(And no, don't say Linux - I don't have enough time to learn it well enough to use it as a desktop machine on a daily basis.)
Isn't that the best way to learn? Using it on a daily basis.
I won't say Linux because, despite the vast improvements the last years, it takes some patience.
But if you'd rather take it as they (MS, Apple) hand it to you by all means. Just don't complain that there aren't alternatives... As the old saying - the cost of freedom isn't free.
From someone who doesn't know the real hoopla about embedded linux - what are benefits of running linux on a handheld versus making an OS highly optimized for that thing?
I fear this will be the latest step in their FUD linux campaign....... luckily the Penguin is protected by Big Blue and a few others who might have a few patents violated by Gates.
But what about the rest of Open Source? What if they go against small to medium sized developers that dare to make things for Linux but not MS?
The patent system as a whole need to be reevaluated. What's being patented in this list aren't new nonobvious processes or solutions to things anymore but just combinations of old things to a new medium (creating a note relating to a phone call). I fail to see the innovation, I hate when someone can patent stuff like that because it will only restrict what we can do in the end with the computers and languages, things they were made to do - solve problems.
The title is the typical stupid panic inducing kind "Hackers prey on unguarded wireless links" but it contains a good point: That with unsecured wireless routers and unencrypted transmissions, anybody near you place can use view your activities and use your internet connection and either steal your identity or abuse the connection and have it traced back to you.
It's not hard to understand, but when I go to a friends' house who has wireless, 2 times out of 3 my notebook can use their internet w/o a problem. Then I end up telling them to admin their router and set it up for encrypted transmission + letting only certain wireless MAC addresses through.
While I switched people over to Linux with the same experience, the non-complainers tend to be newbs or people who really only do webbrowsing/IM or another set of limited functions.
I've run into problems with more advanced people who could and should be able to figure out Linux on their own but don't bother and start complaining when they can't install certain software they are used to on Windows and yet don't want to learn the *nix equivalent.
It's just that I've been hearing too many glowing switch-over stories lately and to be sure, with distros like Ubuntu, linux is easier than ever. But again, in my experience and as counter-intuitive as it seems, the total newbs to computers are easier to nab than the people who've been doing Windows for a few years.
If financial institution think it's a better solution, sortof cut MS's TCO argument down..... these are the guys that should know best (should and do being two different things).
I think a higher percentage - the Slashdot crowd has a tendency to underestimate those around them. Other people may not understand computers as well as geeks, but when presented with the whole picture, they should be able to a competent decision. Sadly, many people don't go investigate the whole picture.
The cynicism may well be deserved by those few - but I have to ask one question:
If Linux is not reaching any of the PHBs and if it's not being adopted by organization headed by these "idiots", why is MS bothering targetting them in advertising to smear it?
If Linux weren't a threat, Microsoft wouldn't be smearing it in a campaign but instead treating it as an annoying little gnat - by ignoring it and lauding it's own positives. By paying so much attention to and attempting to shape Linux's image publicly, Microsoft is validating it by its own advertising despite the negative content.
People with brains will realize what is propaganda and check Linux out on their own. Thanks to MS.
Don't laugh at Physical Education Mr. Gates. With our obesity rates skyrocketing and diabetes II coming already to teenagers, this epidemic will be much more costly than simply having a few less Microsoft Certifieds around.
In highschool, my gym teacher Mr. Brynard taught a better nutrition (more practical and teenage oriented) than the middle school's dietician and also was instrumental in deciding to that the vending machines in school serve no soda. I'm not saying that this is the case everytime - but the ones I met were generally very well self-motivated.
I think they'll do more good than an extra programmer or two.
And Mr. Gates also falls into the trap thinking that more programmers = more productivy. I can't really envision Mr. Brynard as the type of guy sitting down and programming for eight hours a day just because it bought more money. How happy and productive are those people who do it for the money anyway?
There's more to the world than computers - let's remember that.
