More than that, desktop adoption of Linux is going to require a heavy investment in support by a major PC manufacturer. In other words, dropping the price of a PC by $80 bucks and supplying it with Mandrake and no support isn't even going to lure businesses.
Only really small ones (5 dual CPU systems). I saw really large one in a bank one time....but it was in a refridgerated room. So yes, I see your point.;)
Yes, IBM Z-series mainframes running Linux are some glorious beasts, but the same level of performance can be reached with a finely tuned cluster - and for far cheaper with considerable less overhead (overhead that costs a lot of money, as well).
Again, we need to know more about his institution's needs before we can confidently declare which solution (Z\Linux or a cluster) is the best fit for his needs.
I helped a admin friend (pure Novell guy that was somehow tasked with this job) implement TurboLinux on a IBM Z series mainframe. It is kind of easy to work, but you lose some performance, and updates and fixes can be hard to track down sometimes. Clustered Linux solutions could end being cheaper at first, but their TCO may rise higher as time goes on (especially if your company/institution lacks a very competent Linux cluster admin/programmer).
I don't have a lot of experience with these things, but I am positive that there are plenty or "pure Linux" solutions that will be far more flexible - even when using IBM middleware.
1. What exactly demands this solution?
2. Can a pure Linux box, with mild tweaking, still not be more useful and create less overhead than this?
Someone in this thread mentioned IBM implementing wildly complex systems in order to push consultation, and on some levels it's true. PeopleSoft does it also. In some cases, Oracle will have a go at this tactic. My advice is to do some searching first, without the input of IBM, and see if you can't find a better solution to whatever problem you're trying to remedy.
I just posted an eBay auction for a song I bought from the iTunes music store. It should be interesting to see how this works out. I only spent $0.99 on it but I bought the song just as legally as I would a CD, so I should be able to sell it used just as legally right?
[Update 09-03-2003 10:08 AM] Right now I've come up with a couple ways that the transfer of ownership could take place. One is to call up Apple and ask them to do it for me, which would be an interesting call. The other way would be to give my account to the winning bidder, which doesn't seem like a bid deal considering that I've only purchased one song. Still, I'd have to make sure that my credit card info was completely disassociated with the account. Or I could just create a new account and repurchase the song on that account.
[Update 09-03-2003 11:25 AM] I'd like to respond to a few points made by people:
1. It's true that I'm seeking attention, but not for me personally. This is an experiment in property rights in the digital age, something that's gotten surprisingly little attention.
2. I've read the iTunes agreements and found nothing denying transferability. This isn't any more a commercial venture than selling CDs at the local music store, I'm not incorporated or even DBA. Furthermore, in case anyone thinks this is a cheap way to make a buck I will be donating all proceeds to the EFF.
3. When the song is successfully transferred, I will not be keeping a copy of the song. If I don't own it I shouldn't have a copy.
[Update 09-03-2003 11:25 AM] A very excellent comment below by Piggly Wiggly asks if I will convert the format for delivery. My answer right now is "no" because I don't want to cloud the issue of the sale by changing the format. Also, I'd like to thank all the people posting supportive comments who realize that this is about more than a $0.99 song being over-valued on eBay.
The same raw power can be derived from Opteron CPUs (perhaps more) at a far lesser price. The associated hardware is cheaper as well.
Why did the VA Tech crew opt to waste at least $1,000,000 just to use G5's? I would be highly upset if I was an alumni and knew that some of my tuition tax was going to this Macintosh fan boy's wet dream.
But "big deal". Many such aspiring endeavors have been undertaken at the expense of a large corporation's purse, only to fail miserably. I applaud their attempt to better technology and wish them the best, but I'll reserve judgement on the ultimate worthiness of thier crusade until they actually do something.
So, 150 spammers huh? I think I'll opt for the HK MP5. Each magazine can hold 32 bullets, which means I'll need 19 fully loaded magazines, or 192 bullets. I figure that I will need this much ammunition because in my zest filled murderous glee I am likely to waste at least four bullets on each spammer, since the intense joy that I will have while firing said bullets in their direction will cause me to miss at least 75% of the time. I think I will also make use of the 10mm automatic cartridges, which deliver up to twice the muzzle energy of the standard 9mm shell (I aim for optimal terminal effect).
Make no mistake, my aim will prove true. I should have this whole "spam" ordeal cleared up by late September.
*as a side note, it wouldn't hurt to sign up and learn how your enemy thinks, and how he employs his tactics. Before you gun him down like a dog in the street, that is.
A lot of games (Metroid Prime, any Pokemon game, Grand Theft Auto 3/Vice City, Zelda: The Wind Waker, etc) sell more copies than major motion pictures sell tickets.
Considering that we presently greatly lack the amount of energy required to test even the smallest of superstring theory claims, this debate is merely beginnning. Frankly, I still view superstring theory as a fringe science, considering the fact that it holds merit (many of it's hypothesis are built upon solid scientific foundations), but none of it's claims can yet be tested and verified.
