That is a terrible argument. My thoughts are rational. I have control over whether or not I starve. I do not have control over whether or not some towel head flys a plane or drives a car bomb into my place of work. I know there is a greater chance of the government taking my money for something I do not believe in then a company taking my money for a product I do not want to buy.
I am rational, I am looking at the government to protect me from problems I cannot solve as an individual, nothing more.
I solved the gas problem by moving closer to my place of work, switching to a 4 day work week, etc.
I solved my health care problem by opening a health savings account for myself and my wife. I spend less for top of the line healthcare then I do in taxes and I am the diabetec Type I Democrats always talk about wanting to help. Do me a favor please, I beg of you "Don't help me pay for my insulin supplies. Free health care is simply to expensive for me."
I solved my food and shelter problems by getting a job and living within my means. Eating at home and moving to Texas where housing prices are relatively cheap.
I have solved my retirement problem by spending less then I earn and building up savings.
I solved the problem of criminals trying to take by stuff by buying a gun and learning how to use it.
What I cannot stop is some bigot who believes in oppressing women from trying to blow my wife up because she is shopping in a mall that Alah would not approve of. What I cannot do is get Barbara Olson back after Muslims flew her plane into the Pentagon.
The government is supposed to provide a common defense. What I need the government to do is close the border and keep people who hate America out of our country by doing background checks on all legal immigrants who come here and making sure they go back when they are supposed too.
It is very rational thought.
What I see as irrational are Obama sayings like "Only through collective salvation can we achieve personal salvation".
On the surface liberals think, that is so good, because it means that if I mess around and do not save for retirement or work as hard as my neighbors, then I can live off the people around me." and Ithey clap and cheer for "Oh, Oh, Oh".
It is they who never think rationally and say "Hey wait that is an unjust system, why should I have my achievements taxed higher to support the people around me who refuse to work,? Why should my individual prosperity be tired to others instead of being tied to how much I work and contribute to society? Shouldn't my salvation be tied to... me?"
The irrational part of socialism or communism is that it removes the humanity from living. What is the point of living if there is not struggle? Collectivism is irrational, there are not collectist examples from nature, in nature, there are dominant males, in evolution (that liberals love so much) the core point is natural selection, so why do they push to remove it from our society?
The only collective natural examples are with perfectly equal members and let me tell you something, people may be born equal, but they do not end up equal.
Funny how they are getting behind 32 GB flash drive when Samsung is supposed to have 256GB flash drive out by end of year for around $1000. That would be bleeding edge, that would be news. This is just a story about SUN doing something that others have already done in for sometime now.
Microsoft fixes their bugs faster, OK. I agree. I would say it is a result of the large manpower they have.
Riddle me this Batman, what is the big reason behind why Microsoft has so much manpower dedicated to fixing patches? They have told us that it is because back in the day when they took it about as seriously as Apple does presently, people on/. and elsewhere called them out for being terrible at patching and they wanted to undo the negative publicity. Microsoft attempt to fix their poor security image by making a large effort to be more responsive.
This is important because perhaps your conjecture is enabling Steve to skate by with weak security responses, the Windows release of Safari was a joke, clearly Apple didn't care about sexy or cool when they passed that turd. Perhaps instead of sucking up to Steve Jobs, Apple lovers should objectively review Apple's patch performance and then call them out when they realize Apple is as bad as Micrsoft was back in the later 90s.
If you make excuses Apple will continue to slide, but if you call them out, perhaps they would fix the problem. It appears to have worked with their 180 on the issue of an iPhone SDK after people bitched. Perhaps if you really want to light a firer under Steve's ass, write a program or addon that patches Apples with 3rd party fixes. Then he'll get moving as he hates people touching his "art". Just my two cents.
This was written on a CentOS system so I have no horse in this race... as I already won.
I am not a picky eater, sometimes I eat with a VIEW sometimes I go to the homely Penguin Tavern and order the ROAST DUCK. just to look at the waiter's face (which is hard to see with the red fedora on his head) as he tells me I have to cook it myself. Better still every time I do this he goes on and on about while it looks like a duck, it is apparently a penguin and he is not entirely sure who made some of the sides as they have an open buffet. Whatever, I'll eat it, big question I have is why is most popular dish on the menu has an African name or hijacked African variant when nothing in it came from Africa.
