Surely you have missed all of the innovative features that PHP has introduced which have eclipsed the other languages/platforms. I mean, who can turn down a $400 compiler when compared to the pricey Java offerings (free compiler, free IDE, free libraries, free application server, etc). Long live PHP 5.
Are you kidding? Why on earth would they provide anything but a glowing review? Do you think the reviews would be independent? Of course not! Besides, only the/. crowd is geek enough to carry a device around to read product reviews, when simply looking at the box could provide the same content. Again, to provide enough content for it to be useful, the manufacturers themselves would have to provide the content.
Your comments are not really interesting nor informative or enlightening. The same old sales job about IIS problems being the result of severe bugs and bad design.
Here is the real story. Windows worst enemy are the dumb sysadmins who are put in charge of running the boxes. In fact, for a lot of companies (including my employer), there are no dedicated sysadmins. Since the overhead seems minimal, programmers are put in charge of running the boxes, which is the beginning of the bad rap that IIS gets nowdays. The last thing a programmer wants to worry about is locking down an IIS box. After 6 months of developing an application, these guys want to work on something else, and focusing on configuring the application and the OS is extremely boring an uninteresting.
If you agree that free software is more attractive to business than commercial software with similar features, function, and ease of use, then we agree. My point is that this also effects the commercial software market.
University research and the OSS community are different, in my opinion. You can't equate the development of TCP/IP with the development of mysql or jboss. These distict groups had/have completely different motives.
The original submitter specifically asked for FREE software, in spite of the existance of the Suse package that he also mentioned. This is the true color of the prototypical OSS dweeb. The OSS label is the excuse. As long as its free, open source or closed source is really secondary.
Actually, the users want the MS products, while the IS folks just want a product that won't cause friction with management and users, won't eat up all their time and budget, and won't require signing some Faustian deal with a large corporation that has put ever greater demands on them to provide a full accounting for every single piece of software on every desktop in your organization
You just described Microsoft, but there are many other commercial entities providing software. As a software developer, I see the labor market get more and more eroded, partly because of free software. Apache essentially made the Unix web server market non-viable. The likes of Lotus Notes/Domino and Oracle DB, which are higher up on the food chain, may be next on the OSS hit list. In the end, where is the commercial software market? And then what happens to OSS? A parasite cannot survive without its host. And in this case, the commercial software market is OSS host. Commercial software feeds the OSS parasite with models to copy. We know what drives the free market. What drives OSS innovation if the commercial software market dies?
Actually, given that IS folks don't pay for this stuff out of their pockets but instead are spending funds allocated for internal business systems, your notion that "they just want a free ride" is crap.
What does the source of funds have anything to do with it? Someone needs to take responsibility for the damage that OSS does to the marketplace. Companies that sell software need to recognize that their use of OSS is promoting their own demise. The old catalyst for software development (money) has been replaced by geek fame. That and a dollar will get a cup of coffee.
The reason is that most in the OSS community just want free knockoffs of MS products. The argument of actually wanting OSS is crap, when in reality they just want a free ride. OSS or not, if its free, everyone is happy. I'm sorry if this rubs some people the wrong way, but its the truth.
Of course, this is just dumb. Why does everyone want a free lunch? I can see the point of having an alternative to, say, MS Exchange. But why do people always want the freebie, besides the obvious reason of being cheap? It reminds me of the spoiled brat who always gets his way, and never wants to work for something. The commercial software market contributes to innovation and progress of computing in general, and provides jobs to computer programmers. Not everyone wants to live off of scraps for the shear joy of giving away free software to the masses. More and more, I'm believing that the/. community is nothing but a bunch of cheap bastards who never buy software, and are always looking to steal IP (music, movies).
Despite the obvious comparison to the Harlen Globetrotters insane winning percentage, I don't think the Iron Chef is blatantly fixed. When you have the type of judges that they collect (actrors, psychics, politicians), the winning percentage is bound to be in favor of the famous Iron Chef's. If they wanted unbiased judging, they would use figure skating judges from France.:)
Anyhow, it doesn't matter if its fixed or not, the Frenchies still don't like losing, and will gladly piss on anything that isn't French.
Sure it is. Do you know how many Japanese in France are dying to watch the Iron Chef in the original tongue? You know that the French cannot stand those guys, since the French believe they produce the best food and chef's in all the world, but every time an Iron Chef goes against a French weenie, the Fenchie goes down hard. So, getting the content in the original Japenese is crucial for maximum effect and minimum Frenchie bias.
