"What does 64bit mean? Obviously 32 is working for me, why do I need this. Now virus protection, that I need."
Thats why. They don't have to explain what being a 64bit processor means and why they need it, because most people don't, but everyone need virus protection and for the most part they already know that.
I have yet to see a good reason why I should get an A64, beyond the 'dude holy shit its faster then last months model.'
I haven't worked with NDS for a while, so are you simply asking for LDAP authentication or for something more. LDAP auth can be done with nss_ldap or PAM, both of which should work with an existing NDS tree.
It depends on who you talk to. Many GPL advocates will tell you it is more free because of the various restrictions on the usage of the code, ie, how things link to it and if they must be GPL as well, or how you can not use it in a closed app. The BSD license has neither of those restrictions. Often when you say Free Software as opposed to Open Source, the GPL is free, whereas the BSD License is 'merely' Open Source.
One nice thing about silent films is you can talk through them and not miss anything. Personally, I've never seen one in its entirety, but they looked funny at the beginning of the Three Amigos.
Unless you have a very strange and liberal plan, well strange as far as a residential plan goes, this is expressly forbidden in your service agreement. Thats why they'd be pissed, at the very least they would cut off your service.
Your talking about an object less then 500m wide, you send an ICBM or something to it, it shatters into million pieces. Its not going to destroy the world, we might have a nice meteor shower though.
GTK IDE. If I read it right, there is you kdevelop 'alternative' for GTK projects. Though I believe you could do the same thing with kdevelop, so I don't know why you'd need something else, unless you wern't running KDE.
He is a crackpot. He nice and clearly states that you should not choose a system based upon its technical merits alone, but on its confomance to the one trur GNU religion. A computer is a tool, its technical merits are of prime importance and the only one that really matters. He does not live in the real world, he lives in this fantasy where what he says is law. If everything he wants OSS to be, prevent closed apps from running, no binary only drivers and choose to use it even if its complete crap, I will stop using it, it will become completely useless. I'm suprised he didnt advocate using the Hurd for everything.
In 5 or so years he's going to be commited. Not because of free software, but because he's nuts. It just becomes more and more apperent with every interview.
On a more serious note, I doubt it could run the PPC WindowsNT as it would be lacking a few important drivers, but running OS X and Linux side by side would make a very interesting system. It would be nice to see som Xserves in our datacenter here.
What you are saying is that people that are locked in to Exchange now will not be able to EVER migrate off No, I'm saying there is very little business case to move away from a working Exchange solution.
As the article mentions there are people that want to start development of something that will compete with Outlook No, it mentions taking products that exist and extending them, there is a big difference between that and something that doesn't exist at all. Come back when there is something you can show works.
Have you looked at PDA sales lately Have you looked at how many people have PDA's? Do you think they are going to give up on them just because someone said the market for them is dead?
It isn't because Novell and RedHat provide support Unless it is a very small company or a server thats job is unimportant, it is because they got support from someone else
mention developing a whole new app that would be free and based off of an open source model and you and the previous poster attack it and say that given an application that hasen't even been made yet, you wouldn't use it. Exactly, it doesn't exist, you't be starting from scratch. How long did it take for Linux to be useable? If you started writing right now, you might have a working product in 3 years given the size of this project, untill then, your right I would never consider using it, its not an option.
it MUST do every proprietary thing that you want or it will not replace your current proprietary environment If I'm going to go through all the trouble of migrating to something else, your damn right it better *at least* do everything the previous software did, what would be the point otherwise.
I come up with an app that would do 100% of what you want and would free you from the HUGE cost of working with proprietary software and you attack it site unseen (and attack me). Again I ask who is the zealot? Everything I said is based upon existing reality. Again, it would take years before this theoretical app would be useable therefore it is no solution. Do you really want me to answer 'who is the zealot?'
1. No exchange compatability - Yep you are correct, but you could move off of exchange to a FREE server environment. If it is as good and it is FREE then you don't have to worry about CALs any more. Never going to happen. Ok not quite never, but saying its open source, that it will spend a huge X number of dollars to migrate everything that already works, train everyone on a new client, retrain or hire all new admins and that its going to take at least 2 years (Wild pulled-out-of-my-ass-number) to have all the major bugs worked out is not going to inspire decision makers to approve the migration. Don't change things for the sake of changing.
2. No calandar sharing - You would have this.
3. No contact sharing - You would have this. Since the chances of deploying this theoretical OSS Exchange clone is next to 0, these features will not exist.
4. No sharepoint integration - Heh, you are kidding correct? Why didn't you say no Websphere integration? sharepoint is a content management solution. There are free cms solutions like opencms that are as good and they are FREE. Again you would not have the HUGE expense that is sharepoint. No we wern't kidding, some of us live in the real world. A version of Sharepoint is included in W2k3 and a number of companies are using it, again, don't change for the sake of changing or religious reasons.
