You people venture in areas outside the topic. Nobody is talking about price elasticity or saving money by producing the goods in China.
Please stay on topic with the assumptions of the issue which is already established. With all due respect, I have been writting carefully and at the elementary-school level, if neither of you wish to take the time to read and understand what has already been admited, then I demand that we cease the conversation.
Please read the assumption more carefully, there is little difficulty.
"If Californians are willing to pay $200 for shoes."
It is already given (by definition) that Californians are willing to pay $200 for shoes. Not $170, and not $120.
My point is that if the customers are willing to pay $200, the shopkeeper will price the shoes at that price.
Why are you confusing irrelvant issues about "how much it cost to make the product." That is so irrelevant! Do you really think the shoes will be marked down cheaper because they were make in China if Californians are willing to pay $200?
( I think it sooo simple, and please read more carefully next time.)
The media cannot just ignore the Calder/SCO story. They get lots of ad reveniew from Microsoft and Sun, and journalist are always on the take. Hey, even the Slashdot editors have SCO on the front page almost every day -- they love the hit count are very willing to hype and overload just for the extra pennies.
They media will not ignore SCO, but you can ignore the media!
( Expect more media FUD after EU approves software patents in this Fall. Much more FUD is planned for the future. We have not seen nothing yet. )
Nonsense. If Californias were willing to pay $200 for shoes, the price of shoes will be $200. Whether the shoes were made in Idaho or India, is of no relevance whatsoever.
You must be kidding. The major advantage of MS Windows over Free operating systems is that it runs plenty more games. Sure there are advantages, but how about the major advantages of Free Software over proprietary systems that nobody (but Microsoft) knows what code it executes and what it does with your data?
To be sure, your claim is ridiculous: the advantages of Windows and its aesthetics polish is of tiny significance compared to the disadvantages that a proprietary lockin -- especially when at the operating-system level? Bad choice.
All Caldera/SCO did was register a copyright, they were not awarded anything. In other words, they walked to a governmetn office, they claimed that they own the copyright, and their statement was stamped and date on the records. That is it, They were not awarded anyting at all!
So please, you being the 1000th person who repeats misleading half-truths from SCO's PR department, please cease to repeat that a copyright was awarded by the government to System V. That is not the case at all. I can get a the government "award me" the rights to System V tomorrow, it I sent them $30 dollars; and I am confident, hundreds of other people might have received the same "award" to System V already.
No, not really. Considering that the vast majority of of Windows are pre-installed, you should expect a lot more Linux (retail) sales in order to arrive to 5-10% market share. A lot more.
Most of Eric's serious work involved writing HOWTO's, the Jargon File (which he stole form MIT), and the second-half of fetchmail (which he continued from earlier work).
THIS IS NOT SERIOUS WORK FOR ANY PROGRAMMER!
Your serious statement that Eric is "very important to present and future of computer programming", is at best comical.
It seems we keep talking about two differnt topics.
(As for analogies, they are used in literature to illustrate a point, although (unfortunately) today's Americans seem to imply that analogies are valid only when two cases are the same. No two cases are the same; why on earth they expect that from analogies! Analogies are meat to illustrate a point, not to (trivially) prove a point. That is never possible, if TV taught the America public to think of analogies in this way, you are of course excused.)
First, there is no OS product on the market with 90% market share. Most OS Microsoft products are different, it is more like someone having a Nissan '95, someone a Nissan '200, etc,. Second, third parties do make parts for cars, and whether you call it and "upgrade" or "maintenance" lots of people can think of it as one and the same.
The car analogy was meant to illustrate my point, which is that STANDARDS ARE OVERRATED. I never claimed that cars same like computers, that is different topic altogether.
Standards are overrated because if a software company decides to port their game to Red Hat and make lots of money, porting the game also to work of Debian, or SUSE is not a big deal. Sure it is a extra (and minor) expense, but if they expect lots of games to Debian and suse customers, they will not think twice. Sure their could be be corner cases, as there are corner cases in every topic.
