What about them? I won't pay for that software either. Mod me down, but I WILL NOT PAY FOR SOFTWARE, and you shouldn't either. Software should be available for free for all people.
I wont pay for it myself. Software should be free and open for everyone to have access to. Keeping poor people from enjoying software is cruel. You aren't getting one red cent from me.
no. because the "better way" will then be used by all teams and no "other way" will be considered. only in the competitive market does the better way win out. you lose.
I own a web based store that sells various OSS trinkets (t-shirts, cups, mousepads, etc) and I am pretty pissed about this. We all contributed to Mozilla and now they screw us back by not letting us make any money off of it. This is a big deal since I make a good living out of supplying branded goods to tradeshows, corporations, and individuals.
As for Debian, I agree with them. Mozilla is now non-free!
Even if you had a degree in CS and specialize in databases you will have a hard time diving into someones elses code to find the bug and fix it, especially since architectural documents are nonexistent for most OSS.
For most people the interest in OSS is that the software is "free as in beer". If OSS projects started to charge for the product you would see interest in such projects rapidly fading.
"Have you ever tried configuring Windows for commodity hardware (i.e., not bought from a big name manufacturer?). It's near impossible to find drivers that work properly. Under Linux most stuff "just works". Edit text files? Ever try to clean up spyware and adware from a Windows machine before Adaware existed? You're talking serious registry hacking there. Let's not forget all the little tweaks to the TCP/IP stack under Windows that requires, that's right, more registry hacking"
Huh? Are you completely insane or are saying "Windows" but mean "Linux"? Can't get drivers to work for Win2k? Er, for what? Every manufacturer provides Windows drivers. Tweaking the stack? You mean like changing the MTU and stuff? Er, how it is harder to "hack" the registry to change the values rather than editing a text file?
I wouldn't bet it. The idea of "heavy peer review" and "many eyes" doesn't play out in the real world. There are less qualified people looking at the MySQL code than any of the closed source products. The idea that a user of product is going to browse through the source code looking for bugs ia laughable. No user has the time for that.
Ah, share after the competition is a bit better. However, you do run into the risk of local maxima, where everyone agrees that doing something using method 'X' is better and therefore no ones tries method 'Y' even though that produces a better result longterm.
According to the status page all entries are disabled or withdrawn. I can't get their broadcast software working on my 2000 box, it keeps saying it can't write to a.txt file.
Nope, wrong. Fission and fusion have not been well understood. Even all the elemential particles aren't known yet. Without the practical applications we wouldn't be spending billions on building the supercolliders.
Sorry, but staring at blobs in the sky and making up theories about how they got there isn't science. The world is no better off with Hubble.
The big difference is that Windows is not just an OS, it is a strategy for Microsoft. The end goal of Microsoft is to get a Windows based product on everything - and they have a centralized strategy to do so. First, by making the Windows "look and feel" the defacto standard so every consumer understands the Windows interface. Second, by leveraging their desktop dominance and integration to get into every market they can. Linux is missing this strategy (which isn't bad, but relegates it to a niche player who can only compete on cost)
Supercolliders exist so we can understand fission and fusion reactions better, which provides a tangible benefit to mankind in the development of fusion/fission power. Telescopes don't provide a tangible benefit, but they provide us with pretty pictures.
Re:Code needed is infinite, frameworks are not
on
Implementing CIFS
·
· Score: 1
I have read all the comments on this, and although I disagree with them I think we should wait until Bruce publishes his paper on the topic. Hopefully slashdot will post a story on it and we can discuss it then.
Uh, there are standards. Those standards are determined by the individual states for the elections that are run by the state to determine who wins the electorial voters of that state (in a presidential election). Notice the words "federal" were not mentioned at all. These are state elections, the system was designed for this purpose. Believe it or not, the people who set up the system knew what they were doing.
That is illogical. Assuming the outsourced engineer is as competent and as productive as the inhouse engineer, outsourcing will always provide savings and you will be outsourced.
Of course you have pointed out the biggest failing (from my perspective) of OSS economics: less code needs to be written since there is code out there available for zero cost. This means less engineers (inhouse or outsourced) are needed. Thats great for the corporations, but bad for you and I.
This was bought by the Internal Revenue Service in order to improve the auditing of tax returns. They say that the additional revenue brought in will easily pay for the device many times over.
If it was for the DHS or NSA you would not have heard about the purchase.
Slashdot Mirror
What about them? I won't pay for that software either. Mod me down, but I WILL NOT PAY FOR SOFTWARE, and you shouldn't either. Software should be available for free for all people.
I wont pay for it myself. Software should be free and open for everyone to have access to. Keeping poor people from enjoying software is cruel. You aren't getting one red cent from me.
no. because the "better way" will then be used by all teams and no "other way" will be considered. only in the competitive market does the better way win out. you lose.
