If it hasn't been mentioned yet, try Pogo.com. There are your basic casino games and arcade type games, but then there are lots of time-diverting word games and trivia games (the educational stuff). Since you are a geek, there are also classic strategy games like chess, checkers, etc. I've played chess matches with people all over the U.S., which is a lot more fun than playing the computer!
Unfortunately, it is quite slow with Macs, so I have to play on a Winders machine (I haven't tried it with a Linux machine so I can't attest to how fast it is).
I don't really think there is anything on there to actually teach them about computers though... except of course, the process of going to the website and playing the games.
Finally! Tabbed browsing... the one feature I missed from Camino!
From the fifteen minutes I've used it so far, Safari now "acts" a lot like Camino
Now I get the speed of Safari with the features of Camino!
Camino has been quite crashy for me (as others posting have mentioned as well) so I'll hold off the final verdict to see if Safari crashes less (though, I will state that it crashed less anyway... it just didn't have tabs!):)
Actually, with all due respect, you are assuming that because this student (more than likely) infringed on copyrighted works that it has nothing to do with "fair use". While you correctly indicate that DRM works typically deny fair use rights, this is where these issues intersect.
This student, and many other people, use P2P; some do it for valid reasons and some do it for invalid and illegal reasons.
The RIAA has to get over the fact that a "fair use" of a P2P network is time or space shifting of music. Frankly, I think it falls under making an "archival" copy (something I couldn't do to my Gladiator DVD before it got ruined, because of anti-copy protection). If I downloaded a song that I have on 8 track from this guy's P2P network, that is NOT infringement and does NOT fit into the $100 billion dollars in "damages" RIAA is seeking to collect. I am allowed to "time shift" a copyrighted work that I already own. Maybe I want to listen to that song I have on 8 track on my MP3 player!
Unfortunately, with the RIAA's abuse of the DMCA, I am thrown in with "the baby and the bath water" (as you say) when it come to infringement. And that is just not fair... especially in light of the fact that recording companies inflate the cost of music, resist moving to a fee-per-song scheme and resist creating a "time-shiftable" music format for the masses.
The reality is that the more leverage the RIAA gets making all P2P use illegal, the less "fair use" there is.
... not that the RIAA filed suit without informing MTU what it was doing, but because he actually expected advanced notice!!!
Let's get real here! The RIAA has been exploiting the DMCA since it passed! If anything, somebody at some time is going to have to stand up for "fair use" rights (whether this student is guilty of infringement or not!). My sense is that universities, who have the most to gain from strong fair use laws, should step up to the plate. Instead, in a prime example of the pussification of America, universities cowtow and kiss ass to the RIAA out of fear of legal reprecussions.
Well, what's worse? Allowing the RIAA to slowly weaken fair use so that any lawsuit becomes a multi-billion dollar slam dunk for them, or stepping up to the plate (and paying the legal fees) to defend now?
Either way, the universities (whoever) are going to be out of a lot of cash. But, by fighting now, they at least can say they had the balls to do something about it!
If this is a real users and not some set-up by a journalist then I really gotta wonder what she expects from life in general! I can't imagine that she calls tech support (at work, for a product she bought, whatever) and starts off the conversation with "Hey, Shreiking Geek! Fix my computer!". Does she roll into the service station with a flat tire and say "Hey, Grease Monkey! Change my tire... and be quick about it!! Frankly, if my momma knew I talked to support staff that way, she'd (rightfully) smack me silly!
I'm new to Linux, but the only time I had trouble with installs is with old hardware (a Dell 4100CX) and distros (Slackware and Debian) that, after thirty seconds of research on the distro's website, I found the warnings that it was for advanced Linux users. The fact that these distros even give me the option to install Linux on an old laptop with no CD drive is a testament to the developers. Do ya think I could install XP on that laptop, or OS X on a Mac II?
Every other version of Linux... which I'll admit has only been YDL 2.3 on a Lombard PB and a 9600 and Red Hat 8.0 (and now 9.0) on my home built AMD PCs... has been trouble free. Red Hat 8.0 and 9.0 have to be the most user friendly OS installs (behind OS X) that I have ever seen (and I've had my share of Winblows installs (3.11 through ME). No! Printing didn't work right out of the install, but it doesn't with OS X either! And ya know, sometimes you may actually have to open the Prefs panel and select a modem script or a screen resolution!!! Yeah, I've complained on/. before about some of the odd interfaces with Linux desktops and the multiple installs of GUIs (KDE and Gnome) and software (KOffice, Open Office, Kate, AbiWord) for newbies , but ya can't beat "free" (as in the cost of the 3 CD-Rs to burn the ISOs!) with all that Linux gives you!
Here's some advice: buy a newer used computer! What the heck do they pay "technical writers" anyway!?! Heck, I see Dell desktops with 7 - 900 mhz PIIIs for 300 bucks!
Asking any OS to install on old outdated hardware is asking for the impossible
I disagree. System Settings has "Date & Time", "Keyboard", "Display", "Language", "Login Screen" and "Users & Groups"... all things that are "Preferences" as far I am concerned.
Of course, then I look in Preferences and see that "Mouse" and "Keyboard" are doubled up there too. "Sounds" which seems more like a System Setting is in Prefs. And it seems to me that Password, Preferred Applications, File Types and Programs and Network Proxy (all in Prefs) can be "possibly dangerous". Incidentally, why is Network Proxy in Preferences and Network in System Settings?
