The problem is, Close to 90% or more of computers are running Windows instead.
Slight correction.
The problem is, Close to 90% or more of DESKTOP computers are running Windows instead.
There is a HUGE difference and MS has no monopoly in the server room. Unix is actaully the most used server OS. With Linux being the largest growing server OS last year and this year.
This looks like a TOY to me and not a powerful desktop computer. MS is REALLY trying to make a PC into an appliance. What is the point of having processor speeds, hard drive storage, graphics cards, etc go up in power/performance the way they have been, and then turn around and try to turn the PC into a limited functionality appliacne. I am glad I left MS a long time ago. The sad thing is that while they may for now have 90%+ of the desktop, they don't have that monopoly in the server room, and Linux is ever increasing on servers. This Fisher Price GUI just doesn't sit well for a server OS. Instead of this useless "eye candy" they should be tightening up security and stability to make a better server OS that doesn't propogate worms/viruses at the speed of light.
Actually the burden of proof is on the RIAA. It is
them that have to show that the majority of P2P usage
is copyright infringement. Bittorrent actaully has MANY
files on it that are legit. It makes downloading large files
more effcient since you can get the file from more then one host at a time instead of just one HTTP/FTP server.
It would be very simple to educate your friends on how MS is bad and how EASY it would be for them to install AOL's IM or Yahoo's IM client. It is a matter of a few point-and-clicks.
You could even have them install jabber, which is just as easy to install. Then you would have no problems to keep using gaim. Also, while this may sound lame, if they are your friends they would support your choice to not use an MS product. There is no cost for them to upgrade from MSN and as I said, a monkey could do the upgrade.
They still couldn't do that. Even if SCO could some how show the GPL to be an invalid license. The standard copyright laws of the USA would still apply and SCO would have to get a license from EVERY person who has contributed code to the software that they want to try to make their own "IP".
Bruce Perens clearly shows how this code was released under the BSD license a while ago and how it was in circulation for almost 30 years! I hope the stock price of SCO goes way down now that we have analyzed thier best example and shown how it is FUD.
Bruce Perens clearly shows how this code was released under the BSD license a while ago and how it was in circulation for almost 30 years! I hope the stock price of SCO goes way down now that we have analyzed thier best example and shown how it is FUD.
It'd be important to read the license, if they were actually binding. If you buy Windows you're buying the full and unlimited right to use everything they ship it with. The only restrictions are those of copyright law, you can't make extra copies of anything, but as long as your actions don't require any copies, beyond those inherently required to use the software, you're not violating copyright.
Copyright law allows you to make one copy. With MS you agree to give up many rights. They have all kinds of stuff in their licenses. How your not allowed to sell the software even though you purchased it. I think the software HAS to be sold with the hardware. Your not allowed to post benchmarks for many things. Read through some of their EULA's and see how much you give up to use their junk.
I think this is a tough issue because while I don't like MS at all, I do want computing in general to be secure. Now the problem I have is that nasty ole MS likes to slip in additions to their EULA. They know most users don't read it and basically are being unethical IMO. So what happens now when an update is applied without ANY user intervention or knowledge with a new EULA? Will MS say that by not stopping the update or optting out you are agreeing to the new terms? Soon MS will have every MS windows user agreeing to allow them to scan for programs and remove any program that MS wants. Wait.. I think that already happend. I guess the next step will be to have every user "agree" without knowing to allow DRM to be put in their PC's. That would sure make user adoption very easy. I think the ONLY sensible solution is to not have RPC on by default. To not have SMB on by default unless a user chooses to share a folder. They should NOT have users belong to the administrator group by default. That is just brain dead IMO. They should do what Red Hat is doing. If a task requires root (admin) credentials, then prompt for the root(admin) password. Or you can just do what I have done and use Linux exclusivly and enjoy a much more "out of the box" secure computing experience.
What would be nice is if Microsoft provided a CD subscription for their patches for cheap.
So charge people an arm and a leg for a crappy product, use those people as your QA process and THEN charge them again to fix the problems with the crappy product? This senario only sounds like it would benefit MS.
MS won't go under by any number of people buying them. They have plenty of cash to sit through it. They know that the real money is in royalties from game sales and the cost for companies to even be able to develop software for the XBox. So, you ARE supporting MS.
I don't have an XBox because I have this thing called a concious that prevents from buying things from Microsoft.
...
Now on my PC I've bought about ten games in the last year, including Jedi Knight 2, Morrowind, Medal of Honor, Unreal Tournament 2003,...
So your conscience tells you it is bad to buy an MS XBox, but good to buy MS Software? That is like saying that your conscience tells you it is bad to smoke crack, but OK to use heroin. Did you know that Jedi Knight 2, Morrowind - The Elder Scrolls III, WarCraft II, WarCraft III, The Sims all work perfectly under Linux using WineX? Also, I believe Unreal has a native port to Linux. I personally don't understand being against something only half way.
