The author talks about the OS transition being "risky". In what way?
The servers and desktop OS are changes that the user is not much concerned with. It is changing the applications which impacts the users. Once you have changed the application set to one that is not windows dependent I have trouble believing that changing the underlying OS would have much impact at all. Basically being able to get rid of the OS fees is an inherient benefit to getting rid of OS dependent applications. After that the workstation OS can be changed at will without significant retraining of users.
Like the servers, the users do not interact with the OS directly, only with the application icons on their desktop.
The general idea of open source is FREEDOM. It is the that everyone can see, manipulate, modify, and redistribute the source code and that nobody can lock them out.
Yes, the purpose of source code is development, so they go hand in hand, but there is no one specific "open source development model" there are as many development models as there are projects.
There are Sat phones, but that is a different type of sat in a different orbit. The Sats used for internet access generally have about 15-30 seconds round trip.
That means you would make a call, 30 secondsish later it rings on the other end and they pick up. They say "hello", 30 seconds later you hear hello, the actual chunk of voice is smooth but 30 seconds late. Before they could hear your response it would be 30+30+you listening to their hello+you speaking time. Probably about 1-1.5min of dead time after they pick up the phone and say hello. Even if they stuck around long enough to find out it was you the conversation would be unbearable. If you want to find out what I'm talking about, ask a starband user what happens if they turn off their starband "accelerator" software.
Bear in mind also that VOIP has only recently reached good quality from fast cable/dsl to cable/dsl and tolerable quality from cable/dsl to domestic landline. Even on domestic calls there noticable pauses and delays at times.
The latencies associated with a sat connection make voip over one impossible. As bad as latencies appear to be, the sat companies use a lot of tricks to reduce latency with normal web traffic. Those tricks will not work with streaming voice.
These gentlemen seem to be implying that open source is a development model when in reality it is a licensing scheme.
Microsoft might want you to believe open source is a development model they can learn from and harass the benefits of, but the truth is that open source is a set of rights and philosophy related to licensing. An open source project can use any development model.
"The fact is, the number of 'very wealthy' is vanishingly small. Even if we taxed them at 100%, the total amount would be a drop in the bucket of the Federal budget."
This is ridiculous. The wealthy making 6 figure incomes pay almost ALL of the taxes.
This subject always cracks me up. Everybody wants a tax cut for themselves, but they are ignoring what the tax cut was for.
The tax cut was to stimulate the economy. If your going to make a significant tax cut that means catering to the taxes paid by the top 10% earners because the top 10% of the population pay 80% of the total taxes paid in!
"The Republican argument was dividend taxes were double taxation, because the company paid taxes on it when the money was made and it was unfair to tax it again when it was paid out as a dividend."
By this logic, the company paid taxes on the money when it was made and it is therefore unfair to tax it again when it is paid out as a paycheck.
Here in the US you would have to counter-sue for legal expenses and damages. However to win that suit you would have to not only prove that Red Hat was wrong, but that their lawsuit was frivilous.
Legal fights are very expensive and in the US a corporation would send threatening letters to avoid expense. However, a corporation will sue if it is worth the expense to stop the infringment. Since an individual cannot afford to mount a legal defense they are sure to either settle or lose.
Perhaps the brits are governed by parliment, here in the US we are governed by corporations. Luckily if you brits keep following in our direction you will soon be governed by them as well!
Your confusing a point here. Windows Explorer was previously a seperate application. That application was replaced by IE. WE no longer exists, all that exists now is IE renamed to WE and a graphical frontend for it that makes it look like the IE we are used to. This is why you can now view your desktop as a webpage and such. In win95 explorer was a shell NOT an html renderer.
The quirks mode should be kept to a minimum, especially as Gecko based browsers become more popular. The designers should be forced to write html/xhtml or have their pages not render (as opposed to writing their own code which is similar to html/xhtml)
Slashdot Mirror
Did they mention it was blacklisted? Microsoft doesn't provide support anyway, nobody is asking them to answer an email or a phone call.
There were no tests, they looked at reported vulnerabilities and how long it took for them to patch them after being reported.
The "linux enthusiest" has published microsoft funded reports showing windows as more secure previously.
Heroin at least has a high, MS gives your company the addiction/lockin without the fuzzy feelings.
The author talks about the OS transition being "risky". In what way?
The servers and desktop OS are changes that the user is not much concerned with. It is changing the applications which impacts the users. Once you have changed the application set to one that is not windows dependent I have trouble believing that changing the underlying OS would have much impact at all. Basically being able to get rid of the OS fees is an inherient benefit to getting rid of OS dependent applications. After that the workstation OS can be changed at will without significant retraining of users.
