"Defending the Earth from MADMEN with asteroids"
You never know when a criminal mastermind with asteroid controlling capability will aim one of these things at us. Perhaps a new government department needs to be formed. We could start it off with say a 2 or 3 billion dollar study to seek out MADMEN with REAL weapons of mass destruction. Maybe G dubya should be incharge, he already has lots of experience hunting something that cannot be found.
Plumber: "Joes Plumbing, can I help you?"
You:"I need help, and I need it now, I dropped my computer monitor in the toilet as I was flushing it. I need you to send someone over here and fish it out!"
Plumber: 'CLICK!'
And you thought getting help from Dell was a bitch!
How in the hell do you license systems that run X?
Lets see, I have two computers running headless with client applications installed and I have a desktop workstation running an X Server. If I run applications on either of them using remote X, the server is on my Desktop and the client is on the "server?". So which freaking systems needs a server license? All or none?
SCO's defined limitation of a desktop, "It may not host services for clients on other systems.", and SCO defines a server, "A Linux server system is one that hosts services for clients on other systems.".
Is a client a person or a program run by a person? Does accepting data from a remote program that is being run by a person that is using the computer receiving the data qualify as a server?
In this case, do I need to acquire server licenses for all the desktops and a desktop license for the server?
Finally, my gateway/firewall. It technically provides a service, as it lets us connect thru it. Is NAT considered a service? Normally I admin it via ssh, so it would seem to qualify as a server. However, I am not clear that the firewall is providing a service to me by running ssh for it's own administration. It is kinda providing a service to itself which would not seem to qualify. Hell, I don't really want to connect to it, it just kinda forces me because it needs attention every now and then. Maybe I should be licensed by SCO as I run linux on a remote device(my computer) and I provide a service to the firewall! I wonder what SCO will charge for a Human Server License? Surely they own some sort of genetic DNA copyrights! If I disable ssh and connect a monitor and admin it locally can I avoid a server license? Then again, allowing my to avoid standing in a dark closet balancing a keyboard on my knee while looking at 14" monitor on the floor is a service I suppose. Does providing convienience require a server license?
Screw it, I am dumping all this gear in a river and getting web TV!!!! Please tell me SCO does not hold Web TV rights! $699.00 is a bit steep for that screwy web access!
Maybe I have not looked hard enough, but I can't seem to find a way to apply for/aquire a license via telephone or US Mail.
I don't know all the legalities involved, but it sure seems, to me anyway, that they are trying very hard to stay away from any potential for wire/mail fraud charges.
What is the bet that if you managed to get them to send you a paper application/document of any type, they will refuse to use the USPS and instead use Fed Ex. or United Parcel, etc.
I think it is time to try an force their hand. Contact them via registered US Mail, asking them for a license application, a EULA and an exact description of the property to be covered by the license. Provide them a prepaid and registered return shipping envelope. Provide a P.O. Box as the only available method of contact. As far as I know, a P.O. Box is undeliverable to anyone except the USPS
Surely a prospective license applicant has the right to inquire as to the exact nature of what is going to be included in the purchase prior to purchase. I cannot imagine that they can reply, legally, with "Stuff that we cannot reveal". Maybe they do not have to give line by line details, but surely they would have to state the general material that requires a license.
I suppose you could even get more detailed, explain your server/client configuration. Ask them for a detailed quote to bring your installations up to "legal" status as you desire to avoid potential litigation.
Seems they would only have two options. One: Send you the information as you requested and potentially expose themselves to mail fraud. Two: Fail to respond, as specified, at which point it would appear that they cannot proceed against you as you acted in "good faith?" trying to acquire the "necessary" license(s).
(sorry for the bad formatting on the first post)
"Their claims are A. Unsubstantiated, and B. Even if they were substantiated they have no claim to the derivative works that IBM contributed.
The fact that they continue to pursue licensing where currently their legal standing has not been established is insane."
According to the SCO FAQ:
"How can SCO expect me to purchase a license when its case with IBM hasn't been resolved yet? What if SCO loses its case against IBM? Will it reimburse Linux customers who purchased a SCO IP License?
Some Linux users have the misunderstanding that the SCO IP License hinges on the outcome of the SCO vs. IBM case. If that case were completely removed, Linux end users would still need to purchase a license from SCO to use the SCO IP found in Linux. The IBM case surrounds misuse of derivative works of SCO UNIX. It does not change the fact that line-by-line SCO IP code is found in Linux. The copied code includes copyrighted headers and other proprietary UNIX source code."
There are also other choice Q&A's in the FAQ. Mostly stating that Linux does indeed have stolen code. Read their IP FAQ. It pissed me off just skimming it. What a crock of BS!
Seems to me that regardless of the outcome of the IBM/Novell issues/cases, they are going to keep making the accusations that there is still SCO code in the linux kernel and it's sub-systems.
Maybe it's just me, but it sure seems like not only do they need to lose their IBM case, but they also need to be court ordered to drop these claims.
"Their claims are A. Unsubstantiated, and B. Even if they were substantiated they have no claim to the derivative works that IBM contributed.
The fact that they continue to pursue licensing where currently their legal standing has not been established is insane."
According to the SCO FAQ:
"How can SCO expect me to purchase a license when its case with IBM hasn't been resolved yet? What if SCO loses its case against IBM? Will it reimburse Linux customers who purchased a SCO IP License?
