lead any reader to believe that. This is comparable to imprisoning a person secretly in order to cut off their ability to make their opinion known. Is this censorship? In Skylarov's case, Slashdot seems to think so. And if slashdot has EVER censored a poster in this manner, then ALL comments on this site are their responsibility (as recent cases have shown). Maybe it's time we started letting software vendors know about this...they might be interested in knowing that they've been essentially duped by those clever editors...
You're not exactly lending any support to your own reputation, michael. You're responding like a child who has been caught lying.
Here's something to think about. I'm the guy who clicks on the ThinkGeek banner ad and buys the t-shirt and the rounded IDE cables. I'm the guys who clicked through to Penguin Computing and convinced the boss to have them set us up with 6 new web servers. I'm the guy who LINES YOUR FUCKING WALLET. And you have the nerve to try and blow me off when I have a complaint. That, my friend, is why you're *still* not a real journalist.
an MD5 hash of an actual IP address can still be deduced to a real IP address...there is no question about that. And again, I really don't have a problem with a website logging my IP address or making it available only for purely "administrative" purposes. My problem (and i think everyone's for that matter) lies in the fact that this information is not made available to all slashdot readers. The FAQ NEVER states that IP addresses are available (in ANY form, MD5-hashed or otherwise) to editors. Take, for example, Malda's explanation of the AC system from the FAQ:
We think the ability to post anonymously is important. Sometimes people have important information they want to post, but are afraid to do it if they can be linked to it...
That's it. That is the ONLY mention of anonymous posting that is included in the FAQ, and it leads me to believe that my anonymous posts are just that - anonymous. But they're not. The last sentence even goes so far as to indicate that anonymous posters CANNOT BE LINKED TO THEIR COMMENTS, when in fact, they can.
While this might not seem like an issue, it is. As long as editors have the ability to moderate poster comments, they have the ability to discriminate against certain users, based on that user's IP address. That's where the entire problem lies. If editors can moderate, they have two VERY unfair advantages - infinite points, and the ability to truly push their own agenda on any topic they choose. If either one of these two abilities were removed (and the other made blatantly obvious to readers), there wouldn't be a problem. If posters were TRULY anonymous, then editors wouldn't be able to single them out even when they post anonymously. Conversely, if editors were subject to the same rules of moderation that regular users were, then even the ability to sort by IP address wouldn't help them, as they would no longer be able to mod a single user into oblivion.
I don't see why this is such a big problem for you to understand, michael. You seem like a fairly reasonable person (when you take away your very un-journalistic biases), but you have yet to acknowledge the fact that some people might have a problem with this system. Tell me, how do you rationalize the fact that these unadvertised "features" give editors a very unfair advantage over dissenting readers? Why can't the "features" be advertised? Why does the AC system even exist, if AC's aren't really anonymous?
I think you've missed the point here. Nobody's pissed off because of the fact that authors can moderate and bitchslap. We're pissed for three entirely different reasons:
1. Because authors tend to "push their own agendas" with moderation, in severe contradiction to one the core principals behind distributed moderation (see the slashdot FAQ for CmdrTaco's explanation of why EVERYONE gets to moderate).
2. Because Slashdot tries to pass itself off as a COMPLETELY FREE AND OPEN FORUM, when in actuality, it is quite restrictive and subject to censorship by those who maintain it.
3. Because "anonymous coward" is supposed to mean "anonymous coward" - not "anonymous to everyone except for the guys who want to bitchslap dissident voices." If editors can view the IP's of posters, then the entire purpose of the AC system is defeated, and should thus be removed.
None of the things that you mentioned (editor moderation, bitchslapping, IP availability) are inherently WRONG or inexcusable - however, the fact remains that Slashdot refuses to provide readers and posters with appropriate caveats. If slashdot wants to keep these practices up, then they need to inform their audience that they will do so. However, it is unlikely that they will tell anyone, as it could lead to a large-scale withdrawal of a great deal of its readership (a.k.a. "money in OSDN's bank account"). I think you see where I'm going with this.
I think a lot of people are bringing their computer to the home theater in the family or media room and converging it that way.
You're right about that, but I think that this merely marks a transitional period between the "multimedia pc" era (started about 7 years ago) and the "wired home" era (3 years down the road?). Eventually, I think what we'll see is more of a decentralized structure in the home PC area. We're already seeing it today, with wireless e-mail terminals and MP3 audio components for home stereos (a la the RIO Receiver and its bretheren). Look for more integrated versions of these in the future (i.e. wall-mounted touchscreen panels, linked to a file server that pipes MP3 music to any single room in the house).