I forget where I read that, however it is in the license.I am trying to find the link about it. However you can look through the license to see it if you have a copy of MS Front Page. This is why it is SOOO important to read the license of ANY MS software. They really jam it to you and most people have no clue what they have agreed to.
This may have nothing to do with price, I can agree with that. But not EVERYTHING should be "free". There are several good reasons to develop non-free software. For example, control over development and security (on various levels).
That is complete MS FUD. Closed Source has nothing to do with security. Look at MS and their horrid track record. Open Source can be controled just as well if not better then closed source. Look at XFree86. It is a royal pain to get changes make in that code tree unless you are part of that core dev team. That is the reason the split finally took place.
I'm all for free software, but not everyone can live with one man's ideals. To refuse to coexist is purely ignorant and will very likely be what keeps FSF down.
I agree and think RMS is a little too tenacious. I personally think there can be a happy medium between commercial and non-commercial software. The IT market is huge and has plenty of room for both. The problem with commercial software such as MS is they can often get too much money behind them which can allow them to become a too powerfull monopoly.
Commercial software makes complete sense, and should at the very least be ACCEPTED by the linux community. Until it is, the only people to use linux will be people who want to spend lots of time learning the Operating System, manoevring through newsgroups, search engines and irc channels for half-decent support. And none depending on the popularity of the software/device that isn't working.
Commercial software makes sense sure, but not closed source, proprietary software. Proprietary software benefits no one except for the commercial company. And as far as no one using Linux, I think it is time you get a clue. Did you read the report about Linux reaching around 20% of desktop installs by 2008? Thats only about 4 years away. Also, Linux has a very nice share of the server OS market and is the larget increasing OS in the server market.
To make linux accepted by the general public it has to be usable. Currently it is barely that, and without commercial contribution of the closed software to linux, there will be many problems. Realplayer and Shockwave being prime examples being used by the interviewer.
Get a clue. Maybe your knowledge of a PC is limited to a two button mouse. However the current generation growing up have had computer since early childhood and are far more computer savvy then most FUD gives them credit for. I have used Linux EXCLUSIVLEY at home for 3 years. My wife finds it perfectly usable. I switched several family members without any problems and not ONE wants to go back. realPlayer works great under Linux. There is a native port with a plugin. Shockwave sucks IMO and detracts from me using the Internet. However, if you want to use it, it works great in Codeweavers Cross Over Plugin.
RMS's answer of "lobby them until they make it free" is COMPLETELY retarded.
Just as the commercial software companies idea of Lobby the government until they have full control and power over IT is COMPLETELY retarded. I personally would rather have someone lobby software companies to give ME more freedom with a product then some monopoly lobbying the members of congress to TAKE AWAY my freedoms.
Get a clue, the world can't work on one end of the spectrum. It may be cliche, but you cannot have good without evil, and if you cannot embrace this then there is much to learn.
I think you need to come out from that cloud and get a clue. The world currently DOES work from one end of the spectrum and that is the closed source, strip away all rights, commercial software industry. Until there is more balance, people will fight back.
Oh, I agree. Guns make it much more accessible and much less personal to kill. That is why I personally do not own a gun nor support them. However, I do not believe in putting the blame of problems on objects when the blame belongs on a person. It is the person and not the gun that commits the crime.
Hey, Davenport is a great place to live. Ben is 10 miles from Walt Disney World and 25 minutes from Orlando. Ben got tired of all the snow up in Philly and moved to sunny Florida instead.
That is not a copout. Nothing in the FSF philosophy prevents anyone from charging. Take a look at Ximian. You could download their XD2 desktop free of charge OR you can purchase it from them. Same thing with their Red-Carpet product. The same goes for MySQL, Red Hat, SuSE. The reason that most free-as-in-speech software has also been free-as-in-beer is because there are not as many companies who release their products free-as-in-speech verse closed source. As more companies come along that try this business model, you will find more free-as-in-speech software that is charged for. Look at SuSE. Their product is free-as-in-speech, however they try to encourage you to purchase it from them by not making ISO's available and keeping the price low.
What are you taling about? Guns don't kill people. Have you ever heard of a gun killing someone? No. It is the person using the gun. Also, RMS talked of how Ximian was a successful Open Source company. Maybe you cannot understand what Free Software is all about, however that does not mean others cannot. Again, for those that catch on a little slower: Free Software has NOTHING to do with price. You can charge for it or give it away free of charge. The Free in Free Software stands for the freedom granted to you in respect to that software.
