Where have you read this is a Linux 2.6 problem? Linux 2.6 has been in use for quite a long time now and I've never heard of this issue before until Fedora Core 2 hit the streets.
I used to use Publixdirect but they closed down a couple months ago. You did all your shopping via the web page, paid online with a credit card, picked your delivery slot to within a 1.5 hour window(and they'd email you in the morning with a more accurate estimate) and the delivery charge was something like 8 bucks.
I never had issues with stuff missing from orders, every time I ordered fruit or eggs everything was fresh and in great condition. My only complaint was that they didn't always have exactly what you might want. Like they'd have vanilla or chocolate pudding mix but not butterscotch. But it was a minor annoyance as I'd just go without the few things they didn't carry or change brands.
I really miss it and hope my area(SE Florida) gets another internet grocery shopping service soon.
The core problem with Fedora isn't that it has bug X or is missing feature Y, it's that it isn't truly a community project so those issues aren't resolvable by the community.
MP3 support isn't a legal issue, it's a technical one, because there are technical ways of getting around the problem just like you stated.
But because FC is controlled by Red Hat and the community can't touch it those issues won't be solved because RH doesn't care to fix them.
He brought it up because it proves the point that Linus wrote Linux. If he had copied MINIX Linux would've been a microkernel design instead of a macro one.
The fact that Linus wrote Linux "wrong", proves he wrote it and didn't steal it.
Mines are a key part to defending S Korea, specifically in a 2.5 mile wide 150 mile long demilitarized zone. Clinton put in place a policy to restrict mine usage only to Korea by 2003 with plans to sign the treaty in 2006 if a viable alternative could be found for the Korean DMZ. Honestly though, I have no idea if the current administration has held to that.
But the US also uses "smart mines" which automatically disarm themselves, although they're still only 99.99% effective.
I guess, all I am asking is that if the users are going to benefit from "free" software, and that becomes the dominant mode of software usage, how are the large number of programmers going to be compensated directly or indirectly -esp. the ones who are not Hobbyists and Resume-builders.
Installation, support, customization.
Why do companies pay for Red Hat Enterprise when you can download Linux for free?
This is a valid point, but it's also an issue with commercial software.
Why should I upgrade to Office XP when Office 97 does everything I need? The only real way around that is forcing your clients to upgrade(which Microsoft has been doing with a number of their products) and that hasn't generated a lot of goodwill with customers.
If your product is "done", then it might be time to move onto creating a new product.
Well, let me give you a hypothetical example. Document imaging is big business and let's say you have a company called XYZ that specializes in document imaging solutions for hospitals.
One day all the leading industries decide to take an open source document system and spend a few million dollars to code in the features they want. That way they'll have an open source(free) document management system and in the long run spending a million to get it up to speed will save them money over paying companies like yours licensing fees.
So is your company done for? Not really. The key to what your document imaging company provides for hospitals is NOT the software, but the ability of your company to create solutions that improve a hospital's workflow. Nobody knows a hospital's document imaging needs like your company, because you've been doing it for years. No one is better qualified to take that open source project and customize it, repackage it and support it for hospitals than your company.
If the hospitals use that open source software they still need someone to support it. They still need someone to install it. If it doesn't do feature X, they still need someone to add that feature. And that's where your company comes in.
Furthermore you end up with a reduction in costs. It's just not your company fixing bugs and adding features to that software, a lot of other industries are as well. That means your programmers can focus more on tasks suited to support your clients rather than on core basic features or bug fixes.
Think of it in these terms, what are you really selling when you sell a 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 software product over the course of several years? You're selling the ability of your company to make their business more effective. People buy the 2.0 product because they'll be 10% more effecient than if they stay with the 1.0 product. Open source is no different, except instead of selling the software you're selling yourself. YOU make the use of that software 10% more effective, through support or continued customization, so it's cost effective to purchase your services. And instead of selling a 2.0, 3.0 verion of the product they can just buy a yearly support contract from you.
I think that's a bit of a cop out. I was playing "doctor" when I was 5 or 6 with quite a few different girls back in the day and I doubt I was the only one.
The above is normal and harmless because children are inquisitive. I would argue that it only becomes harmful when issues of control and power come into play, like with an adult to child relationship.
But still, I often wonder at today's recent frenzy on the subject matter. 25 years ago Brooke Shields at age 12 starred nude in a popular feature film called Pretty Baby. I doubt such a film could be made today. It's a taboo that's gotten worse, not better.
