Guardian Digital makes a kick ass version of Linux. It is called Engarde Secure Linux. They aren't near as recognized as some of the larger companies but I think they are doing ok.
I registered www.stopsconow.com and am going to try to build an intro page today and hopefully have the DNS changes made so that the page will be available by the weekend. It is intended to serve as a central point for this issue.
I have been toying with the idea of making t-shirts just like that and sell them to pay for costs. What do you think?
I just got off the phone with the FTC. If everyone calls and complains then the chances they will investigate SCO goes up. They look for patterns. In other words, if the majority of their calls are about SCO then they will investigate. It is time to take the Slashdot effect to the phones.
These are the key points to make:
-You did not purchase software from SCO -The company that "produced" your software did not purchase it from SCO -It was not marketed or packaged by SCO -Despite this SCO is asking for $199 from home users (You) and $699 from business for 1 CPU
They will ask for your name, phone number, address etc. That is mostly to verify your identity and citizenship I think.
Here is the number:
1-877-382-4357 option 4
They are nice and listen well. The lady I talked to even took the time to get a better understanding of what Linux is. The best quote from her "You didn't purchase it from them and they want you to pay them? That sounds crazy."
I dunno but I just called their complaint phone number at (202) 942-7040. Their office doesn't open until 9:30AM EST. I am calling then. So should everyone else. Just be polite and and to the point. They probably won't know or care what a kernel is but they will care that a company is making consistent unsubstantiated claims, threatening consumers meanwhile their execs are dumping stocks.
Stick to that. Tell them you are a computer expert if you have to and that it is your professional opinion that their claims are groundless and that it seems everytime their stock takes a dip they make new claims.
Make sure to tell them that in Germany they were required to stop with their threatenting campaign by the German government because they have not produced proof and refuse to do so.
I am sure someone here can come up with better points than me.
I see your point. I just am not sure that cheaper is always better. In computers that isn't such a big deal because your standard PC life isn't more than three or four years for many people.
I am not sure about other industries. I know that in the case of say a surgeon I want the best I can afford. I don't give a damn about how much the surgeon costs as long as I can afford it. I certainly would rather pay $4000 for the best I can buy who has 10 years experience and graduated from a great med school as opposed to $200 for some medicine-doctor-from-the-jungle educated "surgeon" from Brazil (no offense to Brazil).
You could argue it a number of ways but consider drug companies. They make drugs and patent them so they can charge a huge fee to recover R&D costs and make a nice profit. This greatly encourages them to pour countless resources into development because they KNOW that if they make that super great drug (like Viagra) then they will make a killing. If you remove their patent protection that will NOT be the case since any company with reasonable resources could sit and wait for them to develop the compound and then reproduce it and sell it cheaper (no R&D, testing, etc).
Sure there would still be advancements in science/technology without patent protection. You can bet your life that certain sectors will be hit harder than others.
The resources required to spur development in different industries is not the same. The equipment required to produce new medicines is MUCH more expensive than the software industry with the exception of super computers.
The fact that the entry barrier is lower does not and should not mean that a crafty inventor of software should be treated differently than the crafty inventor of hardware.
I am not sure of the original purpose but I know one current benefit of patents. The little guy or company can enjoy protection from the big guy. I don't see how you can argue that idea as bad. Until you can make the food on my table free and the roof over my head free I will not work for free. Neither will those that their job is to develop new ideas and processes.
Let's approach this with a practical attitude and not a "Why us a waterhose to wash your car when you can use a firehose?!!" mentality.
Regardless of the intentions the inventor has in respect to 802.11x technology there are some rather significant reasons that using 802.11b, g or a for keyboards and such just doesn't makes sense.
Addressing ----------
802.11x uses standard 802.3 addressing and is an extension of wired ethernet as such. Thus any 802.11x device will receive a standard IP address.
Compare this to bluetooth where devices are connected in a piconet using a master/slave model.
