Well, with Linux it doesn't matter much. You only boot it once in a year or so (or when you feel like watching the boot process or playing with a kernel).
With Windows, rebooting is very handy (may i say _needed_?) so they better get the boot process optimized:)
Suspend to RAM (either the APM or software versions) allow you to sleep the baby for 12 hours to 24 hours. Just slowing and idling the CPU, turning of the monitor and suspending the HD will allow to keep your uptimes as they deserve when doing long trips:-)
Does the suspend to disk feature keep the uptime as if never turned off? Isn't it like cheating a bit? (although I guess it would be ok. It means that the PC never got into a corrupt state)
What you have to think is that life is smarter that simple regulations. The Iraki already has access to every damn (consumer) CPU in the world and in the quantity they need and can afford.
No regulation will ban their having off all the cryptosystems and computer power they feel like having.
This i just a question, in the mury area (maybe it's crystal clean, but i can't see it).
Let's use the same case, where some goodies use a GPL part and a propietary part (closed source, but source still). Can't the just make a patch to the GPL proyect and distribute to whoever they want? So those other guys can patch the GPL version with the file and compile for "private use"?
I mean, is it completely against the law to make a patch for some GPL app, and distribute to whoever i need? It's my file and I am NOT using any GPL code yet. Do i have the freedom to publish such a patch?
Well, as always GPL questions are not popular (and the usual answer is "RTF GPL License") but i am curious. I don't know but then just a patch file that added a sprint("hello"); at line 100 could be a "patch" to a GPLd source.
Microsoft is all about perception. They learned long ago that they can release pure shite as long as the general public perceives it as good. And that can be accomplished through Marketing, which is much easier to craft and control than Coding....
Not Marketing. I think it is leveraging and delivering what the users wont (be it a good or bad thing).
Everyone can use Windows. Everyone has been using Windows. Some few people use Linux. Most nobody used *nixes in the past. (everyone: as in "mostly everyone")
Things are changing because Unix is delivering something that more and more people are asking for: security, stability and usability.
MS is trying to block the past, but if *nixes keep on delievering what the mayority wont, they will succed.
No amount of marketing is going to make OpenOffice better (in terms of what average joe likes more) that MSOffice. It's won't happen, as people notice from the very second when they don't initialy like something.
So, to make *nixes widespread you need to address the concerns on people that also care about "usability", "niceness", "easiness", "dumbedness". If and only if can *nixes satisfy this group, it will be widespread.
The marketing is fine. But it's not the way MS has pushed their products into people. Leveraging the OS, controlling the OEMs and delivering what people "in the surface" want did the job.
Microsoft wouldn't mind to do it. But it could be easily proved in court that the price was very well below cost, thus leading to uncompetitive pricing (and it really dangerous to do that).
They will grow over a period of time, and the installed base of X-Boxs will reach an important mass. It's just getting the foot on the market.
They are aiming at a home computer, not only a console. They have a different vision. They will make it work if the other players think they are winning.
Make the Linux box limit the bandwidth for each modem (TCP shaping/QoS) and then, if a user uncaps, you can even automatically cut them off and alert the node which modems need to be recaped (DHCP)
Meanwhile everything still works as usual, only that the linux box drops a lot of "extra" packets from uncapped modems.
42 is the answer. In wolfy's view, he would call it the initial condition. The question is the difficult part:) (ok, it's not funny. But really, if you look at the examples, all rules have initial conditions and maybe 42 really really has a role)
Meaning? What is the meaning of love por example? And what is the meaning of peace? And of friendship (i think this is what you meant by relationship)?
You want an accurate meaning of a subjective term (ie: nobody agrees on what those words encompass)?
'What will other people think?' After a while I realized, 'Why am I really doing this? Is it really worth my while to spend 10 years of my life doing something to get other people to say positive things about it?' No, it's not. Absolutely not. And actually, from some very cynical point of view, my opinion of the world at large isn't high enough for me really to be interested in what they have to say."
Arrogant? Maybe. But you need the full quote to bring perspective to this issue. He spent 10 years of his life not to please people, but to do the right thing.
It doesn't matter if people think it's wrong or right. What it matters to him is being right (in the objective sense and not the subjective sense). So he DOES care. But his motivation is not "acceptance" biased. That is a good thing.