Slashdot Mirror
the slashdot reader who disagrees with the majority is always wrong.
I know this is karma suicide. Fuck my karma. This is just too much bullshit to keep hidden.
You're well on your way to having all the basic human rights that are enjoyed by the rest of the free world!! Pretty soon, you'll have the right to a free and unbiased press, and the freedom to organize!! And after that, who knows?? Perhaps the freedom to practice whatever religion you want??? It's a brave new world for the people of CANADA!!!
Did somebody leave Katz's "think out loud" switch set to "ON" again? The guy posts absolute drivel, again and again, with little or no regard to his own integrity. Why doesn't he just pack it in? What's he waiting for - a big zinger of a post that everyone will like and agree with? News flash, katz - it ain't gonna happen. Nobody respects you anymore. We know that you're a trailing remnant of the dotcom bust, and that you're just trying to ride whatever's left of your popularity into oblivion. Everyone knows that you have very little (if any) knowledge of the techie world, and that you're a complete and total poseur with no remaining media outlets.
CmdrTaco, RobLimo, whoever - if you're reading, pleast - consider what you're doing to the public by allowing this man to continue his charade. We've long since grown tired of his garbage. Now try and salvage what's left of this site's integrity. Just get rid of the guy! That's all it takes. I mean come on...is he some kind of vicious stalker or something? Is he going to feed your dog some poison or kidnap your children if you just turn him away? He doesn't even respond to comments about his own stories!!! He can barely be called an active participant if his only contribution to the editorial staff is one "freshman in high school" analysis of some outdated topic every week.
DO WHAT IS RIGHT, PEOPLE!!! GET RID OF KATZ FOR GOOD!!!
Agreed, but it's almost as counter-intuitive as Emacs and Vi.
My point was that Word is easy to use. Easy to use is GOOD for end-users. Open Source apps are NOT easy to use. NOT easy to use is BAD for end-users.
It's that simple.
Oh, i disagree fully. The company that I work for has enterprise licensing deals with Corel AND Lotus, to the extent that both companies' word processing apps are available to all internal users. I've used both WordPerfect (Corel) and WordPro (Lotus), and have supported both apps countless times with users. The bottom line is that NEITHER of them is as easy to use or as intutitively designed as Word. While it is true that Word's HTML conversion feature has much to be desired, the fact of the matter is that the users here don't care because it works. They don't look at the code...they just see the end result, and like it.
Most of the users here have requisitioned individual copies of Office 2000 to replace the Corel software that the company has tried to standardize due to its lower cost. Nearly all of them are happy for doing so. I'm one of those people.
The company's going to be ending their agreement with Corel next year in favor of an XP volume license (we're keeping the Lotus apps because Notes is standard here).
I'm not much for Microsoft's way of doing business, but I will NOT deny the fact that their Word format has pervaded and dominated nearly every market possible. Stallman is making a desperate attempt to reverse this, and all i can ask is - what makes him think that his word (no pun intended) will really change the world?
.DOCs that we have sitting around. When you can do that, you can get back on your soapbox and rant away, because then you might have a few more people listening.
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but it needs to be said. Stallman is a very prominent figure in the Open Source community. However, Stallman is NOT GOD. He's not even a demigod. This editorial gives me the impression that the man has finally convinced himself that he is some sort of Open Source deity, and that all of his "minions" will be the ones that will finally topple the Microsoft Beast(TM). I know he's never been a particularly effective speaker or writer, but it seems to me that the man needs to get off his soapbox for a while. He's starting to remind me of Katz, for christ's sake...
But I digress.
Back on the topic of Microsoft Word...there's a very good reason that Word dominates the market the way it does. I'll spell it out for those who can't see it: Word has no competition. Simple as that. And it's not because Bill Gates personally hired hitmen to wipe out all the competition. And it's not because nobody wants an alternative. It's because the Open Source community hasn't been able to wean itself off of the old Vi/Emacs crap that it's been stuck with for years. Every new word processor that comes out for Linux/Unix looks, feels, and operates a lot like Emacs. Every Open Source attempt at cloning Word has failed miserably because it's not as good as Word...there IS NO OTHER EXCUSE.