The piconet model makes so much more sense for keyboard/mouse or other device model where a simple data transfer is needed that has no reason to be routed anywhere. Otherwise you are turning the master device into an access point to a network and making it do a job better suited for a pure access point. If IP traffic is needed then a higher power access point makes SO much more sense to increase range.
Transfer speeds ---------------
Bluetooth works a 1MB transfer speeds where 802.11x operates at 11MB and up. I can't think of a single instance where a bluetooth device would be better suited for 11MB or higher transfer speeds. How much data does a keyboard push? Is your mouse a data hog?
The only thing I can conceive that you might want higher transmission speeds at close range would be high quality video and in that case you would be better suited to use a wired solution anyway at close range. Interference could cause a noticable lag in video.
Utility -------
The utility of 802.11x is not one that is conducive to simple input devices such as keyboards or mice. To make a comparison does it make sense to rent a bus to drive to the beach with your two friends or rent a standard car/SUV type vehicle? Sure, you could toast a slice of bread in an oven but it makes so much more sense to use a toaster.
To use 802.11x devices to transfer something requring a fraction of the speed is a waste of spectrum.
Overall the great axiom of possibility applies: Just because you COULD doesn't mean you SHOULD. Remember that using a sledgehammer to put a small nail in a wall might work but a hammer is better suited for the job.
I am not saying that in this case Eolas is in the right, but I totally disagree with that philosophy. If I dream up the idea for a new product that does something completely different and draw up a patent for it and then don't actually make a prototype I still own the rights to that idea. Me making a prototype is not a prerequisite for ownership. Likewise if a company comes up with a neat new idea for software but never EVER write it they still own that idea. It does not matter one bit if consumer demand exists for it. Consumer demand does not supercede a company's (or individual for that matter) ownership of an idea.
I know many of us (me included) love the idea of OSS and open ideas but not everyone feels that way and the vehicle to ensure those people have that choice exists in the form of Patents. Sure we could do away with that vehicle but you can be sure that funded R&D by companies would cease. Want that great cancer drug to cure all tumors? Not in a thousand years if a company can't retain rights to it in order to recover the money that went into its creation. That is capitalism for you. Like it or not this principle is at the heart of the creation of almost every piece of technology you are using to read this message right now.
The only way to make this change is to change everything to open and free. People have to eat, pay morgages and buy clothes and so on. Sure this may not be the case in this instance but the principle applies.
I have been wrestling with the idea for software patents for quite a while and have recently concluded that they are equally as legit as any other patent. There is absolutely no reason that inventions involving software should receive any less protection than that involving solid objects.
Just because you store and transfer the results in a multitude of ways doesn't mean it is a commodity upon inception. Granted, many software patents are the equivalent of patenting a stick but that line thus far hasn't been and likely never will be defined.
I usually make a pre-tech support checklist of everything I have tried:
"Hello, yes I am having a problem with my DSL. Here are the things I have tried in the exact order I tried them:
-Rebooted -Rebooted my router -Plugged my phone cable into the phone side and plugged a phone in to make sure it and the outlet works -Tried to reset my PPPoE connection on my router
I am not getting authenticated and haven't changed any settings. Have you changed my password, is your PPPoE access concentrator down or is there a problem with the DSLAM?"
At least at the college I went to that seemed to be the case. I remember I started logging all the security problems I found just with just some simple lazy man's poking around:
-No firewall at all -Old HP-UX e-mail system with weak DES hashed non-shadowed passwords (Hello John the Ripper) -Wide open Lexmark laser printers (MarkVision heaven) -Unpatched lab computers everywhere (Winnuke heaven) -Windows NT pre SP4 Servers -Open relay SMTP -Managed switches with default passwords
Then I sent an e-mail to the admin warning him of what I had found in a few days of poking around. His response was and I paraphrase but almost quote "You are a computer science student and have the ability to exploit those problems but the average student doesn't."
That was fine. I thought I would level the playing field by writing an article for the school newspaper outlining the holes and even gave URL's to download software to test out the problems. Literally within a few weeks a firewall was installed, default passwords changed, printers were locked down and all e-mail passwords were required to be changed with much greater restrictions on length and complexity.