So it seems to me that "easy and low risk" versus "harder, more low-level and possible dangerous" is not the distinction... there really doesn't seem to be a distinction except that one developer thinks these things should be called System Settings and one thinks they should be called Preferences!
Such things are exactly what makes OSS difficult to use for the average user, who, as I said, are the people who will give OSS more of a voice in the overall marketplace.
-A
"Free" still requires clarity and directions
on
Too Much Free Software
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
While many "geeks" may not care whether the average Joe or Jane uses Linux or not, they should.
I'd label myself an above-average Joe when it comes to computers.... I can program some C, I can install and configure Apache and I can build a decent system for a couple of hundred bucks. Yet, I still struggle when I want to install or use a piece of OSS. I find that I often have to get into an "engineer mindset" (which is tough when you are not an engineer) to figure out what the developer means or wants me to do. Sometimes I get the impression that because OSS is "free" and there is no warranty, that developers think they can half-ass the install instructions or that they write them as if somebody with their acumen in programming is installing it. I wish all developers would (if possible) make an install like Phoenix's install... unpack the damn thing and drop the folder wherever you want!
I frankly just don't understand why distros insist on having two desktop environments on a basic install, and two Office suites (Open Office and (Gnome or KOffice)), Kate, Emacs, Mozilla and Konqueror (and Galeon) and two of a bunch of programs. I mean, jeez, how many friggin web browsers do ya need!?!
I look at my Red Hat "Start Menu" and there is a Preference option and a "System Settings" option... who the heck came up with that!?! Add to that "System Tools" and the average user has no idea where to go to do basic stuff... it took me a few months to even get comfortable with three different places for these things. I'm not saying "Make things like Windows or OS X", I'm just saying that the amount of software and the fact that distros feel the need to install doubles of a lot of stuff makes it difficult for the average user to understand (and thus fear) OSS.
The thing is, if the Open Source movement wants more "clout", it has to have more people using the software. There are a limited number of "geeks" in the world, but there are quite a few "quasi-geeks" (like me) and a lot of people just "want the damn thing to work!". So Slashdotters, Developers and everone involved in the OSS movement should all care about getting the average person using OSS, making sure they can install it, understand its interface, and can get help without getting flamed, etc.
Unfortunately, my (completely) anecdotal evidence suggests that until OSS is streamlined and made usable for the masses, it will be hard to get outside of the enterprise environment (not that the desktop user is necessary, but it does provide more "market clout" for OSS).
You make a good point... I forgot the greater goal for a "task" (namely, a "desktop competitor)" that I think is important to achieving that greater goal. The more people who (can) use open source software the more the community (i.e., the world) can regain control of the software that runs our lives. Unfortunately, the server market only has exposure to IT professionals... the general public doesn't know if the web page (or file server or mail server) they are accessing in sitting on Unix or Windows. That goes to the quality of open source software vis-a-vis closed...I see solid, user friendly desktop environments as a way to "advertise" open source. Then people might say "Gee... if this runs so well on my desktop, I wonder if it can run a business?" Then, they might find out it already does!
I did go buy a Mac... back in 1987, but in 2000, I discovered Linux and I really like the philosophy behind open source. I
Everytime a story comes out on Red Hat, we get the "Red Hat is the MS of Linux" posts and the "F@ck Red Hat, roll your own with Gentoo" and the "Debian Rules" posts.
First, I think Red Hat is far from the MS of Linux. I paid 60 bucks to be a part of RHN and I actually downloaded RH 8.0 without paying anything. Now, I will complain (as I did in a previous story) that it pisses me off that I pay that 60 bucks for "priority ISOs"and I am on my fifth try of downloading RH 9.0 disk 1, but that is a different issue.
It was my understanding that the "goal" of the open source community was to get a "desktop Linux" up and running to compete with MS. Gentoo and Debian are way too complicated for that... I can install Debian and Slackware with difficulty (never had success with Gentoo). But I am a "regular user" with just enough gumption and knowledge to be dangerous to myself when it comes to Linux installs. Frankly, that is why I like Red Hat. I have never had an install problem and I always have a working "desktop computer" to use.
Yeah, rolling your own kernel is great, I guess... I've never actually done it... I frankly don't have the time to sit down and figure it out. I count on solid, trouble free distros like Red Hat to get me a working Linux "desktop system" and then I'll compile Apache the way I want on my own (and I still have to do some planning to get it right). But, most desktop users are just fine and happy with the "easy install" of the system and the software they want (Apache, Open Office... whatever).
If the community ever wants to get Linux out of the background for desktop computing, more time has to be spent on easy installs from ALL distro providers and easy (basically meaning, no command line) configurations. Rolling your own kernel and command line configs will always be be there for the hardcore geeks.
I am a Red Hat subscriber and I am pushing a measly 14 kb/sec to download three 600+ MB ISOs. I'm on ISO #1 with 9 hours to go!
So what exactly is the advantage of getting the distro a week ahead of everyone else when the servers for "subscriber use" are so overloaded it will take me a week to download it!?!
Hey, look, no doubt Windows PCs are faster for a lot of "look and feel" things. But as somebody who uses, and is his home's and his small office network admin, there is no comparison.
Windows is a big pain in the @ss when I install, remove or update anything. I figure that Windows "down time" more than makes up for the fact that my Mac has delays when manipulating the GUI, renders PS stuff more slowly and occassionally has a "spinning color wheel" for minutes. Additionally, I have had no catastrophic OS failures with OS X since switching from 9 and I have at least every few months some major problem with Windows that ends up being hours of downtime! Add to that the well-known and well-exploited security issues with Windows and, for me, the choice is clear.
