What's more important, making money or sticking with your ideals?
Gee, I don't know. As an American I should say, "Make money make money." Because that is what I was raised (brain washed) to believe was the purpose of my existence.
Having learned a few things in the past 30 years I would have to say that I prefer my ideals over making some cash.
It's not impossible, or wrong, to make money off of OSS. I have been doing that for years. This year alone I have made literally thousands of dollars off of OSS.
I don't understand why so many people are drawn to advertising as a source for revenue. Be a little freaking creative people.
How about this, do want you love to do and you will be the richest person in the room. If it makes you happy to make an OS with advertisements in it, go for it. If you just want to make a kick ass OS, then do that.
We, in the US, have WAAAAAYYYYY too many ads shoved down our throats and are sick and tired of being thought of as nothing more than consumers - at least I am. Let's move on, let's really innovate.
I like the idea, but there doesn't appear to be any way of regulating it. Perhaps, I didn't find that text on the web site.
It doesn't seem to be any more powerful then saying, "Hey my stuff's Open Source. See look GPL." If your code really isn't GPL then Stallman knocks on your door and gives your titty-twisters until your nipples fall off.
It's cool to spread the term Open Source and do some branding though, it doesn't matter.
I look at it this way, if the site doesn't show up in my browser(Galeon) - then I don't go there. If the company is trying to make money from that site, they just lost some.
Businesses that are serious about making money on the web are going to make their shit work on as many browsers as possible.
Some businesses may not care about the 5 - 10% of the traffic that can't view their pages. I find that strange. That would be like 711 not allowing some people into the store and basically throwing money away. Some businesses may have such a targeted audience of IE users that utilizing the "extensions" in IE makes sense.
I have been a web developer for over 5 years now and I look at it like this:
1. You are spitting out HTML. Use the standard HTML unless there is some compelling business reason to deviate. Even in that case, you should still cover non-IE browsers.
2. This is off-topic. Don't rely on Javascript to make an online "application". Javascript is a supplement that should be used to make the user's experience more pleasant, but shouldn't break your site if it's not enabled.
3. Just make good clean HTML. If you are a web developer that doesn't understand HTML and can't created good clean HTML, you might want to buy a book.
4. Don't use WYSWYG editors. I don't care how much people complain about typing. No one ever said making a web site was supposed to be easy. Good clean code will serve you well into the future and something you can build onto rather than throw away everytime you want to make a change.
This is a statement that I think most web developers will get pissed off about but here goes: I think designers should design and web developers should make this shit work. Example: A web designer creates PSD's of all the pages and hands them to the web developer who breathes life into them. I think that the web developer should be an expert at HTML and should know how to cut up the PSD and make that shit work. The web developer should own the entire site, not just their little PHP or Perl code. That works best for me anyway. I love having total control of the process. And it frees the designer up to focus on designing, which is what they do best. A nice spec. from the designer helps too. Of course, in larger businesses replace the previous term "web developer" with "web development team".
HTML can be tedious at times, but you would be amazed at how pleasing it is to work on something that you know inside and out. Plus it is fun to break apart sites and simplify and eliminate duplicate html code and really make that site maintainable. Programmers kick ass at making things easy, that's what we do.
Don't be afraid of HTML, it's not that big of a deal. One last thing, lose the attitude toward designers. If it weren't for designers all web sites would like Slashdot. I can sitdown with a good designer for an hour and they can make my crappy site look like it's something I can be proud of. It aint shit if you people can't use it.
work for these goons. I am always amazed at people that will blindly work for criminals.
If you are going to take the risk, get some freaking reward. I can't stand people that will faithfully work for some asshole, even when they know they are getting screwed.
If you are going to work for criminals and low-lifes, be a criminal or a lowlife. Don't just do their bidding. Crime does pay, but only if you are a criminal.
Oh, and if you work somewhere where they want you to live in the same apartment complex they live in, don't do it. And if they ask you to drink the Kool Aid, don't do that either.
A message to all open source, or any, developers out there, "Do not make this work. Do not try and hack a Linux solution to make this work. Make sure your stuff doesn't work with this new system. Make sure your site doesn't work with these whacked mobos. Do not allow Microsoft to succeed."
