... why, oh why, does it have to be about "Linux everywhere?" I've no problem with Linux everywhere, but what kind of goal is that? And no matter what the goal(s), is there something wrong with having quite a bit of fun getting there? If some people are uncomfortable with that, they are still free to use Linux without buying a stuffed penguin.
I agree it shouldn't get in the way, but the goal shouldn't get in the way of the fun, either. Nobody has to 'join.' But alot of people could stand to lighten up about life in general... and alot of things in the Linux community lean that way. Nothing wrong with it, at least to my eyes. I find it refreshing, in fact.
A big thing to remember (and a LOT of people seem to overlook this lately...) Linux has as many goals as it has users and developers. That's the way it always has been... and should remain.
Hey, we are just having fun. Tux is cool. And so is Linus... humble, and honest. It wasn't even him that named the kernel Linux.
This guy doesn't matter. Professionalism (I'm assuming that was his point) only gets you so far. Eventually, you have to show the code. Since Linux wasn't developed to "take over the world," why bother with the formality? It just makes the coding/testing/recoding process a whole lot less fun. I'm sure enough of us have to worry about the suits at work... who the hell would want to bring THAT home?
You might want to do a little more research. One of the pillars in the case is the Win 3.1 beta. There's a little piece of code that is encrypted (to hide it's functionality) that, as the MS Exec that wanted it stated, "Put Win 3.1 on a treadmill if it didn't run on MS-DOS." (not a direct quote.) The code looks for a small unused MS-DOS specific funtion, and if not found, issues an error message about DOS versions, at which point you could expect the system to crash eventually. When they released the shipping version, they just flipped the "PerformTest" bit to 0. The code is still there.
The guy who found this is the same guy that used to praise MS, and wrote books on "undocumented" features with MS's blessing. On his web site (anyone have a link?) he tells how you can still turn on the bit in the release version while it's running, at which point you will promptly be issued the exact error message that all the beta testing people saw. The conclusion drawn is that MS used this to scare companies doing the beta testing from using DR-DOS.
I know user interfaces are very subjective, but have you really gotten into Blender? It's something you need to spend a few days with before your brain can 'click' with it.
I find the interface very intuative and powerful. One hand on the keyboard, and one on the mouse, and I'm blazing though models without thinking about the interface. It feels like a good race car. Not that good to look at (depending on your tastes) but everything it right where it belongs to get the work done. You focus on how to create the effect you want, not where that menu item is. That is the goal of a UI, isn't it?
Been using Samba for nearly a year, but it will never get "officially" used. Ah well. Anyway, I'm using it to give me access to the intranet directories for editing, and have it set up for a global share mapped by username (i.e. roaming private drive: where you log in, it follows.) Pretty handy, since we don't use profiles. But then again, I'm not allowed to map anyone to it or allow them to use it. So I use it as an instantly available backup when I give people new boxes.
BTW, it's on a desktop P133 w/128MB ram, and IDE disks (not using software RAID,) running Caldera 1.3, and it STILL outperforms the P66 10K-RPM SCSI RAID5 NT PDC by a factor of 2. (Enough acronyms in a row for any PHB;-)
I don't think Mr. Lewis has a firm grasp on the whole reason Free Software (FS) exists.
First off, Linux and FS in general was not started to squish MS. I still don't think it exists to squish MS. That's not the point. This is a community center that all are welcome in. These community volunteers are not here to build a non-profit organization to put the Embassy Suites out of business. Just a place for people who want a good, down to earth, quality place to go. One that they, too, are free to contribute to. A place that can exist after the founders leave, for whatever reason.
I don't know about the majority here, but I started using linux for a few core reasons.
1) I wanted UNIX. Period. UNIX has power that NT just can't achieve. It's flexible, stable, logical, and versitile.
2) I wanted to learn to code. Having source code to everything is a big plus there. I can peruse the kernel, KDE, Afterstep, sendmail, whatever I want. That makes for some great learning material. Plus, I can reuse this code freely.