I'll elaborate a bit on this point...RMS, like so many other Open Source developers and advocates, is convinced that EVERYONE operates a computer on the same level that he does. He seems to think that EVERYONE using Windows should have at least three years of programming experience in C or something similar. He's convinced that EVERYONE should know how to compile a kernel and maintain his own source code. He's perplexed by the fact that so few people write device drivers for themselves.
The sad, sad truth is that VERY FEW PEOPLE share Mr. Stallman's expertise. In fact, I would be VERY comfortable saying that at least 95% of computer users do not have even close to the same level of expertise. Moreover, it's safe to say that at least 80% of computer users have NEVER EVEN HEARD of Open Source. That's why Word isn't going to disappear. That's why HR execs are going to continually ask you for a Word-formatted resume. That's why Word documents aren't going to magically go away.
My editorial advice to Stallman: if you don't want to get any more Word documents in your e-mail, design something better. When your superior alternative to MS Word is available, make sure it's free, and that the world knows it. And make sure it's FULLY compatible, so that we can convert all of those pesky
...this might sound obvious to some, but maybe if you need to ask this type of question, you shouldn't be in charge of securing a satellite...
Just a thought.
...given the position that you're already in, I really don't think a degree will give you any advantage. You've already got plenty of practical real-world experience (THE most important factor), and additional merits to help back that up. A degree really isn't worth anything unless you're just trying to get in the door. In most cases, a degree is a somewhat-acceptable "substitute" for experience - which you are not lacking.
It seems to me that you're already "over the hump" in terms of getting into the industry, and that ANY degree, be it a BS or MS, isn't going to be worth the effort.
You're not the first to point this out - i should have mentioned the Netvista series in my original post.
You're right - they are black, but they still aren't very pretty - or widely available. Remember, i'm talking about typical, anybody-can-find-it-at-Best-Buy kind of available. If i recall correctly, IBM only sold the NetVistas through catalogs (tigerdirect and the like) and factory-direct. And maybe through Radio Shack, although i doubt it (they're partnered with Compaq now).
Those Netvistas were IBM's first actual attempt at hanging with the other major players, and all i can say is that they failed miserably. They're substandard computers stuffed inside an ugly black box. Not much consumer appeal there.
you missed the point - intellistation PRO computers (emphasis on PRO fully intended) are not your typical, consumer-level PC's. And they really aren't that nice looking.
You're right - most cases look VERY stupid next to a nice G4 tower - but you have to consider the advantage that Apple has in that arena - they can redesign hardware around a case without too many difficulties. The reverse is also true - they can design new, interesting cases around their hardware. They can do these things because they control the entire manufacturing process (well, most of it). Compaq, HP, Dell, and the other PC vendors don't really have this advantage. Their goal is to make cheap PC's that look good. To keep them cheap, they can't do too much dicking around with the case, because they might end up having to redesign hardware. And then the additional cost comes in, immediately placing them behind the competition. Apple doesn't have this type of competition in the traditional sense. People who buy Apple desktops are looking to buy an Apple desktop - and only one vendor makes Apple desktops. PC buyers have a number of vendors to choose from, all of whom are trying to undercut the others' prices. So the best they can do is sell a slightly-glitzed-up ATX case that looks a little better to "most people." Anything more would be overkill (at least to their marketing departments).
IBM is, for some ungodly reason, stuck on manufacturing the UGLIEST desktop computers that the world has ever seen!! They seriously need to take a hint from Dell, HP, Compaq, and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Apple - all of them have made NICE LOOKING consumer-level PC's. While it is true that IBM has never shown any slack in pumping out good quality computers, one must remember that the average consumer is more interested in something that looks good. PC's with rounded, curvy, colorful (or black or silver) exteriors are leading the market, and the other manufacturers out there are capitalizing on this. IBM, on the other hand, hasn't released a decent looking PC since the first Aptiva line back in 1994. Everything since then has been big, clunky, boxy, and generally ugly - and the sales figures have reflected that trend. Even the Thinkpads, as good as they might be, are horribly ugly machines!!