If we hack out a solution that will kinda sorta allow Linux to function in this system of stupidity, we will be forced to deal with it for ever. The best way to fight this latest attack is to make users uncomfortable. Don't allow your apps to run on systems that MS has locked down. People will quickly get pissed when they can't get to their favorite pron site or whatever.
Cigarette smoking costs $10000000 a year
The war on drugs $2000000000 a year
NASA to crash things into Mars $300000000 a year
Who cares, shit costs money. It takes money to make money. Big deal.
How much is saved by using computers over typing everything on type writer and storing everything on sheets of paper and microfilm.
Sure better testing should be employed by a lot of software developers, but the market is really what drives this sort of thing.
Will someone pay $3000 a licence for this app because it was tested really good and is really solid or will they buy the not so well tested competitor's version of $1000 a licence?
If people want better software they are going to have to pay for it. Someone has to pay for testers and shit.
Dude,
Here is a quote that should explain why they, and Microsoft has been, doing for years.
"No one ever went bankrupt underestimating the stupidity of Americans."
We Americans are dumb, we will allows take the path of least resistence - at least as consumers we will.
I think it's pretty obvious to everyone in the world that trying to make money off of smart people is hard. I have no interest in purchasing a United Linux licence, I don't need one. Debian works for me, but I am also someone that like tinkering. I like figuring shit out.
There are a lot of CTO's and CEO's that just want shit to work and don't care of Joe Admin is still trying to figure Linux.
United Linux is making a good move, in my opinion. Market to the masses.
1. Make sure you are in a market that you can actually compete in.
2. Set realistic release cycles.
3. Don't go crazy with features on your first release.
4. Test the shit out of your code, better yet have an actual tester test the shit out of your code. I rarely release code with bugs in it - really.
5. Don't be a cocky, jackass developer with an attitude.
6. Take pride in doing this correctly and professionally.
7. Don't code for 16 hours straight and expect your code to not suck.
8. Take breaks.
9. Relax
10. In a professional manner, inform your client or boss that what he/she is asking is not realistic. Offer alternatives.
11. If you can't do the above, find another gig, that that project/company die so we don't have to deal with their crap software.
Remember when Mexico was supposed to switch over to Linux, or something like that, and they screwed it up. Now MS uses this as a reason to not use Open Source Software, it fails implementation. Of course, all software that is poorly implemented will fail, but that's not the software's fault.
Now that Walmart is selling these Lindows machines I see a similar problem. Joe User buys a computer, but he can't run half the apps his friend can run, like games. He takes the computer back to Walmart, gets his money back and swears the Lindows sucks. So now in his mind Lindows sucks and anything that sounds like Lindows (i.e. Linux) sucks too. After a couple of months Walmart will get tired of giving people their money back and stop selling computers with Lindows installed. Now it's not just a failure on Walmart, but on Lindows which in turn is a failure for Linux and the Open Source community.
Hence MS now has more fuel for their fud campaigns. I don't see this as a winning situation for Linux or OSS.
Most Americans shop at Walmart and they will sell a lot of these computers. This really looks bad to me, really bad.
On the other hand, I don't really care if Linux "beats" MS. I like my Debian whether Joe Shmoe does or not.
don't leave. Take the counter offer, no question. The new job my be a real pain in the ass job, you will never know until you actually start working there.
How many times have you started a job and thought it was one thing and turned out to be completely different and you hated it. I have had several like that.
I currently work at a place that I love and wouldn't leave for anything at this point. Finding good employers is extremely difficult - extremely.
I think your current employer will understand that you were just looking to better your life, not screw them over. They value you and want you to stay. If they decide to kick you to the curb in 3 months, so what you got work somewhere you liked for another 3 months.
Go with your gut and you will make the right decision, no slashdotter is going to be able to get the vibes from your employer.
The poster seems to suggest that a few individuals isn't a community. The open source community is a bunch of individuals. This is really not news. How programmers are working on Samba or Apache, not many. You don't need shitloads of programmers on it a project or want a shitload of programmers on project.
I am not going reiterate stuff that has already been written down in books, but more programmers doesn't equal more program - usually the other way around.
