I don't support Kerry, who is a mirror image of Bush on the Democrat side, so your argument is irrelevant.
The real issue is: the terrorists are CORRECT. The policies of the US are themselves examples of "state terrorism", and the terrorists are correct in fighting back.
Their only error is to target US civilians rather than the statists in the government and their corporate supporters.
But then, most terrorists have emotional reasons for being terrorists and this tends to cloud judgement. As a result, most terrorism is ineffective and inefficient.
I know - I was one.
If 9/11 had been done competently, the only targets would have been the White House, the Senate, the FBI, NSA and CIA headquarters, and the Pentagon. (Fort Knox and the New York Federal Reserve Bank would have been nice, too.)
But since 9/11 was probably suggested by Mossad infiltrators into Al-Qaeda and assisted by them and allowed to occur by the neocons who wanted a "terrorist Pearl Harbor" (their own phrase) to occur, it's not surprising how it actually went down. Meaning nobody but civilians got hurt, and the politicians got the go-ahead to expand their power and line their pockets.
Kerry would have done the same thing, as I indicated in my original post. He didn't hesitate to kill innocent Vietnamese while he was in Vietnam and he would be killing innocent Iraqi civilians today if he was in charge.
But that doesn't excuse Bush who IS doing these things.
Because they would still make money at it, that's why.
So-called "piracy" - even if legally sanctioned and highly effective technologically - is no more pervasive than any other market effect.
Which means people would still make money from their products simply because at least as many people - and probably more - would buy from the source than the unlicensed distributors.
Aha, you say, what about recouping production costs? The answer to that is the same as any other product with competition. You reduce your costs as far as feasible, market your product properly, and add incentives to buy from you than your competitors. The biggest incentive being that you are the originator of the product. As I've said before, the best way for musicians to make money today is live shows over the Net. And also importantly, you budget your production costs based on your expected ROI which would be known in a legal copying world just as much as in today's world.
There is NO economic basis for IP laws. The purpose of a free market is to accelerate to the max the production and dissemination of products beneficial to the species. The removal of IP laws would do this (in the absence of any other coercive constraints on the market - which is the real problem here.)
In the end, the real issue is human stupidity. Without a development of human rationality, NO scheme - political, economic, or social - can be made to work. This is why I am a Transhumanist. All of these issues are ultimately irrelevant since the only issue of importance is the stupidity and irrationality of humans.
And that issue is going to be solved in this century.
High-school diploma? Most people in the population get that - even if it means nothing via-a-vis intelligence.
Aptitude test? Right, that really shows someone is smart. Administer the same test to civilians and see what happens.
BTW, you know who runs Federal prisons? Correctional officers who couldn't pass the aptitude test to become a cop - and ex-military guys who were downsized because they weren't smart enough to advance in the military.
Boot camp? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! It takes no brains at all to get through boot camp. Not only that, the smarter you are, the LESS likely you are to get through boot camp, because you can see how much of it is bullshit and brainwashing and it becomes emotionally hard to deal with it.
I haven't been in the military since 1970, but at that time, yes, the vast majority of people in the military - who were in voluntarily for multiple terms of enlistment, not drafted or enlisted for one term to avoid the draft, as I did - were in fact morons.
And despite propaganda to the contrary about the "new, upgraded Army", what I see coming out of Iraq are the same morons that existed in Vietnam. Both officers and NCOs and enlisted.
Anybody who joins a military and allows himself to be placed in harm's way for reasons other than his own and at someone else's option is by definition a moron.