1. Do you think that a user who is incapable of removing spyware could install linux (especially with helpful anti-spyware programs around)? 2. Do you think that a user who is incapable of removing spyware could keep a linux installation updated and not get rooted?
Ubuntu is easy to set up and pretty easy to update in most cases - click an icon on the top right and it will download and set-up automatically.
They won't get rooted because Ubuntu doesn't provide a root account or password on default and they'd have to go through the trouble of getting one which means they should understand why RUNNING ALWAYS AS ROOT is not good by then. If not, they simply run a similiar risk as Windows users.
3. Do you want to support all these people who are essentially computer-stupid on linux?
I don't personally want to support them but the Ubuntu community is VERY HELPFUL and very open to newbs. The more users the better. I'm sure there are other Linux communities that also don't call all newbs lusers.
4. Do you want to support these people when they start having problems with the internet (and their ISP says "Sorry, Linux is not supported!")
Other than America Online, they can switch to other National (known and advertised) dial-up services. I can see that some might have problems with a crappy Winmodem but even that is becoming less pronounced.
Broadband is usually even easier.
I have too many people asking me how to do stuff, how to fix this... can I come over and fix this... with windows... imagine it when they can't get their soundcard working, or some windows-app running. Windows may not be the best solution for a lot of things, but it's not viable to be completely phased out, either.
I hear you.
I installed for my parents Ubuntu because they recently got broadband and the Windows choked on Malware and spyware and who knows what after configuring the Router correctly and with more security in mind.
All they do is surf the net, print to their laser printer, and write emails.
They had their 2 computers running on Ubuntu the last 3 months and have not called me once to complain.
With Windows, I had to go there every six weeks for a cleaning because IE has made itself the default browser and that led to all types of popsups and what not. I usually just put in the recover cd and walla. Everything erased and gone.
This is my general experience with switching total newbs who really only surf the net. Nice and easy. And when they get more ambitious, they can ask the Ubuntu forum and get a nice response generally.
It's the more advanced users who suck ass and are, on one hand, proficient enough to learn the programs they like, and on the other hand to lazy to switch and learn the counterparts.
These type of people I reluctantly switch over to Linux. If they insist. I'll install it for them but after installation with the internet working, they have to direct all questions to Ubuntuforums.org because unless the computer won't start up and surf the web, I won't help them. I consider them trying to get all hardware working a learning experience and they'll know that before I even touch the computer.
Unless some further regulation is attached, I don't see how promoting a duopoly is beneficial to the consumer.
Traditional U.S. government sanctioned monopolies attained their position by HAVING to provide service to the majority of consumer even in areas that would be a losing proposition (because of infrastructure versus population density) and having their prices set for them by a regulatory commission.
Will Verizon have to suddenly build more Central Offices (CO) or mini-CO's (so more people can get DSL) for the sake of this benefit? And what will Comcast trade in?
I fail to see how this helps anything but the big business.
The part of local government and wireless is cool, but at best this initiative will be sporadic or in big cities where getting broadband is less of a hassle.
Many of Microsoft's security problems comes from initial poor design decisions AND that those design decisions are not easily revoked once put forth because of backward's compatibility.
ActiveX is an example of this. It was made before internet security was much of a concern but to this day MS cannot easily revoke it without breaking apps left and right and pissing off Developers.
They would have to keep the API and rewrite it under the surface while having it react the same. Not an easy task nor guaranteed possible.
On the other hand, Open Source has several advatanges - one of which people complain about - their are redundant APIs and programs galore in several areas. The strength of this is that sometimes overlying programs are programmed to be use a more generic interchangeable API.
*nix has lack of integration. This is IE's and outlook's greatest strength but fatale flaw in some regards. Other OSes, the mail client and webbrowser and filebrowser can be ripped out and exchanged much more easily or not have one at all. Microsoft's Windows tends to be hardcoded to IE/outlook and the otherway around. This non-modular design is a nightmare.