Some Linux users have the misunderstanding that the SCO IP License hinges on the outcome of the SCO vs. IBM case. If that case were completely removed, Linux end users would still need to purchase a license from SCO to use the SCO IP found in Linux. The IBM case surrounds misuse of derivative works of SCO UNIX. It does not change the fact that line-by-line SCO IP code is found in Linux. The copied code includes copyrighted headers and other proprietary UNIX source code."
There are also other choice Q&A's in the FAQ. Mostly stating that Linux does indeed have stolen code. Read their IP FAQ. It pissed me off just skimming it. What a crock of BS!
Seems to me that regardless of the outcome of the IBM/Novell issues/cases, they are going to keep making the accusations that there is still SCO code in the linux kernel and it's sub-systems.
Maybe it's just me, but it sure seems like not only do they need to lose their IBM case, but they also need to be court ordered to drop these claims.
""Dirty images and thoughts cause you to value women only for sexual reasons and leads to the treatment of women as objects."" br>
"There's nothing "dirty" about sex, except for having to change the sheets afterwards."
What are these sheets you speak of?
Oh, sorry, you mean those things my wife, ummm, what's her name changes after I screw her.
Incorrect.
By simple laws of averages, someone doing ~70 dodging and weaving will get where they're going ALOT faster than someone doing ~55. If they end up only a few cars in front of you when you exit, then:
Incorrect:
You are assuming that the speeding car is "AVERAGING" 70 in traffic that is averaging 55. It is not gonna happen like that. what is going to happen is the speeder will be tailgating someone at 55, see a 2 car lenth hole, swerve into it, speed up to sixty, jam his brakes before he hits the new car he is tailgating and go 55 for another 12 seconds waiting for the next 2-3 car length opening.
End result, the speeder probably average 57 miles per hour. Lastly, the bob and weave drivers do increase the grid lock. the the big slinky effects in 20-30 MPH gridlock is almost always caused by the weave/speed & brakers.
"OpenSSH is a part of Linux as much as RPC or Windows Messaging is a part of Windows."
To test that theory, I will turn off ssh on linux and you turn of RPC on XP, no let's both reboot and see who gets back first!
Enough said!
I don't think that the market share is really the cause here. What I think is to blame is the extension of an extension of an extension of a really bad idea called the windows OS.
Even if the "VARIOUS" *nix type OS's were holding 99% of the market, the point is the word VARIOUS. Each haveing slightly different bugs/vunerabilities. In example, let's Linux had 90% of Home User desktops. How many would be running Mandrake, SUSE, RedHat, etc? How many would be running Kmail, Evolution, Sylpheed, etc? How many would be running Opera, Mozilla, Netscape, etc?
The uniqueness of the "VARIOUS" *nix installs and OS's is quite possibly the single largest strength. Assuming I have 500 fellow * nix users in my email address book, what percentage can any virus author hope to infect if he manages to sucker me into executing his nasty code on my Mandrake Box?
Sure, I might know 100 fellow Mandrake users, but what percentage also use the Sylpheed client as I do? Then, what percentage of that group use the same vunerable version that I do?
I think the diverse OS like Linux, BSD, etc is exactly what will stop the rampant malware outbreaks.
That is, in my opinion, why no version of MS windows will ever be secure or immune. When you run a cookie cutter OS, you are vunerable to cookie cutter problems!!!!
Just a measure of Port 135 scans from the last 5 & 1/2 weeks. Scan totals are for full weeks with exception of current week. The current week only shows 8/10 thru present
5 weeks ago - 419
4 weeks ago - 366
3 weeks ago - 278
2 weeks ago - 520
1 weeks ago - 596
Current week - 1684
Most hits from current week are from last night.
Should Chemical engineers be outlawed?
on
Linking Dangerously
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
This is one of those topics that really make me wonder what the hell is happening in this world. What's next, "you have knowledge that "could" be used to build bombs, therefore you probably are a terrorist. If you share your information, you are a terrorist. Oh, wait, you only shared your information in a college environment, you are safe, but don't share it on the web as that is, well, bad!.
Anyone can pick up a chemistry book and make basic explosives. Anyone can set his mind to gaining knowledge and make bombs. Posting information on explicit bomb making is questionable, but is it really wrong?
What's next? "You were overheard talking about how a bomb is made, therefore you are arrested!"
I have mod points as well, your point is what? I guess you missed the humor in the reference. Maybe you should get out more. Let me help you, "Tucks", a well known product to relieve the itching burning sensation.
Either way, your mod was BS. The post was humor based on the previous gentlemans mention of "Tucks".
Mod me down for not funny, sure, especially if you did not get it!
Well, ummm, no, not really, but considering the the time it took to write that rambling conspiracy theory and the time that the average slashdotter spends talking about evil companys and conspiracy theorys, I think I am well ahead of the time game.
Hence, It was sarcasm. I might add that while extreme, it was not too far off base some of the other theories I have seen posted.
