This is great news for everyone who believes in fair competition in the marketplace. Kudos to that judge, and I hope the countersuit goes well!
This is not competition, it would be competition if Psystar had created it's own operating system. What Psystar is doing is taking Apple's work and trying to profit off it.
Many more years ago than I'd care to discuss, I used to pull graveyards at the local 7-11. Corporate and Franchise policy back then was, that if you were robbed, you gave up the entire store, on the theory that you were more valuable than the cash or store contents.
Years ago I worked at 7-11 too. One day we were all called into the district office for a meeting. In the meeting we were told somebody was buying the chain but not to worry, none of us were going to lose our jobs. Less than a week later I did. Three people worked at that store, the manager, an assistant manager and me. The assistant manager and I were fired, and the manager was moved to another store and demoted to assistant manager.
They, 7-11, didn't care what so ever about employees.
What you do is store sensitive material on secure servers and have people check out copies of material that they have access to. I'm sure keeping sensitive data off local hard drives would be easier than actually protecting all those hard drives.
What if you need to keep sensitive data with you? For instance financial data or health records? Currently I use online banking and access my credit card to monitor my accounts and pay the credit bills. I used to use a service that provided access to my credit reports, but canceled that and am looking for another service. I also want to open an online investment account. If I could I'd also like to have a copy my medical records. For both of these reasons I'd like to be able to encrypt my data.
For a suitably large grid, such as that being proposed in the US, wind can provide some 30%+? of it's capacity as baseload (as it's always blowing somewhere you see). From a British report IIRC.
The wind may be blowing somewhere but where? The further electricity has to be transmitted the more power is lost even with HVDC, High-voltage direct current. Now I'm not against alternative energy sources like solar and wind, I'd like to build a home Off the Grid powered by solar and/or wind, but there has to be a baseload of power. For Off the Grid applications batteries are used.
I see that's in the Projects tab. And is new, from the page you provided the link to "OpenOffice.org 3.0.1 has been released on January 26th, 2009." About three weeks ago I upgraded from Tiger to Leopard but before I did I went through all of the software I wanted to run to see if I could use what I already had or if I needed to get a new version. When I checked OO.org all they had for download was a version that required X11, the one I linked to.
It's good they released the native Mac port for OpenOffice but I see no reason to download and install it when NeoOffice works for me. In a few months that may change but for now NeoOffice is all I need.
what you see is not what prints. There's no way to print in landscape mode short of rotating your entire image, manually, 90 degrees to one side.
Switching to landscape mode in Page Setup in every other application is sufficient to produce landscape-orientation printouts, but it has never worked in any version of Inkscape.
What you said used to be true, but OpenOffice.org 3 introduced a native Mac port in October of 2008.
No, OO.org 3 is not Mac native. It still requires X11. I downloaded and tried to install it when I heard it was supposed to be a Mac native app. The native version is Aqua Pre-Release, and is still being tested.
Make changes where it *makes sense*. Microsoft Office currently is best of breed
I agree it's better to make changes when it makes sense, but MS Office is best of breed? More like it's the dominate office suite.
Windows on the desktop obviously goes side by side with this.
There's nothing I could do on my Windows PC I can't do on my Mac, except for suffer through crashes.
I have seen far too often that 'techies' get involved and just because the technology is more superior (in some way) they totally discount the business benefit from having it set up that way.
I agree, the first step when contemplating something new is to evaluate what's being used and what's needed then choosing something that fills those needs.
What is your roadmap for the future of IT? What paths are you looking to cross? Say the CIO wants to invest some money into Sharepoint, or wants to use WIM (standard image format) for deployments, or wants to lock down users better (AD Policies). These things are *windows specific*.
Here's the problem, these are as you say "windows specific". That's locking in one vender instead of analyzing the needs. As an example I'll use Vista. I want to be able to play media files, maybe serve them. So do I get Vista Home or Vista Ultimate? Because a requirement is a server, Ultimate is the better choice. However if what's needed or wanted is an office suite, light photo correcting such as red eye removal, and the occasional games Home would be better. What you're saying, it seems to me, that you would require Ultimate for this.
Usually the cost of changing everything, retraining users, and getting them to be AS PRODUCTIVE as they were before is far more expensive than to keep technology the same and use branches into other things to accomplish business tasks.