3) I am never held captive to a bug again. Without even claiming to be a programmer (I am not) I can say that I have fixed a bug for myself. A NIC driver. Not some glamorous GUI office suite. Just a NIC driver for a card I needed to get working right at that very time. Stores closed, no money, choice between 2 NICs, one broken, and one with a driver that would not compile. Read the error messages from the compiler, fixed what logically seemed to be the problem, and Shazam... a working network.
None of this has anything to do with MS other than you can't do it with MS:)
The biggest reason I try not to use Windows (of any version) is that I have lost work. Alot of work. Windows freezes, and occasionally takes a partition with it. Not often, but how often does it take?
I do disagree with MS in their business practices, but that still is not the reason I use linux and GNU software. I use it because it's just better. I can get things done. And I can learn, which is very important to me.
Do I care if corporate (insert country here) adopts linux? Only to the extent that I may get the one application I really need that isn't on linux yet, and that hardware developers will start contributing open sourced drivers. I think I'll get the drivers and apps with or without this, so in the end, it really doesn't matter.
As to the remarks about bloat and featurism. I see a checks and balances here. The programmers ARE the users. If RedHat decided to start playing "embrace and extend" tomorrow, what would happen? Well, I think the first thing that would happen is the keepers of the code (us... the users and programmers, by grant of the GPL) would just revert the code. And stop using RedHat. RedHat would sink like a rock, and they must know that. Aside from being able to fix and use software on your own terms, this is the most important aspect of Free Software. Without us, they don't exist. And since anybody can start a company to take their place, using the very package they put out, they hold on by honor and reputation alone. Anything they add that isn't liked by the rest of the FS programming world will be an orphaned bastard child left on the side of the road. Plenty of other distro's to take their current place at the top (they are top in the US, anyway, for the time being.)
Those of us who really want to use linux/*BSD/HURD/etc... are in no danger of losing it. We will still wake up tomorrow and have all the code. Nothing lost, nothing to worry about. And there will always be someone that wants to make it do something THEY need. And we will all benefit. New day, same way.
This is linux. You will NOT be assimilated, but you are always welcome to join in. We're having fun over here:)
Does it even support libc6 without fscking around compiling crap yet?
It didn't. One reason I installed RH. It has glibc now, though. And compiling stuff is all part of the environment. If you don't want to do any compiling, what are you doing using Linux. m-a-k-e is not that damn hard.
Slackware also lacked sysv init support which makes the startup scripts absolutely horrible.
Agreed. I prefer sysv. Wondering if Slack changed that, myself.
But then, how do you add an item to your Afterstep menu in RH (Don't give me the answer... I know how.) Add it globaly, and you have to restart X (not normal.) Add it to the user, and it goes away next time they start X. After figuring it out, I didn't find anything anywhere on how to do it for a good 3 months. That's a big fat inconsitency. And RedHat is full of 'em.
When it all comes down to it, they are all Linux, though. That was the point of my post. A distro is a stupid thing to fight over. They all have good and bad points.
LOL. Uh, no. Some of us are using RH just because it's the last disto we installed. I'm thinking very seriously about debian (again) or slackware (again,) even though this will cause a bit of trouble for my wife and kids, while I transition. You really should not lump people together.:)
Redhat has gotten better (first tried 4.x, IIRC,) but it's inconsitencies with the rest of the world can still be mind-numbing at times.
It's on the website... follow the links at the bottom of the Registry page.
I'd like to point out it appears they want all apps to switch to using the "Registry." Here we go, fix it all up for the "Gee, it's not like MS" NT users. Damnit. This will either fall flat on it's face, or take my affordable UNIX-like system away. Personally, I don't like this. Not because it's easy, but because it BREAKS STANDARDS. I'm all for the easy part.
I just wish people didn't think Windows and easy as synonymous.