IBM, pissed over the whole OS2 thing and holding a really bad grudged decides to have some fun. Allows some SCO code into the linux source and of course, secretly points them to this, SCO, a failing business model jumps all over it and MS thinks it has the perfect chance to kill linux once and for all, or at least tie it up in legal BS for years. SO, MS funds SCO to IP linux to death in the media. SCO plays along all the while knowing that IBM had intended to start this whole mess and sues IBM per the "secret" plan. It turns out that SCO really just wants to crush MS for the whole DR-DOS fiasco and has found out thru it's double agent spies that work there, sent from MS that MS has all along been sinking billions into MSLinux and is betting the world on SCO winning the case against IBM, owning linux and then according to the secret negotiation SCO will become a subsidy of MS and MS has the means to rule the world. What SCO does not know is that SUN is really behind this all because in a lunch meeting between SUN and IBM, SUN bet IBM that they could not make SCO dance like a red headed step child. MS, playing innocent just watches this whole mess waiting for the 21 gun salute when it releases it's own Linux. However, IBM thru it's own counter-intelligence knows MS's plan all along and has already purchased SCO and is setting up MS for a crippling cash loss when it is revealed that SCO is really just IBM dba The Canopy Group dba SCO. In the end, SCO loses to IBM and is reaquired by IBM, MS goes broke as LONGHORN is really a codename for MSlinux and linux is now fully owned by IBM. IBM locks linux in a crate and dumps it into the marianas trench and goes back to working on mainframes. SUN who really never gave a shit about the whole mess pays off IBM as it lost the bet about crushing MS for the fun of it. Years later it is found out that the amount of the bet was $1.00.
The whole this or that company is evil is kinda silly. These are all just established corporations doing what is in their best interest from both a bottom line and shareholder perspective. I really doubt that the execs' of these companies, MS as the exception here, really sit around make these decisions based on it's help or hindrence to the OSS world.
IBM is a big evil corporation, UNTIL they help your cause.
Red Hat is a back stabbing linux distributor unitl they file suit against SCO.
Novell is our enemy until they pour money into Ximian.
While I like and dislike companys based on their actions, I don't think any are inherently evil or good. They are just companies trying to make a buck, well, a few zillion bucks, and will do whatever they think they can get away with in the process.
If SUN, tomorrow, dropped Solaris and said they were betting the company on linux, investing 20 billion dollars, everyone would be singing the praises of SUN, for seeing the light and coming over from the dark side. That is, right up until they decide that Solaris was really a better OS and drop linux. Then they are the scum of the earth, no vision, liars and theifs only out to undermine linux for their own gains.
The idea here being, let the corps battle amongst themselves, take what good they do as a bennie and move on. IBM would torch LINUX in 1/4 of a heartbeat if it had a better alternative that could make them billions. End of story.
Agreed, you cannot assume that because something is rapidly catching up with a known familiar standard that it will ever surpass that mark on it's own.
However, useability is a pretty large can of worms. The single biggest complaint I hear is, I bet this sounds familiar, "Where are my programs?". Unfortunately, with windows, we are dealing with a very poor, but long standing example of how not to have a user interact with the underlying FS.
One guy I helped become more familiar with linux frustrated me to no end with the whole c:\, d:\ thing. Now add in the complexity of multiple partitions on single hard drives and many average users are flat out blown away with the concepts of the FS.
Linux cannot compete for "switcher" useability unless the "switcher" can think outside the box for more than a few minutes at a time. Linux, and the general UNIX structure is actually damn good. Old behaviors that are set in stone is actually damn bad.
The same user that is totally lost unless they can browse the "Programs" directory in Windows does not seem to have issues not knowing where the boot loader is. Why? Because windows did not totrture them with it like it has with exposure to the general FS.
So, my point is that if there was ever a moving target, useability is it. My wife runs Win2k, I run linux. When I have to do something on her system, I am pretty lost and frustrated. Likewise, she stays away from my system unless she is surfing while her system defrags. I am not new to windows, used it Win3.x thru XP. The problem is that I have not really used Windows much in 3 years. From my perspective, Windows has a really low useability these days. It's cumbersome and ackward as hell to get anything accomplished from a configuarability/troubleshooting point of view.
Linux is Linux and Windows is Windows. Neither are overly newbie friendly. Most people can play a tape on a VCR without using a manual, yet how many can program their new VCR to record a future program unattended without reading the manual? Do VCR's meet the useability criteria? Hell they all do the exactly same thing, yet 50% of VCR's still blink 12:00.
"My definition of sensible is a model which will raise new windows, but not give them focus." 'snip'
iceWM has exactly the focus settings that you are looking for. If you DL ICEPREF, it is very easy to experiment with the various window behavior / focus models.
I only use components of KDE like Kong, so I cannot speak for the ability to see that focus model in the full desktop env.
As far as making popups from applications on other desktops stay on their original desktop, I don't think ice currently does this. I have never tried to make that happen however, as I prefer that that does happen.
I do not use sound events so that behavior suits me.
"It only works that way because the ISP oversold their pipe."
That is such a crock of BS. They oversold their pipe? Ok, lets calculate this.
I get roughly 200K Bytes/sec DL. 12M Bytes/min 720M Bytes/hr 17.2G Bytes/day 520G Bytes/month
If any ISP built capacity for full 24x7 bandwidth for every user it would cost hundreds and quite possibly a couple thousand of dollars per month for internet access.
The issue IS the 5-10% of users who can't seem to get a grip on MODERATION. You have the current attitude of the modern bandwidth hog. You seem to think it's some undeniably right to get every last data byte you can per month but you whine like a fucking baby when they want you to pay for it.
