The "Next" and "Previous" links have been changed to point to my server, but everything else remains identical.
I am collecting browser statistics on this page. I'll post them in my journal within 24 hours. I'm donating my bandwidth because I'm really interested in what browsers Slashdot users use. If you don't want your statistics collected, don't click on the link.
Even though this will probably get lost in the shuffle, I'd like to add some background on toolbars.
According to Joel Spolsky, toolbars were invented by Microsoft with the release of Excel 3.0 in 1990. Here's a link to his claim. Now, he worked on the Excel team at that time, so I take his claim with a grain of salt.
The "toolbar" that Joel is referring to has two parts: The File/Edit/View (etc.) bar at the top of the program; and the New icon/Open icon/Save icon set below it. This became the de facto standard for most Windows applications, and also a standard feature with most development kits.
I would imagine that many other people can claim to remember a "toolbar" from other types of systems, but I would also imagine that the one in Excel 3.0 looks most like the ones we still use today. If Joel's claim holds up, it appears that Microsoft has been innovative at least once.;)
"You can get as much of a return by investing in a U.S. government bond these days as you can from throwing your money into the AOL Time Warner black hole."
Uncle Sam should definitely co-opt this for advertising: "U.S. savings bonds: not as bad as investing in AOL."
(Note: I don't work for Dell, but after buying this latest round of systems, I wholeheartedly recommend them.)
I got two Celeron 1.1GHz systems and a Pentium IV 1.6GHz for $588 each (shipped!) Here is a Slashdot post that details my experiences with them.
There was absolutely no way I could undercut Dell on price by building my own -- especially not when you include the cost of Windows XP (preinstalled), one-year on-site warranty, and the awesome cases that open with the press of a button.
It really doesn't make sense to build PC's yourself anymore when manufacturers are offering PC's like this for bargain-bin prices. Plus, you can always recycle monitors as well -- that's what I did with this set.
Building your own will certainly give you job security (as someone else mentioned), but it will also give you no end of headaches. Why doesn't video card A work with motherboard B? And installing Windows 60 times is enough to make even the bravest person run away in fear. Even with a copy of Ghost in hand, you still have the daunting task of putting everything together (and charging the company for your effort). In the end, it's really not worth it to either you or the company. Besides, do you really want to spend the next two weeks testing out RAM and hard drives by hand? Bleh.;)
"I miss the days when a simple banner ads could cover the bills."
They couldn't. That's why all the dot-coms went out of business.
Most banner ads pay 5 cents per click (or at least they did then). On average, 1 out of every 100 people visiting your site clicks on the banner. You do the math.
I archive shows (legally) with my TiVo.
on
TiVo Series 2 Review
·
· Score: 4, Informative
First of all:
"With a VCR I can record a show, movie, concert etc. for an unlimited amount of time - why can't TiVo do this?"
I'm not sure what you mean. I have a Sony DirecTiVo. A few months ago, a friend archived a 6-hour concert onto the TiVo just by hitting "Record" while it was on. It records until your available space is used up, just like a VCR.
I've also set up my TiVo to (legally) archive shows to my computer. How? I have an ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500 with video capture tools. I hooked up the S-video input on my video card to the S-video out on my TiVo, and I use ATI's TV software to archive shows. I've archived to DivX, VCD, and WMV with varying results. Sure, it's not as cool as "extracting" all of the shows off the TiVo would be, but it's incredibly easy and there is no question of the legality (as long as you're not distributing the movies, it's the same thing as backing up to a VCR would be.)
By the time this season of Six Feet Under is over, I will have every episode safely archived on my computer. The best part is that I can then take any of this with me on a plane with my laptop without the hassle of carrying around a DVD player.
Before I bought the AIW Radeon, I wasn't sure if archiving to the computer would work, but I can assure you it does. The results (a nice movie/TV episode library) are well worth it, too.
So, if this is the reason you're not buying a TiVo, go to tivo.com and buy one! I love it. I even set up a TiVo for my computer-illiterate parents. The interface is so simple that they picked it up in a couple of days and now they can't live without it. It will change the way you look at TV.
Remember those from college? Usually about $15/semester, they entitled you to use the pool tables at the Student Union or go to college football games for cheap.
They were imposed on every student, regardless of whether that student actually went to football games or used the pool tables at the Student Union.
"Maybe you're rich and can afford to give people $200 for absolutely nothing in return, but most of us aren't and we resent being forced to do so."
Yep. Although, like the activity fee, your choice is always to go somewhere else. Most universities now have the Microsoft program whereby students can get any Microsoft software for $15 or so (everything from Visual Studio to Windows to Office.) Microsoft also routinely gives out free software at college events. I think that most students see this as a value-add, just like most students see being able to go to a football game for cheap see that as a value-add. Regardless of whether you like it or not, if most students are willing to pay, the university will be willing to levy another fee on those students.
On the other hand, if students had protested, I doubt this would have ever been enacted. So the benefit is there, even if it doesn't apply to every student.
