The point is that if they have their own staff doing all the changes, what's the advantage over the systems they have now? They're trying to save costs by NOT doing everything themselves. Certification is very extensive and expensive.
And noone said that the don't have access to the source. Just because it's proprietary doesn't mean they hide everything from you.
I was at a talk once where a guy from Lockheed was saying how they were using more and more commercial off-the-shelf systems to reduce costs. They were moving away from specialized systems custom developed for each plane, to a more general system that didn't need as much work.
He started out with an animation of someone punching bill gates, so that eased my fears. But he said that even though Linux would be great, they could not have a foreign national have control over their system. Sure, they could see exactly what they have, but any changes to the kernel would have to be checked out completely (expensive), so they would be right back at having a specialized system. Politics maybe, but they ended up with a proprietary OS.
I gotta say though, the redundancy systems they have on those things, amazing.
From what I understand, the only 'portable' stuff in.net can only have a CLI. Rotor (MS' 'shared source' implementation of.net that runs on windows/bsd) doesn't have winforms, and I don't know how far along Mono is at their implementation.
How about beating MS at their game and make a free, cross-platfom GUI environment for.net? Something to compete with winforms, but portable. Something compile compatible with Qt or GTK would be great.
I bet companies would rather target this because without much extra effort they have the same software running on Windows/*nix/Mac. We get full featured ports released at the same time as their windows counterparts.
We also get take some power away from MS, since the gui would be open.
Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of these?
Would you have the surgery finish faster on one patient, or would you operate on multiple patients at once?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that the GPL is not a failure, and neither is Linux. Far from it.
But getting Microsoft to call Linux the "Enemy" isn't neccessarily a good measure of success. Who else is left to be the enemy?
If they can add a built-in touchscreen, a battery, and make it fit in my pocket, I think they have a winner!
Now maybe people will believe me when I tell them my fridge tells me to eat too much...
Who's idea of human rights do we use?
I predict that the Hurd will be almost done by then.
The second they release their files, people are going to be reporting sightings of strange lights from where the server room used to be...
The point is that if they have their own staff doing all the changes, what's the advantage over the systems they have now? They're trying to save costs by NOT doing everything themselves. Certification is very extensive and expensive.
And noone said that the don't have access to the source. Just because it's proprietary doesn't mean they hide everything from you.
I was at a talk once where a guy from Lockheed was saying how they were using more and more commercial off-the-shelf systems to reduce costs. They were moving away from specialized systems custom developed for each plane, to a more general system that didn't need as much work.
He started out with an animation of someone punching bill gates, so that eased my fears. But he said that even though Linux would be great, they could not have a foreign national have control over their system. Sure, they could see exactly what they have, but any changes to the kernel would have to be checked out completely (expensive), so they would be right back at having a specialized system. Politics maybe, but they ended up with a proprietary OS.
I gotta say though, the redundancy systems they have on those things, amazing.
The desktop has been in the control of very few hands for years now and aren't we all better off? ;)
Me fail english? That is unpossible!
Now they won't have to cook books anymore. They'll make exactly the amount of money they said they would, no lies.
It's just that then they'll realize that they could have made more...
From what I understand, the only 'portable' stuff in .net can only have a CLI. Rotor (MS' 'shared source' implementation of .net that runs on windows/bsd) doesn't have winforms, and I don't know how far along Mono is at their implementation.
How about beating MS at their game and make a free, cross-platfom GUI environment for .net? Something to compete with winforms, but portable. Something compile compatible with Qt or GTK would be great.
I bet companies would rather target this because without much extra effort they have the same software running on Windows/*nix/Mac. We get full featured ports released at the same time as their windows counterparts.
We also get take some power away from MS, since the gui would be open.
Looks like Win/Win to me.
Conversation at the border:
"Do you have a visa?"
"No, I have a mastercard"
If the PS2 can play it, would that mean that a PS2 running linux can play it?
No music for you!
Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of these? Would you have the surgery finish faster on one patient, or would you operate on multiple patients at once?
1. Make a Geek/English translator 2. ...
3. Profit!
A faster way to find porn