I agree. While my computer nerddom (nerdliness?) has really dropped off in the last couple years, I have never been interested in video games. I am the kind of person who would rather do actual things with computers, then go climb a mountain or something to decompress.
It's almost ironic, as there is a large chunk of the nerd world (me included) holding the belief that video games are a path to stupidity, what with the endless sitting and staring at a screen when there's a big old interesting world out there. The irony comes when the same video game couch potatoes often snidely deride those who watch TV endlessly.
A vast majority of the true nerds (not 'hip' neo-nerds) I have ever known believe that one of the hallmarks of being so is the constant search for knowledge and education that goes well beyond computers. The term 'nerd' has really been bastardized in recent years from its original connotation of someone who is just plain intelligent and worldly (metaphorically), if a bit socially stunted. The term 'nerd,' as I believe it was originally intended, is actually the antithesis of a video game chronic.
In my opinion, the percentage is relatively small but vocal, as junkies attempt to convince everyone else that they're somehow smarter than TV addicts.
Is it ethical to write software that must remain free?
Sure, it's the author's choice.
Is it ethical to write software that cannot be copied in any way, and has limits put on its use?
Sure, it's the author's choice.
Where's any dilemma here? Slashbots shout at the sky over maintaining freedom and then ask if it's ethical to have the freedom to impose usage regulations... why? You don't agree? Don't use the software. There's your freedom.
to what extent you can observe your workers' use of the Internet
I thought that this one was a mercifully closed case already. If I'm your boss and you're being paid to do a job using my equipment, you will do said job to the best of your abilities or be let go. On a break or eating lunch? Great, have fun. Have a shitty internet connection at home? Feel free to stay after hours and use the office one. Otherwise, your ass is mine and I better not see Slashdot.org gobbling up my bandwidth. It's not playschool.
2002: "We couldn't have fixed the Space Shuttle Columbia even if cameras on the ISS had shown that there was indeed iron-clad evidence of tile damage."
2006: "We couldn't have fixed the Space Shuttle Tranquility (sponsored by Nike) even if cameras on the satellite had shown that there was indeed iron-clad evidence of tile damage."
1) Windows NT is now approximately seven years old, which is probably an adjusted thirty outside the "dog years" of IT.
2) Sun and IBM were both engaged in the big-iron game ten years ago, which is completely different than what Windows has ever claimed to be.
Hate Microsoft all you want, but they're not doing anything differently from countless other companies that most of the Slash-herd will happily embrace in any other industry. Everything gets old and dies, including computers and software.
You are correct, the costs of upgrading are often a factor; anyone who has done any consulting work has heard it a million times. However, there is no such thing as a worthwhile product that never, ever requires maintenance at a cost. This is particularly true when the product in question is what an operation hinges upon. Costs like these should be factored into the budget of any intelligent operation to avoid the "holy crap, we can't afford this" problem when things simply get old, which everything does.
HVAC systems get old and become unsupportable, phone systems get old and become unsupportable, OSs get old and become unsupportable. Businesses understand that infrastructure doesn't last forever. Why all the shock here?
Not referring to you personally, but this just sounds like another excuse to fire up the uninformed anti-Microsoft circlejerk.
When's the last time you booted your NT box without a GUI, or could recompile the kernel for performance boosts, or tweak nearly every aspect of it to make it run decently on old hardware?
Don't need to. WinNT ran better on my P100/64MB than Mandrake 7.something did on my C433/128MB. NT was actually usable while Mandrake/KDE just sat there and swapped to disk all day. Now, Win2K runs on the 433 and does so better than any alternatives.
But please, enjoy compiling that kernel while the rest of us do things with computers.
The tab add-on for IE sounds good and I will look into that, but pop-up stoppers for IE seem to be pretty kludgy and very all-or-nothing. I really like the fact that Mozilla will filter jscript popups while allowing for intended (clicked) ones. I have yet to find an IE equiv that does the same without holding down keys or whatever.
You only think IE is reliable as you've not experienced anything better
Au contraire; I use Mozilla myself simply because I like the tabs and pop-up blocking. I put up with the rest of it to get those two features.
They can still pay someone to fix a bug for them if needed
But I won't and nor will anyone else who is using these products outside of a business environment. Ironically, the people who might pay (businesses) continue to happily ignore linux in lieu of something with an actual 800 number behind it. Having the source is an utterly moot point in a vast, vast, vast majority of cases.
Remember how many copies of Windows 95 Microsoft sold to people that didn't even own computers?
Sure, people are idiots. But, they're penny-pinching idiots who are driven to shout at the sky when something doesn't perform for its investment. IE works just fine and has for two full versions. I don't use it because I am willing to compromise its speed and stability for the features of Mozilla I mentioned above. I am sure others disagree. None of that has anything to do with it sucking.
