I'd like to hear a coherent argument in favour though.
I drink with my boss, and get out my camera when the boss is incoherent. The next day we have a brief discussion about company expectations, goats and instant custard.
Please provide me with a link to your band's web site so that I might check them out, download a few songs
I can't speak for Lord_Dweomer, but thisis the band I've been working with, and we'd be happy for you to have a listen to our music. Come and see us if you're ever in Perth.
One thing that seems to be missing from this discussion is how others make this work. The US isn't the only democracy in the world, and many other democracies have managed to get electronic voting right.
It's a fluff piece mixed with subjective op-ed from the author.
To me it reads more like astroturf from a company desperately trying to generate some hype for a product which has received a "ho hum" response in the marketplace.
Have a look around the traps - all the usual media whores are touting the "social and viral" benefits of the Zune, tenuously linking it to MySpace, YouTube etc. It's being pushed heavily in the blogosphere as well.
So guys, how does it feel to be part of a marketing exercise?
Shopping's a good idea, but a better product would be one of the Automated Lone Worker Protection systems (http://www.3wac.com/english/index.html) or perhaps one of the firefighter/rescuer's Man Down alert tools.
People should get over their irrational fear of decaying nuclei.
They already use some nuclear power. Each rover has eight Radioisotope Heater Units, powered by Plutonium 238, so it's not fear that's preventing the use of RTGs.
My guess is that weight is the problem. NASA's standard General Purpose Heat Source RTG generates about 290W and weighs about 60Kg, while the rover's existing power system weighs about a third of that.
Vista works and it doesn't need a super system like you fellas seem to believe.
Well, that's just wonderful for you. I'm very glad you've found satisfaction with Vista, and unsubstantiated anecdotes are always so valuable in helping us assess new products.
Umm, just one question, wtf did all this have to do with TFA?
I wonder how many of the custom apps they're building on Linux will also be open source, and therefore available to the next government looking to switch. It could be that Munich is taking a _really_ big hit, but each organisation which follows the same path will find it progressively easier to switch.
I've often thought that commercial software vendors are taking an immense risk in not porting to Linux, thereby allowing the whole FOSS application stack on the platform to be developed without commercial-grade competition.
This sort of migration could start a cascade effect, where each successful adoption catalyses the next, and there are damn few commercial software houses prepared to take advantage of that.
In an internal memo for senior management Microsoft's head of C++ development, Aaron Contorer, once stated:
"The Windows API is so broad, so deep, and so functional that most Independent Software Vendors would be crazy not to use it. And it is so deeply embedded in the source code of many Windows apps that there is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system instead... It is this switching cost that has given the customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO [total cost of ownership], our lack of a sexy vision at times, and many other difficulties.
So before the "is this the best they can do" crapflood gets out of hand: No, it isn't.
Good thing too - he's not even a real geek.
User: Do you know you're being discussed on Slashdot?
George: No, I didn't know I was talking to two people.
User: Not two people, just one.
George: One rude person?
User: Maybe a little rude. Do you know what Slashdot is?
George: Nope
User: It's a web site for discussing science and technology.
George: Have you ever lost someone?
User: Are you feeling lost right now?
George: Sometimes, don't we all?
So says someone who has been tainted by too much exposure to Windows.
I've been using computers since the early '70s, and make an effort to stay current on most of the relevant platforms available. I own a Mac, and am comfortable with the OS.
The kind of homogenization of software that you suggest is ultimtely bad for users. It means that every application must be dumbed down to the lowest common denomonator (of platform).
Just as dumbing down the x86 PC to the lowest common denominator allowed clone PCs to exist, and networking being dumbed down to the lowest common denominator enabled the internet to exist, doing the same OS services would create similar synergies. That's the benefit of standards.
Without tight integration with the OS, you don't get things like shared (between applications) addressbooks. You don't get to send documents to other applications. You can't embed objects from one application in another. You can't index all your files regardless of type for easy search (Spotlight).
You can achieve all of those things with well-designed and open APIs, communications protocols and formats. POSIX was an attempt at a standard API. LDAP, named pipes, CORBA, SOAP etc etc, are all efforts towards open and consistent application data sharing.
If the OS played such a minor role, as in your proposed scenerio, there would be no point in even having an OS of choice. They'd all be the same.
What we interact with on modern computers is not the operating system, but the shell that is running on that OS. The shell mostly provides us with our file-managing environment, with a few other utilities thrown in. Running your favorite shell on any OS/hardware combination, and running your favorite applications from within that shell shouldn't be impossible.