Yet, I would love Apple to put this Megahertz myth to rest by getting away from Motorola (since they seem not to be able to deliver) and move to IBM, or better yet, move to AMD. Still, I think OS X will always come up slower than Windows because (a) I don't think software companies know how to optimize code (or don't want to put the time and money into it) for the Mac and perhaps more significantly, OS X will always be more secure than Windows. And security generally puts a hit on speed. I'm willing to live with that.
I'd really be interested to see what kind of damages SCO can prove. They may end up racking up millions in dollar of legal fees for a very small reward, if any.
Even the IBM/AT&T agreement is valid, I'd be surprised if IBM wasn't smart enough to isolate engineers with knowledge of SCO Unix source code from engineers assisting in the Linux development. I mean, c'mon, IBM has been in the computer industry since ENIAC and has been in business almost twice that long! Does anybody really believe IBM can't write a non-disclosure agreement and isolate its employees? SCO makes it sound like the 7,000 IBM engineers working on Linux are the only engineers IBM has, thus, IBM must have violated trade secrets! PLEASE! IBM employs hundreds of thousand of people and probably 10 times the number of engineers they have working on Linux.
Just because IBM has thrown some effort into Linux, doesn't mean they are tossing AIX out the window. It is probably a wait and see... if Linux really catches on, we can move AIX enterprises over and add Linux enterprises with the benefits of the GPL. IBM is now a service provider, and the reality is, the only way you make money with Linux is providing service.
It'll be interesting to see how much the lawyers end up making out of all this.
First off, this is a trademark issue, so notwithstanding the misuse of petard in the headline, a trademark is not a copyright... they are under completely separate Acts with different issues and rules of law.
There are three issues people are mixing up here. Likelihood of Confusion is a separate issue from descriptiveness which is a separate (but related) issue to genericness.
There may well be likelihood of confusion issues between Windows and Lindows. Part of confusion is "riding the coattails" of a competitors mark, which it certainly sounds like Lindows is trying to do. But Xerox, nor Apple, bothered to trademark the term WINDOWS as it relates to computer software, so MS won the race to first to register (the Trademark Act is a "race statute").
A defense to confusion is if the prior registered mark is generic. Generic terms are incapable of function as a trademark. See Trademark Act Sec. 23(c). That means if you want a registered trademark, you won't get it, and if you have a registered trademark, you are going to lose it.
Everytime there is a trademark story on slashdot, people think it is like patents, where the rest of the world is precluded from using the word in any context. Not at all! Others are precluded from using a trademarked word or slogan in connection with particular goods and services and related goods and services. So you are precluded from using the word Windows (for now) in connection with software (and a lot of other things because Windows it is a famous trademark), but you would not be precluded from using Windows as a trademark on chairs or fruit or cars. Those goods are not even remotely related to operating systems.
Trademarks are about consumer protection, not about monopolies. Frankly, everybody on Slashdot wants to know if they are buying a Windows product, because then they likely wouldn't buy it! Trademark Law (and Trademark Registration) protects consumers (i.e. Slasdot readers) from confusion by ensuring that consumers know the source of the goods and know the quality (or lack thereof) of the goods.
Descriptive trademarks are when the words describe a purpose, function, feature, use or user, quality or ingredient of the goods or services. Remember, descriptiveness is in relation to the goods and services offered. However, descriptive terms may receive a registration IF they can show secondary meaning. That is, the trademark has been around long enough for people to equate it to the source of goods or services, EVEN THOUGH it describes them. Check the USPTO status page. Punch in Registration No 1872264. Windows is registered under Section 2(f) of the Trademark Act (i.e., the secondary meaning (also called acquired distinctiveness) section of the Act).
At the time the WINDOWS application was pending, it was descriptive (it described a Windowing feature of computer operating software), but it was not at the level of generic (which requires a significant showing by the government). By 1990, Windows had long been in use (5 year) the required time to claim secondary meaning.
Trademarks can become generic over time (the reason for Google's insistance on taking it out of the dictionary). Windows wasn't very strong to begin with and they never really did a great job (IMHO) in "policing their mark". No surprise they are fighting a defense of their mark being generic.
I haven't read the entire letter, but based upon the snippets posted here on Slashdot, I'd say that is just a preliminary letter. They have plenty of time to "get nasty" if they want to. Based upon the hip, young, somewhat offbeat crowd I hear work at Google, it is actually nice to see a lawyer trying an alternative to "Stop or we'll sue!".
Gives me some hope for my profession!
-A
Use as a verb is step towards generic
on
Verbing Weirds Google
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
They actually sent a cease and desist because use as a verb is clear signs that a trademark is becoming (or has become) generic. See TMEP 1209.01(c). As such, another party can use that as a defense if Google tries to claim trademark infringement. So I'm not surprised they sent the cease & desist and would have done the same thing.
Anybody recall the Xerox ad of a few years ago... "There are two R's in XEROX(r) "? The whole purpose of that ad was to get people to realize that a) XEROX is a trademark and b) to stop using it as a verb (i.e., "I xeroxed this article for my friend") which causes it to lose its trademark status.
Trademarks, though a form of intellectual property, are more about consumer protection than about restricting people from using certain words.
I raised this question my first year of law school in a Copyright class and never got a really good answer.
Seems to me that if the public is restricted to accessing Westlaw, Lexis-Nexis and law libraries (that I know of, not too many state law repositories allow non-lawyer access), then ignorance of the law can be an excuse!