The Commander-in-Chief a Civilian Officer.--Is the Commander-in- Chiefship a military or civilian office in the contemplation of the Constitution? Unquestionably the latter. An opinion by a New York surrogate deals adequately, though not authoritatively, with the subject: ''The President receives his compensation for his services, rendered as Chief Executive of the Nation, not for the individual parts of his duties. No part of his compensation is paid from sums appropriated for the military or naval forces; and it is equally clear under the Constitution that the President's duties as Commander in Chief represents only a part of duties ex officio as Chief Executive [Article II, sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution] and that the latter's office is a civil office. [Article II, section 1 of the Constitution; vol. 91, Cong. Rec. 4910-4916; Beard, The Republic (1943) pp. 100-103.] The President does not enlist in, and he is not inducted or drafted into, the armed forces. Nor, is he subject to court-martial or other military discipline. On the contrary, Article II, section 4 of the Constitution provides that 'The President, [Vice President] and All Civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of Treason, Bribery or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.' . . . The last two War Presidents, President Wilson and President Roosevelt, both clearly recognized the civilian nature of the President's position as Commander in Chief. President Roosevelt, in his Navy Day Campaign speech at Shibe Park, Philadelphia, on October 27, 1944, pronounced this principle as follows:--'It was due to no accident and no oversight that the framers of our Constitution put the command of our armed forces under civilian authority. It is the duty of the Commander in Chief to appoint the Secretaries of War and Navy and the Chiefs of Staff.' It is also to be noted that the Secretary of War, who is the regularly constituted organ of the President for the administration of the military establishment of the Nation, has been held by the Supreme Court of the United States to be merely a civilian officer, not in military service. (United States v. Burns, 79 U.S. 246 (1871)). On the general principle of civilian supremacy over the military, by virtue of the Constitution, it has recently been said: 'The supremacy of the civil over the military is one of our great heritages.' Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 324 U.S. 833 (1945), 14 L.W. 4205 at page 4210.'' 193
Nobody ever said all Arabs hate the US - except the rightwing Christian military guy that got in hot water for declaring the Muslims were agents of Satan. Oh, and most of the rightwing so-called pundits and the neocons. You don't remember, "They hate us for our freedom?"
What they hate is George Bush and his policies.
As for the Demos wanting us all terrified, that is undoubtedly true - they're politicians after all.
However, it is DOUBLY TRUE for the Republicans who started this shit.
It was a REPUBLICAN administration who ALLOWED (and possibly orchestrated) the 9/11 attack on this country and then squandered ALL of the goodwill from the rest of the world that followed it.
Kerry may be no better than Bush, but I doubt he could be worse. I could be wrong about that last, however.
The Corrs have said that while most wannabes go for the recording contract, they went for the publishing contract first, because that contract allowed them to spend their precious time writing songs and practicing their musical skills (instead of having to work at odd jobs for a living) and building up a backlog of content that they then could shop to get a recording contract.
Paid off for them in thirty million albums sold worldwide.
And while I have a couple dozen MP3's and a number of downloaded music videos about them, I don't own a single CD or DVD (yet - I'm considering buying something now for various reasons.)
But I did spend $40 to see them live at The Warfield in San Francisco this past August 11.
In my view, entertainers need to start making their money from live shows (which is not easy given the venues money grabs and the expenses involved.) I think they need to start streaming live (or pre-recorded live) shows over the Net to subscribers to make the bulk of their revenue.
You can't pirate live while it's happening - only after the fact (by recording the stream). And most fans would pay money (maybe not much money because contrary to popular opinion, art really isn't high on most people's financial priorities) to see their favorite acts live on a weekly basis, say. Why would a fan pay money to a pirate to get a recorded stream when he can pay the same money to the band to get a live stream?
Maybe the artists wouldn't get rich, but it would pay their expenses.
And nobody is guaranteed the right to get rich - only the opportunity to make a living.
And you know WHY Phillips doesn't get sued by the RIAA for making consumer machines with CD copiers built in?
Because they are a $60 billion company (well, the parent is - the electronics division is $32 billion.)
The entire US record industry is less than $15 billion. The GLOBAL music industry is worth around $32 billion.
In other words, Phillips could theoretically buy the entire industry and put them all out of business.
So they do want they want and the RIAA can kiss their ass.
Sony is in a more difficult position since they sell copiers AND music content. But I suspect they make more from their hardware sales than their content sales.
"If this right did not exist, there would be drastically less incentive to create, and the public domain would become void of artistic works"
Bullshit.
I'll say it again.
Bullshit.
This is totally untrue for any number of social and economic reasons.