I'm happy for you that you enjoy the Mac OSX shell. It sounds like it's a good fit for you, but frankly, I don't feel there's really much to differentiate any of the current major OSs. They all look and feel pretty similar to me, and I'd like more variety and more choice.
are you on crack or did you never use win95/98. XP is a massive improvement. Crashes are few and far between and there is a lot less "format/reinstall" problems.
Still struggling with the whole "social skills" concept, hey?
Curtiss JN-4Bs crashed a whole lot less than 4As as well, but they're recognisably the same plane and worked pretty much the same otherwise.
Failing to crash eventually became an expectation rather than a hope in aircraft. One day that may also be true with consumer operating systems.
Re:I for one welcome our new hypoallergenic overlo
on
Hypoallergenic Cats
·
· Score: 1
Breaded pussy? You might be on to something here.
But why would breading be any better than the traditional flour or Alka-Seltzer?
He's talking about applications made by third-party vendors that target the Windows platform.
In that case, using Direct X to marginalize Open GL, deliberately breaking Java, patent encumbered and closed data formats, APIs and communications protocols, etc, etc.
It's amazing that anyone asks this question anymore - you'd have to have been hiding your head under a blanket for the past two decades not to have seen hundreds of examples of their predatory business practices. What do you think the whole EU/MS anti-trust thing is about?.
Maybe XP is "a pretty good OS", the trouble is, it's not significantly different from the OSs that preceded it, and that's because the Windows monopoly is acting as a huge roadblock across progress in the field.
The Curtiss JN-4 was a pretty good aircraft for its time too, but there were people who had visions of fast monoplanes, of jets, of cargo lifters, of helicopters, of seaplanes. Our situation with operating systems is as if aircraft designs had standardised on JN-4s in the '1920s so that airports could all be the same size.
The operating system should be a fairly minor part of our computing experience - fundamentally, all it is is a way of getting our applications to run, but because currently, OS choice also means format choice, including executable format choice. That means lockin, monopoly, and stagnation.
Computer users should be able to run their applications of choice on the OS of their choice, running on the hardware of their choice. If the world were to shift away from Windows now, the time and money already invested in Windows PE apps would be wasted. The computer industry should be planning for a future where that waste will not repeated, where users can take the applications they've purchased and use them on any new platforms which offer better performance.
Sadly, instead, the software industry is gearing itself towards selling their customers the same application over and over again.
Slashdot Mirror
I drink with my boss, and get out my camera when the boss is incoherent. The next day we have a brief discussion about company expectations, goats and instant custard.
I get a pay rise.
Regards,
BOFH.
Maxwell? Is that you?
The greatest incentive for adhering to the Geneva Conventions is not becoming barbarians, even if those you are in conflict with are already barbaric.
The goal of a people at war is rarely to become their enemy.
I can't speak for Lord_Dweomer, but thisis the band I've been working with, and we'd be happy for you to have a listen to our music. Come and see us if you're ever in Perth.
It's considerably better. You might want to read this http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,61045,00.htm l It would be a good idea to do a quick google for SHA1 as well.
One thing that seems to be missing from this discussion is how others make this work. The US isn't the only democracy in the world, and many other democracies have managed to get electronic voting right.
To me it reads more like astroturf from a company desperately trying to generate some hype for a product which has received a "ho hum" response in the marketplace.
Have a look around the traps - all the usual media whores are touting the "social and viral" benefits of the Zune, tenuously linking it to MySpace, YouTube etc. It's being pushed heavily in the blogosphere as well.
So guys, how does it feel to be part of a marketing exercise?
Shopping's a good idea, but a better product would be one of the Automated Lone Worker Protection systems (http://www.3wac.com/english/index.html) or perhaps one of the firefighter/rescuer's Man Down alert tools.
They already use some nuclear power. Each rover has eight Radioisotope Heater Units, powered by Plutonium 238, so it's not fear that's preventing the use of RTGs.
My guess is that weight is the problem. NASA's standard General Purpose Heat Source RTG generates about 290W and weighs about 60Kg, while the rover's existing power system weighs about a third of that.
Well Mark, you of all people should know that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
My dodder has no nose.
How does it smell?
Terrible!
That had less to do with the war itself, and a great deal to do with the Marshall plan (in Europe) for rebuilding the countries' economies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_plan The Japanese reconstruction, while different to Europe, also involved US economic management under the SCAP system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan's_post-war_econ omy
Well, that's just wonderful for you. I'm very glad you've found satisfaction with Vista, and unsubstantiated anecdotes are always so valuable in helping us assess new products.