And how about supporting the many versions for different platforms? Again, if there is enough profit, like there are for car-parts, nobody particularly cares if some parts have to be slightly different. Same thing at the grocery, some people do not eat meat, some people don't eat fish, and some people eat only vegetables. Still, although the grocery owner would prefer that people eat the same food, they are still happy to sell meat, fish, and vegetables.
Now, don't tell that cars and food are not like computers. You are missing the point entirely.
The main issue is not common standards for Linux. What is of atmost importance to vendors is profit. Standards might be desirable, but it is an issue that can be swallowed.
It is like cars. There are so many model of cars on the market and no stantards: the part that fits is Nissan '95 is not appropriate for a Nissan '98, and definatly not for appropriate for a Honda or Fiat. We have lived without car standards for years, and yet, as long the car industry is making a profit, they dont' particularly care about standards.
> You can go back to your Python program in 6 months and still understand it.
That was one sentense, one sentense of mindless FUD .
My good Sir, if you don't know enough Perl, or that matter any computer or spoken
language that you will not understand six months later, I suggest that you learn
the language better so you can understand later when you need it. It is very
much like saying English is a horrible languge becauce I do not understand it
six months later. Nonesense! The problem is in your skills, not with
the language itself.
It is much like my weak Java, I don't understand what I wrote six months ago.
As for as I know, the few lines of code through which Caldera/SCO claimed that they were injured has been traced to FreeBSD ! Which strongly implies the it was *SCO* who stole the code from Free Software. (After all, what did you expect from these esteemed excecutives?)
GNOME is part of GNU, it is not an outside project. When we say GNU, gnome is already included, and we cannot imply that GNOME is some other contributor. GNU has contributed a lot of things, including GNOME.
There is little you can to defend yourself agaist FUD when SCO and Microsfot dominate the voices of he media. Especially, when they own a good part of the media.
If you really want to help, all you have to do is to fight at the root of the problem. stop using MS Word , damn it! If you are not brave enough to stop using MS products, you are not brave enough to complain.
The future of GNU/Linux depends on what *you*, and it will get damaged according to how *you* choose to live. Why care about the media? For many of us, it is irrelevent whether these English major have posisite or negative opinion about GNU/Linux .
In this case, the childish thing to do is to claim credit for the whole operating system and disegard the giants that came before you. I am afraid it is not childish to claim credit that you earned. It is, however, childish to claim the whole thing as your own.
We can live without Linux, but it is not worth living without GNU and the spirit of Free Software!
Calling the operating system "Linux", also gives more credit than Linus deserves. And because you mentioned examples that (in your opinion) take more credit than they desever, it should also be even more clear that Linus gets all the credit, since there is no "anyone else".
I don't buy it. For too many years, I have programmed and also integrated a lot of stuff. And yet, I don't see any difference between creating a new app or integrating many parts together into an application (or for that matter into a "system", for me they mean the same thing.)
Perhaps I fail to understand what is "creation" and "integration", and to you I appeal. Isn't the act of creating actually an integration, and isn't the act of integration the same as creating? I don't see the difference between these two tasks, when both involve synthesis and "creating".
(Actually, I do understand these buzzwords in the sense that are commonly spoken, but is there a diffence beween these two? No! None.)
So what if Linux people don't switch to Linux because of its anti-business image? Who cares. It is not of great concern if other people do not approve of my life-style or different political views. Again, who cares. (The only people who should care about such things are those who plan to profit from Linux and need more customers. They are the ones who tell you that you *should* care, presumably, for their benefit.)
Hi guys, there is more in life than tracking the Caldera/SCO story minute-by-minute. Most of you already agree that SCO is full of it, then why not behave the way you always do? Like when someone posts on Slashdot wild allegations without evidence, you would moderate SCO as "troll" and that is the end of it.
Slashdot Mirror
People side with their benefit. It will be more
absurd (yes absurd) to be consistent with
an ideology that to be consitent with your
benefit.
topic. Nobody is talking about price elasticity
or saving money by producing the goods in China.
