The first time this was news, the original article did fit the general idea of interest. Since it's become repetitive and hence waste of everyone's time (rather than space).
Then again, even repetitive "good news" like this probably makes the day of many a MS-basher...
>For GPL'd code, 'leasing' would have no meaning, since as soon as you distribute the code to someone they have the usual rights under the GPL to modify/redistribute/etc.
You don't distribute anything. Say a telco leases embedded anti-virus gateways built on Linux and Clam. The code is modified but the customers are not being sold or given the software. They pay for ADSL (or whatever) service and they get their gateways for the duration of the contract. After they return them to the telco.
It's Nikola Tesla (http://nippur.irb.hr/eng/scientist/tesla.html). Couple of nice documentaries on Tesla and HAARP can be found online.
Funny enough, even the site above (supposedly an authoritative source on Croatian scientists) misspells his surname as Telsa. For a moment I thought I was on Wikipedia...
That's simply not true - if they're using GPL-based software internally, they are not obliged to release the modifications. And "anything developed using GPL libraries" is probably a wrong term anyway.
Of course they did - Google's own Answers are pathetic. A bunch of cheap losers looking for expert advice. After more than a year they've only got 500 exeperts. http://answers.google.com/answers/
You can telnet to its management port ( # telnet pda 8443) and you will see "smartphone" or "pda" in the prompt. Greet it with HELO: HELO "ip address" The word you're looking for is going to be the first word that appears after EHLO such as: 200 EHLO "device" "manufacturer" "version" "language" "features"
>any users perceive a lack of strong Linux standards, and that is creating a barrier to their adoption.
To me this reads: users, ISVs and hardware OEMs are sick of having to buy or deal with Red Hat for every Oracle on Linux they sell.
In other words, people don't want one or two or three enterprise distros - they want one server standard so that they can choose among all Linux distros.
Now, if Debian (someone mentioned them being excluded) doesn't like something about it - that's too fscking bad... The community can't sort these things out as they have almost no say in the enterprise domain.
>"The key conundrum is that the LSB is a complex specification, and we want to avoid duplicating the certification efforts the Linux vendors are already doing."
Oracle on any Linux! Not so soon, but ultimately.
> Zemlin said he is not asking users to require LSB compliance for their applications as yet. "Today, it is only being specified at the distribution level," he said.
Read: We can't deal with everyone and everything right now, please ask your distribution to LSB certify first, then when LSB 4.0 is out we'll tighten the screw and put pressure on application vendors to certify as well. By LSB 5.0 you'll be able to move your data and apps between distros in seconds....
Nasty scenarios:
1. Everyone gets certified Imagine how many engineer months it will take to RH to get compliant. Then imagine CentOS getting the same certification without any effort (as they build from the Red Hat Enterprise Linux sources). As the cert will probably be free, then imagine which of the two distros will the average company use - the $1,500/year RH EL or the free CentOS...
2. Sun gets certified Sun, of course, doesn't like RH's domination. I don't know if it's technically possible, but it's easy to imagine Solaris for x86 being one of first OS'es to get the certification for LSB-server OS and then hang that in front of RH's nose (and their customers). What's even "worse" (depending on one's MS stance) is that real standardization is going to be great for Microsoft - they'll finally need to do only one compatibility and cross-platform effort for Linux-related shit.
Novell and Red Hat do have some apps that work on top of their distros, but the thing is those aren't really the best of the breed, so I think tough times are on the horizon. It did sound great a year ago - RH Enterprise Linux with value added thingies like Red Hat Network, RHCE, the apps, etc. - but both them and Novell will have to work harder just to defend what they've gained so far.
deb, rpm, ebuild, emerge - those aren't standards, they are just ways to pack or install software. Windows also has several installers.
The article says that indeed there will be two LSB's, the server and the desktop variety, and people will be able to do fine selection of sub-varieties. For example, if you build a Linux distro for notebooks you might want to follow the LSB-desktop standards with an additional compliance with some sub-standard guidelines or specs for notebooks, power saving, touch-screens, etc.
How is that informative? If anything, that is stupid. FUD the Red Hat way. Woo - I'm scared, my mouse hand is trembling as I'm clicking on that download link...
