Sure we shouldn't be nasty about this guy just because he finds installing Linux - I'm sure everyone found it a nightmare the first time (I certainly did) - but come on, he does seem to have been a little stupid with various things. Does he seriously expect us to think 'This is a professional doing a serious investigation' when he manages to switch off his computer fiddling about with it while it's on. I'm surprised he didn't totally destroy his computer if he did that whilst installing an operating system...
There's a 1,000,000 to 1 chance of Armageddon? Am I the only one that thinks it worrying that apparently Armageddon at the turn of the millennium has better odds than winning the lottery?????
I'm not convinced this was posted to bash anyone. If he feels embarrassed or upset that's his own problem, but that's probably just about a lack of confidence. What I always found useful when starting up with Linux was that I did have the confidence in myself not to get aggravated or upset and not to think myself stupid when someone said 'oh you want to type xshdfd -dfjh | dhsf > hdsjs, isn't that obvious?'....
I only meant that their position is more credible in that when they first started they basically said 'Ooooh, let's have trips to the moon, and pay for it ourselves'.
More recently (though still not very recently) they've actually put together estimates for pricing, and where they'd get more money from. That's all I mean by more credible - they've a long way to go yet!
Aren't people that deliberately troll bound to come across as more defensive, and deem all the moderation made about them as unfair, whereas people who don't tend to troll aren't going to always say that moderation is fair, since they'll be more open to criticism?
The 'ignoring people who always say the moderation is unfair' thing might help, but intelligent trolls who've read that will just say one is fair. Then again, it does say that other techniques might be used to ignore people, and that might well address this very point.
Not allowing ACs to meta-moderate might at least push some to register an account. Hopefully.
Isn't one of the biggest problems in hoping that Linux Laptops will catch on the old problem of M$ Office compatibility? Lots of people that have laptops are business types who don't want to get stuck without their computer, and they aren't going to start using Linux on their laptops any time soon if they can't copy their M$ Word documents straight back onto their desktop when they get back to the office...
Add to that the Guardian, which had a headline about the biggest ever internet security breach.
Which begs the question of whether it was or not? Sure it's not nice for people to have their email read (and there will be lots of sensitive stuff) but surely some corporate cracks were bigger in terms of security issues and things that shouldn't be broken? What about websites that store credit card numbers, for example?
The worst thing about it is that everyone seems to be saying how evil the 'hackers' are, and how they're bringing down the Internet, or something like that. Everybody seems to have annoyed the fact that they made their point, and withdrew the page, and didn't release the source. That seems incredibly responsible of them to me - pity it makes worse news, eh?
It's not the transport, no, but lots of people over here consider buying parts from America at the cheap prices they are over there, and getting them shipped. Thing is it costs an absolute fortune to get computer parts shipped across the Atlantic, rendering such a cost-saver useless...
Didn't we just have an article predicting tiny computers built at molecular level?
Looks cool though - maybe they'll actually be small enough that you wouldn't have to pay ENORMOUS charges to get one shipped across the Atlantic. Perhaps this sort of thing really could precipitate international computer sellers so everyone outside the US won't have to pay enormous amounts for parts...
The article mentions the possibility that Dell might offer a choice between Windows and Redhat, and complains that this wouldn't be acceptable since there are other distributions out there, but it doesn't say whether this is a boxed set or not.
Sure it might be a tiny bit more hassle, but if they're only offering to put RH on the machine, and not charge for a box it would be fairly simple just to get rid of Redhat and start again with another distribution. Aside from the principle issue (which, fair enough, is important) as long as they aren't charging for RH this shouldn't be a problem, should it?
Ooooh sorry - my mistake... What are the odds Win2000 would run on a 133? I'm sure I read somewhere that people don't recommend putting it on anything less that a P200
But that's exactly what this trial is about. This trial is about whether Microsoft deliberately changed the was Windows works purely so that it was incompatible with other DOS offerings...
If someone had worked out a way to send wavs to another person (email perhaps?) and have a program to play them (are there any of those around?;-) ) they couldn't exactly claim to have been responsible for Winamp. It doesn't take brains to work out that you can transmit digital media, just to do it effectively.
The point of anti-trust laws is that just what you claim will happen doesn't. It has been shown that by creating a monopoly companies are able to break away from the laws of competition and it is found that regardless of whether a product is better / cheaper / happier the monopoly wins out. This is the nature of monopolies and it is for just this reason that anti-trust laws were created.
If it were so that monopolies could be easily toppled by better products, there would be no need for legislation to do the same thing.
Whether or not people are able to choose not to buy Microsoft products doesn't seem to be the issue here. What people are objecting to (quite rightly IMHO) is that Microsoft has taken steps to REDUCE the choice. The point of the Caldera case is that when people had the choice to use MS-DOS or not with Windows, MS changed their product so as to remove this particular choice. If this is the case then in the question of what to use with Windows we don't have any choice any more.
Supposing (hypothetically) that WINE, for example, ever becomes fully functional, easily, then this choice will one day be restored. As it is Microsoft has forced a monopoly on one area of the market - and (AFAIAA) monopolies are what anti-trust law is all about.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure we shouldn't be nasty about this guy just because he finds installing Linux - I'm sure everyone found it a nightmare the first time (I certainly did) - but come on, he does seem to have been a little stupid with various things. Does he seriously expect us to think 'This is a professional doing a serious investigation' when he manages to switch off his computer fiddling about with it while it's on. I'm surprised he didn't totally destroy his computer if he did that whilst installing an operating system...
There's a 1,000,000 to 1 chance of Armageddon? Am I the only one that thinks it worrying that apparently Armageddon at the turn of the millennium has better odds than winning the lottery?????
