It depends, of course, of what the client is buying.
Depending on the conditions of the contract, the only deliverables may be the answers to the questions asked and supporting explanations and collected facts. If the client didn't pay for the tools used to do the job, then the client has no right to them. I have clients who will not pay extra for having the source code of the application with them (source-code for exclusive use IS expensive and GPL'ed source-code is VERY expensive). I treat software (and knowledge) we develop as a very valuable asset.
It's also the choice of the client if the results of such contract work are shared within the organization (in a government, this would be the government itself) or its shareholders (the people of the country)
Also, if some research is done with, say, Somali taxpayers money, then it makes no sense to share it for free with, say, US taxpayers;-)
also if you insist on judging XP as a 2001 product, then you must also take its flaws from that time too - blaster etc.
OK, I missed the IMO. Sorry for that.
The SPs should be compared to the point-releases of OSX. You should then compare XP SP2 to, say, OSX 10.2.12 or OSX 10.3.10 (or whatever the release number is)
And yes, I prefer Debian + Gnome and OSX over XP, but I only disagree that XP sucks that bad. In the end, we disagree on the delta-suckness between 2000 and XP. I find XP a lot better than 2000, you don't.;-)
Besides that, it is a comparison of XP to OSX 10.4 - they are years apart release-date wise. One should compare XP to OSX 10.1 or 10.2.
WinXP has numerous usability improvements over 2000, the look-and-feel being only one of the least signigicant ones.
Windows Explorer is a lot smarter when it comes to deal with media files - filmstrip and slideshows are something very useful when browsing thru a large number of pictures (and I have a large number of pictures). The tasks on the left pane are also very useful (even if they get on the way of the folder tree) - no right-click-new-folder to make a new folder, for instance.
Date and time can be synchronized with NTP servers (2000 only synchronized with the domain controller, IIRC)
There is the switch user thing - your wife can check her e-mail while you are downloading something - Apple even copied this one (there is always a first time for everything).
There is remote desktop (and yes, its server side works better than VNC, at least on Windows).
There is sub-pixel anti-aliasing for LCD displays
And it was released about 2001, IIRC.
True - many of these things existed and exist currently on other desktops (I wish I could switch users easily on Gnome, tough), but to say that XP is only a tiny little bit better deal than 2000 is useless Microsoft bashing (and I do quite a lot of it).
Before bashing Microsoft (or anyone else), you should try to use their products. Really.
If Gnome wants to be that "closed" to its users, the users are free to fork the build, switch to KDE or build their own from scratch.
But it is very frustrating when you see a perfectly good product being ruined by not listening to what users want. True - it's up to independent developers to adopt a feature requested by some user, but corporate sponsors, who stand to gain something if and when FOSS becomes expressive on the corporate desktop market, could show more attention and encourage those developers that are paid to do useful development to actually do it.
Back in 2000 I joked that most hobbyist products developed cool features like skins months before they could do boring things such as printing.
I am not near the point of switching from Gnome - it is still my desktop of choice on any *nix (except MacOSS, of course), but there are many things that could and should be improved.
The TV idea does not apply here - it was not the data that was stolen - it is still stored somewhere and Lexis/Nexis has access to it. The exclusive access rights to this data users may have granted to Lexis/Nexis was violated and access was granted, willingly or not, to the hackers
And so, the french who want to publish vulnerability reports and proof-of-concept code will have to travel abroad before doing so.
If I understood correctly, he was fined because his proof of concept code infringed the copyright of the original program he was trying to prove as vulnerable. Maybe some more careful coding could have avoided that.
What will happen under a more unified Europe? Will decisions made in one country be upheld in other countries - will other europeans have to worry about this decision in France?
If you don't deny your users the right to access to the source code and the right to further alter and or redistribute this source code along with the same rights.
Even if Avalon, Indigo and WinFS get backported so new applications built for them can run under XP and 2003, most of the functionality will be restricted to the new applications. Most probably, after Longhorn gets introduced, only a few apps will work under the backported versions (as some APIs will be absent).
If you want a flashy Windows desktop based on Avalon or a smarter Windows Explorer that's WinFS aware, you will have to upgrade to Longhorn. Think Win32s.
How long before the broadcast flag is used to avoid recording news? This government seems more than a little bit inclined to consider images of, say, Guantanamo bay or prisioner torture sensitive information...
Brazilian Govt. offers a free (as in beer) program to do your taxes. It has a Windows and a Java version, but it is not, for now, open sorce.
It's a step in the right direction tough. Currently more that 90% of the tax forms are submitted electronically.
As for voting, there are other issues. Brazilian government discloses the source code to all political parties, but not to the population in general. The license under which it was developed, AFAIK (I worked on the 2002 release) does not allow it.
Nobody knew how to run a computer maker at that time. Apple is about the only non-IBM-compatible PC maker left in the market - all the others went the way of the dinossaur. IIRC, they are the only personal computer maker who survived 1976-2005.
