It's like if someone says I've been using my cell phone for organizer and sending messages and email and overall I've been very pleased.
Companies have forms, applications, scheduling, shared files, shared contact lists and a whole bunch of things built on top of Exchange Server and a big part of it simply can't be migrated. It's completely different from an individual user's experience and satisfaction with 3rd party MUA.
>What gets people into trouble with credit cards is that they're being financially manipulated.
Financially manipulated? They can kiss my ass - I don't even HAVE a credit card. Let's say it like it is - people are stupid, not manipulated.
>Give me one good reason why the bean-counters crunching numbers for banks and credit agencies WOULDN'T take advantage of their position to hamstring a few hundred million people.
Of course there's no reason whey they would not - I would too if I could and it was legal to do so. It doesn't mean that little morons must play along.
> The National Debt is up to what, about $6 trillion?
It's because people like to live beyond their means - they like to live in huge houses, they like to have 3 big cars instead of one normal (European or Asian) car, etc. Why would I need to sympathize with them? In other places (Asia, Europe) - you don't have money, you don't spend money - you work harder and you save. It's time for the Americans to wake up, it's the new and competitive 21st century!
Don't know what's worse - stupidi comments like yours, or people who mod them insightful.
>Is LongHorn delayed bcos MS couldn't implement this simple stuff? I can't think of a word to describe this feeling of anger, fury and loathing combined. Any guesses?
My (correct) guess is that you're a clueless troll. WinFS is not a filesystem but a layer on top of it. Your example with the find command (which searches for filenames) is laughable. Even if you had the brains to think up a better example (|| grep $string or such) it would still have been a total nonsense.
>Patent is obviously a bad idea because we're winding up with situations like this stupid Eolas thing.
I wouldn't say that patents are bad because of few high profile cases - after all, this Eolas case is a good example of how "prior art" works just fine in invalidating baseless claims of patent violation! This article by Lawrence Rosen, technology attorney and author of "Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law" explains why patents are not a major concern to the OSS community (not to mention the rest of population as Mr. Patents-R-Censorship laments): http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl? sid=04/07/2 2/201217&tid=147&tid=110&tid=132
Fraunhoffer's(?) claims are just that - claims. They're a long way from proving that in court. More likely they'll end up like Eolas.
(One follow up to my earlier commend said how the fact that patents are awarded to those to apply first is unfair to those developers who may actually have been the first to come up with the idea; I agree with that, as I said the way they are given could be improved. Besides, such patents would be vulnerable to "prior art" argument. Another one challenged my statement that serious patents require significant investment in R I am not familiar with software patents in detail, but simple calculation can give a rough idea about the investment - divide IBM's annual R&D budget by number of patents and you'll get the "cost" of R&D per patent. Of course this far from the exact cost or even value of those patents, but negating this altogether would mean R&D departments in major software vendors require billions of dollars to invent "single click"-type of patents. I don't think so. Or even better - would OSS be where it is now if it were not for hundreds of millions invested in Red Hat, SuSe and other vendors? )
>all can stay 100% compatible with SuSE despite SuSE setting the de facto Standard. If SuSE comes up with Licensing 6.0 and tries to coerce their users into it, the users have much less of a barrier to switching away to other Linux distros because of this compatibility! Thus SuSE's power is checked despite monopoly position.
Read "Red Hat's Proprietary Full Disclosure" at http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/
And I quote: "example of how Red Hat's managed to dupe the linux community with their proprietary distro, and erect barriers to switching (according to Red Hat's calculation, the cost of switching is $4M per distro for an ISV - and the guy is bragging about it). "
To really understand how "useful" these GPL disclosures are, try patching Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 kernel (2.4.21-9.EL) using the Mosix patch for the generic 2.4.21... You'll get a shitload of rejections that are very very hard to fix (that's why Mosix doesn't support RH EL 3.0).
Or dissect Red Hat's krenel and look at _hundreds_ of patches they do to the kernel. The fact that source for the patches is available is of practically useless.
And you are a moron. Software patents, like other patents, provide the creator with limited-time exclusivity on the invention in exchange for **making the information public**. Whether patentability of software or process inventions should be better regulated, that's another question.
>You shouldn't be stopped from making something because someone else thought of it first.
Nobody is stopped - you can do it while paying patent royalty. And one can invent a better approach, too.
>Software should be sold on quality not on who gets the patent.
Yeah, right. And the money needed for really serious R&D would come from anonymous "contributors" like you?
