I've heard some of the most ridiculous things in these comments.. including all the bad car-gas/printer-cartridge/dvd player-dvd metaphors. Unfortunately they all have a very important thing in common: those products are meant to have their corresponding 'parts' exchanged by the average user regularly, and the 'parts' are meant to be exchanged quickly and easily. An OS is usually only a one-time thing: you install it and you're done.
The point is, it's not practical at all for HP to not sell computers with Windows pre-installed, for the sake of the consumers. The case could be made that other options should be available, but computers that come with Windows will always be mainstream.
But but computers without an OS forced on you are cheaper and give you more options. And they work! You just have to install the OS on them for them to be useful, but ask anyone who knows anything and they can tell you that's easy...
Show me an entrepreneur or CEO that's willing to license, obtain, and have Windows installed on every computer they buy themselves, and I'll show you a fool. For those who just need what's mainstream and what's best for them and/or their employees, preinstallation is faster, cheaper, and easier. The rest of us linux nerds? We'll just have to do our own thing.
...and the workplace is really Windows' main market. I'm willing to guess that at least half their profits come from corporations. The question is, why do they seem to be switching targets?
The possibility of passwords having been compromised is just that, a possibility. It is speculation based on possible facts. Please don't take it as more than that, though if you went through the ordeal last night then you should probably change your password(s).
It just pisses me off how Novell might be very successful in this, and if they are, it has no benefit for Linux (as in, you know, the free/open source side), and quite possibly a negative effect. All this does is benefit Novell, and once companies write up their drivers, where are the rest of us that use real Linux left? In the dust, and possibly moreso, because now the companies can say with a smile on their faces that they support Linux, and may not ever bother to turn back and support the rest of us. Thanks Novell, for giving the world a stabler Windows.
You have to consider that the personal information, such as name and phone number, are probably there to keep people from voting more than once. Also, if you're filling out a form about your opinions and submitting it - whether it says you're sending it elsewhere or not - you're submitting it, for crap's sake. To submit means to turn something in. It's common sense, really.
Without a privacy policy, the state party can tell your views to anyone at all. If you give the "wrong" answers on abortion or other issues, they can tell your boss, members of your church, or anyone else. In fact, these answers could get distributed to campaigns in your town during get-out-the-vote efforts - precisely the place where "wrong" answers can be most damaging.
I'll believe it when I see it - if anyone really did that, it would be on the news in a heartbeat anyway. And - once again, common sense - it's just not going to happen.
What's worse. That information is on a public Web site. I'm not going to tell you what site we found it on, just to let you know that the data is there. And it can be found. Easily so. In fact, the experts I talked with suggested that having it so readily available is "amazingly stupid" of any data mining company.
Well that doesn't sound all so credible to me, but it does beg some consideration. It does sound like a privacy issue to me. But wait a minute - look at that image a little more closely. All I see is a bunch of names and dates and numbers - no opinions. If someone can prove that the opinions are shown, it's fairly serious. Otherwise, although many people may feel uncomfortable or intruded upon for it, it's only names. So do us all a favor and don't get the wrong impression.
According to Optaros, cost savings is one of the most significant factors.
Quite a few people could have told you that for over a decade. I wonder why it took so long for OSS to catch on in the business world? Sure, Microsoft has had their monopoly, but I would have expected high-end businesses to quickly figure out there was a 'better way'. So, was it lack of awareness, lack of training, or something else?
The order prohibits the Foundation from mentioning the full name on any website under the domain "wikipedia.org".
And how is Wikimedia going to carry that out? Censor the name from going into pages? That would severely hurt their credibility while being ineffective (there are so many ways around computer censors that it's not even funny).
Maguhn admitted that the true reason behind the incident is a fictitious work recently published by a German author in which the main actor has the same (civil) name as Tron. The parents sent a protest to the publisher but were turned down with the argument that the German Wikipedia is using the name as well.
In that case it was, as is clearly stated, fictitious. It could have easily misrepresented 'Tron', while Wikipedia is (or strives to be) factual. How can they tell us to stop telling the truth? More importantly, does this mean any old criminal can demand that his name be removed from Wikipedia? Who has the power here - a foreign country that Wikimedia isn't even based in, or Wikimedia itself? Where do freedom of speech/press end and let privacy and the whims of different countries begin to take control?
Sounds a whole lot like the internet control controversy again to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard some of the most ridiculous things in these comments.. including all the bad car-gas/printer-cartridge/dvd player-dvd metaphors. Unfortunately they all have a very important thing in common: those products are meant to have their corresponding 'parts' exchanged by the average user regularly, and the 'parts' are meant to be exchanged quickly and easily. An OS is usually only a one-time thing: you install it and you're done.
