Because I don't like the money I worked hard to earn forcible taken from me. If I feel like giving my money to someone who needs it, maybe I will, but taking money from me, by force is wrong!
"Another example, if you take your first Amendment claim and apply it to the second, wouldn't you argue that the Federal government has no claim to prevent you from owning fully automatic machine guns? Or SAMs or fighter airplanes for that matter?"
Yes, I fully support any type or gun ownership, without restriction!
"The first amendment was not meant to protect your right to say anything, anywhere, anytime"
Actually the first amendment does allow you to say anything, anywhere, anytime, but due to the courts believing that the framers of the consitution couldn't have possible meant ALL speech, they have contrued it to mean what you said. So know we live in a censored society, where speech is anything BUT free!
"Badnarik could run in the Republican primary and with his positions win a fair number of votes, perhaps even win."
I seriously doubt he would get many votes at all, for at least three reasons:
1: He isn't a career politician. 2: The pro-choice stance would be quashed by the religious right. 3: The current "starve the beast" mentality in the RNC wouldn't fit at all with the hallmark of libertarians, (L) or (l).
I don't agree with all of the LP's tatics (Badnarik getting himself arrested was not a good thing), but I can't vote for Bush or Kerry, IMO neither is qualified for the job. My hope is that the LP will gain enough support in some key areas to make the RNC take notice and start heading back to their roots. Like you I believe that MANY people have (l) views and if enough (L) vote for Badnarik and potentially cost Bush the race, maybe the RNC will wake up.
I don't see how this is any different than Howard Stern ranting and raving every morning on his show about Bush and the FCC. Or Rush Limbaugh spewing his garbage every afternoon.
They are absolutely public airwaves, and they ALL have the right to show/say whatever they want on them, and you have the right not to watch/listen
The 15% rule is not a reasonable test. Any candidate that has gotten themselves on enough ballots to be able to win the electorial vote, should be allowed to debate.
Having more real debate should never be discouraged, unfortunately the two primary parties, in the US, have hijacked the process and have limited debates that produce meaningless diatribe and sound bites.
The most important thing to the RNC and the DNC is that they stay in control, who actually wins the whitehouse (or congressional seats) is secondary to this goal.
It would be interesting to watch the 15% rule climb, if a third party ever gets within 5% of it.
Being a minority and having "limited appeal" should NEVER be a reason to exclude, the US was founded on better principles than that!!!
"It's pointless listening to him because he'll say anything that will get him attention; doesn't matter whether it's true, false, what he honestly believes, something he vehemently disagrees with, or whatever. He's just empty speech filling airtime."
Hmm... Sounds a lot like Bush and Kerry. And your last statement is true for them as well.
"The amazing thing is that there are apparently millions of people who haven't worked it out yet"
"Generalization of businesses - the underlying assumption of ANY ERP is most of the business processes that will be tracked/automated/integrated are generic and standard to a business and will only require modest tweaking. This is the most blatant of lies the ERP vendors make (niche players excluded). Overgeneralization forces almost a reinvention of the wheel - either changing processes or changing the program. Guess which one happens most;)"
For years I have thought this is the biggest problems of large ERP/OSS systems. Only large established companies can even afford these packages, but because of all the existing procedures and infrastruture make them the absolute the hardest companies to implement these packages in. Because these packages are so inflexible in their design, small startups, that haven't established their own procedures, are the best suited to implement these packages, unfortunately the price of these packages is prohibtive for a startup.
I totally agree. I work for one of those small players, and we are very glad to see this end quickly (we were pissed that our money was being used to fight this in the first place).
Even beyond the small players, MS is in this market now, and while they are not a big ERP player today, MS doesn't get into a market that it doesn't want to dominate. MS could easily be considered a viable #4.
I agree, but the project that this thread is about is a consumer targeted product, so perhaps some effort should be put into making it more "native feeling". In Java that isn't too hard to do.
The whole native OS interface thing, isn't a Java only problem. Open source native apps suffer the same problem, for instance OpenOffice doesn't take advantage of Carbon, and looks and works poorer on OS X. Unfortunately with native apps, this is a much harder problem.
It all comes down to a resource problem, if all OOS project's had the resources that Eclipse does, they could produce a native look and feel app for all the platforms they support too.
"If you are doing development for OS X, just use Objective-C... that is more fun anyway."