Hard Disks - you don't need HDD for video conferencing and such.
Buses - if you have 10 devices (3 TVs, 2 PCs, 2 video phones, 4 security cameras, 2 PlayStation 5) in your home, it shouldn't be too hard to use up that bandwidth. Any particular device alone wouldn't need to be able to use up the bandwidth, but all together, they could.
Just imagine how much bandwidth could be consumed by four kids playing virtual-reality games on the Internet...
I'd say the idea is that they must create a customer base and show investors customer loyalty, growth, etc. Right now their "customers" (short of Gmail) are only advertisers, which is dwarfed by Yahoo's and Hotmail's >100m registered users.
If 3rd party tools can connect to Gmail any way they please, then Yahoo and whoever could provide that feature. If only Google can do that - then sorry, pal, please install Google software that does that.
If Hotmail notifier works with their 100+m mail accounts why couldn't anyone's? Ping is not exactly a space technology.
Well my conclusion is that Michael always posts articles that are not only pathetic trolling attempts but are also braindead and silly since their arguments almost never hold water.
There's nothing wrong with advocacy, but when it's outright stupid, then it's wrong.
But I guess they do their purpose - they handsomely cater to anti-Microsoft folks and outrage all the others:-)
While I'm already here: > If most of the updates will be available for current versions of Windows, what is the incentive to upgrade?
What is the incentive to upgrade anyway? What is the incentive to buy a PC? What is the incentive to install Linux? Who gives a shit, people just want to get online to read news and check email.
If they charged for the update, he'd complain. Now that's it's free, he's fuding. If they did it both ways (free online upgrade or commercial CD-ROM update), he'd complain about closed source or lock-in effect. Fucking moron.
I'm with you on that. And these same things drive me nuts every day... Oh, sometimes I'd like to enter Slashdot armed to teeth and... too bad it's just a Website - all I can do is change the URL:-(
Totally. I see it like this: o Large enterprises - need to buy support no matter what o Medium - depends; if they can keep skilled people, they can get away with semi-DIY o Small - largely DIY
We use replication, failover and such to ensure short downtime. Sometimes a node goes down and need fixing - in case of failover you have short downtime but you can't screw up anything while fixing the failed node (mount shared storage, screw up DB while failing back, etc.). Then again it comes down to what's the purpose - do it cheaply, do it right, do it quickly, etc.
30 minutes? No offense, but for many enterprises that's already a disaster.
Google - I know, I do the same, but it's about responsibility - the grandparent was right.
Say something goes wrong, you spend an hour on Google (no luck) and have no support contract with the vendor - soon after that you'll start getting calls from your boss, and your boss will start getting calls from his boss. In the end, the big boss will say "screw everything, here's the budget and buy that goddamn support contract, I don't want any excuses any more".
Many of my customers can't stand more than 5 minutes of downtime (during working hours).
>its kind of hypocritical to proclaim opensource when misss treating the Licneses of the code tha tyou use..
its kind of hypocritical to proclaim people are hypocritical whenever they try to make a living.
wtf are companies supposed to do? give away everything under GPL and die? give me a break.
and it is also hypocritical to support GPLization of everything while you work for an entity that either lives off the government budget or makes money selling [whatever product or service].
on a broader note, i dislike Sun and I also (to some extent) compete with their products/services, but i respect them because i know some things they do are cool. many people here (not necessarily author of the parent post) have the lame attitude of being against everything yet bringing nothing or little to the table themselves. have you ever heard Red Hat CEO complaining like that about Sun? Or Bill Gates? of course not yeah, maybe they'll say some generic stuff for the press - customers, value, choice, blah blah blah - but they're essentially interested in going back to whatever they do and doing it better - they are too busy to bitch endlessly about something like some folks on this site.
>essentially ruining any chances of you giving away the software for free and surviving off support calls.
Hah, let me tell you, no matter how good your software or documentation is, users will ALWAYS find ways to fuck it up. It has nothing to do with the software - while shitty app will get more support requests, the perfect app will still get many more than a few.
Sometimes it's just a matter of user misreading (correct) documentation and then bothering you to "fix" the application:-). Hence "luser".
So it's both - always improving the quality to cut down on bullshit calls (the 80:20 rule), and also adding features...
Before, Taiwan (or Japan) would do just fine by making the same thing cheaper, now that doesn't quite cut it any more.
Necessity... I'd say that overall, the ability to innovate is inversely proportional to well-being of individuals.