I work on a team of 3 and 2 or us are programmers and on is a ui designer/manager. It works well and we crank out some pretty fantastic stuff.
Who cares if it takes years to train people to use OSS? No one said that have to switch tomorrow or at all. Just consider OSS and use it when it make sense and slowly rollover.
Most things are not all or nothing. Just because someone gets approval to run an apache web server doesn't mean you can start throwing windows boxes in the trash.
The government is meant to move slowly and not make sudden knee jerk reactions to things (uh hmm like anti-terrorism laws).
I think it is pretty obvious with the number of posts in the last 2 months about governments switching or considering the switch to OSS, that even if the US doesn't embrace OSS 100% - Microsoft is going to be hurt.
I think it's ridiculous for governments to not seriously look at OSS. Only a fool fails to see the value of OSS in this area.
Seriously man, why should I convince you to use Linux. If you are happy with your Windows box, don't change. I run Debian because it fits my personality, it does what I want it to do, and I like to have control over what my computer is doing.
I have never really cared whether you are anyone else in the world uses Linux. Why should I care? If the open source community stayed the same size as it was 2 years ago, I would still be using Linux.
You see the problem with you thinking that "we" need to convince you that Linux is better then Windows is just silly. That's like me trying to convince someone that Screeching Weasel is the best punk band and that everyone needs to listen to them, even if you don't like punk.
Either you like Linux or you don't. I don't really give a crap whether you run Linux or not. Actually I am perfectly fine with the number of Linux users there are currently and see no benefit in more Windows users "converting" to Linux. More Windows users means more Windows-ish stuff. I don't like Windows and don't want my Linux to look and act like Windows.
Open Source is a community, not a business. "We" are not going to crumble because a few million Windows users don't like Linux. "We" have nothing to lose.
Either you like Linux or you don't. The only way to know if you like Linux is to use it. Me telling you that Linux is more stable, faster, and more secure is not going to make you like Linux. You need to actually like using it, that's the most important thing.
Someone has to do the work. A contract that size doesn't just get dumped into the lap of your favorite linux script-kiddie.
You may not know this but companies, including MS, were bidding and working hard to get this contract it's big money. IBM spent a shitload of time and energy into landing this contract, it's how businesses make money. This is how Linux will win, not by selling cd's and shit. Big support contracts that implement Linux solutions that are supported by large respected corporations, ok maybe just large corporations.
You need to take into consideration the gamer population. You aren't going to be able to put some peice shit game console in front of them with some lame ass game and because it only cost $10 people will use it.
You can do that with Windows because the average user is a moron. You can't do that in the gaming industry simply because a lame game is a lame game and there is nothing that will change that.
I would gladly pay $200 for a PS/2 over $10 for something that is totally lame and worthless.
I truly feel that this is an area that MS will fail in.
Game consoles need to be stable and they need to have kick ass games, something Sony has already proved they can do. Let's not forget that Sony is not some little company that is going piss their pants because MS decides to make a game console.
All in all this whole situation should be to the benefit of the consumer, competition is good.
I think there already is a law. There is probably some gray area that allows this sort of obvious slap in the face of taxpayers and the Open Source community.
My opinion is that nothing valuable will come of this. OSS has proven itself already as the most effective way to develop hardened software, no more research should go forward without starting where the OSS community is currently in regards to this area.
This is obvious bullshit and no one with half a brain will stick with this project.
Software written with taxpayer dollars should be released simply as public domain with the source code available upon request.
I use Cakewalk, it's ok. But it's not like some amazing application.
Come to think of it I have yet to use any audio application on any platform that works to my liking (some things are best done the old-fashioned way). A friend of mine uses a Mac to do all his mixing (records on a 4-track) and he loves it.
Linux will get something in the next year or so that works ok, about the same that windows has now.
There is know doubt in my mind that certain areas of the Linux desktop will trail the commercial side.
You just have to know you the limitations of the OS and decide whether it makes sense for what you are doing.
For top-notch audio, go with a hardware solution for recording and use your PC to mix.
Yeah. like the great video/audio editing applications that are available on Windows. Oh wait, those suck too.
I think the problem with making really robust audio/video applications is that it's difficult to do.
