You don't get it: there is no Linux. There are only projects and distributions. Just like with patents and copyrights (there is no "intellectual property"), you have to separate one from the other and attribute the proper problems to each category.
DirectX? Where the hell did that come from? DirectX is the most proprietary thing that Microsoft has and there is absolutely zero chance of having that ported to GNU/Linux or *BSD. Forget it -- forget you even heard the word "DirectX" because it is not the way of the future. Open standards make developing software cheaper and easier to sell to a variety of platforms... so rather than bitch about not having Microsoft's heroin-like DirectX, you should be looking for ways to sell OpenGL to game developers.
The penguin logo sucks hard, I'll agree. It's beyond lame. The Gnu isn't much better, but it could be salvaged. This is irrelevant though, because logos belong to companies and products. There is no Linux. There is no Linux. There is no Linux. If you want a cool logo, get Red Hat EL or Fedora Core, or Sun JDS or SuSE or even XandrOS.
You are of a dying breed of old marketers who don't understand the new market. I mean no ill will toward you, but you're the kind of person who is causing harm to the Free Software world by treating "Linux" as some kind of product when in reality it's a set of other people's personal projects assembled in a variety of creative and useful ways. If you want to market something, pick a distribution and run with it... or better yet, if you want to go proprietary take the FreeBSD source code and ad all kinds of amazing features, extensions, plugins, a customized GUI and sell it under $100 for x86 machines and give Apple and Microsoft a run for their money at the same time.
Yes, the spokespeople aren't perfect. RMS is a brilliant man with no regard for image. Linus is a brilliant man with no regard for tact (see the Tanenbaum Minix flamewar with LT for an example of how much of a dick Linus can apparently be). ESR... most people I know are wondering why he is a spokesman in the first place. He's more of a sideshow freak than a leader of programmers. Theo from the OpenBSD project is another stellar example of a brilliant man with the social skills of an abused child. But these people were not elected, they didn't climb the corporate ladder to positions of leadership, and they didn't buy their way in. They worked hard and started important projects that turned into very useful software tools (with the exception of ESR, whose projects couldn't match those of any of the others in this list) that are used every day in the operation of important networks and other systems. They are the leaders because they did the inital work (the hardest work) and the projects belong to them.
Their projects are theirs, not some company's... if they want to use a lame logo and act like assholes, the worst that can happen is a fork. There is no Linux; these people are not on the payroll at Linux Inc and they don't have to answer to shareholders, give press conferences, engage in anticompetitive or unscrupulous practices or lie about earnings.
Your advice is interesting but not useful. If you want to help the Free Software community your best bet is to work on software, help people on lists and in forums, or write documentation. This is one thing in the Universe that gains nothing by talking and advice. You either do or you watch.
Lastly, the kinds of things you said people think about "Linux" and Microsoft are silly. Anyone who subscribes to the uneducated opinions of the feebly tutored, strongly traditioned folk-mind with its predilection for guess and fantasy and faith and its ability to generate rumor and hearsay based on fears and hopes... anyone who listens to these opinions and gives them credence, is wasting their time. It's an exercise in futility. You can't educate people with marketing; you educate them with experience -- positive experience. You give them Knoppix and show them what they can do with it, you show them
The processor itself can run both 32-bit and 64-bit code, but FreeBSD cannot at present. Yesterday a rather messy hack was posted to the AMD64/FreeBSD list that adds a basic level of 32-bit compatibility, but I haven't tried it out yet. The problem is in the libs, not in the 32-bit program binaries, from what I understand.
You could run 32-bit and 64-bit binaries side by side on the same OS in theory, and eventually this will be possible. However the only advantage would be full backwards compatibility... 32-bit binaries will not get the same level of performance as 64-bit binaries, as seen in the oggenc tests. In most cases there isn't much that has to be changed to move 32-bit code to 64-bit with the AMD64 ISA.
Yet another review that doesn't test in 64-bit mode.