General politics. While I'm sure Linux programming groups have this too, it's a much larger degree where Microsoft's design decisions are often political with their business in mind while OSS tends to be more engineering minded.
No one wants to buy into a crippled system and consumers are getting more savvy to these type of things. I hear enough complaints about the regional encoding in DVDs and players and the market found a way aroud that (region 0).
Sadly, while people are too lazy to vote/voice against things like DMCA, they still vote with their dollars.
iTunes is an example of a system that provides assurance to the music industry while being flexible enough for consumers to use - like being able to share music with friends.
Napster on the other hand is a more inflexible model and also seems like a traitor in some respects: http://p2pnet.net/story/5521
The thing also with HD DVDs is that right now the DVD is an entrenched market that's good enough for most people. Most people don't even own the right TVs to make use of the enhanced resolution. So what is the incentive to move away from DVDs? Hell, VCR's had good enough resolution but the killer was the ability to go anywhere in the movie like a CD (and the smaller size of discs).
If people percieve that HD DVD's or PAIDFOR online downloads are severely restricted, what incentive do they have to move away from DVD?
Resolution they can't take advantage of/notice in most cases? 1 hour wait times until the hour long FBI warning goes away because it stops all those pirates? Compulsory previews?
You're right. I wasn't being clear. Because the article pointed out the division of resources among distros, I wanted to counterpoint whether Windows has improved at the same rate as Linux if you were to compare today's offerings with their '95 offerings.
Competition is good. Ubuntu is a latecomer that just came out September of 2004 and it's one of the best distros for newbies. And most popular.
Knoppix is good and for a different audience/purpose. Imagine if either weren't out there.
A little known distro LFS (Linux From Scratch) is great for learning linux deep down inside and for ultimate configuration, but serves neither market the above two do.
The people who make distros, especially the ones not in the top 20, are people who are doing it for fun. You will not be able to funnel their effort without them feeling forced and ultimately quiting.
I would also like to have more cooperation in the *nix world, but this would have to do purely with standards and how drivers work, etcetera so that there is a reduction on overlap on projects few people want to work on (to get things working right).
But Linux's strength comes from diversity, otherwise it wouldn't have come so far. Just look at the Window Managers - specifically KDE and Gnome - without the one, the other wouldn't have been pushed to be better or as good as it is today.
We don't want to be Windows. A one-size-fits all approach wouldn't have let linux run on servers, as well as PCs, as well as in PDA's and other embedded applications as well as it does.
Has Windows really improved since 95 that much in any significant way? Is their one-size-fits-all solution what we want?
This seems to be a opportunity for Linux. Especially Ubuntu.
As they are talking about older machines and the hassle of disinfecting them versus just a new computer (it actually sounds like an excuse to get a flashy new computer), I can't imagine anybody too happy about throwing their old boxes away but would they want to give it away infected or with all their data on it.
I could see the box easily getting a second life and go to that person's little brother/sister, kid, what have you.
Ubuntu would be the perfect solution, easy to install, gets rid of all that Windows readable data, and won't get nasty pop-ups promoting porn and viagra.
(Ubuntu or any other Easy-to-use distro, I don't mean to just promote Ubuntu or imply it's the only easy one to use.)
What do they think will happen to the next computer? Be magically immune?
Go to distrowatch and for a couple of bucks, order a linux cd of some flavor^_^ Cheaper and it will get rid of all your spyware and malware. Even the MS branded stuff! Something that ad-aware and spybot refuse to detect and correct for some reason^^
Or go with Knoppix and have a decent boot-up cd so you can start up your computer and see what's wrong with it.
Seriously, as if anyone were to buy a computer just because of spyware. You might as well just save your files and do a clean install if you wanted to keep running Windows. And then just run the free AVG virus scanner on those old files.
Relax dude, I didn't say my language was English in the first place nor will I do a spellcheck when my spelling level is readable to the majority of people - even the most anal retentive.