Umm, just one question, wtf did all this have to do with TFA?
That'd be the one you married then?
Don't you think you should actually try Linux before posting in a forum like this?
In case anyone is still wondering, keeping Debian systems and applications up to date is MUCH simpler than doing the same on Windows.
I wonder how many of the custom apps they're building on Linux will also be open source, and therefore available to the next government looking to switch. It could be that Munich is taking a _really_ big hit, but each organisation which follows the same path will find it progressively easier to switch.
I've often thought that commercial software vendors are taking an immense risk in not porting to Linux, thereby allowing the whole FOSS application stack on the platform to be developed without commercial-grade competition.
This sort of migration could start a cascade effect, where each successful adoption catalyses the next, and there are damn few commercial software houses prepared to take advantage of that.
Planet of the Apes
2001
The Matrix Reloaded
Gimme my points...
Good thing too - he's not even a real geek.
Still struggling with the whole "reading comprehension" concept, hey?
Thats a tautology.
I do not think that means what you think it means.
I've been using computers since the early '70s, and make an effort to stay current on most of the relevant platforms available. I own a Mac, and am comfortable with the OS.
The kind of homogenization of software that you suggest is ultimtely bad for users. It means that every application must be dumbed down to the lowest common denomonator (of platform).
Just as dumbing down the x86 PC to the lowest common denominator allowed clone PCs to exist, and networking being dumbed down to the lowest common denominator enabled the internet to exist, doing the same OS services would create similar synergies. That's the benefit of standards.
Without tight integration with the OS, you don't get things like shared (between applications) addressbooks. You don't get to send documents to other applications. You can't embed objects from one application in another. You can't index all your files regardless of type for easy search (Spotlight).
You can achieve all of those things with well-designed and open APIs, communications protocols and formats. POSIX was an attempt at a standard API. LDAP, named pipes, CORBA, SOAP etc etc, are all efforts towards open and consistent application data sharing.
If the OS played such a minor role, as in your proposed scenerio, there would be no point in even having an OS of choice. They'd all be the same.
What we interact with on modern computers is not the operating system, but the shell that is running on that OS. The shell mostly provides us with our file-managing environment, with a few other utilities thrown in. Running your favorite shell on any OS/hardware combination, and running your favorite applications from within that shell shouldn't be impossible.
I'm happy for you that you enjoy the Mac OSX shell. It sounds like it's a good fit for you, but frankly, I don't feel there's really much to differentiate any of the current major OSs. They all look and feel pretty similar to me, and I'd like more variety and more choice.
Still struggling with the whole "social skills" concept, hey?
Curtiss JN-4Bs crashed a whole lot less than 4As as well, but they're recognisably the same plane and worked pretty much the same otherwise.
Failing to crash eventually became an expectation rather than a hope in aircraft. One day that may also be true with consumer operating systems.
But why would breading be any better than the traditional flour or Alka-Seltzer?
In that case, using Direct X to marginalize Open GL, deliberately breaking Java, patent encumbered and closed data formats, APIs and communications protocols, etc, etc.
It's amazing that anyone asks this question anymore - you'd have to have been hiding your head under a blanket for the past two decades not to have seen hundreds of examples of their predatory business practices. What do you think the whole EU/MS anti-trust thing is about?.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/ activation.mspx
Maybe XP is "a pretty good OS", the trouble is, it's not significantly different from the OSs that preceded it, and that's because the Windows monopoly is acting as a huge roadblock across progress in the field.
The Curtiss JN-4 was a pretty good aircraft for its time too, but there were people who had visions of fast monoplanes, of jets, of cargo lifters, of helicopters, of seaplanes. Our situation with operating systems is as if aircraft designs had standardised on JN-4s in the '1920s so that airports could all be the same size.
The operating system should be a fairly minor part of our computing experience - fundamentally, all it is is a way of getting our applications to run, but because currently, OS choice also means format choice, including executable format choice. That means lockin, monopoly, and stagnation.
Computer users should be able to run their applications of choice on the OS of their choice, running on the hardware of their choice. If the world were to shift away from Windows now, the time and money already invested in Windows PE apps would be wasted. The computer industry should be planning for a future where that waste will not repeated, where users can take the applications they've purchased and use them on any new platforms which offer better performance.
Sadly, instead, the software industry is gearing itself towards selling their customers the same application over and over again.