* Windows XP is a fairly stable operating system, with no serious architectural flaw for office use, software development, workstation or hobbyist use.
All those anti-virus, firewall and anti-spyware programs that everybody needs on their Windows systems are nothing but workarounds for architectural flaws. I need none of those on the various free operating systems that I use/have used.
* William H Gates III has stepped away from the company's spotlight and is leveraging his wealth in a remarkably, socially responsible way, making this accumulation truly beneficial to the world that has created it.
Or is he? See links earlier in this discussion.
* No true credible alternative OS has emerged after fifteen years of trying in each and every way : free software, commercial OS companies (Be), alternative OSs pushed by proprietary hardware vendors (Apple, Sun), etc.
Only if your definition of "credible" includes "made by Microsoft".
* In the domain of software development, MS's contributions with.NET and C# are objectively superior to most of their predecessors (I'm talking mainstream environments, not niche or academic ones like Scheme, Haskell or SmallTalk). These are probably the best contribution to mainstream application and system development environment, since Kernighan tried system programming in a high level language and made C. They also have some of the best advanced research in that domain.
Please prove how C# is "objectively superior" to Python. Or Ruby.
* By experience, I have found out that it is easier to tweak XP to behave as a Hobbyist's or developper's UNIX box, than it os to tweak Linux into doing properly all that XP does. Install Cygwin, a proper text editor, MS's free command line compiler suite, and learn how to configure the Terminal, and you're done.
Like many other people here on/., I often build and set up computers for friends and relatives. Some years ago, I would install Windows, spend sometimes HOURS looking for drivers, install office software, install more secure web browser, install anti-virus and other security software, install various utility software, etc, etc. Today, I just install Ubuntu (which by the way is a much simpler process than installing any version of Windows), paste a one-line script which installs all of the nonfree stuff that regular people want (codecs, flash, etc), and I'm done.
Oh, it's official... Just install the package ubuntu-calendar and all the packages it recommends (ubuntu-calendar-december, ubuntu-calendar-january, etc)
Last year MS dropped support for all operating systems except XP SP2 and Vista. This includes security patches.
Not that a promise from Microsoft to deliver security updates is worth much, but officially Windows 2003 is still fully supported, and Windows 2000 (Professional as well as server editions) is in the extended support phase (and will be for another three years), which means there is still free security updates.
There are plenty of valid things to complain about with Microsoft -- no need to complain about any invalid ones:-)
It should be pointed out that when you speak of Mozilla as an entity (as in "they host", "Mozilla doesn't", etc) you are speaking of the Mozilla Corporation, which is only a small, though important subset of all that Mozilla is. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/
IANAL, but in general, you own the copyright on the code you have written until you explicitly assign the copyright to someone else (as in "I hereby assign copyright of this code to Foo").
Dictatorship of the proletariat simply refers to the idea that the workers, rather than the capitalists, should be in control. It is not intended to be any more of a dictatorship than current capitalist countries, nor to include any temporarily suspension civil rights.
The post you were responding to was discussing the difference between copyright infringement and stealing, not the difference between copyright infringement and piracy.
Of course, the difference between copyright infringement and piracy is simple: All the examples you listed are copyright infringement. The act of attacking and robbing ships at sea is piracy.
All I meant was, if it supported Vorbis out of the box I'd definitely buy one, but I have no desire otherwise for any custom applications. There's no need to call me a dumbass.
If any linux desktop could compete with even windows? You and I must live in two different universes. I have installed Ubuntu for (IIRC) six people who used to be regular Windows users (one of them my mom). One of them I have never spoken to since, but the other five had pretty much the same experience: Their computers went from often being a frustrating nightmare to use, into being a pleasant experience. These are people who use their computers for regular stuff like web, email, IM, writing documents, downloading music with soulseek, playing World of Warcraft, etc.
GNOME, particularly in Ubuntu's configuration, simply makes it much more intuitive to use a computer for someone who isn't a power user. Compared to any version of Windows, at least -- my OS X experience is too limited for me to say.
But regarding the idea of the different desktop projects merging... you know, they have different goals and different ideas, and they are not all in it to compete with Windows or Mac OS, but to make the system the way they want to use it. Actually it's almost like suggesting that three rock bands should just come together and make one album instead of making three separate ones, 'cause together they must really be able to make a great album, right?