Reality check chief! If your ISP is locking down your account, you are most likely one of the abusers of a good thing. Unlimited? Yes, they overuse the term and improperly apply it in the most common sense. However, unlimited, when originally applied to internet connections was in reference to connection TIME and not bandwidth.
The unlimited ISP's of the day allowed you to connect as often and as long as you wanted. The bandwidth was not a concern, hell how much could you possibly pull down at 21,600bps.
I would not call the hogs, thiefs. Abusers. Hogs. Absolutely! It's what you are. No, they won't go bankrupt, they will just throttle everyone to make up for the abusers!
The anger, when this occurs, has to be turned not towards the ISP's, but towards the abusers. We will all suffer in the end for a small percentage of people that behave far outside the norm.
Final point. Exactly how much of this crap that you download do you actually keep? Lets assume you use 1/4 of your bandwidth or 130 gig a month. Do you honestly burn 150 CD's a month? Or do you just download for the sake of downloading becuase it is your right?
Let me guess you shitcan most of it! But hey, it's your right. Afterall, you paid for unlimited and damn it, your gonna use it!
First, I have to say that your "Key Examples" as to how Linux could be improved are quite possibly the least important items I have ever seen.
Let's critique them anyway.
"For example, the boot time. Mere seconds. Something on the order of 10 seconds on a P4 1.8 G with 256 Megs of RAM. And this is a boot to GUI situation..."
First, XP shows the GUI really fast, but the OS stills grinds on the HD for another 60 seconds, so, the appearance of the GUI is in no means an indication that the OS is up and ready. It ain't!
Next and most important. Assuming that XP truly finished it's boot process in 10 seconds compared to Linux at 60 seconds. Ok, you save 50 seconds over my boot time. Question, How many times per year do you boot your system? I average about 4 x a year. Assuming you do the same, you have 3 minutes and 20 seconds more productive time than me. OMG, you workaholic!!!! What really makes me curious is that if XP is the pillar of stability that everyone claims, how come so many of it's users seem to be so impressed with it's boot time? How come they are getting so much experience booting?
One woman I converted from Win to Lin forgot how to shutdown Linux because she had not rebooted in 4 months and needed to move her computer,(she runs iceWM and XDM, no fancy login manager). Needless to say, she kinda likes that the thing she forgot was how to reboot. She still remember how to reboot windows even though she does not run it anymore. I guess repetition makes for lasting memories.
Boot time is pretty irrelevant!
"Another thing... "cool factor" of the XP login manager."
I have to give this a 9 out of 10 on the "Who gives a shit-o-meter". Oh Yeah, the "COOL" login manager is a killer app. Lets talk about the 200(exageration) window manager(s), desktop(s), theme(s) that you can have/use in linux. You want mouth dropping stares, show a Win user the workspace customization available to them in *nix/X. WOW, you have a "COOL" login manager and a candy-ass desktop.
Lastly, and I am not even bothering with a quote, Sounds and Games during a load/reload of the OS. Once again, you have hit on a topic that most linux users won't encounter very often and therefore it becomes a pretty useless improvement. However, there are already distro's that provide such things. Lycoris, being one of them, so it's a moot point.
I guess, in the end, I have a lot of trouble understanding your areas in need of improvement. They all seemed to be based on booting, rebooting, loading, reloading the OS and also constant exposure to the login manager. You say you like and use linux at home. Why do you have so much time spent with all those tasks?
Maybe you should try "Using" the computer instead of rebooting all the time.
9:04am up 47 days, 4:10, 3 users, load average: 4.46, 5.80, 5.23
71 processes: 63 sleeping, 8 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 0.9% user, 20.7% system, 78.2% nice, 0.0% idle
Mem: 260316K av, 254820K used, 5496K free, 0K shrd, 53692K buff
Swap: 257032K av, 328K used, 256704K free 38044K cached
I guess we just use our systems differently!
Bill
"If I were an employer, I'd be suspicious of hiring any computer professional (and maybe you are not one, I don't know) who was using antiquated hardware and saw no reason to upgrade. I'd be looking at that and asking myself "if this guy has so little interest in computers that he's running an ancient POS like that, how much enthusiasm can I expect from him in a technical position?"
What kind of care does your mechanic drive? Does he drive a 5000 HP Funny car or a 3 yr old chevy with rust on the quarters? Does that make him a good or bad mechanic? What kind of stupid method of measuring a persons skills is that?
Considering how you have defined all of your needs for processing power, you "really" validated your point on how "Computer Professionals" should use Multi-GHz machines.
Let's see, you need speed for Divx, MP3, altering your porn in photoshop and running FP games. Yep, you are a computer professional allright. Unless you have the "need" for raw cpu power, it's just a penis extension. Get a life!
I totally agree. I have been using Mandrake 7.x stuff for about 2 years. Recently, ( 1:30am up 6 days, 22:24, 2 users ), I DL'd 8.2. Backed up the important stuff and wiped the disk. Install took 10 minutes. All hardware detected and working properly, cable modem, dhcp, NAT, for two win 98 boxes, ftp & telnet (for lan), etc.., worked on post install reboot. Spent 1/2 the day tweaking for personal choice stuff like iceWM and apps I like. Other than my personal preference stuff, I had a fully patched, running and decently configured system in under 20 minutes.