From the article: "Eventually, the Mexican government hopes to have 10,000 free public Internet kiosks in rural areas to help bring government services to citizens and reduce what has been called the ``digital divide'' of the urban rich from the rural poor."
I think this is a good thing, regardless of who is sponsoring it.
Miguel de Icaza is quoted in the article as saying "It's a shame." But why weren't Linux companies involved in this? As Dan asks, where was RedHat? Miguel? Any other Linux-based company?
And if the Linux vendors weren't there, why not? I think it is because it is still the case that no one has figured out how to make money off of Linux. RedHat is profitable -- barely. Mandrake and the others are begging for support, and a lot of them aren't getting it. Meanwhile, the editors and others on Slashdot rail against companies and people who choose Microsoft because they believe that no one should have to pay for an operating system. But isn't this very belief what is killing the commercial Linux companies?
It's a question that needs to be asked.
I think that if you polled those college students who get Microsoft Office for $14 a year, and asked how many of them would not be willing to pay that money, you would find that an overwhelming majority are in favor of getting Office for cheap. Heck, you can't even buy StarOffice for less than $60.
I guess I really don't understand this "everything must be free" mentality. I use Windows, and I think it's worth the $140 (Windows 2000 OEM) because Windows helps me make money doing my job. I am fully supportive of your right to use Linux; however, I believe that you should chip in your support to those vendors that you feel are making a good product, regardless of whether that product is being offered as a free download or not.
If all software developers worked for free, what would your job be? How would you put food on the table?
Keep that in mind next time you bash someone for using a product that costs money.
Please read the whole comment before moderating...
As I understand it, the question can be translated as:
"We're developing a new education product in Flash. Instead of hiring developers to help us design the interface, we would like to call it 'open-source' so we can get people to work on our product for free. We're really too cheap to even supply a basic development tool to our workers, so can we mooch off someone else's work by using a free product?"
Please forgive me if I'm assuming too much, but it really sounds like you want someone to have duplicated Flash and put it on the market for free. Now, having stated something that could be considered "flamebait", I will give you some advice.
-- Don't use Flash. I know that a lot of the tech-heads here on Slashdot will say this as enitre comment and get moderated up for it. I happen to not use Flash, but I do also happen to realize that there are very valid reasons for using it, and that education is one of Flash's core markets.
If you are not willing to pay your developers or at least buy them a tool for their work, use HTML. Most likely, the people on this project will already have a preferred HTML editor, which will enable you to just use CVS or another versioning system to check in the documents.
What bothers me about this whole post, though, is that it epitomizes the "bottom-feeder" attitude of companies that really want to profit from people's hard work without paying those people for that work. To avoid this, I would recommend gathring a core development team and paying for the tools that you believe that team needs. Then, you can release your product so that the masses can update it, with the caveat that the people updating it will need a development tool that they will have to pay for on their own. Everyone goes home happy: you sell a product, your development team gets paid a small amount plus experience, and your customers can update the product on their own accord and with their own tools.
Open-source software usually fulfills a need of the developer(s). I would say that the reason that there aren't free Flash development tools is that either a) Flash is such a good product that the people who use it are willing to pay for it or b) not that many people feel a need to use Flash. It's probably some of both.
Another thing: how do you release a Flash product as "open-source"? Do you distribute your product's SWF files to the target audience? I'm not sure how that would work. Is this something you have considered?
I apologize if I read too much into your statement. I hope that you really did have good intentions and weren't just riding on the "free [as in beer] is cool" bandwagon. I'd appreciate a good response from the original poster or someone who is involved in a similar project. At face value, it seems that there are a lot of "holes" in this project plan that haven't quite been addressed.
Re: "most of the /. crowd build their own boxes"
on
PC Prices to Rise?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
You know, I used to think building my own box was the way to go. I'd get on Pricewatch and find the best motherboards, CPUs, etc. and build the whole thing. It used to be cheaper.
Then my parents needed three new computers at once, and I decided to check out Dell Refurbished.
For $580 shipped (each), I got 2 computers with a 1.1GHz Celeron processor and one with a 1.6GHz Pentium IV. All had at least 128MB RAM and one had 256MB (I bought extra memory from Crucial.com to bring them all up to 256MB.) All had at least a 20GB hard drive, which was all my parents needed for the office. All came preinstalled with Windows XP Home (fine for office work.) And one came with a Firewire card; one came with a kick-ass video card. All had either Ethernet or a 56K modem (in card format, even, not built on to the motherboard.) All of this also came with free one-year ON-SITE hardware tech support from Dell.
I was a bit worried about the quality, since I've seen how Dell shafts its low-end users with shoddy parts. But the computers performed flawlessly upon arrival and have since, with no system crashes. Then, when it came time to swap out a CD-ROM for a CD-RW, I was truly impressed. Swapping out of a drive consisted of the following:
1. Unplugging the computer. 2. Pulling a thumb-tab at the top of the computer. 3. Pulling a latch that released the CD-ROM drive. 4. Unplugging the CD-ROM drive's cables. 5. Pulling out the CD-ROM drive and putting the drive brackets on the new drive (which just snapped on.) 6. Sliding in the new drive, plugging in cables, snapping case back together. 7. Plug in.
