Considering this study was going after business computer use, it completely in-line to assume that the user will not need to install their own workstation as they will have an IT guy to come and do it for them.
So if he wanted to be able to talk about it so bad, and even turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could; why in the world is he not saying who he won this judgement against? He seems to be going out of his way to avoid doing exactly what he claimed he wanted to be able to do.
According to the author's chronology of events, he had already begun the filing in Small Claims Court (costing $135) for getting his money back, and he mentioned this as part of the reason for not accepting the settlement.
If you donate your copy of windows to a charitable organization, then you implicitly accept ownership of it (at least enough ownership to be able to donate it as your property) which would go against your claim of getting a refund for it.
Besides, I think most Windows EULAs state specifically that the license is non-transferable.
As recounted in the story, the Small Claims Court judge properly made the plaintiff "prove up" his case. However, when the plaintiff did so he didn't bother to mention that he agreed to accept $10.00 to settle his claim
He did submit the $10.00 check as evidence to the judge, so why would he need to explain that part unless the judge brought it up?
If that were truely the case, Gates would have a monopoly on Mexican resturants, not computer software.
Re:Maybe they need to change the name....
on
Slackware Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
You could say the same thing about Gentoo, or Peanut Linux, or Knoppix. They don't have names that would necessarily float well in a corporate environment. The good thing is that many of us don't use Linux in a corporate environment, or do and also use it at home. Slackware is a fantastic distro to those users, nevermind the name.
I guess my point is that I don't feel having one distribution named Slackware (with a rather small userbase) will tarnish the name of Linux in the corporate atmosphere. The first thing that a Linux user or admin understands is that the software is free, so anyone can make any distribution they like with it. Blaming the lack of coporate adoption on something as insignificant as the name of one of hundreds of Linux distros sounds like a pretty weak argument to me.
Besides, I rarely hear of anyone in Linux pushing Slackware as a corporate solution. I use it, but I have my reasons, none of which involve corporate motives. It's simple, clean, elegant, and it works. No name will change that.
Trust me... if/when you get married you will continue to aimlessly surf, if only to come up with new and interesting things to talk about with your wife. After being married for a year, my daily grind drivel is only so interesting to the one person who's listened to it every day.
IMO aimless surfing can be a mind-expansive activity if done to do more than simply waste time.
For this reason (or at least as one of my reasons), I bought my laptop second-hand. Costed me about $350 for a reasonably-powered IBM ThinkPad 600E with no OS installed. FreeBSD 4.8 and 5.0 both installed quite effortlessly and 4.8 is the only OS I run on it. No Microsoft tax necessary-- the previous owner was nice enough to pay it for me.
Galileo lived around the age of the Renissance. Women, particularly in Italy, were considered beautiful if they were big, or at least full-figured. I don't think Galileo would have needed a telescopic lens to see his "really attractive woman living next door" under those circumstances.
Rather, I suspect Galileo was more interested in checking out the beautiful Amazonian women on neighboring planets.
I don't think its the laptop itself that's more comfortable, but rather the freedom to be anywhere that raises your level of comfort.
Perfect example: My desktop PC is quite comfortable to use with a 21" monitor at eye level, and a nice adjustable computer chair at my desk.
My laptop, with me in my Lay-Z-Boy in recliner-mode, is tons more comfortable than my desktop computer space.
A laptop's comfort level is directly proportional to the comfort of your best living/working space. A desktop PC's comfort level is only proportional to the comfort of space specifically designed for the desktop computer. Not only that, but it is very nice (with the aid of WiFi) to work or browse off of my back porch every once and a while.
When I can buy a 19/21" LCD that doesn't completely blur motion at 30+ FPS and costs $300, then I'll consider it. Until that time its not ideal by any stretch of the imagination (at least for my needs).
SDSL comes with a service level agreement, so you can recoup your costs if the DSL is down or speeds aren't adequate. Their (cheaper) RADSL packages don't come with SLAs and are generally cheaper.
either pay the local Wi-Fi Admin to rent all this stuff: OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux VPN, Squid web proxy, icecast server, a locally-shared fileserver, Quake/Half-Life server and such to share costs and assure him a living (without counting the costs of these computers)
This can all run on one computer. I have a web proxy, game server, VPN, icecast server, and Samba fileserver running on one PPro-200 box. The machine costed me $285 ($45 for the bare-bones kit + CPU and RAM, $200 for ATAPI-RAID and HDDs, and about $40 for the case) and has been running for the last 4 years with maybe 7 days of downtime (OS updates) running FreeBSD. The only revolving cost I have is power, and that equates to about $3 a month.
There are geeks who already have facilities like this setup in their own houses/apartments, so the cost to add these features is really only the time it takes to sign-up a neighbor or two.
I'm also NOT suggest someone try to make a living off doing this, but they could easily recoup the cost of their DSL (and quite likely other related costs) by providing a service like this.
This isn't a REQUIREMENT to share your bandwidth-- Speakeasy has always allowed you to share your connection with whomever you wish. This is simply so you can opt for Speakeasy to handle the billing to those you share with (if you so choose). Its by no means a requirement, and if you are sharing to people you trust will keep up with their share of the payment, then there is most likely not a reason to use this program (unless the extra email adresses, web space and such make it worth it to you). Scam my ass, you just misread their intentions.