My wifes' system is WIN98SE, she is the master of the reinstall, it still takes her 6 hours just to get the bare OS installed and configured. Something about rebooting 25 times in 6 hours is just a bit time consuming.
End result, the current revs of the bigger distros are pretty damn slick and the installs are FAR better than anything I ever experienced. The developement rate of linux is quite astounding.
I can only imagine what Mandrake 9 or higher will be like. The GUI config stuff is getting to the point that you only use CLI if you want to.
Slashdot Mirror
"Defending the Earth from MADMEN with asteroids" You never know when a criminal mastermind with asteroid controlling capability will aim one of these things at us. Perhaps a new government department needs to be formed. We could start it off with say a 2 or 3 billion dollar study to seek out MADMEN with REAL weapons of mass destruction. Maybe G dubya should be incharge, he already has lots of experience hunting something that cannot be found.
Plumber: "Joes Plumbing, can I help you?" You:"I need help, and I need it now, I dropped my computer monitor in the toilet as I was flushing it. I need you to send someone over here and fish it out!" Plumber: 'CLICK!'
And you thought getting help from Dell was a bitch!
How in the hell do you license systems that run X?
Lets see, I have two computers running headless with client applications installed and I have a desktop workstation running an X Server. If I run applications on either of them using remote X, the server is on my Desktop and the client is on the "server?". So which freaking systems needs a server license? All or none?
SCO's defined limitation of a desktop, "It may not host services for clients on other systems.", and SCO defines a server, "A Linux server system is one that hosts services for clients on other systems.".
Is a client a person or a program run by a person? Does accepting data from a remote program that is being run by a person that is using the computer receiving the data qualify as a server?
In this case, do I need to acquire server licenses for all the desktops and a desktop license for the server?
Finally, my gateway/firewall. It technically provides a service, as it lets us connect thru it. Is NAT considered a service? Normally I admin it via ssh, so it would seem to qualify as a server. However, I am not clear that the firewall is providing a service to me by running ssh for it's own administration. It is kinda providing a service to itself which would not seem to qualify. Hell, I don't really want to connect to it, it just kinda forces me because it needs attention every now and then. Maybe I should be licensed by SCO as I run linux on a remote device(my computer) and I provide a service to the firewall! I wonder what SCO will charge for a Human Server License? Surely they own some sort of genetic DNA copyrights! If I disable ssh and connect a monitor and admin it locally can I avoid a server license? Then again, allowing my to avoid standing in a dark closet balancing a keyboard on my knee while looking at 14" monitor on the floor is a service I suppose. Does providing convienience require a server license?
Screw it, I am dumping all this gear in a river and getting web TV!!!! Please tell me SCO does not hold Web TV rights! $699.00 is a bit steep for that screwy web access!
Maybe I have not looked hard enough, but I can't seem to find a way to apply for/aquire a license via telephone or US Mail.
I don't know all the legalities involved, but it sure seems, to me anyway, that they are trying very hard to stay away from any potential for wire/mail fraud charges.
What is the bet that if you managed to get them to send you a paper application/document of any type, they will refuse to use the USPS and instead use Fed Ex. or United Parcel, etc.
I think it is time to try an force their hand. Contact them via registered US Mail, asking them for a license application, a EULA and an exact description of the property to be covered by the license. Provide them a prepaid and registered return shipping envelope. Provide a P.O. Box as the only available method of contact. As far as I know, a P.O. Box is undeliverable to anyone except the USPS
Surely a prospective license applicant has the right to inquire as to the exact nature of what is going to be included in the purchase prior to purchase. I cannot imagine that they can reply, legally, with "Stuff that we cannot reveal". Maybe they do not have to give line by line details, but surely they would have to state the general material that requires a license.
I suppose you could even get more detailed, explain your server/client configuration. Ask them for a detailed quote to bring your installations up to "legal" status as you desire to avoid potential litigation.
Seems they would only have two options. One: Send you the information as you requested and potentially expose themselves to mail fraud. Two: Fail to respond, as specified, at which point it would appear that they cannot proceed against you as you acted in "good faith?" trying to acquire the "necessary" license(s).
(sorry for the bad formatting on the first post) "Their claims are A. Unsubstantiated, and B. Even if they were substantiated they have no claim to the derivative works that IBM contributed.
The fact that they continue to pursue licensing where currently their legal standing has not been established is insane."
According to the SCO FAQ: "How can SCO expect me to purchase a license when its case with IBM hasn't been resolved yet? What if SCO loses its case against IBM? Will it reimburse Linux customers who purchased a SCO IP License?
Some Linux users have the misunderstanding that the SCO IP License hinges on the outcome of the SCO vs. IBM case. If that case were completely removed, Linux end users would still need to purchase a license from SCO to use the SCO IP found in Linux. The IBM case surrounds misuse of derivative works of SCO UNIX. It does not change the fact that line-by-line SCO IP code is found in Linux. The copied code includes copyrighted headers and other proprietary UNIX source code."
There are also other choice Q&A's in the FAQ. Mostly stating that Linux does indeed have stolen code. Read their IP FAQ. It pissed me off just skimming it. What a crock of BS!