Racist! We all don't get paid a pittance. I make a good living. A lot of Americans get paid pittance to do menial things, pig.
I own a web based store that sells various OSS trinkets (t-shirts, cups, mousepads, etc) and I am pretty pissed about this. We all contributed to Mozilla and now they screw us back by not letting us make any money off of it. This is a big deal since I make a good living out of supplying branded goods to tradeshows, corporations, and individuals.
As for Debian, I agree with them. Mozilla is now non-free!
"Some chinese kid who makes 8$ a month banging out drivers for generic wifi card #23 isn't producing quality code"
How about stopping the racism here?
Even if you had a degree in CS and specialize in databases you will have a hard time diving into someones elses code to find the bug and fix it, especially since architectural documents are nonexistent for most OSS.
For most people the interest in OSS is that the software is "free as in beer". If OSS projects started to charge for the product you would see interest in such projects rapidly fading.
"Have you ever tried configuring Windows for commodity hardware (i.e., not bought from a big name manufacturer?). It's near impossible to find drivers that work properly. Under Linux most stuff "just works". Edit text files? Ever try to clean up spyware and adware from a Windows machine before Adaware existed? You're talking serious registry hacking there. Let's not forget all the little tweaks to the TCP/IP stack under Windows that requires, that's right, more registry hacking"
Huh? Are you completely insane or are saying "Windows" but mean "Linux"? Can't get drivers to work for Win2k? Er, for what? Every manufacturer provides Windows drivers. Tweaking the stack? You mean like changing the MTU and stuff? Er, how it is harder to "hack" the registry to change the values rather than editing a text file?
Is everyone insane around here or is it just me?
What degrees do you have? The team lead should have a PhD with significant postdoc work in the field.
I wouldn't bet it. The idea of "heavy peer review" and "many eyes" doesn't play out in the real world. There are less qualified people looking at the MySQL code than any of the closed source products. The idea that a user of product is going to browse through the source code looking for bugs ia laughable. No user has the time for that.
Because the software is free/open source! As you know, that is more important than being useful.
What are your qualifications? Do you have a resume online?
Ah, share after the competition is a bit better. However, you do run into the risk of local maxima, where everyone agrees that doing something using method 'X' is better and therefore no ones tries method 'Y' even though that produces a better result longterm.
Sharing doesn't create innovation, competition does. If everyone shares, every does the same thing and no innovation is produced.
I recommend staying in school and learning basic spelling before attempting anything. I knew Dan Quayle, and you are no Dan Quayle.
According to the status page all entries are disabled or withdrawn. I can't get their broadcast software working on my 2000 box, it keeps saying it can't write to a .txt file.
Anyone have an update?
...buy it with Virtual money.
Nope, wrong. Fission and fusion have not been well understood. Even all the elemential particles aren't known yet. Without the practical applications we wouldn't be spending billions on building the supercolliders.
Sorry, but staring at blobs in the sky and making up theories about how they got there isn't science. The world is no better off with Hubble.
The big difference is that Windows is not just an OS, it is a strategy for Microsoft. The end goal of Microsoft is to get a Windows based product on everything - and they have a centralized strategy to do so. First, by making the Windows "look and feel" the defacto standard so every consumer understands the Windows interface. Second, by leveraging their desktop dominance and integration to get into every market they can. Linux is missing this strategy (which isn't bad, but relegates it to a niche player who can only compete on cost)
Supercolliders exist so we can understand fission and fusion reactions better, which provides a tangible benefit to mankind in the development of fusion/fission power. Telescopes don't provide a tangible benefit, but they provide us with pretty pictures.
10 years and that guy is only on version 2?
I have read all the comments on this, and although I disagree with them I think we should wait until Bruce publishes his paper on the topic. Hopefully slashdot will post a story on it and we can discuss it then.
Uh, there are standards. Those standards are determined by the individual states for the elections that are run by the state to determine who wins the electorial voters of that state (in a presidential election). Notice the words "federal" were not mentioned at all. These are state elections, the system was designed for this purpose. Believe it or not, the people who set up the system knew what they were doing.
That is illogical. Assuming the outsourced engineer is as competent and as productive as the inhouse engineer, outsourcing will always provide savings and you will be outsourced.
Of course you have pointed out the biggest failing (from my perspective) of OSS economics: less code needs to be written since there is code out there available for zero cost. This means less engineers (inhouse or outsourced) are needed. Thats great for the corporations, but bad for you and I.
This was bought by the Internal Revenue Service in order to improve the auditing of tax returns. They say that the additional revenue brought in will easily pay for the device many times over.
If it was for the DHS or NSA you would not have heard about the purchase.