Will these devices be sold at a loss to get recurring subscription revenue???
Will OSS hacks try to reprogram the watches to run Linux???
Will Batman and Robin escape the trap set by Mr. Gates???
Tune in next time. Same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!
Coming soon... "You MUST buy $200 worth of games."
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 1
Just because MS sells the XBOX's at a loss should not mean that my freedom is restricted. Nobody told MS to sell these boxes at a loss. They did so at your own free will. This is as crazy as the DCMA saying that if I buy an XBOX, because MS is selling these at a loss, I am required BY LAW to buy $200 worth of games, so MS doesn't lose money on the deal. The law should not force dumb business models on consumers. Business should adjust to the wants and tastes of consumers. That IS the free market.
If you participate in file sharing networks (or have in the very recent past), you better seriously start thinking of hiring a lawyer. I bet the recording industry has been logging p2p activity, and are now ready to pounce on the little guys in an attempt to finally kill the p2p networks.
You are taking his comments out of context. He was listing a series of people who would have first hand knowledge of a persons abilities (technical and general), personality, and general reliability. To hiring managers, these are much stronger references than having your name on some OSS project.
This guy is living example of someone who takes the red pill of GNU software, moreless because of the hype involved, and ends up regretting it. Think about where this person would be had he had some entrepeneurial ambition, instead of striving for geek celebrity status? Perhaps work would be optional for him. In any case, there is no denying that GNU ends up being a false nirvana for most developers, as I've said before. Unless you don't mind everyone and their uncle to rip you off, don't go GNU! The idea that not being GNU somehow corrupts your projects is rubbish. Most GNU software developers would be better off if they keep ownership of their code, since most projects do not take advantage of the free labor of hundreds of fellow geeks, and thus the GNU license has no benefit.
These comments are my own, and are in no way influenced by any mega corporation who benefits from OSS, or who is looking to hurt OSS. I have seen the software development labor marketplace going to sh*t, and it pains me to see people to continue to give away their valuable work for free. I would understand if the developer was independently wealthy, but this is usually not the case.
This is yet another example of someone trying to sell the OSS agenda. Statistics can easily lie, and I suspect that the person involved in the study was not a neutral party. A more important question is do people on/. EVER find fault in OSS? Surely it can't be a nirvana. Be honest, and get real.
Its interesting to hear people say that its somehow a loss because others can't experience things the way they did. First, computers are much cheaper today, and even with the addition of a set of development tools (which are lightyears ahead of what we had in the 80's), than what computers cost in the 80's. Of course, possibilities today are much greater, allowing for vast freedom in experimenting with programming. I can still write a simple address book application, but I can also build in p2p networking capabilities, for example. The possibilities have increased exponentially, while the complexity has not neccessarily increased.
Anyhow, it is no great loss that some kids won't be able to dabble in writing BASIC programs. The world trend is moving programming into a commodity class, just like the other trade skills, such as machining, welding, etc, which lessens the tangible value of the skill. This doesn't mean that knowing how to program isn't useful, but as is the case with other skilled labor, programming as a career is turning into a similar animal. It is heading to be seen as more of a trade job instead of a professional job, where career potential is limited.
Cool! I can drive for free in Oregon and get cheaper gas. I sure won't have one of those dumb devices in my car, as I live in California.
NOW JUST IN: The State of California makes it illegal to buy gas in Oregon, as too many Californias were crossing the border to avoid the excessive California gas tax. Suggested remedy: Install GPS in all vehicles and calculate miles driven. DOH!
The big danger with the telecommuting paradigm, especially for IT workers, is that you eliminate the primary factor that keeps your job located in your home country (UK). If your job was easily transferrable to a telecommuting job, then why wouldn't your employer replace you with a guy who will work for 1/10th the cost in India or China? Location is just about the only advantage that you have over this cheap but very capable labor, and so I would not be so hasty to discard it. If you want to promote the "work anywhere" strategy, then prepare to compete against those in China and India. I hear they work for $10/hour and live like kings in their native country. I doubt you could say the same for the UK.
How is Microsoft "giving" away a bunch of software to non-profits is bad? All companies are free to give away their stuff. Why doesn't XYZ software company do the same? People need to get off the anti-MS soapbox and start thinking about the issues before spouting off their anti-MS rhetoric. The group here on slashdot are a bunch of drones for the most part.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely you have missed all of the innovative features that PHP has introduced which have eclipsed the other languages/platforms. I mean, who can turn down a $400 compiler when compared to the pricey Java offerings (free compiler, free IDE, free libraries, free application server, etc). Long live PHP 5.