You know, I think it's a little harsh to say "MS Software is crap". I think the aim of MS Software was to bring cheap software into to the office of the little guy. It ran on cheap hardware(Intel) and was easier than anything at the time to administer. The 2nd part was supposed to make supporting MS software cheaper, but I think it also caused problems in that you ended up with people trying to fix Windows that really didn't understand it(the idiot MCSE syndrome) which caused support problems as well.
I really think Windows helped the economy a lot by putting cheap effective software into every business. It wasn't perfect, but it did the job alright and our per worker productivity today is definately better than it was 10 years ago.
But I just that that open and free software can do with MS tried to do, make software affordable and accessible to everyone, but do it better.
Anything that reduces profits is, by definition bad. Anything that reduces profits reduces the GNP which is, by definition, a social evil.
One thing I think most IT people fail to understand is that Information Technology does not generate revenue, it enhances the ability of other things to generate revenue. The computer sitting on a worker's desk doesn't generate money, it burns it by eating electricity and needing support. However it allows that worker to be more effecient, so they can produce more of a product per working hour.
Tactically speaking, IT is a force multiplier. The cost of buying and supporting IT is less than the gains in productivity you get from your workers. Basically if your business generates 1 million in revenue a year and Information Technology can triple that(web sites, spread sheets, word processors, email, voice mail) it's worth the $100k, $200k, or even $500k yearly drain on the budget to support all that technology.
I use the word drain for IT costs because it's just that, a drain in profits for the business. I'm sorry to say it, but the IT department is not directly generating any revenue. It's the workers in the office that do that. IT just makes those workers more effecient.
Free software works and is good for the economy because it reduces IT costs. You don't have to pay for software licenses, any vendor can support your open source software and free software means the only price barrier for getting that worker productibity increase is hardware related not software. If you can't pay $150 per worker for Office XP licensing you don't get its productivity benefits. Since Open Office costs nothing, you automatically can use it as long as you have the hardware for it.
So yes from a commercial software seller perspective free software is indeed bad because it reduces the profits from those companies(like Microsoft). However from a general economy standpoint commercial software is actually the social evil because it reduces the profits of every company in the world that has to pay to buy it and then has to deal with things like forced upgrades, vendor lock in and the inability for businesses to make use of a shared community of updating and problem fixing.
Choice is good mostly because it promotes competition. As a user in a business environment, choice isn't good because you want to unify the experience. So your systems admin should be choosing for you.
But outside that environment you need choices so that you can be gauranteed of getting the best quality.
It's like, why do we need any other car company except for Ford? Well, because if no other car company came into existance we'd probably still be driving around in model T's. Instead we have many car companies each of which is trying to get us to use their product. They do that by being "newer and better" than the other guy.
It's actually pretty simple. Both GNOME and KDE are quite good and equally comparable as far as features and usability. Sometimes one may be better in one area and worse in the other, but they pretty much stack up well against each other.
The difference is that KDE uses QT which is GPL and GNOME uses GTK which is LGPL. The LGPL is more friendly towards proprietary software which is something that the target audience of UserLinux(corporations) will want.
So UserLinix has chosen GNOME.
It's not the desktop at issue, it's the library licensing.
If you're getting SPAM, its because you're not using e-mail enough...
Really? Is that why your email address is butchered in your user tagline, to the point where it takes 5 mins to decode it? Because SPAM isn't a problem?
Email their support and they'll send you a 30 day trial key.
I personally use it to connect to our Exchange 2003 server and it works quite well. Your company's Exchange server will need OWA support enabled however.
I'm glad to hear they may start doing this, as I've had the same problem as the other user. We use HP Proliant servers and HP has a habit of putting in hardware that's only supported by the latest kernels.
For example, their raid controller only works in the early 2.4 kernels and the ethernet card only works in the latest 2.4 kernels.
This kind of stuff is why I donate to the EFF and would recommend others to do the same. They're one of the best, if not only, organization out there looking out for our electronic rights. They make a difference and you can too by supporting them.
Slashdot Mirror
What's this "Foreign" area you keep talking about? Is that part of Nebraska?
Where have you read this is a Linux 2.6 problem? Linux 2.6 has been in use for quite a long time now and I've never heard of this issue before until Fedora Core 2 hit the streets.
I used to use Publixdirect but they closed down a couple months ago. You did all your shopping via the web page, paid online with a credit card, picked your delivery slot to within a 1.5 hour window(and they'd email you in the morning with a more accurate estimate) and the delivery charge was something like 8 bucks.