When was the last time you used IE for any length? Perhaps it isn't I who is speaking from a lack of experience.
Oh, please. That's just one big stupid OSS flag-waver. IE versions since 4 have been plenty stable and, yes, I do administer LANs of up to 80 machines, all running MSIE 5.5 and 6 reliably. For me and other "die-hard Windows users," Mozilla hangs and crashes. IE doesn't. Does that mean that Mozilla sucks?
If you use linux because it works for you, that's just great, but don't go making blanket statements that are dead wrong. Wishing doesn't make it so. If IE 'sucked,' it would be obsoleted by popular opinion. It doesn't and it isn't.
And, WRT your familiar commentary about the magic of having "the source," how much does that mean to the 99.6% of the world who can't code? I certainly can't code beyond scripts, so I don't care and I'm not about to hire someone to do it for me. If it's broken, I find something that ain't, just like everyone else.
I don't meean to bitch at the parent post specificly just people that are complaining about nit picky stuff while overlooking all the time/energy spent giving them a free speech/beer answer to IE and redmond (something/.ers also complain about)
So, I should embrace OSS out of loyalty rather than using whichever is the best tool for the job? Welcome to reason number 3545552 why this is still a Microsoft world.
Corel is dying because their software is inferior.
By this logic, Microsoft would be dying as well.
Really? Inferior to whom? A spectacular OS X that requires proprietary hardware? Maybe you mean a server OS with an inhumanly kludgy GUI and vastly too many slef-righteous chefs in linux?
Could you be Yet Another Linux Troll? Looks that way.
Why bother? Instead of buying Linux competition, just wait six months and the "companies" commit suicide anyway. Corel was rotting in the sun before Microsoft ever even came near. This is just throwing water on the ashes.
Now, go ahead and nail me with that flamebait so that everyone can pretend I'm wrong.
Oh, you fanboys give me a headache. The ONLY reason why you (and I mean YOU, not one) can trust Red Hat is because nobody uses linux. On that cold day in hell when any of the OSS vendors actually does anything businesswise, this type of tracking will become equally common, albeit suddenly acceptable by the Slashdot sheep. Why? ALL businesses of any consequence are looking out for number one exclusively and you are just a dollar sign. Is it a spectacular reality? No, but that's how the western world works.
Microsoft does this because it can and probably feels that it must to stay on top. If a few users get mad and leave but the overall market share stays high because a higher percentage of users are pleased with a 'one-click' Windows update, fine. It's a cost-benefit balance. Red Hat, on the other hand, can't afford the loss of even one doughy geek and is in the unfortunate spot of pandering to malcontented weirdos like the Slashdolts. Look at it this way: if you fart in bed, everyone knows who did it and now there's hell to pay. Fart in a football stadium and, sure maybe some people leave or throw things at you, but hey, you just farted in a football stadium. Benefit beats cost again.
Theo offers something. What do the rest of these whining, useless malcontents bring forth, other than chuckle-worthy 'facts' and an ego that is hilariously inflated?
Son, innovation requires motivation and most people are swift enough to realize that being an also-ran doesn't put food on the table. Bottom line -- people who agree with you can't stay in business long enough to declare bankruptcy, while people who agree with me run the world; somehow, I'm not worried about changing your mind.
Isn't it sad that you had to offer such a hand-puppet analogy to a group of self-described "intelligent" people?
Those with a knowledge of even the most rudimentary aspects of business know that patents fuel innovation and everyone else, apparently, hangs out at Slashdot. It will be interesting to watch as these hilariously idealistic souls mature and attempt to pay bills with good intentions.
Well, chucklehead, it sure looks like you've done more to insult yourself than I could without investing a lot more time than you are worth. I am sure you wouldn't have time to really read it anyway, what with the endless social engagements to which someone of your status is surely invited. In fact, you're probably adding to your calendar right now, which prevents you from being able to use any meaningful punctuation or proper spelling in your comments. What other explanation could there be? If I hadn't been apprised of your status before now, I'd assume you were a borderline illiterate moron who is lying about his popularity in a vain (and laughable) attempt to assure himself that someone, somewhere may actually care. Can you imagine my audacity?
So, we're done here. Enjoy those non-malls and vital banter with your "partners" in that clearly well-infrastructured metropolis.
So, you're some 16 year old bag of hormones who can't bear the image of ten minutes without a reminder of your undoubtedly immense popularity by pissing everyone off with an almost certainly worthless and inane conversation about nothing with one of your equally vapid friends?