Yeah, Right. TIME is the big issue, in space.
on
Space Station's LAN
·
· Score: 1
Hey, I for one, agree that Windows can be set up to be fairly stable. It's why I insist on doing fresh installs when computers get shifted around at work. No extra garbage from app uninstalls and crap like that. BUT, in one of your posts you stated that w/out installing more software, Win will stay as stable as the day it was installed. Phooey. I've set up my own system with 2 high end apps, and nothing more (except device drivers.) Six months that install lasted. A record.
You may not notice the difference in the software you run, but with multitrack digital audio, system degradation is very apparent. It demands real time, stable performance. Windows can do that for a while, but the registry seems to get "crusty." The best version of Windows isn't even available unless you bought a new computer between 8/96 and 5/98. Win95B was the only one worth spitting on. Go try and buy it. (This excludes NT, which is a whole other set of pros and cons... not a huge leap forward, IMHO.)
Also, buggy apps should be irrelavent to the OS. If the app crashes, restart it. But it shouldn't take the system down with it, increasing the chances that the registry will get corrupted. That's not something I want astronauts I'm paying to worry about.
On the other hand, I don't want them spending the time learning new apps, either. I'll take a guess that this is why NASA chose MS. Hmm, I think the article said something like that, huh?
It's about 2/3s of the way down. Just do a search for "StarOffice". Mr. Maritz even talks about how many platforms it runs on, and how close to MS Office it looks and feels. Makes me wonder if MS has been looking for a new company to kil^H^H^Hinvest in.
It's a great idea. I used to do that (esp with Win3.x) but, I just can't keep my hands off these kernels (oh, ok, and network games. I admit it.) The windows partitions keep shrinking and shrinking and...:)
A better analogy would be a supermarket selling their own brand of juices. Joe, who made his own lemonade from his own trees, pours his neighbor a glass. They chat about how they don't like the taste of the supermarket lemonade. He asks the neighbor if it's good, and how he could make it better. They improve the recipe, and soon, the whole neighborhood is producing it's own lemonade (which they share with anyone walking down the street.)
The supermarket then gets sued by a small corner store. The corner store was making some pretty good orange juice, but were put out of business when the supermarket told food services (caterers, etc...) that anyone buying orange juice from the corner market would be charged more for any food bought at the larger store. They offered to give them free orange juice (which they just started making,) or even pay them, as long as they only bought from the supermarket. They always gave away orange juice to the regular customers. Sometimes, they would have the baggers put a bottle of orange juice in the cart (gratis, of course,) even when the customer didn't want it.
The corner market, of course, could not afford to do that, even though they sold orange juice first, and most people liked it. They lost most orange juice sales, and alot of food sales, too.
On a side note, the corner market also decided to share the recipe to it's orange juice, because the owner (living on the same street as Joe) saw what happened when the guy shared his lemonade recipe.
The supermarket then declares they are doing nothing wrong because on Joe's street, the people make their own lemonade, and it's good.
Ten buck says you wear a suit and tie at work. Sit behind a desk. Worry about profit margins all day. Either that, or you are paid by MS to plant "opinions" like this. Let's clue you in... if your customers or potential customers have so many problems with your products that they have to build their own, they are not competing with your business. You may lose sales, but that is YOUR problem. Your loss of profit does not constitute competition. All that means is your company makes crappy stuff. The people building Free Software are gaining nothing except a usable product, and, more importantly, the freedom to fix and extend the software for their own needs.
Even in light of this, MS still manages to garner HUGE profits. So it's not even a noticable economic loss. So, there's not competition there.
Companies like Red Hat are not selling software, they are selling the service of collecting all these user's hard work and packaging it for convenience. They also provide support. You are just as free to refuse the service and download the product without charge. They do this not to gain market share, but because the people that made it (the users) specify that is the way it will be. An arguement of competition still falls apart here.