Linux cannot take over the desktop for a few simple reasons. First and foremost is the lack of standards. Theres gnome AND kde. And there are several popular distros to develop and test for to make sure installation is smooth and seamless like in Windows. Windows is a single distro and extremely predictable in that regard. Developing and deploying a desktop app for it is much easier.
I'm gonna sort of repeat what I just wrote in reply to paltemalte earlier in this thread: What if instead of thinking of "Linux" as one thing that wants to take over the Desktop, you think of GNOME and KDE as two projects each wanting to take over the desktop, that is, consider GNOME, KDE, OS X, Windows to be on the same level.
And similarly, maybe try to think of the different distros as different operating systems in their own right? Instead of thinking "Windows, OS X, Linux (with many different distros)", think "Windows, OS X, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, etc".
It's all about different levels of abstraction, really. Parodying your argument, one could even argue that UNIX-like systems could never take over the desktop because "first and foremost is the lack of standards. Theres linux AND os x". You see my point?
How about this: Don't think of "Linux on the desktop" as one single competitor to Windows and OS X. Instead, think of GNOME, KDE, XFCE, etc. all as competitors on the same level as Windows and OS X. If you look at it that way, suggesting that KDE and GNOME merge to develop a single desktop makes as much sense as suggesting that KDE and Mac OS X merge.
The goal of the GNOME project, for example, isn't to spread Linux desktops -- it is to spread GNOME desktops.
is it just me, or could IBM easily afford to simply buy SCO group? seams like if they just bought the company, they would have nothing to worry about, and the issue would end.
If IBM buys SCO, you can expect that hundreds of other dying companies will file groundless lawsuits against IBM, hoping to get bought as well. IBM doesn't want that.
WTF? I know its GNU/Linux...but it does not mean that FSF "owns" it.
Of course it does. FSF owns the copyright on the essential GNU software (coreutils, compiler, etc).
And I dont believe that the GPLv2 to GPLv3 transition will leed to a gap between GPLv2 and GPLv3 userlands.
GPLv3 forbids deals like this, so it is illegal for Novell to distribute any software under GPLv3. Therefore they will have to stick with the last versions released under GPLv2.
Slashdot Mirror
...
.NET and C# are objectively superior to most of their predecessors (I'm talking mainstream environments, not niche or academic ones like Scheme, Haskell or SmallTalk). These are probably the best contribution to mainstream application and system development environment, since Kernighan tried system programming in a high level language and made C. They also have some of the best advanced research in that domain.
/., I often build and set up computers for friends and relatives. Some years ago, I would install Windows, spend sometimes HOURS looking for drivers, install office software, install more secure web browser, install anti-virus and other security software, install various utility software, etc, etc. Today, I just install Ubuntu (which by the way is a much simpler process than installing any version of Windows), paste a one-line script which installs all of the nonfree stuff that regular people want (codecs, flash, etc), and I'm done.
* Windows XP is a fairly stable operating system, with no serious architectural flaw for office use, software development, workstation or hobbyist use.
All those anti-virus, firewall and anti-spyware programs that everybody needs on their Windows systems are nothing but workarounds for architectural flaws. I need none of those on the various free operating systems that I use/have used.
* William H Gates III has stepped away from the company's spotlight and is leveraging his wealth in a remarkably, socially responsible way, making this accumulation truly beneficial to the world that has created it.
Or is he? See links earlier in this discussion.
* No true credible alternative OS has emerged after fifteen years of trying in each and every way : free software, commercial OS companies (Be), alternative OSs pushed by proprietary hardware vendors (Apple, Sun), etc.
Only if your definition of "credible" includes "made by Microsoft".
* In the domain of software development, MS's contributions with
Please prove how C# is "objectively superior" to Python. Or Ruby.
* By experience, I have found out that it is easier to tweak XP to behave as a Hobbyist's or developper's UNIX box, than it os to tweak Linux into doing properly all that XP does. Install Cygwin, a proper text editor, MS's free command line compiler suite, and learn how to configure the Terminal, and you're done.
Like many other people here on
What does the code have to do with .net? It's just plain (horrible) VB, isn't it?
