easy, adblock will start filtering out sites known to be full of advertorial if you so wish it. even better, subscribe to feeds which provide your adblocker with info on user generated ratings (ratings will need a STRONG captcha).
sure websites would bitch and moan and even take legal action but in the end it's all a money drain on them (the bullshitters) and costs us nothing. their only option is to clean up their act.
these are the 2 things online advertising need to work on. if i see an ad on tv it's automaticly more trust worthy than an online ad. they also need to make ads more targeted WITHOUT invading my privacy, because at the end of the day ad blocking is going to win that arms race.
how can they make them targeted with out cookies etc? easy, only advertise on relivant website and use facebooks vote up down style. ads that are annoying to the web sites users can be weeded out.
why should you dictate the terms apple distributes it's own work though? that doesn't sound like freedom to me at all. that's my issue with the gpl, if i include gpl'd code in a project and give the whole lot to someone i have give the project to.
it's an unrealistic view of the business world where relationships aren't so cut and dry. but i don't expect fsf types to ever get this.
it's 4 gig PER PROCESS you spastics. PAE gets around it easily. 64bit for the home user is essentially a marketing gimmic. oh and the amount you mobo supports a 64bit issue.
what the hell is he talking about "before it's too late"???? before we get another shit hollywood movie about global warming? i realise the media blames every single natural event on global warming, but really it's not different to what was happening 20 years ago. I remeber 10 years ago being told we'd be out of oil by now and that global warming would be eating our babies. i smell yet another researcher looking for grant money.
I think most of those arguments are weak, but that's not why foss isn't being adopted by business. lack of support (real or perceived) , lack of speciality apps used by industry and secret knowledge are the main reason.
i ran freebsd+postgresql for years. win 2003 + sql server 2005 is every bit as good, if not better in some instances. oh and BSA are easy to stay clear of - just pay for everything!
why would anyone considering a server right now care? you need to consider what you need right now not gloat over what ever problems you believe windows had in the past
And when you start running multiple servers and spend $100,000+ like we do you get a volume license, which are much cheaper. i'll use our last migration as an example. we were running oracle, it was hellish expensive and we had to employ an even more expensive DB to keep it running (it was on linux). now even though linux was free, the DB and oracle licenses were about 3x the price of sql server + win2k3. not only that our existing dba's could now admin it. the other option was go to postgresql but that would mean hiring another person (no one besides me has experience with it and i don't have time to do DBA stuff anymore) which canceled out most of the cost saving and resulted in yet another sacred cow within the department.
in case you were wondering the DBA in question was given the option of towing the line and admining sql server, but i'm pretty sure he refused and quit. silly if you ask me.
"You get what you pay for. Good Windows admins are harder to come by, and cost more. And a good Linux admin can do more -- manage more machines, spend less time doing it."
and why exactly would a linux admin of equal skill get more done? greater l33tness factor or something?
"And this is different than Windows admins, how?"
windows typically utilises standard gui management tools. linux admin's typically utilise cryptic scripts that take even experienced admin's an hours to decypher.
"Almost. Business choose them because they believe them to be cost-effective. It's difficult to have an unbiased study back up either as more cost-effective."
well, i can pick up the phone and have MS tell me exactly what my volume license costs me and what i get with it. can you do the same with linux? management need to know how much things are going to cost in order to budget, some linux guru telling us "it'll cost roughly this an hour and it takes as long as it takes" isn't the same.
"I don't have to use it to think that requiring a video card on a server is fucking moronic. "
why is it moronic? if you lose network connectivity what do you intend on doing? serial terminal? you may as well have a video card since you can't buy a mobo without one these days.
I have to say your wrong. government won't do any better job of this, in fact they don't do a better job of anything really. ultimately it comes down to do you trust a CA? i have to say never, so i don't rely it, instead i examine each certificate and accept or reject them based on other factors.
windows 2003 is a perfectly stable OS and easily holds it's own against linux, look at the top uptimes on netcraft for crying out loud.
and the fact that you think $5k is a lot of money to even a medium sized business shows lack of perspective. whats more important is the ability to get trained staff and software that's compatible with your platform. the typical backyard linux guy you discribe comes in with promises of free software, and leaves with fat consulting fee's and a string of boxes running software that's on the knife edge.
OSS always represents a false economy with the "but it's free" angle. it's NOT free, linux professionals are harder to come by and cost more, they also represent a large risk of taking secret knowledge with them.
to be fair to MS, the reason business chooses them is they are cost effective, not because they are the cheapest. compared to vendors like IBM and redhat, MS products represent good value for money.
does anyone seriously believe windows 2003 with sql server 2005 is a bad platform? i'd suggest if you do you've never used it.