Its a dessert topping, AND a floor wax.
Are you kidding? Why on earth would they provide anything but a glowing review? Do you think the reviews would be independent? Of course not! Besides, only the /. crowd is geek enough to carry a device around to read product reviews, when simply looking at the box could provide the same content. Again, to provide enough content for it to be useful, the manufacturers themselves would have to provide the content.
Your comments are not really interesting nor informative or enlightening. The same old sales job about IIS problems being the result of severe bugs and bad design.
Here is the real story. Windows worst enemy are the dumb sysadmins who are put in charge of running the boxes. In fact, for a lot of companies (including my employer), there are no dedicated sysadmins. Since the overhead seems minimal, programmers are put in charge of running the boxes, which is the beginning of the bad rap that IIS gets nowdays. The last thing a programmer wants to worry about is locking down an IIS box. After 6 months of developing an application, these guys want to work on something else, and focusing on configuring the application and the OS is extremely boring an uninteresting.
If you agree that free software is more attractive to business than commercial software with similar features, function, and ease of use, then we agree. My point is that this also effects the commercial software market.
University research and the OSS community are different, in my opinion. You can't equate the development of TCP/IP with the development of mysql or jboss. These distict groups had/have completely different motives.
The original submitter specifically asked for FREE software, in spite of the existance of the Suse package that he also mentioned. This is the true color of the prototypical OSS dweeb. The OSS label is the excuse. As long as its free, open source or closed source is really secondary.
Actually, the users want the MS products, while the IS folks just want a product that won't cause friction with management and users, won't eat up all their time and budget, and won't require signing some Faustian deal with a large corporation that has put ever greater demands on them to provide a full accounting for every single piece of software on every desktop in your organization
You just described Microsoft, but there are many other commercial entities providing software. As a software developer, I see the labor market get more and more eroded, partly because of free software. Apache essentially made the Unix web server market non-viable. The likes of Lotus Notes/Domino and Oracle DB, which are higher up on the food chain, may be next on the OSS hit list. In the end, where is the commercial software market? And then what happens to OSS? A parasite cannot survive without its host. And in this case, the commercial software market is OSS host. Commercial software feeds the OSS parasite with models to copy. We know what drives the free market. What drives OSS innovation if the commercial software market dies?
Actually, given that IS folks don't pay for this stuff out of their pockets but instead are spending funds allocated for internal business systems, your notion that "they just want a free ride" is crap.
What does the source of funds have anything to do with it? Someone needs to take responsibility for the damage that OSS does to the marketplace. Companies that sell software need to recognize that their use of OSS is promoting their own demise. The old catalyst for software development (money) has been replaced by geek fame. That and a dollar will get a cup of coffee.
The reason is that most in the OSS community just want free knockoffs of MS products. The argument of actually wanting OSS is crap, when in reality they just want a free ride. OSS or not, if its free, everyone is happy. I'm sorry if this rubs some people the wrong way, but its the truth.
Of course, this is just dumb. Why does everyone want a free lunch? I can see the point of having an alternative to, say, MS Exchange. But why do people always want the freebie, besides the obvious reason of being cheap? It reminds me of the spoiled brat who always gets his way, and never wants to work for something. The commercial software market contributes to innovation and progress of computing in general, and provides jobs to computer programmers. Not everyone wants to live off of scraps for the shear joy of giving away free software to the masses. More and more, I'm believing that the /. community is nothing but a bunch of cheap bastards who never buy software, and are always looking to steal IP (music, movies).
Despite the obvious comparison to the Harlen Globetrotters insane winning percentage, I don't think the Iron Chef is blatantly fixed. When you have the type of judges that they collect (actrors, psychics, politicians), the winning percentage is bound to be in favor of the famous Iron Chef's. If they wanted unbiased judging, they would use figure skating judges from France. :)
Anyhow, it doesn't matter if its fixed or not, the Frenchies still don't like losing, and will gladly piss on anything that isn't French.
Sure it is. Do you know how many Japanese in France are dying to watch the Iron Chef in the original tongue? You know that the French cannot stand those guys, since the French believe they produce the best food and chef's in all the world, but every time an Iron Chef goes against a French weenie, the Fenchie goes down hard. So, getting the content in the original Japenese is crucial for maximum effect and minimum Frenchie bias.
Will these devices be sold at a loss to get recurring subscription revenue???
Will OSS hacks try to reprogram the watches to run Linux???