As an amatuer writer, this can be pretty exciting to finally have the best of paper combined with the best of computers and put together a Tablet PC with decent battery life which isn't available with a conventional LCD screen.
These days I still print out hundreds of pages just to edit my stories - editting is a pain in the ass in the conventional computer just because erasing a line with a mouse while seated upright doesn't give the same satisfaction and oversight as crossing it out with a pen and adding notes in between the margins by writing naturally while in a recliner^_^
1. I suppose there are several GPL solutions to this but not an expert. QT was a suggestion and an example - not the only alternative.
2. The Australian government can negotiate licensing with Trolltech. I can't imagine it being expensive. No need for being GPLed.
"Is it really worth wasting tax money to cater to the small percentage of people that this slightly inconveniences?"
3. Is it really worth promoting vendor lock-in with ANOTHER Windows-only solution when the alternative would be almost as painless if planned in from the start?
Steve Ballmer said it with: "Developers! Developers! Developers!"
I'll add that the thing that can kill alternatives like Linux is "APATHY! APATHY! APATHY!"
The requirements:
http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc=/content/32613.htm&page=3&H3
Why in the world do Governments want to be dependent on a foreign company's closed-source proprietary software is beyond me.
I understand the need to get the most common platform but supercomplex software projects like Firefox can manage Mac/Linux/Windows (through QT???) - why can't a government?
It will save them headaches in the long-run, if the code is written to be portable and platform independent.
I get into the same mood when I see a website warning me it's only configured for IE or Active X. What is that BS?
Slashdot Mirror
(And no, don't say Linux - I don't have enough time to learn it well enough to use it as a desktop machine on a daily basis.)
Isn't that the best way to learn? Using it on a daily basis.
I won't say Linux because, despite the vast improvements the last years, it takes some patience.
But if you'd rather take it as they (MS, Apple) hand it to you by all means. Just don't complain that there aren't alternatives... As the old saying - the cost of freedom isn't free.
From someone who doesn't know the real hoopla about embedded linux - what are benefits of running linux on a handheld versus making an OS highly optimized for that thing?
Mr. S.A.S.? Mister Side Angle Side?
:P
I wouldn't want to see him, heard he's always bent out of shape.
Mod lame.
I fear this will be the latest step in their FUD linux campaign....... luckily the Penguin is protected by Big Blue and a few others who might have a few patents violated by Gates.
But what about the rest of Open Source? What if they go against small to medium sized developers that dare to make things for Linux but not MS?
The patent system as a whole need to be reevaluated. What's being patented in this list aren't new nonobvious processes or solutions to things anymore but just combinations of old things to a new medium (creating a note relating to a phone call). I fail to see the innovation, I hate when someone can patent stuff like that because it will only restrict what we can do in the end with the computers and languages, things they were made to do - solve problems.
The title is the typical stupid panic inducing kind "Hackers prey on unguarded wireless links" but it contains a good point: That with unsecured wireless routers and unencrypted transmissions, anybody near you place can use view your activities and use your internet connection and either steal your identity or abuse the connection and have it traced back to you.
It's not hard to understand, but when I go to a friends' house who has wireless, 2 times out of 3 my notebook can use their internet w/o a problem. Then I end up telling them to admin their router and set it up for encrypted transmission + letting only certain wireless MAC addresses through.
Any other suggestion on security?
While I switched people over to Linux with the same experience, the non-complainers tend to be newbs or people who really only do webbrowsing/IM or another set of limited functions.
I've run into problems with more advanced people who could and should be able to figure out Linux on their own but don't bother and start complaining when they can't install certain software they are used to on Windows and yet don't want to learn the *nix equivalent.
It's just that I've been hearing too many glowing switch-over stories lately and to be sure, with distros like Ubuntu, linux is easier than ever. But again, in my experience and as counter-intuitive as it seems, the total newbs to computers are easier to nab than the people who've been doing Windows for a few years.
