> I have installed Solaris x86 8/07 on DL385 systems; what exactly was your problem? HP provides the SmartArray (cciss) to use during the installation (and Broadcom NetXtreme (BNX) drivers to install afterwards).
This is exactly my problem. You need to load the drivers at the time of installation where as in Linux it was supported from day one for DL-385. This is for servers and for Desktop/laptops its even worse.
> but a *guess* would be that for current, popular server systems sold by major vendors (Sun, HP, Dell, IBM), Solaris x86 support shouldn't be that bad.
But people don't deploy things on the servers first. They deploy it on laptops/desktops first and test/learn from it. So support for all type of hardware is of utmost important for widespread adoption.
> Solaris, for example, is being positioned as an alternative to Linux: it's "pick us or pick Linux". From an open source point of view, it would be better if Sun picked a license that allowed the best parts of Solaris and Linux to be combined, and for end users to decide what those best parts are.
This is a very important point. Regardless of any so called technical merit Solaris kernel has over Linux, its NOT going to catch up with Linux in adoption or momentum. At least not anytime in the near future. I am telling this as I have managed to get Solaris(intel version) installed on a machine after about half a dozen failed attempts. Mostly due to hardware incompatibility. The tried hardwares include even the very common ones like DL-385. Just to manage it from my laptop(Kubuntu) I installed OpenSSH on the solaris box. It took almost 30 minutes to get it installed where as in linux it would take less than 30 sec. Solaris is no where near to Linux in hardware compatibility , ease of installation, availability of applications..... But it DOES have some cool technologies like Dtrace and ZFS. So what best SUN can do is to integrate these technologies with Linux and try to get maximum hardware sale and service contract on Linux platform. The problem with SUN has been that they are late in everything. They do things after much resistance. That is what has happened with Java and now going to happen with Solaris. I really wonder why its so hard for the SUN execs to understand such simple things.
> The code still has to be open to allow this though.
This is actually the key point. Take the example of check posts. Not everyone gets thoroughly checked in the check posts. But the FEAR OF BEING CHECKED make people comply with the rule. At least to a great point. Same goes with open source code. The fear of being audited by others stop from inserting any hidden spyware/backdoor in the code.
> Obama wasn't even in the Senate to vote for or against the Iraq war. His diatribes about being "against the war from the beginning" are thus meaningless.
So you mean to say that any non-senate member who protested against Iraq war was "meaningless" ? Including all politicians, journalists, social activists and common man? Obama DID oppose it and that is what is important. This was a time when most of the non-senate members(Like senate members) were supporting the war.
> And why do you think that Obama will be any different?
First I didn't say that Obama will be different. What I said is Obama won because he projected himself as something different. And, his past actions do support this to a great extend. Again , Iraq is the best example. From day one he was against it while Hillary and most of the other leaders were supporting it. So there is reason to believe that he would be different.
> Generally you Democrats and Republicans I don't see enough difference between Republican and Democratic candidates. Party voters still make me sick
This is exactly why Hillary lost the game and Obama got it. People in US(and around the world , though irrelevant) were fed up of the status-co politics. They wanted something different and someone who can make a change. As citizens and consumers, people want products which are different. Especially when they realize that the product they have currently(Bush) sucks so bad. Hillary miserably failed to understand this pulse and stuck with same old crap. There is no perceivable difference between Hillary and Bush. The differences are really cosmetic. Iraq is just one example where there is a striking parallel between the policies of Bush/Mcain and Hillary.
> Not actually true. RHN has always been proprietary (until they announced a change to this, though I think they have yet to open source it)
RHN is not a product right?
> Once someone pays, they can redistribute as it's GPL. But few exercise that right
CentOS ?
> Btw, I talked with MySQL about this and it's not even remotely clear that they are making these add-ons proprietary in the way you envision.
They are NOT planning to open source the add-ons and I dont think they even permit the redistribution of the binary of the same(I could be wrong in the second part). How is it same as redhat ?
And they are NOT going by redhat way ; atleast as of now. Please see the following thread I had with their CEO in this discussion. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=525246&cid=23100380
> * On the support issue, I think there are customers of all types - both the type you describe and the one I described.
