Absolutely incorrect. JP Morgan spent little to no time with his family. He was too busy building his empire and running fat bags of cash to the bank. Do you think his children or ascendants felt malnourished because of his lack of family time? I think not. They are still flipping through wads of bank and staring in awe at portraits of him.
Ah no. I can, because I taught myself. You wasted my time with your incessant, subjective course material while I sought a piece of paper which certifies that I am able. Or something to that effect.
With as many servers that I have to touch, I would have to hire a data entry person to add them to my/etc/hosts file. Server gets deployed, name added to DNS...next!
That is why I lack any serious intelligence... my career is a sham... my ego has been deflated... I'm ruined.
All because I played nintendo like it was a religion when I was younger.
Then I realized I played RPG's and all the other interesting games too.
*bliss*
I'm saved... a few indiscriminate gaming choices when younger have saved me.
Or not?
I have a feeling this case studies the extreme and not the norm. (as with most things). In any event, we know that too much of anything isn't a good thing. We have been preaching this since times begining.
Mandrakesoft is in business to make money. I know, it is a tired old phrase. I think that they can be successful by doing a few things differently.
The should be making most of their money through media purchases and support contracts. I doubt if they are profiting from free downloads. People want free downloads, because people are stingy. Give them free downloads, but don't put them in packaged format. Compile binaries and dump them in an ftp directory. How many people would want to piece an OS application by application?
Donations for QA testing? That is a little absurd. Although, I was directly approached by a Mandrakesoft senior executive once, who asked if I could help in QA testing a piece of their software. I think it is time for a revamp of the business model. Perhaps Linux companies should start selling hardware in addition to their OS distribution. Sun, IBM, and Hewlett Packard make a little money selling hardware.
Slashdot posters are looking more and more like CIO's and less like techies.
You people are totally missing the point of the Linux creed. The GNU/Linux operating system is an operating system for people who like to tinker and hack and play around with operating systems! It's free software. There are certain freedoms that come with it. Say....the freedom to modify source. If you don't like some of the things that Red Hat does...use the force and change the source. It's totally customizable. rpm -e still works. Replace packages, downgrade to RH 6.2, I don't care. Just quit complaining about it. If your car needs some sort of modification, and the mechanic that you take it to tells you that he is going to do some innovative things...they haven't been done before; you should make the decision whether or not to let him do it. If you let him make these modifications, you were the one who made that decision. You are at fault. Either take your car to another mechanic, or god forbid, do it yourself.
I don't have a single problem with RH 7. Any incompatibilities that I have found, I have fixed. I have modified source, and made it work.
I am a SysAdmin, and I really don't care for the CEO, I just browse company traffic for the sheer fun of it....er....I never, ever sniff packets. yeah.
No. Comparing popularity in regarsd to Windows being most used as an end user OS as opposed to Apache being used for web serving is not an accurate representation of this argument.
Windows is the most popular OS for client PC's. I understand this, and accept the fact. How many end users have had exposure to other OS's? When people choose an OS, do they actually look at benchmarks, reviews, etc? We are talking about Web Servers, which careful planning is applied to. I have yet to meet a SysAdmin who chooses Apache or IIS because everyone else is. You have to do research on the matter. Which Web Server suits your needs the best? Which platform will you be running it on? Do you need enterprise support? What about modularity and scalability. What are you willing to spend? These subjects are addressed before a Web Server is decided upon.
With all of the hoopla about possible illegalities surrounding Napster, would ISP's really want to take the risk of buying them? In the end, the RIAA will end up winning. Why, do you ask? Well, they have an infinite cash supply, and Napster is somewhat limited in the cash dept. I am sure that the RIAA would love to butt heads with the AOL's, the Earthlink's, @home, and the such. That is just more money that they can seek for licensing the copyrighted materials.
I think the only thing that can save Napster from the RIAA boogeyman is a sympathetic Supreme Court.
In theory, if this quote is valid, and this is the actual opinion of Red Hat, then it is a heinous claim and they should be scrutinized. I am eager to see Tiemann's retort, and am open to the fact that he may have been mis-quoted. I admit, I bit.
