Eric has made the same set of mistakes others do...
1) The assumption that *a* linux CD is worth the cost of all its development
2) that all of that work was by people who had any market value at all (most of it isn't)
3) that the cost of all that work would have been what he is guessing at - when there is no real way to track the work
In other words, he took all the time he thinks a bunch of people of varying skills and marketability, assigned it the hourly rate of the most expensive professional he could find and then did some math.
What you are preaching is NOTHING short of communism.
Basically, thats/. in a nutshell, those most won;t admit it.
Many on/. demand that no one be able to own something that is valuable (intellectual property) and that the rrsults of their work be free to all.
Additionally, they demand the right to take froma nyone anything they want to have but don;t wish to pay for... music, movies, media. If a/.'er wants it, he considers it his moral right to aquire it by any means he sees fit.
Generally pro-taxes, anti-rich and anti-corporation the run of the mill/. poster is pretty much a supporter of the communist ideal - that is as long as it is letting them have the instant gratification of downloading Blade 3.
Agreed. The COmcast DVR combo we have here rocks. I know a few folks who run TiVo's and while the interface is cute it isn't cute enough to warrent the extra price (hardware purchase) and obsolecense issues.
It costs me an extra $5 a month to have a dual tuner DVR that is HDTV capable, perfectly integrated with my digital cable signal and effectively under infinite warrenty. If it dies, or if a better model comes out I just call Comcast and replace it for free.
There is no feature of TiVo i woudl use that makes any difference compared to the hassle (ir remote repeaters? tape? missed channel changes? bite me TiVo).
Comcast is rolling out their PVR solution and it kicks ass pretty heavily. The box I got from them costs me $5 a month, no additional fees.
* The software is good * The quality rocks * HDTV capable * Digital Cable capable * Dual Tuner
yeah yeah, I can't open it / hack it and so on - but that wasn't my plan anyway. It >works, works well and cost me next to nothing for dual tuner capability. Hell, for $5 a month I'll probably get two more for the other screens in the house and be able to pause them if I want.
"Give us a break. Can't have it both ways. The guy is just trying to make a living. If someone uses it to send spam, it's THEM that are at fault, not the writer of the software."
Welcome to/. - it will be easier to think of it this way...
* If breaking the law helps me get free stuff (piracy) or hurts Microsoft somehow then it is not only OK, but moral.
* If breaking the law might cause me some distress (stealing my logo, sending me spam) then that is evil and bad.
"On the other hand, if you use PostgreSQL, you simply hire someone to maintain the old version and backport any helpfull new features. And if you want to sell your code, you just bundle your own version of PostgreSQL with it."
BEcause every company running a DB wants to additionally take on the burden of coding, testing and porting features to it all the while hoping they don't mess it up and can still remain competative.
The kind of money you would have to pay, on an ongoing basis, to hire someone (or more) who can intelligently and correctly port to, tune, test and enhance something as complex as Postgress is shall we say "non trivial".
Your money woudl be much better spent porting to a supported DB system.
And why the vast majority of people who actually want to make money writing software don't do anything at all that invokes the GPL in any way and why it will always be mostly irrelevent int he software for money world.
"Why do people still use criticisms from the past decade to criticize Microsoft now?"
Denial. They are desperately trying to deny that Linux lost it's window of opportunity. MS saw what was happening, improved the system and slammed that window shut.
While the zealots continue to give each other handjobs over BSOD jokes MS put out XP and 2003 Server which is rock solid.
They will always be confused about why they aren't relevant.
"It's time to drop ActiveX as a mindless Bash Microsoft point. Mozilla.org has ripped off the idea, and they've shown even the Anti-MS people that it can be useful and convienent."
Never. No mindless bash point will ever be dropped by the zealots. No matter how how of day. hypocritical or incorrect it is.
"This decision from Michael Moore is not surprising as he has always said that his goal is to touch as many people as possible. I think he simply doesn't care about the money."
Of course he does - and he is going to get a ton of it - whatever happens to the pirate copies he is still making $$$ hand over fist on this thing. He will also no doubt get a lot of "soft" money from other anti-bush hollywood folks in the form of thank yous and future contract stuff.
Moore is not a caring guy, if he was he woudln't be making any $$$ here. What IS happening is that he is smart enough to make some PR hay out of something he knows he can't prevent.
Oh, and he has such a rabidly anti-bush agenda that in this case it is more important to him than the few >extraMoorewatch article...
Will show you the initial threats. I think it is also worth pointing out that Moorewatch made a call on the legal implications of Moore running his mouth.
Complain if MS sacrafices security for compatability.
Complain if MS sacrafices compatability for security.
Oh hell, just basically complain. And if you don't know what to complain about make up something you "heard on slashdot" that you then think must be true.
As for SP2, its a great upgrade. Lots of folks will love it and lots of them will be much more secure. MS does something right, deal with it.