Then, as the poster above me pointed out, MS has the desktop marketshare monopoly. I can't get the software to do what I need to do on Linux. This is all because of the MS marketshare issue. The requirements for that software is Windows. The other software package I need requires, uh, Windows. I've had to pay MS 2 times for Windows 95. They sent the floppies instead of the CD (THEY screwed up... the fax specified CD.) They charged me another $20 for the CD. Had to have it to run the software I needed, so I paid. I could have gotten by with the floppies, but since Windows vomits all over itself every few months, a CD is MUCH nicer for the frequent re-installs, I paid to fix MS's screw up. No choice. No competition.
Your arguement comes down to saying the users are getting something usable that isn't MS, so that constitutes competition. That is closer to calling the American Revolution "competition" with the English monarchy. That looks pretty stupid from where I sit.
LOL. You ARE kidding, right? Who, exactly, is competing with MS, here? Who? A bunch of hobbyists, doing this for fun, spending money and time on it and getting nothing back besides a thank you?
So, if I write some software, even if it's just for me and a friend, I'm competing with Microsoft? Especially if they make something remotely similar?
Gimme a break.
That's all we have here, just on a bigger scale. When the customers have to make their own alternative, I don't think that can be seen as anything but a lockin and a move of last resort. It virtually PROVES a monopoly.
[picking jaw up off the floor] Now THAT is a company that will get my money if I need the hardware. As long as the hardware is good, mind you. I hate buying from closed source (closed minded) companies, but I hate crappy hardware just as much. So, where can I find these people? I happen to be in need of an inexpensive NIC, and this one just shot to the top of my list.
Just delete/dev/cua0 through/dev/cua3, then create them as soft links to/dev/ttyS0 through/dev/ttyS3. Then you can even boot with old kernels, and have them work:)
IIRC, it was done with Unix98 compatability in mind (and better design?) It unifies the in/out interface for the serial ports.
The.sign file is right there... you can use it to verify with PGP or GPG. Disclaimer: I haven't verified anything yet (never felt the need before,) but with the recent trojan stuff, you can bet I'll figure out how to do that before this gets installed.
What sucks is how anxious I am to see if my sound card works now (didn't w/2.1.125,) but I gotta wait till I get this done. Damn crackers.:(
One flaw with your example. The more software they sell, the more profit margin there is. It's not a fixed cost. Example: a $25 car part might cost $15 to make. How much does another download cost to make? The price of electricity and maintenance on the servers. And if it get's mirrored, that cost can be dispersed. So this game actually gets more profitable for each and every copy, because all the cost is up front and done with (besides CD replication.)
Now, as to how they can make money? Open source the game engine, but not the music, sound effects, artwork, etc. So, make the engine open source and downloadable, and sell the boxes in stores with the extra stuff that makes it a game, and not just an engine. Advatages include (but are not limited to) a better game engine, as more companies and programmers download it, use it for their game, amking improvements to the engine, which get folded back into the original. Eventually, you have an inCREdible game engine, that would run on more platforms, and run better. This opens up bigger markets for the original game developer, and cuts costs on improvements to the engine for the next game.
The customers would also be able to download that engine and plug it in under the content of the game. Upgrades for as long as the engine is compatible with the content. That could save the customer money (i.e. does not have to upgrade hardware as often as the engine gets tuned, making the original game maker even MORE popular.)
It's the test sound on RedHat:) Still wonder why people can't get it right, myself. I Americanize it a tiny bit, but only because I feel like I'm straining when pronounced as Linus does (when using the accent.) BTW, a word for the vowel in the -nux part: spooks.
Didn't know there was a/. fight about Corel stock before... but I tried to tell my coworkers (that have the money) to buy when it dropped to just over $1. No one did.... C'mon, some of you know the drill. "That freeware weenie thinks he knows about stock, too..."
