> The real question is, why for $100 would anyone
> switch off Windows for less than 100%
> compatibility with their Windows software?
As I understand the article, Lindows(tm) will be targeted at those who want to use a core of 11 commonly used Windows applications yet don't want to upgrade to the latest versions of Windows and/or those core applications.
In essence, the target group will stand pat with their current applications and still have the ability to cash in, as it were, on the availability of alternative applications in LINUX.
As for the $100 price tag, there is a little story I would tell you.
There was a company that made excellent shoes for men out of the very best materials. They priced their shoes very low to generate demand. While they had a loyal clientbase, their profits dropped off so much, they almost went out of business.
An analysis showed that:
1. The shoes were an extremely durable product.
2. The loyal clientbase were ready and willing to pay much more for the product.
3. Some prospective new clients were put off by the low price - viewing price as a status symbol and the shoes as not a value at the low price.
The company raised prices on the shoes and immediately saw an increase in clientele and a coresponding jump in profits. The loyal clientbase continued to purchase the product and new clients viewed the product as a durable value item and a status symbol on the foot.
Now, how does that tie into your $100 dollar question? Well, we are dealing with folk who will probably be willing to foot (heh) the price because they view the product to be a value proposition. (They will eventually be forced to upgrade by Microsoft(tm).) Value in that the price is competitive with Windows, will allow them to continue using the products they already own and likey give them a bargaining chip to use against Microsoft(tm).
Yep, I always said that if Microsoft ever made a perfect OS they'd be out of business.
Seems like it doesn't matter though... they'll force people to upgrade by "ensuring" older or unpaid for/unupgraded versions of the OS will not have the functionality needed to view or run the latest apps. Programmed Obsolescence. Shell out the dough buddy or suffer.
I used to consider myself a Windows refugee but, after all this time, I now feel that I'm a UNIX person pitying the Windows people for all the garbage they have to put up with.
It's been a fun ride in Unixland... can't wait to see what tomorrow brings!
Get at least a BS in something with at least a minor in CS or CIS as fast as you can. With the 4+ years experience in the field, you can probably CLEP (test) out of quite a few of the courses with applied credit.
From what I've seen, you could get a BS in bird watching and still meet the specs. heh strange but true.
What? Netscape dropped a couple of icons on your Windows(tm) desktop? EGADS!
I just drag em to the trash and Voila! they're gone. Problem solved.
By the way, this:
> I don't know about anyone else, but anytime I
> install an app and I see that it has installed
> other crap without my permission, I dump it.
sounds alot like Windows(tm).
Isn't the possibility of infection of system binaries the reason we have tripwire?
It, tripwire, may be a pain to run sometimes but it is a pretty good idea if you want to have an even higher level of protection.
Re:Not via email you dont you wascally wabbit
on
Linux Virus Alert
·
· Score: 2
Hmm... as far as I understand the terms...
Virus is: A snippet of code that gets onto a machine by any number of propogation mechanisms - usually as part of a larger program (see Trojan Horse) and is usually designed for malicious purposes. Most antivirus makers agree that viruses that remain undetected and/or are more covert in their activities are more dangerous. Viruse almost always require the intervention of a user to propogate.
Worm is: A network aware program that may or may not be designed for malicious purposes - oftentimes it does have detrimental effects if it's network meanderings cause DoS and/or tieing up the process ID space of the affected machine/s. A worm can usually propogate itself without the intervention of a user.
Trojan Horse: A virus that gains access to a machine by riding on the back of a seemingly harmless package.
Stealth Virus: A virus that is adept at hiding itself from detection mechanisms. It hides itself by morphing it's signature, imitating system code and sometimes even attacking the antivirus software.
Macro Virus: A virus that is designed to be run by a runtime package on the target machine. It can be a shellscript or an attached code block to a larger file and designed to use the built-in runtime of the target application. Easily circumvented by not activating the code or by disabling the runtime package.
Boot Sector Virus: A virus that attacks the boot sector of a bootable disk and inserting it's code into the stream. Usually jumps to new disks by keeping a Terminate and Stay Resident portion for infection of new disks and gets run by booting from an infected disk or the infected program being run.
Module Redirection: Not necessarily a virus or worm but can be the payload. A module that is inserted into the Kernel that redirects calls in order to hide itself and cause mischief. The exploit usually results in a rooted machine. Difficult to detect if the module is loaded before circumvention measures have been activated.
I think you mean POSIX. At least it is largely included in LSB and does provide for minimum base functionality for cross-platform applications. I like the work LSB is doing.
