3.1 to 95 was important for more than the end user interface stuff. Does anyone remember the contortions required to make any kind of networking stable with 3.1 workstations? Also, I still recall experimenting to see whether certain applications blew up faster using 3.1 in real mode or virtual mode. It is unbelievable (even in retrospect) that MS did not lose the market in the 1993-1995 time period. Both OS/2 and Novell Netware were superior at the time.
Could be "Unique Individual People" I suppose, but this is a classic example of the rule that all acronyms (other than those in universal use) should be explained on first use.
I am pleased/. decided to highlight this. His conclusions are perfectly valid. For mainstream applications, Linux works well. However, in some areas, the quality of Windows based applications much exceeds that of the Linux based alternatives.
One factor he does not mention is the exposure of naive users under Windows to viruses and spyware.
It is a paradox that people always tend to suggest Linux is unsuitable for casual computer users and only for power users. The reality is the reverse. For a first time computer user, set him up with Mandriva or SUSE and he will be just as comfortable as he would with Windows.
For the power user, it is better to have both operating systems available but currently (if forced to make a choice) one needs to go with Windows. Part of the reason for this is that Linux based applications can usually be made to run on Windows, often using Cygwin (albeit in a less robust and lower performance environment) but the reverse is not always true.
I like Freemind conceptually. It works well for organisation of small amounts of information. The trouble is that it does not scale well. It becomes very slow when using it to organise copious notes. I also find it rather insular. It is awkward to link data in Freemind with outside information.
I have periodically tried various methods, but (both Windows and Linux) I now just have a QuickNotes folder with a link from the Panel/Taskbar (little known is the fact that you can drag a folder to the taskbar under Windows and it becomes an expandable link). I put small quick notes in my QuickNotes hierarchy using a text editor and use OOo when I need something more capable.
The above solution must be open to improvement. Something like Freemind with better performance and plugins to support different external formats would be ideal.
If this technology had been available even five years ago, it would have been widely used. Now, I question whether it is going to be an economic solution. Recent advances in wireless technologies seem to promise a cheaper service in remote areas while being able to provide similar bandwidth.
I am one of those the author referred to who does not rate Laura DiDio's writing highly. Her latest article has no material I really take objection to. Actually, the latest article has no material. What does she say: a Yankee study revealed that no good data on the relative TCO of Windows and Linux servers was available; the TCO will vary from organisation to organisation; without knowing the TCO, it is hard to make an informed decision.
Has anyone succeeded in resolving their problem of which OS to use based on this insightful article?
What IBM has done is not revolutionary. It is, however, very nice packaging of a number of different technologies. It allows very portable use of any x86 operating system, configured any way the user wants and able to be updated at will in a natural way. This is combined with strong encryption in case of loss or theft.
I see purpose built hardware as the next step and lots of businesses equipping their mobile workers with these. Administration is very easy when the basic hardware comes with VMware preinstalled.
Not true. Assuming an arbitrary length key is allowed, something like "Jack and Jill ran up the hill to fetch a pail of water" or "she sells sea shells on the sea shore" are both easy to remember and are strong keys.
Google has to pay as much as $60 per megabit in IP transit fees.
How do we interpret this nonsense? Taken literally, it would mean that every 100KB mail you read on Gmail costs Google $60. Lol. The most likely interpretation, I suppose, is that Google pays $60 per month for every decicated 1Mbit per second between the Internet backbone and their servers. This would be a bit high for an individual and Google, with its immense purchasing power, must do better than that. Otoh, $60 per year for 1Mbit per second dedicated seems too low. Guess I should just follow standard./ practice and ignore TFA: basing my understanding on the article's headline.
I was admit there is a substantial gap in my understanding here and this comment may reflect that. However, when running a computer way outside its design specifications, how much reliance can be placed in any timing measurements it is reporting? Surely some kind of extrnal timing machanism should be used.
One of the cleverest marketing ploys ever made by MS was when they decided (by default) to just reboot Windows when a blue screen would normally occur. To revert to older behaviour, go to Control Panel -> System -> Advanced -> Startup and Recovery Settings and uncheck 'Automatically restart'. This is one of the first changes I make after a Windows install because, when there is a critical problem, I at least want to be aware of it.
Without this change, you will only ever see a BSOD if a serious error occurs during boot.
