AOL-Time warner is huge. It controls massive amounts of information in this country. BUT it is not a monopoly because
A.It doesn't control it all (I believe only around 30% of Tv-Stations)
B.) It doesn't *ACT* like a monopoly. It doesn't try to lie and pretend it's not a huge company. It doesn't FORCE people to use it's products. (Sure the only way you can get CNN is if you sign up for AOL).
If RedHat (or any other linux company) really does suceed in getting that big it would be different from the MS for a number of reasons but the main is that the source code would still be available, allowing people to pick a different distro, modify it, etc if they really wanted to - and I believe having the Source code out would make it near impossible for any one company to grab a monopoly.
Sun-AOL etc are NOT monopoly's. That is why people aren't crying out about them. Not only are they not monopoly's but they don't do anything to make us believe that they are. In the past few years microsoft has only gotten worse, not better. They have totally ignored the DOJ case and continue to try and grab every bit of market share out there (X-box,.NET). Not only that but a number of recent gaffes (locking Non-IE browsers out of Hotmail,MSN,MSNBC, etc)don't do much to inspire people's confidence that they aren't a monopoly.
Nifty isn't the word I would use for it, but a step in the right direction./me wonders why they don't just give up and start measuring peformance in FLOPS..(You have to admit: those Mac commercials with the cube saying 'supercomputer' where damn cool).
Has anybody actually had expierence using this?
I am curious if this is worth paying any attention to as I am setting up a secure linux box for online transactions and want the most secure version of linux possible.
I noticed that these laptops where supposed to be "donated" from the community to the seventh graders. Oh joy. A bunch of kids with rickety 386's and 486's desperately trying to get them to work all the time. Not to mention the headaches of software licensing costs. How much do you think it is going to cost to make sure that everyone has a liscensed copy of Windows? or Office? Or that you wll even be able to run these on all the computers ? Can *you* imagine trying to make sure that 100 7th graders laptops stay up and running 24/7 and all have exactly identical copys of software (I see win 3.11/dos in their futre). And what happens if they break? Get lost? Stolen? You would have to hire 2-3 people to maintain that many laptops in a school which would further burden the School districts funds which (as has been previously stated) could be used for much better purposes.
Good idea fails in the implementation. Let's face it -- you don't need computers for everything.
Slashdot Mirror
AOL-Time warner is huge. It controls massive amounts of information in this country. BUT it is not a monopoly because
A.It doesn't control it all (I believe only around 30% of Tv-Stations)
B.) It doesn't *ACT* like a monopoly. It doesn't try to lie and pretend it's not a huge company. It doesn't FORCE people to use it's products. (Sure the only way you can get CNN is if you sign up for AOL).
If RedHat (or any other linux company) really does suceed in getting that big it would be different from the MS for a number of reasons but the main is that the source code would still be available, allowing people to pick a different distro, modify it, etc if they really wanted to - and I believe having the Source code out would make it near impossible for any one company to grab a monopoly. .NET). Not only that but a number of recent gaffes (locking Non-IE browsers out of Hotmail,MSN,MSNBC, etc)don't do much to inspire people's confidence that they aren't a monopoly.
Sun-AOL etc are NOT monopoly's. That is why people aren't crying out about them. Not only are they not monopoly's but they don't do anything to make us believe that they are. In the past few years microsoft has only gotten worse, not better. They have totally ignored the DOJ case and continue to try and grab every bit of market share out there (X-box,
Nifty isn't the word I would use for it, but a step in the right direction. /me wonders why they don't just give up and start measuring peformance in FLOPS..(You have to admit: those Mac commercials with the cube saying 'supercomputer' where damn cool).
Has anybody actually had expierence using this? I am curious if this is worth paying any attention to as I am setting up a secure linux box for online transactions and want the most secure version of linux possible.
I noticed that these laptops where supposed to be "donated" from the community to the seventh graders. Oh joy. A bunch of kids with rickety 386's and 486's desperately trying to get them to work all the time. Not to mention the headaches of software licensing costs. How much do you think it is going to cost to make sure that everyone has a liscensed copy of Windows? or Office? Or that you wll even be able to run these on all the computers ? Can *you* imagine trying to make sure that 100 7th graders laptops stay up and running 24/7 and all have exactly identical copys of software (I see win 3.11/dos in their futre). And what happens if they break? Get lost? Stolen? You would have to hire 2-3 people to maintain that many laptops in a school which would further burden the School districts funds which (as has been previously stated) could be used for much better purposes. Good idea fails in the implementation. Let's face it -- you don't need computers for everything.