From the web page you referred to:
Functional programming is a style of programming that emphasizes the evaluation of expressions, rather than execution of commands. The expressions in these language are formed by using functions to combine basic values. A functional language is a language that supports and encourages programming in a functional style.
Hmm...
So, given this definition, a functional programming language is one that uses canned or prewritten functions to evaluate expressions on a higher abstraction level than "procedural" languages such as C.
These "functional languages", you mention, appear to have alot in common with spreadsheet style functional representations... I might have to take a closer look at them... Thank You.
What is the difference between C as a procedural language and C as a functional language.
As far as *I* know, C is functional language being that every part of it is a function. What makes a language procedural anyway? When you really get down to where the rubber meets the road, all code is procedural is it not?
Using your Airfoil analogy, I'd say that you could objectify the airfoil and perform "What If" scenarios by modifying the properties of the object while simulating a wind-tunnel type test.
You could incorporate the physics and differential equation calculations into the object so it reacts in a realistic way. Heck, go ahead and objectify the wind-tunnel while yer at it.
Anyway, I like AIM, it's easy for a brain dead code jockey to use. I've got enough rattling around in my head without having to be 31137 at instant messenger applications.
Desktop Environ: KDE with GNOME and Windowmaker following closely.
Distribution: RedHat - they have been consistent.
Text Editor/Word Processor - KDE Advanced Edit with ABIWORD (love it) and Star Office 6 BETA following on.
Favorite Browser: Netscape 6.2.1. It does just about everything. Browse, Mail, News, AIM (though I have to include Mozilla for which there would be no Netscape 6), and LYNX for CLI.
Fav Time Waster: Return to Castle Wolfenstein - Linux MP Client.
Favorite Project: Linux Standard Base - may it flower and be implemented quickly.
Dead Horse that needs to be shot: Linux is not ready for the Desktop - this is utter nonsense. KDE is already more functional and useful than Windows' GUI.
News:
Biggest: LSB 1.1 ready for public review.
Best: Linux 2.4.
Worst: 9-11 with the Republicans taking office running a very close second.
> Hello? Linux is NOT a viable OS for commercial
> apps.
^^^^^^^^^^^ Fallacy ^^^^^^^^^^^ Where did you get this idea?
> A. only 0.24% desktop market share
Depends on who you ask. Today maybe but what about tomorrow... sometime in the future maybe?
> B. Linux community refuses to pay for software
> (see Corel Wordperfect)
Untrue. I bought Corel Wordperfect for Linux myself. Anyway, Corel is legendary for abandoning projects after putting much work into them.
> C. Linux community believes in software piracy
> (see the complaints from Linux users regarding
> *any* form of copy-protection.
Another fallacy. I am part of the Linux community and I don't believe in software piracy. I'd have to say that there are many more percentage points of software pirates in the Windows world than there are in the UNIX world given the same number of users. Linux users usually only dislike copy protection when it barrs them from participating in the content i.e. Sorenson Quicktime Files and DirectX games.
I'm not saying that there aren't hackers and crackers and warez and script kiddiez in the Linux crowd but the wide generalization of Linux users as being only these is patently false.
How would you like it if I said all Anonymous Cowards were idiots? Just because I said it wouldn't make it true.
> No, it's not a win for Microsoft. It undermines
> Windows -snip- which hurts Microsoft financially,
> -snip- and strategically -snip-
I agree with you on the gist of your comment. However, I did say, "I can see a day..." which means that day is not today. If today was the day then your comment would be right... I meant a day in the future.
> MS Office X is a Carbon application.
-snip-
> Apple claims that converting an application from
> Classic to Carbon requires changing less than
> 10% of the code, depending on how 'correctly'
> the application was written.
Good information. Ok, I can see that it was less costly to port than I originally thought. There was some cost though - how much is merely speculation.
I've never seen such a revisionist and clueless pile of drivel in my life.
I have to apologize to euroderf, if not for any other reason than the fact that he has his own opinion and is welcome to it. I however do not agree with him.
Here are some excerpts from the website and it's articles - not verbatim:
Microsoft created object oriented programming.
Microsoft concieved a workable internet when no one else could.
Microsoft has the common man at the core of it's heart.
All linux users are hackers and zealots.
All linux users hate Microsoft because they charge for software.
Windows95 was written in Visual Basic.
Microsoft is the saviour of the common man when it comes to computers. Trust them(tm)
etc... etc... etc... ad infinitum.
What I want to know is if he ACTUALLY believes what he writes or is he trying to deliberately misleed Joe Public?
I know this is not completely on the topic but it hits around it.