I don't know why this wasn't deemed Slashdot-worthy, but here's an excellent review of a P4 3.2E versus an Athlon 64 3200+ in both 32-bit *AND* 64-bit mode:
Apple won't send G5s to people who intend to benchmark against other computers. I know because I've talked to their PR department. They don't want to lose any benchmark tests.
Next time I won't mention that part of my testing.
Well you can trust my site, of course it's me telling you this, so I don't know if that invalidates the recommendation.
I created The Jem Report as a safe haven for people who want to learn more about computers. I was so dissatisfied with the crappy reviews I saw on other sites that I felt I could do better writing my own. I also wanted to have forums that weren't regularly trolled and flamed by people who didn't hold themselves accountable for their own words.
I don't know if it's a "success" by any particular standard, but I think it does well. I have fun writing articles and people seem to get a lot of good information from them.
Amazing. Every single post above this one should be modded off-topic. If someone asks a question about how to do something with GNU/Linux, it's ridiculous that there have to be 50 Mac switch commercials before someone posts anything resembling an answer to the question.
Maybe this phone can replace the iPod, being that you can receive phone calls on it as well. I wonder how many songs it can hold and what the interface is like for playing music?
If I'm going to spend hundreds of dollars on a little electronic gadget, I'd like it to do more than just play MP3s. This device might get me to spend that kind of money... and I don't have to be embarrased by an Apple logo on it.
Remember a few weeks ago when the Win2000 source was leaked? Microsoft went balls-to-the-wall to crack down on its distribution over P2P networks and other means. If it has the capability to do this, why hasn't it cracked down on the illegal distribution of binary copies of Windows an Office? That's the big question, and until it remains without a reasonable answer, my guess is that Microsoft doesn't care about home user piracy because it encourages upgrade sales down the road and increases its installed base.
The big recyclying company around here used to run TV and radio ads that explained how much money the fines were for illegal computer dumping. Then of course they'd play the happy elevator music and the announcer would sound heroic and tell the listener/viewer about how they can save you and your company the cost of these fines by properly disposing of your old computer equipment. It cost a lot, too -- $50 per unit, I think -- but the company played it off like you were saving money because of the potential fine.
In some states it's illegal to throw a PC or monitor into the garbage. I know in the county I live in there is a fine for dumping computer equipment because of the heavy metals and other hazmats involved, but I've never heard of anyone being arrested or fined or anything for it. There are companies that specialize in proper disposal, but of course it costs you money.
So anyway, even if natural resources don't mean shit to you and you don't want to sound like some save-the-world-with-idealism, tree-hugging liberal, it's a good idea to recycle machines for reasons other than politics. Aside from dumping laws, there is always someone you know that could use an older machine. Or you can donate it to the VOA or Goodwill for a tax credit.
I hope you'll pardon me for saying so, but if you felt "misled" after reading that article then you may have a reading comprehension problem. Whether you do or not, failing to recognize that it is fundamentally wrong for a corporation or individual to attempt to silence a free voice on the Internet is the reason why you got flamed so hard.
The vocal majority is that way for a good reason. If you find that you have differing or opposing opinions, you should ask yourself why. If you truly feel you're correct in your assent, then you'll have to be eloquent and state your opinion clearly and offer a reasonable and detailed explanation why you're on the other side. If you can't do that, you will face the wrath of the vocal majority.
It is never right for someone to threaten a media outlet because they don't like what a writer has to say. HardOCP was 100% correct in refusing to remove the letter and 100% correct in offering to fix any factual errors. There being none, there should be no cause for dispute.
As for your home address... if someone on the Internet really wants to find where you live, they can. Over one million people in the Rochester metro area can find my address and phone number from the phone book that is issued to everyone who has a land line. No one's up in arms about that, are they? You can get lots of people's names, addresses and phone numbers just by searching publicly available tools or by looking up the owner of a domain.
