Well, my guess is that rather than poorly the stats *entirely* from their rear cavities, they do some form of cross-reference on music sales stats and determine that part of the drop in various regions is due to piracy. So it could be that piracy stats are extrapolated from music sales (or lack thereof) stats, although really all such things could indicate would be a lack of people buying crappy music.
I suppose part of how you interpret this depends on what you consider SUSE linux. Some of the various SUSE-specific configuration methods, and configuration front-ends etc would be specific and I suppose could have their licenses go more commercial. The majority of the software though (from Firefox to Ekiga to Apache) is going to be primarily developed by third-parties, and will have to respect the individual licenses (GPL, Mozilla License, etc). I can't see a lot changing here, as I haven't seen a lot that SUSE can lay claim to in the overall linux realm.
Your system cannot be aware of the advanced functionality of any device, including CPU's unless:
a) It has drivers
b) It's programmed into the software
c) It comforms to an existing standard in a more efficient way (aka faster at operation X internally, without any different I/O communication to the machine)
I'd rather have drivers at the OS-level than have code-bloat in every app for hundreds of hardware combinations, besides I've been compiling linux kernels specific to my hardware for years, so windows drivers isn't such a stretch.
Downloading at work is just a shade off from downloading with company properly, it's still misuse of a company asset - at work just also means it's on company time as well. Not to mention that quite a lot of people when they download such material are doing so "one-handed," and if a client happened to see a naughty URL or something bad in the cache it could cause issues for the company. In addition, would you want to be the one that got his hand-me-down laptop?
Still, if he had really wanted to keep the laptop "clean" from his surfing habits, he could have used a thumb drive and a bootable-OS CD. However, if he had really wanted to keep things clean he could have used or bought his own damn laptop.
Actually no. I remember a time long ago when there was tons of free software out there you could trust. I'm not talking about the open-source stuff (which I generally still trust when it's from SF.net or freshmeat), but demos, freeware utilities, shareware games, freeware episodes, etc.
There was a ton of free stuff out there without spyware, adware, or malware of any sort. Yes, you could get free screensavers (though many sucked). You could get free games (though most were demos). Nowadays, I see lots of things that look useful, but I just can't trust them to be *safe*.
There still is some safe free (non-os) software out there though, such as:
The problem is that unless you have a lot of references on the software (and sometimes even then) you just can't trust them to be clean nowadays. The above are some ones that I do trust, but it's sad that I have to second-guess most things that seem free nowadays because there are too many scams and pieces of crapware out there.
You know, as much as I'd like my relatives to use linux - and they may appreciate it in the long term - I realize that it is something that *I* would like. Giving the "gift of Ubuntu" to others during the season is really a gift to yourself, as it panders to your interests, and not likely theirs. If they showed and interest in such things it might be a nice gift, but you really should consider whose interests you have in mind.
One of these days I'll probably be nuking the grandparents' computer and throwing linux at it, probably after one-too-many windows service calls. However, I'd never consider changing everything over a gift, but rather a compromise.
I put "linuxing" somebody's computer as a gift in the same arena as the girlfriends who tried to buy me clothes items they liked (and I didn't) for various occasions. It's not a gift to me, it's an excuse to spend money on yourself in my name. Alternately, I had some smarter ones who actually went shopping with me, and we picked out clothes that we both liked (casual, but not dumpy, and nothing that tried to feel like a smartass 15yr-old).
Perhaps you should gauge what your relatives want before giving this gift, no?
Are you saying "I dunno about HL1" because you actually don't know about it (haven't played it?), or are you just politely disagreeing?
The former. I didn't really get much into HL1 at the time and thus never dived far into the storyline, so I'm forced to comment purely on HL2. As far as the suckage-of-sequels usually goes though, HL1 was (from what I heard) good, and HL2 even better, which is more than most sequel games every accomplish. It seems that for a time FPS's tend to age better (AVP, AVP2 were good as well visual and gameplay wise).
One of these days I'm going to have to pop on and play the Ep1 of Half Life 2 (when I have time), because from what I hear the game has stayed good.
Well, not doing something so 'boneheaded' is the better solution, but apologizing (as much as any big company can be said to do so), admitting a mistake, and rectifying it seems like better than one could expect in many circumstances. Certainly it show more "love" than saying "screw you" and continuing to ignore the customers in question.
In addition, Microsoft won't assert rights over patents over software technology that may be incorporated into Suse Linux
Against SUSE or against linux/competitors in general? Perhaps they'll allow SUSE use of patented technology but still bar it from the rest of the linux community.