Retraining is needed for upgrades, even MS upgrades, as well so that's a wash.
Educating students using the tools their future employers are going to ask them to use when they graduate is not pushing an ideology.
Not all employers want employees with MS Office experience. Maybe for their office drones but not everybody.
Actually Friday my brother-in-law who's a Certified Financial Planner, CFP, and runs his own business called and asked me about those netbooks. He said he saw one in Target with Linux and wanted to know what I thought about them, if they were any good. I guess seeing as how the economy is bad he liked that the netbook was only $300 or whatever. I said I didn't know what Target had or anything so he asked me to look at it.
Do people want to use what's best, or what they are told to use? I think it's the second. And a third choice, what they're used to. A good higher education should teach students to evaluate what is best.
Apple's rapid and recent increase in market share should tell you everything you REALLY want to know about why Linux isn't succeeded. It's the operating system, stupid. People just don't like it.
People don't like Linux? I think that's only a part of it, a bigger part of it are that people haven't heard of or don't know what Linux is. I recently went into an Apple store, I'm typing this on a Mac, because I want to install Ubuntu on it to dualboot Leopard and Ubuntu. I asked if by installing Ubuntu the warranty would be invalidated. When I mentioned Ubuntu I got a blank stare, the person had no idea what I was talking about and asked what it is. I said it's one of the distros of Linux, he still had that look. I've gotten the same blank stare from a number of other people when I spoke about Linux. Many people, when you talk about an operating system they have no clue what is being talked about. As for Apple's market growth, marketing had nothing to do with it?
You are an un-American SOB because you want to impose your own tyranny onto other people.
The US consumes about 100 quads a year.
Show me a way to reduce that by say 20% without a net reduction in GNP and standard of living.
The only way GNP will be reduced is if people cut spending, and as the financial melt down showed people do need to cut spending and save more. How many are losing or are about to lose their homes? You don't think their standard of living won't be affected? Now by becoming more energy efficient people can save money. For instance by turning down the thermostat by a few degrees mys sister was able to save about $150 a month in heating last year. And as I said above, all my lights are CFLs. Even though I use a computer almost all day everyday, my electric bill is probably the lowest I know. Because my bills are relatively low I have more money to spend on other things, and that helps me because I am on disability and don't work. Try to live on what I get for disability then see if you don't try to cut your expenses too.
This idea that everyone can live off the food in their own yard is happy-talk. If the world tried to provide its own food, we would quickly starve. Large fields are more efficient.
Seeing as more and more city farms and gardens are cropping up all over the world, plenty of people disagree with you and are proving gardening does feed people. And large fields only produce more food if they are drowned in synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. All of these are made from petrochemicals.
I applaud your personal experiment, but there isn't enough vegy oil for 1% of the population.
So, instead of a number of different solutions working together you want one big solution? That's what got us where we are now, it only worked for a short period of tyme though.
we went to the moon without impacting the economy. Going to the moon is an easier task than solving our energy problems.
Maybe not if we had an Apollo or Manhattan scaled project. Heck, the US did those alone but it wouldn't have to with energy. Europe and Asian nations could very well join in the effort. Even China, which passed the US in CO2 emissions, is pushing for alternative energy.
If I were going to be using nothing but Film Gimp I might consider it, but I actually use my tools in a novel (to OSS, anyway): in concert. I expect my tools to benefit my workflow, not hinder it by switching up everything and anything when I jump from (say) Photoshop to Illustrator.
I've heard, I haven't personally, that some pros do use GIMP and CinePaint in concert with other FOOS. When I mentioned that GIMP does not have 16 bits of colour channel never mind 24, one said he used GIMP for most of his work then switched to CinePaint or another program to work on deeper colours.
UI
I don't think the UI is that much a valid criticism. You may not like the UI some software has but others do. This can be seen here on/., some like Windows, some OS X, and some the various desktops of Linux. There are photogs who even like Linux.
it's pretty stupid not to teach what's actually used.
Actually I think it's stupid to teach whatever program instead of the principles. Teach the principles and a person should be able to use whatever without too much training, but when teaching a specific application even an upgrade to a new version will require more training. Depending what it is I don't think it's too difficult to switch software, or OSes. As I said in my previous post I use OS X Leopard, I upgraded from Tiger a couple of weeks ago. And I switched to Tiger From Windows, which I've used since 3.x.