Yes indeed. Thats why I say you need to do deeper analysis and study
> * As for Red Hat's immunity to distro clones, I am not sure we know the result yet. It indeed seems that Red Hat is immune, but can we be certain after only a year or two?
They are immune and successful so far and would be in the near future IMHO. But in the long term future...? I dont think so . In fact I dont think any of the business model currently practiced (including pure proprietary ones) would be successful as everything in IT field is getting commoditised.
> * As for the stack, Sun can certainly create such a stack, as can other vendors. And will, I'd say. I see that as an orthogonal issue - i.e. stacks can be created and will be created nevertheless. Our business model decision doesn't (in my mind) affect stacks much.
But their current stack( Solaris/Linux/Java/Netbeans) is open source(at least likely to be so in near future). An open source(without tags) DB server would be a perfect fit to this than one with a proprietary add-ons. Also, as everything is getting commoditised and open sourced, I think companies with better service would excel over the competitors. IBM has sort of realized this I believe.
One final word, changing the license model often spoil your credibility a lot, as a company and as a product.
Thanx indeed for your patience. I do understand that you have put serious thoughts in to the issues I have raised ; but let me clarify on certain points.
>I believe that customers using operating systems will mostly want the latest updates and patches, so on-going support (or subscription) is vital to the the well-being of the installation. But with databases, customers typically want to avoid updates unless they absolutely need them. For this reason I believe that selling a support program (only) to database customers may not be as good a business as doing it to operating system customers.
Let me disagree with you on this. I do agree that customers/sys admins don't like to patch/update DB server on an ongoing basis as much as they do with OS. BUT, DB server is the most critical for any organization and they would like to run some hardware/software combination which is CERTIFIED. Because of this reason they are more likely to be paid customer for DB server/software. One e.g I have about 40-50 Linux servers all of which are CentOS except half a dozen RHEL servers which are DB servers(Actually MySQL). Because on DB we want some certified and officially supported software/hardware.
> An example: the MySQL brand and trademark is owned by us. We don't mind if end-customers say "I am running on MySQL" but we do mind if a vendor names a product "MySQL XYZ" without our permission. In the latter case there is a risk that end-customers would get confused by the naming. They may think the XYZ product comes from the MySQL company when in reality it doesn't. So we use our ownership of the trademark more to govern what vendors can do than what customers can do.
Absolutely ; but if you are bold/confident/capable , then you cannot be beaten by competitors. GPLing will not make you any more vulnerable. One example. Have you ever thought why Oracle Linux initiative has been such a disaster ? How has Redhat become immune to such competition ?
A couple of points more,
Can you point out a single "open source(tm)" company which has established a successful business and credibility with such a hybrid model like you in the long run? I can point out atleast one company which is successful with pure GPL code (redhat)
There are many companies like HP who sell support for Linux and make good money out of it. They infact charge much more than linux vendors. Still people go to them because of the complete stack (HP hardware/HP supported Linux). Why can't SUN come up with such a stack ?
> MySQL may simply be doing what Red Hat did before it
There is a fundamental difference between Redhat and MySQL . Every piece of code developed by Redhat is GPL(or similar FOSS license) . That is not the case with MySQL. They have code which are not FOSS. Comparing MySQL with Redhat is totally wrong. I would like to add that one company is bold and clear about its business model and has a vision. While the other one is always confused and timid.
I sincerely appreciate your willingness to listen to others ; I really do .
>Thx. We have considered Red Hat's model carefully, and it may indeed be one that we and others could also adopt to 100%. If we reach that conclusion, we will align our model with theirs.
I really wish for that.
>But we are not absolutely certain that this is the case, and so we are experimenting with other models. We believe that a DBMS behaves somewhat differently in the market compared to an operating system.
I would be more than happy if you could explain further upon this. And as far as I remember, operating system is not the only one redhat doing. In fact I myself had subscribed so many RHEL license for running mysql cluster on top of RHEL. I went for support/subscription because of some company requirements. If subscription from you for mysql cluster was an option (at that time), I would have definitely opted for that.
> We believe that Red Hat's competitive situation is different from ours. And we are not fully convinced that Red Hat gets a fair compensation in the market for their enormous (and great) investments and contributions.