Money-hungry folks from India and China should out-innovate equally smart people from other countries, just because they're trying harder.
In some ways, I think social injustice is perhaps a motivating factor, too - unless you come up with something new, it's hard to make it to the top by hard work alone.
>I would have no problem with someone making use of my idle resources
Think of the battery resource. Although I'm sure limits could be set, I'd still be careful with granting resources to others. Like, you've got 11% battery left and by the time you actually get online to check your email, your notebook goes into suspend. Oops!
I think they determine your position based on the base station thru which you connect to the telco's network. I wonder if they can use signal strength (measured from three closest base stations) to further pinpoint your exact location.
On the subject of average dumbness raised in other posts - George Carlin postulated that 50% of people are, and I quote, "fucking stupid" (since they are stupider than the average person).
I didn't specifically refer to OSS users (still, my original post was modded flaimbait, which is testimonial to stupidity of moderators who did that) - what is annoying is that it's usually people who've never done anything that compain about these things. Or folks who can't compile kernel from source complaining how they like the freedom to tinker with source code.
Several posts mentioned the following: a) the license is very standard b) many other RFC and standards are based on patented technologies
I don't know if specs of Linux implementation can be freely modified and still maintain compatibility with the standard.
And of course anyone is free to offer their own proposal and their own code, GPL or not, and create a new/different standard. Or even just use it informally, without making it standard.
I don't understand why this is a big deal - people use Ximian, Adobe and Java - all these are probably licensed similarly to this MS's thing and they haven't ever had to talk to a lawyer or bean counter. Specifically Ximian, if I remember well, now has certain clauses similar to this Microsoft's license - whatever people change in Ximian, Novell can patent it and choose to keep it open or closed. (Of course, some zealots went nuts but most people don't give a shit, which is only natural).
Slashdot Mirror
It's like if someone says I've been using my cell phone for organizer and sending messages and email and overall I've been very pleased.
Companies have forms, applications, scheduling, shared files, shared contact lists and a whole bunch of things built on top of Exchange Server and a big part of it simply can't be migrated. It's completely different from an individual user's experience and satisfaction with 3rd party MUA.
>What gets people into trouble with credit cards is that they're being financially manipulated.
Financially manipulated? They can kiss my ass - I don't even HAVE a credit card.
Let's say it like it is - people are stupid, not manipulated.
>Give me one good reason why the bean-counters crunching numbers for banks and credit agencies WOULDN'T take advantage of their position to hamstring a few hundred million people.
Of course there's no reason whey they would not - I would too if I could and it was legal to do so.
It doesn't mean that little morons must play along.
> The National Debt is up to what, about $6 trillion?
It's because people like to live beyond their means - they like to live in huge houses, they like to have 3 big cars instead of one normal (European or Asian) car, etc.
Why would I need to sympathize with them?
In other places (Asia, Europe) - you don't have money, you don't spend money - you work harder and you save. It's time for the Americans to wake up, it's the new and competitive 21st century!
It's the careless parents and the stupid kids.
Don't know what's worse - stupidi comments like yours, or people who mod them insightful.
.
>Is LongHorn delayed bcos MS couldn't implement this simple stuff? I can't think of a word to describe this feeling of anger, fury and loathing combined. Any guesses?
My (correct) guess is that you're a clueless troll. WinFS is not a filesystem but a layer on top of it
Your example with the find command (which searches for filenames) is laughable. Even if you had the brains to think up a better example (|| grep $string or such) it would still have been a total nonsense.
JDS _is_ a properly setup Linux client.
If you want to make it easy for non-gurus to manage Linux, you need some management tools with GUI - and in the end, that is what JDS is.
>Patent is obviously a bad idea because we're winding up with situations like this stupid Eolas thing.
? sid=04/07/2 2/201217&tid=147&tid=110&tid=132
I wouldn't say that patents are bad because of few high profile cases - after all, this Eolas case is a good example of how "prior art" works just fine in invalidating baseless claims of patent violation!
This article by Lawrence Rosen, technology attorney and author of "Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law" explains why patents are not a major concern to the OSS community (not to mention the rest of population as Mr. Patents-R-Censorship laments):
http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl
Fraunhoffer's(?) claims are just that - claims. They're a long way from proving that in court. More likely they'll end up like Eolas.
(One follow up to my earlier commend said how the fact that patents are awarded to those to apply first is unfair to those developers who may actually have been the first to come up with the idea; I agree with that, as I said the way they are given could be improved. Besides, such patents would be vulnerable to "prior art" argument.
