Companies need to start realizing that making money is about providing what customers want. Advertising is a great way of getting your name out, but only a good product or service will actually carry through. So in that frame of thinking, I highly recommend that companies:
Uhh, which world are you living in. Most companies have found that bigger profits can be made, by convincing people that they want what they have. And most customers find it easier to buy what they are told to buy.
I like your world, but it's not the one I've been living in.
If you check, you find they are running an IIS 6 server. I guess the 2GB of memory and quad CPU on MS platform couldn't handle the 15 of us that went to look at this article.
Maybe we could find the cache of the article on Google.
Yes we do and it has been working for us for at least 5 years. Back with Office 97 it didn't work all that well, but since Office 2000 we haven't had that many problems. I don't disagree that this couldn't be better served with a database or content management system and have moved some of this storage over to a database. But, some of these files are in constant change and business rules and format have not been agreed upon. But again they are in constant use and there have been no complaints about usage. So if it's working it's hard to get anyone to agree on how and when to fix it.
When sharing a document on a file server only one user can edit the document at a time. For our office this is a killer. We use a number of multi-user documents and whenever we tested using OO we found that only one person could edit these documents at a time. We would have to resort to running around the office and looking at the computers and finding out who had it open.
I don't think that compatability is as big an issue as some people here have made it to be. Compatability is close enough in most cases and for those who don't remember there were the times where there were WordPerfect docs and Lotus documents along with other specific documents. Basically you had to either have the app or ask someone to convert it for you. Considering those days and the solution that OO provides now (tell them to download a free office suite), I don't think compatability is that big an issue or the stumper. I can tell you right now what my CEO would say and back when it comes time to upgrade everone to the next variant of Office suite. Pay $30,000 for Office licenses or convert everybody over to OO? We would convert to OO right there and then. Except we can't because it were interfere with our business productivity due to the file sharing issues.
1. People ask me to help them clean up all the crap they could avoid if they quit using IE.
2. MS has no incentive to fix their product unless there is pressure from the market. More users that discover the alternatives and benefits the more pressure on MS to make a better product for lower cost.
If you had a friend that said he needed a car to get him back and forth to work, but the only one he could find was $60,000. Wouldn't you tell him about some other alternatives.
Over 12 % didn't say she was a mindless whore or a stupid bitch, but I'm sure this will all become clearer once we get finished with the PowerPoint presentation revisions.
If after 2 days of working on this you didn't realize you were in way over your head and didn't start asking some questions to some newsgroups,
then the only thing I can say is your lucky to have a job.
One of the reasons we use RHEL is that for some of our servers we can install RHEL and for some we can use CENTOS or whitebox linux. They all are the same. I have installed Oracle on RH systems twice it ain't the easiest thing to do, but I went out and asked for some help and found instruction on installation procedures from people who have already gone through this.
After surveying a number of IT professionals about what they thought of Laura Didio.
75% said she was a stupid b%$^*
12.5% said she was a mindless whore.
12.5% said "who's Laura Didio".
Powerpoint presentations are currently being edited. This is a 3rd party survey so we can't give out any particulars of the survey or how it was presented. But we can tell you that no corporate sponsorship was involved.
The biggest problem we had that but a complete stop to the adoption of OO was that files could not be open by more than one user at a time. I don't know how any business's or organization with more than 5 people and a file server can use it. If you have to go and hunt down who has the file open or which computer it is open on it can take a while, especially if you have a number of general use computers which anybody could log into and leave it open.( a lot of users open files and leave them open ). This only gets worse with XP where more than one user can be logged on and have the user currently not working on the computer can have the file open.
This is one of the biggest reasons I can see for medium/large organizations not using OO. Luckily the problem became apparent in early testing before we rolled it out to a bunch of users.
I think OO is great and I use it exclusively at home, but I can't see it in an environment where a lot of file sharing is going on.