Seems to me that regardless of the outcome of the IBM/Novell issues/cases, they are going to keep making the accusations that there is still SCO code in the linux kernel and it's sub-systems.
Maybe it's just me, but it sure seems like not only do they need to lose their IBM case, but they also need to be court ordered to drop these claims.
"Their claims are A. Unsubstantiated, and B. Even if they were substantiated they have no claim to the derivative works that IBM contributed. The fact that they continue to pursue licensing where currently their legal standing has not been established is insane." According to the SCO FAQ: "How can SCO expect me to purchase a license when its case with IBM hasn't been resolved yet? What if SCO loses its case against IBM? Will it reimburse Linux customers who purchased a SCO IP License? Some Linux users have the misunderstanding that the SCO IP License hinges on the outcome of the SCO vs. IBM case. If that case were completely removed, Linux end users would still need to purchase a license from SCO to use the SCO IP found in Linux. The IBM case surrounds misuse of derivative works of SCO UNIX. It does not change the fact that line-by-line SCO IP code is found in Linux. The copied code includes copyrighted headers and other proprietary UNIX source code." There are also other choice Q&A's in the FAQ. Mostly stating that Linux does indeed have stolen code. Read their IP FAQ. It pissed me off just skimming it. What a crock of BS! Seems to me that regardless of the outcome of the IBM/Novell issues/cases, they are going to keep making the accusations that there is still SCO code in the linux kernel and it's sub-systems. Maybe it's just me, but it sure seems like not only do they need to lose their IBM case, but they also need to be court ordered to drop these claims.
""Dirty images and thoughts cause you to value women only for sexual reasons and leads to the treatment of women as objects.""
br> "There's nothing "dirty" about sex, except for having to change the sheets afterwards."
What are these sheets you speak of?
Oh, sorry, you mean those things my wife, ummm, what's her name changes after I screw her.
Oops, too much porn for me!
Incorrect. By simple laws of averages, someone doing ~70 dodging and weaving will get where they're going ALOT faster than someone doing ~55. If they end up only a few cars in front of you when you exit, then:
Incorrect:
You are assuming that the speeding car is "AVERAGING" 70 in traffic that is averaging 55. It is not gonna happen like that. what is going to happen is the speeder will be tailgating someone at 55, see a 2 car lenth hole, swerve into it, speed up to sixty, jam his brakes before he hits the new car he is tailgating and go 55 for another 12 seconds waiting for the next 2-3 car length opening.
End result, the speeder probably average 57 miles per hour. Lastly, the bob and weave drivers do increase the grid lock. the the big slinky effects in 20-30 MPH gridlock is almost always caused by the weave/speed & brakers.
"S. Ballmers' Honesty Questioned"
or, perhaps,
"Politicians Integrity Questioned"
"OpenSSH is a part of Linux as much as RPC or Windows Messaging is a part of Windows."
To test that theory, I will turn off ssh on linux and you turn of RPC on XP, no let's both reboot and see who gets back first! Enough said!
Even if the "VARIOUS" *nix type OS's were holding 99% of the market, the point is the word VARIOUS. Each haveing slightly different bugs/vunerabilities. In example, let's Linux had 90% of Home User desktops. How many would be running Mandrake, SUSE, RedHat, etc? How many would be running Kmail, Evolution, Sylpheed, etc? How many would be running Opera, Mozilla, Netscape, etc?
The uniqueness of the "VARIOUS" *nix installs and OS's is quite possibly the single largest strength. Assuming I have 500 fellow * nix users in my email address book, what percentage can any virus author hope to infect if he manages to sucker me into executing his nasty code on my Mandrake Box?
Sure, I might know 100 fellow Mandrake users, but what percentage also use the Sylpheed client as I do? Then, what percentage of that group use the same vunerable version that I do?
I think the diverse OS like Linux, BSD, etc is exactly what will stop the rampant malware outbreaks.
That is, in my opinion, why no version of MS windows will ever be secure or immune. When you run a cookie cutter OS, you are vunerable to cookie cutter problems!!!!
Just a measure of Port 135 scans from the last 5 & 1/2 weeks. Scan totals are for full weeks with exception of current week. The current week only shows 8/10 thru present 5 weeks ago - 419 4 weeks ago - 366 3 weeks ago - 278 2 weeks ago - 520 1 weeks ago - 596 Current week - 1684 Most hits from current week are from last night.
Anyone can pick up a chemistry book and make basic explosives. Anyone can set his mind to gaining knowledge and make bombs. Posting information on explicit bomb making is questionable, but is it really wrong?
What's next? "You were overheard talking about how a bomb is made, therefore you are arrested!"
Gotta love how all this works!
Either way, your mod was BS. The post was humor based on the previous gentlemans mention of "Tucks".
Mod me down for not funny, sure, especially if you did not get it!
Hence, It was sarcasm. I might add that while extreme, it was not too far off base some of the other theories I have seen posted.