I have always found economics to be a stagnated field. By? Because you can only try to "extend" or complicate the "orthodoxial" core. Everything else will be filed to the trashcan without further analisis.
What this guy is doing is the way to go. If nobody believes in you, then you need selffinancing. That means you need to reach 3 achievements: 1) Be a genius (natural) 2) Make money (luck) 3) Think different and question mainstream if need be
That's hard. And it's really noteworthy that someone has met the requirements. I wish I could make some money so that I can begin to work in the way I believe (as oposed to the way "to please other people, so i get food").
He publish it so that it can be documented that he stated correct answers before anyone else. Don't you ever have the feeling that nobody understands something, but "one day", they will?
Do you don't need to agree with people. It's not a politics or PR thing. We are talking about real, positive things. So he NEEDS to publish all this.
With my knowledge of Windows 3.1, I couldn't figure out anything at all about Windows 95 Why? Word 2 was basically the same thing as today, and the same with excel 4. If you are pushing excel to the real limits then it means you are probably using the incorrect tool.
The problem is no retraining, is _replaying_ every 2 years for the same stuff. How many times people have paid for the same Office amazes me. But MS obsoletes file formats so it's a shared fault.
what you see is what you get = what you see is all you get
I like that. I think it condenses my unspoken interior idea of what accounts to 50% of the tasks that need to be done (well and once and forever and without relearning the "GUI" interface everytime bill feels like).
That's not the most important factor. The SOMETHING UNKNOWN factor makes people go in guard and in a defensive attitude. They seem to feel they are less "valuable" cos it ain't _their_ tool.
Everything different will be tilted as BUG, or something "not so right". Also, every incompatibility WILL be Linux/Mozilla/Evolution fault, and not windows (this is how many people reason).
I know because i'm the only linux user in a 30 windows's enviroment... "They are the standard, usual, _should_be_, 'doesn't work? it's YOUR program!' guys.
They never stop i second, pause, and ask themselves if could posibly be some other problem. It's possible, but it's hard. If you manage to survive 6 months like this, then you'll be close to switching more people.
Why can they do all this and we can't even take a look and see if they abused the GPL license. If anybody with enough resources would sue them, i'd bet my cat and couch there is at least some tiny little portion of GPLd code in there.
Could this retaliation _ever_ happen? They must be some slipped GPL there.
Re:For the lazy ones, here's the FUD briefing
on
StarOffice 6.0
·
· Score: 3, Informative
FUD Part 1: "Companies considering a switch to StarOffice or a competing product won't find the move cheap. Gartner estimates that the average cost per user would be about $1,200, which works out to about $800 for labor and $400 for productivity. In contrast, companies upgrading to Office every two years would spend about $550 per user, or $700 every four years. That means many businesses would take eight years to recover their initial investment. " (note: Was Gartner the company that made some pro MS statements in a report, and forgot to clean the MS-signed footnotes? Can't recall but i think it was them)
FUD Part 2: "Whenever you put StarOffice on the desktop, you're taking a risk," Smith said. "You're moving to something that's not tried and supported...There's no guarantee that file compatibility won't be a problem."
Strict standards and no more unsupported tags (Netscape was famous for this) are a must to have a truly interoperable web.
While I at it, I preffer to see the web as it was mean to be (the way the lazy programmers did it), even if it means 20MB less of ram.
When everthing is w3c conforming (or XMLd:-) i'll start using Opera and the like.
I know i'm not right (in the sense that having "enti-error" in the renderes slows correcting the code), but hey, at least I can show some Windows users that what we have is better (i use the MS fonts so that it looks exactly the same, but with tabs, etc.). And they judge based on what they can see. No evangelion tactics work against the ALL MIGHTY eye.
Why would they want that? You have people willing to work for food all around the globe, with IQs ranging from near idiot to brillian (but uneducated). Why would you want an expensive chimp if you can have cheapo humans. And even in that case, it appers that the "economy" doesn't necesarilly mean this people that would work for food.
(note the sarcasm please before trolling me, thanks)
Well, i live in Argentina so the case is similar:)...anyway, the harm is done. I still think they should force them to build anti-piracy, not post-piracy. If you have $40B and don't build antipiracy you are promoting a monopoly as well as an abusive bussines strategy.
Well that's what i am saying, either keep it to yourself or release it GPL. No other license is fine.
GPL makes most sense if you are a non-profit organization, a goverment agency or someone that will not further bettering the program or a company who's bussiness is not to sell the software but related services. There are other examples also.