The only thing that would happen if IP laws went away is that business models would change. People would make their money in a different manner.
Period.
There is absolutely NO economic evidence that IP laws have ANY positive effect on the production of art or inventions.
From the beginning, it has merely been some people's THEORY that this is true - most of these people in government or business with other agendas than the free dissemination of ideas.
The headline implied that the article stated something specific about performance. Some/.'ers questioned that performance implication. I pointed out that the article itself did not state that all of these programs WERE operating simultaneously in a given NX session. The article states that all of these programs were ALLOWED to run in a given session - which is not the same as stating that they in fact DID ALL RUN in a given session. The implication was that they could, but this was not stated explicitly.
I did NOT state that it is either impossible or even hard to do this. I don't know, since I haven't used the product or Citrix.
I merely pointed out that the headline was misleading.
Apparently most/.'ers flunked simple English.
And I am perfectly well aware of the value of the product if in fact it works as advertised. My other posts in this topic clearly said so.
I would say the/. effect has eaten your brainstem, rather than merely sinking in.
His statement does NOT say that all of them can run simultaneously. English is either not your strong suit or his. His statement explicitly states that non-KDE apps CAN BE USED inside the session, INCLUDING ANY of the following. This is NOT the same as saying that ALL of them can be.
As to your second point, if in fact ALL of them CAN be so included, that is very nice, but you need to be specific about what you mean when you say "simultaneously". If you mean that you can have windows into all these programs open on the desktop at once, and switch to one or the other of them, that is NOT the same as saying that they are ALL refreshing at the same time.
The headline IMPLIED that the article STATED that ALL of these programs can squeeze their refreshes into the SAME 40kbps data stream. The article does NOT in fact state that, as I pointed out. However, I would be willing to believe it if someone would clearly point to an article or demo that demonstrates such.
"The store will also be in beta mode, lacking some of the features that will be added later"
No shit.
Why doesn't this surprise me?
SOP for MS.
Ever since day one, Gates has been screaming at his customers, "Stay the course! The next one will be dynamite!" Read any of the biographies. The entire company was built on FUD, not technology.
While you are probably correct in the general case, in this case the FreeNX tech allows 25 full-screen KDE sessions to be run on a commodity box with 1GB of RAM and a 3GHz CPU.
This is not the same as running forty commodity boxes and a "megabrute server".
This is the same as running 26 commodity boxes and supporting 25 users on one more commodity box.
Do the math.
No one is saying this is going to replace desktop PC's. There are specific places where this tech would be very useful (library patron PC's used to access the Net or shop-floor PC's, for example.) Thin clients have their uses.
I agree that thin clients have been overhyped by people like Ellison, but this is still useful tech. As the developers suggest, this can aid migration from Windows to Linux by allowing companies to run mission-critical Windows-only software on their current Windows servers and allow Linux clients to access it - and vice versa.
"They claim to be able to cram a fullscreen KDE session -- KMail for mailing, Konqueror for file management, Mozilla for web browsing and OpenOffice for word processing -- into a 40 KBit/sec modem connection without losing responsiveness for the user experience."
No, they do NOT. The interviewed persons state that a responsive NX session requires a 40kbps link, and about 25MB of RAM. This allows you to run a KDE session remotely and also allows non-KDE apps like Open Office to run remotely.
They do NOT say that you can cram ALL of those programs SIMULTANEOUSLY INTERACTING into that 40kbps.
Obviously they mean you can interact with all of those programs over that link - one program at a time, switching between programs, just like any other remote-control software.
They estimate that a modern PC with 1GB of RAM and a 3GHz CPU could support 25 simultaneous fullscreen KDE remote sessions, crapping out at 35 sessions.
As for usefulness of this technology, they list at least nine scenarios and benefits of using it.
One of which is that it eases Linux adoption on the desktop by allowing Linux clients to access Windows apps running on Windows servers and vice versa, thereby allowing companies to migrate from Windows to Linux at their own pace and not forcing them to find equivalent Linux programs for various Windows-only mission-critical programs. In other words, migration doesn't have to be all or nothing.
