Whatever - history will bear me out on this one. 'accessibility' will be one of those whiner topics people _still_ complain about when I am old and gray, in about 30 or 40 years.
Yup, when you're old and gray and and macular degeneration or other age related disorder has reduced your vision to the point where you can't use the web and you're tooling around in an electric wheelchair looking for a curb cut, people will still be complaining about this issue all right. However, in all likelihood you'll be hypocritically complaining there right along with them.
A) Determine the cost of the SCO upgrade plus an estimate of any extra out of the ordinary HW/SW costs required by sticking with SCO plus the costs, positive or negative, of deferring the port to Linux (depending on how much longer you think SCO will be alive or how much longer whoever buys them out keeps SCO support alive.)
B) Determine the cost of porting all of the software you use to Linux plus the down time working out the kinks plus the difference in support contracts (if you have any).
Whichever is the cheaper is the one you pick.
Ignore the ideologues; they have no stake in whether your company survives nor is RMS going to re-imburse you if it costs more than expected. If it turns out SCO is cheaper for the moment, remember that you can always switch to OSS later down the road or when SCO goes toes up.
Re:NASA Amazes Me
on
SOHO Is Back
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think you're overstating the case. This succeeded because of ingenuity and innovation, but also because they spend a lot of money and time on the design process to guarantee reliability and flexibility (since they can't send people up for repair) and because they are using hardware/software that are much less complex than a PC/consumer software. (Voyager II's computer is dirt-simple.)
This success doesn't reflect anyting about consumer HW/SW because it's at an entirely different place in the good/fast/cheap space. As ever, consumer software isn't going to be NASA grade because people aren't willing to pay NASA prices for it.
Yeah, identity theft does end up punishing customers.
(Unless, you're suggesting that retailers should just give people stuff without verifying their identities, in which case, I'd like to visit your business to pick up something I ordered last week. Which customer am I? All of them, of course.)
Either way though, this has nothing to do with copyright infringement.
Given the near impossibility of prosecuting everyone on file sharing networks that is commiting copyright infringment, what possible solution(s) seem most likely to bring the problem to a manageable level without excessively infringing on indiviual rights and legitimate uses of such networks? Universal DRM or other hardware changes? Mandatory lack of anonymity on file trading networks? Legislation? User education? Some other solution?
Alternatively, do you believe it's impossible to control this, ala the prohibition era? Will some change to the cultural and business landscape be necessary to accomodate inevitable copyright infringment in file-sharing?
Nearly every post has had the knee-jerk reaction that security through obscurity is a bad thing and that enough redundancy must be installed to minimize the threat of disrupting infrastructure, and that's incontrovertibly true. However, there is one fly in the ointment...
Would anyone here be willing to have their usage fees for their net connection go up by %50 to cover the cost of installing and maintaining this additional redundant infrastructure? (Bear in mind that if you say "Stick it to big businesses!", they will indirectly stick it back to you.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yup, when you're old and gray and and macular degeneration or other age related disorder has reduced your vision to the point where you can't use the web and you're tooling around in an electric wheelchair looking for a curb cut, people will still be complaining about this issue all right. However, in all likelihood you'll be hypocritically complaining there right along with them.
- A) Determine the cost of the SCO upgrade plus an estimate of any extra out of the ordinary HW/SW costs required by sticking with SCO plus the costs, positive or negative, of deferring the port to Linux (depending on how much longer you think SCO will be alive or how much longer whoever buys them out keeps SCO support alive.)
- B) Determine the cost of porting all of the software you use to Linux plus the down time working out the kinks plus the difference in support contracts (if you have any).
Whichever is the cheaper is the one you pick.Ignore the ideologues; they have no stake in whether your company survives nor is RMS going to re-imburse you if it costs more than expected. If it turns out SCO is cheaper for the moment, remember that you can always switch to OSS later down the road or when SCO goes toes up.
This success doesn't reflect anyting about consumer HW/SW because it's at an entirely different place in the good/fast/cheap space. As ever, consumer software isn't going to be NASA grade because people aren't willing to pay NASA prices for it.
(Unless, you're suggesting that retailers should just give people stuff without verifying their identities, in which case, I'd like to visit your business to pick up something I ordered last week. Which customer am I? All of them, of course.)
Either way though, this has nothing to do with copyright infringement.
Alternatively, do you believe it's impossible to control this, ala the prohibition era? Will some change to the cultural and business landscape be necessary to accomodate inevitable copyright infringment in file-sharing?
Would anyone here be willing to have their usage fees for their net connection go up by %50 to cover the cost of installing and maintaining this additional redundant infrastructure? (Bear in mind that if you say "Stick it to big businesses!", they will indirectly stick it back to you.)