- if they go with OOo, the licensing is cheaper (free). They also will be offering a solution that absolutely everyone can use : teacher, staff, university computer labs, students at home, on their laptops... all this regardless of the system : Windows, Mac OS
The problem with this is that OpenOffice does not have a native Mac port. To install and use OpenOffice X Windows has to be installed. Now there is a native version office suite for Macs based on OO, NeoOffice, which I use myself.
I will give you that visio and photoshop is currently better than the oss solutions
That's very generous of you. Can I have Illustrator and InDesign too, if I ask really nicely?
Actually that depends on what you're doing. I don't know about Visio but photographers use both GIMP and CinePaint for photo editing. An open source program for editing vector graphics is Inkscape while Scribus is for desktop publishing.
OSS will have a better shot at making Photoshop and the rest of the Adobe suite work on Linux than they will at getting graphics professionals to switch to a product nobody in the industry uses.
Except graphics pros and photographer do use FOOS, on Linux, OS X, and Windows. Here are some discussions on Photo.net about GIMP and some about Linux.
Because I don't assume that the needs of the users are met. I do graphics work. I've used both the open and closed ecosystems' products. The open ecosystem's products, to be pretty frank, suck.
Have you tried CinePaint? If so what was wrong with it? Then same with Inkscape and Blender? Currently I use OS X Leopard and don't have the resources to buy Photoshop CS for graphics/photography. I tried CinePaint but it only works in X Windows and I wasn't able to get it working so I'm planning to install Ubuntu, then I'll be able to use CinePaint. And the others easier.
If I can't do what I want with them I might buy an older upgradeable version of CS off of eBay. But I want to try open source apps first.
There are shitty OSS things too. For example, openoffice sucks, compared to MS Office. Be open about things.
I believe in being open about things but I haven't had a problem with NeoOffice, as I use a Mac I use NeoOffice instead of OpenOffice. So far I haven't had a problem opening MS Office docs, however I haven't opened any complex docs either.
Also look at external offerings. Why run your own mail server, when you can do google apps - I think it's free for non-profits and.edus. Gmail, and instantly, you just saved a bunch of money, and a bunch of work. Now those people can be put to working on other higher priority stuff.
I only use Google to search but I thought with Google Apps you were locked into Google Apps. How do they work with MS Office? If it's the same as OO.org then you still have OO.org's problems with compatibility.
Seems to be the working plan for our government these days, doesn't it?
Yeap, give hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to those who created a financial crisis.
Something I just thought of, what if those billions had been used to build solar and wind farms? How many jobs would be created? Mind you, generally I oppose subsidies but if they are handed out I'd rather see the money get into the hands of working blue collar stiffs.
Well, the people on the planet now (including us) did not create the problem.
We, and I include myself in that, maybe making things worse. As someone once said, "if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem."
At the moment, the idea is to determine what the best course of action is. To me, it seems like the best way to handle the situation is to get as much low hanging fruit as possible (change light bulbs, etc, etc) in the short term. Things like this reduce energy usage and also don't really add an economic cost.
As happened to me, many others are finding out making some changes actually saves them money.
In the long term, switching to nuclear power would probably be the best way to go.
I haven't been convinced nuclear power is needed never mind the best way to go. Some say it's needed as a baseload, however geothermal energy [pdf warning] might be used as a baseload as well. And without subsidies nuclear power wouldn't be profitable. The Free Market CATO Institute has this article from the business and investment magazine "Forbes" on "Why conservatives should join the left's campaign against nuclear power", "Hooked on Subsidies".
lately I've been hearing 'global climate change' rather than warming.
I don't know if this is why climate change is being used instead of global warming but there's a good reason to use climate change. Global Warming makes it sound like it will warm up everywhere. However while the average temp will rise not everyplace will get warmer, some can actually get colder. Extreme weather conditions can also increase. Rainfall patterns can change so an area that is now wet can dry and what is dry can flood.
Slashdot Mirror
This is great news for everyone who believes in fair competition in the marketplace. Kudos to that judge, and I hope the countersuit goes well!