"Nobody has ever brought together the world of documents, media and structured information in giving you one simple set of verbs that lets you richly find, move around and replicate those things."
Neither have you now, Billy!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Mod this troll, mod this flamebait! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
The bitch in charge of the Florida Elections Commission is - get this:
Counting the ballots for her own election!
Without a watchdog!
And has printed PARTY AFFILIATION on each envelope to be used to return absentee ballots in order to make sure she can tell which ones are "reliable"!
Plus thousands of absentee ballots have "gone missing".
Plus she's a "Republican turned Democrat"!
It doesn't get better than this.
Bush and Karl Rove have got plans for all those people who think absentee ballots are going to save them from corrupt voting machines.
And if that doesn't work, there's always Iran and North Korea waiting in the wings.
Five US military aircraft penetrated Iranian airspace a couple days ago to test the air defenses - obviously preparing for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.
And the US and Japan are scheduling "nuclear interdiction naval exercises" near Korea in October.
After pissing away thirty billion in R&D money for a one-time stock prop scheme?
And their head of security uses Firefox?
This is like discovering Bush prays to Allah!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Hey, how about this theory?! Gates is secretly a hacker like the guy in the Sandra Bullock movie and really wants everybody to be insecure so he can take over the world!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Mod this troll, mod this flamebait! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
This has been Bill Gate's marketing approach since Day One at Microsoft.
Read the biographies of him. They say the exact same thing. Every time Microsoft customers get antsy, he comes out with "Stay the course! The next one will be dynamite!"
I think George Bush learned it from him. Iraq didn't turn out well? Well, relax, Iran will be much better! And wait until you see North Korea!
We TOLD YOU they couldn't do it! Did you believe us? Oh, no, the Windows trolls know best! Microsoft can do no wrong!
Now the Windows trolls will say, "Microsoft didn't cancel WinFS! They just postponed it!"
Whoop-de-doo, morons!
Meanwhile, Reiser 4 on Linux lays the groundwork for enhanced metadata reporting by allowing the efficient storage of millions of small files in the file system.
Where will Linux be in 2006 after two more years of development?
Faster, more secure, more reliable, and heavily enhanced, that's where.
Have a nice day, Windows trolls!
Mod this flamebait, mod this troll! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
As in England preceded the United States in historical time?
Of course,probably nobody today in either country would understand English as it was spoken then either.
Actually I wouldn't expect someone in California to understand "Alabama English" either. I've been in Alabama and I know what he means.
OTOH, if someone in India can't understand someone from Massachusetts (even saying "Cuber" instead of "Cuba") or California, there's a problem on the Indian side. New York? Well, if you say "daawwg" instead of "dog", I would expect the problem is on the American side.
The problem isn't who can understand what, it's the CEOs being too stupid to realize there will BE communication problems in addition to the technical ones, and trying to run a tech support operation in such an environment is just asking for trouble. But CEOs and bean counters don't concern themselves with facts, just dollars.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't support Kerry, who is a mirror image of Bush on the Democrat side, so your argument is irrelevant.
The real issue is: the terrorists are CORRECT. The policies of the US are themselves examples of "state terrorism", and the terrorists are correct in fighting back.
Their only error is to target US civilians rather than the statists in the government and their corporate supporters.
But then, most terrorists have emotional reasons for being terrorists and this tends to cloud judgement. As a result, most terrorism is ineffective and inefficient.
I know - I was one.
If 9/11 had been done competently, the only targets would have been the White House, the Senate, the FBI, NSA and CIA headquarters, and the Pentagon. (Fort Knox and the New York Federal Reserve Bank would have been nice, too.)
But since 9/11 was probably suggested by Mossad infiltrators into Al-Qaeda and assisted by them and allowed to occur by the neocons who wanted a "terrorist Pearl Harbor" (their own phrase) to occur, it's not surprising how it actually went down. Meaning nobody but civilians got hurt, and the politicians got the go-ahead to expand their power and line their pockets.