Next thing you know people will take at this wholesome tavern are going to take a word like organic that means "carbon based" and bastardize it to mean something else and then try to tell me my genetically engineered carbon based beef is somehow not organic.
Sorry to be such a dick, but I clearly have somebody has a case of the Monday's and the fact that I literally work off of Braker Lane in Austin doesn't help. I don't need your mods to get over it, I need a printer and a baseball bat and for that lizard in the corner to stop looking at me. Course the way his eyes move around it is hard to tell.
Now excuse me as I dive head first into that free (as in beer) beer.
Boston is on its way out, simply put your tax structure prevents companies and investors from moving there. Austin and Seattle are the future because they have everything Boston and Silicon Valley do: cutting edge companies, skilled workforce, lots of access to venture capital, quality school systems for research and provide skilled graduates. Still we don't have the negatives i.e. tax burden. Every week I run into another PHD electrical engineers, skilled programmers and various highly qualified people that used to work in Boston for a few years and have since moved to Austin for a better job, at a better company, for better pay, with lower living costs and lower taxes. Course West Coast and North East leftist Democrats think taxes are a good thing and help the economy and they run CA and MA, so time will tell. Currently CA and Boston are loosing jobs and Austin and Seattle are growing jobs.
Why? We already have an answer, we just ignore it.
The US federal government is to strong and was not intended to do all that it does.
The US Constitution lays out the role of the federal government and they says anything not given to the Federal Government is a right that belongs to the state.
So if we want a better government all we really need to do is follow the literal interpretation of the Constitution.
States can setup healthcare plans if they want, but Hillary and Barrack are promising to deliver a national healthcare plan when the Constitution gives them not such right.
Now why is it better to do most government at the state rather then the national level?
1). It means those governing are closer to those being governed. Better representation of the people and if you mess up people will boot you out, whereas if a NM senator votes for something that hurts people in NJ there is no means for people in NJ to respond 2). Not all states are the same so what works in one may not fit another. 3). People can vote with there feet. I for example don't give a shit one way or another about gay marriage or abortion. What I do can about is making sure the state I live in locks up child abusers and executes murders. I also want lower taxes. So I could live in NV, or TX and my friends who want socialized healthcare and gay marriage can live in MA.
Having stronger states and weaker federal government is like having a linux kernel you can customize and pick with modules to load. People hate Congress and the President, yet nobody seems to think about making the President and Congress less powerful and lowering the taxes the federal government takes in and rasing the state taxes (or not) so that states control the funds and canset things like drinking age and whatnot rather then having it dictated by Federal government unconstitutionally I might add.
What is the difference between a Corporation and a Government?
I ask because many on/. love big government and hate big business.
I personally think big business is the lesser of two evils because if you do not like say Wal-Mart, you can shop at Target, Sears, the local mall, dozens of online sites or go to the mom and pop store and pay way to much for the same or different things.
However with big government you cannot shop around, you are stuck, a big socialized government would not be a linux world, it would be a monopoly. If you want a linux type world then you need a free open market with minimal government (that way you are free to do what you want not what the government decides for you), if you want a Microsoft world, then you want a centralized and powerful government.
I fear one of two things will happen with the rising US socialist movement 1). They will realize their mistakes when government is to big and to power and the economy to broken to undo it or 2). They will never realize their mistakes. (Example: Frances youth riots for reducing unemployment in French economy while protesting at same time to not change the system).
I am not saying big corporations are good, they can suck to, but what I hope some progressive thinkers take from my post is that however bad they believe big business, they must be able to see big government is far worse. That is why in the US our founders created a relatively weak federal government with strong state governments, the power that way is closer to the people it is over, different ideas can be tried in different states without breaking the entire country, and if you do not like your state's laws, you are free to move elsewhere.
Yes, hope that sends more revenue to my state or gets people in Maryland to look at higher out of state service companies, in today's world I setup servers I can remotely boot and configure BIOS on. I work with ISPs to build firewalls and routers and ship them to clients all the time, this allow me to VPN into their network and then I am good to go. I have everything in VMware (so the internal network is largely virtual) and all I need is the receptionist onsite to make sure there is power, I get e-mails for hardware failure and have full support warranties. Life is good, well unless you are a service provider in Maryland.