IBM, pissed over the whole OS2 thing and holding a really bad grudged decides to have some fun. Allows some SCO code into the linux source and of course, secretly points them to this, SCO, a failing business model jumps all over it and MS thinks it has the perfect chance to kill linux once and for all, or at least tie it up in legal BS for years. SO, MS funds SCO to IP linux to death in the media. SCO plays along all the while knowing that IBM had intended to start this whole mess and sues IBM per the "secret" plan. It turns out that SCO really just wants to crush MS for the whole DR-DOS fiasco and has found out thru it's double agent spies that work there, sent from MS that MS has all along been sinking billions into MSLinux and is betting the world on SCO winning the case against IBM, owning linux and then according to the secret negotiation SCO will become a subsidy of MS and MS has the means to rule the world. What SCO does not know is that SUN is really behind this all because in a lunch meeting between SUN and IBM, SUN bet IBM that they could not make SCO dance like a red headed step child. MS, playing innocent just watches this whole mess waiting for the 21 gun salute when it releases it's own Linux. However, IBM thru it's own counter-intelligence knows MS's plan all along and has already purchased SCO and is setting up MS for a crippling cash loss when it is revealed that SCO is really just IBM dba The Canopy Group dba SCO. In the end, SCO loses to IBM and is reaquired by IBM, MS goes broke as LONGHORN is really a codename for MSlinux and linux is now fully owned by IBM. IBM locks linux in a crate and dumps it into the marianas trench and goes back to working on mainframes. SUN who really never gave a shit about the whole mess pays off IBM as it lost the bet about crushing MS for the fun of it. Years later it is found out that the amount of the bet was $1.00.
Either that, or, I could be wrong.
'ps' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file.
Once again linux wins hands down.
"Tucks the Penguin"
Now that is a perfect charactor. All we need is a slogan!
I have it, "Tucks the Penguin, helps sooth the hemmoroids caused by exposure to the Windows Virus"
LOL, I kill me!
IBM is a big evil corporation, UNTIL they help your cause.
Red Hat is a back stabbing linux distributor unitl they file suit against SCO.
Novell is our enemy until they pour money into Ximian.
While I like and dislike companys based on their actions, I don't think any are inherently evil or good. They are just companies trying to make a buck, well, a few zillion bucks, and will do whatever they think they can get away with in the process.
If SUN, tomorrow, dropped Solaris and said they were betting the company on linux, investing 20 billion dollars, everyone would be singing the praises of SUN, for seeing the light and coming over from the dark side. That is, right up until they decide that Solaris was really a better OS and drop linux. Then they are the scum of the earth, no vision, liars and theifs only out to undermine linux for their own gains.
The idea here being, let the corps battle amongst themselves, take what good they do as a bennie and move on. IBM would torch LINUX in 1/4 of a heartbeat if it had a better alternative that could make them billions. End of story.
However, useability is a pretty large can of worms. The single biggest complaint I hear is, I bet this sounds familiar, "Where are my programs?". Unfortunately, with windows, we are dealing with a very poor, but long standing example of how not to have a user interact with the underlying FS.
One guy I helped become more familiar with linux frustrated me to no end with the whole c:\, d:\ thing. Now add in the complexity of multiple partitions on single hard drives and many average users are flat out blown away with the concepts of the FS.
Linux cannot compete for "switcher" useability unless the "switcher" can think outside the box for more than a few minutes at a time. Linux, and the general UNIX structure is actually damn good. Old behaviors that are set in stone is actually damn bad.
The same user that is totally lost unless they can browse the "Programs" directory in Windows does not seem to have issues not knowing where the boot loader is. Why? Because windows did not totrture them with it like it has with exposure to the general FS.
So, my point is that if there was ever a moving target, useability is it. My wife runs Win2k, I run linux. When I have to do something on her system, I am pretty lost and frustrated. Likewise, she stays away from my system unless she is surfing while her system defrags. I am not new to windows, used it Win3.x thru XP. The problem is that I have not really used Windows much in 3 years. From my perspective, Windows has a really low useability these days. It's cumbersome and ackward as hell to get anything accomplished from a configuarability/troubleshooting point of view.
Linux is Linux and Windows is Windows. Neither are overly newbie friendly. Most people can play a tape on a VCR without using a manual, yet how many can program their new VCR to record a future program unattended without reading the manual? Do VCR's meet the useability criteria? Hell they all do the exactly same thing, yet 50% of VCR's still blink 12:00.
iceWM has exactly the focus settings that you are looking for. If you DL ICEPREF, it is very easy to experiment with the various window behavior / focus models.
I only use components of KDE like Kong, so I cannot speak for the ability to see that focus model in the full desktop env.
As far as making popups from applications on other desktops stay on their original desktop, I don't think ice currently does this. I have never tried to make that happen however, as I prefer that that does happen.
I do not use sound events so that behavior suits me.
Best of Luck,
Bill
"It only works that way because the ISP oversold their pipe."
That is such a crock of BS. They oversold their pipe? Ok, lets calculate this.
I get roughly 200K Bytes/sec DL.
12M Bytes/min
720M Bytes/hr
17.2G Bytes/day
520G Bytes/month
If any ISP built capacity for full 24x7 bandwidth for every user it would cost hundreds and quite possibly a couple thousand of dollars per month for internet access.
The issue IS the 5-10% of users who can't seem to get a grip on MODERATION. You have the current attitude of the modern bandwidth hog. You seem to think it's some undeniably right to get every last data byte you can per month but you whine like a fucking baby when they want you to pay for it.
Reality check chief! If your ISP is locking down your account, you are most likely one of the abusers of a good thing. Unlimited? Yes, they overuse the term and improperly apply it in the most common sense. However, unlimited, when originally applied to internet connections was in reference to connection TIME and not bandwidth.