Just saying GLPing doesn't make sense makes you look ridiculous.
Regarding the grammar skills, thanks for the tip. It was a typo but yes, i make a lot of mistakes (in how many languages can you write, by the way?)
I at one point in life suggested a way to end the monopoly.
The idea was that the goverment should force Microsoft to put strong antipiracy in their product (no windows-update, no login to any of their support pages, product-activation and whatever is best for limiting pirated office/windows/etc).
Many people would find they prefer to spend 20 minutes installing some alternative product than surrendering their wallet to MS.
Those who blocks ads are most likely not their intended audience; the "idiot" who doesn't care is.
Oh, i see. I'd tend to think that it would depend on what is beign adverticed. And not the fact that advertisement is for idiots and that free-riding is for the EliT3z.
Sure, i'm tired of the casino ads and shoot the monkey. No, i don't think that means adverticing is a bad thing per se.
"Do you hit "30-second skip" on your ReplayTV remote while watching prerecorded shows?"
I would, but if everyone used ReplayTV, there would be no free channels whatsoever. So I do undestand I am killing their revenues and my favorite shows as well.
"Do you fast forward through the commercials at the start of a video tape?"
Of course is skip them, I paid for movie and that's how keeps movies alive (i sometimes watch them thought, to see the new movies trailers).
"does it take you two hours to read a "free" newspaper"
No. I am not saying you should pay attention to any ad. Just read the paper, if an ad happens to catch your attention, then great. If not, then that's ok. Same with the TV, you don't NEED to watch the commercials. But completely baring them from existing (ReplayTV) will kill your shows. And if it does not, it means that a lot of people are supporting the show (by not using ReplayTV).
ReplayTV is great. But those shows are paid by companies that (to fund the shows) expect you see one or two ads from time to time.
"But where do you draw the line?"
IMHO, where you have drawn it seems fair enough (to sometimes block some ads from high polution sites, but with a caring attitude)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, with Linux it doesn't matter much. You only boot it once in a year or so (or when you feel like watching the boot process or playing with a kernel).
:)
With Windows, rebooting is very handy (may i say _needed_?) so they better get the boot process optimized
Suspend to RAM (either the APM or software versions) allow you to sleep the baby for 12 hours to 24 hours. Just slowing and idling the CPU, turning of the monitor and suspending the HD will allow to keep your uptimes as they deserve when doing long trips :-)
Does the suspend to disk feature keep the uptime as if never turned off? Isn't it like cheating a bit? (although I guess it would be ok. It means that the PC never got into a corrupt state)
Federico
What you have to think is that life is smarter that simple regulations. The Iraki already has access to every damn (consumer) CPU in the world and in the quantity they need and can afford.
No regulation will ban their having off all the cryptosystems and computer power they feel like having.
This i just a question, in the mury area (maybe it's crystal clean, but i can't see it).
Let's use the same case, where some goodies use a GPL part and a propietary part (closed source, but source still). Can't the just make a patch to the GPL proyect and distribute to whoever they want? So those other guys can patch the GPL version with the file and compile for "private use"?
I mean, is it completely against the law to make a patch for some GPL app, and distribute to whoever i need? It's my file and I am NOT using any GPL code yet. Do i have the freedom to publish such a patch?
Well, as always GPL questions are not popular (and the usual answer is "RTF GPL License") but i am curious. I don't know but then just a patch file that added a sprint("hello"); at line 100 could be a "patch" to a GPLd source.
Microsoft is all about perception. They learned long ago that they can release pure shite as long as the general public perceives it as good. And that can be accomplished through Marketing, which is much easier to craft and control than Coding....
Not Marketing. I think it is leveraging and delivering what the users wont (be it a good or bad thing).
Everyone can use Windows. Everyone has been using Windows. Some few people use Linux. Most nobody used *nixes in the past. (everyone: as in "mostly everyone")
Things are changing because Unix is delivering something that more and more people are asking for: security, stability and usability.
MS is trying to block the past, but if *nixes keep on delievering what the mayority wont, they will succed.
No amount of marketing is going to make OpenOffice better (in terms of what average joe likes more) that MSOffice. It's won't happen, as people notice from the very second when they don't initialy like something.