How hard would it be to have the following items added to Windows 2008:
1). SSH Server (so I can remote into my machine over a slow connection or my blackberry) 2). A decent shell (powershell has a lot of potention, if they added powershell support for all management feature s in Windows and AD like they did for Exchange 2007, that would be awesome).
I love parts of Linux and I love parts of Windows and I just wonder why there is nothing that puts the good from both together.
I was just wondering if anybody realized that the guys who setup OLPC are themselves hoping to make lots of money?
How you say? Well for one they have tons of free advertising, and two they managed to position themselves to sell directly to 3rd world governments.
But but how can get expect to get rich running a nonprofit? Simple, their nonprofit needs to make sure it never makes money like an evil corporation would, but there is nothing that says it cannot pay its employees really really well, so if you setup the OLPC organization you could end up making a salary of say $500,000 for all of the hard work you do, the organization makes no profit or maybe even losses a bit of money, but you are rolling in it.
Let's do this, agree that Linux and BSD are open. Respectfully disagree as to whether or not Apple or MS is more open.
As for the CF solution, not only do I agree that it is gambling to run off floppies, but it is cleaner, faster and easier to use a CF card.
I have a II GS, which is 16 bit, not 8 like other IIs. The main reason I like to mess with the II GS is that working with a 16 bit processor because it makes understanding low level instructions simple while not as limiting as 8, it is about the most I can handle in my head; with a 32 bit or god forbid a 64 bit processor, there is no way my brain could handle it.
Anyway I have some docs on CF devices, but I have not gone through everything and worked out a solution.
1). Your point about the II series made managing an OS hard because their was so much different hardware to support. Therefore Apple removed user and vender freedoms to make OS development at the time easier. I think you should then recognize what "Microsoft had to overcome." So if Apple ran away from the problem of supporting 3rd party hardware and applications, why do we make fun of the BSoD that MS had while working to overcome the problem, others saw as to hard?
2). Your whole comments about OS X being related to UNIX does not prove Apple is open. It is close to BSD not because Apple gave to BSD, but rather because Apple took from BSD. To see if Apple is closed look at things what they do with their Darwin GUI code. Do they share that code? I see it as further proof they take, but do not give.
3). So you find single button mice "SEXY"?
4). I have an Apple II with a serial console into my Linux server, how cool is that? I boot off floppies now, but I am looking into ways I may be able to boot off a 256MB flash device.
I respect Woz and others, I have an Apple II GS and made it into a thin client to my Linux servers. I love the II series. What made the II series great was that it was open and the slots allowed tons of 3rd party apps to develop for that.
That Apple is DEAD. Jobs killed it.
Jobs could have made the Mac open and given it slots but he closed it. MISTAKE.
Jobs could have let the clones continue and turned Apple into a software company and at that point in history may have knocked off MS and Windows 9x. But he killed the clones. MISTAKE.
Jobs could have made the iPhone open for software developers. MISTAKE.
See a pattern?
Can anybody understand how the fact that/.ers still love this guy and defend him again and again and make excuses for him, just drives me up the wall?
Apple is closed and does not play well with others, why doesn't/. admit this?
How can you bash MS for being to closed compared to Linux, yet love Apple, which is more closed then MS?
I love MS and Linux becuase they are both open enough that I can build and work with them. Do I wish Linux was a bit more controlled that we did not have 100s of distros, sure. Do I also wish at times MS would let me see more of what was going on under the hood, sure.
But I hate Apple all of the time because they are closed all of the time.
Don't give me that they use BSD crap, they took that part, they didn't make it. What have they given back to the BSD community?
Look at the iPod and the iPhone, they are closed. Look at their GUI, it is closed; why not OSS it or sell it for Linux users?
Because Jobs doesn't think about opening to the masses he does not people to question and think about design, he wants people to buy into his design. Why doesn't the iPod have FM or AM or XM radio? Cause they are closed.
Why didn't other wireless providers pick it up, because he was so hard to work with.
Apple today is not the Apple of the late 70s or early 80s. You talk about loving the II series, but do you know Jobs hated it?
He pissed on that product and people that made Apple, why? Because they were to open, they let outsiders in and have control. Jobs wants to control.
