Both Asimov and Dune write science fiction; Farscape is television and I have never seen it so I do not comment. My all time great is the world of CJ Cherryh with books like Cyteen and Downbelow station. It relates how humanity develops when time between travelling from point to point is an issue Do try to read these and enjoy! Gerard
When you start by saying that "it is clear", you assume that it is clear. To me it is not. One license compared to another license tries to achieve different things. Technically superior? I assume that you think BSD kernels are superior to the GPL kernels.
The bottom line of kernels is that to most people they are a given. It is the software on top that is important. A superior OS allows for superior software. That is why it is heartening to see non proprietary kernels evolve so well and become an alternative for desktop use.
It is nice that I can see it ahead of time. But the experience of seeing it in a theatre is awesomwe. So I go and see it anyway.
I have a collection of 350 cd's I bought them. I do not have copies. It suffices. And I am appalled that I have to pay extra for my data cd's as it is to "compensate" for the copieng of all these cd's. I think cd's are too expensive and I am now turned off.
When people take up Open Source/Linux, they take up something that is basically free. Add to that the infrastructure aspects of the software. It needs some dogfood (services) but it is best to have a local dogfood supplier. This gives you labels in your local language in stead of the current lingua franca AND you can speak to them.
For the US to keep a positive trade balance re IT they HAVE to have great programmers. Currently they get them elsewhere as the US education system is said to be lacking. That is the sad thing for the US 'cause IT was great so far and what the next thing will be is unclear
When the USA decides that a monopoly is OK-ish, it does not mean that you have to buy into that monopoly. Microsoft is big as it holds the keys to many data formats that are proprietary. The next software from Redmond has different formats and will therefore be incompatible for those that do no "upgrade" to the new software. So when you do not buy into the hype and return data thhat you cannot read, the message that was send to you will become a challenge to the sender: how do I get my message across?
When open formats like the ones sponsored by Open Office are NOT to be supported by Microsoft we have a similar chicken and egg sitation. However, as these formats are taken up by governments and institutions, it will be increasingly difficult for organisations and people NOT to be able to read those formats.
Another thing is that you may not be able to buy a PC from the likes of IBM or DELL without a Microsoft license. Do consider then NOT to buy such a system; buy it at a local shop, build one from parts.
Look around where the functionality that you require is at what cost. Then vote with your wallet and vote with your feet.
The way I read it, you move the computational resources in a grid; typically a lot of resources are not used anyway. You reduce a lot of fat that way. When you find that you have peaks, you can use capacity elsewhere for a price. This requires that your own resources and the resources elsewhere are related and have appropriate levels of trust. IBM wants to be the honest broker that provides the revenues for excess capacity or collect the revenues for required capacity.
By having systems that do interoperate in this way , the systems must be self regulating healing etc. This will also mean less system management for individual computational resources. So there are cost savings all round.
Technically a lot of this can be done; it needs a getting used to new concepts and different modus operandi. And it will work for some applications and not for others; that is ok there will always be another way of using intellect.
There was an excellent article on Canadian research on the BBC website re what best for the patient; public or private healthcare. One result that you have a better chance of survival in a public hospital. One of the reasons is because the staff is better educated / qualified. So if quality colleagues is a factor..
When one OS or distribibution is enough, then you might opt for Windows. There is a need for standardisation, standardisation with Unix, for security, for standard Linux. Competition keeps everybody on their toes. With the combination of several distros a lot of duplicate effort will not be done any more. Less duplication of effort is good for all.
The continuing security exposures of Microsoft products and the high initial price tag have as a consequense that MY earning power is under threat. I am certified to be professional by Microsoft. But when I am asked if Microsoft produces software that I can securely implement and give a guaranteed performance, I find that it is becoming more and more difficult to say in good consience that it is OK.
I am only ONE professional, Gartner says do not use IIS, the FBI has a hart to hart with Microsoft. I find that I need additional skills and qualifications to secure MY financial future.:(
In the world of prescripion drugs, they are now going to implement a sysem where you pay based on the relative wealth of the country where you live. So a treatment of drugs would be very much more expensive in the USA than in Oeganda.
With the upcoming.Net technology Microsoft could do this as well. Technologically speaking not a problem. Financially speaking not a problem as you can not pluck feathers from a frog.
It would really "help" all these poor people when they pay relative to the money that they can spend in stead of the current all legal versions are cheapest in the USA.
DMCA is a US American law. RIAA is a US American organisation. Open Source, Linux are not bound to one country specifically. As countries like China take Linux up in preference to other products, I do not see what a US American law can do about it.
It is not in the intrest of most countries to take up offerings other than Open Source if the alternative is paying a "proprietary tax" where the proceeds go to the United States of America.
So US American bills became law in the USA. And the rule in US America, it is not your law, it is not my law. Make sure that your representatives know why it is important that Open Source rules OK. If it were only from being free of seeing all these "proprietary tax" dollars going to the US of America.
When US American laws try to enforce themselves over their borders like the Sylarkov case, the result is that well behaving people will shun the USA and not go there. This will make USA less influential and more of a ghetto. And information will become available not for publication in the USA like happened with the recent Linux vulnerabilities. All in all, it is a sad thing to see all this happen.
Slashdot Mirror
Both Asimov and Dune write science fiction; Farscape is television and I have never seen it so I do not comment.