It was not a very intelligent thing to do, but in our realm you must be pretty clear on such bold statements. It really doesn't matter who Tiemann was referencing as "we", it could be Red Hat, it could be Cygnus, or he could be indicating the GNU project in general. It's somewhat of an arrogant statement to make, considering all of the entities that have contributed to the open source model. I don't believe that one group has the right to state that they have "started" a particular paradigm. The same can be said for several other paradigms, such as B2B, e-Commerce, the internet, etc. Journalism can be quite ugly and subjective, but so can a quote as extreme as this.
In retrospect, my previous posts on this story were for the most part, while I was in a fit of rage. I am a victim of the blasphemous jaws of journalism. I bit. If you were mis-quoted, perhaps Tiemann was as well.
This is the problem that we face. We see it day in and day out. We criticize those people who subscribe to the fact that mainstream media is "fact", but sometimes lose sight of the quest for the real truth. Our postings on this article(for the most part) are heir apparent of this. We are all guilty of it.
ESR: Perhaps you could shed some insight on Tiemann's unabridged quote?
For the most part, we are not questioning Red Hat's quality (I say "we", though I don't necessarily think that my views reflect those of every other Slashdot visitor). I think Red Hat's quality is still pretty good. Red Hat 7 includes a lot of new and innovative features, which people blow out of proportion because they are used to the same old Red Hat (fear of change is bad), and call the new features "bugs".
That's beside the point. What we are upset about are the heinous claims that Red Hat started the Open Source movement. That is incredibly stupid, or this could just be some bad journalism on cnet's part. Tiemann could very well have been referencing the GNU project, and his quote could have been misconstrued.
I hate to admit it, but MS did have *a lot* to do with the PC revolution. Sure, there where other OS's at the time of the PC era's inception (CP/M is the only one I can remember), but DOS spearheaded the PC breakout. You could also say that IBM started it, which is a valid statement, considering that PC hardware was IBM based. There is no clearcut innovator to such a large scale paradigm. There will always be naysayers and "we did it first"(s). This comment, however, is a blatant lie.
Bill Joy was open sourcing several years ago. Paul Vixie was doing it in the early 80's. RMS doesn't necessarily align himself with the Open Source movement, rather the Free Software movement. From which he makes a clear distinction. There are probably several people who will claim that they pioneered the Open Source movement, but I don't think a single authority on the subject can be found.
I do think that ESR is the first to submit detailed essays about Open Source, and I tout him as being one of the most influential people in regards to open source.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely incorrect. JP Morgan spent little to no time with his family. He was too busy building his empire and running fat bags of cash to the bank. Do you think his children or ascendants felt malnourished because of his lack of family time? I think not. They are still flipping through wads of bank and staring in awe at portraits of him.
Ah no. I can, because I taught myself. You wasted my time with your incessant, subjective course material while I sought a piece of paper which certifies that I am able. Or something to that effect.
With as many servers that I have to touch, I would have to hire a data entry person to add them to my /etc/hosts file. Server gets deployed, name added to DNS...next!
Have you ever tried to ssh to e4500.sun4u.sparc.sun.dmz.foodorder.web01.joesdeli .domain.com?
There are much more efficient ways to name servers.
At first, I read this and thought...
That is why I lack any serious intelligence... my career is a sham... my ego has been deflated... I'm ruined.
All because I played nintendo like it was a religion when I was younger.
Then I realized I played RPG's and all the other interesting games too.
*bliss*
I'm saved... a few indiscriminate gaming choices when younger have saved me.
Or not?
I have a feeling this case studies the extreme and not the norm. (as with most things). In any event, we know that too much of anything isn't a good thing. We have been preaching this since times begining.
I am not a lawyer, but my law classes in college taught me that seizure via probable cause is still a plausible option to law enforcement agencies.
Mandrakesoft is in business to make money. I know, it is a tired old phrase. I think that they can be successful by doing a few things differently.
The should be making most of their money through media purchases and support contracts. I doubt if they are profiting from free downloads. People want free downloads, because people are stingy. Give them free downloads, but don't put them in packaged format. Compile binaries and dump them in an ftp directory. How many people would want to piece an OS application by application?