As a side note I applied for a job after graduating with the school IT department. I never even got a call. Small price to pay to help save the poor hapless students from getting their PC's owned.
If you do some research on the 310km link you will find it was a weather balloon WAY up in the air so no sort of reflection would be needed.
Besides, 2.4ghz will NOT bounce off of any layer in the upper atmosphere in any sort of predictable way. It will more likely bend on temperature and moisture inversions like light hitting water.
It sounds like this is an attempt to change the topology of 802.11x to a polled topology without the true benefit of such topology without changing the hardware.
In a true polled topology client packets aren't sent until the AP says they can. The client equipment remains completely silent until they receive the right to broadcast packet. AP's are programmed to completely ignore packets that are sent out of turn anyway.
802.11x hardware is NOT designed that way. Sure you can control data flow that way but your AP is still open to the same problems as before. I wonder what happens when one of the client on one of the computers crashes and ceases to act as a polled client. Will it start hogging time slices from the AP again? Seems to me it would unless there was a radical hardware change to both AP and client adapter.
I meant more in general -- bars and such. Recently near where I live a smoking ban was passed for all public places including bars. I have literally heard "smoking is my right if I want to in a bar."
I guess their right to smoke supercedes my right to breathe. But the previous comment really wasn't meant to be about smoking nor a troll for comments on it.
Fair enough. I added a about five years (my memory was foggy). NDS was actually introduced in Netware 4.0 in 1993. Not sure when development on that began but commercially directory services have been available for 10 years. So replace 15 with 10 and the message is still the same.
Well, since the most major improvements to Windows in the last 8 years (Active Directory) has been available in some form or fashion in Novell for over 15 years I would say that their strength may well lie in merging that kind of functionality into Linux. I only hope they keep their development OSS. That is the only real problem I see.
It really won't matter one bit if they start running Ximian offerings into the ground. If they are OSS, the community can take over. I thought that was the whole benefit to OSS in the first place. Don't like what the author is doing or the author gets hit by a bus (or acquisition)? DIY.
Just as with anything else, there is (or should be) etiquette for use. Sometimes it takes quite a while for the social norms to develop. Smokers still seem to think it is and should be acceptable for them to blow smoke right in a non-smokers breathing area. I don't think too many people would argue it is ok to have sex in public (can't wait for responses to that).
The point is that social norms will develop. It will probably take too long (as in smoking) so establishments will probably have no cell phone policies except in special areas. This makes sense anyway as phone conversations tend to be louder than normal conversation. Whenever I get a cell phone call in a public place I always move to a point where I am out of the way and talk just like I was having a conversation with someone right next to me.
Just as a car shouldn't be driven just anywhere (a neighbors lawn), a cell phone shouldn't be used anywhere and anytime. For example, answering a call while your girlfriend is yelling at you is likely to get it broken upside your head. Strangely if they go down while you are actually ON the phone it is ok. Go figure.
What you are referring to is basically "branding." It is an old technique that companies have been using for a long time. Red Hat doesn't necessarily want to make Linux and go proprietary but they certainly would love for people to think "Red Hat" in conjunction with Linux.
It might not be but it smells like a troll. Nonetheless I will take a bite.
I run Linux at home all day long every single day for both work and play. The biggest problems I run into are some web pages that do active content written specifically for IE. Not such a big deal really.
It absolutely IS an alternative on the desktop to Windows. I think what you are trying to say is that for many users it can't operate as a replacement because software XYZ can't run on Linux and the user HAS to have that for whatever reason.
I like to think of this as a percentage of people capable of switching to Linux. I firmly believe that there exists a certain percentage of people that could move to Linux and not be lacking functionality at all. While that percentage is NOT 100% or possibly even 10% it is definitely growing.
Besides, you would be surprised at the reactions of people when I tell them about Linux. "It is free??? I can't run most games or Microsoft software? Big deal as long as there is something I can use instead. There is? THAT'S FREE TOO??? How do I get it?"