If financial institution think it's a better solution, sortof cut MS's TCO argument down..... these are the guys that should know best (should and do being two different things).
Not that I care too much, but wouldn't something like this be breaking the DMCA (assuming you are in the good old US of A)?
I think a higher percentage - the Slashdot crowd has a tendency to underestimate those around them. Other people may not understand computers as well as geeks, but when presented with the whole picture, they should be able to a competent decision. Sadly, many people don't go investigate the whole picture.
The cynicism may well be deserved by those few - but I have to ask one question:
If Linux is not reaching any of the PHBs and if it's not being adopted by organization headed by these "idiots", why is MS bothering targetting them in advertising to smear it?
If Linux weren't a threat, Microsoft wouldn't be smearing it in a campaign but instead treating it as an annoying little gnat - by ignoring it and lauding it's own positives. By paying so much attention to and attempting to shape Linux's image publicly, Microsoft is validating it by its own advertising despite the negative content.
People with brains will realize what is propaganda and check Linux out on their own. Thanks to MS.
Don't laugh at Physical Education Mr. Gates. With our obesity rates skyrocketing and diabetes II coming already to teenagers, this epidemic will be much more costly than simply having a few less Microsoft Certifieds around.
In highschool, my gym teacher Mr. Brynard taught a better nutrition (more practical and teenage oriented) than the middle school's dietician and also was instrumental in deciding to that the vending machines in school serve no soda. I'm not saying that this is the case everytime - but the ones I met were generally very well self-motivated.
I think they'll do more good than an extra programmer or two.
And Mr. Gates also falls into the trap thinking that more programmers = more productivy. I can't really envision Mr. Brynard as the type of guy sitting down and programming for eight hours a day just because it bought more money. How happy and productive are those people who do it for the money anyway?
There's more to the world than computers - let's remember that.
1. Do you think that a user who is incapable of removing spyware could install linux (especially with helpful anti-spyware programs around)?
2. Do you think that a user who is incapable of removing spyware could keep a linux installation updated and not get rooted?
Ubuntu is easy to set up and pretty easy to update in most cases - click an icon on the top right and it will download and set-up automatically.
They won't get rooted because Ubuntu doesn't provide a root account or password on default and they'd have to go through the trouble of getting one which means they should understand why RUNNING ALWAYS AS ROOT is not good by then. If not, they simply run a similiar risk as Windows users.
3. Do you want to support all these people who are essentially computer-stupid on linux?
I don't personally want to support them but the Ubuntu community is VERY HELPFUL and very open to newbs. The more users the better. I'm sure there are other Linux communities that also don't call all newbs lusers.
4. Do you want to support these people when they start having problems with the internet (and their ISP says "Sorry, Linux is not supported!")
Other than America Online, they can switch to other National (known and advertised) dial-up services. I can see that some might have problems with a crappy Winmodem but even that is becoming less pronounced.
Broadband is usually even easier.
I have too many people asking me how to do stuff, how to fix this... can I come over and fix this... with windows... imagine it when they can't get their soundcard working, or some windows-app running. Windows may not be the best solution for a lot of things, but it's not viable to be completely phased out, either.
I hear you.
I installed for my parents Ubuntu because they recently got broadband and the Windows choked on Malware and spyware and who knows what after configuring the Router correctly and with more security in mind.
All they do is surf the net, print to their laser printer, and write emails.
They had their 2 computers running on Ubuntu the last 3 months and have not called me once to complain.
With Windows, I had to go there every six weeks for a cleaning because IE has made itself the default browser and that led to all types of popsups and what not. I usually just put in the recover cd and walla. Everything erased and gone.
This is my general experience with switching total newbs who really only surf the net. Nice and easy. And when they get more ambitious, they can ask the Ubuntu forum and get a nice response generally.