Without a signed, insured contract what guarantee did the sponsor(s) have that the maintainer(s) was doing a competent job anyway? I guess they had the same guarantee the main dev had in getting paid, i.e. none.
I agree. We have no idea what happened behind the scenes here. Did he possibly miss a targeted delivery? Did he refuse to add a feature they needed? Did he prove unreliable?
Companies will rarely toss money at someone like this and not want something (at least performance) intreturn... for all we know they had a good reason to decide the money would be wasted.
1) Build program 2) Get everyone to use it 3) Cry poverty and threaten to go away if you don't get $$$ 4) Profit (in this case defined as not having to get real work)
Hell, they even have an answer to the ??? part.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people in free software seem surprised that development costs money. Gee... maybe thats why some companies charge for software!
This on/. where the average reader probably tops 300 lbs of twinkie eating l33t n3rd that is sitting in a air conditioned apartment with 5 computers - oen of which draws so much powere it needs a custom cooling system:)
Anytime someone on/. bitches about the excesses of other peoples lifestyles it makes me crack up:)
"I also understand the "millions of eyeballs" argument, but doesn't that really apply again to the "big guys.""
Well said - and a point many conveniently overlook. Most OSS programs pull in thousands and tens of thousands of lines of code that has been written by amateurs of questionable skill and reviewed not at all.
The fiction that OSS code is poured over by hundreds of talented eyes looking for each and every bug is a lie.
Slashdot Mirror
There's Eric Greens among others
Eric has made the same set of mistakes others do...
1) The assumption that *a* linux CD is worth the cost of all its development
2) that all of that work was by people who had any market value at all (most of it isn't)
3) that the cost of all that work would have been what he is guessing at - when there is no real way to track the work
In other words, he took all the time he thinks a bunch of people of varying skills and marketability, assigned it the hourly rate of the most expensive professional he could find and then did some math.
Welcome to economics by GNU/voodoo
"There is an estimate that the cost of the software on a typical Linux distribution disk is $4 billion"
References? I would LOVE to see how someone hacked up that number.
Welcome to GNU/Reality
What you are preaching is NOTHING short of communism.
/. in a nutshell, those most won;t admit it.
/. demand that no one be able to own something that is valuable (intellectual property) and that the rrsults of their work be free to all.
/.'er wants it, he considers it his moral right to aquire it by any means he sees fit.
/. poster is pretty much a supporter of the communist ideal - that is as long as it is letting them have the instant gratification of downloading Blade 3.
Basically, thats
Many on
Additionally, they demand the right to take froma nyone anything they want to have but don;t wish to pay for... music, movies, media. If a
Generally pro-taxes, anti-rich and anti-corporation the run of the mill
Wow, a "Firefox Spotted" post. Now Linux sounds EXACTLY like the old Amiga fanaticism.
"It must be good, they use it in Babylon 5!"
Keeping off the radar helps greatly...
/.
:)
I thought "security through obscurity" was officially refuted on
Oh, wait... unless it's an attack on Microsoft. My bad
Agreed. The COmcast DVR combo we have here rocks. I know a few folks who run TiVo's and while the interface is cute it isn't cute enough to warrent the extra price (hardware purchase) and obsolecense issues.
It costs me an extra $5 a month to have a dual tuner DVR that is HDTV capable, perfectly integrated with my digital cable signal and effectively under infinite warrenty. If it dies, or if a better model comes out I just call Comcast and replace it for free.
There is no feature of TiVo i woudl use that makes any difference compared to the hassle (ir remote repeaters? tape? missed channel changes? bite me TiVo).
They blew it in a way.
Comcast is rolling out their PVR solution and it kicks ass pretty heavily. The box I got from them costs me $5 a month, no additional fees.
* The software is good
* The quality rocks
* HDTV capable
* Digital Cable capable
* Dual Tuner
yeah yeah, I can't open it / hack it and so on - but that wasn't my plan anyway. It >works, works well and cost me next to nothing for dual tuner capability. Hell, for $5 a month I'll probably get two more for the other screens in the house and be able to pause them if I want.
"Give us a break. Can't have it both ways. The guy is just trying to make a living. If someone uses it to send spam, it's THEM that are at fault, not the writer of the software."
/. - it will be easier to think of it this way...
Welcome to
* If breaking the law helps me get free stuff (piracy) or hurts Microsoft somehow then it is not only OK, but moral.
* If breaking the law might cause me some distress (stealing my logo, sending me spam) then that is evil and bad.
Got it?
"On the other hand, if you use PostgreSQL, you simply hire someone to maintain the old version and backport any helpfull new features. And if you want to sell your code, you just bundle your own version of PostgreSQL with it."
BEcause every company running a DB wants to additionally take on the burden of coding, testing and porting features to it all the while hoping they don't mess it up and can still remain competative.
The kind of money you would have to pay, on an ongoing basis, to hire someone (or more) who can intelligently and correctly port to, tune, test and enhance something as complex as Postgress is shall we say "non trivial".