Isn't it fair enough that a company with less than 200 developers (or even lesser) can compete successfully with world's largest software companies ?
I repeat marten, you please do a study on the revenue generated by this proprietary add-ons vs the loss of whatever incurred by the same.Specifically, the role a fully GPLed mysql solution would play in SUN's complete solution stack. I am sure you would lean towards the Redhat model.
Marten,
I appreciate your willingness to clarify. But let me suggest you something.
Why can't you follow the successful business model adopted by redhat ? i.e let everything be GPL. But support is ONLY for paying customers.Which model you think would give you better revenue, market value and *credibility* as a company and product in the long run ? the one (like redhat) where everything is GPLed but support is ONLY for paying customers or the one(followed by MySQL now) in which there is *always* some confusion and complication regarding the license with some portion of it proprietary(later planned to be GPLed...?). Have you done a serious study on what is the revenue generated by these kind of proprietary add-ons vs the loss of community and credibility for the product ? I doubt Sir. If a small company like Redhat can be successful with GPLed code, why can't someone who is part of SUN ?
>I'm not sure which wireless issues you guys are complaining about...
Its not just about the card or driver. Also about the GUI interface(knetworkmanager) which creates the problem . I am typing this from my DELL Latitude D620 on a wireless connection from my Linksys router. It works well if I use plain/etc/network/interfaces file. But it has frequent disconnection issues if I use knetworkmanager. Same goes with my wife's T60. Both running kubuntu gutsy only. You go through ubuntuforums and bug database and can see how many people have faced these issues. Again, still I consider kubuntu as the best linux distro for desktops(have tried so many of them).
I think it really depends on each one's case and requirement. In my case , I have switched to Kubuntu almost 3 years back from 5 years of redhat/centos/GNOME usage exclusively. But I am facing exactly the same 3 problems mentioned by the author in the article(wireless screw up by KNetworkmanager, Integration issue of thunderbird and adept_manager). But these may not be issue for someone who is not using wireless(or using a different card), not using thunderbird etc. But unlike the author I never feel like switching back to GNOME as I think Kubuntu is still the best distro when you consider everything. The plus side of Kubuntu, is more important/relevant to me than these issues. So it really comes down to what you are doing with your computer. Different people have different requirement and needs and its unlikely that they all will face the same bugs/issues.
> It seems the same here - the problem is that Chavez is attempting to set up a dictatorship and silence the opposition. It doesn't matter whether RCTV is like Fox or like PBS.
This is the problem. Venezule was far WORSE before Chavez including the press freedom and human right violations. This is confirmed by comparing the amnesty report itself. So things have IMPROVED after Chavez. And as I said earlier, neighboring countries are still far worse. But the western propaganda seems to imply exactly opposite. And that is what I am opposing. You take my post in the complete context , not just one sentence.
NO , I never said so. Please read my post. What I said is the hypocrisy and double standard of western media in this issue and how they ignore facts which are not favoring them.
> Trying to defend him by saying "Oh yeah, well there are worse out there" is like saying turnips are better than rutebegas
Consider these facts,
1. Venezula had worse human right violations in the past. Things are BETTER now, though not at all perfect(scroll up in the same discussion to see the exact comparison of amnesty reports at both times).
2. Other countries in the region has WORSE abuse and stifling of press freedom.
3. This TV station is real crap in quality.
Now consider all these valid points and compare with the outcry of the US/right wing media/ western nations reaction to the issue. They project this issue ignoring all the above mentioned facts. That is pure hypocrisy and double stand. And people here are opposing that. They are not saying everything with chavez rule is fine. They are(mostly) not even justifying this act. But just pointing out the hypocrisy.
>Giving Americans preferential treatment against cost and performance implies that we somehow deserve jobs more >then the rest of the world, can you give me any reason why this is so? > Because boosting the national economy is beneficial to the country and the government's highest goal is the >benefit of the country?
This is a form of "protectionism" right? and if I remember correctly, globalization(as started by US) was a crusade against these sort of things
I am not saying this is bad per se. But have you ever thought for a moment what happens to american companies and economy if everyone else in the world followed this practice ?