There are some interesting projects in the OSS world in this area, but they are new and not yet mature.
Like everything, it takes time for things (e.g. software applications) to take shape and be worth something to anyone other then a niche crowd.
That's the other problem. Audio/video applications in the OSS world are not in as high demand as things like development tools and web servers.
I predict in the next year or so their will be some pretty good OSS apps in this area.
Is spending the money to maintain homegrown systems outweigh the $400 you would have spent on a less resource (i.e. IT staff) intensive system?
You either invest in hardware or people. Cheap hardware means more time maintaining it, usually.
I look at it this way. How long do you plan on keeping the machines around. If you are planning on keeping them for 2 years. Divide 400 by 24 and that's what you save per month. Figure in your time to purchase, build and maintain the system as well as increased downtime because more stuff goes wrong with systems you build yourself.
I don't care what machines you use, but Dell workstations are tested to run as a unit. PC's you build are not tested as such and will have more problems and more downtime.
before RIAA existed and racked in millions and millions of dollars.
It's nice to see a huge corporations are protecting people's rights to make music. Without them we would have no Brittney or nsync or milli vanilli or vanilla ice.
I think it's completely stupid to call every single "evildoer" a terrorist. Terrorism is about terror. I don't care what you do with your stupid computer, I am not terrified. I may be annoyed, it may cost people money and it will piss off a lot of people. But being pissed off is a far cry from being dead. 9/11/01 was terrorism, suicide bombers are terrorists, computer hacking and DOS attacks are NOT terrorism.
Because American media and politicians find a word that sparks emotion they use it whenever they can until the word loses it's true meaning.
If you don't believe me, you don't live in the US.
There is one problem with the jack o' many trades idea. I am a jack o' trades. I can do system administration (NT, Linux, Novell), Java, PHP, Perl, etc. I find myself being expected to fill all of these rolls at the same time for the same company.
I luckily have a job now that lets me be just a programmer and I love it.
Slashdot Mirror
What's more important, making money or sticking with your ideals?
Gee, I don't know. As an American I should say, "Make money make money." Because that is what I was raised (brain washed) to believe was the purpose of my existence.
Having learned a few things in the past 30 years I would have to say that I prefer my ideals over making some cash.
It's not impossible, or wrong, to make money off of OSS. I have been doing that for years. This year alone I have made literally thousands of dollars off of OSS.
I don't understand why so many people are drawn to advertising as a source for revenue. Be a little freaking creative people.
How about this, do want you love to do and you will be the richest person in the room. If it makes you happy to make an OS with advertisements in it, go for it. If you just want to make a kick ass OS, then do that.
We, in the US, have WAAAAAYYYYY too many ads shoved down our throats and are sick and tired of being thought of as nothing more than consumers - at least I am. Let's move on, let's really innovate.
Copyright protection already exists. The point of the OSI certification does what?
I like the idea, but there doesn't appear to be any way of regulating it. Perhaps, I didn't find that text on the web site.
It doesn't seem to be any more powerful then saying, "Hey my stuff's Open Source. See look GPL." If your code really isn't GPL then Stallman knocks on your door and gives your titty-twisters until your nipples fall off.
It's cool to spread the term Open Source and do some branding though, it doesn't matter.
I look at it this way, if the site doesn't show up in my browser(Galeon) - then I don't go there. If the company is trying to make money from that site, they just lost some.
Businesses that are serious about making money on the web are going to make their shit work on as many browsers as possible.
Some businesses may not care about the 5 - 10% of the traffic that can't view their pages. I find that strange. That would be like 711 not allowing some people into the store and basically throwing money away. Some businesses may have such a targeted audience of IE users that utilizing the "extensions" in IE makes sense.
I have been a web developer for over 5 years now and I look at it like this:
1. You are spitting out HTML. Use the standard HTML unless there is some compelling business reason to deviate. Even in that case, you should still cover non-IE browsers.
2. This is off-topic. Don't rely on Javascript to make an online "application". Javascript is a supplement that should be used to make the user's experience more pleasant, but shouldn't break your site if it's not enabled.
3. Just make good clean HTML. If you are a web developer that doesn't understand HTML and can't created good clean HTML, you might want to buy a book.