Slashdot Mirror
reference please.
sure websites would bitch and moan and even take legal action but in the end it's all a money drain on them (the bullshitters) and costs us nothing. their only option is to clean up their act.
how can they make them targeted with out cookies etc? easy, only advertise on relivant website and use facebooks vote up down style. ads that are annoying to the web sites users can be weeded out.
i have to say "nose" was the last place i expected this sentence to end in.
it's an unrealistic view of the business world where relationships aren't so cut and dry. but i don't expect fsf types to ever get this.
the misuse of the word "free" is deliberate on stallman's part i can assure you, just as he insists on calling DRM "Digital Restrictions Management"
yep, gpl is a nightmare to manage, not to mention how misunderstand and militant it's supporters are.
ahh the segway. steve jobs pronounced cities would be built around them.
it's 4 gig PER PROCESS you spastics. PAE gets around it easily. 64bit for the home user is essentially a marketing gimmic. oh and the amount you mobo supports a 64bit issue.
lol. you've drunk the kool-aid, 32bit or 64bit is essentially meaningless...
this calls for the dicks and pussy's speech.
what the hell is he talking about "before it's too late"???? before we get another shit hollywood movie about global warming? i realise the media blames every single natural event on global warming, but really it's not different to what was happening 20 years ago. I remeber 10 years ago being told we'd be out of oil by now and that global warming would be eating our babies. i smell yet another researcher looking for grant money.
I think most of those arguments are weak, but that's not why foss isn't being adopted by business. lack of support (real or perceived) , lack of speciality apps used by industry and secret knowledge are the main reason.
try mosting as yourself next time. gutless.
i ran freebsd+postgresql for years. win 2003 + sql server 2005 is every bit as good, if not better in some instances. oh and BSA are easy to stay clear of - just pay for everything!
why would anyone considering a server right now care? you need to consider what you need right now not gloat over what ever problems you believe windows had in the past
And when you start running multiple servers and spend $100,000+ like we do you get a volume license, which are much cheaper. i'll use our last migration as an example. we were running oracle, it was hellish expensive and we had to employ an even more expensive DB to keep it running (it was on linux). now even though linux was free, the DB and oracle licenses were about 3x the price of sql server + win2k3. not only that our existing dba's could now admin it. the other option was go to postgresql but that would mean hiring another person (no one besides me has experience with it and i don't have time to do DBA stuff anymore) which canceled out most of the cost saving and resulted in yet another sacred cow within the department.
in case you were wondering the DBA in question was given the option of towing the line and admining sql server, but i'm pretty sure he refused and quit. silly if you ask me.
and why exactly would a linux admin of equal skill get more done? greater l33tness factor or something?
"And this is different than Windows admins, how?"
windows typically utilises standard gui management tools. linux admin's typically utilise cryptic scripts that take even experienced admin's an hours to decypher.
"Almost. Business choose them because they believe them to be cost-effective. It's difficult to have an unbiased study back up either as more cost-effective."
well, i can pick up the phone and have MS tell me exactly what my volume license costs me and what i get with it. can you do the same with linux? management need to know how much things are going to cost in order to budget, some linux guru telling us "it'll cost roughly this an hour and it takes as long as it takes" isn't the same.
"I don't have to use it to think that requiring a video card on a server is fucking moronic. "
why is it moronic? if you lose network connectivity what do you intend on doing? serial terminal? you may as well have a video card since you can't buy a mobo without one these days.
I have to say your wrong. government won't do any better job of this, in fact they don't do a better job of anything really. ultimately it comes down to do you trust a CA? i have to say never, so i don't rely it, instead i examine each certificate and accept or reject them based on other factors.
and the fact that you think $5k is a lot of money to even a medium sized business shows lack of perspective. whats more important is the ability to get trained staff and software that's compatible with your platform. the typical backyard linux guy you discribe comes in with promises of free software, and leaves with fat consulting fee's and a string of boxes running software that's on the knife edge.
to be fair to MS, the reason business chooses them is they are cost effective, not because they are the cheapest. compared to vendors like IBM and redhat, MS products represent good value for money.
does anyone seriously believe windows 2003 with sql server 2005 is a bad platform? i'd suggest if you do you've never used it.
yes what a beacon of honest reporting this site is. please it drives me nuts when post pull "facts" from websites like these with a clear agenda.
people use windows for those packages, not the other way around.
you don't even know if there is a new product and your already proclaiming it'll be great?? apple zealots just over took linux zealots.
why the fuck do you people have to tag "mega" and "super" to EVERYTHING? do you think it'll throw us off the smell of your bullshit or something?
considering what i've seen in the south, who the fuck are you to call any country inbred??