Kerry would have done the same thing, as I indicated in my original post. He didn't hesitate to kill innocent Vietnamese while he was in Vietnam and he would be killing innocent Iraqi civilians today if he was in charge.
But that doesn't excuse Bush who IS doing these things.
IP is the total antithesis of property.
It is an attempt to extend concepts of contract over the basic concepts of property.
And it is done for coercive reasons.
It is entirely against the concept of freedom in every respect.
You have absolutely no clue about either my motivations or my arguments.
Enemies list? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Right. I made it through Vietnam and eight years of Federal prison, and I'm worried about your "enemies list".
Moron.
You want a reason?
Because they would still make money at it, that's why.
So-called "piracy" - even if legally sanctioned and highly effective technologically - is no more pervasive than any other market effect.
Which means people would still make money from their products simply because at least as many people - and probably more - would buy from the source than the unlicensed distributors.
Aha, you say, what about recouping production costs? The answer to that is the same as any other product with competition. You reduce your costs as far as feasible, market your product properly, and add incentives to buy from you than your competitors. The biggest incentive being that you are the originator of the product. As I've said before, the best way for musicians to make money today is live shows over the Net. And also importantly, you budget your production costs based on your expected ROI which would be known in a legal copying world just as much as in today's world.
There is NO economic basis for IP laws. The purpose of a free market is to accelerate to the max the production and dissemination of products beneficial to the species. The removal of IP laws would do this (in the absence of any other coercive constraints on the market - which is the real problem here.)
In the end, the real issue is human stupidity. Without a development of human rationality, NO scheme - political, economic, or social - can be made to work. This is why I am a Transhumanist.
All of these issues are ultimately irrelevant since the only issue of importance is the stupidity and irrationality of humans.
And that issue is going to be solved in this century.
But you won't like it.
High-school diploma? Most people in the population get that - even if it means nothing via-a-vis intelligence.
Aptitude test? Right, that really shows someone is smart. Administer the same test to civilians and see what happens.
BTW, you know who runs Federal prisons? Correctional officers who couldn't pass the aptitude test to become a cop - and ex-military guys who were downsized because they weren't smart enough to advance in the military.
Boot camp? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! It takes no brains at all to get through boot camp. Not only that, the smarter you are, the LESS likely you are to get through boot camp, because you can see how much of it is bullshit and brainwashing and it becomes emotionally hard to deal with it.
I haven't been in the military since 1970, but at that time, yes, the vast majority of people in the military - who were in voluntarily for multiple terms of enlistment, not drafted or enlisted for one term to avoid the draft, as I did - were in fact morons.
And despite propaganda to the contrary about the "new, upgraded Army", what I see coming out of Iraq are the same morons that existed in Vietnam.
Both officers and NCOs and enlisted.
Anybody who joins a military and allows himself to be placed in harm's way for reasons other than his own and at someone else's option is by definition a moron.
And yes, between 1967 and 1970, I was a moron.
But I learned and didn't stay one.
You are the idiot.
.--Is the Commander-in- Chiefship a military or civilian office in the contemplation of the Constitution? Unquestionably the latter. An opinion by a New York surrogate deals adequately, though not authoritatively, with the subject: ''The President receives his compensation for his services, rendered as Chief Executive of the Nation, not for the individual parts of his duties. No part of his compensation is paid from sums appropriated for the military or naval forces; and it is equally clear under the Constitution that the President's duties as Commander in Chief represents only a part of duties ex officio as Chief Executive [Article II, sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution] and that the latter's office is a civil office. [Article II, section 1 of the Constitution; vol. 91, Cong. Rec. 4910-4916; Beard, The Republic (1943) pp. 100-103.] The President does not enlist in, and he is not inducted or drafted into, the armed forces. Nor, is he subject to court-martial or other military discipline. On the contrary, Article II, section 4 of the Constitution provides that 'The President, [Vice President] and All Civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of Treason, Bribery or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.' . . . The last two War Presidents, President Wilson and President Roosevelt, both clearly recognized the civilian nature of the President's position as Commander in Chief. President Roosevelt, in his Navy Day Campaign speech at Shibe Park, Philadelphia, on October 27, 1944, pronounced this principle as follows:--'It was due to no accident and no oversight that the framers of our Constitution put the command of our armed forces under civilian authority. It is the duty of the Commander in Chief to appoint the Secretaries of War and Navy and the Chiefs of Staff.' It is also to be noted that the Secretary of War, who is the regularly constituted organ of the President for the administration of the military establishment of the Nation, has been held by the Supreme Court of the United States to be merely a civilian officer, not in military service. (United States v. Burns, 79 U.S. 246 (1871)). On the general principle of civilian supremacy over the military, by virtue of the Constitution, it has recently been said: 'The supremacy of the civil over the military is one of our great heritages.' Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 324 U.S. 833 (1945), 14 L.W. 4205 at page 4210.'' 193
Read this:
The Commander-in-Chief a Civilian Officer
Nobody ever said all Arabs hate the US - except the rightwing Christian military guy that got in hot water for declaring the Muslims were agents of Satan. Oh, and most of the rightwing so-called pundits and the neocons. You don't remember, "They hate us for our freedom?"
