"As an unbiased and impartial observer myself, I've pretty much had it up to here with SCO's antics"
By the definitions of some on slashdot (generally something-fantatics) you stop being unbiased and impartial the minute your impartial and unbiased review of a subject results in a conclusion which differs from their biased and partial from the get conclusion.
Welcome to the club, your now an anti-sco fantatic bigot. Thou shalt be modded into the mud by the Microsoft fans, who claim everyone is against them but have enough mod points to make sure any actual statement against them is modded into the dirt.
This isn't about making SCO money, it never was, it has been clear for awhile now that SCO was going down the toilet, now this is about making the execs money. They do that by making lots of headlines and taking under the table money from someone, most likely microsoft who wants bad linux PR. ANY bad linux PR.
That's nothing, one of these days I'm gonna submit a story about microsoft NOT doing something underhanded, hell maybe I'll even catch them doing a truely good deed. Been looking for years, this is my shipwreck and I'm gonna find it!
How much more glory can you get than bitch slapping a huge headliner corporate in such a devious way that the security experts are fooled into believing the subject of the attack is making it all up!!
ok it's up now, was down for at least 30mins (no config changes here before or after). Had some ssl certs failing on lists.redhat.com as well, although it did bring up the page it showed a self signed localhost.localdomain cert.
Not using IE so no browser hijack and everything resolved properly. I'm fairly sure www.redhat.com was down tonight.
The US public domain is not something the US invented or adopted or does not exist in everywhere in the world. Public domain is the default, the natural order of things.
Ownership by the individual is the made up concept. By default ideals and objects are posessed by those able to obtain them and only so long as they are able to keep them, and by default the ability and right to copy is also limited only by someone elses ability to stop you. This is neither wrong nor evil, it is the natural law.
Actually it's supposed to appear on the screen, in a prominent position. Not buried anywhere. If they have integrated it into the underlying system then this means it should be displayed as part of the windows boot process since that is when the code is initialized.
At least that was pretty much the way it was when I last read the BSD license (which was admittedly awhile ago). I might have the details mixed up, but it was stressed that the credit must be made bold and prominent and couldn't be buried somewhere (like say the registry or the docs).
1. to make my product more valuable to my customers.
2. Because I don't want payment in cash, I want it in code. If you use it, I want payment, I want your code back.
Actually I find there is one major clause missing from the gpl. As it is, the original developer would have to buy a copy or otherwise aquire a binary to be entitled to the modifications of his own source. If the modified app isn't distributed at all that is one thing, but I should hardly have to buy a linksys router if it was MY code linksys modified to use in the firmware. If they used my code, I should be entitled to those modifications.
Yes but yours isn't really the big hole in financial software. The big hole is a quickbooks replacement NOT a Quicken or money replacement.
Honestly, linux is already ready for the corporate desktop and most medium sized business desktops. The next hole to fill is the small business desktop which comes another step closer to the home user, it has alot of the same demands as the home user but is different in that this market has lots of money to spend in pools that are large enough to pay developers to accomplish small tasks for them.
This group has little enough need of consumer type devices that linux can start to move in as is if there were an accounting app, but has enough need and is large enough to get consumer device drivers and support. The people who own these businesses or are high ranked in them are the same people who can afford gobs of usb this or that gadgets at home and who pay rather than pirate. They are the upper middle and middle class, you win them and you will inevitably win the lower class (the average person, yes even in the US and Europe the average person is poor).
"Any decent closed-source software development house writing programs for general consumption (as opposed to strictly in-house line-of-business programming) should have teams of people doing this during the requirements gathering phase. Perhaps not the actual developers, but it's likely that the actual developers may not even have been identified at that point."
In the open source world the developers ARE users. They get into the project BECAUSE THEY USE THE APP or NEED THE APP SO THEY MIGHT USE IT. I don't know many people working on open source projects who don't actually use the app they code! In the closed source world I know plenty who haven't and would never consider actually using the app.
Absolutely, people confuse this all the time. Windows hasn't and never did beat MacOS, the IBM PC Clone beat the macintosh... windows just happened to be what ran on it.
I believe he was refering to a job programming. I don't know anyone who could be called "computer scientist" and has a CS degree rather than an engineering degree. CS theory is largely worthless. CS anything else but coding and theory. Is completely worthless (at least in terms of actually programming for food in the real world).
umm or you could just install APT on your rpm based distribution to do the exact same thing as those other tools, as well or better, and not have to fight with them at all?
"Myth: Installation and configuration aren't as important as making the source available. Reality: If it takes too much work just to get the software working, many people will silently quit.
Yeah, there not that important thats why we did silly stuff like create autoconf to configure and install software. That is why we carry around the install.sh form X11 to install software in a predictable and sane way. That is why we have plain readable text files to configure our software. The reality holds true for closed and open source as well."
I'm sorry but that reality is definately TRUE. You are quite mistaken. Configure and autoconf are developer tools, not user tools. The sad truth is that 95% of open source projects are incomplete, and I don't mean in terms of version number.