You have perfectly summed up it !! I had a DB cluster setup on HP DL-385 and had to migrate to RHEL just to get support for Hardware issues from HP. They blindly refuse to support telling that "we don't support anything other than RHEL". The fact is that vendors are looking for an excuse to say no to support and RHEL/CentOS is enough for them
Until recently I had an IBM Thinkpad R51 and was very happy with it. But just to do some R&D on Xen and virtualization I wanted to have something with VT supported processor and went for DELL Latitude D620. The funny thing is that they have disabled the VT support in BIOS (in a way that it cannot be enabled). I upgraded the BIOS to the newest version and the problem still existed. When I contacted DELL for this, they suggested me to downgrade the bios but it was failing saying the hardware is incompatible with this version of bios. The ticket with DELL is still opened and I dont see any chance of getting it solved (its already 2 months over). The funny thing is that I had swapped my Thinkpad only for this feature and I didnt get it. Plus, it has a lot of problems. Heat generation is horrible. Keyboard is nowhere near to Thinkpad. I can go and on... I curse my bad decision now.
>99% of the computer buying population has no idea what your post even means.
They don't have to ! But before they buy a PC/laptop, they DO consult this 1 % or even some relevant source for that. So its very likely that they are adviced to go for core 2 duo or whatever terms they don't even understand. Last week alone , 2 of my friends took laptops and they had asked me which model to choose for their budget. Its funny that they went ahead with my suggestion and bought Core 2 duo:-)
As someone who pays tax in kerala , I have something to tell you. I want my tax money to be spent wisely. I dont want that to be spent on something which teach the students that is not free, open or even technically superior. I want that to be spent on something upon which students can learn further without any issues like license restriction, closed nature etc. I dont want him/her to be entrapped in any particular technology.
>> Linux and other open source software aren't targetted, not because of the quality of the code, but because less people use it.
When would people stop this bullshit ? This has been answered by many. I would repeat it . Why there is more vulnerability/attack against IIS than Apache ? why track record of IIS is worse than Apache? I am not saying that bigger install base is not a reason for microsoft to be targetted more. But its just ONE OF THE MANY reasons and not the prime one even.
Slashdot Mirror
> I have installed Solaris x86 8/07 on DL385 systems; what exactly was your problem? HP provides the SmartArray (cciss) to use during the installation (and Broadcom NetXtreme (BNX) drivers to install afterwards).
This is exactly my problem. You need to load the drivers at the time of installation where as in Linux it was supported from day one for DL-385. This is for servers and for Desktop/laptops its even worse.
> but a *guess* would be that for current, popular server systems sold by major vendors (Sun, HP, Dell, IBM), Solaris x86 support shouldn't be that bad.
But people don't deploy things on the servers first. They deploy it on laptops/desktops first and test/learn from it. So support for all type of hardware is of utmost important for widespread adoption.
> Solaris, for example, is being positioned as an alternative to Linux: it's "pick us or pick Linux". From an open source point of view, it would be better if Sun picked a license that allowed the best parts of Solaris and Linux to be combined, and for end users to decide what those best parts are.
..... But it DOES have some cool technologies like Dtrace and ZFS. So what best SUN can do is to integrate these technologies with Linux and try to get maximum hardware sale and service contract on Linux platform. The problem with SUN has been that they are late in everything. They do things after much resistance. That is what has happened with Java and now going to happen with Solaris. I really wonder why its so hard for the SUN execs to understand such simple things.
This is a very important point. Regardless of any so called technical merit Solaris kernel has over Linux, its NOT going to catch up with Linux in adoption or momentum. At least not anytime in the near future. I am telling this as I have managed to get Solaris(intel version) installed on a machine after about half a dozen failed attempts. Mostly due to hardware incompatibility. The tried hardwares include even the very common ones like DL-385. Just to manage it from my laptop(Kubuntu) I installed OpenSSH on the solaris box. It took almost 30 minutes to get it installed where as in linux it would take less than 30 sec. Solaris is no where near to Linux in hardware compatibility , ease of installation, availability of applications
> The code still has to be open to allow this though.
This is actually the key point. Take the example of check posts. Not everyone gets thoroughly checked in the check posts. But the FEAR OF BEING CHECKED make people comply with the rule. At least to a great point. Same goes with open source code. The fear of being audited by others stop from inserting any hidden spyware/backdoor in the code.