Please stay on topic with the assumptions of
the issue which is already established. With
all due respect, I have been writting carefully
and at the elementary-school level, if neither
of you wish to take the time to read and
understand what has already been admited, then
I demand that we cease the conversation.
Thanks
difficulty.
"If Californians are willing to pay $200 for shoes."
It is already given (by definition) that Californians
are willing to pay $200 for shoes. Not $170, and
not $120.
My point is that if the customers are willing
to pay $200, the shopkeeper will price the
shoes at that price.
Why are you confusing irrelvant issues about
"how much it cost to make the product." That
is so irrelevant! Do you really think the shoes
will be marked down cheaper because they were
make in China if Californians are willing to
pay $200?
( I think it sooo simple, and please read more
carefully next time.)
story. They get lots of ad reveniew from Microsoft
and Sun, and journalist are always on the take. Hey,
even the Slashdot editors have SCO on the
front page almost every day -- they love the
hit count are very willing to hype and overload just for the extra pennies.
They media will not ignore SCO, but you can
ignore the media!
( Expect more media FUD after EU approves
software patents in this Fall. Much more FUD
is planned for the future. We have not seen nothing
yet. )
Nonsense. If Californias were willing to
pay $200 for shoes, the price of shoes will
be $200. Whether the shoes were made in Idaho
or India, is of no relevance whatsoever.
systems is that it runs plenty more games. Sure there are advantages, but
how about the major advantages of Free Software over proprietary systems
that nobody (but Microsoft) knows what code it executes and what it
does with your data?
To be sure, your claim is ridiculous: the advantages of Windows and its
aesthetics polish is of tiny significance compared to the disadvantages
that a proprietary lockin -- especially when at the operating-system level? Bad
choice.
a copyright, they were not awarded anything.
In other words, they walked to a governmetn
office, they claimed that they own the copyright,
and their statement was stamped and date on
the records. That is it, They were not awarded
anyting at all!
So please, you being the 1000th person who
repeats misleading half-truths from SCO's
PR department, please cease to repeat that
a copyright was awarded by the government to
System V. That is not the case at all. I can
get a the government "award me" the rights to
System V tomorrow, it I sent them $30 dollars;
and I am confident, hundreds of other people might have
received the same "award" to System V already.
majority of of Windows are pre-installed, you
should expect a lot more Linux (retail) sales
in order to arrive to 5-10% market share. A
lot more.
essentially saying that we should not rely on
non-free commercial products.
Why is this brilliant? In most cases, this seems
more like common sense.
(which he stole form MIT), and the second-half of fetchmail
(which he continued from earlier work).
THIS IS NOT SERIOUS WORK FOR ANY PROGRAMMER!
Your serious statement that Eric is "very important to present and future of
computer programming", is at best comical.
I must agree, Linux one of the proper solutions
for Afganistan. But do they still have
electicity over there?
topics.
(As for analogies, they are used in literature to illustrate
a point, although (unfortunately) today's
Americans seem to imply that analogies are
valid only when two cases are the same. No
two cases are the same; why on earth they
expect that from analogies! Analogies are meat
to illustrate a point, not to (trivially) prove
a point. That is never possible, if TV taught the America public
to think of analogies in this way, you are of course excused.)
-- screenrc
products are different, it is more like someone having a Nissan '95, someone a Nissan '200,
etc,. Second, third parties do make parts for cars, and whether you call it
and "upgrade" or "maintenance" lots of people can think of it as one and the same.
The car analogy was meant to illustrate my point, which is that STANDARDS ARE OVERRATED.
I never claimed that cars same like computers, that is different topic altogether.
Standards are overrated because if a software company decides to port their game to
Red Hat and make lots of money, porting the game also to work of Debian, or SUSE is not
a big deal. Sure it is a extra (and minor) expense, but if they expect lots of games
to Debian and suse customers, they will not think twice. Sure their could be be
corner cases, as there are corner cases in every topic.