Wish I woulda had the money. Heck, a $300 buy woulda made me enough to BUY a NW;)
Slashdot Mirror
... why, oh why, does it have to be about "Linux everywhere?" I've no problem with Linux everywhere, but what kind of goal is that? And no matter what the goal(s), is there something wrong with having quite a bit of fun getting there? If some people are uncomfortable with that, they are still free to use Linux without buying a stuffed penguin.
I agree it shouldn't get in the way, but the goal shouldn't get in the way of the fun, either. Nobody has to 'join.' But alot of people could stand to lighten up about life in general... and alot of things in the Linux community lean that way. Nothing wrong with it, at least to my eyes. I find it refreshing, in fact.
A big thing to remember (and a LOT of people seem to overlook this lately...) Linux has as many goals as it has users and developers. That's the way it always has been... and should remain.
Hey, we are just having fun. Tux is cool. And so is Linus... humble, and honest. It wasn't even him that named the kernel Linux.
:)
This guy doesn't matter. Professionalism (I'm assuming that was his point) only gets you so far. Eventually, you have to show the code. Since Linux wasn't developed to "take over the world," why bother with the formality? It just makes the coding/testing/recoding process a whole lot less fun. I'm sure enough of us have to worry about the suits at work... who the hell would want to bring THAT home?
Let's get back to coding...
But what happens when it crashes? YeeeOUCH!
Thanks :)
You might want to do a little more research. One of the pillars in the case is the Win 3.1 beta. There's a little piece of code that is encrypted (to hide it's functionality) that, as the MS Exec that wanted it stated, "Put Win 3.1 on a treadmill if it didn't run on MS-DOS." (not a direct quote.) The code looks for a small unused MS-DOS specific funtion, and if not found, issues an error message about DOS versions, at which point you could expect the system to crash eventually. When they released the shipping version, they just flipped the "PerformTest" bit to 0. The code is still there.
The guy who found this is the same guy that used to praise MS, and wrote books on "undocumented" features with MS's blessing. On his web site (anyone have a link?) he tells how you can still turn on the bit in the release version while it's running, at which point you will promptly be issued the exact error message that all the beta testing people saw. The conclusion drawn is that MS used this to scare companies doing the beta testing from using DR-DOS.
I know user interfaces are very subjective, but have you really gotten into Blender? It's something you need to spend a few days with before your brain can 'click' with it.
I find the interface very intuative and powerful. One hand on the keyboard, and one on the mouse, and I'm blazing though models without thinking about the interface. It feels like a good race car. Not that good to look at (depending on your tastes) but everything it right where it belongs to get the work done. You focus on how to create the effect you want, not where that menu item is. That is the goal of a UI, isn't it?
Been using Samba for nearly a year, but it will never get "officially" used. Ah well. Anyway, I'm using it to give me access to the intranet directories for editing, and have it set up for a global share mapped by username (i.e. roaming private drive: where you log in, it follows.) Pretty handy, since we don't use profiles. But then again, I'm not allowed to map anyone to it or allow them to use it. So I use it as an instantly available backup when I give people new boxes.
BTW, it's on a desktop P133 w/128MB ram, and IDE disks (not using software RAID,) running Caldera 1.3, and it STILL outperforms the P66 10K-RPM SCSI RAID5 NT PDC by a factor of 2. (Enough acronyms in a row for any PHB ;-)
Samba rocks.
I don't think Mr. Lewis has a firm grasp on the whole reason Free Software (FS) exists.
:)
:)
First off, Linux and FS in general was not started to squish MS. I still don't think it exists to squish MS. That's not the point. This is a community center that all are welcome in. These community volunteers are not here to build a non-profit organization to put the Embassy Suites out of business. Just a place for people who want a good, down to earth, quality place to go. One that they, too, are free to contribute to. A place that can exist after the founders leave, for whatever reason.
I don't know about the majority here, but I started using linux for a few core reasons.
1) I wanted UNIX. Period. UNIX has power that NT just can't achieve. It's flexible, stable, logical, and versitile.