I got this email about 6 hours ago and had a chance to check the site before it was/.ed. Very interesting idea, as it brings the whole idea of a bandwidth reseller down to the user/geek level. Combine this with a OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux VPN, Squid web proxy, icecast server, a locally-shared fileserver, Quake/Half-Life server and such, and you could sell a value-added DSL/WiFi package to your neighbors. Get enough to sign-up (or add enough extra features to raise the price) and you could quite likely cover the entire DSL line cost via subscription co-payments, getting your own share of the DSL just for providing support to your users.
I would think that a more rational letter might prove somewhat more fruitful. Here's my letter to Mr. Hatch:
I just read a report on Yahoo! (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030617/ap_on_hi_te/downloading_music) concerning some comments you made regarding the ability to destroy computers of individuals who download copyrighted material against the wishes of the author. You are actually suggesting the destruction of someone's private property for nothing other than an accusation of violation of copyright, a punishment which hardly fits the crime, not to mention that the "criminal" here doesn't have the benefit of due process or a trial by jury to determine if he actually committed a crime in the first place. I am also a published musician with a copyright registered in the US Copyright Office, and I find your comments regarding this situation as irreprehensible and expect much more from an elected representative of the people. While I appreciate your frustration with the problem of illegal use of copyrighted material, I remind you that someone accused of copyright infringement still is still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I sincerely hope you choose to make a more rational and informed judgement on issues like this in the future.
Just want to point out that the new Metallica CD contains an 80 minute DVD containing live performances of the entire album. Typically "free" DVDs are about 20 minutes, so you get quite a deal with this.
Beauty (and value, in this case) is in the eye of the beholder. I'd akin an 80 minute Metallica live DVD with getting a root canal by a epileptic dentist.
Why is it that I could rob a 7-11 of $100 and get jail time, but companies can rob the populus of MILLIONS of dollars and they are immune to everything?
Record companies aren't holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy one of their $18+ CDs. I don't side with record companies on this case either (as I'm one of the ones getting a $13 check), but your analogy doesn't fit.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering this study was going after business computer use, it completely in-line to assume that the user will not need to install their own workstation as they will have an IT guy to come and do it for them.
So if he wanted to be able to talk about it so bad, and even turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could; why in the world is he not saying who he won this judgement against? He seems to be going out of his way to avoid doing exactly what he claimed he wanted to be able to do.
According to the author's chronology of events, he had already begun the filing in Small Claims Court (costing $135) for getting his money back, and he mentioned this as part of the reason for not accepting the settlement.
Would this be possible...?
If you donate your copy of windows to a charitable organization, then you implicitly accept ownership of it (at least enough ownership to be able to donate it as your property) which would go against your claim of getting a refund for it.
Besides, I think most Windows EULAs state specifically that the license is non-transferable.
As recounted in the story, the Small Claims Court judge properly made the plaintiff "prove up" his case. However, when the plaintiff did so he didn't bother to mention that he agreed to accept $10.00 to settle his claim
He did submit the $10.00 check as evidence to the judge, so why would he need to explain that part unless the judge brought it up?
Here's a good place to start.
No, I don't work for these people; I bought an off-lease ThinkPad from them.
Since when has any Apple PC come with a copy of Windows?
In every pile of crap is a diamond.
If that were truely the case, Gates would have a monopoly on Mexican resturants, not computer software.
You could say the same thing about Gentoo, or Peanut Linux, or Knoppix. They don't have names that would necessarily float well in a corporate environment. The good thing is that many of us don't use Linux in a corporate environment, or do and also use it at home. Slackware is a fantastic distro to those users, nevermind the name.
I guess my point is that I don't feel having one distribution named Slackware (with a rather small userbase) will tarnish the name of Linux in the corporate atmosphere. The first thing that a Linux user or admin understands is that the software is free, so anyone can make any distribution they like with it. Blaming the lack of coporate adoption on something as insignificant as the name of one of hundreds of Linux distros sounds like a pretty weak argument to me.
Besides, I rarely hear of anyone in Linux pushing Slackware as a corporate solution. I use it, but I have my reasons, none of which involve corporate motives. It's simple, clean, elegant, and it works. No name will change that.
All it takes is one insider to leak the code and this argument in moot. Remember, no copyrights?
Trust me... if/when you get married you will continue to aimlessly surf, if only to come up with new and interesting things to talk about with your wife. After being married for a year, my daily grind drivel is only so interesting to the one person who's listened to it every day.
IMO aimless surfing can be a mind-expansive activity if done to do more than simply waste time.
For this reason (or at least as one of my reasons), I bought my laptop second-hand. Costed me about $350 for a reasonably-powered IBM ThinkPad 600E with no OS installed. FreeBSD 4.8 and 5.0 both installed quite effortlessly and 4.8 is the only OS I run on it. No Microsoft tax necessary-- the previous owner was nice enough to pay it for me.
Galileo lived around the age of the Renissance. Women, particularly in Italy, were considered beautiful if they were big, or at least full-figured. I don't think Galileo would have needed a telescopic lens to see his "really attractive woman living next door" under those circumstances.