What they hate is George Bush and his policies.
As for the Demos wanting us all terrified, that is undoubtedly true - they're politicians after all.
However, it is DOUBLY TRUE for the Republicans who started this shit.
It was a REPUBLICAN administration who ALLOWED (and possibly orchestrated) the 9/11 attack on this country and then squandered ALL of the goodwill from the rest of the world that followed it.
Kerry may be no better than Bush, but I doubt he could be worse. I could be wrong about that last, however.
The only clueless dolt here is you if you believe the crap that Iraqis like the US.
Only a complete and utter moron could even conceive of believing that.
Or a propagandist spouting bullshit, of course.
The smart ones - like The Corrs - are both.
The Corrs have said that while most wannabes go for the recording contract, they went for the publishing contract first, because that contract allowed them to spend their precious time writing songs and practicing their musical skills (instead of having to work at odd jobs for a living) and building up a backlog of content that they then could shop to get a recording contract.
Paid off for them in thirty million albums sold worldwide.
And while I have a couple dozen MP3's and a number of downloaded music videos about them, I don't own a single CD or DVD (yet - I'm considering buying something now for various reasons.)
But I did spend $40 to see them live at The Warfield in San Francisco this past August 11.
In my view, entertainers need to start making their money from live shows (which is not easy given the venues money grabs and the expenses involved.) I think they need to start streaming live (or pre-recorded live) shows over the Net to subscribers to make the bulk of their revenue.
You can't pirate live while it's happening - only after the fact (by recording the stream). And most fans would pay money (maybe not much money because contrary to popular opinion, art really isn't high on most people's financial priorities) to see their favorite acts live on a weekly basis, say. Why would a fan pay money to a pirate to get a recorded stream when he can pay the same money to the band to get a live stream?
Maybe the artists wouldn't get rich, but it would pay their expenses.
And nobody is guaranteed the right to get rich - only the opportunity to make a living.
And you know WHY Phillips doesn't get sued by the RIAA for making consumer machines with CD copiers built in?
Because they are a $60 billion company (well, the parent is - the electronics division is $32 billion.)
The entire US record industry is less than $15 billion. The GLOBAL music industry is worth around $32 billion.
In other words, Phillips could theoretically buy the entire industry and put them all out of business.
So they do want they want and the RIAA can kiss their ass.
Sony is in a more difficult position since they sell copiers AND music content. But I suspect they make more from their hardware sales than their content sales.
"If this right did not exist, there would be drastically less incentive to create, and the public domain would become void of artistic works"
Bullshit.
I'll say it again.
Bullshit.
This is totally untrue for any number of social and economic reasons.
The only thing that would happen if IP laws went away is that business models would change. People would make their money in a different manner.
Period.
There is absolutely NO economic evidence that IP laws have ANY positive effect on the production of art or inventions.
From the beginning, it has merely been some people's THEORY that this is true - most of these people in government or business with other agendas than the free dissemination of ideas.