I never had issues with stuff missing from orders, every time I ordered fruit or eggs everything was fresh and in great condition. My only complaint was that they didn't always have exactly what you might want. Like they'd have vanilla or chocolate pudding mix but not butterscotch. But it was a minor annoyance as I'd just go without the few things they didn't carry or change brands.
I really miss it and hope my area(SE Florida) gets another internet grocery shopping service soon.
The core problem with Fedora isn't that it has bug X or is missing feature Y, it's that it isn't truly a community project so those issues aren't resolvable by the community.
MP3 support isn't a legal issue, it's a technical one, because there are technical ways of getting around the problem just like you stated.
But because FC is controlled by Red Hat and the community can't touch it those issues won't be solved because RH doesn't care to fix them.
He brought it up because it proves the point that Linus wrote Linux. If he had copied MINIX Linux would've been a microkernel design instead of a macro one.
The fact that Linus wrote Linux "wrong", proves he wrote it and didn't steal it.
Mines are a key part to defending S Korea, specifically in a 2.5 mile wide 150 mile long demilitarized zone. Clinton put in place a policy to restrict mine usage only to Korea by 2003 with plans to sign the treaty in 2006 if a viable alternative could be found for the Korean DMZ. Honestly though, I have no idea if the current administration has held to that.
But the US also uses "smart mines" which automatically disarm themselves, although they're still only 99.99% effective.
Am I the only one thinking:
1) Switch on computer
2) Login
3) Wait until everything is loaded and the disk stops chunking
4) Plug in network
Is that really hard?
Is it really that hard to design an OS so the stupid firewall loads up before the networks starts???
I'd be curious to know why the auther thinks Python isn't a good language for writting large desktop apps.
.NET.
Seems he's pretty quick to rule out every language except for Java and
Er, that's not so strange because everything on the planet comes from the same process.
Just because Debian worked for you on the latest hardware doesn't mean it works like that for everyone.
I guess, all I am asking is that if the users are going to benefit from "free" software, and that becomes the dominant mode of software usage, how are the large number of programmers going to be compensated directly or indirectly -esp. the ones who are not Hobbyists and Resume-builders.
Installation, support, customization.
Why do companies pay for Red Hat Enterprise when you can download Linux for free?
Installation, support, customization.
This is a valid point, but it's also an issue with commercial software.
Why should I upgrade to Office XP when Office 97 does everything I need? The only real way around that is forcing your clients to upgrade(which Microsoft has been doing with a number of their products) and that hasn't generated a lot of goodwill with customers.
If your product is "done", then it might be time to move onto creating a new product.
Well, let me give you a hypothetical example. Document imaging is big business and let's say you have a company called XYZ that specializes in document imaging solutions for hospitals.
One day all the leading industries decide to take an open source document system and spend a few million dollars to code in the features they want. That way they'll have an open source(free) document management system and in the long run spending a million to get it up to speed will save them money over paying companies like yours licensing fees.
So is your company done for? Not really. The key to what your document imaging company provides for hospitals is NOT the software, but the ability of your company to create solutions that improve a hospital's workflow. Nobody knows a hospital's document imaging needs like your company, because you've been doing it for years. No one is better qualified to take that open source project and customize it, repackage it and support it for hospitals than your company.
If the hospitals use that open source software they still need someone to support it. They still need someone to install it. If it doesn't do feature X, they still need someone to add that feature. And that's where your company comes in.
Furthermore you end up with a reduction in costs. It's just not your company fixing bugs and adding features to that software, a lot of other industries are as well. That means your programmers can focus more on tasks suited to support your clients rather than on core basic features or bug fixes.
Think of it in these terms, what are you really selling when you sell a 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 software product over the course of several years? You're selling the ability of your company to make their business more effective. People buy the 2.0 product because they'll be 10% more effecient than if they stay with the 1.0 product. Open source is no different, except instead of selling the software you're selling yourself. YOU make the use of that software 10% more effective, through support or continued customization, so it's cost effective to purchase your services. And instead of selling a 2.0, 3.0 verion of the product they can just buy a yearly support contract from you.
I think that's a bit of a cop out. I was playing "doctor" when I was 5 or 6 with quite a few different girls back in the day and I doubt I was the only one.
The above is normal and harmless because children are inquisitive. I would argue that it only becomes harmful when issues of control and power come into play, like with an adult to child relationship.
But still, I often wonder at today's recent frenzy on the subject matter. 25 years ago Brooke Shields at age 12 starred nude in a popular feature film called Pretty Baby. I doubt such a film could be made today. It's a taboo that's gotten worse, not better.