Donations for QA testing? That is a little absurd. Although, I was directly approached by a Mandrakesoft senior executive once, who asked if I could help in QA testing a piece of their software. I think it is time for a revamp of the business model. Perhaps Linux companies should start selling hardware in addition to their OS distribution. Sun, IBM, and Hewlett Packard make a little money selling hardware.
Could you work on making my i1000's battery last for more than 1 day *grumble*
Well dig his ass up. We need to win!!!
If used properly, Napster will help reduce the risk of transmission of mp3's and many other internetly transmitted diseases
You people are totally missing the point of the Linux creed. The GNU/Linux operating system is an operating system for people who like to tinker and hack and play around with operating systems! It's free software. There are certain freedoms that come with it. Say....the freedom to modify source. If you don't like some of the things that Red Hat does...use the force and change the source. It's totally customizable. rpm -e still works. Replace packages, downgrade to RH 6.2, I don't care. Just quit complaining about it. If your car needs some sort of modification, and the mechanic that you take it to tells you that he is going to do some innovative things...they haven't been done before; you should make the decision whether or not to let him do it. If you let him make these modifications, you were the one who made that decision. You are at fault. Either take your car to another mechanic, or god forbid, do it yourself.
I don't have a single problem with RH 7. Any incompatibilities that I have found, I have fixed. I have modified source, and made it work.
I am a SysAdmin, and I really don't care for the CEO, I just browse company traffic for the sheer fun of it....er....I never, ever sniff packets. yeah.
It looks like Dell is speaking out of both sides of the mouth
Windows is the most popular OS for client PC's. I understand this, and accept the fact. How many end users have had exposure to other OS's? When people choose an OS, do they actually look at benchmarks, reviews, etc? We are talking about Web Servers, which careful planning is applied to. I have yet to meet a SysAdmin who chooses Apache or IIS because everyone else is. You have to do research on the matter. Which Web Server suits your needs the best? Which platform will you be running it on? Do you need enterprise support? What about modularity and scalability. What are you willing to spend? These subjects are addressed before a Web Server is decided upon.
Dell would use Red Hat, because they are a Red Hat distributor.
Netcraft. They give some basic info about webservers; what people are using, what is used the most (*cough* Apache *cough*).
mod +1 Funny
I think the only thing that can save Napster from the RIAA boogeyman is a sympathetic Supreme Court.
It was not a very intelligent thing to do, but in our realm you must be pretty clear on such bold statements. It really doesn't matter who Tiemann was referencing as "we", it could be Red Hat, it could be Cygnus, or he could be indicating the GNU project in general. It's somewhat of an arrogant statement to make, considering all of the entities that have contributed to the open source model. I don't believe that one group has the right to state that they have "started" a particular paradigm. The same can be said for several other paradigms, such as B2B, e-Commerce, the internet, etc. Journalism can be quite ugly and subjective, but so can a quote as extreme as this.
This is the problem that we face. We see it day in and day out. We criticize those people who subscribe to the fact that mainstream media is "fact", but sometimes lose sight of the quest for the real truth. Our postings on this article(for the most part) are heir apparent of this. We are all guilty of it.
ESR: Perhaps you could shed some insight on Tiemann's unabridged quote?
That's beside the point. What we are upset about are the heinous claims that Red Hat started the Open Source movement. That is incredibly stupid, or this could just be some bad journalism on cnet's part. Tiemann could very well have been referencing the GNU project, and his quote could have been misconstrued.
Yes it did. And Red Hat was originally based (somewhat) on Slackware.
I hate to admit it, but MS did have *a lot* to do with the PC revolution. Sure, there where other OS's at the time of the PC era's inception (CP/M is the only one I can remember), but DOS spearheaded the PC breakout. You could also say that IBM started it, which is a valid statement, considering that PC hardware was IBM based. There is no clearcut innovator to such a large scale paradigm. There will always be naysayers and "we did it first"(s). This comment, however, is a blatant lie.
I do think that ESR is the first to submit detailed essays about Open Source, and I tout him as being one of the most influential people in regards to open source.
Bad move on Red Hat's part.
[kirwin@xxxx kirwin]$ uptime
1:52PM up 99 days, 7:59, 1 user, load averages: 0.08, 0.30, 0.60
what is the point you are trying to make?
PS: Cobalts are not new.