The unlimited ISP's of the day allowed you to connect as often and as long as you wanted. The bandwidth was not a concern, hell how much could you possibly pull down at 21,600bps.
I would not call the hogs, thiefs. Abusers. Hogs. Absolutely! It's what you are. No, they won't go bankrupt, they will just throttle everyone to make up for the abusers!
The anger, when this occurs, has to be turned not towards the ISP's, but towards the abusers. We will all suffer in the end for a small percentage of people that behave far outside the norm.
Final point. Exactly how much of this crap that you download do you actually keep? Lets assume you use 1/4 of your bandwidth or 130 gig a month. Do you honestly burn 150 CD's a month? Or do you just download for the sake of downloading becuase it is your right?
Let me guess you shitcan most of it! But hey, it's your right. Afterall, you paid for unlimited and damn it, your gonna use it!
Get a life!
First, I have to say that your "Key Examples" as to how Linux could be improved are quite possibly the least important items I have ever seen. Let's critique them anyway. "For example, the boot time. Mere seconds. Something on the order of 10 seconds on a P4 1.8 G with 256 Megs of RAM. And this is a boot to GUI situation..." First, XP shows the GUI really fast, but the OS stills grinds on the HD for another 60 seconds, so, the appearance of the GUI is in no means an indication that the OS is up and ready. It ain't! Next and most important. Assuming that XP truly finished it's boot process in 10 seconds compared to Linux at 60 seconds. Ok, you save 50 seconds over my boot time. Question, How many times per year do you boot your system? I average about 4 x a year. Assuming you do the same, you have 3 minutes and 20 seconds more productive time than me. OMG, you workaholic!!!! What really makes me curious is that if XP is the pillar of stability that everyone claims, how come so many of it's users seem to be so impressed with it's boot time? How come they are getting so much experience booting? One woman I converted from Win to Lin forgot how to shutdown Linux because she had not rebooted in 4 months and needed to move her computer,(she runs iceWM and XDM, no fancy login manager). Needless to say, she kinda likes that the thing she forgot was how to reboot. She still remember how to reboot windows even though she does not run it anymore. I guess repetition makes for lasting memories. Boot time is pretty irrelevant! "Another thing... "cool factor" of the XP login manager." I have to give this a 9 out of 10 on the "Who gives a shit-o-meter". Oh Yeah, the "COOL" login manager is a killer app. Lets talk about the 200(exageration) window manager(s), desktop(s), theme(s) that you can have/use in linux. You want mouth dropping stares, show a Win user the workspace customization available to them in *nix/X. WOW, you have a "COOL" login manager and a candy-ass desktop. Lastly, and I am not even bothering with a quote, Sounds and Games during a load/reload of the OS. Once again, you have hit on a topic that most linux users won't encounter very often and therefore it becomes a pretty useless improvement. However, there are already distro's that provide such things. Lycoris, being one of them, so it's a moot point. I guess, in the end, I have a lot of trouble understanding your areas in need of improvement. They all seemed to be based on booting, rebooting, loading, reloading the OS and also constant exposure to the login manager. You say you like and use linux at home. Why do you have so much time spent with all those tasks? Maybe you should try "Using" the computer instead of rebooting all the time. 9:04am up 47 days, 4:10, 3 users, load average: 4.46, 5.80, 5.23 71 processes: 63 sleeping, 8 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped CPU states: 0.9% user, 20.7% system, 78.2% nice, 0.0% idle Mem: 260316K av, 254820K used, 5496K free, 0K shrd, 53692K buff Swap: 257032K av, 328K used, 256704K free 38044K cached I guess we just use our systems differently! Bill
What kind of care does your mechanic drive? Does he drive a 5000 HP Funny car or a 3 yr old chevy with rust on the quarters? Does that make him a good or bad mechanic? What kind of stupid method of measuring a persons skills is that?
Considering how you have defined all of your needs for processing power, you "really" validated your point on how "Computer Professionals" should use Multi-GHz machines.
Let's see, you need speed for Divx, MP3, altering your porn in photoshop and running FP games. Yep, you are a computer professional allright. Unless you have the "need" for raw cpu power, it's just a penis extension. Get a life!
I totally agree. I have been using Mandrake 7.x stuff for about 2 years. Recently, ( 1:30am up 6 days, 22:24, 2 users ), I DL'd 8.2. Backed up the important stuff and wiped the disk. Install took 10 minutes. All hardware detected and working properly, cable modem, dhcp, NAT, for two win 98 boxes, ftp & telnet (for lan), etc.., worked on post install reboot. Spent 1/2 the day tweaking for personal choice stuff like iceWM and apps I like. Other than my personal preference stuff, I had a fully patched, running and decently configured system in under 20 minutes.
My wifes' system is WIN98SE, she is the master of the reinstall, it still takes her 6 hours just to get the bare OS installed and configured. Something about rebooting 25 times in 6 hours is just a bit time consuming.
End result, the current revs of the bigger distros are pretty damn slick and the installs are FAR better than anything I ever experienced. The developement rate of linux is quite astounding.
I can only imagine what Mandrake 9 or higher will be like. The GUI config stuff is getting to the point that you only use CLI if you want to.
Hats off to the OSS world. I am impressed.
Bill