hey hey hey... can we set the record straight here?
most slashdotters (most, not all) seem to have this perception that capitalism is some kind of economic guerrilla warfare where multiple parties try to stiff each other to prove they're the best, all in the name of the holy green. not quite so.
at the heart of it, capitalism has nothing to do with money as a goal. it's an end, but not the highest/noblest/coolest pursuit of capitalism. capitalism is all about creation, connection, and solution. a capitalist is not a man/woman who loves money. a capitalist is a person who loves creation and ingenuity, and many times can make money at it.
that being said, what microsoft is doing is not considered to be capitalism. where is the creation? where is the origninality and ingenuity? it's not there. check your assumptions before you go slamming your head against the wall. you just look like a fool.
it may just be me, but does this thing look like they just slapped a screen and some hookups onto an old hard drive casing? part of the attractiveness of the ipod is, well... it's attractiveness.
obviously, i'm gonna get modded/flamed/hated for this comment... but could this actually be a good thing?
since when did the responsibility for making sure your system is secure fall on the shoulders of the software manufacturers? when you buy a car, does it come with thief-proof measures? no, it comes with basic security measures that most any car thief can get through easily... if you want more, you've gotta buy more. same with your house... you get deadbolts and whatnot, but if you want better security, you get an alarm system from ADT or whomever.
perhaps microsoft isn't absolutely the best company to go to for security software, but i ask again... who said it was ever their responsibility to make sure that no one is intelligent enough to crack/trojan/poison your system? come on guys... you can't have it both ways. one or the other.
i'd actually go for this whole deal. let me purchase a system that doesn't come bloated with inane, ineffective security measures... then let me decide how to best protect my investment. i'd be insane to demand what you're demanding from the company who makes my car. take some initiative and responsibility and thank the heavens that you might have a chance at a less bloated OS.
in the end, who do you want to be responsible? yourself, or the software companies. if you said the software companies then stop bitching about all their EULAs that supposedly invade your privacy. hey, they've gotta cover their asses so snot-nosed brats can't come back on them because the system wasn't protected... therefore you see the EULAs with all the stipulations about allowing microsoft to install software without your permission. if you said yourself, go ahead and bitch about the EULAs, but make sure you know what you're doing when you design your system.
SuSE has an ftp installation... so if you don't want to buy the CD, you have to download their installation manager and boot to that. then you can select the packages you want, etc. via ftp.
keaton pulled off the whole batman thing better than anyone else has, or will (considering the current crop of stars out there) precisely because he pulled off the whole 'brooding spoiled brat who has his life thrown askew by the murder of his parents' when no one else could come close.
batman was never supposed to be a superhero. he was meant to be the anti-hero in ways much more apparent (and believable) than any other comic... no superpowers; just drive, revenge, money, and ingenuity. the latter movies simply tried to pull off batman as being a gadget pimp without a care in the world... which just doesn't work when people know otherwise. keaton managed to convince us that there was a method to the madness, and a purpose to the gadgets, while kilmer and clooney's versions put the gadgets in because they were cool and the killing in because he 'had to'. come on! the whole reason batman goes after the joker is because he wants revenge... he's pissed and he wants the smiling face on a platter... there was no 'had to' there... he could have just been a worthless playboy, but he had a reason.
you can say that the cinematics are incredible in today's movies, but you'll never convince me that a movie without believable motive is anything more than a waste of time.
Alright, people, here's why microsoft kicked everyone else's ass:
They offered this nice little thing called migration compatibility . the only product microsoft EVER created from scratch was windows, and even that claim is dubious. their business strategy was to purchase established products, give them a microsoft-esque look, spice the functionality up a bit, and offer it to the public (now pay attention here) WITH MIGRATION CAPABILITIES ALREADY IN PLACE. want to move your documents from wordperfect to word? no problem. how about migrating email from eudora to outlook? gotcha covered. that's where microsoft wraps your underwear around your ankles and gives it to you rotten.
and you know what? it's only gonna continue. it's like screwing a gorilla... you ain't gonna stop till the gorilla stops.
so, what's the solution? first of all, don't offer an alternative to microsoft, offer a migration. you might also consider actually using some of microsoft's products. how about this? i see all of these posts talking about working with major vendors on making their software work on linux... well, the one vendor i KNOW all you fascist, self-mutilating slashdotters (and by god you are, don't even try to deny it) are overlooking is microsoft. why not try and convince them to work on linux functionality? with the whole court thing going on (email me sometime to find out how much BS and how anti-democratic it is), they've got a vested interest in making other products at least viable enough so that they can claim that they're not monopolizing the market. take that and run with it.