It's the more advanced users who suck ass and are, on one hand, proficient enough to learn the programs they like, and on the other hand to lazy to switch and learn the counterparts.
These type of people I reluctantly switch over to Linux. If they insist. I'll install it for them but after installation with the internet working, they have to direct all questions to Ubuntuforums.org because unless the computer won't start up and surf the web, I won't help them. I consider them trying to get all hardware working a learning experience and they'll know that before I even touch the computer.
It turns some off but hey, makes my life easier.
Unless some further regulation is attached, I don't see how promoting a duopoly is beneficial to the consumer.
Traditional U.S. government sanctioned monopolies attained their position by HAVING to provide service to the majority of consumer even in areas that would be a losing proposition (because of infrastructure versus population density) and having their prices set for them by a regulatory commission.
Will Verizon have to suddenly build more Central Offices (CO) or mini-CO's (so more people can get DSL) for the sake of this benefit? And what will Comcast trade in?
I fail to see how this helps anything but the big business.
The part of local government and wireless is cool, but at best this initiative will be sporadic or in big cities where getting broadband is less of a hassle.
That's not fair blanket statement.
One Dvorak alleviates the wrists. The other aggravates the brain.
Has he gotten worse since he was correct on the Mactel issue?
Never mind like every psychic, he overall correct prediction rate is low and the correct ones were often broad or obvious.
Props to him for his Mactel prediction though. I hope he doesn't replace his footstool with a ladder though. The higher they are......
I doubt Linux will wilt under pressure.
Many of Microsoft's security problems comes from initial poor design decisions AND that those design decisions are not easily revoked once put forth because of backward's compatibility.
ActiveX is an example of this. It was made before internet security was much of a concern but to this day MS cannot easily revoke it without breaking apps left and right and pissing off Developers.
They would have to keep the API and rewrite it under the surface while having it react the same. Not an easy task nor guaranteed possible.
On the other hand, Open Source has several advatanges - one of which people complain about - their are redundant APIs and programs galore in several areas. The strength of this is that sometimes overlying programs are programmed to be use a more generic interchangeable API.
*nix has lack of integration. This is IE's and outlook's greatest strength but fatale flaw in some regards. Other OSes, the mail client and webbrowser and filebrowser can be ripped out and exchanged much more easily or not have one at all. Microsoft's Windows tends to be hardcoded to IE/outlook and the otherway around. This non-modular design is a nightmare.
General politics. While I'm sure Linux programming groups have this too, it's a much larger degree where Microsoft's design decisions are often political with their business in mind while OSS tends to be more engineering minded.
No one wants to buy into a crippled system and consumers are getting more savvy to these type of things. I hear enough complaints about the regional encoding in DVDs and players and the market found a way aroud that (region 0).
Sadly, while people are too lazy to vote/voice against things like DMCA, they still vote with their dollars.
iTunes is an example of a system that provides assurance to the music industry while being flexible enough for consumers to use - like being able to share music with friends.
Napster on the other hand is a more inflexible model and also seems like a traitor in some respects:
http://p2pnet.net/story/5521
The thing also with HD DVDs is that right now the DVD is an entrenched market that's good enough for most people. Most people don't even own the right TVs to make use of the enhanced resolution. So what is the incentive to move away from DVDs? Hell, VCR's had good enough resolution but the killer was the ability to go anywhere in the movie like a CD (and the smaller size of discs).
If people percieve that HD DVD's or PAIDFOR online downloads are severely restricted, what incentive do they have to move away from DVD?
Resolution they can't take advantage of/notice in most cases? 1 hour wait times until the hour long FBI warning goes away because it stops all those pirates? Compulsory previews?
You're right. I wasn't being clear. Because the article pointed out the division of resources among distros, I wanted to counterpoint whether Windows has improved at the same rate as Linux if you were to compare today's offerings with their '95 offerings.
Competition is good. Ubuntu is a latecomer that just came out September of 2004 and it's one of the best distros for newbies. And most popular.