Personally, I'm glad you got flamed; you deserve it if you spoke out against HardOCP in this issue. As an Internet journalist and writer I think it's of extreme importance that everyone recognize that HardOCP is in the right in this matter according to the facts as they have been presented, and that Infinium Labs was appallingly wrong for doing what they did.
Stress is a human condition, an emotion. A computer does not cause this; only a human being can generate, maintain or eliminate its own stress. You have completely missed my point. The only way a computer could cause stress is if it emits a signal or a wave of some kind which stimulates a stressful reaction in people. All other considerations are totally irrelevant to the question of computers and stress.
There are myriad environmental, social, cultural, societal and psychological factors that are involved with the question. The poster does not seem ready to consider these factors; he simply wants a yes or no answer to make a theory fit a result. This is the problem with "studies" based on dubious research. Reminds me of the old joke that says cancer research has been found to cause cancer in lab rats.
You *could* make sweeping generalizations about something that is ridiculous, but don't expect reasonably intelligent people to accept your statements, theories, or hypotheses. Pseudointellectualism may impress your friends, but it doesn't hold water with critical thinkers and people who actually value solid reasoning.
You cannot rightfully make a broad, sweeping generalization about stress and computers because of the limitless range of their uses and functions. For most Slashdotters and geeks, computers are a hobby and a way to relieve stress. For secretaries, journalists and others who depend on computers solely for work, computers can be a source of horrible stress.
Many people play games on their computer to relieve stress. Others find new stress by trying to get their computer adjusted so that it can play games.
Computers have introduced a new kind of tool to the human race; one that can be used for a broader range of applications (in the old sense) than anything that came before them. Computers do not cause stress; people cause stress for themselves or allow outside forces to enhance or reduce their stress. To blame a machine as a source of stress is as stupid as blaming your dinner for a lack of taste.
Vested does not mean hidden in any sense. Often it means clothed, but in the context of the referenced post it means "Not in a state of contingency or suspension; fixed." Or at least that's what the dictionary says...
A paid subscription site, eh? Information should always be free, especially if it's useful. In this instance I question the usefulness of this article because it doesn't offer a better solution.
I'm glad I didn't pay for this article. I looked at some of the other Salon articles that were recommended at the end, and they were so rife with over-descriptive, drippy purple prose that it made my teeth hurt. This is really bad writing by people who think that they're really good writers. Bad writing affects me physically; I will never return to salon.com and I'm sure it's no skin off their nose.
But back to the topic... honestly, isn't it obvious that "free" phone support is useless? This is nothing new; it's been this way since the dawn of tech support. Even some of the paid support is useless unless you're on a premium support contract with someone big like IBM, Sun, or HP. In those instances you end up with skilled technicans who know what they're doing and in appropriate circumstances have access to service manuals and other important tools that you can't get to otherwise.
For home users, nothing beats community support. All of us here should know that already, and we should be passing this knowledge (along with links to good forums and lists) to those who don't know.
-Jem
I can't help but think that this is just a way of keeping hardware development going at ATI. Video cards don't need to be faster than they already are in the midrange and top end. It looks to me like an excuse to sell something different... much like the recent Adobe and Macromedia "upgrades."
$892 per system... but you're talking about hardware and software that will be working until it dies or is completely replaced by a new fleet of systems. To begin with, GNU/Linux (especially SuSE) brings new life to old machines because it works better with older hardware than Windows does. One deciding factor for this choice may have been that Windows XP doesn't support some of their current machines whereas SuSE does. So $892 may have to pay for a whole new computer, OS, and Office license.
While we're on the subject of licensing, let me remind you that the MS EULA prohibits you from doing everything except using the software on a limited basis. If you lose the license sticker or CD, that license becomes effectively invalid and you are unable to legally reinstall it. I don't know what the penalty in Germany is, but in the US it's $150,000 plus the cost of the license in question -- and prayer for no criminal charges, which are $200,000 plus five years in prison.