And how about supporting the many versions for different platforms? Again, if
there is enough profit, like there are for car-parts, nobody particularly cares
if some parts have to be slightly different. Same thing at the grocery, some
people do not eat meat, some people don't eat fish, and some people
eat only vegetables. Still, although the grocery owner would prefer that
people eat the same food, they are still happy to sell meat, fish, and vegetables.
Now, don't tell that cars and food are not like computers. You are missing the
point entirely.
Linux. What is of atmost importance to vendors
is profit. Standards might be
desirable, but it is an issue that can be swallowed.
It is like cars. There are so many model of
cars on the market and no stantards: the
part that fits is Nissan '95 is not appropriate
for a Nissan '98, and definatly not for appropriate
for a Honda or Fiat. We have lived without
car standards for years, and yet, as long
the car industry is making a profit, they dont'
particularly care about standards.
long as humans need to eat.
Same logic as yours, but do you really think
farming is a good field to get into? And how about
electicity, textiles, steel, forestry, or shoe-making?
That was one sentense, one sentense of mindless FUD .
My good Sir, if you don't know enough Perl, or that matter any computer or spoken language that you will not understand six months later, I suggest that you learn the language better so you can understand later when you need it. It is very much like saying English is a horrible languge becauce I do not understand it six months later. Nonesense! The problem is in your skills, not with the language itself.
It is much like my weak Java, I don't understand what I wrote six months ago.
As for as I know, the few lines of code through which
Caldera/SCO claimed that they were injured
has been traced to FreeBSD ! Which strongly
implies the it was *SCO* who stole the code from
Free Software. (After all, what did you
expect from these esteemed excecutives?)
GNOME is part of GNU, it is not an outside project.
When we say GNU, gnome is already included, and
we cannot imply that GNOME is some other contributor.
GNU has contributed a lot of things, including GNOME.
agaist FUD when SCO and Microsfot dominate
the voices of he media. Especially, when they
own a good part of the media.
If you really want to help, all you have
to do is to fight at the root of the problem.
stop using MS Word , damn it! If you are not
brave enough to stop using MS products, you
are not brave enough to complain.
The future of GNU/Linux depends on what *you*,
and it will get damaged according to how *you*
choose to live. Why care about the media?
For many of us, it is irrelevent whether these
English major have posisite or negative opinion
about GNU/Linux .
In this case, the childish thing to do is
to claim credit for the whole operating system
and disegard the giants that came before you.
I am afraid it is not childish to claim credit
that you earned. It is, however, childish
to claim the whole thing as your own.
We can live without Linux, but it is not worth
living without GNU and the spirit of Free Software!
Calling the operating system "Linux", also
gives more credit than Linus deserves. And because
you mentioned examples that (in your opinion)
take more credit than they desever, it should
also be even more clear that Linus gets all
the credit, since there is no "anyone else".
programmed and also integrated a lot of stuff.
And yet, I don't see any difference between
creating a new app or integrating many parts
together into an application (or for that matter
into a "system", for me they mean the same thing.)
Perhaps I fail to understand what is "creation" and "integration",
and to you I appeal. Isn't the act of creating
actually an integration, and isn't the act
of integration the same as creating? I don't
see the difference between these two tasks, when
both involve synthesis and "creating".
(Actually, I do understand these buzzwords in
the sense that are commonly spoken, but is there
a diffence beween these two? No! None.)
So what if Linux people don't switch to Linux
because of its anti-business image? Who cares.
It is not of great concern if other people
do not approve of my life-style or different political
views. Again, who cares. (The only people
who should care about such things are those
who plan to profit from Linux and need more
customers. They are the ones who tell you that
you *should* care, presumably, for their benefit.)
lab used a casher-type roller instead of a monitor.
A green monitor was science fiction many years
ago.
I no longer feel young when ohters complain
about 256 colors.
tracking the Caldera/SCO story minute-by-minute.
Most of you already agree that SCO is full
of it, then why not behave the way you always do? Like when someone posts on Slashdot
wild allegations without evidence, you
would moderate SCO as "troll" and that is the end of it.
For God's sake, enough with SCO already!