4. Don't use WYSWYG editors. I don't care how much people complain about typing. No one ever said making a web site was supposed to be easy. Good clean code will serve you well into the future and something you can build onto rather than throw away everytime you want to make a change.
This is a statement that I think most web developers will get pissed off about but here goes: I think designers should design and web developers should make this shit work. Example: A web designer creates PSD's of all the pages and hands them to the web developer who breathes life into them. I think that the web developer should be an expert at HTML and should know how to cut up the PSD and make that shit work. The web developer should own the entire site, not just their little PHP or Perl code. That works best for me anyway. I love having total control of the process. And it frees the designer up to focus on designing, which is what they do best. A nice spec. from the designer helps too. Of course, in larger businesses replace the previous term "web developer" with "web development team".
HTML can be tedious at times, but you would be amazed at how pleasing it is to work on something that you know inside and out. Plus it is fun to break apart sites and simplify and eliminate duplicate html code and really make that site maintainable. Programmers kick ass at making things easy, that's what we do.
Don't be afraid of HTML, it's not that big of a deal. One last thing, lose the attitude toward designers. If it weren't for designers all web sites would like Slashdot. I can sitdown with a good designer for an hour and they can make my crappy site look like it's something I can be proud of. It aint shit if you people can't use it.
work for these goons. I am always amazed at people that will blindly work for criminals.
If you are going to take the risk, get some freaking reward. I can't stand people that will faithfully work for some asshole, even when they know they are getting screwed.
If you are going to work for criminals and low-lifes, be a criminal or a lowlife. Don't just do their bidding. Crime does pay, but only if you are a criminal.
Oh, and if you work somewhere where they want you to live in the same apartment complex they live in, don't do it. And if they ask you to drink the Kool Aid, don't do that either.
A message to all open source, or any, developers out there, "Do not make this work. Do not try and hack a Linux solution to make this work. Make sure your stuff doesn't work with this new system. Make sure your site doesn't work with these whacked mobos. Do not allow Microsoft to succeed."
If we hack out a solution that will kinda sorta allow Linux to function in this system of stupidity, we will be forced to deal with it for ever. The best way to fight this latest attack is to make users uncomfortable. Don't allow your apps to run on systems that MS has locked down. People will quickly get pissed when they can't get to their favorite pron site or whatever.
Cigarette smoking costs $10000000 a year
The war on drugs $2000000000 a year
NASA to crash things into Mars $300000000 a year
Who cares, shit costs money. It takes money to make money. Big deal.
How much is saved by using computers over typing everything on type writer and storing everything on sheets of paper and microfilm.
Sure better testing should be employed by a lot of software developers, but the market is really what drives this sort of thing.
Will someone pay $3000 a licence for this app because it was tested really good and is really solid or will they buy the not so well tested competitor's version of $1000 a licence?
If people want better software they are going to have to pay for it. Someone has to pay for testers and shit.
It's called capitalism.
Dude,
Here is a quote that should explain why they, and Microsoft has been, doing for years.
"No one ever went bankrupt underestimating the stupidity of Americans."
We Americans are dumb, we will allows take the path of least resistence - at least as consumers we will.
I think it's pretty obvious to everyone in the world that trying to make money off of smart people is hard. I have no interest in purchasing a United Linux licence, I don't need one. Debian works for me, but I am also someone that like tinkering. I like figuring shit out.
There are a lot of CTO's and CEO's that just want shit to work and don't care of Joe Admin is still trying to figure Linux.
United Linux is making a good move, in my opinion. Market to the masses.
1. Make sure you are in a market that you can actually compete in. 2. Set realistic release cycles. 3. Don't go crazy with features on your first release. 4. Test the shit out of your code, better yet have an actual tester test the shit out of your code. I rarely release code with bugs in it - really. 5. Don't be a cocky, jackass developer with an attitude. 6. Take pride in doing this correctly and professionally. 7. Don't code for 16 hours straight and expect your code to not suck. 8. Take breaks. 9. Relax 10. In a professional manner, inform your client or boss that what he/she is asking is not realistic. Offer alternatives. 11. If you can't do the above, find another gig, that that project/company die so we don't have to deal with their crap software.