Another one challenged my statement that serious patents require significant investment in R I am not familiar with software patents in detail, but simple calculation can give a rough idea about the investment - divide IBM's annual R&D budget by number of patents and you'll get the "cost" of R&D per patent. Of course this far from the exact cost or even value of those patents, but negating this altogether would mean R&D departments in major software vendors require billions of dollars to invent "single click"-type of patents. I don't think so. Or even better - would OSS be where it is now if it were not for hundreds of millions invested in Red Hat, SuSe and other vendors? )
>all can stay 100% compatible with SuSE despite SuSE setting the de facto Standard. If SuSE comes up with Licensing 6.0 and tries to coerce their users into it, the users have much less of a barrier to switching away to other Linux distros because of this compatibility! Thus SuSE's power is checked despite monopoly position.
Read "Red Hat's Proprietary Full Disclosure" at http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/
And I quote: "example of how Red Hat's managed to dupe the linux community with their proprietary distro, and erect barriers to switching (according to Red Hat's calculation, the cost of switching is $4M per distro for an ISV - and the guy is bragging about it). "
To really understand how "useful" these GPL disclosures are, try patching Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 kernel (2.4.21-9.EL) using the Mosix patch for the generic 2.4.21... You'll get a shitload of rejections that are very very hard to fix (that's why Mosix doesn't support RH EL 3.0).
Or dissect Red Hat's krenel and look at _hundreds_ of patches they do to the kernel.
The fact that source for the patches is available is of practically useless.
What a nonsense.
> Software patents are censorship.
And you are a moron.
Software patents, like other patents, provide the creator with limited-time exclusivity on the invention in exchange for **making the information public**.
Whether patentability of software or process inventions should be better regulated, that's another question.
>You shouldn't be stopped from making something because someone else thought of it first.
Nobody is stopped - you can do it while paying patent royalty.
And one can invent a better approach, too.
>Software should be sold on quality not on who gets the patent.
Yeah, right. And the money needed for really serious R&D would come from anonymous "contributors" like you?
>>Hard Disks - you don't need HDD for video conferencing and such.
>You do if you're recording the conference for archival purposes (as many people do with emails).
You don't if you're recording it on NFS or CIFS drive at your ISP, Google or somewhere..
Hard Disks - you don't need HDD for video conferencing and such.
Buses - if you have 10 devices (3 TVs, 2 PCs, 2 video phones, 4 security cameras, 2 PlayStation 5) in your home, it shouldn't be too hard to use up that bandwidth. Any particular device alone wouldn't need to be able to use up the bandwidth, but all together, they could.
Just imagine how much bandwidth could be consumed by four kids playing virtual-reality games on the Internet...
I noticed the guy has six freaking invitations!
I'd say the idea is that they must create a customer base and show investors customer loyalty, growth, etc.
Right now their "customers" (short of Gmail) are only advertisers, which is dwarfed by Yahoo's and Hotmail's >100m registered users.
If 3rd party tools can connect to Gmail any way they please, then Yahoo and whoever could provide that feature. If only Google can do that - then sorry, pal, please install Google software that does that.
If Hotmail notifier works with their 100+m mail accounts why couldn't anyone's? Ping is not exactly a space technology.
They've entered it already via Brin & Page.
Well my conclusion is that Michael always posts articles that are not only pathetic trolling attempts but are also braindead and silly since their arguments almost never hold water.
:-)
There's nothing wrong with advocacy, but when it's outright stupid, then it's wrong.
But I guess they do their purpose - they handsomely cater to anti-Microsoft folks and outrage all the others
While I'm already here:
> If most of the updates will be available for current versions of Windows, what is the incentive to upgrade?
What is the incentive to upgrade anyway? What is the incentive to buy a PC? What is the incentive to install Linux? Who gives a shit, people just want to get online to read news and check email.
If they charged for the update, he'd complain. Now that's it's free, he's fuding. If they did it both ways (free online upgrade or commercial CD-ROM update), he'd complain about closed source or lock-in effect. Fucking moron.
I'm with you on that. ... too bad it's just a Website - all I can do is change the URL :-(
And these same things drive me nuts every day...
Oh, sometimes I'd like to enter Slashdot armed to teeth and
> Well... depends on what you are doing...
