Somehow I think DiBona confuses the word Sponsor with Patron. Open Source needs sponsors. It doesn't need some fatherly Patron that pimps code out to companies because "its free". Linux has single-handedly managed to tie the hands of EVERY CIO on Earth to shrinking (or flat) budgets because "software is free". We need someone that can change the CFO's "it's all free" paradigm to a more stable "plan for growth" paradigm.
Nope, sysadmins are not grumpy because they can't manage their time. They're surly because the tech boom of the 1990's left them in an odd position of power. Allowing them to get away with being surly, rude and lazy. Only problem now is, they no longer have the ability to leave a job and get another one on the drive home.
As a historian, you should be far more concerned with how valid your data is. The whole million monkeys concept is very valid regarding most of the data I've found on Wiki. In fact, I find more relevant data from a narrow google search than I do from wiki.
Not sure I'd call that an interview, but rather a fishing expedition for dirt and blame. After his first 'egomancer' question the programmer should have recognized it for what it was and either ended the session or started answering in arabic or something.
Or better yet, give your product away for free! Why charge for the movie or music you spent money to produce??? DRM, at it's heart is more about protecting revenue than it is about pissing off techies and taking 13 year old kids to court. Frankly, I'm in favor of harsher laws for piracy. If anyone here made software for PROFIT (novel concept, I know) you'd agree.
Most CFO's do not request ROI reports for OS upgrades. Out right OS replacements, yes. But not an OS upgrade. CFO's will agree that to compete in the next 7-10 years a server OS upgrade with be entirely worthwhile. The concern will fall into the upgrade project plan and it's impact on uptime (and thus revenue streams).
User groups are and pretty much always have been the stigmata of the linux community, much the same way LARPS give role-players a bad name.
*cue the endless variable of losers who met their wives through LUGS giving touching diatribes of the beauty of LUGs (and consequently LARPS).
Precisely, our labs at BU were funded initially by Wang (heehee) and IBM. Later a seperate lab at BU was funded by the US Navy and EDS. At the time Wang and IBM were fierce competitors, and frankly all we saw were grants and hardware from both. This is news much like the fact that GM makes Saturn and Fords.
Developers really need to stop whining about all of this non-sense. The bottom line is, the market supports the current publisher/developer model. If the development crew lost rights, it's because they legally allowed it. This business is about how much you can LEGALLY get, not how much you created. If your baby slips away from you, it's because you, as a developer, didn't want it bad enough. I'm not seeing the shortage of game development positions. So the burn-out is obviously hyperbole. I've lost two development babies of my own, and I don't hate on the corporations that I partnered with that currently have the rights. I allowed it because thats how the world works.
65k for how many licenses of Office? Also, most project managers speak in terms of seats/users, not network size when discussing software roll-outs for client apps. So it's specious to say you're rolling out a client app on a medium sized network and expecting people to make the connection between network size and user-base. I'm not flaming, I'm just filling in some logistical gaps you're going to encounter using the wrong lingo. I'm going to assume medium sized network translates to roughly under 500 licenses. Have you had a user-base test out OO yet? Do you know if there will be any user acceptance? If users don't accept your 'free roll-out' you will run into rampant pirating of MS licenses. Try using the least technically apt people and the most technically apt users for a test base. If it works for both, you'll get a solid acceptance level. Remember, client apps are to make work smoother for users, not harder and frankly OO is not intuitive at all. Did this come up outside of a budget scope? Did you not plan out a budget for end-user applications? Or is this a knee-jerk reaction to feel cool when talking with other techies?
Really, the only demographic that would tolerate this is San Francisco and possibly Seattle.
Once a tit flops( or a cthuloid vagina) out the whole #! will get tossed.