Done! No screws, no screwdriver, no nasty cheap ATX case with a hood you have to struggle with getting in the right place. Check out this picture to see what I'm talking about.
There was no way I could have built these computers, bought Windows XP, and had any money left over to profit at $580 a computer. Plus, I would have had to put them in an ugly case that would have caused hassle for me later.
I don't think it's economical any more to build your own computer. This is a GOOD thing -- it shows that computers have become a commodity. Do you build your own TV? Probably not. Microwave? Heck no. The quality to price ratio of pre-built computers is now such that even geeks are starting to buy pre-built computers. I, for one, am glad. Let Dell take over the hassle of being called when the computer has a problem. I'll spend more time doing things that I'd rather be doing.:)
I have a Sony Dream Machine (ARV: $20) that someone gave me as a gift several years ago. It has two buttons to set the alarm: forward and backward. If you hold them down, they zoom through the time extremely fast. So if the alarm is set to 8:30, and you want to wake up at 8:15, you just hit the back button for a couple of seconds. This is all without the clutter of a numeric keypad. I've seen it on alarm clocks that dated back to the late 70's.
I'm sure Bose or Bang and Olufsen has made a $300 clock that has a numeric keypad to set the time, but this method works equally as well, and it has the added benefit that mere mortals can afford it.:)
Expansion, GPS, Wireless Internet...?
on
New Clie Handhelds
·
· Score: 2
Hmm, it seems to have everything I want except for expansion opportunities (sniff, no CompactFlash, just proprietary Memory Stick...)
Does anyone know if Sony is planning to introduce a GPS add-on or a wireless Internet add-on? That would really make it worth the $600+!
Hmm, you checked out my homepage, but interestingly enough, you didn't check Netcraft to see what my server was running...;)
I write these kinds of posts (pro-Microsoft, etc.) for two reasons:
1) People respond with better answers to a post filled with half-truths or a post from someone who they believe is "misinformed"; 2) I really do want to know what corporations use if they don't use Microsoft products.
This about it this way: the sales people at Microsoft are out there every day selling their product. They are out there telling your PHB every day that Exchange is better, that SAMBA won't do the half of what Windows 2000 Server will do, and that an all-Windows infrastructure is the way to go.
The real question is: what can you tell your PHB to dispute that?
That's why I write these. Often, the best way to find alternatives is to say something decidedly biased toward one camp. Come on, admit it -- you'd much rather hit "reply" to someone who is wrong or half-right than someone who says "What is the best solution for xxx?" You're also much more likely to provide real, concrete evidence that your product is superior instead of just saying "Hey, Product Y will do xxx! Go check out their homepage."
Now, I can take this information and hand it to the guy who is looking for an Exchange alternative, and I can say, "Look, why don't we check out Products Y and Z, because they might really fit the bill." I can then hand him what is basically a brochure describing migration problems and benefits of changing to the other products. Not only have I provided a solution, but I haven't asked you for bullet points -- I've asked you to prove that your product is better.
It's marketing, pure and simple. I learn infinitely more by writing what I hear from Microsoft salespeople and having Slashdotters prove it wrong than I would asking a question somewhere. Plus, I get to hear and make contact with people who have actually used the product. And in some cases, I get people admitting that the Microsoft solution is the best one out there, in which case that is what I will take back to my customers.
Try it sometime. You might be surprised at what you can learn.
What is interesting about this article is that it mentions Linux encroaching on UNIX (read: Sun's) territory, but it doesn't mention Microsoft at all. I have to assume that this means an external (web, application) server migration to Linux. If not, I'd like to know the answers to the following questions:
1) How do you work around the complete lack of server-side productivity software on Linux servers? By deploying Exchange, you can make scheduling a meeting as easy as sending an email with a time and having everyone click to confirm the meeting, which is then added to everyone's calendar. There is no solution like this without using Exchange (and I've looked.)
2) How do you work around the lack of group policy controls in SAMBA? By this I mean forcing a computer to have the most up-to-date anti-virus software when it logs on to the domain; mapping network drives automatically; downloading OS patches automatically through a local server. AFAIK, Samba can't do any of this as well as a Windows 2000 Server can. And what about Active Directory? LDAP isn't as cohesive a solution if you are running Windows clients.
From this article, I have to think that Merrill Lynch and others are changing their external server infrastructure, not their internal IT infrastructure.
The other conclusion I must draw is that the companies that are migrating to Linux as a workgroup server (i.e. replacing Windows NT/2000 Server with Linux) did not have a cohesive Windows network in the first place. Unfortunately, Linux is nowhere near a solution to Exchange, and it's perhaps 25% of the way to replacing a Windows 2000 primary domain controller's capabilities.