2) I wanted to learn to code. Having source code to everything is a big plus there. I can peruse the kernel, KDE, Afterstep, sendmail, whatever I want. That makes for some great learning material. Plus, I can reuse this code freely.
3) I am never held captive to a bug again. Without even claiming to be a programmer (I am not) I can say that I have fixed a bug for myself. A NIC driver. Not some glamorous GUI office suite. Just a NIC driver for a card I needed to get working right at that very time. Stores closed, no money, choice between 2 NICs, one broken, and one with a driver that would not compile. Read the error messages from the compiler, fixed what logically seemed to be the problem, and Shazam... a working network.
None of this has anything to do with MS other than you can't do it with MS
The biggest reason I try not to use Windows (of any version) is that I have lost work. Alot of work. Windows freezes, and occasionally takes a partition with it. Not often, but how often does it take?
I do disagree with MS in their business practices, but that still is not the reason I use linux and GNU software. I use it because it's just better. I can get things done. And I can learn, which is very important to me.
Do I care if corporate (insert country here) adopts linux? Only to the extent that I may get the one application I really need that isn't on linux yet, and that hardware developers will start contributing open sourced drivers. I think I'll get the drivers and apps with or without this, so in the end, it really doesn't matter.
As to the remarks about bloat and featurism. I see a checks and balances here. The programmers ARE the users. If RedHat decided to start playing "embrace and extend" tomorrow, what would happen? Well, I think the first thing that would happen is the keepers of the code (us... the users and programmers, by grant of the GPL) would just revert the code. And stop using RedHat. RedHat would sink like a rock, and they must know that. Aside from being able to fix and use software on your own terms, this is the most important aspect of Free Software. Without us, they don't exist. And since anybody can start a company to take their place, using the very package they put out, they hold on by honor and reputation alone. Anything they add that isn't liked by the rest of the FS programming world will be an orphaned bastard child left on the side of the road. Plenty of other distro's to take their current place at the top (they are top in the US, anyway, for the time being.)
Those of us who really want to use linux/*BSD/HURD/etc... are in no danger of losing it. We will still wake up tomorrow and have all the code. Nothing lost, nothing to worry about. And there will always be someone that wants to make it do something THEY need. And we will all benefit. New day, same way.
This is linux. You will NOT be assimilated, but you are always welcome to join in. We're having fun over here
Does it even support libc6 without fscking around compiling crap yet?
It didn't. One reason I installed RH. It has glibc now, though. And compiling stuff is all part of the environment. If you don't want to do any compiling, what are you doing using Linux. m-a-k-e is not that damn hard.
Slackware also lacked sysv init support which makes the startup scripts absolutely horrible.
Agreed. I prefer sysv. Wondering if Slack changed that, myself.
But then, how do you add an item to your Afterstep menu in RH (Don't give me the answer... I know how.) Add it globaly, and you have to restart X (not normal.) Add it to the user, and it goes away next time they start X. After figuring it out, I didn't find anything anywhere on how to do it for a good 3 months. That's a big fat inconsitency. And RedHat is full of 'em.
When it all comes down to it, they are all Linux, though. That was the point of my post. A distro is a stupid thing to fight over. They all have good and bad points.
LOL. Uh, no. Some of us are using RH just because it's the last disto we installed. I'm thinking very seriously about debian (again) or slackware (again,) even though this will cause a bit of trouble for my wife and kids, while I transition. You really should not lump people together. :)
Redhat has gotten better (first tried 4.x, IIRC,) but it's inconsitencies with the rest of the world can still be mind-numbing at times.
It's on the website... follow the links at the bottom of the Registry page.
I'd like to point out it appears they want all apps to switch to using the "Registry." Here we go, fix it all up for the "Gee, it's not like MS" NT users. Damnit. This will either fall flat on it's face, or take my affordable UNIX-like system away. Personally, I don't like this. Not because it's easy, but because it BREAKS STANDARDS. I'm all for the easy part.