I actually wrote down some websites for this woman to read about Linux and a few for downloading. She wouldn't know the difference between Firewire and USB but she understood free loud and clear.
The SCO Group has made unsubstantiated allegations about IBM and the GNU/Linux (Linux) operating system concerning alleged intellectual property and copyright issues via a contract between IBM and The SCO Group. In the process they are threatening legal action against companies using the GNU/Linux operating system unless they pay for a license for their software.
My company uses the GNU/Linux operating system and as yet have not been contacted by The SCO Group. However, their actions are disrupting our business flow as we try to ascertain the implications of their threats.
I urge you to investigate their current practice of making legal threats and demanding money from companies based on as yet unsubstantiated allegations concerning an ongoing legal battle of which those companies are not involved nor party to the contract in question.
Not sure which book you had for class but mine had the entire Minix source code included. There was no extra source code. Why would there be? What function would that possibly serve?
We used to use old Netscape 4.x for mail. Now that I have been brought in I am migrating users slowly to Mozilla.
The transition has been rather smooth since you can easily import old inboxes and such. The best thing has been the junk mail control. One of my users has just fallen in love with the fact that junk mail gets automagically sent to her junk mail file (thanks to Bayesian filtering).
The only thing I have found missing (unless I just don't know where to look) is a mail monitoring program that sits in the task bar (on Windows clients) and tells them when they have new e-mails. Plus there was no icon for the mail program at lest up until version 1.3. Haven't tried 1.4 yet.
So far everything has been great.
This is a small business with almost no geeks here except me and one other guy. The level of understanding in regards to computers is very low in general but the users seem to work with it just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Guardian Digital makes a kick ass version of Linux. It is called Engarde Secure Linux. They aren't near as recognized as some of the larger companies but I think they are doing ok.
www.guardiandigital.com
I registered www.stopsconow.com and am going to try to build an intro page today and hopefully have the DNS changes made so that the page will be available by the weekend. It is intended to serve as a central point for this issue.
I have been toying with the idea of making t-shirts just like that and sell them to pay for costs. What do you think?
nt
I just got off the phone with the FTC. If everyone calls and complains then the chances they will investigate SCO goes up. They look for patterns. In other words, if the majority of their calls are about SCO then they will investigate. It is time to take the Slashdot effect to the phones.
These are the key points to make:
-You did not purchase software from SCO
-The company that "produced" your software did not purchase it from SCO
-It was not marketed or packaged by SCO
-Despite this SCO is asking for $199 from home users (You) and $699 from business for 1 CPU
They will ask for your name, phone number, address etc. That is mostly to verify your identity and citizenship I think.
Here is the number:
1-877-382-4357 option 4
They are nice and listen well. The lady I talked to even took the time to get a better understanding of what Linux is. The best quote from her "You didn't purchase it from them and they want you to pay them? That sounds crazy."
I dunno but I just called their complaint phone number at (202) 942-7040. Their office doesn't open until 9:30AM EST. I am calling then. So should everyone else. Just be polite and and to the point. They probably won't know or care what a kernel is but they will care that a company is making consistent unsubstantiated claims, threatening consumers meanwhile their execs are dumping stocks.
Stick to that. Tell them you are a computer expert if you have to and that it is your professional opinion that their claims are groundless and that it seems everytime their stock takes a dip they make new claims.
Make sure to tell them that in Germany they were required to stop with their threatenting campaign by the German government because they have not produced proof and refuse to do so.
I am sure someone here can come up with better points than me.
Hey, I thought of 42 first!!! :)
I see your point. I just am not sure that cheaper is always better. In computers that isn't such a big deal because your standard PC life isn't more than three or four years for many people.
I am not sure about other industries. I know that in the case of say a surgeon I want the best I can afford. I don't give a damn about how much the surgeon costs as long as I can afford it. I certainly would rather pay $4000 for the best I can buy who has 10 years experience and graduated from a great med school as opposed to $200 for some medicine-doctor-from-the-jungle educated "surgeon" from Brazil (no offense to Brazil).