No question you'd be laughed out of the courthouse with that argument, however, how can one "know the law", if one doesn't have access?
Do you handle large sums of money for the company? Are you in a position of trust for binding the company to contracts?
Then I'd say you must submit.
-A
Broadband overestimation
on
Sim-Dud?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I think EA (and Microsoft) probably overestimated the number of broadband users.
At 40 bucks a month (at a minimum), Broadband ain't cheap. And though Sims Online is quite fun, it would suck without a highspeed connection. And anyway, The Sims is pretty fun on its own... without dealing with virtual SimTrolls.
Completely irrelevant! We are talking about the desktop market, NOT the Server Market. What parent is going to buy MS IIS for their kid!?!
But OK, I'll see your Mac OS X Server, but I guess that means I get to add all of these servers in too then, huh? http://www.microsoft.com/servers/evaluation/overvi ew/default.asp
Today's Celeron 1.7 is yesterday's PII 350. A PII doesn't run ME very well (heck I have a PIII 800 that doesn't run it very well) and a Celeron doesn't run XP very well.
48X CD-ROM drives were standard in 1999. Combo Drives (or at least a DVD and a CD-RW drives) are standard in 2003.
64 MB of RAM runs Win 98. 256 MB RAM does not run XP very well (especially with a Celeron 1.7).
"Free" 15" monitor!?! No thanks... you can't even find a 15" CRT in the store anymore. A 20 dollar Lexmark printer with crappy printing and an ink cartridge I have to replace after 2 months? Are they doing me a favor by throwing that in, or just trying to ditch old inventory?
I just went to Dell's site to build a 499 dollar PC! There was no more 499 dollar one, so I went with the 699 (799 - 100 dollar rebate). It ended up costing 1488. Yeah it as a PIV now... 1.8 ghz. 15" monitor (flat screen too), but no free printer. I added 512 MB of RAM to run XP. I upgraded to full operating system, XP Pro (Note: OS X only has one version). I added a Combo Drive (since that is the minimum you can get on a Power Mac). Gigabit ethernet wasn't an option. Neither was a graphics card. That could have something to do with the Intel built in video motherboard they used to save money. There is no AGP slot to upgrade that either. There is also probably only 2 PCI slots in that machine. And not likely any room to put a second harddrive.
All that and the thrill of using Windows! No thanks! I suspect that the reason the G4 is slow has more to do with the OS than the CPU. I suspect PIV's are so darn fast is because Windows is so full of security holes.
So I'd say for 1488, I'll pony up the extra 200 bucks to buy a CRT for an entry level G4 and not waste my time trying to upgrade a PC with no expansion slots, nor configure and secure Windows XP. And a single 1 ghz G4 Power Mac probably is comparable in speed (whatever that means) to a P-IV 1.8.
Like I said. I got nothing against PC boxes. I build them and enjoy doing it. The 499 dollar PC is great for a basic business machine. But these machines aren't directed at businesses. They are directed at parents buying for their kid. And I do have a problem with pawning off underpowered, unexpandable, unupgradeable machines as some great home media/game box to unsuspecting parents.
The $499.00 Dell (Gateway, HP, whatever) is a farce and borders on, IMHO, consumer fraud. Everytime, I go to Dell and try to configure a $499.00 Dell with the standard bells & whistles (that comes with a PowerMac, BTW), the price always jumps from 499 to 1100 or 1200 bucks (minimum).
Yeah, you can get a 499 dollar Dell, but it has the standard equipment of a four year old model.
What a joke!
I like building my own machines, especially for running Linux (webservers, file sharing and such), but when I want to get anything done (i.e., to make a living), I get it done on a Mac. I don't spend time configuring (as in Linux) and I don't spend time recovering from crashes or things just not working not matter what I do (as I do in Windows).
Any bets, this won't get past the Sherman Anti-Trust Act?
At the very least, I'm sure there will be consumers proteection issues for price-fixing out the wazoo for DRM challenge music files!
That will make me run out and buy! Unforunately, the media companies just don't get it. I will NOT spend 18 dollars on a CD, and neither will most (all!) of my mid-20 to mid 30s friends. So there aren't not "losing" music sales to music file sharing. They just aren't getting any sales anymore because I am fed up of them feeding me schlock and expecting me to pay for it. As far as I'm concerned the ball is in their court to offer non-DRM challenge MP3 (Ogg, whatever!) files to me at a reasonable per song rate (reasonable to me seems to be a buck fifty to 2 bucks a song (average 12 songs over an 18 dollar CD)). Then frankly, I will pay for music.
Until then, I'm buying up as much cheap casettes as I can so I can "time-shift" my music to MP3 format -- That is Fair Use!
My new thing now is to hit the flea markets. I buy up every album that interests me on tape or LP (and sometimes CD if the price is right) for 50 cents to 5 bucks a piece. Thus, if I have the "Right of Time Shifting" under the Copyright Act's fair use section, then it is perfectly within my right to download a copy off of Limewire to us ein my MP3 player.
Beyond that if RIAA ever decides they want to collect for anything that I don't actually own on LP, Casette or CD, my defense will be that I've already been charged for selections in their "compilations" (i.e. songs I didn't want on many of the albums I bought) that I've already overpaid for their music.