I have not tried LTSP, but I have tried running VNC on a server system to try to get some idea of what it might be like. So far I haven't been impressed enough to think some magic in LTSP would make things better. Could someone explain where the performance enhancement would come from. The client was running RH9 on a 533Mhz 256 MB 32MB video 100MB ethernet( on start up didn't open any apps other than VNC). Server was 1.33 GHz with 768 MB . I also tried it on a 150 MHz Pentium with 64MB of RAM W98 client 10MB ethernet (this sucked big time, but this computer and 2 others like it were the reason I was looking). The first test se seemed to be okay but with the other systems it seemed to be worse than running on the native OS. Since they are still getting some use out of these computers I have left them alone, but I keep thinking that this would be a great place for LTSP. These computers are primarily being used to run a web app and occassionally run excel (maybe I could run this via wine). Looking for some help or where to find it and thoughts on this idea?
I quit reading their articles and asked them to quit sending any subscriptions, mainly because of crap like this article. Whenever someone references an article such as this here on slashdot someone, should copy it and mirror it somewhere else. All they are trying to do is get./ed so they can tell advertisers how many 1000's of people come and read their stuff.
Oh, yeah that copyright thing, fu**'em.
When your start yelling fire in a crowded theatre and there isn't a fire, well as far as I'm concerned you lose certain rights.
These transistors HBT are for higher speed circuits and communications. They are not for basic computing. 3-5 (GaAs) (InP), technology is a completly different class and has a different purpose.
There is also a speed limitation to CMOS transitors. currently silicon CMOS is running close to its limits whereas with 3-5 technology we are finding out what the limits are. Manufacturing is much more expensive though, so devices built with this technology are usually for state of the art equipment. Guidance systems Night vision High speed switching - network backbones - fiber optic networks - satellite communications - cell phones
Novell's big risk is becoming silly.
Both RHAT and Novell keep looking at MS and trying to emulate or keep up with them. Most businesses look to Linux for a cheaper alternative and both these companies keep pricing their products comparable to MS.
Yes there is a difference in performance and capability, but to PHB's the cost of a server is the cost of a server and the brand they are familiar with is MS. Neither one of these companies appear to be looking at the huge market in mid-size and small size companies. This is going to hurt them in the long run.
Novell's big advantage is brand recognition (weak as it may be), and technology that could possibly be ported to linux. RHAT's advantage is that they have a reputation as being a good professional company, with a good professional product (since conception). I have not seen or worked with Novell's ES yet, but after using Suse desktop and various version of RH desktop I find the RH desktop to be more stable. That is why my servers are RH based. I think Suse is a nice desktop and is improving dramatically, but I'm still concerned with what appears to concentration on flash (latest and greatest cutting edge).
Since MS isn't going to come to either of these companies I think that they are going to have to concentrate more on going to them. ie.. making linux desktops and servers more compatable in a MS environment.
The way I think they should do it is by concentrating on servers in this environment, making them easier to manage and easing some of the compatability issues ( not necessarily adding more GUI features [I'd prefer more command line scripts], but more on documentation [ease of finding information]). [ aside: I recently worked on a remote server, after completing the work I realized that I never could have done that with a MS system with GUI interface controls( I was working with a 124 kB bandwidth limitation, but if I had only had a 56k modem I could have still got the job done) ]
But still the way to make it into these smaller shops is to provide cheaper servers. This is where RH has an advantage (there are at least 2 clones of their ES Server). Once the tech's figure out the servers then the desktops can follow.
But trying to price an unknown at slightly less cost than MS, isn't going to get either company significant market share, it's just being silly.
I agree with your guestion/request and would like to see it.
But we also have to realise that these companies have an agenda and that they pay people full time to work on marketing that agenda/spin.
If this claims can be refuted, then I thinks it time to refute the claims one by one. Get donations for an advertisement page in the NYT or WSJ and have it printed.
This could be the biggest backfire these companies every participated in.
