Although no excuse for shit movies, there is some truth in this.
I have on a number of occassions left the cinema, come home and messengered a few night owls about how good/bad a movie I've just seen is.
I'm not a texter, but can imagine younger people using text as their medium.
This seems like good news. Maybe studios will start concentrating on making quality movies rather than big opening weekend movies that are shite, but hope to recoup in 1 weekend.
But Stallman isn't just going for Free as in Freedom - he wants Free as in Beer too, from what I can see.
You can of course sort of "free as in freedom" without "free as in beer". This would be if people published their file formats like Adobe have with PDF. I can write and manipulate these files programmatically, and a giant document tells me how to.
I can compete with Adobe, make my own PDF tools and sell them alongside.
Trouble with computer journalists is that they have some strange ideas.
I wonder when the last time was that this guy actually worked in a computer department? In the early 80s when departments were well staffed?
I'll ask my work tech admin if he's happy dealing with the fall out from Windows Viruses or if my boss is? I know what the answer is "we have better/more enjoyable things to do than patch windows".
There are more simple reasons why companies don't use macs.
There is a perception that you are 'bound' to Apple in terms of hardware, rather than the vendor independence afforded by Microsoft
There is less business software. We use a call centre package at work. Is there a Mac version? Nope. What about something like Coda? Nope.
You can't so easily get developers to write software for Macs. I know that's a vicious circle, but that's the way it is.
They are perceived as being "for graphic designers".
I'm sure many people just running Word and browsing the net can manage fine with a Mac. Personally, I'd rather stick with Microsoft or bank on Linux.
So consider it Microsoft's fault all you want, but they won't be forced to do anything about it.
It's just not good enough, and eventually something's gonna give on it. When there are 3 worms in a week and everyone in the country gets a major impact, the press will squeal like crazy and the government will be forced to act.
I don't use Linux, but I'm gradually switching my applications to Open Source (Firebird/Thunderbird/Open Office) to allow me to switch easier if I want to.
I've found it initially difficult (particularly with Open Office), but I'm now fine, and find using Outlook less pleasant than using Thunderbird.
If I ever found my source code in someone else's code, my first action would be to trace it back to where they got it from and who I first sold it to, and then approach them and suggest a settlement - remove my code and negotiate a financial settlement.
If they didn't do that, I'd then take them to court. It seems to me that SCO just started out by making a ton of allegations in public.
SCO are not interested in having their alleged code exposed because it seems they aren't in this to get their code removed, they want license revenues because people are buying Linux instead of shitty SCO UNIX.
What would be really funny is if the duplicate 80 (or what's today's number) lines of code were not originally SCOs.
You are right that there's a strange co-incidence that every time that SCO's share price falls a bit, SCO make an announcement like this "license" one.
I think that now that IBM have filed suit though, that people are taking the SCO case less seriously.
Apparently they claim to have had "more than 300 companies in the first four business days of this program contact SCO to inquire about SCO's Intellectual Property License for Linux."
Most likely/.ers trying to waste as much of SCO's time as possible sending salesmen to an address.
Not only do we have the moral high ground when it comes to software, but we are percieved to have the moral high ground.
It's lucky that those brave people in the French Resistance didn't do that. "We've decided not to take on the German invaders, as we'd only be lowering ourselves to their level".
And users of software generally don't care about the 'moral high ground'. They are keen on getting some standards into software and getting away from manufacturer lock in (both of which are moral), but most users of Linux would see a viewpoint that says "i will not support an aggressor against me" (which is what supporting software on SCO means) as acceptable.
Bottom line is, SCO started the equivalent of a 'legal war' against Linux users. The gloves are off. SCO must die.
Is this $48 billion cash reserve some kind of an accountant figure, or is there a numbered bank account sitting there with $48 billion which can be drawn on?
I only ask, because sometimes, things are described by accounting in such a way that it leads people to think one way rather than another.
I was thinking about whether there is a new 'new world'.
Seems to me that every force in the world starts out as strong, with the intent to be more advanced than those that went before, as a result become economically stronger, and then eventually become lazy, corrupt and divided.
Seems to me that China or India are the places of the future. Probably India.
Another thing is that tyre makers are major players with known brands, not like some small guys making duplicate Lexmark cartridges.
If a car manufacturer got into bed with 1 tyre maker, the attack on that car maker would come from:-
- rights groups
- other tyre makers
- other car makers
Because people seem to report news about cars far more than about PCs (joe public understands them more), it would be major news. The public mostly wouldn't buy it, unless there was a good reason.
In the UK, there was plenty of coverage of the Tesco/Levis case, but almost nothing about copy protected CDs.
The whole point is that if you pass a bill on a date like September 11th, you are (to quote Jo Moore) "burying bad news".
Similarly, the UK government published bad unemployment figures on the day of a royal wedding, and passed a law on lowering the age of consent for gay men to 16 on the same day as a major England World Cup football game.
This is ridiculous. They are painting Linux developers as being incapable of doing clever things without SCO, and without expensive equipment.
In my experience, equipment is rarely an issue in developing code. It's generally down to a combination of smart people, co-ordination and will. I've seen people come up with really clever work in tiny companies, and seen huge companies run at snails pace. Big projects with a bad structure and bad architecture can get nailed by small projects with a good architecture.
You don't need any financial investment to start writing code. The only costs are: a basic PC (like a 486), electricity, lighting, and most importantly, your time. I built a data-driven website for a small organisation, and I think the fixed costs were probably less than $50.