Other comments in this thread have mentioned that the OSX GUI isn't X. That Microsoft used a subset of the MAC GUI to port Office to OSX. I'm sure that required a bit of work and not a little expenditure of capitol.
Now, as I said before, I can see a day when Microsoft helps write WINE. As you can plainly see, WINE potentially can help Microsoft programs run on many platforms without the need for extensive porting. It's a win for Microsoft isn't it? Well, it will be when they finally realize that there is a viable market in Non-Microsoft OS's.
I see software development happening at the speed of hardware development. I see people buying software and it just runs - no matter what brand of computer you own. I hear old folks talking about windows and their children think they mean the holes in the walls that you look out of. I hear old folks talking about operating systems and their children thinking - what is an operating system?... it just works. It's going to be an even greater world when it happens too. I hope it is soon.
Is it need from the perspective of long-time Linux/UNIX users? Those that feel Microsoft software is unstable and filled with security holes will likely say, "No! We don't NEED Microsoft Office."
Or is it need from the perspective of prospective users? Users that come from a Microsoft dominated platform will likely say, "If it doesn't have Microsoft Office then it isn't compatible with how we work and it's not what we NEED."
If you feel you have to fix it, then prioritise the most problematic parts and fix them according to a set plan/policy. Use a naming and calling convention. Break functions that do more than one thing up into component functions that can be tested, verified and reused by other parts of your program. Fix it incrementally not all at once. Try using an interface contract when you make objects; that way, your new functions can call new methods and the old code can depend on old methods to be there. Deprecate the old methods when there is no code that depends on it. Don't forget to comment - comment the code then come back the next day and read your own comments. Make changes to the comments so they make sense today.
Slashdot Mirror
> The real question is, why for $100 would anyone
> switch off Windows for less than 100%
> compatibility with their Windows software?
As I understand the article, Lindows(tm) will be targeted at those who want to use a core of 11 commonly used Windows applications yet don't want to upgrade to the latest versions of Windows and/or those core applications.
In essence, the target group will stand pat with their current applications and still have the ability to cash in, as it were, on the availability of alternative applications in LINUX.
As for the $100 price tag, there is a little story I would tell you.
There was a company that made excellent shoes for men out of the very best materials. They priced their shoes very low to generate demand. While they had a loyal clientbase, their profits dropped off so much, they almost went out of business.
An analysis showed that:
1. The shoes were an extremely durable product.
2. The loyal clientbase were ready and willing to pay much more for the product.
3. Some prospective new clients were put off by the low price - viewing price as a status symbol and the shoes as not a value at the low price.
The company raised prices on the shoes and immediately saw an increase in clientele and a coresponding jump in profits. The loyal clientbase continued to purchase the product and new clients viewed the product as a durable value item and a status symbol on the foot.
Now, how does that tie into your $100 dollar question? Well, we are dealing with folk who will probably be willing to foot (heh) the price because they view the product to be a value proposition. (They will eventually be forced to upgrade by Microsoft(tm).) Value in that the price is competitive with Windows, will allow them to continue using the products they already own and likey give them a bargaining chip to use against Microsoft(tm).
Yeah, we got enough unpolished games out there. I agree - let Blizzard take their good sweet time and get it right!
More quality... less quantity.
> When I made the posts, the prospect of someone
> storing every message on USENET and making them
> available years later did not occur to me.
Well, it is a NEWS machine which is really a type of Chronicle or Journal.
Someone once said (not verbatim), "Never say in public what you wouldn't like brought out in court."
Hindsight though... I made many mistakes too.
If you've seen the flash, you're already dead.
Yep, I always said that if Microsoft ever made a perfect OS they'd be out of business.
Seems like it doesn't matter though... they'll force people to upgrade by "ensuring" older or unpaid for/unupgraded versions of the OS will not have the functionality needed to view or run the latest apps. Programmed Obsolescence. Shell out the dough buddy or suffer.
I used to consider myself a Windows refugee but, after all this time, I now feel that I'm a UNIX person pitying the Windows people for all the garbage they have to put up with.
It's been a fun ride in Unixland... can't wait to see what tomorrow brings!
Why all they have to do is say that it's a PPC 2000+
Get at least a BS in something with at least a minor in CS or CIS as fast as you can. With the 4+ years experience in the field, you can probably CLEP (test) out of quite a few of the courses with applied credit.
From what I've seen, you could get a BS in bird watching and still meet the specs. heh strange but true.
What? Netscape dropped a couple of icons on your Windows(tm) desktop? EGADS!
I just drag em to the trash and Voila! they're gone. Problem solved.