First, 99.9% percent of those who try will never see thieir libc contents (or, can't understand them). Second, it's not that Drepper is some legal expert. Furthermore he has vested interest - the fewer folks look at Solaris the better for him and Red Hat stock price.
Those who can think with their own head should read the FAQ and licensing terms themselves rather than listen legal advice of a coder...
>I would like to know how a page with neither the word "Miserable" nor the word "Failure" turns up in an "I'm feeling lucky" search. I was always under the impression that this returned the first found page matching the criteria. Anyone know a bit more on how this works?
It works that way because of Google's technology that got hacked. Basically if enough folks link to your site and title the link Miserable Failure (imagine that the two capitalized words are formated as URL), then your site becomes associated with the term. Go to Google and do some search on "Miserable failure" and yuo'll find a detailed explanation.
Ok kids let's not buy the proprietary Windows XP - let's instead spend our money on a Red Hat Workstation!
What? Debian? No, no, no - you got that wrong!
To learn about Linux you should only use Red Hat Linux - the most popular Linux distribution on the planet! And if you study hard one day you may get lucky and get a RHCE certificate - the most coveted international certification!
> "Already, Brazil spends more in licensing fees on proprietary software than it spends on hunger,"
Wait - does the Brazil government spends that much? Or it's Brazil as a country (their enterprises, organizations, citizens, the government, etc.)? In case it's the latter - well yeah why would enterprises spend anything on hunger (they already get taxed enough and it's not their job anyway). And private spending (citizens and enterprises) shouldn't be that bozo's concern anyway. If it's the former - let's not forget that: a) Spending on hunger has nothing to do with spending on software. Imagine this: "Already, Brazil spends more on OSS than on hunger". Or, "Brazil spends more on biotechnology than on hunger". So what? b) A handsome 30% to 50% of whatever they spend ends up in hands of Brazillian VARs and others in the value chain. If they spent all the money on OSS (which is impossible), they would have saved just a fraction of it.
And, as others observed, it's not like they pay for all the software anyway - probably just a fraction of commercial software is paid for and the rest is actually helping them increase productivity for free. All in all, that article full of shit.
It is unfortunate that even shittiest and most superficial articles rarely get the trashing they deserve.
>Despite all the (mostly incompatible) flash memory/card formats out there already
Yet another of in a long series of illiterate articles. Not everyone was born to be a writer, but illiterate individuals should observe utmost care when submitting articles.
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/illite ra te
>Lately, many software engineers are losing productivity when compared to, for example, (dare I say it) India.
They're not losing anything - it's just the fact that they make 10 times more than engineers in underdeveloped countries. In order to keep business they'd have to be 10 times as productive. As they're probably only twice as productive, well...
Another way to look at it - as soon as China and India catch up in engineer pay with the U.S., the U.S. will be relatively more competitive.
>the growing majority of the people that don't even need to be happy with something, as long as they're used to 'good enough'.
Of course, 90% of things in my life are "good enough" - the reason is that I want to focus on remaining 10% that I really care about. For you that may be Linux, but for countless others software is just a vehicle to get from point A to point B.
85% of people who do use computers just want to browse the web, use email, perhaps do some Quicken and create couple of ugly formatted B-day invitations, okay?
Slashdot Mirror
> On my Macintosh PowerBook 3400c
Didn't know that bastardized versions also count in!
The first time this was news, the original article did fit the general idea of interest. Since it's become repetitive and hence waste of everyone's time (rather than space).
Then again, even repetitive "good news" like this probably makes the day of many a MS-basher...
And what exactly is newsworthy in this article?
Don't the events described take place almost every day?
>Microsoft needs to be banned from preinstalling.
Yeah, right. And Windows users should wear a distinguishing mark on their foreheads.
Are you insane?
Even Bill Gates hasn't said that Linux should be banned.
>For GPL'd code, 'leasing' would have no meaning, since as soon as you distribute the code to someone they have the usual rights under the GPL to modify/redistribute/etc.
You don't distribute anything.
Say a telco leases embedded anti-virus gateways built on Linux and Clam. The code is modified but the customers are not being sold or given the software. They pay for ADSL (or whatever) service and they get their gateways for the duration of the contract. After they return them to the telco.