In addition, people are often more motivated to do their own things, because they are doing them for fun.
You also don't need to employ people like Darl McBride when you are writing code for fun.
Slashdot Mirror
You think there's going to be any money left, once IBM and Red Hat have finished with them?
Suggest you read other postings on this story.
I have on a number of occassions left the cinema, come home and messengered a few night owls about how good/bad a movie I've just seen is.
I'm not a texter, but can imagine younger people using text as their medium.
This seems like good news. Maybe studios will start concentrating on making quality movies rather than big opening weekend movies that are shite, but hope to recoup in 1 weekend.
I know what my boss would say "copyright our changes". He doesn't pay me to write code for other people.
You can of course sort of "free as in freedom" without "free as in beer". This would be if people published their file formats like Adobe have with PDF. I can write and manipulate these files programmatically, and a giant document tells me how to.
I can compete with Adobe, make my own PDF tools and sell them alongside.
And does Richard Stallman do all his work for free, then?
I wonder when the last time was that this guy actually worked in a computer department? In the early 80s when departments were well staffed?
I'll ask my work tech admin if he's happy dealing with the fall out from Windows Viruses or if my boss is? I know what the answer is "we have better/more enjoyable things to do than patch windows".
There are more simple reasons why companies don't use macs.
There is a perception that you are 'bound' to Apple in terms of hardware, rather than the vendor independence afforded by Microsoft
There is less business software. We use a call centre package at work. Is there a Mac version? Nope. What about something like Coda? Nope.
You can't so easily get developers to write software for Macs. I know that's a vicious circle, but that's the way it is.
They are perceived as being "for graphic designers".
I'm sure many people just running Word and browsing the net can manage fine with a Mac. Personally, I'd rather stick with Microsoft or bank on Linux.
I just signed on to Windows Update (which is supposed to check automatically) and there are 2 updates waiting for me.
Maybe it's the upgrade to my firewall, but the point is, Windows Update failed silently - so I don't know I'm not protected.
Pathetic.
Particularly under EU law, where they are investigating Microsoft over Media Player?
It's just not good enough, and eventually something's gonna give on it. When there are 3 worms in a week and everyone in the country gets a major impact, the press will squeal like crazy and the government will be forced to act.
I've found it initially difficult (particularly with Open Office), but I'm now fine, and find using Outlook less pleasant than using Thunderbird.
If they didn't do that, I'd then take them to court. It seems to me that SCO just started out by making a ton of allegations in public.
SCO are not interested in having their alleged code exposed because it seems they aren't in this to get their code removed, they want license revenues because people are buying Linux instead of shitty SCO UNIX.
What would be really funny is if the duplicate 80 (or what's today's number) lines of code were not originally SCOs.
I'm wondering if anyone managed to get a SCO salesman to come out and waste half a day of their time.
You are right that there's a strange co-incidence that every time that SCO's share price falls a bit, SCO make an announcement like this "license" one.
I think that now that IBM have filed suit though, that people are taking the SCO case less seriously.
Most likely /.ers trying to waste as much of SCO's time as possible sending salesmen to an address.
SCO says it won't identify all the infringing code in Linux because Linux developers would quickly replace it.
Which as the author correctly observes is surely what SCO should be wanting, that their copyright-infringing material is removed.
Says it all about this case really.
It's lucky that those brave people in the French Resistance didn't do that. "We've decided not to take on the German invaders, as we'd only be lowering ourselves to their level".
And users of software generally don't care about the 'moral high ground'. They are keen on getting some standards into software and getting away from manufacturer lock in (both of which are moral), but most users of Linux would see a viewpoint that says "i will not support an aggressor against me" (which is what supporting software on SCO means) as acceptable.
Bottom line is, SCO started the equivalent of a 'legal war' against Linux users. The gloves are off. SCO must die.
SCO are silenced for once?
curruption? Yes, keep it like that. make people think it has already happened.
I only ask, because sometimes, things are described by accounting in such a way that it leads people to think one way rather than another.
Didn't that quarter include all the profits for some of their licensing programs for the next 3 years or something?
Seems to me that every force in the world starts out as strong, with the intent to be more advanced than those that went before, as a result become economically stronger, and then eventually become lazy, corrupt and divided.
Seems to me that China or India are the places of the future. Probably India.
If a car manufacturer got into bed with 1 tyre maker, the attack on that car maker would come from:- - rights groups - other tyre makers - other car makers
Because people seem to report news about cars far more than about PCs (joe public understands them more), it would be major news. The public mostly wouldn't buy it, unless there was a good reason.
In the UK, there was plenty of coverage of the Tesco/Levis case, but almost nothing about copy protected CDs.
The whole point is that if you pass a bill on a date like September 11th, you are (to quote Jo Moore) "burying bad news".
Similarly, the UK government published bad unemployment figures on the day of a royal wedding, and passed a law on lowering the age of consent for gay men to 16 on the same day as a major England World Cup football game.
In my experience, equipment is rarely an issue in developing code. It's generally down to a combination of smart people, co-ordination and will. I've seen people come up with really clever work in tiny companies, and seen huge companies run at snails pace. Big projects with a bad structure and bad architecture can get nailed by small projects with a good architecture.
You don't need any financial investment to start writing code. The only costs are: a basic PC (like a 486), electricity, lighting, and most importantly, your time. I built a data-driven website for a small organisation, and I think the fixed costs were probably less than $50.
In addition, people are often more motivated to do their own things, because they are doing them for fun.
You also don't need to employ people like Darl McBride when you are writing code for fun.