My all time great is the world of CJ Cherryh with books like Cyteen and Downbelow station. It relates how humanity develops when time between travelling from point to point is an issue
Do try to read these and enjoy!
Gerard
When you start by saying that "it is clear", you assume that it is clear. To me it is not. One license compared to another license tries to achieve different things. Technically superior? I assume that you think BSD kernels are superior to the GPL kernels.
The bottom line of kernels is that to most people they are a given. It is the software on top that is important. A superior OS allows for superior software. That is why it is heartening to see non proprietary kernels evolve so well and become an alternative for desktop use.
It is nice that I can see it ahead of time. But the experience of seeing it in a theatre is awesomwe. So I go and see it anyway. I have a collection of 350 cd's I bought them. I do not have copies. It suffices. And I am appalled that I have to pay extra for my data cd's as it is to "compensate" for the copieng of all these cd's. I think cd's are too expensive and I am now turned off.
When people take up Open Source/Linux, they take up something that is basically free. Add to that the infrastructure aspects of the software. It needs some dogfood (services) but it is best to have a local dogfood supplier. This gives you labels in your local language in stead of the current lingua franca AND you can speak to them. For the US to keep a positive trade balance re IT they HAVE to have great programmers. Currently they get them elsewhere as the US education system is said to be lacking. That is the sad thing for the US 'cause IT was great so far and what the next thing will be is unclear
When the USA decides that a monopoly is OK-ish, it does not mean that you have to buy into that monopoly. Microsoft is big as it holds the keys to many data formats that are proprietary. The next software from Redmond has different formats and will therefore be incompatible for those that do no "upgrade" to the new software. So when you do not buy into the hype and return data thhat you cannot read, the message that was send to you will become a challenge to the sender: how do I get my message across?
When open formats like the ones sponsored by Open Office are NOT to be supported by Microsoft we have a similar chicken and egg sitation. However, as these formats are taken up by governments and institutions, it will be increasingly difficult for organisations and people NOT to be able to read those formats.
Another thing is that you may not be able to buy a PC from the likes of IBM or DELL without a Microsoft license. Do consider then NOT to buy such a system; buy it at a local shop, build one from parts.
Look around where the functionality that you require is at what cost. Then vote with your wallet and vote with your feet.
The way I read it, you move the computational resources in a grid; typically a lot of resources are not used anyway. You reduce a lot of fat that way. When you find that you have peaks, you can use capacity elsewhere for a price. This requires that your own resources and the resources elsewhere are related and have appropriate levels of trust. IBM wants to be the honest broker that provides the revenues for excess capacity or collect the revenues for required capacity.
By having systems that do interoperate in this way , the systems must be self regulating healing etc. This will also mean less system management for individual computational resources. So there are cost savings all round.
Technically a lot of this can be done; it needs a getting used to new concepts and different modus operandi. And it will work for some applications and not for others; that is ok there will always be another way of using intellect.
Works fine for me with the new release. PS my yahoo looks good as well. NB I do not really use it but it recognizes me and everything :)
There was an excellent article on Canadian research on the BBC website re what best for the patient; public or private healthcare. One result that you have a better chance of survival in a public hospital. One of the reasons is because the staff is better educated / qualified.
So if quality colleagues is a factor..
When one OS or distribibution is enough, then you might opt for Windows. There is a need for standardisation, standardisation with Unix, for security, for standard Linux. Competition keeps everybody on their toes. With the combination of several distros a lot of duplicate effort will not be done any more. Less duplication of effort is good for all.
The continuing security exposures of Microsoft products and the high initial price tag have as a consequense that MY earning power is under threat. I am certified to be professional by Microsoft. But when I am asked if Microsoft produces software that I can securely implement and give a guaranteed performance, I find that it is becoming more and more difficult to say in good consience that it is OK.
:(
I am only ONE professional, Gartner says do not use IIS, the FBI has a hart to hart with Microsoft. I find that I need additional skills and qualifications to secure MY financial future.
In the world of prescripion drugs, they are now going to implement a sysem where you pay based on the relative wealth of the country where you live. So a treatment of drugs would be very much more expensive in the USA than in Oeganda. With the upcoming .Net technology Microsoft could do this as well. Technologically speaking not a problem. Financially speaking not a problem as you can not pluck feathers from a frog.
It would really "help" all these poor people when they pay relative to the money that they can spend in stead of the current all legal versions are cheapest in the USA.
DMCA is a US American law. RIAA is a US American organisation. Open Source, Linux are not bound to one country specifically. As countries like China take Linux up in preference to other products, I do not see what a US American law can do about it. It is not in the intrest of most countries to take up offerings other than Open Source if the alternative is paying a "proprietary tax" where the proceeds go to the United States of America. So US American bills became law in the USA. And the rule in US America, it is not your law, it is not my law. Make sure that your representatives know why it is important that Open Source rules OK. If it were only from being free of seeing all these "proprietary tax" dollars going to the US of America. When US American laws try to enforce themselves over their borders like the Sylarkov case, the result is that well behaving people will shun the USA and not go there. This will make USA less influential and more of a ghetto. And information will become available not for publication in the USA like happened with the recent Linux vulnerabilities. All in all, it is a sad thing to see all this happen.