Well, Microsoft has a small windows of oportunity here, once Linux is stablished, they won't be able to take that market back. They won't be able to push a Cairo or Longhorn here, since several years of development will mean they'll lose that window. If history is any guide, MS should better already have a long ongoing work on porting their OS.
Maybe nobody is yet sure that the current action is really a trap... Altough, comming from Microsoft, it is quite likely, that is why people are trying to figure the plot here.
I'm quite sure freedom of initiative is a right on most european countries. Freedom of speech is also so. Now, how come the govenrment can forbid people from contracting access to a comunication media again?
That is a good reason for them to merge. Getting hold of Java may be another one (altough a business case for Java other than destroying Microsoft seems quite hard to find). Now, if those were so important, Oracle would have already let MySQL go. They are quite interested on owning a big competitor.
How often do the fluid-and-pipe based (hydraulic) steering break? Except for totaly losing the batery, they have similar modes of failure, a tube could break, a piston could stuck or break open...
"The laughability of the Peace Prize notwithstanding, you don't get a Nobel Prize for Physics by claiming to violate Conservation of Energy."
Well, if you have any kind of experiment to sustain the claim, I'm quite sure you'll get it. You probably won't even need to get old before getting the prize.
Ok, I agree that open source may not be superior in every possible situation, but I lack counter-examples and yours isn't really obvious. Would the clients of Microsoft be better or worse if they colaboratively developed the software they buy? Would it be cheaper or more expensive? Would it have lower or highter quality? In short is Microsoft a leacher or a constructive member of society*?
* Specificaly for Microsoft, the answer is quite easy, but it doesn't extend to other software dealers on any obvious way.
1) That is a problem for FreeBSD, but the overall driver situation doesn't really mater, what matters is whether the OS has the drivers you need. FreeBSD has the drivers lots of people need, so lots of people are able to use it without any problem.
2) If you choosed Debian because of startup time, you choosed it wrong. Debian is very easy to maintain and upgrade, and has a huge collection of sotfware ready to use. There are other factors here, but startup time isn't one of them.
HURD runs over L4, and there are already testing releases of it that run on virtualizaed hardware. It doesn't have a lot of drivers, so it isn't really usefull yet, but it is quite out of the achitect's heads aready.
Also, it is available on Debian testing, if you want to try the kernel.
Well, 16 Exabytes of RAM (ok, just 8 if you use signed relative jumps) ought to be enough for a quite long time. Long enough to develop another OS, that is for sure.
"If the engine of his car was missing, do you think he'd complain that the car wouldn't start?"
Probably. Hell, even if the engine of MY car were stolen, I'd take quite a bit of time to understand that it isn't just a drained batery, or a bad contact somewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
That was Napster's line.
Well, Microsoft has a small windows of oportunity here, once Linux is stablished, they won't be able to take that market back. They won't be able to push a Cairo or Longhorn here, since several years of development will mean they'll lose that window. If history is any guide, MS should better already have a long ongoing work on porting their OS.
Maybe nobody is yet sure that the current action is really a trap... Altough, comming from Microsoft, it is quite likely, that is why people are trying to figure the plot here.
What do you think your computer mounts as /dev/null?
I'm quite sure freedom of initiative is a right on most european countries. Freedom of speech is also so. Now, how come the govenrment can forbid people from contracting access to a comunication media again?
Aparently they ofsored that tiket to France Telecom.
That is a good reason for them to merge. Getting hold of Java may be another one (altough a business case for Java other than destroying Microsoft seems quite hard to find). Now, if those were so important, Oracle would have already let MySQL go. They are quite interested on owning a big competitor.
How often do the fluid-and-pipe based (hydraulic) steering break? Except for totaly losing the batery, they have similar modes of failure, a tube could break, a piston could stuck or break open...
Well, obviously the IA with mod points isn't commenting. What let us to know that.... /. is full of NLP AIs!
Geneticists sound like that for a while already.
Well, if you have any kind of experiment to sustain the claim, I'm quite sure you'll get it. You probably won't even need to get old before getting the prize.
But, ok, enough nitipicking.
Studing too much quantum tuneling recently, isn't you?
Maybe, but the existence of FTL transtportation would make that limit moot anyway.
Well, you are the one needing to study some history here. Take a look at Plank and Einstein (the two that first proposed quantum physics) as a start.
Otherwise, using quantum mechanics as an example of something not based on experiments is really funny. Maybe there is a woosh here somehere...
Still, the second one is the weakest.
That spider digest its food in a way that is completely different from other spiders, how is that not an important change?
Ok, I agree that open source may not be superior in every possible situation, but I lack counter-examples and yours isn't really obvious. Would the clients of Microsoft be better or worse if they colaboratively developed the software they buy? Would it be cheaper or more expensive? Would it have lower or highter quality? In short is Microsoft a leacher or a constructive member of society*?
* Specificaly for Microsoft, the answer is quite easy, but it doesn't extend to other software dealers on any obvious way.
1) That is a problem for FreeBSD, but the overall driver situation doesn't really mater, what matters is whether the OS has the drivers you need. FreeBSD has the drivers lots of people need, so lots of people are able to use it without any problem.
2) If you choosed Debian because of startup time, you choosed it wrong. Debian is very easy to maintain and upgrade, and has a huge collection of sotfware ready to use. There are other factors here, but startup time isn't one of them.
HURD runs over L4, and there are already testing releases of it that run on virtualizaed hardware. It doesn't have a lot of drivers, so it isn't really usefull yet, but it is quite out of the achitect's heads aready.
Also, it is available on Debian testing, if you want to try the kernel.
If you go all the way into creating a test environment, having an inhouse repository (or at least a cache) is the least one should expect.
Well, their EULA prohibits one from publishing such comparation without permission from Microsoft, so I guess it is not taboo.
Well, 16 Exabytes of RAM (ok, just 8 if you use signed relative jumps) ought to be enough for a quite long time. Long enough to develop another OS, that is for sure.
They did the same to EOLAS.
He did, that is the point of RMS's article.
Oh, that one he didn't.