So what servers is Merrill Lynch migrating? Linux does have its core competencies -- web servers; application servers; network storage to some degree -- but they didn't mention what part of the infrastructure they were replacing. I would thus take the words "companywide" with a grain of salt in this case.
"Wouldn't it make a lot more sense if your OS worked like your web browser?"
In Windows Explorer, go to the Tools menu, then click on Folder Options. Click the radio button labeled "Single-click to open an item (point to select)." Icons on your desktop will then act like web page links.
This option has been around in Windows for a while. I think the real reason people don't use it is mostly because they have grown accustomed to double-clicking. You're right -- it is inconsistent behavior. However, at least Windows gives you a pretty easy way to change it.
Actually, you bring up an interesting point...
on
IT Certifications Summary
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm studying for my MCSE right now, and I whizzed through the practice questions on the Windows 2000 Professional (workstation) part last night. One of the questions in particular caught my eye. It said (paraphrased):
"Which of these two operating systems [Windows 2000 Professional | Windows 2000 Server] can you run a public web server on?"
Well, of course, I picked both. I'm running Apache on Windows 2000 Pro right now, and IIS also comes as an optional add-on. When I looked up my answer, I was surprised to find that I was wrong. Then I remembered that I wasn't wrong because of the technical capabilities of the OS, but because of the licensing agreement, which states that you can only connect 5 computers to a Pro OS at any one time for file sharing and "Internet Information Services".
It's a different mindset. Being used to Linux servers, I assumed that the only thing limiting me from running what I wanted was hardware. However, to pass the MCSE, you not only have to know the technical features of the OS, but also what Microsoft wants you to do with it.
BTW, if you think the MCSE is easy, try taking it yourself. I've been doing Linux and Windows system administration for years, and this stuff still isn't coming naturally to me. It's also good experience for anyone adminning Windows boxes, as you will definitely know how to set up disk images and domain controllers once you are done with it. If you think Windows Update is the best way to maintain your set of 5+ Windows PCs, definitely take it, or at least read the study guides. It might make your job a lot easier.
The case you mentioned is indeed a very interesting case, but it doesn't directly support the Lindows side of the case. Why?
In the case you mention, the man proved that the Mc- prefix actually meant something in a language that he knew well, and that it made sense to name a restaurant McChina because of the meaning of the prefix. Therefore, there was reasonable doubt that he was capitalizing off of McDonalds' success.
However, in the Lindows case, there is no doubt that the product would have been named Lindows if there was not already a product named Windows that was created by Microsoft. Indeed, if you look at Lindows' about page, it is obvious that the name is a mixture of Windows and Linux, and doesn't derive from another language.
I, too, think the McChina case had the correct outcome, but Lindows doesn't have that luxury. IMO, Lindows will lose.
The article referenced at the top of the page doesn't go into much detail regarding the outcome of the suit (which will finally be decided in a year or so), but here is an article that might be a bit more informative.
The most interesting part of that article is the following quote:
"'There's no evidence Windows is generic and strong evidence it's not,' responded Karl Quackenbush, an attorney arguing for Microsoft. He said Microsoft has spent more than a billion dollars promoting and protecting the name Windows. That includes sending letters to hundreds of infringers warning them not to use the name, he said.
In any case, he said, names such as Amazon.com and Apple -- two other generic words -- have been adjudged valid trademarks because they've acquired a 'secondary meaning' through their strong association to products."
So, even though Microsoft might not win the preliminary injunction, it is likely to win the case. After all, if Apple and Amazon were both held up as trademarks in court, it's likely that the ubiquitous "Windows" will be as well.
I, for one, will be glad if "Lindows" loses in court simply because it is confusing to say out loud. Try saying this out loud: "I'd like some help with configuring Lindows, please." I fully support anyone's right to create a new OS, but I don't support naming a product in a confusing manner (and playing off the name of a more popular product), which is exactly what Lindows is doing. This sort of infringement is what trademark law was designed to protect, and I think Microsoft will win this one in the end.
...that Microsoft uses free software, I invite you to take a look at this.
In Windows 2000, open a command prompt window. Type "nslookup". This will drop you into interactive mode for nslookup, which has been ported from UNIX (most likely BSD.)
Now type "help". Check out this line at the bottom of the output:
view FILE - sort an 'ls' output file and view it with pg
Aha! Okay, I knew I was missing something. I used to use that kind of stuff in Opera. Yeah, it's cool, but Windows XP does that with IE as well (well, in a sense: it groups all IE windows together.) I could see how this would be beneficial, though. I'll keep it in mind when Moz 1.0 comes out.:)
I heard all the raves about tabbed browsing and I downloaded a copy of Mozilla 0.9 to try it out. It's the exact same thing as the Search/Favorites/History panel in IE! I don't get how this is "revolutionary". (Please, if you care to enlighten me on how it is different, do so. I'd welcome a better explanation.)
Check out this screenshot that I did for my friend, and tell me how this is different from tabbed browsing in Mozilla.
Slashdot Mirror
I happened to be bored, so I grabbed all 6 pages and posted them here:
http://pages.simpli.biz/casemod
The "Next" and "Previous" links have been changed to point to my server, but everything else remains identical.