Your money woudl be much better spent porting to a supported DB system.
Thus the claims of GPL being viral.
And why the vast majority of people who actually want to make money writing software don't do anything at all that invokes the GPL in any way and why it will always be mostly irrelevent int he software for money world.
Someone please explain to me how this is different than Linux?
It's not - but they desperately need something to complain about. With SP2 windows is pretty damn tight - and it's killing them.
"Why do people still use criticisms from the past decade to criticize Microsoft now?"
Denial. They are desperately trying to deny that Linux lost it's window of opportunity. MS saw what was happening, improved the system and slammed that window shut.
While the zealots continue to give each other handjobs over BSOD jokes MS put out XP and 2003 Server which is rock solid.
They will always be confused about why they aren't relevant.
"It's time to drop ActiveX as a mindless Bash Microsoft point. Mozilla.org has ripped off the idea, and they've shown even the Anti-MS people that it can be useful and convienent."
Never. No mindless bash point will ever be dropped by the zealots. No matter how how of day. hypocritical or incorrect it is.
Dammit man, this is war!
"This simply isn't true (at least not under XP). "
Now you've done it - you brought facts into it. They are going to mod you (and me) down to oblivion.
You got facts in my Linux FUD!
"This isn't really a fix for a security problem in Mozilla, it's a workaround for a security problem in windows... "
Bull, if the exploit was triggered via email peopel woudl be complainign that Outlook should never hand stuff liek this off.
The same is true for Mozilla. Jeez, can you people simply NEVER admit you were wrong?
"If you were able to run Windows with real restricted user accounts, this wouldn't really be such a problem."
You can. The fact that your either not familiar enough with it or too FUD bound to mention it doesn't change anything.
As long as OSS zealots keep fighting their IMAGE of MS software instead of what is actually out there they will continue to look like morons.
"This decision from Michael Moore is not surprising as he has always said that his goal is to touch as many people as possible. I think he simply doesn't care about the money."
Of course he does - and he is going to get a ton of it - whatever happens to the pirate copies he is still making $$$ hand over fist on this thing. He will also no doubt get a lot of "soft" money from other anti-bush hollywood folks in the form of thank yous and future contract stuff.
Moore is not a caring guy, if he was he woudln't be making any $$$ here. What IS happening is that he is smart enough to make some PR hay out of something he knows he can't prevent.
Oh, and he has such a rabidly anti-bush agenda that in this case it is more important to him than the few >extraMoorewatch article...
Will show you the initial threats. I think it is also worth pointing out that Moorewatch made a call on the legal implications of Moore running his mouth.
Complain if MS sacrafices security for compatability.
Complain if MS sacrafices compatability for security.
Oh hell, just basically complain. And if you don't know what to complain about make up something you "heard on slashdot" that you then think must be true.
As for SP2, its a great upgrade. Lots of folks will love it and lots of them will be much more secure. MS does something right, deal with it.
Now, while we are at it, can someone send an invite to soulhuntre@soulhuntre.com ?
:)
C'mon, you know you have one to spare!
Thanks
WindowsXP runnign with some MS mice have many more :)
My mouse has 5 buttons (including the scroll wheel) and it scrolls and tilts in two directions.
So does XP win?
Without a signed, insured contract what guarantee did the sponsor(s) have that the maintainer(s) was doing a competent job anyway? I guess they had the same guarantee the main dev had in getting paid, i.e. none.
I agree. We have no idea what happened behind the scenes here. Did he possibly miss a targeted delivery? Did he refuse to add a feature they needed? Did he prove unreliable?
Companies will rarely toss money at someone like this and not want something (at least performance) intreturn... for all we know they had a good reason to decide the money would be wasted.
Welcome to reality.
Alternately...
3) Launch a hugely public lawesuit against MS claiming anti-competative practices and get a settlement.
Actually it sounds a lot like free software...
1) Build program
2) Get everyone to use it
3) Cry poverty and threaten to go away if you don't get $$$
4) Profit (in this case defined as not having to get real work)
Hell, they even have an answer to the ??? part.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people in free software seem surprised that development costs money. Gee... maybe thats why some companies charge for software!
"take their fat asses out of their SUV's"
/. where the average reader probably tops 300 lbs of twinkie eating l33t n3rd that is sitting in a air conditioned apartment with 5 computers - oen of which draws so much powere it needs a custom cooling system :)
/. bitches about the excesses of other peoples lifestyles it makes me crack up :)
This on
Anytime someone on
"I also understand the "millions of eyeballs" argument, but doesn't that really apply again to the "big guys.""
Well said - and a point many conveniently overlook. Most OSS programs pull in thousands and tens of thousands of lines of code that has been written by amateurs of questionable skill and reviewed not at all.
The fiction that OSS code is poured over by hundreds of talented eyes looking for each and every bug is a lie.