I just wish people didn't think Windows and easy as synonymous.
Hey, I for one, agree that Windows can be set up to be fairly stable. It's why I insist on doing fresh installs when computers get shifted around at work. No extra garbage from app uninstalls and crap like that. BUT, in one of your posts you stated that w/out installing more software, Win will stay as stable as the day it was installed. Phooey. I've set up my own system with 2 high end apps, and nothing more (except device drivers.) Six months that install lasted. A record.
You may not notice the difference in the software you run, but with multitrack digital audio, system degradation is very apparent. It demands real time, stable performance. Windows can do that for a while, but the registry seems to get "crusty." The best version of Windows isn't even available unless you bought a new computer between 8/96 and 5/98. Win95B was the only one worth spitting on. Go try and buy it. (This excludes NT, which is a whole other set of pros and cons... not a huge leap forward, IMHO.)
Also, buggy apps should be irrelavent to the OS. If the app crashes, restart it. But it shouldn't take the system down with it, increasing the chances that the registry will get corrupted. That's not something I want astronauts I'm paying to worry about.
On the other hand, I don't want them spending the time learning new apps, either. I'll take a guess that this is why NASA chose MS. Hmm, I think the article said something like that, huh?
It's about 2/3s of the way down. Just do a search for "StarOffice". Mr. Maritz even talks about how many platforms it runs on, and how close to MS Office it looks and feels. Makes me wonder if MS has been looking for a new company to kil^H^H^Hinvest in.
It's a great idea. I used to do that (esp with Win3.x) but, I just can't keep my hands off these kernels (oh, ok, and network games. I admit it.) The windows partitions keep shrinking and shrinking and... :)
A better analogy would be a supermarket selling their own brand of juices. Joe, who made his own lemonade from his own trees, pours his neighbor a glass. They chat about how they don't like the taste of the supermarket lemonade. He asks the neighbor if it's good, and how he could make it better. They improve the recipe, and soon, the whole neighborhood is producing it's own lemonade (which they share with anyone walking down the street.)
The supermarket then gets sued by a small corner store. The corner store was making some pretty good orange juice, but were put out of business when the supermarket told food services (caterers, etc...) that anyone buying orange juice from the corner market would be charged more for any food bought at the larger store. They offered to give them free orange juice (which they just started making,) or even pay them, as long as they only bought from the supermarket. They always gave away orange juice to the regular customers. Sometimes, they would have the baggers put a bottle of orange juice in the cart (gratis, of course,) even when the customer didn't want it.
The corner market, of course, could not afford to do that, even though they sold orange juice first, and most people liked it. They lost most orange juice sales, and alot of food sales, too.
On a side note, the corner market also decided to share the recipe to it's orange juice, because the owner (living on the same street as Joe) saw what happened when the guy shared his lemonade recipe.
The supermarket then declares they are doing nothing wrong because on Joe's street, the people make their own lemonade, and it's good.
Fair warning: put on asbestos attire now.
Ten buck says you wear a suit and tie at work. Sit behind a desk. Worry about profit margins all day. Either that, or you are paid by MS to plant "opinions" like this. Let's clue you in... if your customers or potential customers have so many problems with your products that they have to build their own, they are not competing with your business. You may lose sales, but that is YOUR problem. Your loss of profit does not constitute competition. All that means is your company makes crappy stuff. The people building Free Software are gaining nothing except a usable product, and, more importantly, the freedom to fix and extend the software for their own needs.
Even in light of this, MS still manages to garner HUGE profits. So it's not even a noticable economic loss. So, there's not competition there.
Companies like Red Hat are not selling software, they are selling the service of collecting all these user's hard work and packaging it for convenience. They also provide support. You are just as free to refuse the service and download the product without charge. They do this not to gain market share, but because the people that made it (the users) specify that is the way it will be. An arguement of competition still falls apart here.