Oh, it's official... Just install the package ubuntu-calendar and all the packages it recommends (ubuntu-calendar-december, ubuntu-calendar-january, etc)
Not that a promise from Microsoft to deliver security updates is worth much, but officially Windows 2003 is still fully supported, and Windows 2000 (Professional as well as server editions) is in the extended support phase (and will be for another three years), which means there is still free security updates.
There are plenty of valid things to complain about with Microsoft -- no need to complain about any invalid ones
It should be pointed out that when you speak of Mozilla as an entity (as in "they host", "Mozilla doesn't", etc) you are speaking of the Mozilla Corporation, which is only a small, though important subset of all that Mozilla is. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/
IANAL, but in general, you own the copyright on the code you have written until you explicitly assign the copyright to someone else (as in "I hereby assign copyright of this code to Foo").
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Brand+Necrophil
I thought slash would escape the entities. Anyway, here they are: < > & " '
Small correction: It actually has 5 (< > & " '). The last one wasn't in HTML4.
Dictatorship of the proletariat simply refers to the idea that the workers, rather than the capitalists, should be in control. It is not intended to be any more of a dictatorship than current capitalist countries, nor to include any temporarily suspension civil rights.
p roletariat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_
Do not blame an ideology for the people who believes in it.
The post you were responding to was discussing the difference between copyright infringement and stealing, not the difference between copyright infringement and piracy.
Of course, the difference between copyright infringement and piracy is simple: All the examples you listed are copyright infringement. The act of attacking and robbing ships at sea is piracy.
All I meant was, if it supported Vorbis out of the box I'd definitely buy one, but I have no desire otherwise for any custom applications. There's no need to call me a dumbass.
Yes, most likely... that's why I'm saying I won't buy one :-)
Personally I don't care about third party applications. What would make me buy one is if I could play Ogg Vorbis music with it.
If any linux desktop could compete with even windows? You and I must live in two different universes. I have installed Ubuntu for (IIRC) six people who used to be regular Windows users (one of them my mom). One of them I have never spoken to since, but the other five had pretty much the same experience: Their computers went from often being a frustrating nightmare to use, into being a pleasant experience. These are people who use their computers for regular stuff like web, email, IM, writing documents, downloading music with soulseek, playing World of Warcraft, etc.
GNOME, particularly in Ubuntu's configuration, simply makes it much more intuitive to use a computer for someone who isn't a power user. Compared to any version of Windows, at least -- my OS X experience is too limited for me to say.
But regarding the idea of the different desktop projects merging... you know, they have different goals and different ideas, and they are not all in it to compete with Windows or Mac OS, but to make the system the way they want to use it. Actually it's almost like suggesting that three rock bands should just come together and make one album instead of making three separate ones, 'cause together they must really be able to make a great album, right?
I'm gonna sort of repeat what I just wrote in reply to paltemalte earlier in this thread: What if instead of thinking of "Linux" as one thing that wants to take over the Desktop, you think of GNOME and KDE as two projects each wanting to take over the desktop, that is, consider GNOME, KDE, OS X, Windows to be on the same level.
And similarly, maybe try to think of the different distros as different operating systems in their own right? Instead of thinking "Windows, OS X, Linux (with many different distros)", think "Windows, OS X, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, etc".
It's all about different levels of abstraction, really. Parodying your argument, one could even argue that UNIX-like systems could never take over the desktop because "first and foremost is the lack of standards. Theres linux AND os x". You see my point?
How about this: Don't think of "Linux on the desktop" as one single competitor to Windows and OS X. Instead, think of GNOME, KDE, XFCE, etc. all as competitors on the same level as Windows and OS X. If you look at it that way, suggesting that KDE and GNOME merge to develop a single desktop makes as much sense as suggesting that KDE and Mac OS X merge.
The goal of the GNOME project, for example, isn't to spread Linux desktops -- it is to spread GNOME desktops.
No shit. Read this: http://mpt.net.nz/archive/2005/12/30/gates
No, Takedown is completely unrelated to Hackers.
I put in 1 GBP, and it said "You are the richest person in the world". Yay.
Of course it does. FSF owns the copyright on the essential GNU software (coreutils, compiler, etc).
GPLv3 forbids deals like this, so it is illegal for Novell to distribute any software under GPLv3. Therefore they will have to stick with the last versions released under GPLv2.