Stock prices may be gravitationally-immuned, but they are not immune to the up-down cycles.
The RH, VA and Andover examples that you have picked are examples of stock prices that have gone TOO HIGH, TOO FAST.
Let's say if RH discovers a VERT CHEAP way to produce REAL DIAMOND, its stock price will shot up, but after a while, cool-headed thinking takes over, and people will realize that there are only so much DEMANDS for diamonds (including industrial uses) and after a while RH's stock prices will come down, real-diamond or not.
"Sometimes getting a good old-fashioned butt kicking is good for the soul."
The above quote should be repeated by many a Linux-advocates. We should remember that we are not YET the best, and good old-fashioned butt kicking is what many of us truly need right now.
"The more you layer GUI on top of the system, the more you clutter its ability to process efficiently and security is more easily compromised. Windows has and continues to prove that fact over and over again."
I am not disagreeing with you, but I do need to point out that for most applications that non-geeks use, GUI is a MUST these days.
No longer can we expect the non-geeks of the world succumb to our level of command-line-interfacing thingy.
We do have to understand that most of the non-geeks just can't function properly if they are faced with command line prompts, and we do need to acknowledge the facts that for _SOME_ of the applix we geeks use, command-line interface sometimes is NOT enough.
Whether or not we like GUI, it is here to stay. For a program that does not survive solely on command-line interface, some type of GUI _is_ necessary. Even the good old WORDSTAR (remember that?) has its own GUI, you can click on something and have one or two thing pulled down, and you can click on those things to get what you want. Of course, you can use the shortcuts like the ctrl-something thingy, but there are times our brain just couldn't handle ctrl-this or ctrl-that anymore and we went through the click-this-pull-down-that-click-that-other-thing routine instead.
And there is one more thing I like you to consider . . .
About GUI... which one do you think is better?
A. A unify GUI where all applixes share similar GUI and the similar functions.
B. Each applix comes with its own unique way of GUI, and user have to re-learn each and every single applix GUI in order to work from word-processing to spreadsheet to plotting graph to simulation to whatever.
If there _is_ a need for GUI anyway, why not have a simplified but powerful GUI which can be shared by all the applix?
I have been in the software fields for about 3 decades. I have heard many claims before.
I have heard from some people claiming that softwares that are written in the Assembly Language are better, because it can be better optimized.
I have also heard, that softwares that are written with "embedded AI" are better than those that are not.
There are so many claims like that over the years.
This time though, someone is claiming that "HURD is Object Oriented, unlike Linux, so it may be a superior system in the long run".
Is that true?
Just because HURD is written in the Object Oriented manner, does that makes it better than Linux (or BSD or AIX) which, unfortunately, the authors of the other systems have not had the foresight to utilize the OO techniques?
Please excuse my ignorance.
Is a piece of software which is written in the OO manner truly superior to those which are not?
If you feel that the whole report is too lengthy, you can print out the "BOTTOMLINE" and distribute it to whoever you think should take a look at it.
The "BOTTOMLINE" is as follows (as I copied from the website):
Bottom Line: Contrary to common perceptions, open-source development is neither a recent phenomenon nor a transient one, and more significantly, it is one that will increasingly be associated with commercial vendors and end-user organizations. We recommend that IT organizations which currently exclude all OSS from their acquisition plans should re-examine this policy.
That is the question I have asked myself many, many times, whenever I play the role of "Linux advocate" and introducing Linux to the people around me.
I can show them the amazing things Linux can do; The incredible value Linux represents; The wide array (and getting ever more wider) of softwares that run under Linux; The many platforms Linux runs under; but when it comes to printing, Linux takes a back seat, a back, back, back seat.
If the joint effort between HP and VA is successful, then, I do not have to ask myself the "To print or not to print" question again, and I can go show them the amazing things Linux can do and I can put them on paper/slide/whatever.
It's just another right step towards world domination.
To say that I am amuzed by Sun's contention is a little bit of an understatement.
Sun is scared, very scared, and yet the people in Sun is trying to put up a brave face, and think that the world will buy their "I am not scared of nobody" ploy.
IBM, by comparison, is more honest in their approach. IBM knows that in the coming decades, whichever OS the users use is not important, what is important is that the APPLICATIONS and the HARDWARE the users will choose. That is why IBM has embarked on its journey in adopting Linux, and IBM is not apologetic on what they are doing.
Unlike Sun, IBM is not scared of Linux. IBM looks at Linux as a UTLITY, while Sun looks at Linux as a THREAT.
I think that sums up the difference between IBM (a winner) and Sun (a loser).