Totally. I see it like this:
o Large enterprises - need to buy support no matter what
o Medium - depends; if they can keep skilled people, they can get away with semi-DIY
o Small - largely DIY
We use replication, failover and such to ensure short downtime. Sometimes a node goes down and need fixing - in case of failover you have short downtime but you can't screw up anything while fixing the failed node (mount shared storage, screw up DB while failing back, etc.). Then again it comes down to what's the purpose - do it cheaply, do it right, do it quickly, etc.
>I'm wondering why they're saying it's 'Google like'.
I'd say it means what it says - its GUI will _look_ like Google's.
It may not work as well, though.
> If I can't find the solution within 30 minutes
30 minutes? No offense, but for many enterprises that's already a disaster.
Google - I know, I do the same, but it's about responsibility - the grandparent was right.
Say something goes wrong, you spend an hour on Google (no luck) and have no support contract with the vendor - soon after that you'll start getting calls from your boss, and your boss will start getting calls from his boss.
In the end, the big boss will say "screw everything, here's the budget and buy that goddamn support contract, I don't want any excuses any more".
Many of my customers can't stand more than 5 minutes of downtime (during working hours).
>its kind of hypocritical to proclaim opensource when misss treating the Licneses of the code tha tyou use..
its kind of hypocritical to proclaim people are hypocritical whenever they try to make a living.
wtf are companies supposed to do? give away everything under GPL and die? give me a break.
and it is also hypocritical to support GPLization of everything while you work for an entity that either lives off the government budget or makes money selling [whatever product or service].
on a broader note, i dislike Sun and I also (to some extent) compete with their products/services, but i respect them because i know some things they do are cool.
many people here (not necessarily author of the parent post) have the lame attitude of being against everything yet bringing nothing or little to the table themselves.
have you ever heard Red Hat CEO complaining like that about Sun? Or Bill Gates? of course not
yeah, maybe they'll say some generic stuff for the press - customers, value, choice, blah blah blah - but they're essentially interested in going back to whatever they do and doing it better - they are too busy to bitch endlessly about something like some folks on this site.
>essentially ruining any chances of you giving away the software for free and surviving off support calls.
:-). Hence "luser".
Hah, let me tell you, no matter how good your software or documentation is, users will ALWAYS find ways to fuck it up.
It has nothing to do with the software - while shitty app will get more support requests, the perfect app will still get many more than a few.
Sometimes it's just a matter of user misreading (correct) documentation and then bothering you to "fix" the application
So it's both - always improving the quality to cut down on bullshit calls (the 80:20 rule), and also adding features...
Before, Taiwan (or Japan) would do just fine by making the same thing cheaper, now that doesn't quite cut it any more.
... I'd say that overall, the ability to innovate is inversely proportional to well-being of individuals.
Necessity
Money-hungry folks from India and China should out-innovate equally smart people from other countries, just because they're trying harder.
In some ways, I think social injustice is perhaps a motivating factor, too - unless you come up with something new, it's hard to make it to the top by hard work alone.
>I would have no problem with someone making use of my idle resources
Think of the battery resource.
Although I'm sure limits could be set, I'd still be careful with granting resources to others. Like, you've got 11% battery left and by the time you actually get online to check your email, your notebook goes into suspend. Oops!
>i guess Solomon was a nerd too :)
>(work done under the sun...)
maybe he was just a Sun employee
I think they determine your position based on the base station thru which you connect to the telco's network.
I wonder if they can use signal strength (measured from three closest base stations) to further pinpoint your exact location.
Hey that's really funny!
On the subject of average dumbness raised in other posts - George Carlin postulated that 50% of people are, and I quote, "fucking stupid" (since they are stupider than the average person).
I didn't specifically refer to OSS users (still, my original post was modded flaimbait, which is testimonial to stupidity of moderators who did that) - what is annoying is that it's usually people who've never done anything that compain about these things.
Or folks who can't compile kernel from source complaining how they like the freedom to tinker with source code.
Several posts mentioned the following:
a) the license is very standard
b) many other RFC and standards are based on patented technologies
I don't know if specs of Linux implementation can be freely modified and still maintain compatibility with the standard.
And of course anyone is free to offer their own proposal and their own code, GPL or not, and create a new/different standard. Or even just use it informally, without making it standard.
I don't understand why this is a big deal - people use Ximian, Adobe and Java - all these are probably licensed similarly to this MS's thing and they haven't ever had to talk to a lawyer or bean counter. Specifically Ximian, if I remember well, now has certain clauses similar to this Microsoft's license - whatever people change in Ximian, Novell can patent it and choose to keep it open or closed. (Of course, some zealots went nuts but most people don't give a shit, which is only natural).