5. No office integration Your solution is again based upon a software product that does not exist.
6. no PocketPC syncing- Um I hate to be the one to tell you this but PDA's are dead Your full of crap. Plenty of people continue to use what works for them
You seem to have a problem with reality. Companies will not change because you told them this new app is OSS, they don't care. They want what works with minimum fuss. Exchange/Outlook works, there are clear upgrade paths, and it plugs in nicely with other MS business apps, Sharepoint being the one that comes up most in this disscussion. Sharepoint is included with Windows 2003 unless you need these super-wow options, then you license the next version up. Very few OSS projects are useable in a corperate invironment for several years, so no for most things there is no free version that is comparable. On top of that, its only free if you never need support. In the real world, that support gets used, so now in addition to the huge up front cost of migrating, you have the costs of support.
your arguments are exactly the same arguments people used to defent IBM in the 80's and early 90's Yours are of an out of work zealot that seems to have forgotten how things really work and is making decisions based upon the religion of the holy GPL. As soon as you based everything upon developing a whole new app, it became infeasable.
Exactly what have they done that NASA hasn't? I seem to recall that the Murcury Missions did exactly what SS1 did, but about 40 years ago. Well, ok, the Murcury capsules were not reusable.
Each of those was intended to become a standard at a time when there was no existing one. Right now however, for desktops Windows is the undisputed standard. So yes, I would say that it is ridiculous to speculate that Sony would create their own OS now.
This is hardly a stunt lawsuit. The person in question undoubtedly signed an NDA and now he has broken it. Ya there are too many lawsuits going on but you might want to pick which one you whine about next time. On top of that Apple is about as innovative as a Desktop computer company gets, exactly what are you whining about there?
Slashdot Mirror
I went from a 486 to a Sempron 2500+. Unfortunatly the artical doesn't go back far enough so I can't tell if it was worth it.
Speak for yourself, None of my systems have contracted one.
That wouldn't take into account the human factor in spreading these, that being the cluelessness of the average user, or complacency of an admin.
"What does 64bit mean? Obviously 32 is working for me, why do I need this. Now virus protection, that I need."
Thats why. They don't have to explain what being a 64bit processor means and why they need it, because most people don't, but everyone need virus protection and for the most part they already know that.
I have yet to see a good reason why I should get an A64, beyond the 'dude holy shit its faster then last months model.'
I haven't worked with NDS for a while, so are you simply asking for LDAP authentication or for something more. LDAP auth can be done with nss_ldap or PAM, both of which should work with an existing NDS tree.
It depends on who you talk to. Many GPL advocates will tell you it is more free because of the various restrictions on the usage of the code, ie, how things link to it and if they must be GPL as well, or how you can not use it in a closed app. The BSD license has neither of those restrictions. Often when you say Free Software as opposed to Open Source, the GPL is free, whereas the BSD License is 'merely' Open Source.
One nice thing about silent films is you can talk through them and not miss anything. Personally, I've never seen one in its entirety, but they looked funny at the beginning of the Three Amigos.
Well there would also be the matter of running a business from your home. You would still need to deal with those legal requirements.
Unless you have a very strange and liberal plan, well strange as far as a residential plan goes, this is expressly forbidden in your service agreement. Thats why they'd be pissed, at the very least they would cut off your service.
I think he had already hit the GlÃgg pretty good when they named this one.
Your talking about an object less then 500m wide, you send an ICBM or something to it, it shatters into million pieces. Its not going to destroy the world, we might have a nice meteor shower though.
GTK IDE. If I read it right, there is you kdevelop 'alternative' for GTK projects. Though I believe you could do the same thing with kdevelop, so I don't know why you'd need something else, unless you wern't running KDE.
He is a crackpot. He nice and clearly states that you should not choose a system based upon its technical merits alone, but on its confomance to the one trur GNU religion. A computer is a tool, its technical merits are of prime importance and the only one that really matters. He does not live in the real world, he lives in this fantasy where what he says is law. If everything he wants OSS to be, prevent closed apps from running, no binary only drivers and choose to use it even if its complete crap, I will stop using it, it will become completely useless. I'm suprised he didnt advocate using the Hurd for everything.
In 5 or so years he's going to be commited. Not because of free software, but because he's nuts. It just becomes more and more apperent with every interview.
Maybe the performance of an Xserve with one of these updated G5's will kick ass, so why wouldn't I get something like that.
Apple once made a Network Server that ran AIX.
You've never run multiple machines have you.
But it sounded really interesting.