Lastly, Microsoft forced this upgrade on them with their bullshit licensing. They bullied Munich into an upgrade -- why would anyone stick with a company that attempts to force you to pay them for unnecessary upgrades? The article says that some machines were still using Windows 3.1, meaning they had no need for anything above that and in all liklihood (as mentioned above) they would not be able to upgrade to WinXP.
Windows really isn't a very good solution for a business environment. The only value it has is in third-party software support, which has nothing to do with Microsoft (outside of MS Office and VB).
This was modded Insightful but it really should be a troll... but anyway, here's a cautious response:
With an OSS solution you don't have to pay to have the software built; it is already built. If it needs to be customized at the code level, it can be done and yes it can be done cheaply. The alternative is to write a proprietary app from the ground up, which takes forever, has lousy support options, and costs a fortune.
Or go with a premade proprietary solution. If it needs to be customized at the code level, it can't be. If it has bugs that need to be fixed, you have to beg and threaten to even be heard and unless you're really rich and powerful, they won't listen to you. If there's a security flaw you will be at the mercy of a company that you have no control over, and they are under no obligation to provide a fix for it.
The real question is, why would anyone choose a proprietary solution in a business where software runs the company?
Free Software can be used without restriction, and may be cheaply modified to fit your specific needs.
Open-Source Software is more secure because there are more people reviewing it. In some cases, like OpenBSD, there are regular audits to check for vulnerabilities. There are no viruses to speak of, especially email-bourne viruses.
It's cheaper to use Free/Open-Source Software. Sometimes free of charge.
GNU/Linux and BSD are designed for servers and are built to take greater loads than Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't get it: there is no Linux. There are only projects and distributions. Just like with patents and copyrights (there is no "intellectual property"), you have to separate one from the other and attribute the proper problems to each category.
DirectX? Where the hell did that come from? DirectX is the most proprietary thing that Microsoft has and there is absolutely zero chance of having that ported to GNU/Linux or *BSD. Forget it -- forget you even heard the word "DirectX" because it is not the way of the future. Open standards make developing software cheaper and easier to sell to a variety of platforms... so rather than bitch about not having Microsoft's heroin-like DirectX, you should be looking for ways to sell OpenGL to game developers.
The penguin logo sucks hard, I'll agree. It's beyond lame. The Gnu isn't much better, but it could be salvaged. This is irrelevant though, because logos belong to companies and products. There is no Linux. There is no Linux. There is no Linux. If you want a cool logo, get Red Hat EL or Fedora Core, or Sun JDS or SuSE or even XandrOS.
You are of a dying breed of old marketers who don't understand the new market. I mean no ill will toward you, but you're the kind of person who is causing harm to the Free Software world by treating "Linux" as some kind of product when in reality it's a set of other people's personal projects assembled in a variety of creative and useful ways. If you want to market something, pick a distribution and run with it... or better yet, if you want to go proprietary take the FreeBSD source code and ad all kinds of amazing features, extensions, plugins, a customized GUI and sell it under $100 for x86 machines and give Apple and Microsoft a run for their money at the same time.
Yes, the spokespeople aren't perfect. RMS is a brilliant man with no regard for image. Linus is a brilliant man with no regard for tact (see the Tanenbaum Minix flamewar with LT for an example of how much of a dick Linus can apparently be). ESR... most people I know are wondering why he is a spokesman in the first place. He's more of a sideshow freak than a leader of programmers. Theo from the OpenBSD project is another stellar example of a brilliant man with the social skills of an abused child. But these people were not elected, they didn't climb the corporate ladder to positions of leadership, and they didn't buy their way in. They worked hard and started important projects that turned into very useful software tools (with the exception of ESR, whose projects couldn't match those of any of the others in this list) that are used every day in the operation of important networks and other systems. They are the leaders because they did the inital work (the hardest work) and the projects belong to them.