Rather, I suspect Galileo was more interested in checking out the beautiful Amazonian women on neighboring planets.
I don't think its the laptop itself that's more comfortable, but rather the freedom to be anywhere that raises your level of comfort.
Perfect example: My desktop PC is quite comfortable to use with a 21" monitor at eye level, and a nice adjustable computer chair at my desk.
My laptop, with me in my Lay-Z-Boy in recliner-mode, is tons more comfortable than my desktop computer space.
A laptop's comfort level is directly proportional to the comfort of your best living/working space. A desktop PC's comfort level is only proportional to the comfort of space specifically designed for the desktop computer. Not only that, but it is very nice (with the aid of WiFi) to work or browse off of my back porch every once and a while.
When I can buy a 19/21" LCD that doesn't completely blur motion at 30+ FPS and costs $300, then I'll consider it. Until that time its not ideal by any stretch of the imagination (at least for my needs).
How is Mozilla Mail painful?
When its used over an exported X session to a client with a 608kbps DSL upstream.
For this reason I still prefer Pine w/ PineGPG.
SDSL comes with a service level agreement, so you can recoup your costs if the DSL is down or speeds aren't adequate. Their (cheaper) RADSL packages don't come with SLAs and are generally cheaper.
either pay the local Wi-Fi Admin to rent all this stuff: OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux VPN, Squid web proxy, icecast server, a locally-shared fileserver, Quake/Half-Life server and such to share costs and assure him a living (without counting the costs of these computers)
This can all run on one computer. I have a web proxy, game server, VPN, icecast server, and Samba fileserver running on one PPro-200 box. The machine costed me $285 ($45 for the bare-bones kit + CPU and RAM, $200 for ATAPI-RAID and HDDs, and about $40 for the case) and has been running for the last 4 years with maybe 7 days of downtime (OS updates) running FreeBSD. The only revolving cost I have is power, and that equates to about $3 a month.
There are geeks who already have facilities like this setup in their own houses/apartments, so the cost to add these features is really only the time it takes to sign-up a neighbor or two.
I'm also NOT suggest someone try to make a living off doing this, but they could easily recoup the cost of their DSL (and quite likely other related costs) by providing a service like this.
This isn't a REQUIREMENT to share your bandwidth-- Speakeasy has always allowed you to share your connection with whomever you wish. This is simply so you can opt for Speakeasy to handle the billing to those you share with (if you so choose). Its by no means a requirement, and if you are sharing to people you trust will keep up with their share of the payment, then there is most likely not a reason to use this program (unless the extra email adresses, web space and such make it worth it to you). Scam my ass, you just misread their intentions.
I got this email about 6 hours ago and had a chance to check the site before it was /.ed. Very interesting idea, as it brings the whole idea of a bandwidth reseller down to the user/geek level. Combine this with a OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux VPN, Squid web proxy, icecast server, a locally-shared fileserver, Quake/Half-Life server and such, and you could sell a value-added DSL/WiFi package to your neighbors. Get enough to sign-up (or add enough extra features to raise the price) and you could quite likely cover the entire DSL line cost via subscription co-payments, getting your own share of the DSL just for providing support to your users.
This is exactly what a trunk is designed for.
I would think that a more rational letter might prove somewhat more fruitful. Here's my letter to Mr. Hatch:
p /20030617/ap_on_hi_te/downloading_music) concerning some comments you made regarding the ability to destroy computers of individuals who download copyrighted material against the wishes of the author. You are actually suggesting the destruction of someone's private property for nothing other than an accusation of violation of copyright, a punishment which hardly fits the crime, not to mention that the "criminal" here doesn't have the benefit of due process or a trial by jury to determine if he actually committed a crime in the first place. I am also a published musician with a copyright registered in the US Copyright Office, and I find your comments regarding this situation as irreprehensible and expect much more from an elected representative of the people. While I appreciate your frustration with the problem of illegal use of copyrighted material, I remind you that someone accused of copyright infringement still is still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I sincerely hope you choose to make a more rational and informed judgement on issues like this in the future.
I just read a report on Yahoo! (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a
(And yes, I am a musician and copyright holder)
Add something to do with slavedriving CowboyNeal and you've just come up with this week's poll!
The analogy fits. They stole from all of us and we had no idea.
From m-w.com:
robbery:
: the act or practice of robbing; specifically : larceny from the person or presence of another by violence or threat
This is NOT what record companies are/were doing. Your analogy does not fit.
Just want to point out that the new Metallica CD contains an 80 minute DVD containing live performances of the entire album. Typically "free" DVDs are about 20 minutes, so you get quite a deal with this.
Beauty (and value, in this case) is in the eye of the beholder. I'd akin an 80 minute Metallica live DVD with getting a root canal by a epileptic dentist.
Why is it that I could rob a 7-11 of $100 and get jail time, but companies can rob the populus of MILLIONS of dollars and they are immune to everything?
Record companies aren't holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy one of their $18+ CDs. I don't side with record companies on this case either (as I'm one of the ones getting a $13 check), but your analogy doesn't fit.