I wish some review sites come up with a common rubric to rate OS's. Things like different multimedia files running out of the box, graphical interfaces for system tasks, graphical package manager, ability to install 3rd party applications through windows like mouse click, or simply able to run most, etc. They could have it be an easy checklist where you check which functions it had and in the column next to it what it used to due it. It would make it easier for people to review distributions and if some smart desktop people got involved create a nice roadmap to get desktop linux sealing the final holes consumers notice.
There could even be some sparate ones for advanced users, or for server use. I would love that easy and visual comparison and would love to contribute if I knew what to look for aside from the typical "I liked it, install was quick".
My 4 cents
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep, just like my grandpa did. Unlike the passengers in his car at the time."
If you really want people to obey the laws you don't do something stupid like send them tickets all the time. Its much more logical to just have these monitors and sensors be capable of only allowing the car to go an acceptable speed, no more. That would seem to be almost as easy as this and prevent all those stupid tickets and big government that goes along with this kind of thing.
They could then build the lane stuff in so that it beeps if you are in a wrong lane and if you stay there over so many seconds it reports it.
Crazy stuff.
I do not think that is true about having to deal with them first.
I have a case immediately as they have already told me I am in violation of their copyrights if I am using 2.4.19 or above or whatever it is. So I can sue immediately as they are trying to tell me I have to pay and I have no proof as to why I need to pay this. That should be perfectly fine.
The fact I don't have any of their questionable areas even compiled into the kernel just gives me more ammo to fight with. They already dropped the gloves by saying anyone unlicensed with new kernels is in violations. Everyone running later linux kernels is therefore supposed to be a customer to be legal. We can fight that premise as there is no proof we are doing anything illegal as they won't provide any and that extortion and fraud.
Everyone is pissed at SCO. I am wondering if it would work to just have thousand/tens of thousands of people go and almost simultaneously file small claims court case against them. The amount (199-699) is perfect for small claims and we can all allege fraud and extortion, and sue for court cost (or maybe add on the attempted license fee too). In the suit we can say there is no proof to substantiate the license.
If they show up you don't have much to lose and they have to show prrof so we would find out and remove the proof. If they don't you should be immune to further prosecution on that computer and they get stuck with many bills. If enough users file there is no way they could respond to this.
Maybe this is far fetched, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. It would ultimately force SCO to quit this as we bleed them dry and they end up with almost no end users to try and charge without finally revealing their code and having it removed anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish some review sites come up with a common rubric to rate OS's. Things like different multimedia files running out of the box, graphical interfaces for system tasks, graphical package manager, ability to install 3rd party applications through windows like mouse click, or simply able to run most, etc. They could have it be an easy checklist where you check which functions it had and in the column next to it what it used to due it. It would make it easier for people to review distributions and if some smart desktop people got involved create a nice roadmap to get desktop linux sealing the final holes consumers notice.
There could even be some sparate ones for advanced users, or for server use. I would love that easy and visual comparison and would love to contribute if I knew what to look for aside from the typical "I liked it, install was quick".
My 4 cents
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep, just like my grandpa did. Unlike the passengers in his car at the time."
If you really want people to obey the laws you don't do something stupid like send them tickets all the time. Its much more logical to just have these monitors and sensors be capable of only allowing the car to go an acceptable speed, no more. That would seem to be almost as easy as this and prevent all those stupid tickets and big government that goes along with this kind of thing.
They could then build the lane stuff in so that it beeps if you are in a wrong lane and if you stay there over so many seconds it reports it.
Crazy stuff.
I do not think that is true about having to deal with them first.
I have a case immediately as they have already told me I am in violation of their copyrights if I am using 2.4.19 or above or whatever it is. So I can sue immediately as they are trying to tell me I have to pay and I have no proof as to why I need to pay this. That should be perfectly fine.
The fact I don't have any of their questionable areas even compiled into the kernel just gives me more ammo to fight with. They already dropped the gloves by saying anyone unlicensed with new kernels is in violations. Everyone running later linux kernels is therefore supposed to be a customer to be legal. We can fight that premise as there is no proof we are doing anything illegal as they won't provide any and that extortion and fraud.
Everyone is pissed at SCO. I am wondering if it would work to just have thousand/tens of thousands of people go and almost simultaneously file small claims court case against them. The amount (199-699) is perfect for small claims and we can all allege fraud and extortion, and sue for court cost (or maybe add on the attempted license fee too). In the suit we can say there is no proof to substantiate the license. If they show up you don't have much to lose and they have to show prrof so we would find out and remove the proof. If they don't you should be immune to further prosecution on that computer and they get stuck with many bills. If enough users file there is no way they could respond to this. Maybe this is far fetched, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. It would ultimately force SCO to quit this as we bleed them dry and they end up with almost no end users to try and charge without finally revealing their code and having it removed anyway.