I had problems moving a Java app and a php app that was using OpenLDAP in my dev environment to AD. I just wished they stuck to the LDAP standard 100% without any proprietary stuff added to it. Plus we have 110,000 employees in it as well as other junk. It can get a little slow at times with only 110,000 employees.
The problem is, is that AD is not a general purpose LDAP server. They diverged too much from regular ole LDAP which makes coding against it a pain. The company I am at have 110,000 employees in it plus other junk. It just get a little too slow for me with that much stuff in it. OpenLDAP and Novell can handle it with no problems. I also had more of a pain coding a java app and a php site to use it over a standard LDAP server.
You should. OpenLDAP is very good. However, you can also look at commercial versions put out by Novell and Sun. Present them with choice over the MS dictate method.
I think you are missing the point that RMS is trying to make. The freedom he is talking about has NOTHING to do with money. Only freedom over the software. I have not read anything from RMS that said he thinks making money off of software wrong. It is only the stripping of freedoms that is wrong. I am all for a balanced software industry where some products have zero cost and others do not. However, I think all software needs to be free as in speech and let the end user do with it as they will. The current practice of many software companies, especiall MS it to strip away all the rights for what you can do with that software by keeping the source closed, using proprietary/closed protocols and document formats. And even worse, to actaully restrict what activities that you can do with that software like how MS says you are not allowed to use MS Front Page to make a web site that is negative about MS. That is a little over-the-top IMO. So remember, Free Software has NOTHIG to do with cost and everything to do with freedom. If every piece of Free Software cost money, no on in the FSF would complain.
Are you suggesting that AD is a good LDAP server? If so you are very wrong. AD really blows is and is very slow. I remember a statement from MS about them getting 2.x million entries into their AD server, at about the same time Novell announced 1 billion! The only reason any effort is made within the Linux community to work with AD is because it is needed to work in many MS networks. Also, AD is an LDAP server with proprietary crap tacked on that MS does not share. I think the Samba team have made some great gains with SMB and now AD all from reverse engineering.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, Close to 90% or more of DESKTOP computers are running Windows instead.
There is a HUGE difference and MS has no monopoly in the server room. Unix is actaully the most used server OS. With Linux being the largest growing server OS last year and this year.
This looks like a TOY to me and not a powerful desktop computer. MS is REALLY trying to make a PC into an appliance. What is the point of having processor speeds, hard drive storage, graphics cards, etc go up in power/performance the way they have been, and then turn around and try to turn the PC into a limited functionality appliacne. I am glad I left MS a long time ago. The sad thing is that while they may for now have 90%+ of the desktop, they don't have that monopoly in the server room, and Linux is ever increasing on servers. This Fisher Price GUI just doesn't sit well for a server OS. Instead of this useless "eye candy" they should be tightening up security and stability to make a better server OS that doesn't propogate worms/viruses at the speed of light.
Actually the burden of proof is on the RIAA. It is them that have to show that the majority of P2P usage is copyright infringement. Bittorrent actaully has MANY files on it that are legit. It makes downloading large files more effcient since you can get the file from more then one host at a time instead of just one HTTP/FTP server.
I found the link about this. Control with fine print
It would be very simple to educate your friends on how MS is bad and how EASY it would be for them to install AOL's IM or Yahoo's IM client. It is a matter of a few point-and-clicks. You could even have them install jabber, which is just as easy to install. Then you would have no problems to keep using gaim. Also, while this may sound lame, if they are your friends they would support your choice to not use an MS product. There is no cost for them to upgrade from MSN and as I said, a monkey could do the upgrade.
They still couldn't do that. Even if SCO could some how show the GPL to be an invalid license. The standard copyright laws of the USA would still apply and SCO would have to get a license from EVERY person who has contributed code to the software that they want to try to make their own "IP".
Didn't anyone read the links? Especially this one? Analysis of Linux Code that SCO Alleges Is In Violation Of Their Copyright and Trade Secrets
Bruce Perens clearly shows how this code was released under the BSD license a while ago and how it was in circulation for almost 30 years! I hope the stock price of SCO goes way down now that we have analyzed thier best example and shown how it is FUD.
Didn't anyone read the links? Especially this one? Analysis of Linux Code that SCO Alleges Is In Violation Of Their Copyright and Trade Secrets
Bruce Perens clearly shows how this code was released under the BSD license a while ago and how it was in circulation for almost 30 years! I hope the stock price of SCO goes way down now that we have analyzed thier best example and shown how it is FUD.