If Gates fudged it so he got back dated options, would you have let him off as easy as you did Jobs?
So while you think Apple and Jobs are great they aren't.
Man, in your world, there just isn't enough room for a Blackberry and an iPhone to be successful, is there. Why not?
Simply put I personally like that with my Blackberry I have finally gotten down to one device. As for others using iPhones, I really don't have a problem with people using other devices. But my friend with a Treo for example will talk about his device and say things like "Hey check this out, I setup ubuntu on my phone so that I can plug it into crappy machines, and boot off my phone and use Linux." So he is not forcing his view, he is sharing his experience. Whereas my friend with an iPhone and people on/. will be like "Apple rules, you must get an iPhone, they never make mistakes". See, with Apple fans, it is not sharing what Apples can do, it is trying to convert followers. And they are dishonest about Apple's many shortcomings and failures.
Also I am a bit lost by your comment, Blackberry is by RIMM not MS.
SDKs are usually released before or with a product launch along with a list of 3rd party developers. Not having an SDK in 2007 with the iPhone launch is like not having hardware slots in 1984 with the Mac launch. Jobs is an idiot because he does not learn from his mistakes, he just keeps making variations on the same fundamental misconceptions. Worse he never admits he is wrong.
Maybe it is just what software (not hardware) companies do, but shouldn't Apple have been working on the SDK as they worked up to the release of the iPhone. That way they could have a nice list all of the applications and developers who were behind their product?.
Oh wait, that is what Microsoft, Palm and Blackberry have done with their products, based on Windows Mobile, Palm OS or Java. That is why if you use any of those phones you have a variety of useful apps by countless companies.
Steve Jobs is a control freak, he should have been smart enough to recognize that an SDK would have helped adoption. Furthermore it could have helped to lead companies that are presently Windows or Java development shops step into OS X application development.
Jobs has made a ton of mistakes in his career. Worse he repeats mistakes and does not learn. Not having and SDK for a PDA/phone is similar to not having expansion slots on the Mac. He is more interested in telling people how to use his products rather then make products that allow people to use them in a variety of ways.
Oddly, it is Microsoft who is better at working with 3rd hardware and software companies than Apple. iPhone may survive because/.ers and teenagers buy them, but it will never thrive like Blackberry has.
Ubuntu is one of those free loading distributions, why aren't people supporting distributions that actually help to move Linux forward?
In my mind Red Hat, Novell and Debian are to Linux as Pink Floyd, Lead Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones are to Rock n' Roll.
Ubuntu can best be compared to Britney Spears; to get noticed they both showed off some pussy, they both attract young kids and they both suck.
- Eric
FYI:
Slackware would be Aerosmith (How many times have you thought you saw the last release and they have one more) Gentoo would be Pearl Jam (Commands respect, 'nough said) Yellow Dog would be Prince (It's gay; plays different processors, I mean instruments) Linus would be Lennon (They are both revolutionaries)
Does anybody know how the numbers add up? I mean if Google has 100 million very active users with a 3GB limit and Yahoo has 10 million users who are largley inactive, with no limit, the comparision doesn't really work.
I am going to google it now, but the interesting thing to find out is:
1). How much actual storage do Yahoo!, Google and MS have. 2). How many total users do the all have. 3). User stats like average mailbox usage, how many users have logged on in the last 60 days, etc.
I would think that given that Hotmail and Yahoo at one point had tight limits, it could be that their users are more tailored or trained to mailbox cleanup, whereas I being a lazy/.er just leave everything there for reference. Heck I have a firefox addon to effectively use a second GMail account as an FTP dumping ground for core PDF, Word and Excel files I may need if my house burns down. So I have a GMail account with 226 MB used, I have a second Google Data account that is 2.5 GB and I have a Yahoo account that is about 25 MB. So Yahoo, which I don't really use anymore can feel safer giving me and unlimited amount of space. Although, come to think about it I should see if I could find a yahoo Firefox addon that lets me dump my core files there, without and concern for how big it gets, just make folders for month/year and do full backups every month. Head spinning with idea, must investigate.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a terrible argument. My thoughts are rational. I have control over whether or not I starve. I do not have control over whether or not some towel head flys a plane or drives a car bomb into my place of work. I know there is a greater chance of the government taking my money for something I do not believe in then a company taking my money for a product I do not want to buy.