True, Sculley's through Jobs' Apple had a huge and confusing product line, its products were incompatible with others (i.e.: Windows worked with Lan Manager and NetWare and Microsoft even took the trouble of writing a NetWare client themselves so it could work better - read seamlessly - with Windows) and was quite happy to be a niche player.
Their products could not compete outside the niche they have built almost by accident for themselves. MacOS 8 was a mess, A/UX was dead since ages, Taligent's Pink went nowhere and they considered Linux atop Mach, buying Be or NeXT. They lacked an inspiring CEO. They chose NeXT and Jobs, solving two problems at once.
I was discussing this with my mother yesterday. She doesn't trust computers to the measure she goes to the bank to pay her bills and is horrified that I pay almost all my bills without leaving my chair (Brazil has an excellent banking system, with all banks connected to each other since early 70s and able to conduct to-the-minute money tranfers very easily). To her, my advice was "know the tools you are using". If you have no idea of what a post card looks like or how it works, you may think that a secret written on one is safe.
However, remember that a business owner (or panel) operating within a capitalist economy is under PERPETUAL pressure to increase sales and reduce costs. It NEVER lets up. Never.
Sure. But there are also some moral constraints even capitalists should follow
Brazilian government will probably go with IBM or other huge IT services provider because of the size of the demand. Don't forget selling free software is not about selling boxes but selling support. They may, of course, decide to go with Conectiva's distro for political reasons.
I know this has been said before, but did you ask a clever question by yourself or has your brain simulated a clever person by firing neural stimuli according to a partly inherited partly acquired pattern?
Speculating about the nature of understanding is futile if the real understanding can't be distinguished from a computer model by having a limited interaction with it. As long as we can't say what something is, it's hard to say what it isn't.
Machines will eventually become smarter than humans. It's not a question of if, but of when.
Right now, they may be smarter than humans who suffered severe brain damage or have other debilitating diseases. I will refrain from president jokes.
Slashdot Mirror
It depends, of course, of what the client is buying.
;-)
Depending on the conditions of the contract, the only deliverables may be the answers to the questions asked and supporting explanations and collected facts. If the client didn't pay for the tools used to do the job, then the client has no right to them. I have clients who will not pay extra for having the source code of the application with them (source-code for exclusive use IS expensive and GPL'ed source-code is VERY expensive). I treat software (and knowledge) we develop as a very valuable asset.
It's also the choice of the client if the results of such contract work are shared within the organization (in a government, this would be the government itself) or its shareholders (the people of the country)
Also, if some research is done with, say, Somali taxpayers money, then it makes no sense to share it for free with, say, US taxpayers
LOL. Funny mods for you!
And then they will call it the Firefox/Thunderbird suite
Sounds like "nuclear scientists disappear overnight".
An evil genius must have kidnapped all australian p2p sites in a plan to create a secret weapon that will dominate the entertainment industry.
Maybe it would make sense to have different types of Debian GNU/Linux for tiny devices, desktops and servers.
After all, it makes as little sense to have KDevelop running on m68k as having a Gaim package for s390.
OK, I missed the IMO. Sorry for that.
The SPs should be compared to the point-releases of OSX. You should then compare XP SP2 to, say, OSX 10.2.12 or OSX 10.3.10 (or whatever the release number is)
And yes, I prefer Debian + Gnome and OSX over XP, but I only disagree that XP sucks that bad. In the end, we disagree on the delta-suckness between 2000 and XP. I find XP a lot better than 2000, you don't. ;-)
That is unfair, to say the least.
Besides that, it is a comparison of XP to OSX 10.4 - they are years apart release-date wise. One should compare XP to OSX 10.1 or 10.2.
WinXP has numerous usability improvements over 2000, the look-and-feel being only one of the least signigicant ones.
Windows Explorer is a lot smarter when it comes to deal with media files - filmstrip and slideshows are something very useful when browsing thru a large number of pictures (and I have a large number of pictures). The tasks on the left pane are also very useful (even if they get on the way of the folder tree) - no right-click-new-folder to make a new folder, for instance.
Date and time can be synchronized with NTP servers (2000 only synchronized with the domain controller, IIRC)
There is the switch user thing - your wife can check her e-mail while you are downloading something - Apple even copied this one (there is always a first time for everything).
There is remote desktop (and yes, its server side works better than VNC, at least on Windows).
There is sub-pixel anti-aliasing for LCD displays
And it was released about 2001, IIRC.
True - many of these things existed and exist currently on other desktops (I wish I could switch users easily on Gnome, tough), but to say that XP is only a tiny little bit better deal than 2000 is useless Microsoft bashing (and I do quite a lot of it).
Before bashing Microsoft (or anyone else), you should try to use their products. Really.