Yeah, it probably won't fly, but my sense is that it will bring enough negative exposure that RIAA might just settle with me.:)
Slashdot Mirror
If it hasn't been mentioned yet, try Pogo.com. There are your basic casino games and arcade type games, but then there are lots of time-diverting word games and trivia games (the educational stuff). Since you are a geek, there are also classic strategy games like chess, checkers, etc. I've played chess matches with people all over the U.S., which is a lot more fun than playing the computer!
Unfortunately, it is quite slow with Macs, so I have to play on a Winders machine (I haven't tried it with a Linux machine so I can't attest to how fast it is).
I don't really think there is anything on there to actually teach them about computers though... except of course, the process of going to the website and playing the games.
Have fun!
-A
Finally! Tabbed browsing... the one feature I missed from Camino!
From the fifteen minutes I've used it so far, Safari now "acts" a lot like Camino
Now I get the speed of Safari with the features of Camino!
Camino has been quite crashy for me (as others posting have mentioned as well) so I'll hold off the final verdict to see if Safari crashes less (though, I will state that it crashed less anyway... it just didn't have tabs!) :)
-A
Actually, with all due respect, you are assuming that because this student (more than likely) infringed on copyrighted works that it has nothing to do with "fair use". While you correctly indicate that DRM works typically deny fair use rights, this is where these issues intersect.
This student, and many other people, use P2P; some do it for valid reasons and some do it for invalid and illegal reasons.The RIAA has to get over the fact that a "fair use" of a P2P network is time or space shifting of music. Frankly, I think it falls under making an "archival" copy (something I couldn't do to my Gladiator DVD before it got ruined, because of anti-copy protection). If I downloaded a song that I have on 8 track from this guy's P2P network, that is NOT infringement and does NOT fit into the $100 billion dollars in "damages" RIAA is seeking to collect. I am allowed to "time shift" a copyrighted work that I already own. Maybe I want to listen to that song I have on 8 track on my MP3 player!
Unfortunately, with the RIAA's abuse of the DMCA, I am thrown in with "the baby and the bath water" (as you say) when it come to infringement. And that is just not fair... especially in light of the fact that recording companies inflate the cost of music, resist moving to a fee-per-song scheme and resist creating a "time-shiftable" music format for the masses.
The reality is that the more leverage the RIAA gets making all P2P use illegal, the less "fair use" there is.
-A
... not that the RIAA filed suit without informing MTU what it was doing, but because he actually expected advanced notice!!!
Let's get real here! The RIAA has been exploiting the DMCA since it passed! If anything, somebody at some time is going to have to stand up for "fair use" rights (whether this student is guilty of infringement or not!). My sense is that universities, who have the most to gain from strong fair use laws, should step up to the plate. Instead, in a prime example of the pussification of America, universities cowtow and kiss ass to the RIAA out of fear of legal reprecussions.
Well, what's worse? Allowing the RIAA to slowly weaken fair use so that any lawsuit becomes a multi-billion dollar slam dunk for them, or stepping up to the plate (and paying the legal fees) to defend now?
Either way, the universities (whoever) are going to be out of a lot of cash. But, by fighting now, they at least can say they had the balls to do something about it!
-A
If this is a real users and not some set-up by a journalist then I really gotta wonder what she expects from life in general! I can't imagine that she calls tech support (at work, for a product she bought, whatever) and starts off the conversation with "Hey, Shreiking Geek! Fix my computer!". Does she roll into the service station with a flat tire and say "Hey, Grease Monkey! Change my tire... and be quick about it!! Frankly, if my momma knew I talked to support staff that way, she'd (rightfully) smack me silly!
I'm new to Linux, but the only time I had trouble with installs is with old hardware (a Dell 4100CX) and distros (Slackware and Debian) that, after thirty seconds of research on the distro's website, I found the warnings that it was for advanced Linux users. The fact that these distros even give me the option to install Linux on an old laptop with no CD drive is a testament to the developers. Do ya think I could install XP on that laptop, or OS X on a Mac II?
Every other version of Linux... which I'll admit has only been YDL 2.3 on a Lombard PB and a 9600 and Red Hat 8.0 (and now 9.0) on my home built AMD PCs... has been trouble free. Red Hat 8.0 and 9.0 have to be the most user friendly OS installs (behind OS X) that I have ever seen (and I've had my share of Winblows installs (3.11 through ME). No! Printing didn't work right out of the install, but it doesn't with OS X either! And ya know, sometimes you may actually have to open the Prefs panel and select a modem script or a screen resolution!!! Yeah, I've complained on /. before about some of the odd interfaces with Linux desktops and the multiple installs of GUIs (KDE and Gnome) and software (KOffice, Open Office, Kate, AbiWord) for newbies , but ya can't beat "free" (as in the cost of the 3 CD-Rs to burn the ISOs!) with all that Linux gives you!
Here's some advice: buy a newer used computer! What the heck do they pay "technical writers" anyway!?! Heck, I see Dell desktops with 7 - 900 mhz PIIIs for 300 bucks!
Asking any OS to install on old outdated hardware is asking for the impossible
-A
I disagree. System Settings has "Date & Time", "Keyboard", "Display", "Language", "Login Screen" and "Users & Groups"... all things that are "Preferences" as far I am concerned.
Of course, then I look in Preferences and see that "Mouse" and "Keyboard" are doubled up there too. "Sounds" which seems more like a System Setting is in Prefs. And it seems to me that Password, Preferred Applications, File Types and Programs and Network Proxy (all in Prefs) can be "possibly dangerous". Incidentally, why is Network Proxy in Preferences and Network in System Settings?