I agree if we're talking about special-purpose hardware thin clients like the sort of thing Ellison's subsidiary sells.
Here we're talking commodity boxes which are slimmed down clients. Not the same thing.
Yes, I know what a remote desktop is.
/.'ers questioned that performance implication. I pointed out that the article itself did not state that all of these programs WERE operating simultaneously in a given NX session. The article states that all of these programs were ALLOWED to run in a given session - which is not the same as stating that they in fact DID ALL RUN in a given session. The implication was that they could, but this was not stated explicitly.
/.'ers flunked simple English.
/. effect has eaten your brainstem, rather than merely sinking in.
The headline implied that the article stated something specific about performance. Some
I did NOT state that it is either impossible or even hard to do this. I don't know, since I haven't used the product or Citrix.
I merely pointed out that the headline was misleading.
Apparently most
And I am perfectly well aware of the value of the product if in fact it works as advertised. My other posts in this topic clearly said so.
I would say the
His statement does NOT say that all of them can run simultaneously. English is either not your strong suit or his. His statement explicitly states that non-KDE apps CAN BE USED inside the session, INCLUDING ANY of the following. This is NOT the same as saying that ALL of them can be.
As to your second point, if in fact ALL of them CAN be so included, that is very nice, but you need to be specific about what you mean when you say "simultaneously". If you mean that you can have windows into all these programs open on the desktop at once, and switch to one or the other of them, that is NOT the same as saying that they are ALL refreshing at the same time.
The headline IMPLIED that the article STATED that ALL of these programs can squeeze their refreshes into the SAME 40kbps data stream. The article does NOT in fact state that, as I pointed out. However, I would be willing to believe it if someone would clearly point to an article or demo that demonstrates such.
"BBC investigates the Techology Hype Cycle"
"Longhorn will be the best yet!"
"Longhorn will be out in 2003."
"We won't be doing WinFS over the network."
"We won't be doing WinFS".
"Longhorn will be out in 2006."
"We won't be doing Avalon" (next month).
"Longhorn will be out in 2008."
"We won't be doing Longhorn."
"The store will also be in beta mode, lacking some of the features that will be added later"
No shit.
Why doesn't this surprise me?
SOP for MS.
Ever since day one, Gates has been screaming at his customers, "Stay the course! The next one will be dynamite!" Read any of the biographies. The entire company was built on FUD, not technology.
While you are probably correct in the general case, in this case the FreeNX tech allows 25 full-screen KDE sessions to be run on a commodity box with 1GB of RAM and a 3GHz CPU.
This is not the same as running forty commodity boxes and a "megabrute server".
This is the same as running 26 commodity boxes and supporting 25 users on one more commodity box.
Do the math.
No one is saying this is going to replace desktop PC's. There are specific places where this tech would be very useful (library patron PC's used to access the Net or shop-floor PC's, for example.) Thin clients have their uses.
I agree that thin clients have been overhyped by people like Ellison, but this is still useful tech. As the developers suggest, this can aid migration from Windows to Linux by allowing companies to run mission-critical Windows-only software on their current Windows servers and allow Linux clients to access it - and vice versa.
"They claim to be able to cram a fullscreen KDE session -- KMail for mailing, Konqueror for file management, Mozilla for web browsing and OpenOffice for word processing -- into a 40 KBit/sec modem connection without losing responsiveness for the user experience."
./'ers to comprehend?
No, they do NOT. The interviewed persons state that a responsive NX session requires a 40kbps link, and about 25MB of RAM. This allows you to run a KDE session remotely and also allows non-KDE apps like Open Office to run remotely.
They do NOT say that you can cram ALL of those programs SIMULTANEOUSLY INTERACTING into that 40kbps.
Obviously they mean you can interact with all of those programs over that link - one program at a time, switching between programs, just like any other remote-control software.
They estimate that a modern PC with 1GB of RAM and a 3GHz CPU could support 25 simultaneous fullscreen KDE remote sessions, crapping out at 35 sessions.
As for usefulness of this technology, they list at least nine scenarios and benefits of using it.
