I disagree. I use both MS stuff and linux, for very practical reasons. Even if I don't like the MS OS-es, and I don't like their strategies, I find Word and Excel very useful, and will happily use them if released under Linux.
Now, if I could have exactly the same functionality WITHOUT Microsoft products, fine... But until then...
I would hazard a guess that most Linux users are IT professionals. Working with computers is our job
I'll have to disagree with you here. MOST people I know who use linux are NOT IT professionals. Quite a few guys in my department (integrated logistics support to a radar company) use Linux - for FUN. And I think THAT is the key word. We use Linux because we enjoy 'playing' with it. We ARE technically inclined people, who like a challenge, but are NOT IT professionals
Still, your point is mostly valid. At this point, Linux is not ready for a-technical people who just want to use the thing. I have faith that within a few years, it will be, though... Will it be in time?
I've got a bunch of WAVELAN cards (the old, not IEEE certified version) around the place.
In order to use them, I need at least one, and probably a few, PCMCIA adapters for my desktop(s). Anyone know a place where these can be had at a decent price? Last time I looked they were still ridiculously expensive.
Nevermind the fact that you need a new version of Windows and Linux...
Okay, maybe I'm showing ignorance here, but as far as I understood the Transmeta releases and the reviews, you would not need a new Windows/Linux version, since to the software, the transmate chip looks just the same as theIntel x86 it xpects to be running on?
Except that your option doesn't make it any easier to FIND the damn site. Now, if I want to look up intel stuff, I know I could well go to 'http://www.intel.com/'. Now, I have NO idea where the main intel office is located, so I would have no way to guess (for example) 'http://www.intel.miami.us.com/'. Back to the already over-stuffed search engines who turn up ever more spurious pages which try to register as useful sites.
"Americans suck, they're all prone to using stereotypes and generalizations.
I rest my case... But don't worry, we KNOW there's good Americans, too!:P
Newsflash: Slashdot is run in America, by Americans. Of course it's going to be America-centric, as those who run it live in this country and are interested in things that affect Americans.
Sorry, but I have to disagree here. Yes, Slashdot is in America - but is server location all that relevant, nowadays, on the internet? I think placing such importance on physicality is ever more a thing of the past. Yes, Slashdot is run by americans - but I thought there were some non-american folks staffing too? Correct me if I am wrong? As for Americans finding American stuff interesting, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Hey, other folks might find american stuff interesting too; I know I do, it's one of the reasons I paid your country a visit this summer, and want to do so again in the future. (If only for curiosity value; visit it while it's still there! (Aww.. I'm alowed this little tease, am I?))
So I don't mind the american subjects popping up (a lot) - they may be relevant to americans, but quite a few of the issues tend to have a short or long term international spinoff anyway, making them relevant to us europeans too - and to those readers from other countries as well. HOWEVER, I think sometimes it'd do Slashdot good to aspire to a somewhat larger view - in particular where the subject itself is an international one. I'd be very surprised if there aren't a lot of americans who would like to see the international angles as well as domestic ones, too.
And last but not least... Even if Slashdot is in America and by Americans, you can hardly claim the same about the audience. Slashdot's audience, and I think Slashdot's aspirations, are a lot more than just American. But I don't think that you disagree with that, do you?
I feel much the same about homesexuals who have to shove their sexuality in my face. Or heterosexuals who do the same. Fine, do your own thing, but don't shoove it in my face. I'm quite willing to accept your sexuality, I'm not willing to accept rude and annoying behaviour.
Funnily enough, kids seem to pick up most computer stuff a LOT faster than adukts. I know _I_ was teaching my dad Lotus 1-2-3 (a spreadsheet), where he worked with it daily and I just peeked at the screen and leafed through the manual a bit. And I heard similar stories all round. Mind you, this is well over a decade ago, when XTs were way hot and interfaces were still basic and practical. Sorta like Linux;)
Uh. I don't mind you having odd interests. But don't you have a site of your own to discuss all the gory (Err. Maybe in this case 'rocky'?) details between yourself? Why do you have to go on about this in each and every slashdot thread, recently?
this is a small example of the harrassment you say Christians never get.