How I wish I had "toys" like this one when I was a small kid. Instead of "killer robots" figures or mind-numbling nintendos or lame "games" the kindy teachers had devised and forced us to participate in.
I rather spent my time with toys that encourage me to explore and think and investigate and learn, rather than "I kill you, my robot is better than your robot, MUAHAHAHAHA !" or "Barbie, meet Ken, let's have lunch".
When I have kids, I rather they play pokers and chess and toys like the ones we are discussing, including Legos, than lame games that shut the brain down.
Kids of today and tomorrow are blessed with so many good and useful toys. My only hope is parents will start use more of their time to pick toys that encourage development of the brains than giving their kids toys that encourages violences and/or vogue.
Pardon me for not remembering the title of the movie, but it has to do with "mind gymnastic" or somekind of "brain olympic", in which a young boy, supposingly a GENUINE GENIUS, was brought into the world of the "mind gymnastic" but he was surrounded by "genius wannabes" and in the competition, the little boy got bored and took some pencils and rubber band and he made an elastic skeletal globe that looks very similar to the picture I saw in the website.
Can anyone confirm that the thing the movie has shown (pencil and rubberband) is the same thing as the one this discussion thread is focused on?
Time is always slipping by and I rather spent my 4 hours LEARNING something than waste it in something that is unproductive.
Who knows, maybe the things I learn in that 4 hours may one day, 20 years later, give me an insight that may worth a whole lot more than the 4 hours time I've "invested"?
I find it interesting that there are still many people having the thought that governments can do no wrong, and all the wrongs committed must be by the 15-year-old hacks.
I also find it alarming that the influence of media on our everyday life is so thorough that some people's mindset are being changed/programmed by the "news items" (I rather call it propaganda, but I digress) that they are being bombarded with.
That Slashdot has chosen to parrot the press release in using words like "21st century fields".
Of course something that started development in the year 2000, with promising result that may take 2 to 5 years to realize, will CERTAINLY be something from the 21st century field !
Unless someone has successfully built and tested a time machine, I do not think we can invent something from today onwards and call it a "18th century invention" or "12 century BC discovery".
I hope that slashdot from now on will not parrot _every_word_ from press releases it receives.
Making use of intelligent phrases, yes please; Parroting tired and mind-numbing cliches, no thanks!
If backdoors are NOT important, the big brothers can cracked into your systems through the backdoors they have put in place, with the help from Microsoft, and they can wreck havoc with your system, your life, and everything that you own.
You own your computer, you put vital data into your computer thinking that it is secure, and when someone can get into your computer via backdoor, isn't _THAT_ a breach of security?
But I don't know. Maybe I am just not smart enough to know what it really means by "security".
Look, if you want to produce games, EXCITING GAMES, touchy-feely just ain't gonna hack it.
I don't like the gore and blood and all the violence in the games, but we have to face the reality, and the reality is that people's FIRST IMPRESSION on almost _EVERYTHING_ is the way things LOOK, and in the gaming area, it's the GRAPHICS that count.
Touch-feely thingy just don't make GREAT GRAPHICS, sex and violence do.
It is easy to talk about "SECURITY". You can have a million-bit encryption routine and still you are not secure, if there are backdoors readily to be cracked by spy agencies like the CIA or NSA.
Politicians are politicians. They are good at one thing, and ONE THING ONLY, and that is, TELLING LIES.
Whether they do it online or not, LIES are still LIES.
Whether or not the people the pols are telling lies to are online or not, the pols know how to TAILOR their lies so nicely that people will BUY INTO THEIR LIES.
Even if 100% of the electorate are online, even if 100% of the pols are here to woo our votes, it still won't change the basic tenet a bit - that they (the pols) will end up RUINING OUR LIVES, because WE LET THEM !
Can you imagine what this world will look like if Intel has the patent right for "a round thing"?
We wouldn't have wheels for our cars, we wouldn't have balls to play with, no ballbearings for industrial use, no hot air balloon festival (except the square or weird-shaped ones), no hoola-hoops, all waterpipes would be triangular or square shape, and so on.
While "patents" and "copyrights" do have their use, the way Intel is exercising their "rights" is not contributing to the world's intellectual richness. Conversely, the more Intel (and other companies) abusing the "patents" and "copyrights" laws to their selfish advantages, the poorer the world is going to be.
Count ourselves lucky, then, since they forget to file for the "a round thing" patent.
No matter if it's perjury, threat, lies, extortion or whatever, MPAA has NO jurisdiction over the WEB.