Unlike many competing products, the linux market doesn't require you to buy out rights to use the software. MS can join in the linux market, rather than fighting it tooth-and-nail, and probably manage to make a profit from it alongside their windows products. If their offering are good enough, competing linux products might also dropped off, which puts the ball in MS's side of the court.
Remember, Sony's profit on the consoles is currently in the negetive to near-zero range. That being so, they're hoping to profit from game sales. So if somebody spends $1000 on a PS3, that's a couple hundred bucks that they could have been spending on games to Sony's profit (assuming the don't also have the extra few hundred on-hand at the time to purchase games).
Still, nothing illegal about it, but Sony's gripe is probably that they're not getting their expected slice of the pie. Perhaps they should direct-list some consoles on eBay themselves... certainly there's nothing preventing them.
Selling the unit at a profit is business, and not really any more greedy than any other business. It's certainly not a scam no matter how Sony wants to represent it, unless you're selling fake units or something that is not-a-PS3 (or not a complete one).
IMHO, selling there's nothing wrong with selling at good profit luxury item - aka something not a necessity - as none of the buyers will be out any quality of life if they have to go without the product.
For many who may be like me, you may already be cramming quite a bit onto one circuit/power bar. In my case, I've got:
TV
DVD Player+Surround Head Unit
VCR
Various Consoles
Lamp
One can fairly safely assume that only one console may be running at a time, but since the surround it piped through the DVD it's assumed to be on, and the VCR may be on (recording, etc) as well as the lamp in various situations. That gives us:
lamp: 50/100/150W variable
TV: unknown
DVD/Surround: At least 150W+sub in my case, some units are up to 500W for the surround
So you've got anywhere from about 250/300W up to 700-800W power draw without the console. Throw in 350W for the PS/3 and you may be over 1000W, possibly flipping the circuit-breaker on your power bar (especially the el-cheapo ones many people use) and/or possibly on a house circuit depending on whatever else is sharing the power.
I don't find it a reason to not by the PS3, but it's definately a good reason to be careful where and how you're plugging the sucker in.
It seems to me that most of the local ISP's have clauses stating that they may covertly monitor and log your internet activity. There was a bit of a discussion on/. about that at some time, I believe, as several ISP's had sneaky policy changes implemented
If it puts a more professional focus on emulators, why the heck not. OK, so now you have to pay (what is probably not an overly large amount) for the emulator/games. If the company who is being emulated produces the emulator (and therefore has a lot better access to internal code, specs, etc) you are going to end up having a better product, and in the end somebody is probably getting paid for the development work.
End result, a few more jobs, a better product, and slightly higher cost.
It is, but it seems that the term is broadly. In many cases, the term DOS was often used as a term to describe an attack which would render an entire system inoperable. That is to say, when I heard it used in this context, I expected that it would crash the browser, and lock or disable the OS. As it is, it's still an annoying bug, but having to simply restart the browser hardly seems as serious as a full-out machine crash.
If you're going electronic, it's going to give you quick results. Just dump the results from the machines into a tabulator, and then you've got the vote.
Now afterwards, you have a group of people (with mixed or no political affiliation) count the paper votes. It might take longer, but in a few days you've got your initial electronic vote, and what is hopefully a consistent paper vote to back it up. If there's a big difference between the two, it's time to do some serious investigating as to why.
Hmmm, in most cases I find that those that can design useful and attractive UI's are not the same as those who can develop kernel drivers or other such things. I see no reason why those with design/UI skills can't continue to improve the look & feel of linux, while those with skills at dissassembling/developing drivers, kernel features, and other such things continue provide those skills.
Not to mention the fact that kernel drivers, in an ideal world, would be developed and provided (preferably with source) by the hardware manufacturers, who have very little do with with the GUI in any operating system.
Possibly, but by that time I'm counting in science to give me improved longevity and virility. When is comes to living longer, well your the choice of die vs the side effects of well, die isn't quite as complicated:-)
I always wonder about the long-term effects of these pills. How do they know that, in 10-15 years, the pills won't cause permanent infertility in a certain percentage of males? How about in 20-50 years, that they won't have long-term defects in offspring. It's not that the research isn't a useful thing, but I think I'll let a generation or two act as the guinea pigs for this before me.
Slashdot Mirror
When I buy a toaster, a lawnmower, a microwave, a sculpture, cabinet or pretty much anything else, it's mine. Why should music be any different?
Well, my guess is that rather than poorly the stats *entirely* from their rear cavities, they do some form of cross-reference on music sales stats and determine that part of the drop in various regions is due to piracy. So it could be that piracy stats are extrapolated from music sales (or lack thereof) stats, although really all such things could indicate would be a lack of people buying crappy music.