Uh. Hello? The original post suggested Christians were being harressed by the US government/Clinton administration. I don't think anybody is going to deny that there are folks who feel a certain religion is silly, but hey, let's not pretend like Christians are never judgemental. But as for US GOVERNMENT harassment, please put forward examples? Otherwise you might as well try shutting up.
I'm afraid you have your mind made up about what you want to read into this. The EU is NOT over-reacting, since the only thing said in the article is that they need to LOOK INTO it. This means to an intelligent reader that in case they DO find the FBI/NSA connection they'll do something about it, and if not, not?
And let's not fool ourselves this is above the US government to do. NSA does listen in on other nation's communications, and there is evidence of this being used to further US indusctry goals, so let's not pretend at innocence, shall we?
Re:Here in holland Nerd is something to be proud o
on
Geeks vs. Nerds
·
· Score: 1
In the Netherlands, like anywhere else, you'll find differing opinions on this.
IMO, I could live with geek. Nerd I don't like. For me, it implies too much interests ONLY in computers (or something similiar, and generally 'dull' (No, I am WELL aware computers aren't dull)). Me, I have plenty interests, 95% of them crazy ones.
As it stands no country, that I am aware of, currently has the capability to "shoot down" a missile of any type with a viable accuracy.
Sure there are! For one, the Dutch Goalkeeper system, in use with many navies around the world, WILL shoot down an anti-ship missile. And it will do so, accurately and repeatably. Triels condacted in the US - by folks who would much like to see Goalkeeper fail, and thus favouring the US Phalanx system - have demonstrated as much. However, ballistic missiles are a different beast entirely. Only today is effective Ballistic Missile Defence being developed.
If Open Source is better for the software companies, legal requirements are not necessary.
I'm not under the impression we're talking legal requirements, anyway. The subject matter is, if I understood correctly, that the french senator suggests a decision with respect to the french government software procurement. He wants the government, as a consumer, to decide to buy Open Source instead of Closed. That's all there is to it.
No conspiracy to write legislation to twist the arms of software companies or any such thing.
I suspect that it's only the real fanatics who take that attitude - most will take the more reasonable view. Unlike the guy earlier, stating that source is a "consumers right".
I think this is a misquote. DEMANDING source is a consumer's right. Just like, when the demand isn't met, shopping elsewhere is a consumer's right. Handing out source is NOT a producer's legal obligation, nor should it be.
I'm afraid not. Consumers, by definition, use software. They could care less about the source code. Demanding Open Source is a boon to a certain sector of the developers. And it represents a shift in the software economy, away from one where consumers pay for a product that includes a certain amount of support built-in (manuals, etc.), to one where the user has to hunker down and spend two hours a day on Usenet to know that the OS is secure, and deal with badly written HOWTO files and third party (it's all third party with Open Source!) books for documentation.
You, Sir, with all due respect, don't seem to have a clue what you are on about. First of all, how does what you are saying deny that it is a consumer's right to demand OS? You MIGHT be demonstrating that it is not a WISE choice. But it does not in anyway refute the RIGHT to demand.
You claim Open Source is, by definition, a shift away from support and documentation. By that very statement, you demonstrate your ignorance. In Open Source, support and documentation is where the money is. Therefore, if a government would demand open source, they would also look for a good party to support their software. And who better suited to support/document/etc the software (and hence earn money) than the very folks who made it?
Ultimately the end result is lots and lots of incompatability, where the consumer again pays.
This line is even more revealing. With Open Source, it is EASIER to ensure compatibility, not HARDER. With closed source, one will only be able to ascertein the same level of compatibility as is possible with Open Source, when buying ALL software from a single provider. Of course, not all Open Source software will be compatible, but only the better compatible software will stick around as the rest fades to the background.
As for companies making pretty darn good closed source software, sure, I won't disagree with you there. But what guarantee do you have of support, say, 10 years from now? Who knows that that company is still alive by then? Just to name one reason why one might choose Open Source. It is, afterall, a choice.