Wow, you've got a lot of people to blame. Windows will do what the legal system and market allows them to do. With the penetration of their product-line, and lack of acceptance of similar quality products that are free (open source), I'd say that not only is the market accepting of MS they are eager for more. The same cannot be said for any other desktop suite by any vendor, open or closed source. The few folks who seem to be declaring that the president is blindly allowing MS to oppress the world all seem to gather here and total less than a million, hell, the AARP has more pull than the open source endevour. Maybe what is needed is some sort of Harrison Bergeron-type justice...after all, it seems so totally unfair that a company be allowed to continue to make money selling their product(s).
You're also sampling a very negatively biased audience. Most pro-MS posters tend to get mod'd into oblivion and almost never have their posts even seen by the majority of folks here.
Normal operations are still complicated or not possible in Star Office. Office 12 will not see a dent in it's sales from Star Office. Star Office isn't a MS killer, it is a RAM killer though.
Rather than focus on servers and clustering, having fault tolerant services is more important. Typically this means a farm, albeit scaled to your business needs, that allows for services to to fail-over. Clustering is very different than fault tolerant servers, clustering ensures proceses get distributed evenly over several processors....yes a symptom of that is normally a certain level of fault tolerance. But it is not a fault tolerant design per se.
Cock blocking is what happens when someone is prevented from getting laid by a third-party. Even suggesting someone at this convention will get laid without paying for it is laughable. Kudos to you for making me laugh.:)
IN this modern era, many people read to live a brief fantasy wherein the medium would make even a luddite happy. The medium of a hard-copy book lends itself to curling up comfortably in bed, sitting under a tree in a park or catching some rays at the beach (all hard to do even with even a teeny Vaio). The book will reign supreme for years to come.
Slashdot Mirror
Just curious, but why do your office mates need to burn dvds or cds?
Is there no network file shares available or is there simply no network at all?
Somehow I think DiBona confuses the word Sponsor with Patron.
Open Source needs sponsors. It doesn't need some fatherly Patron that pimps code out to companies because "its free".
Linux has single-handedly managed to tie the hands of EVERY CIO on Earth to shrinking (or flat) budgets because "software is free". We need someone that can change the CFO's "it's all free" paradigm to a more stable "plan for growth" paradigm.
Nope, sysadmins are not grumpy because they can't manage their time. They're surly because the tech boom of the 1990's left them in an odd position of power. Allowing them to get away with being surly, rude and lazy.
Only problem now is, they no longer have the ability to leave a job and get another one on the drive home.
Is with uptime.
In fact, I bonus my people based on uptime and it works remarkably well.
As a historian, you should be far more concerned with how valid your data is.
The whole million monkeys concept is very valid regarding most of the data I've found on Wiki.
In fact, I find more relevant data from a narrow google search than I do from wiki.
Not sure I'd call that an interview, but rather a fishing expedition for dirt and blame.
After his first 'egomancer' question the programmer should have recognized it for what it was and either ended the session or started answering in arabic or something.
Or better yet, give your product away for free!
Why charge for the movie or music you spent money to produce???
DRM, at it's heart is more about protecting revenue than it is about pissing off techies and taking 13 year old kids to court.
Frankly, I'm in favor of harsher laws for piracy.
If anyone here made software for PROFIT (novel concept, I know) you'd agree.
Most CFO's do not request ROI reports for OS upgrades. Out right OS replacements, yes. But not an OS upgrade. CFO's will agree that to compete in the next 7-10 years a server OS upgrade with be entirely worthwhile.
The concern will fall into the upgrade project plan and it's impact on uptime (and thus revenue streams).
User groups are and pretty much always have been the stigmata of the linux community, much the same way LARPS give role-players a bad name.
*cue the endless variable of losers who met their wives through LUGS giving touching diatribes of the beauty of LUGs (and consequently LARPS).
Precisely, our labs at BU were funded initially by Wang (heehee) and IBM. Later a seperate lab at BU was funded by the US Navy and EDS. At the time Wang and IBM were fierce competitors, and frankly all we saw were grants and hardware from both. This is news much like the fact that GM makes Saturn and Fords.