You can get a CD with the checksums from the National Software Reference Library. They even have some tools for automating this. You can also use sleuthkit to automate the checks. www.nsrl.nist.gov
The regulations on interstate trade can drive people nuts. Because of interstate regulations you could actually by Natural Gas outside of Texas cheaper than you could by it in Texas (where it was produced). I don't know if that is still true, but in the late 80's and early 90's it was.
I have heard this request before and it never and still makes no sense to me. What is wrong with automating the process of catching violators of traffic laws. I think it makes complete sense. Things that don't make sense to me:
1.Paying someone 60k a year to have someone drive in circles catching people going through red lights and driving 10mph over the speed limit.
2.Paying someone 30k a year to have them available to rush to my house when someone with a gun breaks into my house.
Okay I'd like to play devils advocate today (I don't really want to have my a%% torched, but I expect it). Everytime the security issue is brought up the number of patches is brought in as an argument (I agree this is ridiculous for a number of reasons already pointed out, basically I don't think the number of patches has anything to do with how secure a system is). But the real FUD line which keeps bring brought up is, if 50% of the computers on the internet were Linux, would linux users have the same problems as Windows users. If linux was targeted more often would linux users have the same problem.
I have some concerns that Firefox is going to be used as the test for this argument. Currently the argument is that Firefox is a more secure browser. The counter argument is that currently the reason it is a more secure browser is nobody targets it. My big concern being that once Firefox is targeted it starts displaying a lot of problems. From then on the argument would be, see as long as nobody uses Open Source they are secure. But once they gain in popularity and become targets they fail. So can someone point me to the simple golden bullet argument that says Linux is and will continue to be more secure than Windows?
Well after reading this I realized, this is going to have zero impact on me. Nobody in the higher part of the food-chain here is going to read this. I guess this just goes to show you how far out of touch Gates is. Doesn't he know that executives only have about a 5 minute attention span and prefer Impress presentation formats.
Slashdot Mirror
Companies need to start realizing that making money is about providing what customers want. Advertising is a great way of getting your name out, but only a good product or service will actually carry through. So in that frame of thinking, I highly recommend that companies:
Uhh, which world are you living in. Most companies have found that bigger profits can be made, by convincing people that they want what they have. And most customers find it easier to buy what they are told to buy.
I like your world, but it's not the one I've been living in.
If you check, you find they are running an IIS 6 server. I guess the 2GB of memory and quad CPU on MS platform couldn't handle the 15 of us that went to look at this article.
Maybe we could find the cache of the article on Google.
Yes we do and it has been working for us for at least 5 years. Back with Office 97 it didn't work all that well, but since Office 2000 we haven't had that many problems. I don't disagree that this couldn't be better served with a database or content management system and have moved some of this storage over to a database. But, some of these files are in constant change and business rules and format have not been agreed upon. But again they are in constant use and there have been no complaints about usage. So if it's working it's hard to get anyone to agree on how and when to fix it.
When sharing a document on a file server only one user can edit the document at a time. For our office this is a killer. We use a number of multi-user documents and whenever we tested using OO we found that only one person could edit these documents at a time. We would have to resort to running around the office and looking at the computers and finding out who had it open.
I don't think that compatability is as big an issue as some people here have made it to be. Compatability is close enough in most cases and for those who don't remember there were the times where there were WordPerfect docs and Lotus documents along with other specific documents. Basically you had to either have the app or ask someone to convert it for you. Considering those days and the solution that OO provides now (tell them to download a free office suite), I don't think compatability is that big an issue or the stumper.
I can tell you right now what my CEO would say and back when it comes time to upgrade everone to the next variant of Office suite. Pay $30,000 for Office licenses or convert everybody over to OO? We would convert to OO right there and then. Except we can't because it were interfere with our business productivity due to the file sharing issues.
It's because SCO's assets doubled when it was announced that they had an IBM server.
Oh great, now your incouraging him to reproduce.
Hopefully he can't figure it out.
1. People ask me to help them clean up all the crap they could avoid if they quit using IE.
2. MS has no incentive to fix their product unless there is pressure from the market. More users that discover the alternatives and benefits the more pressure on MS to make a better product for lower cost.