So, to make *nixes widespread you need to address the concerns on people that also care about "usability", "niceness", "easiness", "dumbedness". If and only if can *nixes satisfy this group, it will be widespread.
The marketing is fine. But it's not the way MS has pushed their products into people. Leveraging the OS, controlling the OEMs and delivering what people "in the surface" want did the job.
Microsoft wouldn't mind to do it. But it could be easily proved in court that the price was very well below cost, thus leading to uncompetitive pricing (and it really dangerous to do that).
They will grow over a period of time, and the installed base of X-Boxs will reach an important mass. It's just getting the foot on the market.
They are aiming at a home computer, not only a console. They have a different vision. They will make it work if the other players think they are winning.
(just an opinion though)
Here's how to do it, without ditching the already installed modems.
|---- Linux box (1 )--- [Node]----(internet/whatever)
|
|
|
--|-------|--------|
[modem] [modem] [modem]
Make the Linux box limit the bandwidth for each modem (TCP shaping/QoS) and then, if a user uncaps, you can even automatically cut them off and alert the node which modems need to be recaped (DHCP)
Meanwhile everything still works as usual, only that the linux box drops a lot of "extra" packets from uncapped modems.
42 is the answer. In wolfy's view, he would call it the initial condition. The question is the difficult part :) (ok, it's not funny. But really, if you look at the examples, all rules have initial conditions and maybe 42 really really has a role)
Meaning? What is the meaning of love por example? And what is the meaning of peace? And of friendship (i think this is what you meant by relationship)?
You want an accurate meaning of a subjective term (ie: nobody agrees on what those words encompass)?
'What will other people think?' After a while I realized, 'Why am I really doing this? Is it really worth my while to spend 10 years of my life doing something to get other people to say positive things about it?' No, it's not. Absolutely not. And actually, from some very cynical point of view, my opinion of the world at large isn't high enough for me really to be interested in what they have to say."
Arrogant? Maybe. But you need the full quote to bring perspective to this issue. He spent 10 years of his life not to please people, but to do the right thing.
It doesn't matter if people think it's wrong or right. What it matters to him is being right (in the objective sense and not the subjective sense). So he DOES care. But his motivation is not "acceptance" biased. That is a good thing.
I have always found economics to be a stagnated field. By? Because you can only try to "extend" or complicate the "orthodoxial" core. Everything else will be filed to the trashcan without further analisis.
What this guy is doing is the way to go. If nobody believes in you, then you need selffinancing. That means you need to reach 3 achievements:
1) Be a genius (natural)
2) Make money (luck)
3) Think different and question mainstream if need be
That's hard. And it's really noteworthy that someone has met the requirements. I wish I could make some money so that I can begin to work in the way I believe (as oposed to the way "to please other people, so i get food").
Thanks!
He publish it so that it can be documented that he stated correct answers before anyone else. Don't you ever have the feeling that nobody understands something, but "one day", they will?
Do you don't need to agree with people. It's not a politics or PR thing. We are talking about real, positive things. So he NEEDS to publish all this.
come with a compact flash reader? Oh...
With my knowledge of Windows 3.1, I couldn't figure out anything at all about Windows 95
Why? Word 2 was basically the same thing as today, and the same with excel 4. If you are pushing excel to the real limits then it means you are probably using the incorrect tool.
The problem is no retraining, is _replaying_ every 2 years for the same stuff. How many times people have paid for the same Office amazes me. But MS obsoletes file formats so it's a shared fault.
what you see is what you get = what you see is all you get
I like that. I think it condenses my unspoken interior idea of what accounts to 50% of the tasks that need to be done (well and once and forever and without relearning the "GUI" interface everytime bill feels like).
That's not the most important factor. The SOMETHING UNKNOWN factor makes people go in guard and in a defensive attitude. They seem to feel they are less "valuable" cos it ain't _their_ tool.
Everything different will be tilted as BUG, or something "not so right". Also, every incompatibility WILL be Linux/Mozilla/Evolution fault, and not windows (this is how many people reason).
I know because i'm the only linux user in a 30 windows's enviroment... "They are the standard, usual, _should_be_, 'doesn't work? it's YOUR program!' guys.
They never stop i second, pause, and ask themselves if could posibly be some other problem. It's possible, but it's hard. If you manage to survive 6 months like this, then you'll be close to switching more people.
Why can they do all this and we can't even take a look and see if they abused the GPL license. If anybody with enough resources would sue them, i'd bet my cat and couch there is at least some tiny little portion of GPLd code in there.