Ahhh, so you've been talking to this guy, then
I suppose part of how you interpret this depends on what you consider SUSE linux. Some of the various SUSE-specific configuration methods, and configuration front-ends etc would be specific and I suppose could have their licenses go more commercial. The majority of the software though (from Firefox to Ekiga to Apache) is going to be primarily developed by third-parties, and will have to respect the individual licenses (GPL, Mozilla License, etc). I can't see a lot changing here, as I haven't seen a lot that SUSE can lay claim to in the overall linux realm.
Your system cannot be aware of the advanced functionality of any device, including CPU's unless:
a) It has drivers
b) It's programmed into the software
c) It comforms to an existing standard in a more efficient way (aka faster at operation X internally, without any different I/O communication to the machine)
I'd rather have drivers at the OS-level than have code-bloat in every app for hundreds of hardware combinations, besides I've been compiling linux kernels specific to my hardware for years, so windows drivers isn't such a stretch.
Downloading at work is just a shade off from downloading with company properly, it's still misuse of a company asset - at work just also means it's on company time as well. Not to mention that quite a lot of people when they download such material are doing so "one-handed," and if a client happened to see a naughty URL or something bad in the cache it could cause issues for the company. In addition, would you want to be the one that got his hand-me-down laptop?
Still, if he had really wanted to keep the laptop "clean" from his surfing habits, he could have used a thumb drive and a bootable-OS CD. However, if he had really wanted to keep things clean he could have used or bought his own damn laptop.
Firefox has an automatic push feature that automatically downloads and offers to install the new version of FF. So does IE.
*Firefox: Can be disabled in the browser
*IE: Comes with security updates. If you want those, you can't really avoid it.
There's a difference, although personally I'd prefer the 'fox auto-updates to be disabled by default as well.
Actually no. I remember a time long ago when there was tons of free software out there you could trust. I'm not talking about the open-source stuff (which I generally still trust when it's from SF.net or freshmeat), but demos, freeware utilities, shareware games, freeware episodes, etc.
There was a ton of free stuff out there without spyware, adware, or malware of any sort. Yes, you could get free screensavers (though many sucked). You could get free games (though most were demos). Nowadays, I see lots of things that look useful, but I just can't trust them to be *safe*.
There still is some safe free (non-os) software out there though, such as:
Skype talk to other computers, call phones in N. America for free?! Would you have trusted it
Screensavers and more Screensavers
Compression utilities
and more
The problem is that unless you have a lot of references on the software (and sometimes even then) you just can't trust them to be clean nowadays. The above are some ones that I do trust, but it's sad that I have to second-guess most things that seem free nowadays because there are too many scams and pieces of crapware out there.
You know, as much as I'd like my relatives to use linux - and they may appreciate it in the long term - I realize that it is something that *I* would like. Giving the "gift of Ubuntu" to others during the season is really a gift to yourself, as it panders to your interests, and not likely theirs. If they showed and interest in such things it might be a nice gift, but you really should consider whose interests you have in mind.
One of these days I'll probably be nuking the grandparents' computer and throwing linux at it, probably after one-too-many windows service calls. However, I'd never consider changing everything over a gift, but rather a compromise.
I put "linuxing" somebody's computer as a gift in the same arena as the girlfriends who tried to buy me clothes items they liked (and I didn't) for various occasions. It's not a gift to me, it's an excuse to spend money on yourself in my name. Alternately, I had some smarter ones who actually went shopping with me, and we picked out clothes that we both liked (casual, but not dumpy, and nothing that tried to feel like a smartass 15yr-old).
Perhaps you should gauge what your relatives want before giving this gift, no?
Are you saying "I dunno about HL1" because you actually don't know about it (haven't played it?), or are you just politely disagreeing?
The former. I didn't really get much into HL1 at the time and thus never dived far into the storyline, so I'm forced to comment purely on HL2. As far as the suckage-of-sequels usually goes though, HL1 was (from what I heard) good, and HL2 even better, which is more than most sequel games every accomplish. It seems that for a time FPS's tend to age better (AVP, AVP2 were good as well visual and gameplay wise).
One of these days I'm going to have to pop on and play the Ep1 of Half Life 2 (when I have time), because from what I hear the game has stayed good.
But HL2 was pretty decent. Yes, it was an FPS, but as far as a storyline in FPS's go it did a pretty good job of mixing plot with action.
Well, not doing something so 'boneheaded' is the better solution, but apologizing (as much as any big company can be said to do so), admitting a mistake, and rectifying it seems like better than one could expect in many circumstances. Certainly it show more "love" than saying "screw you" and continuing to ignore the customers in question.