You know, I think it's a little harsh to say "MS Software is crap". I think the aim of MS Software was to bring cheap software into to the office of the little guy. It ran on cheap hardware(Intel) and was easier than anything at the time to administer. The 2nd part was supposed to make supporting MS software cheaper, but I think it also caused problems in that you ended up with people trying to fix Windows that really didn't understand it(the idiot MCSE syndrome) which caused support problems as well.
I really think Windows helped the economy a lot by putting cheap effective software into every business. It wasn't perfect, but it did the job alright and our per worker productivity today is definately better than it was 10 years ago.
But I just that that open and free software can do with MS tried to do, make software affordable and accessible to everyone, but do it better.
Anything that reduces profits is, by definition bad. Anything that reduces profits reduces the GNP which is, by definition, a social evil.
One thing I think most IT people fail to understand is that Information Technology does not generate revenue, it enhances the ability of other things to generate revenue. The computer sitting on a worker's desk doesn't generate money, it burns it by eating electricity and needing support. However it allows that worker to be more effecient, so they can produce more of a product per working hour.
Tactically speaking, IT is a force multiplier. The cost of buying and supporting IT is less than the gains in productivity you get from your workers. Basically if your business generates 1 million in revenue a year and Information Technology can triple that(web sites, spread sheets, word processors, email, voice mail) it's worth the $100k, $200k, or even $500k yearly drain on the budget to support all that technology.
I use the word drain for IT costs because it's just that, a drain in profits for the business. I'm sorry to say it, but the IT department is not directly generating any revenue. It's the workers in the office that do that. IT just makes those workers more effecient.
Free software works and is good for the economy because it reduces IT costs. You don't have to pay for software licenses, any vendor can support your open source software and free software means the only price barrier for getting that worker productibity increase is hardware related not software. If you can't pay $150 per worker for Office XP licensing you don't get its productivity benefits. Since Open Office costs nothing, you automatically can use it as long as you have the hardware for it.
So yes from a commercial software seller perspective free software is indeed bad because it reduces the profits from those companies(like Microsoft). However from a general economy standpoint commercial software is actually the social evil because it reduces the profits of every company in the world that has to pay to buy it and then has to deal with things like forced upgrades, vendor lock in and the inability for businesses to make use of a shared community of updating and problem fixing.
Choice is good mostly because it promotes competition. As a user in a business environment, choice isn't good because you want to unify the experience. So your systems admin should be choosing for you.
But outside that environment you need choices so that you can be gauranteed of getting the best quality.
It's like, why do we need any other car company except for Ford? Well, because if no other car company came into existance we'd probably still be driving around in model T's. Instead we have many car companies each of which is trying to get us to use their product. They do that by being "newer and better" than the other guy.
Competition drives innovation.
It's actually pretty simple. Both GNOME and KDE are quite good and equally comparable as far as features and usability. Sometimes one may be better in one area and worse in the other, but they pretty much stack up well against each other.
The difference is that KDE uses QT which is GPL and GNOME uses GTK which is LGPL. The LGPL is more friendly towards proprietary software which is something that the target audience of UserLinux(corporations) will want.
So UserLinix has chosen GNOME.
It's not the desktop at issue, it's the library licensing.
Is there any way to point yum at the Fedora RPMs so you don't have to manually download and install each RPM file?
"Avoiding unnecessary bloodshed" hasn't worked as a reason for the last 4000 years or so, why would it work any better today?
If money keeps these morons from fighting, then I say hurrah for money.
Er, actually guns do have a fair use, self defense. Things like pepper spray and tazers aren't always that effective.
That's why police forces carry guns, to defend themselves. I hardly think it's out of bounds for private citizens to have the same right.
If you're getting SPAM, its because you're not using e-mail enough ...
Really? Is that why your email address is butchered in your user tagline, to the point where it takes 5 mins to decode it? Because SPAM isn't a problem?
Email their support and they'll send you a 30 day trial key.
I personally use it to connect to our Exchange 2003 server and it works quite well. Your company's Exchange server will need OWA support enabled however.
I'm glad to hear they may start doing this, as I've had the same problem as the other user. We use HP Proliant servers and HP has a habit of putting in hardware that's only supported by the latest kernels.
For example, their raid controller only works in the early 2.4 kernels and the ethernet card only works in the latest 2.4 kernels.
This kind of stuff is why I donate to the EFF and would recommend others to do the same. They're one of the best, if not only, organization out there looking out for our electronic rights. They make a difference and you can too by supporting them.
Link to their donation page.