On the web server this may be true. In Germany it is even > 89% Apache.
But Microsoft still is strong in the Desktop market. Soon KDE 3.2 will be released and as Linux quickly matures on the desktop I don't see a reason why it will not be the default plattform in the enterprise desktop market.
- no GUI for linux server on old hardware - authentification with uncrypthed text as default - no Kerberos support - no smartcart authentification support - no public key infrastructure with directory service - no default cryptho file system
translated "the protection of sensitive business data can only partiell be done with Linux"
- bug fixes by "free will" contributors (may be okay for hobby applications, not for sensitive business data) - few professional trained specialists
FAt is patented. This example shows how important the interoperability privilegue was that FFII got into the EU Parl proposal of the software patents directive.
http://swpat.ffii.org
"When Lomborg restates the number of lost species as a percentage of total species, is he simply showing the true size of the problem or is he perhaps also trying to trivialize it? By analogy, in 2001 AIDS killed three million people, with devastating effects on societies in Africa and elsewhere. But that was only 0.05 percent of all humans."
By analogy Al Quaida terror killed only...:-)
"right-wing organizations such as the Cato Institute"
Cato institute is a think tank, i.e. it can be bought by intrest groups. At UN World Summit on the Information society they even sent SPAM letters to participants of the summit.
Scientific American is a popular science magazine, so it seems to be no "real science" as it is used as a communication platform. Politics or Science? I don't believe he is a real scientist. Science shall avoid to deliver to the people what they want to listen to. But science is subject of intrests too. In this case there are probably more commercial intrests in his case than on the side that he attacks. Therefore his opponents are more trustworthy.
Perhaps the same as in the tabacco industry.
From the linkes text: "The Kyoto Protocol will do very little good--it will postpone warming for six years in 2100."
I guess no real scientist can be THAT sure about the effects.
"By the end of this century the U.N. expects we will have more forests, simply because even inhabitants in the developing countries will be much richer than we are now."
As every rich man plants a tree?? That sounds silly to me but the author claims that would be an UN opinion. Well, "the UN" has no opinion as it is a network of international organisations. It is a popular sinmplification.
I think the letter of him sound unscientific to me, too apologetic.
"Take all the issues the critics did not even mention (about half my book). We have a world in which we live longer and are healthier, with more food, fewer starving, better education, higher standards of living, less poverty, less inequality, more leisure time and fewer risks."
Nobody doubts that. What's the issue?
I don't understand this, what is a cube?
A great office room with boxes. A office box for low paid workers? I already saw this that in the United States people are forced to work under such working conditions. So I think this may be very good to improve your workplace conditions a little bit.
Well, the only thing needed are professional press releases by a think tank. I just remind you that journalists just do copy and paste with SCO's accusations. Feedback doesn't help. Up to now we don't have any proof from SCO.
Even if there were copyright infringements what I don't believe anymore, you just don't start a such a media campaign. A copyright infringement is a banality. It is not unlikely that SCO infringes Linux copyright. Nothing wrong with it.
I really wonder why no journalist, no analyst from the financial market mentions that SCO's dealing with the case is totally inappropriate.
Most of us believe that SCO's action is financial fraud. Mr McBride cannot go to Germany and express his claims there because he would be arrested on the spot. There already is an injunction from Munich Landgericht. SCO misuses the US legal system in an anti-competitive way.
Emperor's clothes. It is funny to see the official media institutions fail while the internet knows very well what SCO's action is all about.
IPR in the hands of failed companies are a danger for society.
Fact is that SCO's statements are professional media statements, they are designed and distributed trogh the channel. And obviously mainstream journalists are too stupid to get that it is all crap.
Solution: Write professional media statements, facts don't count.
unfortunately jounalists don't read slashdot or Groklaw. It is very obvious for us that SCOs claims are baseless, but obviously not for mainstream press.
In my mind Sco does criminal action. A Munich court ruled it anti-competitive, SCO Germany even had to pay a penalty, so we are secure against SCO FUD. A BSA troll used the SCO argument against Linux in a meeting in Germany, but we are more or less safe. Sco infringed basic business rules, when you are concerned about an infringement of copyright, nothing special, it happens, you don't start a public media campaign. Sco mixed up patents and copyright. Its messages to the press were intended to be misguiding.