... me?"
I am rational, I am looking at the government to protect me from problems I cannot solve as an individual, nothing more.
I solved the gas problem by moving closer to my place of work, switching to a 4 day work week, etc.
I solved my health care problem by opening a health savings account for myself and my wife. I spend less for top of the line healthcare then I do in taxes and I am the diabetec Type I Democrats always talk about wanting to help. Do me a favor please, I beg of you "Don't help me pay for my insulin supplies. Free health care is simply to expensive for me."
I solved my food and shelter problems by getting a job and living within my means. Eating at home and moving to Texas where housing prices are relatively cheap.
I have solved my retirement problem by spending less then I earn and building up savings.
I solved the problem of criminals trying to take by stuff by buying a gun and learning how to use it.
What I cannot stop is some bigot who believes in oppressing women from trying to blow my wife up because she is shopping in a mall that Alah would not approve of. What I cannot do is get Barbara Olson back after Muslims flew her plane into the Pentagon.
The government is supposed to provide a common defense. What I need the government to do is close the border and keep people who hate America out of our country by doing background checks on all legal immigrants who come here and making sure they go back when they are supposed too.
It is very rational thought.
What I see as irrational are Obama sayings like "Only through collective salvation can we achieve personal salvation".
On the surface liberals think, that is so good, because it means that if I mess around and do not save for retirement or work as hard as my neighbors, then I can live off the people around me." and Ithey clap and cheer for "Oh, Oh, Oh".
It is they who never think rationally and say "Hey wait that is an unjust system, why should I have my achievements taxed higher to support the people around me who refuse to work,? Why should my individual prosperity be tired to others instead of being tied to how much I work and contribute to society? Shouldn't my salvation be tied to
The irrational part of socialism or communism is that it removes the humanity from living. What is the point of living if there is not struggle? Collectivism is irrational, there are not collectist examples from nature, in nature, there are dominant males, in evolution (that liberals love so much) the core point is natural selection, so why do they push to remove it from our society?
The only collective natural examples are with perfectly equal members and let me tell you something, people may be born equal, but they do not end up equal.
Collectivism is irrational.
Funny how they are getting behind 32 GB flash drive when Samsung is supposed to have 256GB flash drive out by end of year for around $1000. That would be bleeding edge, that would be news. This is just a story about SUN doing something that others have already done in for sometime now.
Riddle me this Batman, what is the big reason behind why Microsoft has so much manpower dedicated to fixing patches? They have told us that it is because back in the day when they took it about as seriously as Apple does presently, people on
This is important because perhaps your conjecture is enabling Steve to skate by with weak security responses, the Windows release of Safari was a joke, clearly Apple didn't care about sexy or cool when they passed that turd. Perhaps instead of sucking up to Steve Jobs, Apple lovers should objectively review Apple's patch performance and then call them out when they realize Apple is as bad as Micrsoft was back in the later 90s.
If you make excuses Apple will continue to slide, but if you call them out, perhaps they would fix the problem. It appears to have worked with their 180 on the issue of an iPhone SDK after people bitched. Perhaps if you really want to light a firer under Steve's ass, write a program or addon that patches Apples with 3rd party fixes. Then he'll get moving as he hates people touching his "art". Just my two cents.
This was written on a CentOS system so I have no horse in this race
I am not a picky eater, sometimes I eat with a VIEW sometimes I go to the homely Penguin Tavern and order the ROAST DUCK . just to look at the waiter's face (which is hard to see with the red fedora on his head) as he tells me I have to cook it myself. Better still every time I do this he goes on and on about while it looks like a duck, it is apparently a penguin and he is not entirely sure who made some of the sides as they have an open buffet. Whatever, I'll eat it, big question I have is why is most popular dish on the menu has an African name or hijacked African variant when nothing in it came from Africa.
Next thing you know people will take at this wholesome tavern are going to take a word like organic that means "carbon based" and bastardize it to mean something else and then try to tell me my genetically engineered carbon based beef is somehow not organic.
Sorry to be such a dick, but I clearly have somebody has a case of the Monday's and the fact that I literally work off of Braker Lane in Austin doesn't help. I don't need your mods to get over it, I need a printer and a baseball bat and for that lizard in the corner to stop looking at me. Course the way his eyes move around it is hard to tell.