The WEB is everywhere, that is, it can NOT be legally defined as residing in ONE country, or under the jurisdiction of any one COURT DISTRICT, so, MPAA is out of luck.
MPAA's "letters" is a desperate SCARING TACTIC. There is NO NEED to heed the letters at all.
In fact, those who received the letter can use it (the letter) as the PERFECT EVIDENCE to COUNTERSUE the MPAA for THREATENING and the INVASION OF PRIVACY.
Hope that someone will take that course to teach MPAA a lesson.
What is the _real_ point of having linux on N64, Playstation, or a plain toaster?
Is "I do it because I can" the main motivation behind all these extra-ordinary porting projects?
I mean, Linux exists because there is a NEED for it. Just how much NEEDS there is for Linux to run on N64 or Playstation, or microwave oven or toaster?
"As I see it, the real key would be selling the packaged software and and then selling support contracts for your GPL'ed software. Selling the packaged software means that people get the software in a pretty package with an introductory manual."
If I am not mistaken, once a software is GPLed, _anyone_ can package the software in a CD and sell it, right? Just like cheapbytes.com sells various Linux distros, and sell them at a very cheap price, what advantage there is left for the producer of the GPL software if someone-else can sell your software packages at a better price point than you can?
Manual for GPLed software is kinda risky, since GPLed software, by its nature, evolves CONSTANTLY, and printed manuals gets outdated _very_ fast, and electronic form of "man" pages for GPLed softwares are, AFAIK, treated as GPLed too.
That is to say, anyone can download the e-forms of manual, and as far as I see, that only leaves "SUPPORT" as the only option where a company producing GPLed software can hope to make _some_ money to cover the various expenses.
Has there been any successful GPLed software company - other than those like RedHat and such that goes by IPO, and those supported by venture capitalists - that lasted 3 years without needing IPO and/or the involvement of venture capitalists?
If so there are such companies, can anyone please point me to the place where I can read about their experience, and perhaps I can learn something from them.
Slashdot Mirror
Stock prices may be gravitationally-immuned, but they are not immune to the up-down cycles.
The RH, VA and Andover examples that you have picked are examples of stock prices that have gone TOO HIGH, TOO FAST.
Let's say if RH discovers a VERT CHEAP way to produce REAL DIAMOND, its stock price will shot up, but after a while, cool-headed thinking takes over, and people will realize that there are only so much DEMANDS for diamonds (including industrial uses) and after a while RH's stock prices will come down, real-diamond or not.
"Sometimes getting a good old-fashioned butt kicking is good for the soul."
The above quote should be repeated by many a Linux-advocates. We should remember that we are not YET the best, and good old-fashioned butt kicking is what many of us truly need right now.
You said:
"The more you layer GUI on top of the system, the more you clutter its ability to process efficiently and security is more easily compromised. Windows has and continues to
prove that fact over and over again."
I am not disagreeing with you, but I do need to point out that for most applications that non-geeks use, GUI is a MUST these days.
No longer can we expect the non-geeks of the world succumb to our level of command-line-interfacing thingy.
We do have to understand that most of the non-geeks just can't function properly if they are faced with command line prompts, and we do need to acknowledge the facts that for _SOME_ of the applix we geeks use, command-line interface sometimes is NOT enough.
Whether or not we like GUI, it is here to stay. For a program that does not survive solely on command-line interface, some type of GUI _is_ necessary. Even the good old WORDSTAR (remember that?) has its own GUI, you can click on something and have one or two thing pulled down, and you can click on those things to get what you want. Of course, you can use the shortcuts like the ctrl-something thingy, but there are times our brain just couldn't handle ctrl-this or ctrl-that anymore and we went through the click-this-pull-down-that-click-that-other-thing routine instead.
And there is one more thing I like you to consider . . .
About GUI... which one do you think is better?
A. A unify GUI where all applixes share similar GUI and the similar functions.
B. Each applix comes with its own unique way of GUI, and user have to re-learn each and every single applix GUI in order to work from word-processing to spreadsheet to plotting graph to simulation to whatever.
If there _is_ a need for GUI anyway, why not have a simplified but powerful GUI which can be shared by all the applix?
There was one more thing Jobs saw.
The MOUSE.
I have been in the software fields for about 3 decades. I have heard many claims before.
I have heard from some people claiming that softwares that are written in the Assembly Language are better, because it can be better optimized.
I have also heard, that softwares that are written with "embedded AI" are better than those that are not.
There are so many claims like that over the years.
This time though, someone is claiming that "HURD is Object Oriented, unlike Linux, so it may be a superior system in the long run".
Is that true?