Then, as the poster above me pointed out, MS has the desktop marketshare monopoly. I can't get the software to do what I need to do on Linux. This is all because of the MS marketshare issue. The requirements for that software is Windows. The other software package I need requires, uh, Windows. I've had to pay MS 2 times for Windows 95. They sent the floppies instead of the CD (THEY screwed up... the fax specified CD.) They charged me another $20 for the CD. Had to have it to run the software I needed, so I paid. I could have gotten by with the floppies, but since Windows vomits all over itself every few months, a CD is MUCH nicer for the frequent re-installs, I paid to fix MS's screw up. No choice. No competition.
Your arguement comes down to saying the users are getting something usable that isn't MS, so that constitutes competition. That is closer to calling the American Revolution "competition" with the English monarchy. That looks pretty stupid from where I sit.
LOL. You ARE kidding, right? Who, exactly, is competing with MS, here? Who? A bunch of hobbyists, doing this for fun, spending money and time on it and getting nothing back besides a thank you?
So, if I write some software, even if it's just for me and a friend, I'm competing with Microsoft? Especially if they make something remotely similar?
Gimme a break.
That's all we have here, just on a bigger scale. When the customers have to make their own alternative, I don't think that can be seen as anything but a lockin and a move of last resort. It virtually PROVES a monopoly.
[picking jaw up off the floor] Now THAT is a company that will get my money if I need the hardware. As long as the hardware is good, mind you. I hate buying from closed source (closed minded) companies, but I hate crappy hardware just as much. So, where can I find these people? I happen to be in need of an inexpensive NIC, and this one just shot to the top of my list.
Love it!
See topic :)
Just delete /dev/cua0 through /dev/cua3, then create them as soft links to /dev/ttyS0 through /dev/ttyS3. Then you can even boot with old kernels, and have them work :)
IIRC, it was done with Unix98 compatability in mind (and better design?) It unifies the in/out interface for the serial ports.
The .sign file is right there... you can use it to verify with PGP or GPG. Disclaimer: I haven't verified anything yet (never felt the need before,) but with the recent trojan stuff, you can bet I'll figure out how to do that before this gets installed.
:(
What sucks is how anxious I am to see if my sound card works now (didn't w/2.1.125,) but I gotta wait till I get this done. Damn crackers.
One flaw with your example. The more software they sell, the more profit margin there is. It's not a fixed cost. Example: a $25 car part might cost $15 to make. How much does another download cost to make? The price of electricity and maintenance on the servers. And if it get's mirrored, that cost can be dispersed. So this game actually gets more profitable for each and every copy, because all the cost is up front and done with (besides CD replication.)
Now, as to how they can make money? Open source the game engine, but not the music, sound effects, artwork, etc. So, make the engine open source and downloadable, and sell the boxes in stores with the extra stuff that makes it a game, and not just an engine. Advatages include (but are not limited to) a better game engine, as more companies and programmers download it, use it for their game, amking improvements to the engine, which get folded back into the original. Eventually, you have an inCREdible game engine, that would run on more platforms, and run better. This opens up bigger markets for the original game developer, and cuts costs on improvements to the engine for the next game.
The customers would also be able to download that engine and plug it in under the content of the game. Upgrades for as long as the engine is compatible with the content. That could save the customer money (i.e. does not have to upgrade hardware as often as the engine gets tuned, making the original game maker even MORE popular.)
At least, that's how I see it. Comments?
It's the test sound on RedHat :) Still wonder why people can't get it right, myself. I Americanize it a tiny bit, but only because I feel like I'm straining when pronounced as Linus does (when using the accent.) BTW, a word for the vowel in the -nux part: spooks.
Didn't know there was a /. fight about Corel stock before... but I tried to tell my coworkers (that have the money) to buy when it dropped to just over $1. No one did.... C'mon, some of you know the drill. "That freeware weenie thinks he knows about stock, too..."
;)
Wish I woulda had the money. Heck, a $300 buy woulda made me enough to BUY a NW