There's nothing to believe in as the code hasn't been re-distributed, it's noone's business but the user/company's.
For example you make some kernel patches at home - why would anyone care?
>Nicholai Tesla's experiments
Couple of nice documentaries on Tesla and HAARP can be found online.
It's Nikola Tesla (http://nippur.irb.hr/eng/scientist/tesla.html).
Funny enough, even the site above (supposedly an authoritative source on Croatian scientists) misspells his surname as Telsa. For a moment I thought I was on Wikipedia...
That's simply not true - if they're using GPL-based software internally, they are not obliged to release the modifications.
And "anything developed using GPL libraries" is probably a wrong term anyway.
>but using GPL base code as part of a project sold to a customer is where the problems start.
:-)
That's why you can _lease_ software/servers/service to the customer (so they don't really buy it from you).
Then you don't have to give them the source code even if they ask
The same thing goes for ASP/ISPs.
>Google has jumped aboard GuruNet's Answers.com
Of course they did - Google's own Answers are pathetic.
A bunch of cheap losers looking for expert advice. After more than a year they've only got 500 exeperts.
http://answers.google.com/answers/
It's easy to tell if it has the IP address.
You can telnet to its management port (
# telnet pda 8443) and you will see "smartphone" or "pda" in the prompt.
Greet it with HELO:
HELO "ip address"
The word you're looking for is going to be the first word that appears after EHLO such as:
200 EHLO "device" "manufacturer" "version" "language" "features"
That doesn't mattter.
They used to say that about Terminator (I) but people liked him anyway.
>any users perceive a lack of strong Linux standards, and that is creating a barrier to their adoption.
To me this reads: users, ISVs and hardware OEMs are sick of having to buy or deal with Red Hat for every Oracle on Linux they sell.
In other words, people don't want one or two or three enterprise distros - they want one server standard so that they can choose among all Linux distros.
Now, if Debian (someone mentioned them being excluded) doesn't like something about it - that's too fscking bad... The community can't sort these things out as they have almost no say in the enterprise domain.
>"The key conundrum is that the LSB is a complex specification, and we want to avoid duplicating the certification efforts the Linux vendors are already doing."
Oracle on any Linux! Not so soon, but ultimately.
> Zemlin said he is not asking users to require LSB compliance for their applications as yet. "Today, it is only being specified at the distribution level," he said.
Read: We can't deal with everyone and everything right now, please ask your distribution to LSB certify first, then when LSB 4.0 is out we'll tighten the screw and put pressure on application vendors to certify as well.
By LSB 5.0 you'll be able to move your data and apps between distros in seconds....
Nasty scenarios:
1. Everyone gets certified
Imagine how many engineer months it will take to RH to get compliant. Then imagine CentOS getting the same certification without any effort (as they build from the Red Hat Enterprise Linux sources).
As the cert will probably be free, then imagine which of the two distros will the average company use - the $1,500/year RH EL or the free CentOS...
2. Sun gets certified
Sun, of course, doesn't like RH's domination. I don't know if it's technically possible, but it's easy to imagine Solaris for x86 being one of first OS'es to get the certification for LSB-server OS and then hang that in front of RH's nose (and their customers). What's even "worse" (depending on one's MS stance) is that real standardization is going to be great for Microsoft - they'll finally need to do only one compatibility and cross-platform effort for Linux-related shit.
Novell and Red Hat do have some apps that work on top of their distros, but the thing is those aren't really the best of the breed, so I think tough times are on the horizon. It did sound great a year ago - RH Enterprise Linux with value added thingies like Red Hat Network, RHCE, the apps, etc. - but both them and Novell will have to work harder just to defend what they've gained so far.
deb, rpm, ebuild, emerge - those aren't standards, they are just ways to pack or install software. Windows also has several installers.
The article says that indeed there will be two LSB's, the server and the desktop variety, and people will be able to do fine selection of sub-varieties. For example, if you build a Linux distro for notebooks you might want to follow the LSB-desktop standards with an additional compliance with some sub-standard guidelines or specs for notebooks, power saving, touch-screens, etc.
Yeah, now it's called editorial freedom. When it's elsewhere then it's (random insult of the day).
/. bastards... It was time for them to take taste of their own medicine.
The grandparent post is truly hilariuos and a great discovery!