you know who you guys remind me of? all the people who are hanging around bitching that racism/sexism/any other -ism you want is still rampant and that there's no equalization of opportunity when all they really want is for the government to hold everyone else down so they can walk on them. fuck that! if you want to operate based upon the lowest common denominator, go right ahead, but i'll be damned if i'm gonna work on it, and you'll just keep getting trampled on by those with the ambition and the capability.
i'm having trouble understanding how this would be beneficial... yea, we all like free software (that's why open-source is so great), but i think the unfortunate result is going to be that all of these students will grow up thinking that pirated software is legal.
the other thing that really burns me is that they're not looking for any sort of cooperation from the software companies. there's something intrinsically wrong with that.
having lived with a blind mother all of my life, and realizing that blind people travel in packs (ha! i made a funny!), i ran this by them... the one response that i heard repeatedly, from both those who had been blind from birth and those who had lost it at some point in their lives, was that they would honestly prefer to remain blind. some said that they would appreciate partial sight (the ability to discern shapes, etc.), but that full sight would be too much for them to deal with. i argued that with proper therapy they could get used to having their sight back, but they stuck to their guns.
on a side note (at the risk of being rated down), is anyone in the slashdot community actively and consciously creating accessible websites? at this point in artificial vision technology, no one has yet to create a widely accepted, usable solution. there are too many diseases, too many causes of blindness to deal with to see a fix-all solution come about... so the best solution is to either ensure that a site is accessible, or design an accessible alternative site. you would be surprised at the number of blind people who are online these days. my little brothers and my father are always complaining that my mother is using up their broadband bandwidth at home with her usage.
My certifications didn't land my my current job (i didn't have any when i started). neither did my college degree (i don't have that, either). what landed me the job (manufacturing systems consultant) was something a little harder to get: Experience. now, you have to get a job to get experience, right? here's my suggestion:
find a small company that doesn't have an in-house IT guy/department. if you live close to a large city, manufacturing plants are about your best bet. now, this part is important: walk in and present them with your resume. don't just mail it. explain to them that you have the skills and that you want to apply them. offer to be their IT guy, whether it be full or part time. explain to them why an in-house IT guy is better to have than outsourcing it (better system design, more homogenous setup, not having to call outside for help, etc.). most plants will be open to this. offer to do it for a low salary (yeah, it's not what you think you're worth, but it's better than what you're making now). use that as your jumping off point when you move onto your next job.
i did that when i was 16, and it's what helped me get to my current job. trust me, if you can swallow your pride, it will work.
Slashdot Mirror
most slashdotters (most, not all) seem to have this perception that capitalism is some kind of economic guerrilla warfare where multiple parties try to stiff each other to prove they're the best, all in the name of the holy green. not quite so.
at the heart of it, capitalism has nothing to do with money as a goal. it's an end, but not the highest/noblest/coolest pursuit of capitalism. capitalism is all about creation, connection, and solution. a capitalist is not a man/woman who loves money. a capitalist is a person who loves creation and ingenuity, and many times can make money at it.
that being said, what microsoft is doing is not considered to be capitalism. where is the creation? where is the origninality and ingenuity? it's not there. check your assumptions before you go slamming your head against the wall. you just look like a fool.
that's incredible
i can't stop laughing
it may just be me, but does this thing look like they just slapped a screen and some hookups onto an old hard drive casing? part of the attractiveness of the ipod is, well... it's attractiveness.
since when did the responsibility for making sure your system is secure fall on the shoulders of the software manufacturers? when you buy a car, does it come with thief-proof measures? no, it comes with basic security measures that most any car thief can get through easily... if you want more, you've gotta buy more. same with your house... you get deadbolts and whatnot, but if you want better security, you get an alarm system from ADT or whomever.
perhaps microsoft isn't absolutely the best company to go to for security software, but i ask again... who said it was ever their responsibility to make sure that no one is intelligent enough to crack/trojan/poison your system? come on guys... you can't have it both ways. one or the other.
i'd actually go for this whole deal. let me purchase a system that doesn't come bloated with inane, ineffective security measures... then let me decide how to best protect my investment. i'd be insane to demand what you're demanding from the company who makes my car. take some initiative and responsibility and thank the heavens that you might have a chance at a less bloated OS.
in the end, who do you want to be responsible? yourself, or the software companies. if you said the software companies then stop bitching about all their EULAs that supposedly invade your privacy. hey, they've gotta cover their asses so snot-nosed brats can't come back on them because the system wasn't protected... therefore you see the EULAs with all the stipulations about allowing microsoft to install software without your permission. if you said yourself, go ahead and bitch about the EULAs, but make sure you know what you're doing when you design your system.
common sense, people... common sense.