But we know you like playing with your straw man.
Huh. I do? Pray tell, for whom? This is news to me. I guess you know me well, then?
"requiring open-source sounds like communism in disguise to me"
That's the usual anti-Open Source nonsense again. Demanding Open Source is a consumer's right. This is not a demand to 'not make profit', it is a demand to open up the source. Folks can still make money on support, on bundled documentation, etc etc. Guess what? Governments pay far more for support contracts than they ever do for software pur sec, anyway! And if you don't want to sell under these conditions, well hey... There's other consumers around.
There is a slight difference. You sign up with a US backbone provider. so you abide by their terms of service.
Europeans (for example) sign up with a european backbone provider. So abide by their terms of service.
US and european backbone providers exchange data on a peer-to-peer basis. We handle their traffic, they handle ours. Not at all the same as you and your higher-level provider. The fact that you fall into this thinking-trap seems to be the very essence of the problem. The US is _NOT_ the _core_ of the internet. In fact, from the very design of the net, the net _has_ no core, no single 'highest-level-point'.
Hrm. I got the impression they are all pretty much neer the 1500nm range. Therefore, the spread due to differences in refraction are going to be pretty small.
Yes, linux users use linux because it is free. This is not the same as 'it doesn't cost anything', though. It means it is licensed under the GPL. I, and many others with me, buy linux distros, and I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable sum for good applications, too.
Linux users are unwilling to spend money on software? I also run windows, mainlky for games. Of the 10 games I installed the past year, only one was a copy - and I liked it enough to buy the game, after playing it a while.
I don't understand what you're on about with your 'pirating' of linux distributions. There is no such thing, since you are ALLOWED to copy them freely. Do you know what you are talking about, at all?
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. I use both MS stuff and linux, for very practical reasons. Even if I don't like the MS OS-es, and I don't like their strategies, I find Word and Excel very useful, and will happily use them if released under Linux.
Now, if I could have exactly the same functionality WITHOUT Microsoft products, fine... But until then...
I would hazard a guess that most Linux users are IT professionals. Working with computers is our job
I'll have to disagree with you here. MOST people I know who use linux are NOT IT professionals. Quite a few guys in my department (integrated logistics support to a radar company) use Linux - for FUN. And I think THAT is the key word. We use Linux because we enjoy 'playing' with it. We ARE technically inclined people, who like a challenge, but are NOT IT professionals
Still, your point is mostly valid. At this point, Linux is not ready for a-technical people who just want to use the thing. I have faith that within a few years, it will be, though... Will it be in time?
Derk
I've got a bunch of WAVELAN cards (the old, not IEEE certified version) around the place.
In order to use them, I need at least one, and probably a few, PCMCIA adapters for my desktop(s). Anyone know a place where these can be had at a decent price? Last time I looked they were still ridiculously expensive.
Thanks!
Derk
Nevermind the fact that you need a new version of Windows and Linux...
Okay, maybe I'm showing ignorance here, but as far as I understood the Transmeta releases and the reviews, you would not need a new Windows/Linux version, since to the software, the transmate chip looks just the same as theIntel x86 it xpects to be running on?
Except that your option doesn't make it any easier to FIND the damn site. Now, if I want to look up intel stuff, I know I could well go to 'http://www.intel.com/'. Now, I have NO idea where the main intel office is located, so I would have no way to guess (for example) 'http://www.intel.miami.us.com/'. Back to the already over-stuffed search engines who turn up ever more spurious pages which try to register as useful sites.
"Americans suck, they're all prone to using stereotypes and generalizations.
I rest my case... But don't worry, we KNOW there's good Americans, too! :P
Newsflash: Slashdot is run in America, by Americans. Of course it's going to be America-centric, as those who run it live in this country and are interested in things that affect Americans.