So it seems to me that "easy and low risk" versus "harder, more low-level and possible dangerous" is not the distinction... there really doesn't seem to be a distinction except that one developer thinks these things should be called System Settings and one thinks they should be called Preferences!
Such things are exactly what makes OSS difficult to use for the average user, who, as I said, are the people who will give OSS more of a voice in the overall marketplace.
-A
While many "geeks" may not care whether the average Joe or Jane uses Linux or not, they should.
I'd label myself an above-average Joe when it comes to computers.... I can program some C, I can install and configure Apache and I can build a decent system for a couple of hundred bucks. Yet, I still struggle when I want to install or use a piece of OSS. I find that I often have to get into an "engineer mindset" (which is tough when you are not an engineer) to figure out what the developer means or wants me to do. Sometimes I get the impression that because OSS is "free" and there is no warranty, that developers think they can half-ass the install instructions or that they write them as if somebody with their acumen in programming is installing it. I wish all developers would (if possible) make an install like Phoenix's install... unpack the damn thing and drop the folder wherever you want!
I frankly just don't understand why distros insist on having two desktop environments on a basic install, and two Office suites (Open Office and (Gnome or KOffice)), Kate, Emacs, Mozilla and Konqueror (and Galeon) and two of a bunch of programs. I mean, jeez, how many friggin web browsers do ya need!?!
I look at my Red Hat "Start Menu" and there is a Preference option and a "System Settings" option... who the heck came up with that!?! Add to that "System Tools" and the average user has no idea where to go to do basic stuff... it took me a few months to even get comfortable with three different places for these things. I'm not saying "Make things like Windows or OS X", I'm just saying that the amount of software and the fact that distros feel the need to install doubles of a lot of stuff makes it difficult for the average user to understand (and thus fear) OSS.
The thing is, if the Open Source movement wants more "clout", it has to have more people using the software. There are a limited number of "geeks" in the world, but there are quite a few "quasi-geeks" (like me) and a lot of people just "want the damn thing to work!". So Slashdotters, Developers and everone involved in the OSS movement should all care about getting the average person using OSS, making sure they can install it, understand its interface, and can get help without getting flamed, etc.
Unfortunately, my (completely) anecdotal evidence suggests that until OSS is streamlined and made usable for the masses, it will be hard to get outside of the enterprise environment (not that the desktop user is necessary, but it does provide more "market clout" for OSS).
-A
You make a good point... I forgot the greater goal for a "task" (namely, a "desktop competitor)" that I think is important to achieving that greater goal. The more people who (can) use open source software the more the community (i.e., the world) can regain control of the software that runs our lives. Unfortunately, the server market only has exposure to IT professionals... the general public doesn't know if the web page (or file server or mail server) they are accessing in sitting on Unix or Windows. That goes to the quality of open source software vis-a-vis closed...I see solid, user friendly desktop environments as a way to "advertise" open source. Then people might say "Gee... if this runs so well on my desktop, I wonder if it can run a business?" Then, they might find out it already does!
I did go buy a Mac... back in 1987, but in 2000, I discovered Linux and I really like the philosophy behind open source. I
Everytime a story comes out on Red Hat, we get the "Red Hat is the MS of Linux" posts and the "F@ck Red Hat, roll your own with Gentoo" and the "Debian Rules" posts.
First, I think Red Hat is far from the MS of Linux. I paid 60 bucks to be a part of RHN and I actually downloaded RH 8.0 without paying anything. Now, I will complain (as I did in a previous story) that it pisses me off that I pay that 60 bucks for "priority ISOs"and I am on my fifth try of downloading RH 9.0 disk 1, but that is a different issue.
It was my understanding that the "goal" of the open source community was to get a "desktop Linux" up and running to compete with MS. Gentoo and Debian are way too complicated for that... I can install Debian and Slackware with difficulty (never had success with Gentoo). But I am a "regular user" with just enough gumption and knowledge to be dangerous to myself when it comes to Linux installs. Frankly, that is why I like Red Hat. I have never had an install problem and I always have a working "desktop computer" to use.
Yeah, rolling your own kernel is great, I guess... I've never actually done it... I frankly don't have the time to sit down and figure it out. I count on solid, trouble free distros like Red Hat to get me a working Linux "desktop system" and then I'll compile Apache the way I want on my own (and I still have to do some planning to get it right). But, most desktop users are just fine and happy with the "easy install" of the system and the software they want (Apache, Open Office... whatever).
If the community ever wants to get Linux out of the background for desktop computing, more time has to be spent on easy installs from ALL distro providers and easy (basically meaning, no command line) configurations. Rolling your own kernel and command line configs will always be be there for the hardcore geeks.
I am a Red Hat subscriber and I am pushing a measly 14 kb/sec to download three 600+ MB ISOs. I'm on ISO #1 with 9 hours to go!
So what exactly is the advantage of getting the distro a week ahead of everyone else when the servers for "subscriber use" are so overloaded it will take me a week to download it!?!
Hey, look, no doubt Windows PCs are faster for a lot of "look and feel" things. But as somebody who uses, and is his home's and his small office network admin, there is no comparison.
Windows is a big pain in the @ss when I install, remove or update anything. I figure that Windows "down time" more than makes up for the fact that my Mac has delays when manipulating the GUI, renders PS stuff more slowly and occassionally has a "spinning color wheel" for minutes. Additionally, I have had no catastrophic OS failures with OS X since switching from 9 and I have at least every few months some major problem with Windows that ends up being hours of downtime! Add to that the well-known and well-exploited security issues with Windows and, for me, the choice is clear.