I am collecting browser statistics on this page. I'll post them in my journal within 24 hours. I'm donating my bandwidth because I'm really interested in what browsers Slashdot users use. If you don't want your statistics collected, don't click on the link.
Even though this will probably get lost in the shuffle, I'd like to add some background on toolbars.
;)
According to Joel Spolsky, toolbars were invented by Microsoft with the release of Excel 3.0 in 1990. Here's a link to his claim. Now, he worked on the Excel team at that time, so I take his claim with a grain of salt.
The "toolbar" that Joel is referring to has two parts: The File/Edit/View (etc.) bar at the top of the program; and the New icon/Open icon/Save icon set below it. This became the de facto standard for most Windows applications, and also a standard feature with most development kits.
I would imagine that many other people can claim to remember a "toolbar" from other types of systems, but I would also imagine that the one in Excel 3.0 looks most like the ones we still use today. If Joel's claim holds up, it appears that Microsoft has been innovative at least once.
Cobalt Developer Site (where you can follow the step-by-step instructions to roll your own packages
Pkgmaster.com -- pre-packaged versions of Webalizer and PHP 4.1.2 for Cobalts (and others)
cobalt-users mailing list, where you can find help on all of the above topics
From the article:
"You can get as much of a return by investing in a U.S. government bond these days as you can from throwing your money into the AOL Time Warner black hole."
Uncle Sam should definitely co-opt this for advertising: "U.S. savings bonds: not as bad as investing in AOL."
(Note: I don't work for Dell, but after buying this latest round of systems, I wholeheartedly recommend them.)
;)
I got two Celeron 1.1GHz systems and a Pentium IV 1.6GHz for $588 each (shipped!) Here is a Slashdot post that details my experiences with them.
There was absolutely no way I could undercut Dell on price by building my own -- especially not when you include the cost of Windows XP (preinstalled), one-year on-site warranty, and the awesome cases that open with the press of a button.
It really doesn't make sense to build PC's yourself anymore when manufacturers are offering PC's like this for bargain-bin prices. Plus, you can always recycle monitors as well -- that's what I did with this set.
Building your own will certainly give you job security (as someone else mentioned), but it will also give you no end of headaches. Why doesn't video card A work with motherboard B? And installing Windows 60 times is enough to make even the bravest person run away in fear. Even with a copy of Ghost in hand, you still have the daunting task of putting everything together (and charging the company for your effort). In the end, it's really not worth it to either you or the company. Besides, do you really want to spend the next two weeks testing out RAM and hard drives by hand? Bleh.
"I miss the days when a simple banner ads could cover the bills."
They couldn't. That's why all the dot-coms went out of business.
Most banner ads pay 5 cents per click (or at least they did then). On average, 1 out of every 100 people visiting your site clicks on the banner. You do the math.
First of all:
"With a VCR I can record a show, movie, concert etc. for an unlimited amount of time - why can't TiVo do this?"
I'm not sure what you mean. I have a Sony DirecTiVo. A few months ago, a friend archived a 6-hour concert onto the TiVo just by hitting "Record" while it was on. It records until your available space is used up, just like a VCR.
I've also set up my TiVo to (legally) archive shows to my computer. How? I have an ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500 with video capture tools. I hooked up the S-video input on my video card to the S-video out on my TiVo, and I use ATI's TV software to archive shows. I've archived to DivX, VCD, and WMV with varying results. Sure, it's not as cool as "extracting" all of the shows off the TiVo would be, but it's incredibly easy and there is no question of the legality (as long as you're not distributing the movies, it's the same thing as backing up to a VCR would be.)
By the time this season of Six Feet Under is over, I will have every episode safely archived on my computer. The best part is that I can then take any of this with me on a plane with my laptop without the hassle of carrying around a DVD player.
Before I bought the AIW Radeon, I wasn't sure if archiving to the computer would work, but I can assure you it does. The results (a nice movie/TV episode library) are well worth it, too.
So, if this is the reason you're not buying a TiVo, go to tivo.com and buy one! I love it. I even set up a TiVo for my computer-illiterate parents. The interface is so simple that they picked it up in a couple of days and now they can't live without it. It will change the way you look at TV.
They were imposed on every student, regardless of whether that student actually went to football games or used the pool tables at the Student Union.
Yep. Although, like the activity fee, your choice is always to go somewhere else. Most universities now have the Microsoft program whereby students can get any Microsoft software for $15 or so (everything from Visual Studio to Windows to Office.) Microsoft also routinely gives out free software at college events. I think that most students see this as a value-add, just like most students see being able to go to a football game for cheap see that as a value-add. Regardless of whether you like it or not, if most students are willing to pay, the university will be willing to levy another fee on those students.
On the other hand, if students had protested, I doubt this would have ever been enacted. So the benefit is there, even if it doesn't apply to every student.
Weren't people on Slashdot just yesterday praising the guy who put a computer in a wall in an Indian slum? How is this much different?