Just because HURD is written in the Object Oriented manner, does that makes it better than Linux (or BSD or AIX) which, unfortunately, the authors of the other systems have not had the foresight to utilize the OO techniques?
Please excuse my ignorance.
Is a piece of software which is written in the OO manner truly superior to those which are not?
I definitely want some answers.
Thank you.
If you feel that the whole report is too lengthy, you can print out the "BOTTOMLINE" and distribute it to whoever you think should take a look at it.
The "BOTTOMLINE" is as follows (as I copied from the website):
Bottom Line: Contrary to common perceptions,
open-source development is neither a recent
phenomenon nor a transient one, and more
significantly, it is one that will increasingly be
associated with commercial vendors and end-user
organizations. We recommend that IT organizations
which currently exclude all OSS from their
acquisition plans should re-examine this policy.
That is the question I have asked myself many, many times, whenever I play the role of "Linux advocate" and introducing Linux to the people around me.
I can show them the amazing things Linux can do; The incredible value Linux represents; The wide array (and getting ever more wider) of softwares that run under Linux; The many platforms Linux runs under; but when it comes to printing, Linux takes a back seat, a back, back, back seat.
If the joint effort between HP and VA is successful, then, I do not have to ask myself the "To print or not to print" question again, and I can go show them the amazing things Linux can do and I can put them on paper/slide/whatever.
It's just another right step towards world domination.
Thanks again !
To say that I am amuzed by Sun's contention is a little bit of an understatement.
Sun is scared, very scared, and yet the people in Sun is trying to put up a brave face, and think that the world will buy their "I am not scared of nobody" ploy.
IBM, by comparison, is more honest in their approach. IBM knows that in the coming decades, whichever OS the users use is not important, what is important is that the APPLICATIONS and the HARDWARE the users will choose. That is why IBM has embarked on its journey in adopting Linux, and IBM is not apologetic on what they are doing.
Unlike Sun, IBM is not scared of Linux. IBM looks at Linux as a UTLITY, while Sun looks at Linux as a THREAT.
I think that sums up the difference between IBM (a winner) and Sun (a loser).
How I wish I had "toys" like this one when I was a small kid. Instead of "killer robots" figures or mind-numbling nintendos or lame "games" the kindy teachers had devised and forced us to participate in.
I rather spent my time with toys that encourage me to explore and think and investigate and learn, rather than "I kill you, my robot is better than your robot, MUAHAHAHAHA !" or "Barbie, meet Ken, let's have lunch".
When I have kids, I rather they play pokers and chess and toys like the ones we are discussing, including Legos, than lame games that shut the brain down.
Kids of today and tomorrow are blessed with so many good and useful toys. My only hope is parents will start use more of their time to pick toys that encourage development of the brains than giving their kids toys that encourages violences and/or vogue.
Pardon me for not remembering the title of the movie, but it has to do with "mind gymnastic" or somekind of "brain olympic", in which a young boy, supposingly a GENUINE GENIUS, was brought into the world of the "mind gymnastic" but he was surrounded by "genius wannabes" and in the competition, the little boy got bored and took some pencils and rubber band and he made an elastic skeletal globe that looks very similar to the picture I saw in the website.
Can anyone confirm that the thing the movie has shown (pencil and rubberband) is the same thing as the one this discussion thread is focused on?
Nothing lasts forever.
Time is always slipping by and I rather spent my 4 hours LEARNING something than waste it in something that is unproductive.
Who knows, maybe the things I learn in that 4 hours may one day, 20 years later, give me an insight that may worth a whole lot more than the 4 hours time I've "invested"?
Thanks, Yardley, for your post.
I find it interesting that there are still many people having the thought that governments can do no wrong, and all the wrongs committed must be by the 15-year-old hacks.
I also find it alarming that the influence of media on our everyday life is so thorough that some people's mindset are being changed/programmed by the "news items" (I rather call it propaganda, but I digress) that they are being bombarded with.
That Slashdot has chosen to parrot the press release in using words like "21st century fields".
Of course something that started development in the year 2000, with promising result that may take 2 to 5 years to realize, will CERTAINLY be something from the 21st century field !
Unless someone has successfully built and tested a time machine, I do not think we can invent something from today onwards and call it a "18th century invention" or "12 century BC discovery".
I hope that slashdot from now on will not parrot _every_word_ from press releases it receives.
Making use of intelligent phrases, yes please; Parroting tired and mind-numbing cliches, no thanks!
Hahaha, it should be Steve Ballmer getting himself stuck in a MOUSEtrap.
What is "security"?