But it is very frustrating when you see a perfectly good product being ruined by not listening to what users want. True - it's up to independent developers to adopt a feature requested by some user, but corporate sponsors, who stand to gain something if and when FOSS becomes expressive on the corporate desktop market, could show more attention and encourage those developers that are paid to do useful development to actually do it.
Back in 2000 I joked that most hobbyist products developed cool features like skins months before they could do boring things such as printing.
I am not near the point of switching from Gnome - it is still my desktop of choice on any *nix (except MacOSS, of course), but there are many things that could and should be improved.
And don't make me talk about Mono.
And better get a very good lawyer
As far as my company goes, I would be fine with selling to a bigger company.
I can always start another company if and when money runs out or I get bored, whatever comes first.
The TV idea does not apply here - it was not the data that was stolen - it is still stored somewhere and Lexis/Nexis has access to it. The exclusive access rights to this data users may have granted to Lexis/Nexis was violated and access was granted, willingly or not, to the hackers
And so, the french who want to publish vulnerability reports and proof-of-concept code will have to travel abroad before doing so.
If I understood correctly, he was fined because his proof of concept code infringed the copyright of the original program he was trying to prove as vulnerable. Maybe some more careful coding could have avoided that.
What will happen under a more unified Europe? Will decisions made in one country be upheld in other countries - will other europeans have to worry about this decision in France?
If you don't deny your users the right to access to the source code and the right to further alter and or redistribute this source code along with the same rights.
If it's not this, what is it then?
I would prefer to say "...if you don't deny your users certain rights"
Bush downsizing is not about saving money - it's about spending as much money as possible with campaign supporters.
Of course not.
Even if Avalon, Indigo and WinFS get backported so new applications built for them can run under XP and 2003, most of the functionality will be restricted to the new applications. Most probably, after Longhorn gets introduced, only a few apps will work under the backported versions (as some APIs will be absent).
If you want a flashy Windows desktop based on Avalon or a smarter Windows Explorer that's WinFS aware, you will have to upgrade to Longhorn. Think Win32s.
How long before the broadcast flag is used to avoid recording news? This government seems more than a little bit inclined to consider images of, say, Guantanamo bay or prisioner torture sensitive information...
I only hope this idea doesn't catch.
Brazilian Govt. offers a free (as in beer) program to do your taxes. It has a Windows and a Java version, but it is not, for now, open sorce.
It's a step in the right direction tough. Currently more that 90% of the tax forms are submitted electronically.
As for voting, there are other issues. Brazilian government discloses the source code to all political parties, but not to the population in general. The license under which it was developed, AFAIK (I worked on the 2002 release) does not allow it.
Nobody knew how to run a computer maker at that time. Apple is about the only non-IBM-compatible PC maker left in the market - all the others went the way of the dinossaur. IIRC, they are the only personal computer maker who survived 1976-2005.
True, Sculley's through Jobs' Apple had a huge and confusing product line, its products were incompatible with others (i.e.: Windows worked with Lan Manager and NetWare and Microsoft even took the trouble of writing a NetWare client themselves so it could work better - read seamlessly - with Windows) and was quite happy to be a niche player.
Their products could not compete outside the niche they have built almost by accident for themselves. MacOS 8 was a mess, A/UX was dead since ages, Taligent's Pink went nowhere and they considered Linux atop Mach, buying Be or NeXT. They lacked an inspiring CEO. They chose NeXT and Jobs, solving two problems at once.
And, well, Jobs sort of saved Apple.
They will probably float. It should be quite impossible to drown in liquid mercury. I am not sure what other side effects may arise ;-)
I was discussing this with my mother yesterday. She doesn't trust computers to the measure she goes to the bank to pay her bills and is horrified that I pay almost all my bills without leaving my chair (Brazil has an excellent banking system, with all banks connected to each other since early 70s and able to conduct to-the-minute money tranfers very easily). To her, my advice was "know the tools you are using". If you have no idea of what a post card looks like or how it works, you may think that a secret written on one is safe.
Sure. But there are also some moral constraints even capitalists should follow
Two pages dedicated to state the obvious - this pointy-haired writer is an idiot and has absolutely no idea of what he writes about...
;-)
What a waste of Slashdot
And there are people who print his words on dead forests...
Brazilian government will probably go with IBM or other huge IT services provider because of the size of the demand. Don't forget selling free software is not about selling boxes but selling support. They may, of course, decide to go with Conectiva's distro for political reasons.
I know this has been said before, but did you ask a clever question by yourself or has your brain simulated a clever person by firing neural stimuli according to a partly inherited partly acquired pattern?
Speculating about the nature of understanding is futile if the real understanding can't be distinguished from a computer model by having a limited interaction with it. As long as we can't say what something is, it's hard to say what it isn't.
Machines will eventually become smarter than humans. It's not a question of if, but of when.
Right now, they may be smarter than humans who suffered severe brain damage or have other debilitating diseases. I will refrain from president jokes.