> Obama wasn't even in the Senate to vote for or against the Iraq war. His diatribes about being "against the war from the beginning" are thus meaningless.
So you mean to say that any non-senate member who protested against Iraq war was "meaningless" ? Including all politicians, journalists, social activists and common man? Obama DID oppose it and that is what is important. This was a time when most of the non-senate members(Like senate members) were supporting the war.
> And why do you think that Obama will be any different?
First I didn't say that Obama will be different. What I said is Obama won because he projected himself as something different. And, his past actions do support this to a great extend. Again , Iraq is the best example. From day one he was against it while Hillary and most of the other leaders were supporting it. So there is reason to believe that he would be different.
> Generally you Democrats and Republicans I don't see enough difference between Republican and Democratic candidates. Party voters still make me sick
This is exactly why Hillary lost the game and Obama got it. People in US(and around the world , though irrelevant) were fed up of the status-co politics. They wanted something different and someone who can make a change. As citizens and consumers, people want products which are different. Especially when they realize that the product they have currently(Bush) sucks so bad. Hillary miserably failed to understand this pulse and stuck with same old crap. There is no perceivable difference between Hillary and Bush. The differences are really cosmetic. Iraq is just one example where there is a striking parallel between the policies of Bush/Mcain and Hillary.
> Not actually true. RHN has always been proprietary (until they announced a change to this, though I think they have yet to open source it)
RHN is not a product right?
> Once someone pays, they can redistribute as it's GPL. But few exercise that right
CentOS ?
> Btw, I talked with MySQL about this and it's not even remotely clear that they are making these add-ons proprietary in the way you envision.
They are NOT planning to open source the add-ons and I dont think they even permit the redistribution of the binary of the same(I could be wrong in the second part). How is it same as redhat ?
And they are NOT going by redhat way ; atleast as of now. Please see the following thread I had with their CEO in this discussion.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=525246&cid=23100380
Thanx again for the insightful comments,
...? I dont think so . In fact I dont think any of the business model currently practiced (including pure proprietary ones) would be successful as everything in IT field is getting commoditised.
> * On the support issue, I think there are customers of all types - both the type you describe and the one I described.
Yes indeed. Thats why I say you need to do deeper analysis and study
> * As for Red Hat's immunity to distro clones, I am not sure we know the result yet. It indeed seems that Red Hat is immune, but can we be certain after only a year or two?
They are immune and successful so far and would be in the near future IMHO. But in the long term future
> * As for the stack, Sun can certainly create such a stack, as can other vendors. And will, I'd say. I see that as an orthogonal issue - i.e. stacks can be created and will be created nevertheless. Our business model decision doesn't (in my mind) affect stacks much.
But their current stack( Solaris/Linux/Java/Netbeans) is open source(at least likely to be so in near future). An open source(without tags) DB server would be a perfect fit to this than one with a proprietary add-ons. Also, as everything is getting commoditised and open sourced, I think companies with better service would excel over the competitors. IBM has sort of realized this I believe.
One final word, changing the license model often spoil your credibility a lot, as a company and as a product.
Thanx indeed for your patience. I do understand that you have put serious thoughts in to the issues I have raised ; but let me clarify on certain points.
>I believe that customers using operating systems will mostly want the latest updates and patches, so on-going support (or subscription) is vital to the the well-being of the installation. But with databases, customers typically want to avoid updates unless they absolutely need them. For this reason I believe that selling a support program (only) to database customers may not be as good a business as doing it to operating system customers.
Let me disagree with you on this. I do agree that customers/sys admins don't like to patch/update DB server on an ongoing basis as much as they do with OS. BUT, DB server is the most critical for any organization and they would like to run some hardware/software combination which is CERTIFIED. Because of this reason they are more likely to be paid customer for DB server/software. One e.g I have about 40-50 Linux servers all of which are CentOS except half a dozen RHEL servers which are DB servers(Actually MySQL). Because on DB we want some certified and officially supported software/hardware.
> An example: the MySQL brand and trademark is owned by us. We don't mind if end-customers say "I am running on MySQL" but we do mind if a vendor names a product "MySQL XYZ" without our permission. In the latter case there is a risk that end-customers would get confused by the naming. They may think the XYZ product comes from the MySQL company when in reality it doesn't. So we use our ownership of the trademark more to govern what vendors can do than what customers can do.