If backdoors are NOT important, the big brothers can cracked into your systems through the backdoors they have put in place, with the help from Microsoft, and they can wreck havoc with your system, your life, and everything that you own.
You own your computer, you put vital data into your computer thinking that it is secure, and when someone can get into your computer via backdoor, isn't _THAT_ a breach of security?
But I don't know. Maybe I am just not smart enough to know what it really means by "security".
Look, if you want to produce games, EXCITING GAMES, touchy-feely just ain't gonna hack it.
I don't like the gore and blood and all the violence in the games, but we have to face the reality, and the reality is that people's FIRST IMPRESSION on almost _EVERYTHING_ is the way things LOOK, and in the gaming area, it's the GRAPHICS that count.
Touch-feely thingy just don't make GREAT GRAPHICS, sex and violence do.
So there !
It is easy to talk about "SECURITY". You can have a million-bit encryption routine and still you are not secure, if there are backdoors readily to be cracked by spy agencies like the CIA or NSA.
What about the backdoors, Microsoft?
Politicians are politicians. They are good at one thing, and ONE THING ONLY, and that is, TELLING LIES.
Whether they do it online or not, LIES are still LIES.
Whether or not the people the pols are telling lies to are online or not, the pols know how to TAILOR their lies so nicely that people will BUY INTO THEIR LIES.
Even if 100% of the electorate are online, even if 100% of the pols are here to woo our votes, it still won't change the basic tenet a bit - that they (the pols) will end up RUINING OUR LIVES, because WE LET THEM !
Can you imagine what this world will look like if Intel has the patent right for "a round thing"?
We wouldn't have wheels for our cars, we wouldn't have balls to play with, no ballbearings for industrial use, no hot air balloon festival (except the square or weird-shaped ones), no hoola-hoops, all waterpipes would be triangular or square shape, and so on.
While "patents" and "copyrights" do have their use, the way Intel is exercising their "rights" is not contributing to the world's intellectual richness. Conversely, the more Intel (and other companies) abusing the "patents" and "copyrights" laws to their selfish advantages, the poorer the world is going to be.
Count ourselves lucky, then, since they forget to file for the "a round thing" patent.
No matter if it's perjury, threat, lies, extortion or whatever, MPAA has NO jurisdiction over the WEB.
The WEB is everywhere, that is, it can NOT be legally defined as residing in ONE country, or under the jurisdiction of any one COURT DISTRICT, so, MPAA is out of luck.
MPAA's "letters" is a desperate SCARING TACTIC. There is NO NEED to heed the letters at all.
In fact, those who received the letter can use it (the letter) as the PERFECT EVIDENCE to COUNTERSUE the MPAA for THREATENING and the INVASION OF PRIVACY.
Hope that someone will take that course to teach MPAA a lesson.
Please excuse me, but I just don't get it.
What is the _real_ point of having linux on N64, Playstation, or a plain toaster?
Is "I do it because I can" the main motivation behind all these extra-ordinary porting projects?
I mean, Linux exists because there is a NEED for it. Just how much NEEDS there is for Linux to run on N64 or Playstation, or microwave oven or toaster?
Sorry, I just don't get it.
Please pardon this stupid question.
Is OpenGL opensourced?
If not, is there an opensource project working on an OpenGL clone?
Thanks in advance.
You wrote:
"I'd be looking for www.linuxprogrammer.com first."
Guess what? www.linuxprogrammer.org exists, and it IS for sale !!
Thanks for your comment.
You said:
"As I see it, the real key would be selling the packaged software and and then selling support contracts for your GPL'ed software. Selling the packaged software means that people get the software in a pretty package with an introductory manual."
If I am not mistaken, once a software is GPLed, _anyone_ can package the software in a CD and sell it, right? Just like cheapbytes.com sells various Linux distros, and sell them at a very cheap price, what advantage there is left for the producer of the GPL software if someone-else can sell your software packages at a better price point than you can?
Manual for GPLed software is kinda risky, since GPLed software, by its nature, evolves CONSTANTLY, and printed manuals gets outdated _very_ fast, and electronic form of "man" pages for GPLed softwares are, AFAIK, treated as GPLed too.
That is to say, anyone can download the e-forms of manual, and as far as I see, that only leaves "SUPPORT" as the only option where a company producing GPLed software can hope to make _some_ money to cover the various expenses.
Has there been any successful GPLed software company - other than those like RedHat and such that goes by IPO, and those supported by venture capitalists - that lasted 3 years without needing IPO and/or the involvement of venture capitalists?
If so there are such companies, can anyone please point me to the place where I can read about their experience, and perhaps I can learn something from them.
Thanks again !