The installer is not optional, it's part of the project and I don't care what project it is. RPM, APT, etc are NOT installers. Most projects don't even provide packages for these management systems, let alone provide installers. Package management is something in the underlying distribution that is AGAIN a DEVELOPER tool.
Your installer sits ON TOP of the package management system, it consists of a text AND gui "wizard" which takes care of the task installing the deps (which of course should be included in the end user release, unless blatantly obvious like when your app is a plugin for x, if there are any y's they should be included or clearly documented).
As for not having the resources to test an installer and binary package on all the possible systems out there, why not? If you've actually written source code for the rest of your project and managed to test it to the extent you claim it runs on those systems, then you obviously have people out there using them, how are the resources any less than for the rest of project???
Give me a break, even the lamest windows and mac apps have an installer. A good framework would be nice here having worked out most of the typical headaches already, but a lack of one is hardly an excuse for never starting let alone completing the most critical part of any project that is to be released to an end user. The installer of course, shouldn't have deps that aren't included either.
Re:They couldn't put it on the beatle because of G
on
Linux Goes to Mars
·
· Score: 4, Funny
That's quite incorrect. They would only be distributing it if after they got to mars they gave it to the local residents. And they wouldn't have to ship the sourcecode with the beagle, they just have to plaster a notice on the side explaining how to request it. Now if the locals request the code they could charge the martians the expense of delivering the code back to Mars and in this way fund further Mars missions.
I really think the Brits were shortsighted on this one, it really could make for a great way of funding a large portion of their space program.
umm harden is a rather strong term when refering to a windows system. Perhaps you could call it "make less paper thin and pudding soft". I thought jello for a minute, but jello really does have too much resistance. If you don't push on jello hard enough to break it, it bounces back.. in pudding however you leave a hole distorting it's shape. A failed exploit often simply smashes a windows box into the dirt so it's much closer.
The way that reads, it sounds like a webpage that writes and executes a windows app on a users pc. Microsoft has patented browser exploits? It's hard to dispute this one, they certainly have all the prior art on their side...
Although your point about the proprietary software is completely valid. Alot of people seem to be missing something. Just because tivo can or can't or doesn't have to do this that or the other, it doesn't change what I and every other user can do with the gpl'd source code.
Tivo doesn't have to give out binary images, but there is no reason I can't distribute a binary of the gpl'd software regardless of whether or not they choose to.
Slashdot Mirror
"As an unbiased and impartial observer myself, I've pretty much had it up to here with SCO's antics"
By the definitions of some on slashdot (generally something-fantatics) you stop being unbiased and impartial the minute your impartial and unbiased review of a subject results in a conclusion which differs from their biased and partial from the get conclusion.
Welcome to the club, your now an anti-sco fantatic bigot. Thou shalt be modded into the mud by the Microsoft fans, who claim everyone is against them but have enough mod points to make sure any actual statement against them is modded into the dirt.
This isn't about making SCO money, it never was, it has been clear for awhile now that SCO was going down the toilet, now this is about making the execs money. They do that by making lots of headlines and taking under the table money from someone, most likely microsoft who wants bad linux PR. ANY bad linux PR.
That's nothing, one of these days I'm gonna submit a story about microsoft NOT doing something underhanded, hell maybe I'll even catch them doing a truely good deed. Been looking for years, this is my shipwreck and I'm gonna find it!
How much more glory can you get than bitch slapping a huge headliner corporate in such a devious way that the security experts are fooled into believing the subject of the attack is making it all up!!
ok it's up now, was down for at least 30mins (no config changes here before or after). Had some ssl certs failing on lists.redhat.com as well, although it did bring up the page it showed a self signed localhost.localdomain cert.
Not using IE so no browser hijack and everything resolved properly. I'm fairly sure www.redhat.com was down tonight.
When I go to www.redhat.com I get the standard apache you haven't setup a page yet deal. Anyone else getting this? The site seems to resolve ok.
The US public domain is not something the US invented or adopted or does not exist in everywhere in the world. Public domain is the default, the natural order of things.
Ownership by the individual is the made up concept. By default ideals and objects are posessed by those able to obtain them and only so long as they are able to keep them, and by default the ability and right to copy is also limited only by someone elses ability to stop you. This is neither wrong nor evil, it is the natural law.
Actually it's supposed to appear on the screen, in a prominent position. Not buried anywhere. If they have integrated it into the underlying system then this means it should be displayed as part of the windows boot process since that is when the code is initialized.
At least that was pretty much the way it was when I last read the BSD license (which was admittedly awhile ago). I might have the details mixed up, but it was stressed that the credit must be made bold and prominent and couldn't be buried somewhere (like say the registry or the docs).
No
There are two reasons to release my code:
1. to make my product more valuable to my customers.
2. Because I don't want payment in cash, I want it in code. If you use it, I want payment, I want your code back.
Actually I find there is one major clause missing from the gpl. As it is, the original developer would have to buy a copy or otherwise aquire a binary to be entitled to the modifications of his own source. If the modified app isn't distributed at all that is one thing, but I should hardly have to buy a linksys router if it was MY code linksys modified to use in the firmware. If they used my code, I should be entitled to those modifications.