From the article: "Eventually, the Mexican government hopes to have 10,000 free public Internet kiosks in rural areas to help bring government services to citizens and reduce what has been called the ``digital divide'' of the urban rich from the rural poor."
I think this is a good thing, regardless of who is sponsoring it.
Miguel de Icaza is quoted in the article as saying "It's a shame." But why weren't Linux companies involved in this? As Dan asks, where was RedHat? Miguel? Any other Linux-based company?
And if the Linux vendors weren't there, why not? I think it is because it is still the case that no one has figured out how to make money off of Linux. RedHat is profitable -- barely. Mandrake and the others are begging for support, and a lot of them aren't getting it. Meanwhile, the editors and others on Slashdot rail against companies and people who choose Microsoft because they believe that no one should have to pay for an operating system. But isn't this very belief what is killing the commercial Linux companies?
It's a question that needs to be asked.
I think that if you polled those college students who get Microsoft Office for $14 a year, and asked how many of them would not be willing to pay that money, you would find that an overwhelming majority are in favor of getting Office for cheap. Heck, you can't even buy StarOffice for less than $60.
I guess I really don't understand this "everything must be free" mentality. I use Windows, and I think it's worth the $140 (Windows 2000 OEM) because Windows helps me make money doing my job. I am fully supportive of your right to use Linux; however, I believe that you should chip in your support to those vendors that you feel are making a good product, regardless of whether that product is being offered as a free download or not.
If all software developers worked for free, what would your job be? How would you put food on the table?
Keep that in mind next time you bash someone for using a product that costs money.
Please read the whole comment before moderating...
As I understand it, the question can be translated as:
"We're developing a new education product in Flash. Instead of hiring developers to help us design the interface, we would like to call it 'open-source' so we can get people to work on our product for free. We're really too cheap to even supply a basic development tool to our workers, so can we mooch off someone else's work by using a free product?"
Please forgive me if I'm assuming too much, but it really sounds like you want someone to have duplicated Flash and put it on the market for free. Now, having stated something that could be considered "flamebait", I will give you some advice.
-- Don't use Flash. I know that a lot of the tech-heads here on Slashdot will say this as enitre comment and get moderated up for it. I happen to not use Flash, but I do also happen to realize that there are very valid reasons for using it, and that education is one of Flash's core markets.
If you are not willing to pay your developers or at least buy them a tool for their work, use HTML. Most likely, the people on this project will already have a preferred HTML editor, which will enable you to just use CVS or another versioning system to check in the documents.
What bothers me about this whole post, though, is that it epitomizes the "bottom-feeder" attitude of companies that really want to profit from people's hard work without paying those people for that work. To avoid this, I would recommend gathring a core development team and paying for the tools that you believe that team needs. Then, you can release your product so that the masses can update it, with the caveat that the people updating it will need a development tool that they will have to pay for on their own. Everyone goes home happy: you sell a product, your development team gets paid a small amount plus experience, and your customers can update the product on their own accord and with their own tools.
Open-source software usually fulfills a need of the developer(s). I would say that the reason that there aren't free Flash development tools is that either a) Flash is such a good product that the people who use it are willing to pay for it or b) not that many people feel a need to use Flash. It's probably some of both.
Another thing: how do you release a Flash product as "open-source"? Do you distribute your product's SWF files to the target audience? I'm not sure how that would work. Is this something you have considered?
I apologize if I read too much into your statement. I hope that you really did have good intentions and weren't just riding on the "free [as in beer] is cool" bandwagon. I'd appreciate a good response from the original poster or someone who is involved in a similar project. At face value, it seems that there are a lot of "holes" in this project plan that haven't quite been addressed.
You know, I used to think building my own box was the way to go. I'd get on Pricewatch and find the best motherboards, CPUs, etc. and build the whole thing. It used to be cheaper.
:)
Then my parents needed three new computers at once, and I decided to check out Dell Refurbished.
For $580 shipped (each), I got 2 computers with a 1.1GHz Celeron processor and one with a 1.6GHz Pentium IV. All had at least 128MB RAM and one had 256MB (I bought extra memory from Crucial.com to bring them all up to 256MB.) All had at least a 20GB hard drive, which was all my parents needed for the office. All came preinstalled with Windows XP Home (fine for office work.) And one came with a Firewire card; one came with a kick-ass video card. All had either Ethernet or a 56K modem (in card format, even, not built on to the motherboard.) All of this also came with free one-year ON-SITE hardware tech support from Dell.
I was a bit worried about the quality, since I've seen how Dell shafts its low-end users with shoddy parts. But the computers performed flawlessly upon arrival and have since, with no system crashes. Then, when it came time to swap out a CD-ROM for a CD-RW, I was truly impressed. Swapping out of a drive consisted of the following:
1. Unplugging the computer.
2. Pulling a thumb-tab at the top of the computer.
3. Pulling a latch that released the CD-ROM drive.
4. Unplugging the CD-ROM drive's cables.
5. Pulling out the CD-ROM drive and putting the drive brackets on the new drive (which just snapped on.)
6. Sliding in the new drive, plugging in cables, snapping case back together.
7. Plug in.
Done! No screws, no screwdriver, no nasty cheap ATX case with a hood you have to struggle with getting in the right place. Check out this picture to see what I'm talking about.