Absolutely ; but if you are bold/confident/capable , then you cannot be beaten by competitors. GPLing will not make you any more vulnerable. One example. Have you ever thought why Oracle Linux initiative has been such a disaster ? How has Redhat become immune to such competition ?
A couple of points more,
Can you point out a single "open source(tm)" company which has established a successful business and credibility with such a hybrid model like you in the long run? I can point out atleast one company which is successful with pure GPL code (redhat)
There are many companies like HP who sell support for Linux and make good money out of it. They infact charge much more than linux vendors. Still people go to them because of the complete stack (HP hardware/HP supported Linux). Why can't SUN come up with such a stack ?
> MySQL may simply be doing what Red Hat did before it
There is a fundamental difference between Redhat and MySQL . Every piece of code developed by Redhat is GPL(or similar FOSS license) . That is not the case with MySQL. They have code which are not FOSS. Comparing MySQL with Redhat is totally wrong. I would like to add that one company is bold and clear about its business model and has a vision. While the other one is always confused and timid.
I sincerely appreciate your willingness to listen to others ; I really do .
>Thx. We have considered Red Hat's model carefully, and it may indeed be one that we and others could also adopt to 100%. If we reach that conclusion, we will align our model with theirs.
I really wish for that.
>But we are not absolutely certain that this is the case, and so we are experimenting with other models. We believe that a DBMS behaves somewhat differently in the market compared to an operating system.
I would be more than happy if you could explain further upon this. And as far as I remember, operating system is not the only one redhat doing. In fact I myself had subscribed so many RHEL license for running mysql cluster on top of RHEL. I went for support/subscription because of some company requirements. If subscription from you for mysql cluster was an option (at that time), I would have definitely opted for that.
> We believe that Red Hat's competitive situation is different from ours. And we are not fully convinced that Red Hat gets a fair compensation in the market for their enormous (and great) investments and contributions.
Isn't it fair enough that a company with less than 200 developers (or even lesser) can compete successfully with world's largest software companies ?
I repeat marten, you please do a study on the revenue generated by this proprietary add-ons vs the loss of whatever incurred by the same.Specifically, the role a fully GPLed mysql solution would play in SUN's complete solution stack. I am sure you would lean towards the Redhat model.
Marten, ...?). Have you done a serious study on what is the revenue generated by these kind of proprietary add-ons vs the loss of community and credibility for the product ? I doubt Sir. If a small company like Redhat can be successful with GPLed code, why can't someone who is part of SUN ?
I appreciate your willingness to clarify. But let me suggest you something.
Why can't you follow the successful business model adopted by redhat ? i.e let everything be GPL. But support is ONLY for paying customers.Which model you think would give you better revenue, market value and *credibility* as a company and product in the long run ? the one (like redhat) where everything is GPLed but support is ONLY for paying customers or the one(followed by MySQL now) in which there is *always* some confusion and complication regarding the license with some portion of it proprietary(later planned to be GPLed
>I'm not sure which wireless issues you guys are complaining about...
/etc/network/interfaces file. But it has frequent disconnection issues if I use knetworkmanager. Same goes with my wife's T60. Both running kubuntu gutsy only. You go through ubuntuforums and bug database and can see how many people have faced these issues. Again, still I consider kubuntu as the best linux distro for desktops(have tried so many of them).
Its not just about the card or driver. Also about the GUI interface(knetworkmanager) which creates the problem . I am typing this from my DELL Latitude D620 on a wireless connection from my Linksys router. It works well if I use plain
I think it really depends on each one's case and requirement. In my case , I have switched to Kubuntu almost 3 years back from 5 years of redhat/centos/GNOME usage exclusively. But I am facing exactly the same 3 problems mentioned by the author in the article(wireless screw up by KNetworkmanager, Integration issue of thunderbird and adept_manager). But these may not be issue for someone who is not using wireless(or using a different card), not using thunderbird etc. But unlike the author I never feel like switching back to GNOME as I think Kubuntu is still the best distro when you consider everything. The plus side of Kubuntu, is more important/relevant to me than these issues. So it really comes down to what you are doing with your computer. Different people have different requirement and needs and its unlikely that they all will face the same bugs/issues.