I'm not doing development for OS X, our target is any platform that has a Java VM. I just happen to develop on OS X, the rest of the team develops on *nix, and Win32.
"And you JAVA peopel should get it into your head that applications need to fit in with the environment they are runnign on. Why the hell should that oen application look out of place?"
I agree completely with this statement. This has become a much bigger frustration for me since I moved to OS X. I used to use NetBeans for developement. Netbeans looks fine on X11 and Linux, and OK on Windows, but looks horrible on OS X. So I switched to Eclipse, and it looks great. The Eclipse folks have shown that a little effort can make a Java GUI look good, and be integrated well into the native environment.
Thanks! I forgot about those. "Dead Ends" are sometimes interesting to look back on, as long as you weren't one that got stuck with one, like the 50 pound paperweight Mac XL, I have in my attic.;)
Have you been following the SCO suits? People sue all the time for things they have no legal ground to sue on, the courts are jammed with friviously lawsuits.
Also consider, the suit doesn't have to have any merit, and may not even go to trial, but for a public company (or soon to be public company), even the hint of a lawsuit can cause severe damage to the companies stock.
An ex-employee/contractor, who has some of this stock, and feels he/she was wronged by the company, could easily file a lawsuit and cause some pain to the company.
Because there are certain people in this world that like to sue. For whatever reason they think they got screwed in some way, and they are going to make the entity that did alleged screwing pay!
Which is why, I suspect, most people won't take them up on their offer. The article states any shares not sold back to the company will be registered, and then tradable. So it may cost them less than $25 million, provided no one sues, which I'm sure someone will....
I work with mostly small to medium sized companies that use Linux (as servers and desktops), because it's free and the software, they require to run their business, is free. Their opinion is if they have to pay for it, they might as well buy MS.
Ultimately if Linux users will pay for software depends on the Linux user, certainly the ones I work with would not pay $200+ for an Office suite or any desktop application, of course they also won't be buying Mac's anytime soon.
I am a coder, and have done extensive porting, my first job was keeping ports running for ~2 million lines of C++ code, on VMS, AIX, SunOS 4.x, HP-UX, Irix and Ultrix. This was back when C++ wasn't standardized, DEC barely had a C++ compiler for either VMS or Ultrix and it seemed like every vendor had a different version of the ARM in front of them.;)
Having that experience I understand how to write platform indepedant code and whenever I work on any project that requires support for multiple platforms, I make sure every developer on that team stays away from platform dependant features. Any platform dependant aspects, like GUI's, are kept very isolated from the business and database logic (and yes I write database indepedant code as well), so that they can be dealt with easily.
Does MS practice this approach? Doubtful. I understand though that the Office X team is a separate team at MS, and that Office X is not so much a port as a total rewrite of the Office product, which makes some sense since there are features in Office X which are not in the Windows version. If MS were to take this approach and dedicated a new team to build an Office for Linux, I think they could succeed quite well.
The bigger difference is that Mac users still don't mind paying for a product, Linux users have never cared for paying for a product...
Office on Windows is platform dependant, but I use Office X on OS X and it works flawlessly and is not platform dependant, except for the Carbon integration.
Office X wasn't my first choice but unforunately it ended up being the only real choice since, at the time, OpenOffice was woefully behind for OS X and requires you to run X11, which ends up being like an emulation layer on OS X.
It seems if they can do such a nice job on Office X (I personally think it is 100% better than the Windows version of Office), then doing a native port to Linux shouldn't be that hard.
PAM/LDAP/NSS is the method I have used for almost two years to authenticate to an AD. I chose not to use AD4Unix, and purchased Microsoft's SFU instead (for the AD and MMC extensions only, I use none of the NIS features of the product). But AD4Unix is well written and would opted for that solution in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
Because I don't like the money I worked hard to earn forcible taken from me. If I feel like giving my money to someone who needs it, maybe I will, but taking money from me, by force is wrong!
I believe it's called: Survival of the fittest.
I for one, am completely tired of supporting the dregs of society that refuse to work!
"Another example, if you take your first Amendment claim and apply it to the second, wouldn't you argue that the Federal government has no claim to prevent you from owning fully automatic machine guns? Or SAMs or fighter airplanes for that matter?"
Yes, I fully support any type or gun ownership, without restriction!