....because people use all sorts of applications and save info all sorts of places. SQL, Excel, Access, Word, mySQL, etc - all from not only our company, but our partners. That's how us big ballers roll, grass hopper.
This may actually signal the beginning of the end of the monopoly. People have always speculated that widespread damnation of DRM technologies will only occur once a major manufacturer, such as Microsoft, uses it to blatantly direct the consumer to spend money that they really didn't intend on spending. It goes hand in hand to suppose that the said company will become a major target for customer disdain, and the act will make them infamous as "the first". The spin that the media can place upon such a story will be catastrophic to the companie's image. And Microsoft will have no where to hide, because it no longer only be the geeks that are tasting the effects of the monopoly.
Just imagine the backlash that will come from inter-company communication via Excel and Word. Hell, my company has had numerous problems with reporting (scripts that mine data from various sources, such as Excel, and generate reports) and document management systems just because of differences between Excel/Word 97 and 2000 files. This may be what FOSS needs to start making massive market penetration.
In other news, Microsoft chairman and cofounder Bill Gates expressed regret, and is reportedly highly upset that Microsoft must pay $10,000 ($10,800 USD) Euros in legal expenses, after a judgement was passed by German courts.
$10,800 USD seems a bit low, considering that SCOs lies and threats have probably damaged Linux companies and consultants many times that amount. While the US legal system appears impotent in the face of this slandering and despicable business tactic, Germany is obviously prepared for this nonsense. Since the effects of SCOs claims have the potential of effecting companies in just about every nation on Earth, I say that Germany fine them appropriately, and even get the European Union in on the action.
At the end of the day, companies like Microsoft and SCO won't be stopped by the US. The best we can do is waste a couple hundred million in tax dollars on a useless court case that is headed by a puppet judge. We can only hope that the EU will save us, a body that acts swiftly against vil business tactics, and usually solidly (just look at how they dealt with Nintendo).
"The technology, based on the research from Queen Mary College, University of London by Peter McOwan, 'uses a neural network to pick out the unique features of the way that someone uses a mouse..."
...and probably easily replicable, since an actual physical presence is unneeded, and the ability to play back a "mouse stroke" will be a capable feat by any second year CS major.
This means that Microsoft's marketing division hasn't figured out how to get businesses to upgrade next year, especially when you factor in the less than avid response to Windows XP and their recent security problems. In addition, Linux shows no signs of slowing up, and Novell may even be making a small come back (emphasis on the word "small"). This means that Microsoft will seek revenue from licences and Office while spending the real money on figuring out how to stop IBM.
Expect to see a lot of other smaller, less significant Microsoft software hitting shelves in the next two years (at least twice as much as usual) while Microsoft targets the datacenter with their R&D budget, and outfits like SCO with their legal purse.
China is many times older than any other existing civilization. At no time during this long and illustrious period did their people opt for democracy. A handful of students protesting for an increase of free speech does not equate to full blown revolution by the people.
I fear that you have mistaken the meaning of the word "bigot", also.
What does the RIAA have to say about you using their copyrighted material to generate music - music which is arguably not unique, but rather derivatives of their property?
All you have to do is pay for the service. You have that right, you have this freedom. Use your freedoms, because a million people in Iran would love to possess your myriad of freedoms instead of a measily free Anonymizer.
The Chinese never have, nor have they ever shown much aspiration towards being a democracy. What they have always displayed is an ardent mistrust of the outside world, and far more nationalistic arrogance then we Americans. I would argue that they deserve to be arrogant, given their long history and record of achievement. Regardless, they do need influence, and who better than us?
Japan was not transformed from a 1,000+ year old fuedal society into a bustling democracy on their own wants and wills. We served as an example for them for years. Their youth aspired to overtake the old establishment some day and make their nation like ours. World War II gave them that chance, and for better or worse, it was us that were there when the smoke cleared to help them.
Something similar might happen in China, but it won't magically occur without help and persuasion.
Slashdot Mirror
More than that, desktop adoption of Linux is going to require a heavy investment in support by a major PC manufacturer. In other words, dropping the price of a PC by $80 bucks and supplying it with Mandrake and no support isn't even going to lure businesses.
Just picture the two of them together, stoned out of their gourds, with a guy in a big penguin suit behind them.
They make the visual of some pale, skinny nerd with a "Got Root?" shirt on, banging away on a keyboard in a poorly lit dorm room sound exciting.
Only really small ones (5 dual CPU systems). I saw really large one in a bank one time....but it was in a refridgerated room. So yes, I see your point. ;)
Again, we need to know more about his institution's needs before we can confidently declare which solution (Z\Linux or a cluster) is the best fit for his needs.