If you had a friend that said he needed a car to get him back and forth to work, but the only one he could find was $60,000. Wouldn't you tell him about some other alternatives.
Over 12 % didn't say she was a mindless whore or a stupid bitch, but I'm sure this will all become clearer once we get finished with the PowerPoint presentation revisions.
If after 2 days of working on this you didn't realize you were in way over your head and didn't start asking some questions to some newsgroups, then the only thing I can say is your lucky to have a job.
One of the reasons we use RHEL is that for some of our servers we can install RHEL and for some we can use CENTOS or whitebox linux. They all are the same.
I have installed Oracle on RH systems twice it ain't the easiest thing to do, but I went out and asked for some help and found instruction on installation procedures from people who have already gone through this.
After surveying a number of IT professionals about what they thought of Laura Didio.
75% said she was a stupid b%$^*
12.5% said she was a mindless whore.
12.5% said "who's Laura Didio".
Powerpoint presentations are currently being edited. This is a 3rd party survey so we can't give out any particulars of the survey or how it was presented. But we can tell you that no corporate sponsorship was involved.
The biggest problem we had that but a complete stop to the adoption of OO was that files could not be open by more than one user at a time. I don't know how any business's or organization with more than 5 people and a file server can use it. If you have to go and hunt down who has the file open or which computer it is open on it can take a while, especially if you have a number of general use computers which anybody could log into and leave it open.( a lot of users open files and leave them open ). This only gets worse with XP where more than one user can be logged on and have the user currently not working on the computer can have the file open.
This is one of the biggest reasons I can see for medium/large organizations not using OO. Luckily the problem became apparent in early testing before we rolled it out to a bunch of users.
I think OO is great and I use it exclusively at home, but I can't see it in an environment where a lot of file sharing is going on.
Thanks for the information. Wish I had some mod points.
I have not tried LTSP, but I have tried running VNC on a server system to try to get some idea of what it might be like. So far I haven't been impressed enough to think some magic in LTSP would make things better. Could someone explain where the performance enhancement would come from. The client was running RH9 on a 533Mhz 256 MB 32MB video 100MB ethernet( on start up didn't open any apps other than VNC). Server was 1.33 GHz with 768 MB . I also tried it on a 150 MHz Pentium with 64MB of RAM W98 client 10MB ethernet (this sucked big time, but this computer and 2 others like it were the reason I was looking). The first test se seemed to be okay but with the other systems it seemed to be worse than running on the native OS.
Since they are still getting some use out of these computers I have left them alone, but I keep thinking that this would be a great place for LTSP. These computers are primarily being used to run a web app and occassionally run excel (maybe I could run this via wine).
Looking for some help or where to find it and thoughts on this idea?
Sounds good to me as long as Natalie Portman is in my bunker.
I think, bringing back the 8-track is kind of scary though.
I quit reading their articles and asked them to quit sending any subscriptions, mainly because of crap like this article. Whenever someone references an article such as this here on slashdot someone, should copy it and mirror it somewhere else. All they are trying to do is get ./ed so they can tell advertisers how many 1000's of people come and read their stuff.
Oh, yeah that copyright thing, fu**'em.
When your start yelling fire in a crowded theatre and there isn't a fire, well as far as I'm concerned you lose certain rights.
These transistors HBT are for higher speed circuits and communications. They are not for basic computing. 3-5 (GaAs) (InP), technology is a completly different class and has a different purpose.
There is also a speed limitation to CMOS transitors. currently silicon CMOS is running close to its limits whereas with 3-5 technology we are finding out what the limits are.
Manufacturing is much more expensive though, so devices built with this technology are usually for state of the art equipment.
Guidance systems
Night vision
High speed switching
- network backbones
- fiber optic networks
- satellite communications
- cell phones
Novell's big risk is becoming silly.
Both RHAT and Novell keep looking at MS and trying to emulate or keep up with them. Most businesses look to Linux for a cheaper alternative and both these companies keep pricing their products comparable to MS.