This is not competition, it would be competition if Psystar had created it's own operating system. What Psystar is doing is taking Apple's work and trying to profit off it.
Falcon
Many more years ago than I'd care to discuss, I used to pull graveyards at the local 7-11. Corporate and Franchise policy back then was, that if you were robbed, you gave up the entire store, on the theory that you were more valuable than the cash or store contents.
Years ago I worked at 7-11 too. One day we were all called into the district office for a meeting. In the meeting we were told somebody was buying the chain but not to worry, none of us were going to lose our jobs. Less than a week later I did. Three people worked at that store, the manager, an assistant manager and me. The assistant manager and I were fired, and the manager was moved to another store and demoted to assistant manager.
They, 7-11, didn't care what so ever about employees.
Falcon
What you do is store sensitive material on secure servers and have people check out copies of material that they have access to. I'm sure keeping sensitive data off local hard drives would be easier than actually protecting all those hard drives.
What if you need to keep sensitive data with you? For instance financial data or health records? Currently I use online banking and access my credit card to monitor my accounts and pay the credit bills. I used to use a service that provided access to my credit reports, but canceled that and am looking for another service. I also want to open an online investment account. If I could I'd also like to have a copy my medical records. For both of these reasons I'd like to be able to encrypt my data.
Falcon
For a suitably large grid, such as that being proposed in the US, wind can provide some 30%+? of it's capacity as baseload (as it's always blowing somewhere you see). From a British report IIRC.
The wind may be blowing somewhere but where? The further electricity has to be transmitted the more power is lost even with HVDC, High-voltage direct current. Now I'm not against alternative energy sources like solar and wind, I'd like to build a home Off the Grid powered by solar and/or wind, but there has to be a baseload of power. For Off the Grid applications batteries are used.
Falcon
If that's true, this page is very misleading: http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/download/aqua-Intel.html
I see that's in the Projects tab. And is new, from the page you provided the link to "OpenOffice.org 3.0.1 has been released on January 26th, 2009." About three weeks ago I upgraded from Tiger to Leopard but before I did I went through all of the software I wanted to run to see if I could use what I already had or if I needed to get a new version. When I checked OO.org all they had for download was a version that required X11, the one I linked to.
It's good they released the native Mac port for OpenOffice but I see no reason to download and install it when NeoOffice works for me. In a few months that may change but for now NeoOffice is all I need.
Falcon
First: "photog" sounds retarded. You don't want to sound retarded, do you?
Perhaps you'd better tell that to all of the photographers who use "photog" on Photo.net.
"Well, some people like it" is not a good fucking point to make when you're talking about how the industry works.
I've already provided links to some in the industry who do use CinePaint and other open source software. Are you saying they are all wrong?
industry standard tools--and it's what the grads want to be learning on.
Some not all, but they're not really pros because they don't use what you want them to use I guess.
Falcon
what you see is not what prints. There's no way to print in landscape mode short of rotating your entire image, manually, 90 degrees to one side.
Switching to landscape mode in Page Setup in every other application is sufficient to produce landscape-orientation printouts, but it has never worked in any version of Inkscape.
Ump, I wonder why. Thanks.
Falcon
What you said used to be true, but OpenOffice.org 3 introduced a native Mac port in October of 2008.
No, OO.org 3 is not Mac native. It still requires X11. I downloaded and tried to install it when I heard it was supposed to be a Mac native app. The native version is Aqua Pre-Release, and is still being tested.
Falcon
Make changes where it *makes sense*. Microsoft Office currently is best of breed
I agree it's better to make changes when it makes sense, but MS Office is best of breed? More like it's the dominate office suite.
Windows on the desktop obviously goes side by side with this.
There's nothing I could do on my Windows PC I can't do on my Mac, except for suffer through crashes.
I have seen far too often that 'techies' get involved and just because the technology is more superior (in some way) they totally discount the business benefit from having it set up that way.
I agree, the first step when contemplating something new is to evaluate what's being used and what's needed then choosing something that fills those needs.
What is your roadmap for the future of IT? What paths are you looking to cross? Say the CIO wants to invest some money into Sharepoint, or wants to use WIM (standard image format) for deployments, or wants to lock down users better (AD Policies). These things are *windows specific*.