Sorry, but I have to disagree here. Yes, Slashdot is in America - but is server location all that relevant, nowadays, on the internet? I think placing such importance on physicality is ever more a thing of the past. Yes, Slashdot is run by americans - but I thought there were some non-american folks staffing too? Correct me if I am wrong? As for Americans finding American stuff interesting, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Hey, other folks might find american stuff interesting too; I know I do, it's one of the reasons I paid your country a visit this summer, and want to do so again in the future. (If only for curiosity value; visit it while it's still there! (Aww.. I'm alowed this little tease, am I?))
So I don't mind the american subjects popping up (a lot) - they may be relevant to americans, but quite a few of the issues tend to have a short or long term international spinoff anyway, making them relevant to us europeans too - and to those readers from other countries as well. HOWEVER, I think sometimes it'd do Slashdot good to aspire to a somewhat larger view - in particular where the subject itself is an international one. I'd be very surprised if there aren't a lot of americans who would like to see the international angles as well as domestic ones, too.
And last but not least... Even if Slashdot is in America and by Americans, you can hardly claim the same about the audience. Slashdot's audience, and I think Slashdot's aspirations, are a lot more than just American. But I don't think that you disagree with that, do you?
I feel much the same about homesexuals who have to shove their sexuality in my face. Or heterosexuals who do the same. Fine, do your own thing, but don't shoove it in my face. I'm quite willing to accept your sexuality, I'm not willing to accept rude and annoying behaviour.
Moderate that post up as funny!
'uncensored net access' - not if it's up to that democratic government of yours!
That's even funnier than the rest of that hilarious post!
Funnily enough, kids seem to pick up most computer stuff a LOT faster than adukts. I know _I_ was teaching my dad Lotus 1-2-3 (a spreadsheet), where he worked with it daily and I just peeked at the screen and leafed through the manual a bit. And I heard similar stories all round. Mind you, this is well over a decade ago, when XTs were way hot and interfaces were still basic and practical. Sorta like Linux ;)
Uh. I don't mind you having odd interests. But don't you have a site of your own to discuss all the gory (Err. Maybe in this case 'rocky'?) details between yourself? Why do you have to go on about this in each and every slashdot thread, recently?
this is a small example of the harrassment you say Christians never get.
Uh. Hello? The original post suggested Christians were being harressed by the US government/Clinton administration. I don't think anybody is going to deny that there are folks who feel a certain religion is silly, but hey, let's not pretend like Christians are never judgemental. But as for US GOVERNMENT harassment, please put forward examples? Otherwise you might as well try shutting up.
Uh... Well, except for the naturalist bit (Much prefer armour, in fact), and holy places being a requirement... All the rest seems to fit? ;)
The trains DO run on time over here, almost all the time. So there ;)
I'm afraid you have your mind made up about what you want to read into this. The EU is NOT over-reacting, since the only thing said in the article is that they need to LOOK INTO it.
This means to an intelligent reader that in case they DO find the FBI/NSA connection they'll do something about it, and if not, not?
And let's not fool ourselves this is above the US government to do. NSA does listen in on other nation's communications, and there is evidence of this being used to further US indusctry goals, so let's not pretend at innocence, shall we?
In the Netherlands, like anywhere else, you'll find differing opinions on this.
IMO, I could live with geek. Nerd I don't like. For me, it implies too much interests ONLY in computers (or something similiar, and generally 'dull' (No, I am WELL aware computers aren't dull)). Me, I have plenty interests, 95% of them crazy ones.
As it stands no country, that I am aware of, currently has the capability to "shoot down" a missile of any type with a viable accuracy.
Sure there are! For one, the Dutch Goalkeeper system, in use with many navies around the world, WILL shoot down an anti-ship missile. And it will do so, accurately and repeatably. Triels condacted in the US - by folks who would much like to see Goalkeeper fail, and thus favouring the US Phalanx system - have demonstrated as much. However, ballistic missiles are a different beast entirely. Only today is effective Ballistic Missile Defence being developed.
If Open Source is better for the software companies, legal requirements are not necessary.
I'm not under the impression we're talking legal requirements, anyway. The subject matter is, if I understood correctly, that the french senator suggests a decision with respect to the french government software procurement. He wants the government, as a consumer, to decide to buy Open Source instead of Closed. That's all there is to it.