Could this retaliation _ever_ happen? They must be some slipped GPL there.
FUD Part 1:
:)
"Companies considering a switch to StarOffice or a competing product won't find the move cheap. Gartner estimates that the average cost per user would be about $1,200, which works out to about $800 for labor and $400 for productivity. In contrast, companies upgrading to Office every two years would spend about $550 per user, or $700 every four years. That means many businesses would take eight years to recover their initial investment.
" (note: Was Gartner the company that made some pro MS statements in a report, and forgot to clean the MS-signed footnotes? Can't recall but i think it was them)
FUD Part 2:
"Whenever you put StarOffice on the desktop, you're taking a risk," Smith said. "You're moving to something that's not tried and supported...There's no guarantee that file compatibility won't be a problem."
Are we happy now?
Strict standards and no more unsupported tags (Netscape was famous for this) are a must to have a truly interoperable web.
:-) i'll start using Opera and the like.
While I at it, I preffer to see the web as it was mean to be (the way the lazy programmers did it), even if it means 20MB less of ram.
When everthing is w3c conforming (or XMLd
I know i'm not right (in the sense that having "enti-error" in the renderes slows correcting the code), but hey, at least I can show some Windows users that what we have is better (i use the MS fonts so that it looks exactly the same, but with tabs, etc.). And they judge based on what they can see. No evangelion tactics work against the ALL MIGHTY eye.
Why would they want that? You have people willing to work for food all around the globe, with IQs ranging from near idiot to brillian (but uneducated). Why would you want an expensive chimp if you can have cheapo humans. And even in that case, it appers that the "economy" doesn't necesarilly mean this people that would work for food.
(note the sarcasm please before trolling me, thanks)
Well, i live in Argentina so the case is similar :) ...anyway, the harm is done. I still think they should force them to build anti-piracy, not post-piracy. If you have $40B and don't build antipiracy you are promoting a monopoly as well as an abusive bussines strategy.
Well that's what i am saying, either keep it to yourself or release it GPL. No other license is fine.
GPL makes most sense if you are a non-profit organization, a goverment agency or someone that will not further bettering the program or a company who's bussiness is not to sell the software but related services. There are other examples also.
Just saying GLPing doesn't make sense makes you look ridiculous.
Regarding the grammar skills, thanks for the tip. It was a typo but yes, i make a lot of mistakes (in how many languages can you write, by the way?)
I at one point in life suggested a way to end the monopoly.
The idea was that the goverment should force Microsoft to put strong antipiracy in their product (no windows-update, no login to any of their support pages, product-activation and whatever is best for limiting pirated office/windows/etc).
Many people would find they prefer to spend 20 minutes installing some alternative product than surrendering their wallet to MS.
Thanks, this reminds me i must reread it :) It's so fun. I specilly like the way his grammar makes you laugh (like in the "just like bricks don't")!
Those who blocks ads are most likely not their intended audience; the "idiot" who doesn't care is.
Oh, i see. I'd tend to think that it would depend on what is beign adverticed. And not the fact that advertisement is for idiots and that free-riding is for the EliT3z.
Sure, i'm tired of the casino ads and shoot the monkey. No, i don't think that means adverticing is a bad thing per se.
"Do you hit "30-second skip" on your ReplayTV remote while watching prerecorded shows?"
I would, but if everyone used ReplayTV, there would be no free channels whatsoever. So I do undestand I am killing their revenues and my favorite shows as well.
"Do you fast forward through the commercials at the start of a video tape?"
Of course is skip them, I paid for movie and that's how keeps movies alive (i sometimes watch them thought, to see the new movies trailers).
"does it take you two hours to read a "free" newspaper"
No. I am not saying you should pay attention to any ad. Just read the paper, if an ad happens to catch your attention, then great. If not, then that's ok. Same with the TV, you don't NEED to watch the commercials. But completely baring them from existing (ReplayTV) will kill your shows. And if it does not, it means that a lot of people are supporting the show (by not using ReplayTV).
ReplayTV is great. But those shows are paid by companies that (to fund the shows) expect you see one or two ads from time to time.
"But where do you draw the line?"
IMHO, where you have drawn it seems fair enough (to sometimes block some ads from high polution sites, but with a caring attitude)
Thanks for your post (you seem to care).