Now excuse me as I dive head first into that free (as in beer) beer.
Boston is on its way out, simply put your tax structure prevents companies and investors from moving there. Austin and Seattle are the future because they have everything Boston and Silicon Valley do: cutting edge companies, skilled workforce, lots of access to venture capital, quality school systems for research and provide skilled graduates. Still we don't have the negatives i.e. tax burden. Every week I run into another PHD electrical engineers, skilled programmers and various highly qualified people that used to work in Boston for a few years and have since moved to Austin for a better job, at a better company, for better pay, with lower living costs and lower taxes. Course West Coast and North East leftist Democrats think taxes are a good thing and help the economy and they run CA and MA, so time will tell. Currently CA and Boston are loosing jobs and Austin and Seattle are growing jobs.
Why? We already have an answer, we just ignore it.
The US federal government is to strong and was not intended to do all that it does.
The US Constitution lays out the role of the federal government and they says anything not given to the Federal Government is a right that belongs to the state.
So if we want a better government all we really need to do is follow the literal interpretation of the Constitution.
States can setup healthcare plans if they want, but Hillary and Barrack are promising to deliver a national healthcare plan when the Constitution gives them not such right.
Now why is it better to do most government at the state rather then the national level?
1). It means those governing are closer to those being governed. Better representation of the people and if you mess up people will boot you out, whereas if a NM senator votes for something that hurts people in NJ there is no means for people in NJ to respond
2). Not all states are the same so what works in one may not fit another.
3). People can vote with there feet. I for example don't give a shit one way or another about gay marriage or abortion. What I do can about is making sure the state I live in locks up child abusers and executes murders. I also want lower taxes. So I could live in NV, or TX and my friends who want socialized healthcare and gay marriage can live in MA.
Having stronger states and weaker federal government is like having a linux kernel you can customize and pick with modules to load. People hate Congress and the President, yet nobody seems to think about making the President and Congress less powerful and lowering the taxes the federal government takes in and rasing the state taxes (or not) so that states control the funds and canset things like drinking age and whatnot rather then having it dictated by Federal government unconstitutionally I might add.
What is the difference between a Corporation and a Government?
/. love big government and hate big business.
I ask because many on
I personally think big business is the lesser of two evils because if you do not like say Wal-Mart, you can shop at Target, Sears, the local mall, dozens of online sites or go to the mom and pop store and pay way to much for the same or different things.
However with big government you cannot shop around, you are stuck, a big socialized government would not be a linux world, it would be a monopoly. If you want a linux type world then you need a free open market with minimal government (that way you are free to do what you want not what the government decides for you), if you want a Microsoft world, then you want a centralized and powerful government.
I fear one of two things will happen with the rising US socialist movement 1). They will realize their mistakes when government is to big and to power and the economy to broken to undo it or 2). They will never realize their mistakes. (Example: Frances youth riots for reducing unemployment in French economy while protesting at same time to not change the system).
I am not saying big corporations are good, they can suck to, but what I hope some progressive thinkers take from my post is that however bad they believe big business, they must be able to see big government is far worse. That is why in the US our founders created a relatively weak federal government with strong state governments, the power that way is closer to the people it is over, different ideas can be tried in different states without breaking the entire country, and if you do not like your state's laws, you are free to move elsewhere.
Would this be a "bug"?
Why doesn't Apple let Tiger users download Bootcamp? Smells like a "forced update".
- Eric
Yes, hope that sends more revenue to my state or gets people in Maryland to look at higher out of state service companies, in today's world I setup servers I can remotely boot and configure BIOS on. I work with ISPs to build firewalls and routers and ship them to clients all the time, this allow me to VPN into their network and then I am good to go. I have everything in VMware (so the internal network is largely virtual) and all I need is the receptionist onsite to make sure there is power, I get e-mails for hardware failure and have full support warranties. Life is good, well unless you are a service provider in Maryland.
How hard would it be to have the following items added to Windows 2008:
1). SSH Server (so I can remote into my machine over a slow connection or my blackberry)
2). A decent shell (powershell has a lot of potention, if they added powershell support for all management feature s in Windows and AD like they did for Exchange 2007, that would be awesome).