Because, and say it with me here, no one outside of you people is going to even walk past the linux shelf with this voucher. So, sure, your favorite distribution may see a couple grand as a handful of Slashdotters follow your detailed plan, but that's only enough to keep coffee flowing at vendor headquarters as they arrange another beg session to obtain a meaningful amount of capital.
...and stifling innovation. (i.e. HOW long has Mozilla had tabbed browsing and ad-suppression? *When* might IE?)
Let me see if I have this right; Microsoft is stifling innovation because it chooses not to implement the same features as Mozilla and yet remains popular?
Does that also mean that, since you have 86% body fat, anyone who chooses to remain in shape is stifling your genetic replication by appearing more attractive to the opposite sex?
The problem is this; "buggy" is a relative term and, at present, there isn't any other product that allows for a quantification. Watch --
"Chevies are pieces of crap." "Oh, in comparison to what?" "A Toyota."
"Windows is a piece of crap." "Oh, in comparison to what" "???"
Now, despite the default Slashdot response to everything, there really is no alternative and it's not the fault of Microsoft. OSX could be an alternative, but it requires hardware that is three times the cost. That's Apple's choice. Linux could be an alternative, but those in charge refuse to target the lowest common denominator that is an absolute requirement in anything mainstream. It is Linux' choice (as a collective) to operate this way.
So, what's left? Nothing, and that's why Windows' past bugginess (no longer a real concern in Win2000) is essentially a moot point.
Slashdot Mirror
It's almost ironic, as there is a large chunk of the nerd world (me included) holding the belief that video games are a path to stupidity, what with the endless sitting and staring at a screen when there's a big old interesting world out there. The irony comes when the same video game couch potatoes often snidely deride those who watch TV endlessly.
A vast majority of the true nerds (not 'hip' neo-nerds) I have ever known believe that one of the hallmarks of being so is the constant search for knowledge and education that goes well beyond computers. The term 'nerd' has really been bastardized in recent years from its original connotation of someone who is just plain intelligent and worldly (metaphorically), if a bit socially stunted. The term 'nerd,' as I believe it was originally intended, is actually the antithesis of a video game chronic.
In my opinion, the percentage is relatively small but vocal, as junkies attempt to convince everyone else that they're somehow smarter than TV addicts.
Sure, it's the author's choice.
Is it ethical to write software that cannot be copied in any way, and has limits put on its use?
Sure, it's the author's choice.
Where's any dilemma here? Slashbots shout at the sky over maintaining freedom and then ask if it's ethical to have the freedom to impose usage regulations... why? You don't agree? Don't use the software. There's your freedom.
I thought that this one was a mercifully closed case already. If I'm your boss and you're being paid to do a job using my equipment, you will do said job to the best of your abilities or be let go. On a break or eating lunch? Great, have fun. Have a shitty internet connection at home? Feel free to stay after hours and use the office one. Otherwise, your ass is mine and I better not see Slashdot.org gobbling up my bandwidth. It's not playschool.
2006: "We couldn't have fixed the Space Shuttle Tranquility (sponsored by Nike) even if cameras on the satellite had shown that there was indeed iron-clad evidence of tile damage."
Now that's progress.
1) Windows NT is now approximately seven years old, which is probably an adjusted thirty outside the "dog years" of IT.
2) Sun and IBM were both engaged in the big-iron game ten years ago, which is completely different than what Windows has ever claimed to be.
Hate Microsoft all you want, but they're not doing anything differently from countless other companies that most of the Slash-herd will happily embrace in any other industry. Everything gets old and dies, including computers and software.
HVAC systems get old and become unsupportable, phone systems get old and become unsupportable, OSs get old and become unsupportable. Businesses understand that infrastructure doesn't last forever. Why all the shock here?
Not referring to you personally, but this just sounds like another excuse to fire up the uninformed anti-Microsoft circlejerk.
When's the last time you booted your NT box without a GUI, or could recompile the kernel for performance boosts, or tweak nearly every aspect of it to make it run decently on old hardware?
Don't need to. WinNT ran better on my P100/64MB than Mandrake 7.something did on my C433/128MB. NT was actually usable while Mandrake/KDE just sat there and swapped to disk all day. Now, Win2K runs on the 433 and does so better than any alternatives.
But please, enjoy compiling that kernel while the rest of us do things with computers.
The tab add-on for IE sounds good and I will look into that, but pop-up stoppers for IE seem to be pretty kludgy and very all-or-nothing. I really like the fact that Mozilla will filter jscript popups while allowing for intended (clicked) ones. I have yet to find an IE equiv that does the same without holding down keys or whatever.
Au contraire; I use Mozilla myself simply because I like the tabs and pop-up blocking. I put up with the rest of it to get those two features.