Here's the problem, these are as you say "windows specific". That's locking in one vender instead of analyzing the needs. As an example I'll use Vista. I want to be able to play media files, maybe serve them. So do I get Vista Home or Vista Ultimate? Because a requirement is a server, Ultimate is the better choice. However if what's needed or wanted is an office suite, light photo correcting such as red eye removal, and the occasional games Home would be better. What you're saying, it seems to me, that you would require Ultimate for this.
Usually the cost of changing everything, retraining users, and getting them to be AS PRODUCTIVE as they were before is far more expensive than to keep technology the same and use branches into other things to accomplish business tasks.
Retraining is needed for upgrades, even MS upgrades, as well so that's a wash.
Falcon
Educating students using the tools their future employers are going to ask them to use when they graduate is not pushing an ideology.
Not all employers want employees with MS Office experience. Maybe for their office drones but not everybody.
Actually Friday my brother-in-law who's a Certified Financial Planner, CFP, and runs his own business called and asked me about those netbooks. He said he saw one in Target with Linux and wanted to know what I thought about them, if they were any good. I guess seeing as how the economy is bad he liked that the netbook was only $300 or whatever. I said I didn't know what Target had or anything so he asked me to look at it.
Falcon
People just like to use what they think is best
Do people want to use what's best, or what they are told to use? I think it's the second. And a third choice, what they're used to. A good higher education should teach students to evaluate what is best.
Apple's rapid and recent increase in market share should tell you everything you REALLY want to know about why Linux isn't succeeded. It's the operating system, stupid. People just don't like it.
People don't like Linux? I think that's only a part of it, a bigger part of it are that people haven't heard of or don't know what Linux is. I recently went into an Apple store, I'm typing this on a Mac, because I want to install Ubuntu on it to dualboot Leopard and Ubuntu. I asked if by installing Ubuntu the warranty would be invalidated. When I mentioned Ubuntu I got a blank stare, the person had no idea what I was talking about and asked what it is. I said it's one of the distros of Linux, he still had that look. I've gotten the same blank stare from a number of other people when I spoke about Linux. Many people, when you talk about an operating system they have no clue what is being talked about. As for Apple's market growth, marketing had nothing to do with it?
You are an un-American SOB because you want to impose your own tyranny onto other people.
And requiring Windows isn't tyranny?
Falcon
A universitys job is to not compromise the future of its students to push an ideology
That's, pushing an ideology, exactly what you are doing by requiring MS Office.
Falcon
The US consumes about 100 quads a year.
Show me a way to reduce that by say 20% without a net reduction in GNP and standard of living.
The only way GNP will be reduced is if people cut spending, and as the financial melt down showed people do need to cut spending and save more. How many are losing or are about to lose their homes? You don't think their standard of living won't be affected? Now by becoming more energy efficient people can save money. For instance by turning down the thermostat by a few degrees mys sister was able to save about $150 a month in heating last year. And as I said above, all my lights are CFLs. Even though I use a computer almost all day everyday, my electric bill is probably the lowest I know. Because my bills are relatively low I have more money to spend on other things, and that helps me because I am on disability and don't work. Try to live on what I get for disability then see if you don't try to cut your expenses too.
This idea that everyone can live off the food in their own yard is happy-talk. If the world tried to provide its own food, we would quickly starve. Large fields are more efficient.
Seeing as more and more city farms and gardens are cropping up all over the world, plenty of people disagree with you and are proving gardening does feed people. And large fields only produce more food if they are drowned in synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. All of these are made from petrochemicals.
I applaud your personal experiment, but there isn't enough vegy oil for 1% of the population.
So, instead of a number of different solutions working together you want one big solution? That's what got us where we are now, it only worked for a short period of tyme though.
we went to the moon without impacting the economy. Going to the moon is an easier task than solving our energy problems.
Maybe not if we had an Apollo or Manhattan scaled project. Heck, the US did those alone but it wouldn't have to with energy. Europe and Asian nations could very well join in the effort. Even China, which passed the US in CO2 emissions, is pushing for alternative energy.
Falcon
If I were going to be using nothing but Film Gimp I might consider it, but I actually use my tools in a novel (to OSS, anyway): in concert. I expect my tools to benefit my workflow, not hinder it by switching up everything and anything when I jump from (say) Photoshop to Illustrator.