I helped a admin friend (pure Novell guy that was somehow tasked with this job) implement TurboLinux on a IBM Z series mainframe. It is kind of easy to work, but you lose some performance, and updates and fixes can be hard to track down sometimes. Clustered Linux solutions could end being cheaper at first, but their TCO may rise higher as time goes on (especially if your company/institution lacks a very competent Linux cluster admin/programmer).
1. What exactly demands this solution?
2. Can a pure Linux box, with mild tweaking, still not be more useful and create less overhead than this?
Someone in this thread mentioned IBM implementing wildly complex systems in order to push consultation, and on some levels it's true. PeopleSoft does it also. In some cases, Oracle will have a go at this tactic. My advice is to do some searching first, without the input of IBM, and see if you can't find a better solution to whatever problem you're trying to remedy.
I just posted an eBay auction for a song I bought from the iTunes music store. It should be interesting to see how this works out. I only spent $0.99 on it but I bought the song just as legally as I would a CD, so I should be able to sell it used just as legally right?
[Update 09-03-2003 10:08 AM] Right now I've come up with a couple ways that the transfer of ownership could take place. One is to call up Apple and ask them to do it for me, which would be an interesting call. The other way would be to give my account to the winning bidder, which doesn't seem like a bid deal considering that I've only purchased one song. Still, I'd have to make sure that my credit card info was completely disassociated with the account. Or I could just create a new account and repurchase the song on that account.
[Update 09-03-2003 11:25 AM] I'd like to respond to a few points made by people: 1. It's true that I'm seeking attention, but not for me personally. This is an experiment in property rights in the digital age, something that's gotten surprisingly little attention. 2. I've read the iTunes agreements and found nothing denying transferability. This isn't any more a commercial venture than selling CDs at the local music store, I'm not incorporated or even DBA. Furthermore, in case anyone thinks this is a cheap way to make a buck I will be donating all proceeds to the EFF. 3. When the song is successfully transferred, I will not be keeping a copy of the song. If I don't own it I shouldn't have a copy.
[Update 09-03-2003 11:25 AM] A very excellent comment below by Piggly Wiggly asks if I will convert the format for delivery. My answer right now is "no" because I don't want to cloud the issue of the sale by changing the format. Also, I'd like to thank all the people posting supportive comments who realize that this is about more than a $0.99 song being over-valued on eBay.
Why did the VA Tech crew opt to waste at least $1,000,000 just to use G5's? I would be highly upset if I was an alumni and knew that some of my tuition tax was going to this Macintosh fan boy's wet dream.
But "big deal". Many such aspiring endeavors have been undertaken at the expense of a large corporation's purse, only to fail miserably. I applaud their attempt to better technology and wish them the best, but I'll reserve judgement on the ultimate worthiness of thier crusade until they actually do something.
In my feverish anticipation of the hunt, I got my math wrong. You can see how anxious I am to get started on my righteous campaign.
5-7-5!!!!!n!i!g!g!e!r!
Make no mistake, my aim will prove true. I should have this whole "spam" ordeal cleared up by late September.
*as a side note, it wouldn't hurt to sign up and learn how your enemy thinks, and how he employs his tactics. Before you gun him down like a dog in the street, that is.
But, whatever.
Still, intriguing stuff.
....because people use all sorts of applications and save info all sorts of places. SQL, Excel, Access, Word, mySQL, etc - all from not only our company, but our partners. That's how us big ballers roll, grass hopper.
Just imagine the backlash that will come from inter-company communication via Excel and Word. Hell, my company has had numerous problems with reporting (scripts that mine data from various sources, such as Excel, and generate reports) and document management systems just because of differences between Excel/Word 97 and 2000 files. This may be what FOSS needs to start making massive market penetration.
;)
At the end of the day, companies like Microsoft and SCO won't be stopped by the US. The best we can do is waste a couple hundred million in tax dollars on a useless court case that is headed by a puppet judge. We can only hope that the EU will save us, a body that acts swiftly against vil business tactics, and usually solidly (just look at how they dealt with Nintendo).
...and probably easily replicable, since an actual physical presence is unneeded, and the ability to play back a "mouse stroke" will be a capable feat by any second year CS major.
Expect to see a lot of other smaller, less significant Microsoft software hitting shelves in the next two years (at least twice as much as usual) while Microsoft targets the datacenter with their R&D budget, and outfits like SCO with their legal purse.
I fear that you have mistaken the meaning of the word "bigot", also.
What does the RIAA have to say about you using their copyrighted material to generate music - music which is arguably not unique, but rather derivatives of their property?
All you have to do is pay for the service. You have that right, you have this freedom. Use your freedoms, because a million people in Iran would love to possess your myriad of freedoms instead of a measily free Anonymizer.
Japan was not transformed from a 1,000+ year old fuedal society into a bustling democracy on their own wants and wills. We served as an example for them for years. Their youth aspired to overtake the old establishment some day and make their nation like ours. World War II gave them that chance, and for better or worse, it was us that were there when the smoke cleared to help them.
Something similar might happen in China, but it won't magically occur without help and persuasion.