They can still pay someone to fix a bug for them if needed
But I won't and nor will anyone else who is using these products outside of a business environment. Ironically, the people who might pay (businesses) continue to happily ignore linux in lieu of something with an actual 800 number behind it. Having the source is an utterly moot point in a vast, vast, vast majority of cases.
Remember how many copies of Windows 95 Microsoft sold to people that didn't even own computers?
Sure, people are idiots. But, they're penny-pinching idiots who are driven to shout at the sky when something doesn't perform for its investment. IE works just fine and has for two full versions. I don't use it because I am willing to compromise its speed and stability for the features of Mozilla I mentioned above. I am sure others disagree. None of that has anything to do with it sucking.
When was the last time you used IE for any length? Perhaps it isn't I who is speaking from a lack of experience.
If you use linux because it works for you, that's just great, but don't go making blanket statements that are dead wrong. Wishing doesn't make it so. If IE 'sucked,' it would be obsoleted by popular opinion. It doesn't and it isn't.
And, WRT your familiar commentary about the magic of having "the source," how much does that mean to the 99.6% of the world who can't code? I certainly can't code beyond scripts, so I don't care and I'm not about to hire someone to do it for me. If it's broken, I find something that ain't, just like everyone else.
So, I should embrace OSS out of loyalty rather than using whichever is the best tool for the job? Welcome to reason number 3545552 why this is still a Microsoft world.
By this logic, Microsoft would be dying as well.
Really? Inferior to whom? A spectacular OS X that requires proprietary hardware? Maybe you mean a server OS with an inhumanly kludgy GUI and vastly too many slef-righteous chefs in linux?
Could you be Yet Another Linux Troll? Looks that way.
Now, go ahead and nail me with that flamebait so that everyone can pretend I'm wrong.
Microsoft does this because it can and probably feels that it must to stay on top. If a few users get mad and leave but the overall market share stays high because a higher percentage of users are pleased with a 'one-click' Windows update, fine. It's a cost-benefit balance. Red Hat, on the other hand, can't afford the loss of even one doughy geek and is in the unfortunate spot of pandering to malcontented weirdos like the Slashdolts. Look at it this way: if you fart in bed, everyone knows who did it and now there's hell to pay. Fart in a football stadium and, sure maybe some people leave or throw things at you, but hey, you just farted in a football stadium. Benefit beats cost again.
Wow, I've never met a lawsuit fetishist before. What's that like?
I am sure that a Toyota Echo is a great replacement for an 18-wheeler, too, unless you're actually going to haul anything.
Face it, junior, you got molested, and rightfully so.
Theo offers something. What do the rest of these whining, useless malcontents bring forth, other than chuckle-worthy 'facts' and an ego that is hilariously inflated?
Son, innovation requires motivation and most people are swift enough to realize that being an also-ran doesn't put food on the table. Bottom line -- people who agree with you can't stay in business long enough to declare bankruptcy, while people who agree with me run the world; somehow, I'm not worried about changing your mind.
Those with a knowledge of even the most rudimentary aspects of business know that patents fuel innovation and everyone else, apparently, hangs out at Slashdot. It will be interesting to watch as these hilariously idealistic souls mature and attempt to pay bills with good intentions.
So, we're done here. Enjoy those non-malls and vital banter with your "partners" in that clearly well-infrastructured metropolis.
"What's up?"
"Just chillin' at the mall."
Oooh, what a life you have, junior.
Because, and say it with me here, no one outside of you people is going to even walk past the linux shelf with this voucher. So, sure, your favorite distribution may see a couple grand as a handful of Slashdotters follow your detailed plan, but that's only enough to keep coffee flowing at vendor headquarters as they arrange another beg session to obtain a meaningful amount of capital.
Let me see if I have this right; Microsoft is stifling innovation because it chooses not to implement the same features as Mozilla and yet remains popular?
Does that also mean that, since you have 86% body fat, anyone who chooses to remain in shape is stifling your genetic replication by appearing more attractive to the opposite sex?
Really? Name five. Let me get you started:
1. It's probably gratis.
2. It offers an alternative to Microsoft.
Please, continue.
"Chevies are pieces of crap." "Oh, in comparison to what?" "A Toyota."
"Windows is a piece of crap." "Oh, in comparison to what" "???"
Now, despite the default Slashdot response to everything, there really is no alternative and it's not the fault of Microsoft. OSX could be an alternative, but it requires hardware that is three times the cost. That's Apple's choice. Linux could be an alternative, but those in charge refuse to target the lowest common denominator that is an absolute requirement in anything mainstream. It is Linux' choice (as a collective) to operate this way.
So, what's left? Nothing, and that's why Windows' past bugginess (no longer a real concern in Win2000) is essentially a moot point.