> It seems the same here - the problem is that Chavez is attempting to set up a dictatorship and silence the opposition. It doesn't matter whether RCTV is like Fox or like PBS.
This is the problem. Venezule was far WORSE before Chavez including the press freedom and human right violations. This is confirmed by comparing the amnesty report itself. So things have IMPROVED after Chavez. And as I said earlier, neighboring countries are still far worse. But the western propaganda seems to imply exactly opposite. And that is what I am opposing. You take my post in the complete context , not just one sentence.
> Right, so it's ok to ban it.
NO , I never said so. Please read my post. What I said is the hypocrisy and double standard of western media in this issue and how they ignore facts which are not favoring them.
> Trying to defend him by saying "Oh yeah, well there are worse out there" is like saying turnips are better than rutebegas
Consider these facts,
1. Venezula had worse human right violations in the past. Things are BETTER now, though not at all perfect(scroll up in the same discussion to see the exact comparison of amnesty reports at both times).
2. Other countries in the region has WORSE abuse and stifling of press freedom.
3. This TV station is real crap in quality.
Now consider all these valid points and compare with the outcry of the US/right wing media/ western nations reaction to the issue. They project this issue ignoring all the above mentioned facts. That is pure hypocrisy and double stand. And people here are opposing that. They are not saying everything with chavez rule is fine. They are(mostly) not even justifying this act. But just pointing out the hypocrisy.
>Giving Americans preferential treatment against cost and performance implies that we somehow deserve jobs more >then the rest of the world, can you give me any reason why this is so?
> Because boosting the national economy is beneficial to the country and the government's highest goal is the >benefit of the country?
This is a form of "protectionism" right? and if I remember correctly, globalization(as started by US) was a crusade against these sort of things
>Support your local businesses
I am not saying this is bad per se. But have you ever thought for a moment what happens to american companies and economy if everyone else in the world followed this practice ?
You have perfectly summed up it !! I had a DB cluster setup on HP DL-385 and had to migrate to RHEL just to get support for Hardware issues from HP. They blindly refuse to support telling that "we don't support anything other than RHEL". The fact is that vendors are looking for an excuse to say no to support and RHEL/CentOS is enough for them
Until recently I had an IBM Thinkpad R51 and was very happy with it. But just to do some R&D on Xen and virtualization I wanted to have something with VT supported processor and went for DELL Latitude D620. The funny thing is that they have disabled the VT support in BIOS (in a way that it cannot be enabled). I upgraded the BIOS to the newest version and the problem still existed. When I contacted DELL for this, they suggested me to downgrade the bios but it was failing saying the hardware is incompatible with this version of bios. The ticket with DELL is still opened and I dont see any chance of getting it solved (its already 2 months over). The funny thing is that I had swapped my Thinkpad only for this feature and I didnt get it. Plus, it has a lot of problems. Heat generation is horrible. Keyboard is nowhere near to Thinkpad. I can go and on... I curse my bad decision now.
>99% of the computer buying population has no idea what your post even means.
:-)
They don't have to ! But before they buy a PC/laptop, they DO consult this 1 % or even some relevant source for that. So its very likely that they are adviced to go for core 2 duo or whatever terms they don't even understand. Last week alone , 2 of my friends took laptops and they had asked me which model to choose for their budget. Its funny that they went ahead with my suggestion and bought Core 2 duo
As someone who pays tax in kerala , I have something to tell you. I want my tax money to be spent wisely. I dont want that to be spent on something which teach the students that is not free, open or even technically superior. I want that to be spent on something upon which students can learn further without any issues like license restriction, closed nature etc. I dont want him/her to be entrapped in any particular technology.
>Iran is an example of how democracy and fascism are often compatible.
US ?
>> Linux and other open source software aren't targetted, not because of the quality of the code, but because less people use it.
When would people stop this bullshit ? This has been answered by many. I would repeat it . Why there is more vulnerability/attack against IIS than Apache ? why track record of IIS is worse than Apache? I am not saying that bigger install base is not a reason for microsoft to be targetted more. But its just ONE OF THE MANY reasons and not the prime one even.