You could argue it a number of ways but consider drug companies. They make drugs and patent them so they can charge a huge fee to recover R&D costs and make a nice profit. This greatly encourages them to pour countless resources into development because they KNOW that if they make that super great drug (like Viagra) then they will make a killing. If you remove their patent protection that will NOT be the case since any company with reasonable resources could sit and wait for them to develop the compound and then reproduce it and sell it cheaper (no R&D, testing, etc).
:)
Sure there would still be advancements in science/technology without patent protection. You can bet your life that certain sectors will be hit harder than others.
The resources required to spur development in different industries is not the same. The equipment required to produce new medicines is MUCH more expensive than the software industry with the exception of super computers.
The fact that the entry barrier is lower does not and should not mean that a crafty inventor of software should be treated differently than the crafty inventor of hardware.
I am not sure of the original purpose but I know one current benefit of patents. The little guy or company can enjoy protection from the big guy. I don't see how you can argue that idea as bad. Until you can make the food on my table free and the roof over my head free I will not work for free. Neither will those that their job is to develop new ideas and processes.
I wish you luck in your project
Let's approach this with a practical attitude and not a "Why us a waterhose to wash your car when you can use a firehose?!!" mentality.
Regardless of the intentions the inventor has in respect to 802.11x technology there are some rather significant reasons that using 802.11b, g or a for keyboards and such just doesn't makes sense.
Addressing
----------
802.11x uses standard 802.3 addressing and is an extension of wired ethernet as such. Thus any 802.11x device will receive a standard IP address.
Compare this to bluetooth where devices are connected in a piconet using a master/slave model.
The piconet model makes so much more sense for keyboard/mouse or other device model where a simple data transfer is needed that has no reason to be routed anywhere. Otherwise you are turning the master device into an access point to a network and making it do a job better suited for a pure access point. If IP traffic is needed then a higher power access point makes SO much more sense to increase range.
Transfer speeds
---------------
Bluetooth works a 1MB transfer speeds where 802.11x operates at 11MB and up. I can't think of a single instance where a bluetooth device would be better suited for 11MB or higher transfer speeds. How much data does a keyboard push? Is your mouse a data hog?
The only thing I can conceive that you might want higher transmission speeds at close range would be high quality video and in that case you would be better suited to use a wired solution anyway at close range. Interference could cause a noticable lag in video.
Utility
-------
The utility of 802.11x is not one that is conducive to simple input devices such as keyboards or mice. To make a comparison does it make sense to rent a bus to drive to the beach with your two friends or rent a standard car/SUV type vehicle? Sure, you could toast a slice of bread in an oven but it makes so much more sense to use a toaster.
To use 802.11x devices to transfer something requring a fraction of the speed is a waste of spectrum.
Overall the great axiom of possibility applies: Just because you COULD doesn't mean you SHOULD. Remember that using a sledgehammer to put a small nail in a wall might work but a hammer is better suited for the job.
I am not saying that in this case Eolas is in the right, but I totally disagree with that philosophy. If I dream up the idea for a new product that does something completely different and draw up a patent for it and then don't actually make a prototype I still own the rights to that idea. Me making a prototype is not a prerequisite for ownership. Likewise if a company comes up with a neat new idea for software but never EVER write it they still own that idea. It does not matter one bit if consumer demand exists for it. Consumer demand does not supercede a company's (or individual for that matter) ownership of an idea.
I know many of us (me included) love the idea of OSS and open ideas but not everyone feels that way and the vehicle to ensure those people have that choice exists in the form of Patents. Sure we could do away with that vehicle but you can be sure that funded R&D by companies would cease. Want that great cancer drug to cure all tumors? Not in a thousand years if a company can't retain rights to it in order to recover the money that went into its creation. That is capitalism for you. Like it or not this principle is at the heart of the creation of almost every piece of technology you are using to read this message right now.