No conspiracy to write legislation to twist the arms of software companies or any such thing.
I suspect that it's only the real fanatics who take that attitude - most will take the more reasonable view. Unlike the guy
earlier, stating that source is a "consumers right".
I think this is a misquote. DEMANDING source is a consumer's right. Just like, when the demand isn't met, shopping elsewhere is a consumer's right. Handing out source is NOT a producer's legal obligation, nor should it be.
And more FUD
I'm afraid not. Consumers, by definition, use software. They could care less about the source code. Demanding Open Source is a boon to a certain sector of the developers. And it represents a shift in the software economy, away from one where consumers pay for a product that includes a certain amount of support built-in (manuals, etc.), to one where the user has to hunker down and spend two hours a day on Usenet to know that the OS is secure, and deal with badly written HOWTO files and third party (it's all third party with Open Source!) books for documentation.
You, Sir, with all due respect, don't seem to have a clue what you are on about. First of all, how does what you are saying deny that it is a consumer's right to demand OS? You MIGHT be demonstrating that it is not a WISE choice. But it does not in anyway refute the RIGHT to demand.
You claim Open Source is, by definition, a shift away from support and documentation. By that very statement, you demonstrate your ignorance. In Open Source, support and documentation is where the money is. Therefore, if a government would demand open source, they would also look for a good party to support their software. And who better suited to support/document/etc the software (and hence earn money) than the very folks who made it?
Ultimately the end result is lots and lots of incompatability, where the consumer again pays.
This line is even more revealing. With Open Source, it is EASIER to ensure compatibility, not HARDER. With closed source, one will only be able to ascertein the same level of compatibility as is possible with Open Source, when buying ALL software from a single provider. Of course, not all Open Source software will be compatible, but only the better compatible software will stick around as the rest fades to the background.
As for companies making pretty darn good closed source software, sure, I won't disagree with you there. But what guarantee do you have of support, say, 10 years from now? Who knows that that company is still alive by then? Just to name one reason why one might choose Open Source. It is, afterall, a choice.
But we know you like playing with your straw man.
Huh. I do? Pray tell, for whom? This is news to me. I guess you know me well, then?
"requiring open-source sounds like communism in disguise to me"
That's the usual anti-Open Source nonsense again.
Demanding Open Source is a consumer's right. This is not a demand to 'not make profit', it is a demand to open up the source. Folks can still make money on support, on bundled documentation, etc etc.
Guess what? Governments pay far more for support contracts than they ever do for software pur sec, anyway!
And if you don't want to sell under these conditions, well hey... There's other consumers around.
There is a slight difference. You sign up with a US backbone provider. so you abide by their terms of service.
Europeans (for example) sign up with a european backbone provider. So abide by their terms of service.
US and european backbone providers exchange data on a peer-to-peer basis. We handle their traffic, they handle ours. Not at all the same as you and your higher-level provider. The fact that you fall into this thinking-trap seems to be the very essence of the problem. The US is _NOT_ the _core_ of the internet. In fact, from the very design of the net, the net _has_ no core, no single 'highest-level-point'.
Just my $0.02
Hrm. I got the impression they are all pretty much neer the 1500nm range. Therefore, the spread due to differences in refraction are going to be pretty small.
Or more likely, active stabilisers driven from the gyro's in the ship's centre.
Besides, infra red in the 1500nm range is affected to a lesser degree by fog and such, than light in the visual range.
Yes, linux users use linux because it is free. This is not the same as 'it doesn't cost anything', though. It means it is licensed under the GPL. I, and many others with me, buy linux distros, and I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable sum for good applications, too.
Linux users are unwilling to spend money on software? I also run windows, mainlky for games. Of the 10 games I installed the past year, only one was a copy - and I liked it enough to buy the game, after playing it a while.
I don't understand what you're on about with your 'pirating' of linux distributions. There is no such thing, since you are ALLOWED to copy them freely. Do you know what you are talking about, at all?