Knoppix is good and for a different audience/purpose. Imagine if either weren't out there.
A little known distro LFS (Linux From Scratch) is great for learning linux deep down inside and for ultimate configuration, but serves neither market the above two do.
The people who make distros, especially the ones not in the top 20, are people who are doing it for fun. You will not be able to funnel their effort without them feeling forced and ultimately quiting.
I would also like to have more cooperation in the *nix world, but this would have to do purely with standards and how drivers work, etcetera so that there is a reduction on overlap on projects few people want to work on (to get things working right).
But Linux's strength comes from diversity, otherwise it wouldn't have come so far. Just look at the Window Managers - specifically KDE and Gnome - without the one, the other wouldn't have been pushed to be better or as good as it is today.
We don't want to be Windows. A one-size-fits all approach wouldn't have let linux run on servers, as well as PCs, as well as in PDA's and other embedded applications as well as it does.
Has Windows really improved since 95 that much in any significant way? Is their one-size-fits-all solution what we want?
This seems to be a opportunity for Linux. Especially Ubuntu.
As they are talking about older machines and the hassle of disinfecting them versus just a new computer (it actually sounds like an excuse to get a flashy new computer), I can't imagine anybody too happy about throwing their old boxes away but would they want to give it away infected or with all their data on it.
I could see the box easily getting a second life and go to that person's little brother/sister, kid, what have you.
Ubuntu would be the perfect solution, easy to install, gets rid of all that Windows readable data, and won't get nasty pop-ups promoting porn and viagra.
(Ubuntu or any other Easy-to-use distro, I don't mean to just promote Ubuntu or imply it's the only easy one to use.)
Throw out the computer?
What do they think will happen to the next computer? Be magically immune?
Go to distrowatch and for a couple of bucks, order a linux cd of some flavor^_^ Cheaper and it will get rid of all your spyware and malware. Even the MS branded stuff! Something that ad-aware and spybot refuse to detect and correct for some reason^^
Or go with Knoppix and have a decent boot-up cd so you can start up your computer and see what's wrong with it.
Seriously, as if anyone were to buy a computer just because of spyware. You might as well just save your files and do a clean install if you wanted to keep running Windows. And then just run the free AVG virus scanner on those old files.
Relax dude, I didn't say my language was English in the first place nor will I do a spellcheck when my spelling level is readable to the majority of people - even the most anal retentive.
As an amatuer writer, this can be pretty exciting to finally have the best of paper combined with the best of computers and put together a Tablet PC with decent battery life which isn't available with a conventional LCD screen.
These days I still print out hundreds of pages just to edit my stories - editting is a pain in the ass in the conventional computer just because erasing a line with a mouse while seated upright doesn't give the same satisfaction and oversight as crossing it out with a pen and adding notes in between the margins by writing naturally while in a recliner^_^
1. I suppose there are several GPL solutions to this but not an expert. QT was a suggestion and an example - not the only alternative.
2. The Australian government can negotiate licensing with Trolltech. I can't imagine it being expensive. No need for being GPLed.
"Is it really worth wasting tax money to cater to the small percentage of people that this slightly inconveniences?"
3. Is it really worth promoting vendor lock-in with ANOTHER Windows-only solution when the alternative would be almost as painless if planned in from the start?
Steve Ballmer said it with: "Developers! Developers! Developers!"
I'll add that the thing that can kill alternatives like Linux is "APATHY! APATHY! APATHY!"
The requirements: http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc= /content/32613.htm&page=3&H3
Why in the world do Governments want to be dependent on a foreign company's closed-source proprietary software is beyond me.
I understand the need to get the most common platform but supercomplex software projects like Firefox can manage Mac/Linux/Windows (through QT???) - why can't a government?
It will save them headaches in the long-run, if the code is written to be portable and platform independent.
I get into the same mood when I see a website warning me it's only configured for IE or Active X. What is that BS?