The case shows how dangerous IPR in the hands of failed companies may become.
SCO's action has to be investigated because of capital market fraud.
"The big fuss this week was the exclusion of QT, and and by extension, KDE from UserLinux. The main reason being that QT is licenced under the GPL, with the option of a closed source license for proprietary development. So with a stroke, about half of the desktop developers are excluded from an initiative that among other things targets the enterprise desktop. I believe that this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of free and open source software. What is the scarce resource? Is it customers and users? I don't think so. The value proposition in FOSS is so good, customers will come. The scarce resources are developers. One wonders at the wisdom of pissing off half of your most valuable resource.
Paradoxically, this situation will incite many to code. Peter Rockai committed two Debian focused projects, both of which have goals of simplifying the configuration of KDE for Debian users. One is a DebConf front end, the other an Apt front end. Zach Rusin extended KConfEdit, adding the capability of configuring KDE over the network. No, neither KDE or Gnome are going away soon."
Well, he seems to be not very wise to chose a desktop environment that is not ready for the desktop yet. Who shall use Gnome? While KDe based distributions entered the desktop market, RedHat with Gnome withdrew.
Haha, Linux desktop means KDE. Nobody cares about II companys as they are all nuts. QT was not GPL? Well, freeQT creates a true incentive to license your works as GPL while Gnome libs LGPL license tends to spread the license variety. Gecko? KDE wanted to integrate it but then KHTML was backed by Apple and turned out to be better and faster.
KDE developers never started Gnome bashing as Miguel and other did. It seems to me that this reflects the disadvantages of Gnome. the user does not want Gnome for the desktop. Despite RedHat no mayor distribution used Gnome as default.
In Europe there *is* a Linux desktop market, but none of these customers wants Gnome. Gnome may be fine for a solaris linux or an developer desktop but not for the average customer. Gnome 2.x by default looks boring and conservative. Gnome 1.x was fun, but a hacker desktop. I think Bruce tries to reinvent the wheel. There is a Desktop market and it is a KDE desktop market. Probably the states lack behind because RedHats Gnome committment and the KDE license FUD and KDe bashing by ximian.
I personally use Gnome sometimes, but I prefer KDE. Gnome's zealotish anti-KDE attitude always seemed to be very silly to me. KDE never started Gnome bashing, they concentrated on their plattform and everything works well together.
License FUD. The KDE license problem is slashdot-fiction.
It is a pure ideological decision from Bruce Perens because Gnome is not ready for the desktop yet while KDe serves as an enterprise desktop in many organisations.
When we talk about Desktop-Linux success in Europe we think of Linux/KDE. RedHat, dominant player on the US market, chose Gnome. RedHat is not intrested in the desktop market at all, they focus on the server. Guess why. For me and you gnome is okay, hackers will prefer gnustep, but the "real" desktop user will be suited better with KDE.
It is absolute new to me to explicitely exclude a piece of software.
You are probably right. I don't think many use it as their plattform of choice. But, hmm why not port it. I would like to see a real x plattform browser...
Well, the revolution is still there. Many friends of mine install Linux and are ready for a switch.
I think within the next 8 month we will see huge progress.
What I think is quite good is that he takes care of other issues such as software patents. Economists are opposed to it, but politicians believe in the lawyers who sell their broken innovation tool.
The patent system of today reminds me of Mao: He ordered to make steel in each village, of course steel may be important for industrialisation, but an non-efficient patent system does not make sense, esp. when extended to areas where patents are not common usage.
Slashdot Mirror
On the web server this may be true. In Germany it is even > 89% Apache.
But Microsoft still is strong in the Desktop market. Soon KDE 3.2 will be released and as Linux quickly matures on the desktop I don't see a reason why it will not be the default plattform in the enterprise desktop market.
Only software patents can stop Linux now, but today software patents and patent privateers harm Microsoft (eolas, SPX ecc.). But Microsoft performs well in the armsraise.
Sure, Microsoft will die away. It's only a matter of time.
Securityfocus belongs to Microsoft, that seems to be very likely. They don't seem to be experts in It security.
Your're right. We know it. I guess Microsoft knows it too. I just wanted to show their Propaganda.