One of which is that it eases Linux adoption on the desktop by allowing Linux clients to access Windows apps running on Windows servers and vice versa, thereby allowing companies to migrate from Windows to Linux at their own pace and not forcing them to find equivalent Linux programs for various Windows-only mission-critical programs. In other words, migration doesn't have to be all or nothing.
Is this too hard for
"Nobody has ever brought together the world of documents, media and structured information in giving you one simple set of verbs that lets you richly find, move around and replicate those things."
Neither have you now, Billy!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Mod this troll, mod this flamebait! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
The bitch in charge of the Florida Elections Commission is - get this:
Counting the ballots for her own election!
Without a watchdog!
And has printed PARTY AFFILIATION on each envelope to be used to return absentee ballots in order to make sure she can tell which ones are "reliable"!
Plus thousands of absentee ballots have "gone missing".
Plus she's a "Republican turned Democrat"!
It doesn't get better than this.
Bush and Karl Rove have got plans for all those people who think absentee ballots are going to save them from corrupt voting machines.
And if that doesn't work, there's always Iran and North Korea waiting in the wings.
Five US military aircraft penetrated Iranian airspace a couple days ago to test the air defenses - obviously preparing for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.
And the US and Japan are scheduling "nuclear interdiction naval exercises" near Korea in October.
Oh, yeah, "October Surprise" is on the board.
It doesn't get better than this!
Microsoft will take TEN YEARS to get secure?
After pissing away thirty billion in R&D money for a one-time stock prop scheme?
And their head of security uses Firefox?
This is like discovering Bush prays to Allah!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Hey, how about this theory?! Gates is secretly a hacker like the guy in the Sandra Bullock movie and really wants everybody to be insecure so he can take over the world!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Mod this troll, mod this flamebait! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Yeah, that's what they're saying NOW!
In another X months, it will be:
"Avalon dumped from Longhorn!"
Just like WinFS was guaranteed to be in Longhorn just a few months ago.
You're absolutely right.
This has been Bill Gate's marketing approach since Day One at Microsoft.
Read the biographies of him. They say the exact same thing. Every time Microsoft customers get antsy, he comes out with "Stay the course! The next one will be dynamite!"
I think George Bush learned it from him. Iraq didn't turn out well? Well, relax, Iran will be much better! And wait until you see North Korea!
Now no WinFS!
First it was "no WinFS over the network"!
What next? Roll back NTFS to FAT32?
We TOLD YOU they couldn't do it! Did you believe us? Oh, no, the Windows trolls know best! Microsoft can do no wrong!
Now the Windows trolls will say, "Microsoft didn't cancel WinFS! They just postponed it!"
Whoop-de-doo, morons!
Meanwhile, Reiser 4 on Linux lays the groundwork for enhanced metadata reporting by allowing the efficient storage of millions of small files in the file system.
Where will Linux be in 2006 after two more years of development?
Faster, more secure, more reliable, and heavily enhanced, that's where.
Have a nice day, Windows trolls!
Mod this flamebait, mod this troll! Is that all you got, huh? Are you nuts? Come at me!
Captured the mouse in my room.
Told him to run fast enough to power my night light.
He didn't run fast enough to make enough light for me to see to feed him so he didn't have enough energy to run fast enough to...
Result: dead mouse. No night light.
Now I can't see to clean up the dead mouse.
Room smells bad.
"Define "original English language"."
As in England preceded the United States in historical time?
Of course,probably nobody today in either country would understand English as it was spoken then either.
Actually I wouldn't expect someone in California to understand "Alabama English" either. I've been in Alabama and I know what he means.
OTOH, if someone in India can't understand someone from Massachusetts (even saying "Cuber" instead of "Cuba") or California, there's a problem on the Indian side. New York? Well, if you say "daawwg" instead of "dog", I would expect the problem is on the American side.
The problem isn't who can understand what, it's the CEOs being too stupid to realize there will BE communication problems in addition to the technical ones, and trying to run a tech support operation in such an environment is just asking for trouble. But CEOs and bean counters don't concern themselves with facts, just dollars.