The only way to make this change is to change everything to open and free. People have to eat, pay morgages and buy clothes and so on. Sure this may not be the case in this instance but the principle applies.
I have been wrestling with the idea for software patents for quite a while and have recently concluded that they are equally as legit as any other patent. There is absolutely no reason that inventions involving software should receive any less protection than that involving solid objects.
Just because you store and transfer the results in a multitude of ways doesn't mean it is a commodity upon inception. Granted, many software patents are the equivalent of patenting a stick but that line thus far hasn't been and likely never will be defined.
I usually make a pre-tech support checklist of everything I have tried:
"Hello, yes I am having a problem with my DSL. Here are the things I have tried in the exact order I tried them:
-Rebooted
-Rebooted my router
-Plugged my phone cable into the phone side and plugged a phone in to make sure it and the outlet works
-Tried to reset my PPPoE connection on my router
I am not getting authenticated and haven't changed any settings. Have you changed my password, is your PPPoE access concentrator down or is there a problem with the DSLAM?"
That usually works.
At least at the college I went to that seemed to be the case. I remember I started logging all the security problems I found just with just some simple lazy man's poking around:
-No firewall at all
-Old HP-UX e-mail system with weak DES hashed non-shadowed passwords (Hello John the Ripper)
-Wide open Lexmark laser printers (MarkVision heaven)
-Unpatched lab computers everywhere (Winnuke heaven)
-Windows NT pre SP4 Servers
-Open relay SMTP
-Managed switches with default passwords
Then I sent an e-mail to the admin warning him of what I had found in a few days of poking around. His response was and I paraphrase but almost quote "You are a computer science student and have the ability to exploit those problems but the average student doesn't."
That was fine. I thought I would level the playing field by writing an article for the school newspaper outlining the holes and even gave URL's to download software to test out the problems. Literally within a few weeks a firewall was installed, default passwords changed, printers were locked down and all e-mail passwords were required to be changed with much greater restrictions on length and complexity.
As a side note I applied for a job after graduating with the school IT department. I never even got a call. Small price to pay to help save the poor hapless students from getting their PC's owned.
If you do some research on the 310km link you will find it was a weather balloon WAY up in the air so no sort of reflection would be needed.
Besides, 2.4ghz will NOT bounce off of any layer in the upper atmosphere in any sort of predictable way. It will more likely bend on temperature and moisture inversions like light hitting water.
It sounds like this is an attempt to change the topology of 802.11x to a polled topology without the true benefit of such topology without changing the hardware.
In a true polled topology client packets aren't sent until the AP says they can. The client equipment remains completely silent until they receive the right to broadcast packet. AP's are programmed to completely ignore packets that are sent out of turn anyway.
802.11x hardware is NOT designed that way. Sure you can control data flow that way but your AP is still open to the same problems as before. I wonder what happens when one of the client on one of the computers crashes and ceases to act as a polled client. Will it start hogging time slices from the AP again? Seems to me it would unless there was a radical hardware change to both AP and client adapter.
I meant more in general -- bars and such. Recently near where I live a smoking ban was passed for all public places including bars. I have literally heard "smoking is my right if I want to in a bar."
I guess their right to smoke supercedes my right to breathe. But the previous comment really wasn't meant to be about smoking nor a troll for comments on it.
Fair enough. I added a about five years (my memory was foggy). NDS was actually introduced in Netware 4.0 in 1993. Not sure when development on that began but commercially directory services have been available for 10 years. So replace 15 with 10 and the message is still the same.
Well, since the most major improvements to Windows in the last 8 years (Active Directory) has been available in some form or fashion in Novell for over 15 years I would say that their strength may well lie in merging that kind of functionality into Linux. I only hope they keep their development OSS. That is the only real problem I see.
It really won't matter one bit if they start running Ximian offerings into the ground. If they are OSS, the community can take over. I thought that was the whole benefit to OSS in the first place. Don't like what the author is doing or the author gets hit by a bus (or acquisition)? DIY.