Like the servers, the users do not interact with the OS directly, only with the application icons on their desktop.
A good deal of junkies have quit smoking largely because of price.
The general idea of open source is FREEDOM. It is the that everyone can see, manipulate, modify, and redistribute the source code and that nobody can lock them out.
Yes, the purpose of source code is development, so they go hand in hand, but there is no one specific "open source development model" there are as many development models as there are projects.
Hitler, Bush, Castro, their all dictators so it makes little difference.
They truely and honestly believe there is a good chance they might day and as long as that is true they better convince themselves there is a reason.
There are Sat phones, but that is a different type of sat in a different orbit. The Sats used for internet access generally have about 15-30 seconds round trip.
That means you would make a call, 30 secondsish later it rings on the other end and they pick up. They say "hello", 30 seconds later you hear hello, the actual chunk of voice is smooth but 30 seconds late. Before they could hear your response it would be 30+30+you listening to their hello+you speaking time. Probably about 1-1.5min of dead time after they pick up the phone and say hello. Even if they stuck around long enough to find out it was you the conversation would be unbearable. If you want to find out what I'm talking about, ask a starband user what happens if they turn off their starband "accelerator" software.
Bear in mind also that VOIP has only recently reached good quality from fast cable/dsl to cable/dsl and tolerable quality from cable/dsl to domestic landline. Even on domestic calls there noticable pauses and delays at times.
The latencies associated with a sat connection make voip over one impossible. As bad as latencies appear to be, the sat companies use a lot of tricks to reduce latency with normal web traffic. Those tricks will not work with streaming voice.
These gentlemen seem to be implying that open source is a development model when in reality it is a licensing scheme.
Microsoft might want you to believe open source is a development model they can learn from and harass the benefits of, but the truth is that open source is a set of rights and philosophy related to licensing. An open source project can use any development model.
"The fact is, the number of 'very wealthy' is vanishingly small. Even if we taxed them at 100%, the total amount would be a drop in the bucket of the Federal budget."
This is ridiculous. The wealthy making 6 figure incomes pay almost ALL of the taxes.
This subject always cracks me up. Everybody wants a tax cut for themselves, but they are ignoring what the tax cut was for.
The tax cut was to stimulate the economy. If your going to make a significant tax cut that means catering to the taxes paid by the top 10% earners because the top 10% of the population pay 80% of the total taxes paid in!
"The Republican argument was dividend taxes were double taxation, because the company paid taxes on it when the money was made and it was unfair to tax it again when it was paid out as a dividend."
By this logic, the company paid taxes on the money when it was made and it is therefore unfair to tax it again when it is paid out as a paycheck.
Open source development has disproven brooks' law long ago.
Redhat does not seem to agree since they are not allowing Centos to say their name in order to credit them.
Here in the US you would have to counter-sue for legal expenses and damages. However to win that suit you would have to not only prove that Red Hat was wrong, but that their lawsuit was frivilous.
Legal fights are very expensive and in the US a corporation would send threatening letters to avoid expense. However, a corporation will sue if it is worth the expense to stop the infringment. Since an individual cannot afford to mount a legal defense they are sure to either settle or lose.
Perhaps the brits are governed by parliment, here in the US we are governed by corporations. Luckily if you brits keep following in our direction you will soon be governed by them as well!
Your confusing a point here. Windows Explorer was previously a seperate application. That application was replaced by IE. WE no longer exists, all that exists now is IE renamed to WE and a graphical frontend for it that makes it look like the IE we are used to. This is why you can now view your desktop as a webpage and such. In win95 explorer was a shell NOT an html renderer.
Your missing one critical factor. My understanding is that in the EU there will not be XP Pro and XP Home, ONLY XP Reduced Media Edition.
Well what did you think would happen would you signed up for free sample address labels on freebiecrap.com?
It's called natural selection. Culling the weak (be it intellectual or physical) is NOT a bad thing.
If someone manages to be governor it DOES however mean they are a puppet. Schwarenagger isn't competent, his puppeteers are.
The quirks mode should be kept to a minimum, especially as Gecko based browsers become more popular. The designers should be forced to write html/xhtml or have their pages not render (as opposed to writing their own code which is similar to html/xhtml)
If Slashdot's HTML cannot pass the validator then Slashdot's HTML that is also bugged. Incompatability with the standards is a bug, not an oops.
"I suppose there are worse things - for example spending that much money on weapons to kill people when your own people are starving..."
The US does this.