"The first amendment was not meant to protect your right to say anything, anywhere, anytime"
Actually the first amendment does allow you to say anything, anywhere, anytime, but due to the courts believing that the framers of the consitution couldn't have possible meant ALL speech, they have contrued it to mean what you said. So know we live in a censored society, where speech is anything BUT free!
"Badnarik could run in the Republican primary and with his positions win a fair number of votes, perhaps even win."
I seriously doubt he would get many votes at all, for at least three reasons:
1: He isn't a career politician.
2: The pro-choice stance would be quashed by the religious right.
3: The current "starve the beast" mentality in the RNC wouldn't fit at all with the hallmark of libertarians, (L) or (l).
I don't agree with all of the LP's tatics (Badnarik getting himself arrested was not a good thing), but I can't vote for Bush or Kerry, IMO neither is qualified for the job. My hope is that the LP will gain enough support in some key areas to make the RNC take notice and start heading back to their roots. Like you I believe that MANY people have (l) views and if enough (L) vote for Badnarik and potentially cost Bush the race, maybe the RNC will wake up.
I don't see how this is any different than Howard Stern ranting and raving every morning on his show about Bush and the FCC. Or Rush Limbaugh spewing his garbage every afternoon.
They are absolutely public airwaves, and they ALL have the right to show/say whatever they want on them, and you have the right not to watch/listen
The 15% rule is not a reasonable test. Any candidate that has gotten themselves on enough ballots to be able to win the electorial vote, should be allowed to debate.
Having more real debate should never be discouraged, unfortunately the two primary parties, in the US, have hijacked the process and have limited debates that produce meaningless diatribe and sound bites.
The most important thing to the RNC and the DNC is that they stay in control, who actually wins the whitehouse (or congressional seats) is secondary to this goal.
It would be interesting to watch the 15% rule climb, if a third party ever gets within 5% of it.
Being a minority and having "limited appeal" should NEVER be a reason to exclude, the US was founded on better principles than that!!!
"It's pointless listening to him because he'll say anything that will get him attention; doesn't matter whether it's true, false, what he honestly believes, something he vehemently disagrees with, or whatever. He's just empty speech filling airtime."
Hmm... Sounds a lot like Bush and Kerry. And your last statement is true for them as well.
"The amazing thing is that there are apparently millions of people who haven't worked it out yet"
"Generalization of businesses - the underlying assumption of ANY ERP is most of the business processes that will be tracked/automated/integrated are generic and standard to a business and will only require modest tweaking. This is the most blatant of lies the ERP vendors make (niche players excluded). Overgeneralization forces almost a reinvention of the wheel - either changing processes or changing the program. Guess which one happens most ;)"
For years I have thought this is the biggest problems of large ERP/OSS systems. Only large established companies can even afford these packages, but because of all the existing procedures and infrastruture make them the absolute the hardest companies to implement these packages in. Because these packages are so inflexible in their design, small startups, that haven't established their own procedures, are the best suited to implement these packages, unfortunately the price of these packages is prohibtive for a startup.
I totally agree. I work for one of those small players, and we are very glad to see this end quickly (we were pissed that our money was being used to fight this in the first place).
Even beyond the small players, MS is in this market now, and while they are not a big ERP player today, MS doesn't get into a market that it doesn't want to dominate. MS could easily be considered a viable #4.
Sadly most of the choices in large ERP/OSS software are poor.
IMHO, it's because most of them are old, complex and the architectures have not been updated.
I agree, but the project that this thread is about is a consumer targeted product, so perhaps some effort should be put into making it more "native feeling". In Java that isn't too hard to do.
The whole native OS interface thing, isn't a Java only problem. Open source native apps suffer the same problem, for instance OpenOffice doesn't take advantage of Carbon, and looks and works poorer on OS X. Unfortunately with native apps, this is a much harder problem.
It all comes down to a resource problem, if all OOS project's had the resources that Eclipse does, they could produce a native look and feel app for all the platforms they support too.
"If you are doing development for OS X, just use Objective-C... that is more fun anyway."
I'm not doing development for OS X, our target is any platform that has a Java VM. I just happen to develop on OS X, the rest of the team develops on *nix, and Win32.
"And you JAVA peopel should get it into your head that applications need to fit in with the environment they are runnign on. Why the hell should that oen application look out of place?"