Poor
This is like Red Hat preaching freedom and at the same time boasting to the analysts about the lock-up effect of their Enterprise Linux...
Hah, hah, that's really outstanding!
>Future?
Yes, future (as in "in coming weeks"; when they launch el cheapo PowerPC servers for Linux).
Which part of that post is unclear?
> Don't fall for the Solaris trap!
How is that informative? If anything, that is stupid. FUD the Red Hat way. Woo - I'm scared, my mouse hand is trembling as I'm clicking on that download link...
First, 99.9% percent of those who try will never see thieir libc contents (or, can't understand them).
Second, it's not that Drepper is some legal expert. Furthermore he has vested interest - the fewer folks look at Solaris the better for him and Red Hat stock price.
Those who can think with their own head should read the FAQ and licensing terms themselves rather than listen legal advice of a coder...
www.sun.com/software/communitysource/faq.xml
>I would like to know how a page with neither the word "Miserable" nor the word "Failure" turns up in an "I'm feeling lucky" search. I was always under the impression that this returned the first found page matching the criteria. Anyone know a bit more on how this works?
It works that way because of Google's technology that got hacked. Basically if enough folks link to your site and title the link Miserable Failure (imagine that the two capitalized words are formated as URL), then your site becomes associated with the term.
Go to Google and do some search on "Miserable failure" and yuo'll find a detailed explanation.
Ok kids let's not buy the proprietary Windows XP - let's instead spend our money on a Red Hat Workstation!
What? Debian? No, no, no - you got that wrong!
To learn about Linux you should only use Red Hat Linux - the most popular Linux distribution on the planet! And if you study hard one day you may get lucky and get a RHCE certificate - the most coveted international certification!
> "Already, Brazil spends more in licensing fees on proprietary software than it spends on hunger,"
Wait - does the Brazil government spends that much?
Or it's Brazil as a country (their enterprises, organizations, citizens, the government, etc.)?
In case it's the latter - well yeah why would enterprises spend anything on hunger (they already get taxed enough and it's not their job anyway).
And private spending (citizens and enterprises) shouldn't be that bozo's concern anyway.
If it's the former - let's not forget that:
a) Spending on hunger has nothing to do with spending on software.
Imagine this: "Already, Brazil spends more on OSS than on hunger". Or, "Brazil spends more on biotechnology than on hunger".
So what?
b) A handsome 30% to 50% of whatever they spend ends up in hands of Brazillian VARs and others in the value chain.
If they spent all the money on OSS (which is impossible), they would have saved just a fraction of it.
And, as others observed, it's not like they pay for all the software anyway - probably just a fraction of commercial software is paid for and the rest is actually helping them increase productivity for free.
All in all, that article full of shit.
It is unfortunate that even shittiest and most superficial articles rarely get the trashing they deserve.
>and the bottled water companies exist only because they convince people that their product is better, when in many cases it is objectively not.
Tap: Debian, Gentoo, CentOS, etc.
Bottled: Red Hat, SuSE, etc.
>Despite all the (mostly incompatible) flash memory/card formats out there already
e ra te
Yet another of in a long series of illiterate articles. Not everyone was born to be a writer, but illiterate individuals should observe utmost care when submitting articles.
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/illit
>Lately, many software engineers are losing productivity when compared to, for example, (dare I say it) India.
They're not losing anything - it's just the fact that they make 10 times more than engineers in underdeveloped countries. In order to keep business they'd have to be 10 times as productive. As they're probably only twice as productive, well...
Another way to look at it - as soon as China and India catch up in engineer pay with the U.S., the U.S. will be relatively more competitive.
>the growing majority of the people that don't even need to be happy with something, as long as they're used to 'good enough'.
Of course, 90% of things in my life are "good enough" - the reason is that I want to focus on remaining 10% that I really care about. For you that may be Linux, but for countless others software is just a vehicle to get from point A to point B.
85% of people who do use computers just want to browse the web, use email, perhaps do some Quicken and create couple of ugly formatted B-day invitations, okay?
> Horny Hedgehog..
And I thought it was Hairy Hedgehog.
Funny - I guess they overhead inmates saying things like "Gee, 2005? The past 5 years have passed so quicly. I LOVE those games!"