All i can say to IBM is that it's their own fault that they aren't selling anything. ANY armchair analyst can see that they weren't trying hard enough to stay in contention with the other manufacturers, and because of that, they lost. Sorry, IBM - sucks to be you.
you're completely off the subject. we're not dicussing morality here...we're discussing the facts. Your idea of what is moral or immoral means nothing to microsoft's investors. The fact of the matter is that Microsoft published a white paper detailing what they believe are the features of embedded XP that make it a better product than any embedded Linux distribution. If embedded Linux distributors disagree, fine. Let them disagree. But to accuse microsoft of "blatantly lying" about its product or the competing product would be to part with reason. That IS how business works...in order to compete, a company must show consumers (and in this case, developers) why their product is superior. If they don't, then the other company wins.
I'm very sorry that these bad bad people happen to disagree with you and mr. marx, but hey - that's life.
no, i think that WAS the point. I read the whole white paper, and all the corresponding articles, including the responses from Lineo and others. The white paper does NOT blatantly lie about anything. It points out a number of features of embedded XP that are either not present in Linux or are not as good. That's called marketing. Of course the truth is stretched at some points, and of course MS is trying to make Linux look bad. THAT'S FUCKING MARKETING!!!!!! That is how customers are won and lost!!! What is MS supposed to do, release a white paper that says "Linux is every bit as good as our embedded solution." They might as well say "don't buy XP!!" That is not how business works, my friend. The world is not the Linux-centric commune that all of you daydreaming hippies want so badly. It's never going to be that way. There's always going to be competition, and most of the time, some company is going to dominate that competition.
But i digress. My point is, if you want to say that MS actually lied in its whitepaper, you show me one point in that press release, and give me some facts to prove that it is an outright lie. Then you can say that MS is in the wrong. Until then, MS is merely competing.
I am talking about the same system of quality control here, but let's be realistic...we're talking about actual EXECUTABLE PROCESSES (since that's what trojans are) that are slipping through here. Not some obscure, nearly impossible-to-find directory traversal hack. Believe me, something like this would have been found.
and yes, that concern HAS been addressed already. Repeatedly. Too many times in too many discussions. We're all well aware of the blunders from Redmond. We don't need you to keep telling us how bad they suck. Besides, everybody makes mistakes sometimes. So please spare us the typical zealotry.
I have a LOT of trouble believing that such things could have happened. Any reputable software vendor has a system of quality control that would make it nearly impossible for these things to slip through to the end user. Even at Microsoft (insert your favorite joke about IE here). So unless a very large number of MS employees are al Quaeda members, it seems impossible for this to have happened.
Could you have been any LESS enthusiastic about that blurb? What, have your hopes for "armageddon courtesy of your pals at Microsoft" been obliterated? Sorry to hear it.
Anyway, this is a really good indication on the part of MS...perhaps an indicator of more initiative on these problems in the future. I definitely think that this is the type of thing that they need to continue if they wish to salvage their reputation at all...
I've read materials somewhat akin to this in the past, and they all seem to boil down to the "if you stand back far enough, it looks like order..." argument. But they always seem to overlook that inescapable fact of probability - if you look at ANYTHING on a large enough scale, you'll begin to see some order. Kind of like the "infinite monkeys/infinite typewriters" adage. That is, if you put an infinite number of monkeys in front of an infinite number of typewriters, at least one of those monkeys is going to type the complete works of Shakespeare. Sounds stupid at first, but in reality, it's absolutely true. Infinite scope leads to infinite odds in favor of what you're looking for (or not looking for).
By the way, did anyone else notice that this review sounded more like a school book report than an actual review? The guy who submitted spent an awful lot of time pointing out stupid "technical errors" (they weren't errors, by the way) to really lend any plausibility to his review. Just a thought.
fair enough -- I'll wait for more evidence before arguing this point any further.
However, you seem to be avoiding the other concerns that I and the other readers here have expressed - in regards to IP tracking, unlimited editor moderation, and discrimination. Would you care to respond to those allegations?
All i can say to that is EXACTLY. I am of the opinion that Slashdot's "upper brass" (if they can legitimately be given that title) has made themselves IMMENSELY liable for ALL comments posted on their site, because of the fact that there ARE situations on this site to which "censorship" is the only term that can be applied. Modding to -2 is an example. While the comment still "exists" in the database, there is no indication that would lead any reader to believe that. This is comparable to imprisoning a person secretly in order to cut off their ability to make their opinion known. Is this censorship? In Skylarov's case, Slashdot seems to think so. And if slashdot has EVER censored a poster in this manner, then ALL comments on this site are their responsibility (as recent cases have shown). Maybe it's time we started letting software vendors know about this...they might be interested in knowing that they've been essentially duped by those clever editors...