I am quite familiar with the GPL, yes. If I was too subtle, I am sorry. My post was written tongue in cheek. I was ridiculing the article. However, a literal reading of the article would suggest that they have PCs that have versions of Windows XP, Windows 2000 and Linux built into the firmware (not that they are providing a way to boot them separately). It would be awfully difficult to do that without at least some new hooks within those operating systems. So, anyone achieving such a feat with Linux (it has been done with routers in fact) would likely have some code to share to comply with the GPL.
It occurs to me that, with some hardware hacking, this could become an interesting thin client. The price and form factor are very attractive and a 200 MHz (or so) CPU would be adequate. Need to check on RAM -- 128MB would be ample.
A small Utah-based company has developed a portable Linux (Overview, Articles, Company) server that can be plugged into the USB (Universal Serial Bus) port of a Windows PCs.
What a horrible introductory sentence to an article.
How did I miss the introduction of computer hardware that comes with a built-in version of "Windows" (from later in the article, it seems to define Windows as Linux, Windows 2000 or Windows XP)? I hope the hardware manufacturer has proper licenses for their MS Windows version and has made the source of the Linux version of their BIOS available as required by the GPL.
I must confess, however, to be puzzled as to why Realm did not just make their device work with regular, unmodified Intel/AMD compatible PCs.
"Only the openSUSE project refines its Linux distribution to the point where non-technical users can have a successful Linux experience."
Umm.. Ubuntu?
Ubuntu is good, but I am pushing my small business customers more towards SUSE.
The FAQ is certainly laced with a bit of marketing. That said, I have been really impressed by the progress Novell has made in the last year, and with their commitment to two aspects critical to long term success: following standards (trying to create genuinely open standards where no good ones exist) and a big investment in improving the experience of end users.
IMHO, Red Hat would like to "differentiate" itself and be the dominant Linux vendor. SUSE is aiming to be the best among cooperating organisations.
Your Wikipedia reference provides a partial answer on why robotics R&D largely moved out of the US:
Unimation had obtained patents in the United States but not in Japan
While strong claims are made that patents encourage innovation, the reality, I believe, is the reverse. Invention thrives in an atmosphere of freedom, not one of bureaucratic control.
Others have already mentioned the possibility of remote sex. Here your partner can control your arms and hands in the same way as you may control his or hers...
The mind boggles. Does this mean that, in the future, you could potentially be charged with indecent assault on someone you have not even met? A remote sex service that gives the punter the ability to really control the actions of the model?
Microsoft actually have an interesting problem. If they make IE7 standards compliant, lots of sites that work with IE6 will not work with IE7. THAT would really dangerous from a marketing prespective.
Some people get very upset when personally identifiable data is sent to servers. Does Microsoft ever send the Windows serial number across the network today? I am guessing that they chose to do this client-side (knowing it would get bypassed) because they did not want to deal with the backlash from passing the data to the server.
If the printer already has firmware that can detect different kinds of currency and other financial instruments, I predict it has also been setup to detect attempts to bypass the identity mechanism (a lot easier).
No, I think we need to look for ways to influence the behaviour of the firmware itself. Some printers may well have mechanisms to patch firmware (maybe even a specific 'set serial' function). Others may have a code to turn the identity function off.
Anyone remember the SCO-Vista relationship? It may well be that Microsoft "owes" the SCO and Vista principals (who own substantial blocks of Vista stock) and this is their way of paying it in a form that IBM, Red Hat and Novell will never be able to take away.
Slashdot Mirror
3.1 to 95 was important for more than the end user interface stuff. Does anyone remember the contortions required to make any kind of networking stable with 3.1 workstations? Also, I still recall experimenting to see whether certain applications blew up faster using 3.1 in real mode or virtual mode. It is unbelievable (even in retrospect) that MS did not lose the market in the 1993-1995 time period. Both OS/2 and Novell Netware were superior at the time.
Could be "Unique Individual People" I suppose, but this is a classic example of the rule that all acronyms (other than those in universal use) should be explained on first use.
One factor he does not mention is the exposure of naive users under Windows to viruses and spyware.
It is a paradox that people always tend to suggest Linux is unsuitable for casual computer users and only for power users. The reality is the reverse. For a first time computer user, set him up with Mandriva or SUSE and he will be just as comfortable as he would with Windows.