Unless you're a fan of "print... [next page]... print... [next page]... etc"
In addition, Microsoft won't assert rights over patents over software technology that may be incorporated into Suse Linux
Against SUSE or against linux/competitors in general? Perhaps they'll allow SUSE use of patented technology but still bar it from the rest of the linux community.
Unlike many competing products, the linux market doesn't require you to buy out rights to use the software. MS can join in the linux market, rather than fighting it tooth-and-nail, and probably manage to make a profit from it alongside their windows products. If their offering are good enough, competing linux products might also dropped off, which puts the ball in MS's side of the court.
Remember, Sony's profit on the consoles is currently in the negetive to near-zero range. That being so, they're hoping to profit from game sales. So if somebody spends $1000 on a PS3, that's a couple hundred bucks that they could have been spending on games to Sony's profit (assuming the don't also have the extra few hundred on-hand at the time to purchase games).
Still, nothing illegal about it, but Sony's gripe is probably that they're not getting their expected slice of the pie. Perhaps they should direct-list some consoles on eBay themselves... certainly there's nothing preventing them.
Selling the unit at a profit is business, and not really any more greedy than any other business. It's certainly not a scam no matter how Sony wants to represent it, unless you're selling fake units or something that is not-a-PS3 (or not a complete one).
IMHO, selling there's nothing wrong with selling at good profit luxury item - aka something not a necessity - as none of the buyers will be out any quality of life if they have to go without the product.
For many who may be like me, you may already be cramming quite a bit onto one circuit/power bar. In my case, I've got:
TV
DVD Player+Surround Head Unit
VCR
Various Consoles
Lamp
One can fairly safely assume that only one console may be running at a time, but since the surround it piped through the DVD it's assumed to be on, and the VCR may be on (recording, etc) as well as the lamp in various situations. That gives us:
lamp: 50/100/150W variable
TV: unknown
DVD/Surround: At least 150W+sub in my case, some units are up to 500W for the surround
So you've got anywhere from about 250/300W up to 700-800W power draw without the console. Throw in 350W for the PS/3 and you may be over 1000W, possibly flipping the circuit-breaker on your power bar (especially the el-cheapo ones many people use) and/or possibly on a house circuit depending on whatever else is sharing the power.
I don't find it a reason to not by the PS3, but it's definately a good reason to be careful where and how you're plugging the sucker in.
It seems to me that most of the local ISP's have clauses stating that they may covertly monitor and log your internet activity. There was a bit of a discussion on /. about that at some time, I believe, as several ISP's had sneaky policy changes implemented
If it puts a more professional focus on emulators, why the heck not. OK, so now you have to pay (what is probably not an overly large amount) for the emulator/games. If the company who is being emulated produces the emulator (and therefore has a lot better access to internal code, specs, etc) you are going to end up having a better product, and in the end somebody is probably getting paid for the development work.
End result, a few more jobs, a better product, and slightly higher cost.
It is, but it seems that the term is broadly. In many cases, the term DOS was often used as a term to describe an attack which would render an entire system inoperable. That is to say, when I heard it used in this context, I expected that it would crash the browser, and lock or disable the OS. As it is, it's still an annoying bug, but having to simply restart the browser hardly seems as serious as a full-out machine crash.
If you're going electronic, it's going to give you quick results. Just dump the results from the machines into a tabulator, and then you've got the vote.
Now afterwards, you have a group of people (with mixed or no political affiliation) count the paper votes. It might take longer, but in a few days you've got your initial electronic vote, and what is hopefully a consistent paper vote to back it up. If there's a big difference between the two, it's time to do some serious investigating as to why.
Hmmm, in most cases I find that those that can design useful and attractive UI's are not the same as those who can develop kernel drivers or other such things. I see no reason why those with design/UI skills can't continue to improve the look & feel of linux, while those with skills at dissassembling/developing drivers, kernel features, and other such things continue provide those skills.
Not to mention the fact that kernel drivers, in an ideal world, would be developed and provided (preferably with source) by the hardware manufacturers, who have very little do with with the GUI in any operating system.
Possibly, but by that time I'm counting in science to give me improved longevity and virility. When is comes to living longer, well your the choice of die vs the side effects of well, die isn't quite as complicated :-)
I always wonder about the long-term effects of these pills. How do they know that, in 10-15 years, the pills won't cause permanent infertility in a certain percentage of males? How about in 20-50 years, that they won't have long-term defects in offspring. It's not that the research isn't a useful thing, but I think I'll let a generation or two act as the guinea pigs for this before me.