There was no way I could have built these computers, bought Windows XP, and had any money left over to profit at $580 a computer. Plus, I would have had to put them in an ugly case that would have caused hassle for me later.
I don't think it's economical any more to build your own computer. This is a GOOD thing -- it shows that computers have become a commodity. Do you build your own TV? Probably not. Microwave? Heck no. The quality to price ratio of pre-built computers is now such that even geeks are starting to buy pre-built computers. I, for one, am glad. Let Dell take over the hassle of being called when the computer has a problem. I'll spend more time doing things that I'd rather be doing.
How about
Controversial
Bill
Devised by
Truly
Pompous
Assholes
??
I have a Sony Dream Machine (ARV: $20) that someone gave me as a gift several years ago. It has two buttons to set the alarm: forward and backward. If you hold them down, they zoom through the time extremely fast. So if the alarm is set to 8:30, and you want to wake up at 8:15, you just hit the back button for a couple of seconds. This is all without the clutter of a numeric keypad. I've seen it on alarm clocks that dated back to the late 70's.
:)
I'm sure Bose or Bang and Olufsen has made a $300 clock that has a numeric keypad to set the time, but this method works equally as well, and it has the added benefit that mere mortals can afford it.
Hmm, it seems to have everything I want except for expansion opportunities (sniff, no CompactFlash, just proprietary Memory Stick...)
Does anyone know if Sony is planning to introduce a GPS add-on or a wireless Internet add-on? That would really make it worth the $600+!
Hmm, you checked out my homepage, but interestingly enough, you didn't check Netcraft to see what my server was running... ;)
I write these kinds of posts (pro-Microsoft, etc.) for two reasons:
1) People respond with better answers to a post filled with half-truths or a post from someone who they believe is "misinformed";
2) I really do want to know what corporations use if they don't use Microsoft products.
This about it this way: the sales people at Microsoft are out there every day selling their product. They are out there telling your PHB every day that Exchange is better, that SAMBA won't do the half of what Windows 2000 Server will do, and that an all-Windows infrastructure is the way to go.
The real question is: what can you tell your PHB to dispute that?
That's why I write these. Often, the best way to find alternatives is to say something decidedly biased toward one camp. Come on, admit it -- you'd much rather hit "reply" to someone who is wrong or half-right than someone who says "What is the best solution for xxx?" You're also much more likely to provide real, concrete evidence that your product is superior instead of just saying "Hey, Product Y will do xxx! Go check out their homepage."
Now, I can take this information and hand it to the guy who is looking for an Exchange alternative, and I can say, "Look, why don't we check out Products Y and Z, because they might really fit the bill." I can then hand him what is basically a brochure describing migration problems and benefits of changing to the other products. Not only have I provided a solution, but I haven't asked you for bullet points -- I've asked you to prove that your product is better.
It's marketing, pure and simple. I learn infinitely more by writing what I hear from Microsoft salespeople and having Slashdotters prove it wrong than I would asking a question somewhere. Plus, I get to hear and make contact with people who have actually used the product. And in some cases, I get people admitting that the Microsoft solution is the best one out there, in which case that is what I will take back to my customers.
Try it sometime. You might be surprised at what you can learn.
What is interesting about this article is that it mentions Linux encroaching on UNIX (read: Sun's) territory, but it doesn't mention Microsoft at all. I have to assume that this means an external (web, application) server migration to Linux. If not, I'd like to know the answers to the following questions:
1) How do you work around the complete lack of server-side productivity software on Linux servers? By deploying Exchange, you can make scheduling a meeting as easy as sending an email with a time and having everyone click to confirm the meeting, which is then added to everyone's calendar. There is no solution like this without using Exchange (and I've looked.)
2) How do you work around the lack of group policy controls in SAMBA? By this I mean forcing a computer to have the most up-to-date anti-virus software when it logs on to the domain; mapping network drives automatically; downloading OS patches automatically through a local server. AFAIK, Samba can't do any of this as well as a Windows 2000 Server can. And what about Active Directory? LDAP isn't as cohesive a solution if you are running Windows clients.
From this article, I have to think that Merrill Lynch and others are changing their external server infrastructure, not their internal IT infrastructure.
The other conclusion I must draw is that the companies that are migrating to Linux as a workgroup server (i.e. replacing Windows NT/2000 Server with Linux) did not have a cohesive Windows network in the first place. Unfortunately, Linux is nowhere near a solution to Exchange, and it's perhaps 25% of the way to replacing a Windows 2000 primary domain controller's capabilities.
So what servers is Merrill Lynch migrating? Linux does have its core competencies -- web servers; application servers; network storage to some degree -- but they didn't mention what part of the infrastructure they were replacing. I would thus take the words "companywide" with a grain of salt in this case.