For the power user, it is better to have both operating systems available but currently (if forced to make a choice) one needs to go with Windows. Part of the reason for this is that Linux based applications can usually be made to run on Windows, often using Cygwin (albeit in a less robust and lower performance environment) but the reverse is not always true.
I have periodically tried various methods, but (both Windows and Linux) I now just have a QuickNotes folder with a link from the Panel/Taskbar (little known is the fact that you can drag a folder to the taskbar under Windows and it becomes an expandable link). I put small quick notes in my QuickNotes hierarchy using a text editor and use OOo when I need something more capable.
The above solution must be open to improvement. Something like Freemind with better performance and plugins to support different external formats would be ideal.
If this technology had been available even five years ago, it would have been widely used. Now, I question whether it is going to be an economic solution. Recent advances in wireless technologies seem to promise a cheaper service in remote areas while being able to provide similar bandwidth.
Has anyone succeeded in resolving their problem of which OS to use based on this insightful article?
I see purpose built hardware as the next step and lots of businesses equipping their mobile workers with these. Administration is very easy when the basic hardware comes with VMware preinstalled.
Not true. Assuming an arbitrary length key is allowed, something like "Jack and Jill ran up the hill to fetch a pail of water" or "she sells sea shells on the sea shore" are both easy to remember and are strong keys.
I was admit there is a substantial gap in my understanding here and this comment may reflect that. However, when running a computer way outside its design specifications, how much reliance can be placed in any timing measurements it is reporting? Surely some kind of extrnal timing machanism should be used.
One of the cleverest marketing ploys ever made by MS was when they decided (by default) to just reboot Windows when a blue screen would normally occur. To revert to older behaviour, go to Control Panel -> System -> Advanced -> Startup and Recovery Settings and uncheck 'Automatically restart'. This is one of the first changes I make after a Windows install because, when there is a critical problem, I at least want to be aware of it. Without this change, you will only ever see a BSOD if a serious error occurs during boot.
I am quite familiar with the GPL, yes. If I was too subtle, I am sorry. My post was written tongue in cheek. I was ridiculing the article. However, a literal reading of the article would suggest that they have PCs that have versions of Windows XP, Windows 2000 and Linux built into the firmware (not that they are providing a way to boot them separately). It would be awfully difficult to do that without at least some new hooks within those operating systems. So, anyone achieving such a feat with Linux (it has been done with routers in fact) would likely have some code to share to comply with the GPL.
It occurs to me that, with some hardware hacking, this could become an interesting thin client. The price and form factor are very attractive and a 200 MHz (or so) CPU would be adequate. Need to check on RAM -- 128MB would be ample.
How did I miss the introduction of computer hardware that comes with a built-in version of "Windows" (from later in the article, it seems to define Windows as Linux, Windows 2000 or Windows XP)? I hope the hardware manufacturer has proper licenses for their MS Windows version and has made the source of the Linux version of their BIOS available as required by the GPL.
I must confess, however, to be puzzled as to why Realm did not just make their device work with regular, unmodified Intel/AMD compatible PCs.
The FAQ is certainly laced with a bit of marketing. That said, I have been really impressed by the progress Novell has made in the last year, and with their commitment to two aspects critical to long term success: following standards (trying to create genuinely open standards where no good ones exist) and a big investment in improving the experience of end users.
IMHO, Red Hat would like to "differentiate" itself and be the dominant Linux vendor. SUSE is aiming to be the best among cooperating organisations.
While ID cannot be definitively disproven, I present GW as Exhibit 1 in showing the conjecture to be improbable.
Microsoft actually have an interesting problem. If they make IE7 standards compliant, lots of sites that work with IE6 will not work with IE7. THAT would really dangerous from a marketing prespective.
Some people get very upset when personally identifiable data is sent to servers. Does Microsoft ever send the Windows serial number across the network today? I am guessing that they chose to do this client-side (knowing it would get bypassed) because they did not want to deal with the backlash from passing the data to the server.
Just curious. I would not do anything illegal like making use of one.
No, I think we need to look for ways to influence the behaviour of the firmware itself. Some printers may well have mechanisms to patch firmware (maybe even a specific 'set serial' function). Others may have a code to turn the identity function off.
Do NSA printers exhibit the same behaviour?
If so, clever!