By the way, this:
> I don't know about anyone else, but anytime I
> install an app and I see that it has installed
> other crap without my permission, I dump it.
sounds alot like Windows(tm).
Isn't the possibility of infection of system binaries the reason we have tripwire?
It, tripwire, may be a pain to run sometimes but it is a pretty good idea if you want to have an even higher level of protection.
Hmm... as far as I understand the terms...
Virus is: A snippet of code that gets onto a machine by any number of propogation mechanisms - usually as part of a larger program (see Trojan Horse) and is usually designed for malicious purposes. Most antivirus makers agree that viruses that remain undetected and/or are more covert in their activities are more dangerous. Viruse almost always require the intervention of a user to propogate.
Worm is: A network aware program that may or may not be designed for malicious purposes - oftentimes it does have detrimental effects if it's network meanderings cause DoS and/or tieing up the process ID space of the affected machine/s. A worm can usually propogate itself without the intervention of a user.
Trojan Horse: A virus that gains access to a machine by riding on the back of a seemingly harmless package.
Stealth Virus: A virus that is adept at hiding itself from detection mechanisms. It hides itself by morphing it's signature, imitating system code and sometimes even attacking the antivirus software.
Macro Virus: A virus that is designed to be run by a runtime package on the target machine. It can be a shellscript or an attached code block to a larger file and designed to use the built-in runtime of the target application. Easily circumvented by not activating the code or by disabling the runtime package.
Boot Sector Virus: A virus that attacks the boot sector of a bootable disk and inserting it's code into the stream. Usually jumps to new disks by keeping a Terminate and Stay Resident portion for infection of new disks and gets run by booting from an infected disk or the infected program being run.
Module Redirection: Not necessarily a virus or worm but can be the payload. A module that is inserted into the Kernel that redirects calls in order to hide itself and cause mischief. The exploit usually results in a rooted machine. Difficult to detect if the module is loaded before circumvention measures have been activated.
Know thine enemy.
I think you mean POSIX. At least it is largely included in LSB and does provide for minimum base functionality for cross-platform applications. I like the work LSB is doing.
From the web page you referred to:
Functional programming is a style of programming that emphasizes the evaluation of expressions, rather than execution of commands. The expressions in these language are formed by using functions to combine basic values. A functional language is a language that supports and encourages programming in a functional style.
Hmm...
So, given this definition, a functional programming language is one that uses canned or prewritten functions to evaluate expressions on a higher abstraction level than "procedural" languages such as C.
These "functional languages", you mention, appear to have alot in common with spreadsheet style functional representations... I might have to take a closer look at them... Thank You.
What is the difference between C as a procedural language and C as a functional language.
As far as *I* know, C is functional language being that every part of it is a function. What makes a language procedural anyway? When you really get down to where the rubber meets the road, all code is procedural is it not?
Using your Airfoil analogy, I'd say that you could objectify the airfoil and perform "What If" scenarios by modifying the properties of the object while simulating a wind-tunnel type test.
You could incorporate the physics and differential equation calculations into the object so it reacts in a realistic way. Heck, go ahead and objectify the wind-tunnel while yer at it.
If I hear that word migrate again... I'm a goin to puke.
Up front costs maybe... long term costs would be down though... seeing as you wouldn't have costly upgrades to software from Microsoft all the time.
to use strncpy instead of strcpy...
Anyway, I like AIM, it's easy for a brain dead code jockey to use. I've got enough rattling around in my head without having to be 31137 at instant messenger applications.
I was able to view the DOC file using StarOffice 6 BETA and the PDF file inside my Netscape 6.2.1 Browser using acroread from Adobe.
It took a little work to get acroread to work properly - 15min - but now it's working great. I prefer PDFs. heh
At any rate, it looks like the UK is going to save alot of Pounds and get great software to boot.
Desktop Environ: KDE with GNOME and Windowmaker following closely.
Distribution: RedHat - they have been consistent.
Text Editor/Word Processor - KDE Advanced Edit with ABIWORD (love it) and Star Office 6 BETA following on.
Favorite Browser: Netscape 6.2.1. It does just about everything. Browse, Mail, News, AIM (though I have to include Mozilla for which there would be no Netscape 6), and LYNX for CLI.
Fav Time Waster: Return to Castle Wolfenstein - Linux MP Client.
Favorite Project: Linux Standard Base - may it flower and be implemented quickly.
Dead Horse that needs to be shot: Linux is not ready for the Desktop - this is utter nonsense. KDE is already more functional and useful than Windows' GUI.