Their projects are theirs, not some company's... if they want to use a lame logo and act like assholes, the worst that can happen is a fork. There is no Linux; these people are not on the payroll at Linux Inc and they don't have to answer to shareholders, give press conferences, engage in anticompetitive or unscrupulous practices or lie about earnings.
Your advice is interesting but not useful. If you want to help the Free Software community your best bet is to work on software, help people on lists and in forums, or write documentation. This is one thing in the Universe that gains nothing by talking and advice. You either do or you watch.
Lastly, the kinds of things you said people think about "Linux" and Microsoft are silly. Anyone who subscribes to the uneducated opinions of the feebly tutored, strongly traditioned folk-mind with its predilection for guess and fantasy and faith and its ability to generate rumor and hearsay based on fears and hopes... anyone who listens to these opinions and gives them credence, is wasting their time. It's an exercise in futility. You can't educate people with marketing; you educate them with experience -- positive experience. You give them Knoppix and show them what they can do with it, you show them
Well Jim's been dead for more than thirty years... Robby, Ray, and John are still around though. They don't play much anymore.
Or were you talking about ports to games on old Amiga BBSes?
-JemHere's the story.
Didn't find any pictures though.
-JemThe processor itself can run both 32-bit and 64-bit code, but FreeBSD cannot at present. Yesterday a rather messy hack was posted to the AMD64/FreeBSD list that adds a basic level of 32-bit compatibility, but I haven't tried it out yet. The problem is in the libs, not in the 32-bit program binaries, from what I understand.
You could run 32-bit and 64-bit binaries side by side on the same OS in theory, and eventually this will be possible. However the only advantage would be full backwards compatibility... 32-bit binaries will not get the same level of performance as 64-bit binaries, as seen in the oggenc tests. In most cases there isn't much that has to be changed to move 32-bit code to 64-bit with the AMD64 ISA.
-JemYet another review that doesn't test in 64-bit mode.
I don't know why this wasn't deemed Slashdot-worthy, but here's an excellent review of a P4 3.2E versus an Athlon 64 3200+ in both 32-bit *AND* 64-bit mode:
AMD64 vs. i386 in FreeBSD
-JemApple won't send G5s to people who intend to benchmark against other computers. I know because I've talked to their PR department. They don't want to lose any benchmark tests.
Next time I won't mention that part of my testing.
-JemWell you can trust my site, of course it's me telling you this, so I don't know if that invalidates the recommendation.
I created The Jem Report as a safe haven for people who want to learn more about computers. I was so dissatisfied with the crappy reviews I saw on other sites that I felt I could do better writing my own. I also wanted to have forums that weren't regularly trolled and flamed by people who didn't hold themselves accountable for their own words.
I don't know if it's a "success" by any particular standard, but I think it does well. I have fun writing articles and people seem to get a lot of good information from them.
-JemAmazing. Every single post above this one should be modded off-topic. If someone asks a question about how to do something with GNU/Linux, it's ridiculous that there have to be 50 Mac switch commercials before someone posts anything resembling an answer to the question.
The next one below this is good too...
-JemMaybe this phone can replace the iPod, being that you can receive phone calls on it as well. I wonder how many songs it can hold and what the interface is like for playing music?
If I'm going to spend hundreds of dollars on a little electronic gadget, I'd like it to do more than just play MP3s. This device might get me to spend that kind of money... and I don't have to be embarrased by an Apple logo on it.
-JemMicrosoft may turn a blind eye to home user "piracy." I recently wrote an article on this:
HereRemember a few weeks ago when the Win2000 source was leaked? Microsoft went balls-to-the-wall to crack down on its distribution over P2P networks and other means. If it has the capability to do this, why hasn't it cracked down on the illegal distribution of binary copies of Windows an Office? That's the big question, and until it remains without a reasonable answer, my guess is that Microsoft doesn't care about home user piracy because it encourages upgrade sales down the road and increases its installed base.