Remember when Mexico was supposed to switch over to Linux, or something like that, and they screwed it up. Now MS uses this as a reason to not use Open Source Software, it fails implementation. Of course, all software that is poorly implemented will fail, but that's not the software's fault.
Now that Walmart is selling these Lindows machines I see a similar problem. Joe User buys a computer, but he can't run half the apps his friend can run, like games. He takes the computer back to Walmart, gets his money back and swears the Lindows sucks. So now in his mind Lindows sucks and anything that sounds like Lindows (i.e. Linux) sucks too. After a couple of months Walmart will get tired of giving people their money back and stop selling computers with Lindows installed. Now it's not just a failure on Walmart, but on Lindows which in turn is a failure for Linux and the Open Source community.
Hence MS now has more fuel for their fud campaigns. I don't see this as a winning situation for Linux or OSS.
Most Americans shop at Walmart and they will sell a lot of these computers. This really looks bad to me, really bad.
On the other hand, I don't really care if Linux "beats" MS. I like my Debian whether Joe Shmoe does or not.
don't leave. Take the counter offer, no question. The new job my be a real pain in the ass job, you will never know until you actually start working there.
How many times have you started a job and thought it was one thing and turned out to be completely different and you hated it. I have had several like that.
I currently work at a place that I love and wouldn't leave for anything at this point. Finding good employers is extremely difficult - extremely.
I think your current employer will understand that you were just looking to better your life, not screw them over. They value you and want you to stay. If they decide to kick you to the curb in 3 months, so what you got work somewhere you liked for another 3 months.
Go with your gut and you will make the right decision, no slashdotter is going to be able to get the vibes from your employer.
The poster seems to suggest that a few individuals isn't a community. The open source community is a bunch of individuals. This is really not news. How programmers are working on Samba or Apache, not many. You don't need shitloads of programmers on it a project or want a shitload of programmers on project.
I am not going reiterate stuff that has already been written down in books, but more programmers doesn't equal more program - usually the other way around.
I work on a team of 3 and 2 or us are programmers and on is a ui designer/manager. It works well and we crank out some pretty fantastic stuff.
Who cares if it takes years to train people to use OSS? No one said that have to switch tomorrow or at all. Just consider OSS and use it when it make sense and slowly rollover.
Most things are not all or nothing. Just because someone gets approval to run an apache web server doesn't mean you can start throwing windows boxes in the trash.
The government is meant to move slowly and not make sudden knee jerk reactions to things (uh hmm like anti-terrorism laws).
I think it is pretty obvious with the number of posts in the last 2 months about governments switching or considering the switch to OSS, that even if the US doesn't embrace OSS 100% - Microsoft is going to be hurt.
I think it's ridiculous for governments to not seriously look at OSS. Only a fool fails to see the value of OSS in this area.
Seriously man, why should I convince you to use Linux. If you are happy with your Windows box, don't change. I run Debian because it fits my personality, it does what I want it to do, and I like to have control over what my computer is doing.
I have never really cared whether you are anyone else in the world uses Linux. Why should I care? If the open source community stayed the same size as it was 2 years ago, I would still be using Linux.
You see the problem with you thinking that "we" need to convince you that Linux is better then Windows is just silly. That's like me trying to convince someone that Screeching Weasel is the best punk band and that everyone needs to listen to them, even if you don't like punk.
Either you like Linux or you don't. I don't really give a crap whether you run Linux or not. Actually I am perfectly fine with the number of Linux users there are currently and see no benefit in more Windows users "converting" to Linux. More Windows users means more Windows-ish stuff. I don't like Windows and don't want my Linux to look and act like Windows.
Open Source is a community, not a business. "We" are not going to crumble because a few million Windows users don't like Linux. "We" have nothing to lose.
Either you like Linux or you don't. The only way to know if you like Linux is to use it. Me telling you that Linux is more stable, faster, and more secure is not going to make you like Linux. You need to actually like using it, that's the most important thing.
Someone has to do the work. A contract that size doesn't just get dumped into the lap of your favorite linux script-kiddie.