I love parts of Linux and I love parts of Windows and I just wonder why there is nothing that puts the good from both together.
I was just wondering if anybody realized that the guys who setup OLPC are themselves hoping to make lots of money?
How you say? Well for one they have tons of free advertising, and two they managed to position themselves to sell directly to 3rd world governments.
But but how can get expect to get rich running a nonprofit? Simple, their nonprofit needs to make sure it never makes money like an evil corporation would, but there is nothing that says it cannot pay its employees really really well, so if you setup the OLPC organization you could end up making a salary of say $500,000 for all of the hard work you do, the organization makes no profit or maybe even losses a bit of money, but you are rolling in it.
Is it me or does that sentence seem silly?
Agreed, building a radio that says "Hey I am here for a short period of time" is not hard, but launching it into space is.
Let's do this, agree that Linux and BSD are open. Respectfully disagree as to whether or not Apple or MS is more open.
As for the CF solution, not only do I agree that it is gambling to run off floppies, but it is cleaner, faster and easier to use a CF card.
I have a II GS, which is 16 bit, not 8 like other IIs. The main reason I like to mess with the II GS is that working with a 16 bit processor because it makes understanding low level instructions simple while not as limiting as 8, it is about the most I can handle in my head; with a 32 bit or god forbid a 64 bit processor, there is no way my brain could handle it.
Anyway I have some docs on CF devices, but I have not gone through everything and worked out a solution.
1). Your point about the II series made managing an OS hard because their was so much different hardware to support. Therefore Apple removed user and vender freedoms to make OS development at the time easier. I think you should then recognize what "Microsoft had to overcome." So if Apple ran away from the problem of supporting 3rd party hardware and applications, why do we make fun of the BSoD that MS had while working to overcome the problem, others saw as to hard? 2). Your whole comments about OS X being related to UNIX does not prove Apple is open. It is close to BSD not because Apple gave to BSD, but rather because Apple took from BSD. To see if Apple is closed look at things what they do with their Darwin GUI code. Do they share that code? I see it as further proof they take, but do not give. 3). So you find single button mice "SEXY"? 4). I have an Apple II with a serial console into my Linux server, how cool is that? I boot off floppies now, but I am looking into ways I may be able to boot off a 256MB flash device.
I respect Woz and others, I have an Apple II GS and made it into a thin client to my Linux servers. I love the II series. What made the II series great was that it was open and the slots allowed tons of 3rd party apps to develop for that.
/.ers still love this guy and defend him again and again and make excuses for him, just drives me up the wall?
/. admit this?
That Apple is DEAD. Jobs killed it.
Jobs could have made the Mac open and given it slots but he closed it. MISTAKE.
Jobs could have let the clones continue and turned Apple into a software company and at that point in history may have knocked off MS and Windows 9x. But he killed the clones. MISTAKE.
Jobs could have made the iPhone open for software developers. MISTAKE.
See a pattern?
Can anybody understand how the fact that
Apple is closed and does not play well with others, why doesn't
How can you bash MS for being to closed compared to Linux, yet love Apple, which is more closed then MS?
I love MS and Linux becuase they are both open enough that I can build and work with them. Do I wish Linux was a bit more controlled that we did not have 100s of distros, sure. Do I also wish at times MS would let me see more of what was going on under the hood, sure.
But I hate Apple all of the time because they are closed all of the time.
Don't give me that they use BSD crap, they took that part, they didn't make it. What have they given back to the BSD community?
Look at the iPod and the iPhone, they are closed. Look at their GUI, it is closed; why not OSS it or sell it for Linux users?
Because Jobs doesn't think about opening to the masses he does not people to question and think about design, he wants people to buy into his design. Why doesn't the iPod have FM or AM or XM radio? Cause they are closed.
Why didn't other wireless providers pick it up, because he was so hard to work with.
Apple today is not the Apple of the late 70s or early 80s. You talk about loving the II series, but do you know Jobs hated it?
He pissed on that product and people that made Apple, why? Because they were to open, they let outsiders in and have control. Jobs wants to control.
If Gates fudged it so he got back dated options, would you have let him off as easy as you did Jobs?
So while you think Apple and Jobs are great they aren't.