-JemThe big recyclying company around here used to run TV and radio ads that explained how much money the fines were for illegal computer dumping. Then of course they'd play the happy elevator music and the announcer would sound heroic and tell the listener/viewer about how they can save you and your company the cost of these fines by properly disposing of your old computer equipment. It cost a lot, too -- $50 per unit, I think -- but the company played it off like you were saving money because of the potential fine.
Sometimes I really hate capitalism.
-JemIn some states it's illegal to throw a PC or monitor into the garbage. I know in the county I live in there is a fine for dumping computer equipment because of the heavy metals and other hazmats involved, but I've never heard of anyone being arrested or fined or anything for it. There are companies that specialize in proper disposal, but of course it costs you money.
So anyway, even if natural resources don't mean shit to you and you don't want to sound like some save-the-world-with-idealism, tree-hugging liberal, it's a good idea to recycle machines for reasons other than politics. Aside from dumping laws, there is always someone you know that could use an older machine. Or you can donate it to the VOA or Goodwill for a tax credit.
-JemAnd you're not on the forums on The Jem Report? For shame!
But yeah, it is a little odd finding locals on the wide world of Slashdot, isn't it?
-JemI hope you'll pardon me for saying so, but if you felt "misled" after reading that article then you may have a reading comprehension problem. Whether you do or not, failing to recognize that it is fundamentally wrong for a corporation or individual to attempt to silence a free voice on the Internet is the reason why you got flamed so hard.
The vocal majority is that way for a good reason. If you find that you have differing or opposing opinions, you should ask yourself why. If you truly feel you're correct in your assent, then you'll have to be eloquent and state your opinion clearly and offer a reasonable and detailed explanation why you're on the other side. If you can't do that, you will face the wrath of the vocal majority.
It is never right for someone to threaten a media outlet because they don't like what a writer has to say. HardOCP was 100% correct in refusing to remove the letter and 100% correct in offering to fix any factual errors. There being none, there should be no cause for dispute.
As for your home address... if someone on the Internet really wants to find where you live, they can. Over one million people in the Rochester metro area can find my address and phone number from the phone book that is issued to everyone who has a land line. No one's up in arms about that, are they? You can get lots of people's names, addresses and phone numbers just by searching publicly available tools or by looking up the owner of a domain.
Personally, I'm glad you got flamed; you deserve it if you spoke out against HardOCP in this issue. As an Internet journalist and writer I think it's of extreme importance that everyone recognize that HardOCP is in the right in this matter according to the facts as they have been presented, and that Infinium Labs was appallingly wrong for doing what they did.
-JemStress is a human condition, an emotion. A computer does not cause this; only a human being can generate, maintain or eliminate its own stress. You have completely missed my point. The only way a computer could cause stress is if it emits a signal or a wave of some kind which stimulates a stressful reaction in people. All other considerations are totally irrelevant to the question of computers and stress.
There are myriad environmental, social, cultural, societal and psychological factors that are involved with the question. The poster does not seem ready to consider these factors; he simply wants a yes or no answer to make a theory fit a result. This is the problem with "studies" based on dubious research. Reminds me of the old joke that says cancer research has been found to cause cancer in lab rats.
You *could* make sweeping generalizations about something that is ridiculous, but don't expect reasonably intelligent people to accept your statements, theories, or hypotheses. Pseudointellectualism may impress your friends, but it doesn't hold water with critical thinkers and people who actually value solid reasoning.
-JemYou cannot rightfully make a broad, sweeping generalization about stress and computers because of the limitless range of their uses and functions. For most Slashdotters and geeks, computers are a hobby and a way to relieve stress. For secretaries, journalists and others who depend on computers solely for work, computers can be a source of horrible stress.
Many people play games on their computer to relieve stress. Others find new stress by trying to get their computer adjusted so that it can play games.
Computers have introduced a new kind of tool to the human race; one that can be used for a broader range of applications (in the old sense) than anything that came before them. Computers do not cause stress; people cause stress for themselves or allow outside forces to enhance or reduce their stress. To blame a machine as a source of stress is as stupid as blaming your dinner for a lack of taste.