Yet, I would love Apple to put this Megahertz myth to rest by getting away from Motorola (since they seem not to be able to deliver) and move to IBM, or better yet, move to AMD. Still, I think OS X will always come up slower than Windows because (a) I don't think software companies know how to optimize code (or don't want to put the time and money into it) for the Mac and perhaps more significantly, OS X will always be more secure than Windows. And security generally puts a hit on speed. I'm willing to live with that.
-A
I'd really be interested to see what kind of damages SCO can prove. They may end up racking up millions in dollar of legal fees for a very small reward, if any.
Even the IBM/AT&T agreement is valid, I'd be surprised if IBM wasn't smart enough to isolate engineers with knowledge of SCO Unix source code from engineers assisting in the Linux development. I mean, c'mon, IBM has been in the computer industry since ENIAC and has been in business almost twice that long! Does anybody really believe IBM can't write a non-disclosure agreement and isolate its employees? SCO makes it sound like the 7,000 IBM engineers working on Linux are the only engineers IBM has, thus, IBM must have violated trade secrets! PLEASE! IBM employs hundreds of thousand of people and probably 10 times the number of engineers they have working on Linux.
Just because IBM has thrown some effort into Linux, doesn't mean they are tossing AIX out the window. It is probably a wait and see... if Linux really catches on, we can move AIX enterprises over and add Linux enterprises with the benefits of the GPL. IBM is now a service provider, and the reality is, the only way you make money with Linux is providing service.
It'll be interesting to see how much the lawyers end up making out of all this.
-Anthony
First off, this is a trademark issue, so notwithstanding the misuse of petard in the headline, a trademark is not a copyright... they are under completely separate Acts with different issues and rules of law.
There are three issues people are mixing up here. Likelihood of Confusion is a separate issue from descriptiveness which is a separate (but related) issue to genericness.
There may well be likelihood of confusion issues between Windows and Lindows. Part of confusion is "riding the coattails" of a competitors mark, which it certainly sounds like Lindows is trying to do. But Xerox, nor Apple, bothered to trademark the term WINDOWS as it relates to computer software, so MS won the race to first to register (the Trademark Act is a "race statute").
A defense to confusion is if the prior registered mark is generic. Generic terms are incapable of function as a trademark. See Trademark Act Sec. 23(c). That means if you want a registered trademark, you won't get it, and if you have a registered trademark, you are going to lose it.
Everytime there is a trademark story on slashdot, people think it is like patents, where the rest of the world is precluded from using the word in any context. Not at all! Others are precluded from using a trademarked word or slogan in connection with particular goods and services and related goods and services. So you are precluded from using the word Windows (for now) in connection with software (and a lot of other things because Windows it is a famous trademark), but you would not be precluded from using Windows as a trademark on chairs or fruit or cars. Those goods are not even remotely related to operating systems.
Trademarks are about consumer protection, not about monopolies. Frankly, everybody on Slashdot wants to know if they are buying a Windows product, because then they likely wouldn't buy it! Trademark Law (and Trademark Registration) protects consumers (i.e. Slasdot readers) from confusion by ensuring that consumers know the source of the goods and know the quality (or lack thereof) of the goods.
Descriptive trademarks are when the words describe a purpose, function, feature, use or user, quality or ingredient of the goods or services. Remember, descriptiveness is in relation to the goods and services offered. However, descriptive terms may receive a registration IF they can show secondary meaning. That is, the trademark has been around long enough for people to equate it to the source of goods or services, EVEN THOUGH it describes them. Check the USPTO status page. Punch in Registration No 1872264. Windows is registered under Section 2(f) of the Trademark Act (i.e., the secondary meaning (also called acquired distinctiveness) section of the Act).
At the time the WINDOWS application was pending, it was descriptive (it described a Windowing feature of computer operating software), but it was not at the level of generic (which requires a significant showing by the government). By 1990, Windows had long been in use (5 year) the required time to claim secondary meaning.
Trademarks can become generic over time (the reason for Google's insistance on taking it out of the dictionary). Windows wasn't very strong to begin with and they never really did a great job (IMHO) in "policing their mark". No surprise they are fighting a defense of their mark being generic.
-A
I haven't read the entire letter, but based upon the snippets posted here on Slashdot, I'd say that is just a preliminary letter. They have plenty of time to "get nasty" if they want to. Based upon the hip, young, somewhat offbeat crowd I hear work at Google, it is actually nice to see a lawyer trying an alternative to "Stop or we'll sue!".
Gives me some hope for my profession!
-A
They actually sent a cease and desist because use as a verb is clear signs that a trademark is becoming (or has become) generic. See TMEP 1209.01(c). As such, another party can use that as a defense if Google tries to claim trademark infringement. So I'm not surprised they sent the cease & desist and would have done the same thing.
Anybody recall the Xerox ad of a few years ago... "There are two R's in XEROX(r) "? The whole purpose of that ad was to get people to realize that a) XEROX is a trademark and b) to stop using it as a verb (i.e., "I xeroxed this article for my friend") which causes it to lose its trademark status.
Trademarks, though a form of intellectual property, are more about consumer protection than about restricting people from using certain words.
-A
I'm sure Intel will rush to make Palladium and TCPA compliant hardware for Micro$oft.
-A
Seems to me that if the public is restricted to accessing Westlaw, Lexis-Nexis and law libraries (that I know of, not too many state law repositories allow non-lawyer access), then ignorance of the law can be an excuse!