SuSE has an ftp installation... so if you don't want to buy the CD, you have to download their installation manager and boot to that. then you can select the packages you want, etc. via ftp.
batman was never supposed to be a superhero. he was meant to be the anti-hero in ways much more apparent (and believable) than any other comic... no superpowers; just drive, revenge, money, and ingenuity. the latter movies simply tried to pull off batman as being a gadget pimp without a care in the world... which just doesn't work when people know otherwise. keaton managed to convince us that there was a method to the madness, and a purpose to the gadgets, while kilmer and clooney's versions put the gadgets in because they were cool and the killing in because he 'had to'. come on! the whole reason batman goes after the joker is because he wants revenge... he's pissed and he wants the smiling face on a platter... there was no 'had to' there... he could have just been a worthless playboy, but he had a reason.
you can say that the cinematics are incredible in today's movies, but you'll never convince me that a movie without believable motive is anything more than a waste of time.
They offered this nice little thing called migration compatibility . the only product microsoft EVER created from scratch was windows, and even that claim is dubious. their business strategy was to purchase established products, give them a microsoft-esque look, spice the functionality up a bit, and offer it to the public (now pay attention here) WITH MIGRATION CAPABILITIES ALREADY IN PLACE. want to move your documents from wordperfect to word? no problem. how about migrating email from eudora to outlook? gotcha covered. that's where microsoft wraps your underwear around your ankles and gives it to you rotten.
and you know what? it's only gonna continue. it's like screwing a gorilla... you ain't gonna stop till the gorilla stops.
so, what's the solution? first of all, don't offer an alternative to microsoft, offer a migration. you might also consider actually using some of microsoft's products. how about this? i see all of these posts talking about working with major vendors on making their software work on linux... well, the one vendor i KNOW all you fascist, self-mutilating slashdotters (and by god you are, don't even try to deny it) are overlooking is microsoft. why not try and convince them to work on linux functionality? with the whole court thing going on (email me sometime to find out how much BS and how anti-democratic it is), they've got a vested interest in making other products at least viable enough so that they can claim that they're not monopolizing the market. take that and run with it.
you know who you guys remind me of? all the people who are hanging around bitching that racism/sexism/any other -ism you want is still rampant and that there's no equalization of opportunity when all they really want is for the government to hold everyone else down so they can walk on them. fuck that! if you want to operate based upon the lowest common denominator, go right ahead, but i'll be damned if i'm gonna work on it, and you'll just keep getting trampled on by those with the ambition and the capability.
nuff said
i'm having trouble understanding how this would be beneficial... yea, we all like free software (that's why open-source is so great), but i think the unfortunate result is going to be that all of these students will grow up thinking that pirated software is legal.
the other thing that really burns me is that they're not looking for any sort of cooperation from the software companies. there's something intrinsically wrong with that.
http://irishcar.com/ICOimages/autonomy.jpg
chinacars.com (google cache)
e-insite.net (pdf)
enjoy
on a side note (at the risk of being rated down), is anyone in the slashdot community actively and consciously creating accessible websites? at this point in artificial vision technology, no one has yet to create a widely accepted, usable solution. there are too many diseases, too many causes of blindness to deal with to see a fix-all solution come about... so the best solution is to either ensure that a site is accessible, or design an accessible alternative site. you would be surprised at the number of blind people who are online these days. my little brothers and my father are always complaining that my mother is using up their broadband bandwidth at home with her usage.
at any rate, it's something to consider.
find a small company that doesn't have an in-house IT guy/department. if you live close to a large city, manufacturing plants are about your best bet. now, this part is important: walk in and present them with your resume. don't just mail it. explain to them that you have the skills and that you want to apply them. offer to be their IT guy, whether it be full or part time. explain to them why an in-house IT guy is better to have than outsourcing it (better system design, more homogenous setup, not having to call outside for help, etc.). most plants will be open to this. offer to do it for a low salary (yeah, it's not what you think you're worth, but it's better than what you're making now). use that as your jumping off point when you move onto your next job.
i did that when i was 16, and it's what helped me get to my current job. trust me, if you can swallow your pride, it will work.
RedHat (and all the other distros) do let you upgrade from Windows for free... it's called going out and downloading it.