Listen what Ms say in its advertisements about Linux Server security:
:-)
Take a look at the german MS advertisement
- no GUI for linux server on old hardware
- authentification with uncrypthed text as default
- no Kerberos support
- no smartcart authentification support
- no public key infrastructure with directory service
- no default cryptho file system
translated "the protection of sensitive business data can only partiell be done with Linux"
- bug fixes by "free will" contributors (may be okay for hobby applications, not for sensitive business data)
- few professional trained specialists
- Linux as a problem and cost trap
--- don't tell me this is FUD
FAt is patented. This example shows how important the interoperability privilegue was that FFII got into the EU Parl proposal of the software patents directive. http://swpat.ffii.org
"When Lomborg restates the number of lost species as a percentage of total species, is he simply showing the true size of the problem or is he perhaps also trying to trivialize it? By analogy, in 2001 AIDS killed three million people, with devastating effects on societies in Africa and elsewhere. But that was only 0.05 percent of all humans." By analogy Al Quaida terror killed only ... :-)
"right-wing organizations such as the Cato Institute" Cato institute is a think tank, i.e. it can be bought by intrest groups. At UN World Summit on the Information society they even sent SPAM letters to participants of the summit. Scientific American is a popular science magazine, so it seems to be no "real science" as it is used as a communication platform. Politics or Science? I don't believe he is a real scientist. Science shall avoid to deliver to the people what they want to listen to. But science is subject of intrests too. In this case there are probably more commercial intrests in his case than on the side that he attacks. Therefore his opponents are more trustworthy. Perhaps the same as in the tabacco industry. From the linkes text: "The Kyoto Protocol will do very little good--it will postpone warming for six years in 2100." I guess no real scientist can be THAT sure about the effects. "By the end of this century the U.N. expects we will have more forests, simply because even inhabitants in the developing countries will be much richer than we are now." As every rich man plants a tree?? That sounds silly to me but the author claims that would be an UN opinion. Well, "the UN" has no opinion as it is a network of international organisations. It is a popular sinmplification. I think the letter of him sound unscientific to me, too apologetic. "Take all the issues the critics did not even mention (about half my book). We have a world in which we live longer and are healthier, with more food, fewer starving, better education, higher standards of living, less poverty, less inequality, more leisure time and fewer risks." Nobody doubts that. What's the issue?
I don't understand this, what is a cube? A great office room with boxes. A office box for low paid workers? I already saw this that in the United States people are forced to work under such working conditions. So I think this may be very good to improve your workplace conditions a little bit.
Well, the only thing needed are professional press releases by a think tank. I just remind you that journalists just do copy and paste with SCO's accusations. Feedback doesn't help. Up to now we don't have any proof from SCO. Even if there were copyright infringements what I don't believe anymore, you just don't start a such a media campaign. A copyright infringement is a banality. It is not unlikely that SCO infringes Linux copyright. Nothing wrong with it. I really wonder why no journalist, no analyst from the financial market mentions that SCO's dealing with the case is totally inappropriate. Most of us believe that SCO's action is financial fraud. Mr McBride cannot go to Germany and express his claims there because he would be arrested on the spot. There already is an injunction from Munich Landgericht. SCO misuses the US legal system in an anti-competitive way. Emperor's clothes. It is funny to see the official media institutions fail while the internet knows very well what SCO's action is all about. IPR in the hands of failed companies are a danger for society.
Fact is that SCO's statements are professional media statements, they are designed and distributed trogh the channel. And obviously mainstream journalists are too stupid to get that it is all crap. Solution: Write professional media statements, facts don't count.
unfortunately jounalists don't read slashdot or Groklaw. It is very obvious for us that SCOs claims are baseless, but obviously not for mainstream press.
Jorn Wittenberger's Askemos project may be intresting for you.
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2003/0903scofined.htm l
Q ue stions-and-Answers.html
SCO fined $10,800 for Linux claims, IDG
http://www.tarent.de/html/tarent-vs-sco/030612_
Q & A tarent v. SCO
The Landgericht Munich I has enjoined SCO from claiming and from distributing the assertions in the course of its business activities
1. that the software Linux" contains SCO's intellectual property that has been unlawfully obtained
2. that end users who apply Linux are liable for intellectual property infringements towards SCO,
and / or
3. that LINUX is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX,
as far as such assertions are not proven to be true.