Will Batman and Robin escape the trap set by Mr. Gates???
Tune in next time. Same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!
Just because MS sells the XBOX's at a loss should not mean that my freedom is restricted. Nobody told MS to sell these boxes at a loss. They did so at your own free will. This is as crazy as the DCMA saying that if I buy an XBOX, because MS is selling these at a loss, I am required BY LAW to buy $200 worth of games, so MS doesn't lose money on the deal. The law should not force dumb business models on consumers. Business should adjust to the wants and tastes of consumers. That IS the free market.
Because there is a segment of the /. population that thinks if a company tries to make some money, it must be bad, especially if its a soft good.
If you participate in file sharing networks (or have in the very recent past), you better seriously start thinking of hiring a lawyer. I bet the recording industry has been logging p2p activity, and are now ready to pounce on the little guys in an attempt to finally kill the p2p networks.
You are taking his comments out of context. He was listing a series of people who would have first hand knowledge of a persons abilities (technical and general), personality, and general reliability. To hiring managers, these are much stronger references than having your name on some OSS project.
This guy is living example of someone who takes the red pill of GNU software, moreless because of the hype involved, and ends up regretting it. Think about where this person would be had he had some entrepeneurial ambition, instead of striving for geek celebrity status? Perhaps work would be optional for him. In any case, there is no denying that GNU ends up being a false nirvana for most developers, as I've said before. Unless you don't mind everyone and their uncle to rip you off, don't go GNU! The idea that not being GNU somehow corrupts your projects is rubbish. Most GNU software developers would be better off if they keep ownership of their code, since most projects do not take advantage of the free labor of hundreds of fellow geeks, and thus the GNU license has no benefit.
These comments are my own, and are in no way influenced by any mega corporation who benefits from OSS, or who is looking to hurt OSS. I have seen the software development labor marketplace going to sh*t, and it pains me to see people to continue to give away their valuable work for free. I would understand if the developer was independently wealthy, but this is usually not the case.
This is yet another example of someone trying to sell the OSS agenda. Statistics can easily lie, and I suspect that the person involved in the study was not a neutral party. A more important question is do people on /. EVER find fault in OSS? Surely it can't be a nirvana. Be honest, and get real.
I am more impressed that Al Gore hasn't taken credit for any of these great acheivments!
Its interesting to hear people say that its somehow a loss because others can't experience things the way they did. First, computers are much cheaper today, and even with the addition of a set of development tools (which are lightyears ahead of what we had in the 80's), than what computers cost in the 80's. Of course, possibilities today are much greater, allowing for vast freedom in experimenting with programming. I can still write a simple address book application, but I can also build in p2p networking capabilities, for example. The possibilities have increased exponentially, while the complexity has not neccessarily increased.
Anyhow, it is no great loss that some kids won't be able to dabble in writing BASIC programs. The world trend is moving programming into a commodity class, just like the other trade skills, such as machining, welding, etc, which lessens the tangible value of the skill. This doesn't mean that knowing how to program isn't useful, but as is the case with other skilled labor, programming as a career is turning into a similar animal. It is heading to be seen as more of a trade job instead of a professional job, where career potential is limited.
On reviewing the MS patent, I found this from IBM which apparently is a patent on the listbox control!
Cool! I can drive for free in Oregon and get cheaper gas. I sure won't have one of those dumb devices in my car, as I live in California. NOW JUST IN: The State of California makes it illegal to buy gas in Oregon, as too many Californias were crossing the border to avoid the excessive California gas tax. Suggested remedy: Install GPS in all vehicles and calculate miles driven. DOH!
Just who the hell are you, and why are you screwing with my computer in the first place?! 'Nuff said.
The big danger with the telecommuting paradigm, especially for IT workers, is that you eliminate the primary factor that keeps your job located in your home country (UK). If your job was easily transferrable to a telecommuting job, then why wouldn't your employer replace you with a guy who will work for 1/10th the cost in India or China? Location is just about the only advantage that you have over this cheap but very capable labor, and so I would not be so hasty to discard it. If you want to promote the "work anywhere" strategy, then prepare to compete against those in China and India. I hear they work for $10/hour and live like kings in their native country. I doubt you could say the same for the UK.
How is Microsoft "giving" away a bunch of software to non-profits is bad? All companies are free to give away their stuff. Why doesn't XYZ software company do the same? People need to get off the anti-MS soapbox and start thinking about the issues before spouting off their anti-MS rhetoric. The group here on slashdot are a bunch of drones for the most part.