Yes but yours isn't really the big hole in financial software. The big hole is a quickbooks replacement NOT a Quicken or money replacement.
Honestly, linux is already ready for the corporate desktop and most medium sized business desktops. The next hole to fill is the small business desktop which comes another step closer to the home user, it has alot of the same demands as the home user but is different in that this market has lots of money to spend in pools that are large enough to pay developers to accomplish small tasks for them.
This group has little enough need of consumer type devices that linux can start to move in as is if there were an accounting app, but has enough need and is large enough to get consumer device drivers and support. The people who own these businesses or are high ranked in them are the same people who can afford gobs of usb this or that gadgets at home and who pay rather than pirate. They are the upper middle and middle class, you win them and you will inevitably win the lower class (the average person, yes even in the US and Europe the average person is poor).
"Any decent closed-source software development house writing programs for general consumption (as opposed to strictly in-house line-of-business programming) should have teams of people doing this during the requirements gathering phase. Perhaps not the actual developers, but it's likely that the actual developers may not even have been identified at that point."
In the open source world the developers ARE users. They get into the project BECAUSE THEY USE THE APP or NEED THE APP SO THEY MIGHT USE IT. I don't know many people working on open source projects who don't actually use the app they code! In the closed source world I know plenty who haven't and would never consider actually using the app.
Absolutely, people confuse this all the time. Windows hasn't and never did beat MacOS, the IBM PC Clone beat the macintosh... windows just happened to be what ran on it.
Open source means free (as in speech) source code, an NDA is NOT free as in speech OR as in beer. That would not qualify as open source.
I believe he was refering to a job programming. I don't know anyone who could be called "computer scientist" and has a CS degree rather than an engineering degree. CS theory is largely worthless. CS anything else but coding and theory. Is completely worthless (at least in terms of actually programming for food in the real world).
umm or you could just install APT on your rpm based distribution to do the exact same thing as those other tools, as well or better, and not have to fight with them at all?
"Myth: Installation and configuration aren't as important as making the source available.
Reality: If it takes too much work just to get the software working, many people will silently quit.
Yeah, there not that important thats why we did silly stuff like create autoconf to configure and install software. That is why we carry around the install.sh form X11 to install software in a predictable and sane way. That is why we have plain readable text files to configure our software. The reality holds true for closed and open source as well."
I'm sorry but that reality is definately TRUE. You are quite mistaken. Configure and autoconf are developer tools, not user tools. The sad truth is that 95% of open source projects are incomplete, and I don't mean in terms of version number.
The installer is not optional, it's part of the project and I don't care what project it is. RPM, APT, etc are NOT installers. Most projects don't even provide packages for these management systems, let alone provide installers. Package management is something in the underlying distribution that is AGAIN a DEVELOPER tool.
Your installer sits ON TOP of the package management system, it consists of a text AND gui "wizard" which takes care of the task installing the deps (which of course should be included in the end user release, unless blatantly obvious like when your app is a plugin for x, if there are any y's they should be included or clearly documented).
As for not having the resources to test an installer and binary package on all the possible systems out there, why not? If you've actually written source code for the rest of your project and managed to test it to the extent you claim it runs on those systems, then you obviously have people out there using them, how are the resources any less than for the rest of project???
Give me a break, even the lamest windows and mac apps have an installer. A good framework would be nice here having worked out most of the typical headaches already, but a lack of one is hardly an excuse for never starting let alone completing the most critical part of any project that is to be released to an end user. The installer of course, shouldn't have deps that aren't included either.
That's quite incorrect. They would only be distributing it if after they got to mars they gave it to the local residents. And they wouldn't have to ship the sourcecode with the beagle, they just have to plaster a notice on the side explaining how to request it. Now if the locals request the code they could charge the martians the expense of delivering the code back to Mars and in this way fund further Mars missions.
I really think the Brits were shortsighted on this one, it really could make for a great way of funding a large portion of their space program.
MARS is clearly a unix derivative. Please send a check or money order for $699 to:
Darle "The Expired Trojan" McBride
1234 oncracklegal st.
PhantomIP, Utah 01010
Local admin is certainly not the same as Domain admin.
umm harden is a rather strong term when refering to a windows system. Perhaps you could call it "make less paper thin and pudding soft". I thought jello for a minute, but jello really does have too much resistance. If you don't push on jello hard enough to break it, it bounces back.. in pudding however you leave a hole distorting it's shape. A failed exploit often simply smashes a windows box into the dirt so it's much closer.
yes but you were talking about home, he was talking about pro.
The way that reads, it sounds like a webpage that writes and executes a windows app on a users pc. Microsoft has patented browser exploits? It's hard to dispute this one, they certainly have all the prior art on their side...
Give me a break, the US runs the UN and has since it was established.
UN == US, I fail to see what difference this makes.
Although your point about the proprietary software is completely valid. Alot of people seem to be missing something. Just because tivo can or can't or doesn't have to do this that or the other, it doesn't change what I and every other user can do with the gpl'd source code.
Tivo doesn't have to give out binary images, but there is no reason I can't distribute a binary of the gpl'd software regardless of whether or not they choose to.