Man, in your world, there just isn't enough room for a Blackberry and an iPhone to be successful, is there. Why not?
/. will be like "Apple rules, you must get an iPhone, they never make mistakes". See, with Apple fans, it is not sharing what Apples can do, it is trying to convert followers. And they are dishonest about Apple's many shortcomings and failures.
Simply put I personally like that with my Blackberry I have finally gotten down to one device. As for others using iPhones, I really don't have a problem with people using other devices. But my friend with a Treo for example will talk about his device and say things like "Hey check this out, I setup ubuntu on my phone so that I can plug it into crappy machines, and boot off my phone and use Linux." So he is not forcing his view, he is sharing his experience. Whereas my friend with an iPhone and people on
Also I am a bit lost by your comment, Blackberry is by RIMM not MS.
SDKs are usually released before or with a product launch along with a list of 3rd party developers. Not having an SDK in 2007 with the iPhone launch is like not having hardware slots in 1984 with the Mac launch. Jobs is an idiot because he does not learn from his mistakes, he just keeps making variations on the same fundamental misconceptions. Worse he never admits he is wrong.
Maybe it is just what software (not hardware) companies do, but shouldn't Apple have been working on the SDK as they worked up to the release of the iPhone. That way they could have a nice list all of the applications and developers who were behind their product?.
/.ers and teenagers buy them, but it will never thrive like Blackberry has.
Oh wait, that is what Microsoft, Palm and Blackberry have done with their products, based on Windows Mobile, Palm OS or Java. That is why if you use any of those phones you have a variety of useful apps by countless companies.
Steve Jobs is a control freak, he should have been smart enough to recognize that an SDK would have helped adoption. Furthermore it could have helped to lead companies that are presently Windows or Java development shops step into OS X application development.
Jobs has made a ton of mistakes in his career. Worse he repeats mistakes and does not learn. Not having and SDK for a PDA/phone is similar to not having expansion slots on the Mac. He is more interested in telling people how to use his products rather then make products that allow people to use them in a variety of ways.
Oddly, it is Microsoft who is better at working with 3rd hardware and software companies than Apple. iPhone may survive because
Do you get tired of making excuses for Apple all the time? I mean so you honestly would give Microsoft or Red Hat the same respect you grant Apple?
My Java based Blackberry is loaded with dozens of 3rd party apps and it never crashes like your iPhone apparently does.
Your claim does not fit the facts.
Simply logic shows how you could have two black holes merge and bing you have larger black hole.
Ubuntu is one of those free loading distributions, why aren't people supporting distributions that actually help to move Linux forward?
In my mind Red Hat, Novell and Debian are to Linux as Pink Floyd, Lead Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones are to Rock n' Roll.
Ubuntu can best be compared to Britney Spears; to get noticed they both showed off some pussy, they both attract young kids and they both suck.
- Eric
FYI:
Slackware would be Aerosmith (How many times have you thought you saw the last release and they have one more)
Gentoo would be Pearl Jam (Commands respect, 'nough said)
Yellow Dog would be Prince (It's gay; plays different processors, I mean instruments)
Linus would be Lennon (They are both revolutionaries)
Does anybody know how the numbers add up? I mean if Google has 100 million very active users with a 3GB limit and Yahoo has 10 million users who are largley inactive, with no limit, the comparision doesn't really work.
/.er just leave everything there for reference. Heck I have a firefox addon to effectively use a second GMail account as an FTP dumping ground for core PDF, Word and Excel files I may need if my house burns down. So I have a GMail account with 226 MB used, I have a second Google Data account that is 2.5 GB and I have a Yahoo account that is about 25 MB. So Yahoo, which I don't really use anymore can feel safer giving me and unlimited amount of space. Although, come to think about it I should see if I could find a yahoo Firefox addon that lets me dump my core files there, without and concern for how big it gets, just make folders for month/year and do full backups every month. Head spinning with idea, must investigate.
I am going to google it now, but the interesting thing to find out is:
1). How much actual storage do Yahoo!, Google and MS have.
2). How many total users do the all have.
3). User stats like average mailbox usage, how many users have logged on in the last 60 days, etc.
I would think that given that Hotmail and Yahoo at one point had tight limits, it could be that their users are more tailored or trained to mailbox cleanup, whereas I being a lazy