"Wouldn't it make a lot more sense if your OS worked like your web browser?"
In Windows Explorer, go to the Tools menu, then click on Folder Options. Click the radio button labeled "Single-click to open an item (point to select)." Icons on your desktop will then act like web page links.
This option has been around in Windows for a while. I think the real reason people don't use it is mostly because they have grown accustomed to double-clicking. You're right -- it is inconsistent behavior. However, at least Windows gives you a pretty easy way to change it.
I'm studying for my MCSE right now, and I whizzed through the practice questions on the Windows 2000 Professional (workstation) part last night. One of the questions in particular caught my eye. It said (paraphrased):
"Which of these two operating systems [Windows 2000 Professional | Windows 2000 Server] can you run a public web server on?"
Well, of course, I picked both. I'm running Apache on Windows 2000 Pro right now, and IIS also comes as an optional add-on. When I looked up my answer, I was surprised to find that I was wrong. Then I remembered that I wasn't wrong because of the technical capabilities of the OS, but because of the licensing agreement, which states that you can only connect 5 computers to a Pro OS at any one time for file sharing and "Internet Information Services".
It's a different mindset. Being used to Linux servers, I assumed that the only thing limiting me from running what I wanted was hardware. However, to pass the MCSE, you not only have to know the technical features of the OS, but also what Microsoft wants you to do with it.
BTW, if you think the MCSE is easy, try taking it yourself. I've been doing Linux and Windows system administration for years, and this stuff still isn't coming naturally to me. It's also good experience for anyone adminning Windows boxes, as you will definitely know how to set up disk images and domain controllers once you are done with it. If you think Windows Update is the best way to maintain your set of 5+ Windows PCs, definitely take it, or at least read the study guides. It might make your job a lot easier.
The case you mentioned is indeed a very interesting case, but it doesn't directly support the Lindows side of the case. Why?
In the case you mention, the man proved that the Mc- prefix actually meant something in a language that he knew well, and that it made sense to name a restaurant McChina because of the meaning of the prefix. Therefore, there was reasonable doubt that he was capitalizing off of McDonalds' success.
However, in the Lindows case, there is no doubt that the product would have been named Lindows if there was not already a product named Windows that was created by Microsoft. Indeed, if you look at Lindows' about page, it is obvious that the name is a mixture of Windows and Linux, and doesn't derive from another language.
I, too, think the McChina case had the correct outcome, but Lindows doesn't have that luxury. IMO, Lindows will lose.
The article referenced at the top of the page doesn't go into much detail regarding the outcome of the suit (which will finally be decided in a year or so), but here is an article that might be a bit more informative.
The most interesting part of that article is the following quote:
"'There's no evidence Windows is generic and strong evidence it's not,' responded Karl Quackenbush, an attorney arguing for Microsoft. He said Microsoft has spent more than a billion dollars promoting and protecting the name Windows. That includes sending letters to hundreds of infringers warning them not to use the name, he said.
In any case, he said, names such as Amazon.com and Apple -- two other generic words -- have been adjudged valid trademarks because they've acquired a 'secondary meaning' through their strong association to products."
So, even though Microsoft might not win the preliminary injunction, it is likely to win the case. After all, if Apple and Amazon were both held up as trademarks in court, it's likely that the ubiquitous "Windows" will be as well.
I, for one, will be glad if "Lindows" loses in court simply because it is confusing to say out loud. Try saying this out loud: "I'd like some help with configuring Lindows, please." I fully support anyone's right to create a new OS, but I don't support naming a product in a confusing manner (and playing off the name of a more popular product), which is exactly what Lindows is doing. This sort of infringement is what trademark law was designed to protect, and I think Microsoft will win this one in the end.
news.google.com. Just released yesterday. I haven't yet played around with it enough to say whether it's cool or not, but it does look promising.
...since DOS doesn't have a command called "pg".
...that Microsoft uses free software, I invite you to take a look at this.
In Windows 2000, open a command prompt window. Type "nslookup". This will drop you into interactive mode for nslookup, which has been ported from UNIX (most likely BSD.)
Now type "help". Check out this line at the bottom of the output:
view FILE - sort an 'ls' output file and view it with pg
Uh, yeah. Oops.
Aha! Okay, I knew I was missing something. I used to use that kind of stuff in Opera. Yeah, it's cool, but Windows XP does that with IE as well (well, in a sense: it groups all IE windows together.) I could see how this would be beneficial, though. I'll keep it in mind when Moz 1.0 comes out. :)
Thanks again.
I heard all the raves about tabbed browsing and I downloaded a copy of Mozilla 0.9 to try it out. It's the exact same thing as the Search/Favorites/History panel in IE! I don't get how this is "revolutionary". (Please, if you care to enlighten me on how it is different, do so. I'd welcome a better explanation.)
Check out this screenshot that I did for my friend, and tell me how this is different from tabbed browsing in Mozilla.