No question you'd be laughed out of the courthouse with that argument, however, how can one "know the law", if one doesn't have access?
-Anthony
http://www.itslegal.com/infonet/employ/hired.asp
Do you handle large sums of money for the company? Are you in a position of trust for binding the company to contracts?
Then I'd say you must submit.
-A
I think EA (and Microsoft) probably overestimated the number of broadband users.
At 40 bucks a month (at a minimum), Broadband ain't cheap. And though Sims Online is quite fun, it would suck without a highspeed connection. And anyway, The Sims is pretty fun on its own... without dealing with virtual SimTrolls.
-Anthony
Completely irrelevant! We are talking about the desktop market, NOT the Server Market. What parent is going to buy MS IIS for their kid!?!
But OK, I'll see your Mac OS X Server, but I guess that means I get to add all of these servers in too then, huh? http://www.microsoft.com/servers/evaluation/overvi ew/default.asp
FUD? That's a little dramatic.
Today's Celeron 1.7 is yesterday's PII 350. A PII doesn't run ME very well (heck I have a PIII 800 that doesn't run it very well) and a Celeron doesn't run XP very well.
48X CD-ROM drives were standard in 1999. Combo Drives (or at least a DVD and a CD-RW drives) are standard in 2003.
64 MB of RAM runs Win 98. 256 MB RAM does not run XP very well (especially with a Celeron 1.7).
"Free" 15" monitor!?! No thanks... you can't even find a 15" CRT in the store anymore. A 20 dollar Lexmark printer with crappy printing and an ink cartridge I have to replace after 2 months? Are they doing me a favor by throwing that in, or just trying to ditch old inventory?
I just went to Dell's site to build a 499 dollar PC! There was no more 499 dollar one, so I went with the 699 (799 - 100 dollar rebate). It ended up costing 1488. Yeah it as a PIV now... 1.8 ghz. 15" monitor (flat screen too), but no free printer. I added 512 MB of RAM to run XP. I upgraded to full operating system, XP Pro (Note: OS X only has one version). I added a Combo Drive (since that is the minimum you can get on a Power Mac). Gigabit ethernet wasn't an option. Neither was a graphics card. That could have something to do with the Intel built in video motherboard they used to save money. There is no AGP slot to upgrade that either. There is also probably only 2 PCI slots in that machine. And not likely any room to put a second harddrive.
All that and the thrill of using Windows! No thanks! I suspect that the reason the G4 is slow has more to do with the OS than the CPU. I suspect PIV's are so darn fast is because Windows is so full of security holes.
So I'd say for 1488, I'll pony up the extra 200 bucks to buy a CRT for an entry level G4 and not waste my time trying to upgrade a PC with no expansion slots, nor configure and secure Windows XP. And a single 1 ghz G4 Power Mac probably is comparable in speed (whatever that means) to a P-IV 1.8.
Like I said. I got nothing against PC boxes. I build them and enjoy doing it. The 499 dollar PC is great for a basic business machine. But these machines aren't directed at businesses. They are directed at parents buying for their kid. And I do have a problem with pawning off underpowered, unexpandable, unupgradeable machines as some great home media/game box to unsuspecting parents.
The $499.00 Dell (Gateway, HP, whatever) is a farce and borders on, IMHO, consumer fraud. Everytime, I go to Dell and try to configure a $499.00 Dell with the standard bells & whistles (that comes with a PowerMac, BTW), the price always jumps from 499 to 1100 or 1200 bucks (minimum).
Yeah, you can get a 499 dollar Dell, but it has the standard equipment of a four year old model.What a joke!
I like building my own machines, especially for running Linux (webservers, file sharing and such), but when I want to get anything done (i.e., to make a living), I get it done on a Mac. I don't spend time configuring (as in Linux) and I don't spend time recovering from crashes or things just not working not matter what I do (as I do in Windows).
Any bets, this won't get past the Sherman Anti-Trust Act?
At the very least, I'm sure there will be consumers proteection issues for price-fixing out the wazoo for DRM challenge music files!
That will make me run out and buy! Unforunately, the media companies just don't get it. I will NOT spend 18 dollars on a CD, and neither will most (all!) of my mid-20 to mid 30s friends. So there aren't not "losing" music sales to music file sharing. They just aren't getting any sales anymore because I am fed up of them feeding me schlock and expecting me to pay for it. As far as I'm concerned the ball is in their court to offer non-DRM challenge MP3 (Ogg, whatever!) files to me at a reasonable per song rate (reasonable to me seems to be a buck fifty to 2 bucks a song (average 12 songs over an 18 dollar CD)). Then frankly, I will pay for music.
Until then, I'm buying up as much cheap casettes as I can so I can "time-shift" my music to MP3 format -- That is Fair Use!
Gee, and I just thought they want another quasi-generic trademark like "Windows"!
-A
My new thing now is to hit the flea markets. I buy up every album that interests me on tape or LP (and sometimes CD if the price is right) for 50 cents to 5 bucks a piece. Thus, if I have the "Right of Time Shifting" under the Copyright Act's fair use section, then it is perfectly within my right to download a copy off of Limewire to us ein my MP3 player.
Beyond that if RIAA ever decides they want to collect for anything that I don't actually own on LP, Casette or CD, my defense will be that I've already been charged for selections in their "compilations" (i.e. songs I didn't want on many of the albums I bought) that I've already overpaid for their music.
Yeah, it probably won't fly, but my sense is that it will bring enough negative exposure that RIAA might just settle with me. :)
-A