Developers really need to stop whining about all of this non-sense.
The bottom line is, the market supports the current publisher/developer model. If the development crew lost rights, it's because they legally allowed it. This business is about how much you can LEGALLY get, not how much you created.
If your baby slips away from you, it's because you, as a developer, didn't want it bad enough.
I'm not seeing the shortage of game development positions. So the burn-out is obviously hyperbole.
I've lost two development babies of my own, and I don't hate on the corporations that I partnered with that currently have the rights. I allowed it because thats how the world works.
65k for how many licenses of Office?
Also, most project managers speak in terms of seats/users, not network size when discussing software roll-outs for client apps. So it's specious to say you're rolling out a client app on a medium sized network and expecting people to make the connection between network size and user-base.
I'm not flaming, I'm just filling in some logistical gaps you're going to encounter using the wrong lingo.
I'm going to assume medium sized network translates to roughly under 500 licenses.
Have you had a user-base test out OO yet? Do you know if there will be any user acceptance? If users don't accept your 'free roll-out' you will run into rampant pirating of MS licenses. Try using the least technically apt people and the most technically apt users for a test base. If it works for both, you'll get a solid acceptance level.
Remember, client apps are to make work smoother for users, not harder and frankly OO is not intuitive at all.
Did this come up outside of a budget scope? Did you not plan out a budget for end-user applications? Or is this a knee-jerk reaction to feel cool when talking with other techies?
Darknets are and will be the future.
The internet proper will be like an AOL bulletin board is today in 10 years.
Because the leader of Slashdot's Hive Mind has spoken.
That it why.
Really, the only demographic that would tolerate this is San Francisco and possibly Seattle.
Once a tit flops( or a cthuloid vagina) out the whole #! will get tossed.
Wow, you've got a lot of people to blame.
Windows will do what the legal system and market allows them to do.
With the penetration of their product-line, and lack of acceptance of similar quality products that are free (open source), I'd say that not only is the market accepting of MS they are eager for more.
The same cannot be said for any other desktop suite by any vendor, open or closed source.
The few folks who seem to be declaring that the president is blindly allowing MS to oppress the world all seem to gather here and total less than a million, hell, the AARP has more pull than the open source endevour.
Maybe what is needed is some sort of Harrison Bergeron-type justice...after all, it seems so totally unfair that a company be allowed to continue to make money selling their product(s).
With you as the exception.
Name 1 FOIA reasonable application blocked. And 5 NSA patents (ever).
You're also sampling a very negatively biased audience.
Most pro-MS posters tend to get mod'd into oblivion and almost never have their posts even seen by the majority of folks here.
Normal operations are still complicated or not possible in Star Office.
Office 12 will not see a dent in it's sales from Star Office.
Star Office isn't a MS killer, it is a RAM killer though.
Rather than focus on servers and clustering, having fault tolerant services is more important.
Typically this means a farm, albeit scaled to your business needs, that allows for services to to fail-over.
Clustering is very different than fault tolerant servers, clustering ensures proceses get distributed evenly over several processors....yes a symptom of that is normally a certain level of fault tolerance. But it is not a fault tolerant design per se.
Cock blocking is what happens when someone is prevented from getting laid by a third-party. :)
Even suggesting someone at this convention will get laid without paying for it is laughable.
Kudos to you for making me laugh.
IN this modern era, many people read to live a brief fantasy wherein the medium would make even a luddite happy.
The medium of a hard-copy book lends itself to curling up comfortably in bed, sitting under a tree in a park or catching some rays at the beach (all hard to do even with even a teeny Vaio).
The book will reign supreme for years to come.
I think they should base one of the protagonists off this guy: http://www.landoverbaptist.org/sermons/christmas.h tml
I like the way you left off the word 'potentially'.
We all know a lot of poorly formed php/sql statements are often considered "potentially malign".