I think this is a tough issue because while I don't like MS at all, I do want computing in general to be secure. Now the problem I have is that nasty ole MS likes to slip in additions to their EULA. They know most users don't read it and basically are being unethical IMO. So what happens now when an update is applied without ANY user intervention or knowledge with a new EULA? Will MS say that by not stopping the update or optting out you are agreeing to the new terms? Soon MS will have every MS windows user agreeing to allow them to scan for programs and remove any program that MS wants. Wait.. I think that already happend. I guess the next step will be to have every user "agree" without knowing to allow DRM to be put in their PC's. That would sure make user adoption very easy. I think the ONLY sensible solution is to not have RPC on by default. To not have SMB on by default unless a user chooses to share a folder. They should NOT have users belong to the administrator group by default. That is just brain dead IMO. They should do what Red Hat is doing. If a task requires root (admin) credentials, then prompt for the root(admin) password. Or you can just do what I have done and use Linux exclusivly and enjoy a much more "out of the box" secure computing experience.
MS won't go under by any number of people buying them. They have plenty of cash to sit through it. They know that the real money is in royalties from game sales and the cost for companies to even be able to develop software for the XBox. So, you ARE supporting MS.
I forget where I read that, however it is in the license.I am trying to find the link about it. However you can look through the license to see it if you have a copy of MS Front Page. This is why it is SOOO important to read the license of ANY MS software. They really jam it to you and most people have no clue what they have agreed to.
Oh, I agree. Guns make it much more accessible and much less personal to kill. That is why I personally do not own a gun nor support them. However, I do not believe in putting the blame of problems on objects when the blame belongs on a person. It is the person and not the gun that commits the crime.
Hey, Davenport is a great place to live. Ben is 10 miles from Walt Disney World and 25 minutes from Orlando. Ben got tired of all the snow up in Philly and moved to sunny Florida instead.
That is not a copout. Nothing in the FSF philosophy prevents anyone from charging. Take a look at Ximian. You could download their XD2 desktop free of charge OR you can purchase it from them. Same thing with their Red-Carpet product. The same goes for MySQL, Red Hat, SuSE. The reason that most free-as-in-speech software has also been free-as-in-beer is because there are not as many companies who release their products free-as-in-speech verse closed source. As more companies come along that try this business model, you will find more free-as-in-speech software that is charged for. Look at SuSE. Their product is free-as-in-speech, however they try to encourage you to purchase it from them by not making ISO's available and keeping the price low.
What are you taling about? Guns don't kill people. Have you ever heard of a gun killing someone? No. It is the person using the gun. Also, RMS talked of how Ximian was a successful Open Source company. Maybe you cannot understand what Free Software is all about, however that does not mean others cannot. Again, for those that catch on a little slower: Free Software has NOTHING to do with price. You can charge for it or give it away free of charge. The Free in Free Software stands for the freedom granted to you in respect to that software.
I had problems moving a Java app and a php app that was using OpenLDAP in my dev environment to AD. I just wished they stuck to the LDAP standard 100% without any proprietary stuff added to it. Plus we have 110,000 employees in it as well as other junk. It can get a little slow at times with only 110,000 employees.
The problem is, is that AD is not a general purpose LDAP server. They diverged too much from regular ole LDAP which makes coding against it a pain. The company I am at have 110,000 employees in it plus other junk. It just get a little too slow for me with that much stuff in it. OpenLDAP and Novell can handle it with no problems. I also had more of a pain coding a java app and a php site to use it over a standard LDAP server.
You should. OpenLDAP is very good. However, you can also look at commercial versions put out by Novell and Sun. Present them with choice over the MS dictate method.
I can't use my mod points since I posted on this topic. However, if I had not used them I would mod you up. I think that was a very good analogy.
I think you are missing the point that RMS is trying to make. The freedom he is talking about has NOTHING to do with money. Only freedom over the software. I have not read anything from RMS that said he thinks making money off of software wrong. It is only the stripping of freedoms that is wrong. I am all for a balanced software industry where some products have zero cost and others do not. However, I think all software needs to be free as in speech and let the end user do with it as they will. The current practice of many software companies, especiall MS it to strip away all the rights for what you can do with that software by keeping the source closed, using proprietary/closed protocols and document formats. And even worse, to actaully restrict what activities that you can do with that software like how MS says you are not allowed to use MS Front Page to make a web site that is negative about MS. That is a little over-the-top IMO. So remember, Free Software has NOTHIG to do with cost and everything to do with freedom. If every piece of Free Software cost money, no on in the FSF would complain.
Are you suggesting that AD is a good LDAP server? If so you are very wrong. AD really blows is and is very slow. I remember a statement from MS about them getting 2.x million entries into their AD server, at about the same time Novell announced 1 billion! The only reason any effort is made within the Linux community to work with AD is because it is needed to work in many MS networks. Also, AD is an LDAP server with proprietary crap tacked on that MS does not share. I think the Samba team have made some great gains with SMB and now AD all from reverse engineering.