-JemVested does not mean hidden in any sense. Often it means clothed, but in the context of the referenced post it means "Not in a state of contingency or suspension; fixed." Or at least that's what the dictionary says...
-Jem
A paid subscription site, eh? Information should always be free, especially if it's useful. In this instance I question the usefulness of this article because it doesn't offer a better solution. I'm glad I didn't pay for this article. I looked at some of the other Salon articles that were recommended at the end, and they were so rife with over-descriptive, drippy purple prose that it made my teeth hurt. This is really bad writing by people who think that they're really good writers. Bad writing affects me physically; I will never return to salon.com and I'm sure it's no skin off their nose. But back to the topic... honestly, isn't it obvious that "free" phone support is useless? This is nothing new; it's been this way since the dawn of tech support. Even some of the paid support is useless unless you're on a premium support contract with someone big like IBM, Sun, or HP. In those instances you end up with skilled technicans who know what they're doing and in appropriate circumstances have access to service manuals and other important tools that you can't get to otherwise. For home users, nothing beats community support. All of us here should know that already, and we should be passing this knowledge (along with links to good forums and lists) to those who don't know. -Jem
I'll save the poster the effort of finding out with an RC helicopter: Area 51 is a tinfoil hat production facility.
-Jem
why Microsoft isn't so rabid about stopping the spread of Windows XP and 2000 ISOs on filesharing services...
-Jem
I can't help but think that this is just a way of keeping hardware development going at ATI. Video cards don't need to be faster than they already are in the midrange and top end. It looks to me like an excuse to sell something different... much like the recent Adobe and Macromedia "upgrades."
-Jem$892 per system... but you're talking about hardware and software that will be working until it dies or is completely replaced by a new fleet of systems. To begin with, GNU/Linux (especially SuSE) brings new life to old machines because it works better with older hardware than Windows does. One deciding factor for this choice may have been that Windows XP doesn't support some of their current machines whereas SuSE does. So $892 may have to pay for a whole new computer, OS, and Office license.
While we're on the subject of licensing, let me remind you that the MS EULA prohibits you from doing everything except using the software on a limited basis. If you lose the license sticker or CD, that license becomes effectively invalid and you are unable to legally reinstall it. I don't know what the penalty in Germany is, but in the US it's $150,000 plus the cost of the license in question -- and prayer for no criminal charges, which are $200,000 plus five years in prison.
Lastly, Microsoft forced this upgrade on them with their bullshit licensing. They bullied Munich into an upgrade -- why would anyone stick with a company that attempts to force you to pay them for unnecessary upgrades? The article says that some machines were still using Windows 3.1, meaning they had no need for anything above that and in all liklihood (as mentioned above) they would not be able to upgrade to WinXP.
Windows really isn't a very good solution for a business environment. The only value it has is in third-party software support, which has nothing to do with Microsoft (outside of MS Office and VB).
-JemThis was modded Insightful but it really should be a troll... but anyway, here's a cautious response:
With an OSS solution you don't have to pay to have the software built; it is already built. If it needs to be customized at the code level, it can be done and yes it can be done cheaply. The alternative is to write a proprietary app from the ground up, which takes forever, has lousy support options, and costs a fortune.
Or go with a premade proprietary solution. If it needs to be customized at the code level, it can't be. If it has bugs that need to be fixed, you have to beg and threaten to even be heard and unless you're really rich and powerful, they won't listen to you. If there's a security flaw you will be at the mercy of a company that you have no control over, and they are under no obligation to provide a fix for it.
The real question is, why would anyone choose a proprietary solution in a business where software runs the company?
-JemHow's that for a start?
-JemIf Mozilla gets slow after a while, it's usually an IPv6 problem. Turn of IPv6 and you should be okay. Well, in Mozilla anyway...
-Jem