I'm not convinced this was posted to bash anyone. If he feels embarrassed or upset that's his own problem, but that's probably just about a lack of confidence. What I always found useful when starting up with Linux was that I did have the confidence in myself not to get aggravated or upset and not to think myself stupid when someone said 'oh you want to type xshdfd -dfjh | dhsf > hdsjs, isn't that obvious?'....
I only meant that their position is more credible in that when they first started they basically said 'Ooooh, let's have trips to the moon, and pay for it ourselves'.
More recently (though still not very recently) they've actually put together estimates for pricing, and where they'd get more money from. That's all I mean by more credible - they've a long way to go yet!
Hasn't Artemis been around for absolutely AGES now? I have a feeling that I read about it in a forum somewhere on Slashdot....
Having said that, when it started it did look rather 'Pie in the Sky', but these days they are looking in a much more credible position!
... some people won't though.
Aren't people that deliberately troll bound to come across as more defensive, and deem all the moderation made about them as unfair, whereas people who don't tend to troll aren't going to always say that moderation is fair, since they'll be more open to criticism?
The 'ignoring people who always say the moderation is unfair' thing might help, but intelligent trolls who've read that will just say one is fair. Then again, it does say that other techniques might be used to ignore people, and that might well address this very point.
Not allowing ACs to meta-moderate might at least push some to register an account. Hopefully.
Isn't one of the biggest problems in hoping that Linux Laptops will catch on the old problem of M$ Office compatibility? Lots of people that have laptops are business types who don't want to get stuck without their computer, and they aren't going to start using Linux on their laptops any time soon if they can't copy their M$ Word documents straight back onto their desktop when they get back to the office...
Add to that the Guardian, which had a headline about the biggest ever internet security breach.
Which begs the question of whether it was or not? Sure it's not nice for people to have their email read (and there will be lots of sensitive stuff) but surely some corporate cracks were bigger in terms of security issues and things that shouldn't be broken? What about websites that store credit card numbers, for example?
The worst thing about it is that everyone seems to be saying how evil the 'hackers' are, and how they're bringing down the Internet, or something like that. Everybody seems to have annoyed the fact that they made their point, and withdrew the page, and didn't release the source. That seems incredibly responsible of them to me - pity it makes worse news, eh?
It's not the transport, no, but lots of people over here consider buying parts from America at the cheap prices they are over there, and getting them shipped. Thing is it costs an absolute fortune to get computer parts shipped across the Atlantic, rendering such a cost-saver useless...
Didn't we just have an article predicting tiny computers built at molecular level?
Looks cool though - maybe they'll actually be small enough that you wouldn't have to pay ENORMOUS charges to get one shipped across the Atlantic. Perhaps this sort of thing really could precipitate international computer sellers so everyone outside the US won't have to pay enormous amounts for parts...
The article mentions the possibility that Dell might offer a choice between Windows and Redhat, and complains that this wouldn't be acceptable since there are other distributions out there, but it doesn't say whether this is a boxed set or not.
Sure it might be a tiny bit more hassle, but if they're only offering to put RH on the machine, and not charge for a box it would be fairly simple just to get rid of Redhat and start again with another distribution. Aside from the principle issue (which, fair enough, is important) as long as they aren't charging for RH this shouldn't be a problem, should it?
You have checked out http://www.winehq.com haven't you?
AFAIAA Dosemu is much more finished than Wine, and should run any Dos programs you have fine (I think).
God I must be tired!
You're right of course!
I basically meant I wonder if Win2000 would run on a similar spec machine...
Ouch! Seriously????
But but but that means I won't be able to put it on my little machine....
Oh no wait! I wouldn't anyway!
Ooooh sorry - my mistake... What are the odds Win2000 would run on a 133? I'm sure I read somewhere that people don't recommend putting it on anything less that a P200
A cynic would say they used a cheap machine so they could get rid of it....
Someone more charitable would point out that the Windows test is running on a, what is it? 450 MHz...
I wonder if Win2000 would even run on the linuxppc machine....
Not at all! It should be nice to ask a question and get a straight answer - especially if it's the same from lots of different people ;-)
There are some of us who are very much still learning - and know it. This is a good way of finding out this stuff!
Even if it were true that the weather affected the test, I don't think this is any excuse for Microsoft - Message from God more like!
And here was me thinking that it was Americans, not Europeans, who had this big thing about communism...
But that's exactly what this trial is about. This trial is about whether Microsoft deliberately changed the was Windows works purely so that it was incompatible with other DOS offerings...
Exactly!
;-) ) they couldn't exactly claim to have been responsible for Winamp. It doesn't take brains to work out that you can transmit digital media, just to do it effectively.
If someone had worked out a way to send wavs to another person (email perhaps?) and have a program to play them (are there any of those around?
OMG! Is that true?
That explains the dialogue!
Erm. Quite simply no.
The point of anti-trust laws is that just what you claim will happen doesn't. It has been shown that by creating a monopoly companies are able to break away from the laws of competition and it is found that regardless of whether a product is better / cheaper / happier the monopoly wins out. This is the nature of monopolies and it is for just this reason that anti-trust laws were created.
If it were so that monopolies could be easily toppled by better products, there would be no need for legislation to do the same thing.
Whether or not people are able to choose not to buy Microsoft products doesn't seem to be the issue here. What people are objecting to (quite rightly IMHO) is that Microsoft has taken steps to REDUCE the choice. The point of the Caldera case is that when people had the choice to use MS-DOS or not with Windows, MS changed their product so as to remove this particular choice. If this is the case then in the question of what to use with Windows we don't have any choice any more.
Supposing (hypothetically) that WINE, for example, ever becomes fully functional, easily, then this choice will one day be restored. As it is Microsoft has forced a monopoly on one area of the market - and (AFAIAA) monopolies are what anti-trust law is all about.