You may not know this but companies, including MS, were bidding and working hard to get this contract it's big money. IBM spent a shitload of time and energy into landing this contract, it's how businesses make money. This is how Linux will win, not by selling cd's and shit. Big support contracts that implement Linux solutions that are supported by large respected corporations, ok maybe just large corporations.
How much space would you get on SourceForge?
Check out http://www.webgroupmedia.com/. They aren't perfect, but for $5 a month, it works well for some things.
You need to take into consideration the gamer population. You aren't going to be able to put some peice shit game console in front of them with some lame ass game and because it only cost $10 people will use it.
You can do that with Windows because the average user is a moron. You can't do that in the gaming industry simply because a lame game is a lame game and there is nothing that will change that.
I would gladly pay $200 for a PS/2 over $10 for something that is totally lame and worthless.
I truly feel that this is an area that MS will fail in.
Game consoles need to be stable and they need to have kick ass games, something Sony has already proved they can do. Let's not forget that Sony is not some little company that is going piss their pants because MS decides to make a game console.
All in all this whole situation should be to the benefit of the consumer, competition is good.
I think there already is a law. There is probably some gray area that allows this sort of obvious slap in the face of taxpayers and the Open Source community.
My opinion is that nothing valuable will come of this. OSS has proven itself already as the most effective way to develop hardened software, no more research should go forward without starting where the OSS community is currently in regards to this area.
This is obvious bullshit and no one with half a brain will stick with this project.
Software written with taxpayer dollars should be released simply as public domain with the source code available upon request.
Read it, Learn it, Live it.
I use Cakewalk, it's ok. But it's not like some amazing application.
Come to think of it I have yet to use any audio application on any platform that works to my liking (some things are best done the old-fashioned way). A friend of mine uses a Mac to do all his mixing (records on a 4-track) and he loves it.
Linux will get something in the next year or so that works ok, about the same that windows has now.
There is know doubt in my mind that certain areas of the Linux desktop will trail the commercial side.
You just have to know you the limitations of the OS and decide whether it makes sense for what you are doing.
For top-notch audio, go with a hardware solution for recording and use your PC to mix.
Yeah. like the great video/audio editing applications that are available on Windows. Oh wait, those suck too.
I think the problem with making really robust audio/video applications is that it's difficult to do.
There are some interesting projects in the OSS world in this area, but they are new and not yet mature.
Like everything, it takes time for things (e.g. software applications) to take shape and be worth something to anyone other then a niche crowd.
That's the other problem. Audio/video applications in the OSS world are not in as high demand as things like development tools and web servers.
I predict in the next year or so their will be some pretty good OSS apps in this area.
Is spending the money to maintain homegrown systems outweigh the $400 you would have spent on a less resource (i.e. IT staff) intensive system?
You either invest in hardware or people. Cheap hardware means more time maintaining it, usually.
I look at it this way. How long do you plan on keeping the machines around. If you are planning on keeping them for 2 years. Divide 400 by 24 and that's what you save per month. Figure in your time to purchase, build and maintain the system as well as increased downtime because more stuff goes wrong with systems you build yourself.
I don't care what machines you use, but Dell workstations are tested to run as a unit. PC's you build are not tested as such and will have more problems and more downtime.
6 of one and half dozen of the other.
before RIAA existed and racked in millions and millions of dollars.
It's nice to see a huge corporations are protecting people's rights to make music. Without them we would have no Brittney or nsync or milli vanilli or vanilla ice.
For real music visit these badasses.
I think it's completely stupid to call every single "evildoer" a terrorist. Terrorism is about terror. I don't care what you do with your stupid computer, I am not terrified. I may be annoyed, it may cost people money and it will piss off a lot of people. But being pissed off is a far cry from being dead. 9/11/01 was terrorism, suicide bombers are terrorists, computer hacking and DOS attacks are NOT terrorism.
Because American media and politicians find a word that sparks emotion they use it whenever they can until the word loses it's true meaning.
If you don't believe me, you don't live in the US.
There is one problem with the jack o' many trades idea. I am a jack o' trades. I can do system administration (NT, Linux, Novell), Java, PHP, Perl, etc. I find myself being expected to fill all of these rolls at the same time for the same company.
I luckily have a job now that lets me be just a programmer and I love it.