You're not exactly lending any support to your own reputation, michael. You're responding like a child who has been caught lying.
Here's something to think about. I'm the guy who clicks on the ThinkGeek banner ad and buys the t-shirt and the rounded IDE cables. I'm the guys who clicked through to Penguin Computing and convinced the boss to have them set us up with 6 new web servers. I'm the guy who LINES YOUR FUCKING WALLET. And you have the nerve to try and blow me off when I have a complaint. That, my friend, is why you're *still* not a real journalist.
an MD5 hash of an actual IP address can still be deduced to a real IP address...there is no question about that. And again, I really don't have a problem with a website logging my IP address or making it available only for purely "administrative" purposes. My problem (and i think everyone's for that matter) lies in the fact that this information is not made available to all slashdot readers. The FAQ NEVER states that IP addresses are available (in ANY form, MD5-hashed or otherwise) to editors. Take, for example, Malda's explanation of the AC system from the FAQ:
We think the ability to post anonymously is important. Sometimes people have important information they want to post, but are afraid to do it if they can be linked to it...
That's it. That is the ONLY mention of anonymous posting that is included in the FAQ, and it leads me to believe that my anonymous posts are just that - anonymous. But they're not. The last sentence even goes so far as to indicate that anonymous posters CANNOT BE LINKED TO THEIR COMMENTS, when in fact, they can.
While this might not seem like an issue, it is. As long as editors have the ability to moderate poster comments, they have the ability to discriminate against certain users, based on that user's IP address. That's where the entire problem lies. If editors can moderate, they have two VERY unfair advantages - infinite points, and the ability to truly push their own agenda on any topic they choose. If either one of these two abilities were removed (and the other made blatantly obvious to readers), there wouldn't be a problem. If posters were TRULY anonymous, then editors wouldn't be able to single them out even when they post anonymously. Conversely, if editors were subject to the same rules of moderation that regular users were, then even the ability to sort by IP address wouldn't help them, as they would no longer be able to mod a single user into oblivion.
I don't see why this is such a big problem for you to understand, michael. You seem like a fairly reasonable person (when you take away your very un-journalistic biases), but you have yet to acknowledge the fact that some people might have a problem with this system. Tell me, how do you rationalize the fact that these unadvertised "features" give editors a very unfair advantage over dissenting readers? Why can't the "features" be advertised? Why does the AC system even exist, if AC's aren't really anonymous?
I think you've missed the point here. Nobody's pissed off because of the fact that authors can moderate and bitchslap. We're pissed for three entirely different reasons:
1. Because authors tend to "push their own agendas" with moderation, in severe contradiction to one the core principals behind distributed moderation (see the slashdot FAQ for CmdrTaco's explanation of why EVERYONE gets to moderate).
2. Because Slashdot tries to pass itself off as a COMPLETELY FREE AND OPEN FORUM, when in actuality, it is quite restrictive and subject to censorship by those who maintain it.
3. Because "anonymous coward" is supposed to mean "anonymous coward" - not "anonymous to everyone except for the guys who want to bitchslap dissident voices." If editors can view the IP's of posters, then the entire purpose of the AC system is defeated, and should thus be removed.
None of the things that you mentioned (editor moderation, bitchslapping, IP availability) are inherently WRONG or inexcusable - however, the fact remains that Slashdot refuses to provide readers and posters with appropriate caveats. If slashdot wants to keep these practices up, then they need to inform their audience that they will do so. However, it is unlikely that they will tell anyone, as it could lead to a large-scale withdrawal of a great deal of its readership (a.k.a. "money in OSDN's bank account"). I think you see where I'm going with this.
I think a lot of people are bringing their computer to the home theater in the family or media room and converging it that way.
You're right about that, but I think that this merely marks a transitional period between the "multimedia pc" era (started about 7 years ago) and the "wired home" era (3 years down the road?). Eventually, I think what we'll see is more of a decentralized structure in the home PC area. We're already seeing it today, with wireless e-mail terminals and MP3 audio components for home stereos (a la the RIO Receiver and its bretheren). Look for more integrated versions of these in the future (i.e. wall-mounted touchscreen panels, linked to a file server that pipes MP3 music to any single room in the house).
Add the following link to your .sig:
8 1& uid=169099
http://slashdot.org/journal.pl?op=display&id=28
Perhaps if enough people find out about this bullshit, some change will come about...