Yes there is a difference in performance and capability, but to PHB's the cost of a server is the cost of a server and the brand they are familiar with is MS. Neither one of these companies appear to be looking at the huge market in mid-size and small size companies. This is going to hurt them in the long run.
Novell's big advantage is brand recognition (weak as it may be), and technology that could possibly be ported to linux. RHAT's advantage is that they have a reputation as being a good professional company, with a good professional product (since conception). I have not seen or worked with Novell's ES yet, but after using Suse desktop and various version of RH desktop I find the RH desktop to be more stable. That is why my servers are RH based. I think Suse is a nice desktop and is improving dramatically, but I'm still concerned with what appears to concentration on flash (latest and greatest cutting edge).
Since MS isn't going to come to either of these companies I think that they are going to have to concentrate more on going to them. ie.. making linux desktops and servers more compatable in a MS environment.
The way I think they should do it is by concentrating on servers in this environment, making them easier to manage and easing some of the compatability issues ( not necessarily adding more GUI features [I'd prefer more command line scripts], but more on documentation [ease of finding information]).
[ aside: I recently worked on a remote server, after completing the work I realized that I never could have done that with a MS system with GUI interface controls( I was working with a 124 kB bandwidth limitation, but if I had only had a 56k modem I could have still got the job done) ]
But still the way to make it into these smaller shops is to provide cheaper servers. This is where RH has an advantage (there are at least 2 clones of their ES Server). Once the tech's figure out the servers then the desktops can follow.
But trying to price an unknown at slightly less cost than MS, isn't going to get either company significant market share, it's just being silly.
I agree with your guestion/request and would like to see it.
But we also have to realise that these companies have an agenda and that they pay people full time to work on marketing that agenda/spin.
If this claims can be refuted, then I thinks it time to refute the claims one by one. Get donations for an advertisement page in the NYT or WSJ and have it printed.
This could be the biggest backfire these companies every participated in.
You can get a CD with the checksums from the National Software Reference Library. They even have some tools for automating this. You can also use sleuthkit to automate the checks.
www.nsrl.nist.gov
The regulations on interstate trade can drive people nuts. Because of interstate regulations you could actually by Natural Gas outside of Texas cheaper than you could by it in Texas (where it was produced). I don't know if that is still true, but in the late 80's and early 90's it was.
I have heard this request before and it never and still makes no sense to me. What is wrong with automating the process of catching violators of traffic laws. I think it makes complete sense.
Things that don't make sense to me:
1.Paying someone 60k a year to have someone drive in circles catching people going through red lights and driving 10mph over the speed limit.
2.Paying someone 30k a year to have them available to rush to my house when someone with a gun breaks into my house.
Which real world are you talking about here? In the world I'm living in plausible predictions in vibrant colors win out over being correct.
Okay I'd like to play devils advocate today (I don't really want to have my a%% torched, but I expect it). Everytime the security issue is brought up the number of patches is brought in as an argument (I agree this is ridiculous for a number of reasons already pointed out, basically I don't think the number of patches has anything to do with how secure a system is). But the real FUD line which keeps bring brought up is, if 50% of the computers on the internet were Linux, would linux users have the same problems as Windows users. If linux was targeted more often would linux users have the same problem.
I have some concerns that Firefox is going to be used as the test for this argument. Currently the argument is that Firefox is a more secure browser. The counter argument is that currently the reason it is a more secure browser is nobody targets it. My big concern being that once Firefox is targeted it starts displaying a lot of problems. From then on the argument would be, see as long as nobody uses Open Source they are secure. But once they gain in popularity and become targets they fail.
So can someone point me to the simple golden bullet argument that says Linux is and will continue to be more secure than Windows?
Well after reading this I realized, this is going to have zero impact on me.
Nobody in the higher part of the food-chain here is going to read this.
I guess this just goes to show you how far out of touch Gates is. Doesn't he know that executives only have about a 5 minute attention span and prefer Impress presentation formats.