Just as with anything else, there is (or should be) etiquette for use. Sometimes it takes quite a while for the social norms to develop. Smokers still seem to think it is and should be acceptable for them to blow smoke right in a non-smokers breathing area. I don't think too many people would argue it is ok to have sex in public (can't wait for responses to that).
The point is that social norms will develop. It will probably take too long (as in smoking) so establishments will probably have no cell phone policies except in special areas. This makes sense anyway as phone conversations tend to be louder than normal conversation. Whenever I get a cell phone call in a public place I always move to a point where I am out of the way and talk just like I was having a conversation with someone right next to me.
Just as a car shouldn't be driven just anywhere (a neighbors lawn), a cell phone shouldn't be used anywhere and anytime. For example, answering a call while your girlfriend is yelling at you is likely to get it broken upside your head. Strangely if they go down while you are actually ON the phone it is ok. Go figure.
What you are referring to is basically "branding." It is an old technique that companies have been using for a long time. Red Hat doesn't necessarily want to make Linux and go proprietary but they certainly would love for people to think "Red Hat" in conjunction with Linux.
Examples of branding:
Bailey's (Irish Cream)
Coke (soft drink)
Polaroid (instant camera)
It might not be but it smells like a troll. Nonetheless I will take a bite.
I run Linux at home all day long every single day for both work and play. The biggest problems I run into are some web pages that do active content written specifically for IE. Not such a big deal really.
It absolutely IS an alternative on the desktop to Windows. I think what you are trying to say is that for many users it can't operate as a replacement because software XYZ can't run on Linux and the user HAS to have that for whatever reason.
I like to think of this as a percentage of people capable of switching to Linux. I firmly believe that there exists a certain percentage of people that could move to Linux and not be lacking functionality at all. While that percentage is NOT 100% or possibly even 10% it is definitely growing.
Besides, you would be surprised at the reactions of people when I tell them about Linux. "It is free??? I can't run most games or Microsoft software? Big deal as long as there is something I can use instead. There is? THAT'S FREE TOO??? How do I get it?"
I actually wrote down some websites for this woman to read about Linux and a few for downloading. She wouldn't know the difference between Firewire and USB but she understood free loud and clear.
The SCO Group has made unsubstantiated allegations about IBM and the GNU/Linux (Linux) operating system concerning alleged intellectual property and copyright issues via a contract between IBM and The SCO Group. In the process they are threatening legal action against companies using the GNU/Linux operating system unless they pay for a license for their software.
My company uses the GNU/Linux operating system and as yet have not been contacted by The SCO Group. However, their actions are disrupting our business flow as we try to ascertain the implications of their threats.
I urge you to investigate their current practice of making legal threats and demanding money from companies based on as yet unsubstantiated allegations concerning an ongoing legal battle of which those companies are not involved nor party to the contract in question.
Thank you.
Not sure which book you had for class but mine had the entire Minix source code included. There was no extra source code. Why would there be? What function would that possibly serve?
Hmmm. Dunno. I did enable quickstart. I am probably doing something wrong. I haven't spent more than a few minutes investigating.
We used to use old Netscape 4.x for mail. Now that I have been brought in I am migrating users slowly to Mozilla.
The transition has been rather smooth since you can easily import old inboxes and such. The best thing has been the junk mail control. One of my users has just fallen in love with the fact that junk mail gets automagically sent to her junk mail file (thanks to Bayesian filtering).
The only thing I have found missing (unless I just don't know where to look) is a mail monitoring program that sits in the task bar (on Windows clients) and tells them when they have new e-mails. Plus there was no icon for the mail program at lest up until version 1.3. Haven't tried 1.4 yet.
So far everything has been great.
This is a small business with almost no geeks here except me and one other guy. The level of understanding in regards to computers is very low in general but the users seem to work with it just fine.
I don't know when it was built but one of the largest cattle farms in the world is located in Maui. It might even be THE largest. I don't know.