The point is, it's not practical at all for HP to not sell computers with Windows pre-installed, for the sake of the consumers. The case could be made that other options should be available, but computers that come with Windows will always be mainstream.
But but computers without an OS forced on you are cheaper and give you more options. And they work! You just have to install the OS on them for them to be useful, but ask anyone who knows anything and they can tell you that's easy...
Show me an entrepreneur or CEO that's willing to license, obtain, and have Windows installed on every computer they buy themselves, and I'll show you a fool. For those who just need what's mainstream and what's best for them and/or their employees, preinstallation is faster, cheaper, and easier. The rest of us linux nerds? We'll just have to do our own thing.
...and the workplace is really Windows' main market. I'm willing to guess that at least half their profits come from corporations. The question is, why do they seem to be switching targets?
The possibility of passwords having been compromised is just that, a possibility. It is speculation based on possible facts. Please don't take it as more than that, though if you went through the ordeal last night then you should probably change your password(s).
It just pisses me off how Novell might be very successful in this, and if they are, it has no benefit for Linux (as in, you know, the free/open source side), and quite possibly a negative effect. All this does is benefit Novell, and once companies write up their drivers, where are the rest of us that use real Linux left? In the dust, and possibly moreso, because now the companies can say with a smile on their faces that they support Linux, and may not ever bother to turn back and support the rest of us. Thanks Novell, for giving the world a stabler Windows.
Perhaps there's no need to learn how to program it - all the software they need to conduct research and whatnot has probably already been made?
You have to consider that the personal information, such as name and phone number, are probably there to keep people from voting more than once. Also, if you're filling out a form about your opinions and submitting it - whether it says you're sending it elsewhere or not - you're submitting it, for crap's sake. To submit means to turn something in. It's common sense, really.
Without a privacy policy, the state party can tell your views to anyone at all. If you give the "wrong" answers on abortion or other issues, they can tell your boss, members of your church, or anyone else. In fact, these answers could get distributed to campaigns in your town during get-out-the-vote efforts - precisely the place where "wrong" answers can be most damaging.
I'll believe it when I see it - if anyone really did that, it would be on the news in a heartbeat anyway. And - once again, common sense - it's just not going to happen.
What's worse. That information is on a public Web site. I'm not going to tell you what site we found it on, just to let you know that the data is there. And it can be found. Easily so. In fact, the experts I talked with suggested that having it so readily available is "amazingly stupid" of any data mining company.
Well that doesn't sound all so credible to me, but it does beg some consideration. It does sound like a privacy issue to me. But wait a minute - look at that image a little more closely. All I see is a bunch of names and dates and numbers - no opinions. If someone can prove that the opinions are shown, it's fairly serious. Otherwise, although many people may feel uncomfortable or intruded upon for it, it's only names. So do us all a favor and don't get the wrong impression.
In case you didn't catch it, it's NOT the first ever Gentoo LiveCD; it's the first ever Gentoo LiveCD with an installer (GUI to boot).
You can't take it with you. So Arizona resort operator David Pizer has a plan to come back and get it.
Does anyone else think this sounds like a bad horror movie?
According to Optaros, cost savings is one of the most significant factors.
Quite a few people could have told you that for over a decade. I wonder why it took so long for OSS to catch on in the business world? Sure, Microsoft has had their monopoly, but I would have expected high-end businesses to quickly figure out there was a 'better way'. So, was it lack of awareness, lack of training, or something else?
From the Wikipedia article:
The order prohibits the Foundation from mentioning the full name on any website under the domain "wikipedia.org".
And how is Wikimedia going to carry that out? Censor the name from going into pages? That would severely hurt their credibility while being ineffective (there are so many ways around computer censors that it's not even funny).
Maguhn admitted that the true reason behind the incident is a fictitious work recently published by a German author in which the main actor has the same (civil) name as Tron. The parents sent a protest to the publisher but were turned down with the argument that the German Wikipedia is using the name as well.
In that case it was, as is clearly stated, fictitious. It could have easily misrepresented 'Tron', while Wikipedia is (or strives to be) factual. How can they tell us to stop telling the truth? More importantly, does this mean any old criminal can demand that his name be removed from Wikipedia? Who has the power here - a foreign country that Wikimedia isn't even based in, or Wikimedia itself? Where do freedom of speech/press end and let privacy and the whims of different countries begin to take control?
Sounds a whole lot like the internet control controversy again to me.