News:
Biggest: LSB 1.1 ready for public review.
Best: Linux 2.4.
Worst: 9-11 with the Republicans taking office running a very close second.
Well, those are my picks...
> Hello? Linux is NOT a viable OS for commercial
> apps.
^^^^^^^^^^^ Fallacy ^^^^^^^^^^^ Where did you get this idea?
> A. only 0.24% desktop market share
Depends on who you ask. Today maybe but what about tomorrow... sometime in the future maybe?
> B. Linux community refuses to pay for software
> (see Corel Wordperfect)
Untrue. I bought Corel Wordperfect for Linux myself. Anyway, Corel is legendary for abandoning projects after putting much work into them.
> C. Linux community believes in software piracy
> (see the complaints from Linux users regarding
> *any* form of copy-protection.
Another fallacy. I am part of the Linux community and I don't believe in software piracy. I'd have to say that there are many more percentage points of software pirates in the Windows world than there are in the UNIX world given the same number of users. Linux users usually only dislike copy protection when it barrs them from participating in the content i.e. Sorenson Quicktime Files and DirectX games.
I'm not saying that there aren't hackers and crackers and warez and script kiddiez in the Linux crowd but the wide generalization of Linux users as being only these is patently false.
How would you like it if I said all Anonymous Cowards were idiots? Just because I said it wouldn't make it true.
> No, it's not a win for Microsoft. It undermines
> Windows -snip- which hurts Microsoft financially,
> -snip- and strategically -snip-
I agree with you on the gist of your comment. However, I did say, "I can see a day..." which means that day is not today. If today was the day then your comment would be right... I meant a day in the future.
Let's try to look ahead shall we?
> MS Office X is a Carbon application.
-snip-
> Apple claims that converting an application from
> Classic to Carbon requires changing less than
> 10% of the code, depending on how 'correctly'
> the application was written.
Good information. Ok, I can see that it was less costly to port than I originally thought. There was some cost though - how much is merely speculation.
and it scared the hell out of me.
I've never seen such a revisionist and clueless pile of drivel in my life.
I have to apologize to euroderf, if not for any other reason than the fact that he has his own opinion and is welcome to it. I however do not agree with him.
Here are some excerpts from the website and it's articles - not verbatim:
Microsoft created object oriented programming.
Microsoft concieved a workable internet when no one else could.
Microsoft has the common man at the core of it's heart.
All linux users are hackers and zealots.
All linux users hate Microsoft because they charge for software.
Windows95 was written in Visual Basic.
Microsoft is the saviour of the common man when it comes to computers. Trust them(tm)
etc... etc... etc... ad infinitum.
What I want to know is if he ACTUALLY believes what he writes or is he trying to deliberately misleed Joe Public?
I know this is not completely on the topic but it hits around it.
... it just works. It's going to be an even greater world when it happens too. I hope it is soon.
Other comments in this thread have mentioned that the OSX GUI isn't X. That Microsoft used a subset of the MAC GUI to port Office to OSX. I'm sure that required a bit of work and not a little expenditure of capitol.
Now, as I said before, I can see a day when Microsoft helps write WINE. As you can plainly see, WINE potentially can help Microsoft programs run on many platforms without the need for extensive porting. It's a win for Microsoft isn't it? Well, it will be when they finally realize that there is a viable market in Non-Microsoft OS's.
I see software development happening at the speed of hardware development. I see people buying software and it just runs - no matter what brand of computer you own. I hear old folks talking about windows and their children think they mean the holes in the walls that you look out of. I hear old folks talking about operating systems and their children thinking - what is an operating system?
> Does Unix really need Office at this point?
You have to define need.
Is it need from the perspective of long-time Linux/UNIX users? Those that feel Microsoft software is unstable and filled with security holes will likely say, "No! We don't NEED Microsoft Office."
Or is it need from the perspective of prospective users? Users that come from a Microsoft dominated platform will likely say, "If it doesn't have Microsoft Office then it isn't compatible with how we work and it's not what we NEED."
Which is it?
if it works... don't fix it.
If you feel you have to fix it, then prioritise the most problematic parts and fix them according to a set plan/policy. Use a naming and calling convention. Break functions that do more than one thing up into component functions that can be tested, verified and reused by other parts of your program. Fix it incrementally not all at once. Try using an interface contract when you make objects; that way, your new functions can call new methods and the old code can depend on old methods to be there. Deprecate the old methods when there is no code that depends on it. Don't forget to comment - comment the code then come back the next day and read your own comments. Make changes to the comments so they make sense today.
Blah... blah... blah... Etc... etc... etc...