I agree completely with this statement. This has become a much bigger frustration for me since I moved to OS X. I used to use NetBeans for developement. Netbeans looks fine on X11 and Linux, and OK on Windows, but looks horrible on OS X. So I switched to Eclipse, and it looks great. The Eclipse folks have shown that a little effort can make a Java GUI look good, and be integrated well into the native environment.
Thanks! I forgot about those. "Dead Ends" are sometimes interesting to look back on, as long as you weren't one that got stuck with one, like the 50 pound paperweight Mac XL, I have in my attic. ;)
I was wondering the same thing. I can already run OS X and Linux on my Mac why would I need Solaris?
I would suspect that Sun's intent is to impact AIX on IBM PowerPC's platform and not Mac's.
Have you been following the SCO suits? People sue all the time for things they have no legal ground to sue on, the courts are jammed with friviously lawsuits.
Also consider, the suit doesn't have to have any merit, and may not even go to trial, but for a public company (or soon to be public company), even the hint of a lawsuit can cause severe damage to the companies stock.
An ex-employee/contractor, who has some of this stock, and feels he/she was wronged by the company, could easily file a lawsuit and cause some pain to the company.
Because there are certain people in this world that like to sue. For whatever reason they think they got screwed in some way, and they are going to make the entity that did alleged screwing pay!
Which is why, I suspect, most people won't take them up on their offer. The article states any shares not sold back to the company will be registered, and then tradable. So it may cost them less than $25 million, provided no one sues, which I'm sure someone will....
Sorry, should have said in my own experience...
I work with mostly small to medium sized companies that use Linux (as servers and desktops), because it's free and the software, they require to run their business, is free. Their opinion is if they have to pay for it, they might as well buy MS.
Ultimately if Linux users will pay for software depends on the Linux user, certainly the ones I work with would not pay $200+ for an Office suite or any desktop application, of course they also won't be buying Mac's anytime soon.
I am a coder, and have done extensive porting, my first job was keeping ports running for ~2 million lines of C++ code, on VMS, AIX, SunOS 4.x, HP-UX, Irix and Ultrix. This was back when C++ wasn't standardized, DEC barely had a C++ compiler for either VMS or Ultrix and it seemed like every vendor had a different version of the ARM in front of them. ;)
Having that experience I understand how to write platform indepedant code and whenever I work on any project that requires support for multiple platforms, I make sure every developer on that team stays away from platform dependant features. Any platform dependant aspects, like GUI's, are kept very isolated from the business and database logic (and yes I write database indepedant code as well), so that they can be dealt with easily.
Does MS practice this approach? Doubtful. I understand though that the Office X team is a separate team at MS, and that Office X is not so much a port as a total rewrite of the Office product, which makes some sense since there are features in Office X which are not in the Windows version. If MS were to take this approach and dedicated a new team to build an Office for Linux, I think they could succeed quite well.
The bigger difference is that Mac users still don't mind paying for a product, Linux users have never cared for paying for a product...
Office on Windows is platform dependant, but I use Office X on OS X and it works flawlessly and is not platform dependant, except for the Carbon integration.
Office X wasn't my first choice but unforunately it ended up being the only real choice since, at the time, OpenOffice was woefully behind for OS X and requires you to run X11, which ends up being like an emulation layer on OS X.
It seems if they can do such a nice job on Office X (I personally think it is 100% better than the Windows version of Office), then doing a native port to Linux shouldn't be that hard.
I agree with this completely. I am glad my tax dollars won't be wasted on yet another currently "unsolveable problem".
...Doubtful.
Maybe there is some intelligence in Washington yet!?...
Another way to install 10G on a version of RH or FC, other than server, simply change the /etc/redhat-release to read:
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 3 (Taroon Update 1)"
The Oracle installer won't know the difference.
10G does run very nicely, I have had it installed for about three weeks and haven't seen one problem.
I second that, very good article!
PAM/LDAP/NSS is the method I have used for almost two years to authenticate to an AD. I chose not to use AD4Unix, and purchased Microsoft's SFU instead (for the AD and MMC extensions only, I use none of the NIS features of the product). But AD4Unix is well written and would opted for that solution in the future.
Visio does work with CodeWeaver's product. I have used Visio 2000 Enterprise for over a year. The best part, startup times are faster than on Windows!