On a more serious note, I doubt it could run the PPC WindowsNT as it would be lacking a few important drivers, but running OS X and Linux side by side would make a very interesting system. It would be nice to see som Xserves in our datacenter here.
What if you have a dynamic IP?
What you are saying is that people that are locked in to Exchange now will not be able to EVER migrate off
No, I'm saying there is very little business case to move away from a working Exchange solution.
As the article mentions there are people that want to start development of something that will compete with Outlook
No, it mentions taking products that exist and extending them, there is a big difference between that and something that doesn't exist at all. Come back when there is something you can show works.
Have you looked at PDA sales lately
Have you looked at how many people have PDA's? Do you think they are going to give up on them just because someone said the market for them is dead?
It isn't because Novell and RedHat provide support
Unless it is a very small company or a server thats job is unimportant, it is because they got support from someone else
mention developing a whole new app that would be free and based off of an open source model and you and the previous poster attack it and say that given an application that hasen't even been made yet, you wouldn't use it.
Exactly, it doesn't exist, you't be starting from scratch. How long did it take for Linux to be useable? If you started writing right now, you might have a working product in 3 years given the size of this project, untill then, your right I would never consider using it, its not an option.
it MUST do every proprietary thing that you want or it will not replace your current proprietary environment
If I'm going to go through all the trouble of migrating to something else, your damn right it better *at least* do everything the previous software did, what would be the point otherwise.
I come up with an app that would do 100% of what you want and would free you from the HUGE cost of working with proprietary software and you attack it site unseen (and attack me). Again I ask who is the zealot?
Everything I said is based upon existing reality. Again, it would take years before this theoretical app would be useable therefore it is no solution. Do you really want me to answer 'who is the zealot?'
and attack me
Well I had to attack someone.
1. No exchange compatability - Yep you are correct, but you could move off of exchange to a FREE server environment. If it is as good and it is FREE then you don't have to worry about CALs any more.
Never going to happen. Ok not quite never, but saying its open source, that it will spend a huge X number of dollars to migrate everything that already works, train everyone on a new client, retrain or hire all new admins and that its going to take at least 2 years (Wild pulled-out-of-my-ass-number) to have all the major bugs worked out is not going to inspire decision makers to approve the migration. Don't change things for the sake of changing.
2. No calandar sharing - You would have this.
3. No contact sharing - You would have this.
Since the chances of deploying this theoretical OSS Exchange clone is next to 0, these features will not exist.
4. No sharepoint integration - Heh, you are kidding correct? Why didn't you say no Websphere integration? sharepoint is a content management solution. There are free cms solutions like opencms that are as good and they are FREE. Again you would not have the HUGE expense that is sharepoint.
No we wern't kidding, some of us live in the real world. A version of Sharepoint is included in W2k3 and a number of companies are using it, again, don't change for the sake of changing or religious reasons.
5. No office integration
Your solution is again based upon a software product that does not exist.
6. no PocketPC syncing- Um I hate to be the one to tell you this but PDA's are dead
Your full of crap. Plenty of people continue to use what works for them
You seem to have a problem with reality. Companies will not change because you told them this new app is OSS, they don't care. They want what works with minimum fuss. Exchange/Outlook works, there are clear upgrade paths, and it plugs in nicely with other MS business apps, Sharepoint being the one that comes up most in this disscussion. Sharepoint is included with Windows 2003 unless you need these super-wow options, then you license the next version up. Very few OSS projects are useable in a corperate invironment for several years, so no for most things there is no free version that is comparable. On top of that, its only free if you never need support. In the real world, that support gets used, so now in addition to the huge up front cost of migrating, you have the costs of support.
your arguments are exactly the same arguments people used to defent IBM in the 80's and early 90's
Yours are of an out of work zealot that seems to have forgotten how things really work and is making decisions based upon the religion of the holy GPL. As soon as you based everything upon developing a whole new app, it became infeasable.
Exactly what have they done that NASA hasn't? I seem to recall that the Murcury Missions did exactly what SS1 did, but about 40 years ago. Well, ok, the Murcury capsules were not reusable.
I'm Shocked, SHOCKED! Well not that shocked.
Each of those was intended to become a standard at a time when there was no existing one. Right now however, for desktops Windows is the undisputed standard. So yes, I would say that it is ridiculous to speculate that Sony would create their own OS now.
This is hardly a stunt lawsuit. The person in question undoubtedly signed an NDA and now he has broken it. Ya there are too many lawsuits going on but you might want to pick which one you whine about next time. On top of that Apple is about as innovative as a Desktop computer company gets, exactly what are you whining about there?
Oh excuse me
Warning: The following post requires Humour 2.1 or higher
Was that review English?