In my mind Sco does criminal action. A Munich court ruled it anti-competitive, SCO Germany even had to pay a penalty, so we are secure against SCO FUD. A BSA troll used the SCO argument against Linux in a meeting in Germany, but we are more or less safe. Sco infringed basic business rules, when you are concerned about an infringement of copyright, nothing special, it happens, you don't start a public media campaign. Sco mixed up patents and copyright. Its messages to the press were intended to be misguiding.
The case shows how dangerous IPR in the hands of failed companies may become.
SCO's action has to be investigated because of capital market fraud.
So what is wrong with a gpled qt used for the KDe librarys? what could happen?
Statement in KDE CVS digest:
"The big fuss this week was the exclusion of QT, and and by extension, KDE from UserLinux. The main reason being that QT is licenced under the GPL, with the option of a closed source license for proprietary development. So with a stroke, about half of the desktop developers are excluded from an initiative that among other things targets the enterprise desktop. I believe that this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of free and open source software. What is the scarce resource? Is it customers and users? I don't think so. The value proposition in FOSS is so good, customers will come. The scarce resources are developers. One wonders at the wisdom of pissing off half of your most valuable resource.
Paradoxically, this situation will incite many to code. Peter Rockai committed two Debian focused projects, both of which have goals of simplifying the configuration of KDE for Debian users. One is a DebConf front end, the other an Apt front end. Zach Rusin extended KConfEdit, adding the capability of configuring KDE over the network. No, neither KDE or Gnome are going away soon."
Well, he seems to be not very wise to chose a desktop environment that is not ready for the desktop yet. Who shall use Gnome? While KDe based distributions entered the desktop market, RedHat with Gnome withdrew.
Haha, Linux desktop means KDE. Nobody cares about II companys as they are all nuts. QT was not GPL? Well, freeQT creates a true incentive to license your works as GPL while Gnome libs LGPL license tends to spread the license variety. Gecko? KDE wanted to integrate it but then KHTML was backed by Apple and turned out to be better and faster.
KDE developers never started Gnome bashing as Miguel and other did. It seems to me that this reflects the disadvantages of Gnome. the user does not want Gnome for the desktop. Despite RedHat no mayor distribution used Gnome as default.
In Europe there *is* a Linux desktop market, but none of these customers wants Gnome. Gnome may be fine for a solaris linux or an developer desktop but not for the average customer. Gnome 2.x by default looks boring and conservative. Gnome 1.x was fun, but a hacker desktop. I think Bruce tries to reinvent the wheel. There is a Desktop market and it is a KDE desktop market. Probably the states lack behind because RedHats Gnome committment and the KDE license FUD and KDe bashing by ximian. I personally use Gnome sometimes, but I prefer KDE. Gnome's zealotish anti-KDE attitude always seemed to be very silly to me. KDE never started Gnome bashing, they concentrated on their plattform and everything works well together.
License FUD. The KDE license problem is slashdot-fiction. It is a pure ideological decision from Bruce Perens because Gnome is not ready for the desktop yet while KDe serves as an enterprise desktop in many organisations. When we talk about Desktop-Linux success in Europe we think of Linux/KDE. RedHat, dominant player on the US market, chose Gnome. RedHat is not intrested in the desktop market at all, they focus on the server. Guess why. For me and you gnome is okay, hackers will prefer gnustep, but the "real" desktop user will be suited better with KDE. It is absolute new to me to explicitely exclude a piece of software.
Yesterday i figured out that you can run Qbasic with dosbox on Linux. Haven't tried gorilla.bas yet :-)
1. emulator7port 2. my grandma is dead 3. KDE/BSD? 4. haha 5. it is an OS
You are probably right. I don't think many use it as their plattform of choice. But, hmm why not port it. I would like to see a real x plattform browser...
Well, the revolution is still there. Many friends of mine install Linux and are ready for a switch. I think within the next 8 month we will see huge progress.
What I think is quite good is that he takes care of other issues such as software patents. Economists are opposed to it, but politicians believe in the lawyers who sell their broken innovation tool. The patent system of today reminds me of Mao: He ordered to make steel in each village, of course steel may be important for industrialisation, but an non-efficient patent system does not make sense, esp. when extended to areas where patents are not common usage.