I've heard, I haven't personally, that some pros do use GIMP and CinePaint in concert with other FOOS. When I mentioned that GIMP does not have 16 bits of colour channel never mind 24, one said he used GIMP for most of his work then switched to CinePaint or another program to work on deeper colours.
UI
I don't think the UI is that much a valid criticism. You may not like the UI some software has but others do. This can be seen here on /., some like Windows, some OS X, and some the various desktops of Linux. There are photogs who even like Linux.
it's pretty stupid not to teach what's actually used.
Actually I think it's stupid to teach whatever program instead of the principles. Teach the principles and a person should be able to use whatever without too much training, but when teaching a specific application even an upgrade to a new version will require more training. Depending what it is I don't think it's too difficult to switch software, or OSes. As I said in my previous post I use OS X Leopard, I upgraded from Tiger a couple of weeks ago. And I switched to Tiger From Windows, which I've used since 3.x.
Falcon
Student will probably get pirated copies anyway, so there's no point in trying to give them free licenses.
This isn't as easy as it used to be. Now even MS Office requires Activation, Office has since Office 2000.
Falcon
- if they go with OOo, the licensing is cheaper (free). They also will be offering a solution that absolutely everyone can use : teacher, staff, university computer labs, students at home, on their laptops... all this regardless of the system : Windows, Mac OS
The problem with this is that OpenOffice does not have a native Mac port. To install and use OpenOffice X Windows has to be installed. Now there is a native version office suite for Macs based on OO, NeoOffice, which I use myself.
Falcon
I will give you that visio and photoshop is currently better than the oss solutions
That's very generous of you. Can I have Illustrator and InDesign too, if I ask really nicely?
Actually that depends on what you're doing. I don't know about Visio but photographers use both GIMP and CinePaint for photo editing. An open source program for editing vector graphics is Inkscape while Scribus is for desktop publishing.
Falcon
There is the costs of training and implementation... and finding well qualified employees to run your systems will not be easy on a education budget.
There's a cost to upgrading to a new version of proprietary software as well... and student may find it difficult to afford a proprietary program.
Falcon
OSS will have a better shot at making Photoshop and the rest of the Adobe suite work on Linux than they will at getting graphics professionals to switch to a product nobody in the industry uses.
Except graphics pros and photographer do use FOOS, on Linux, OS X, and Windows. Here are some discussions on Photo.net about GIMP and some about Linux.
Falcon
ways:
1. The userbase doesn't turn over every 4 years, so you can invest more in training.
Students are more likely to be used to or open to using something else.
2. You pay the users, not vice versa, so you can tell them what to do.
Perhaps I should have tried that on my professors.
4. Govt employees want solutions, undergrads want mail and porn.
I get all, solutions, mail, and porn, with open source.
Falcon
Because I don't assume that the needs of the users are met. I do graphics work. I've used both the open and closed ecosystems' products. The open ecosystem's products, to be pretty frank, suck.
Have you tried CinePaint? If so what was wrong with it? Then same with Inkscape and Blender? Currently I use OS X Leopard and don't have the resources to buy Photoshop CS for graphics/photography. I tried CinePaint but it only works in X Windows and I wasn't able to get it working so I'm planning to install Ubuntu, then I'll be able to use CinePaint. And the others easier.
If I can't do what I want with them I might buy an older upgradeable version of CS off of eBay. But I want to try open source apps first.
Falcon
There are shitty OSS things too. For example, openoffice sucks, compared to MS Office. Be open about things.
I believe in being open about things but I haven't had a problem with NeoOffice, as I use a Mac I use NeoOffice instead of OpenOffice. So far I haven't had a problem opening MS Office docs, however I haven't opened any complex docs either.
Also look at external offerings. Why run your own mail server, when you can do google apps - I think it's free for non-profits and .edus. Gmail, and instantly, you just saved a bunch of money, and a bunch of work. Now those people can be put to working on other higher priority stuff.
I only use Google to search but I thought with Google Apps you were locked into Google Apps. How do they work with MS Office? If it's the same as OO.org then you still have OO.org's problems with compatibility.
Falcon
Seems to be the working plan for our government these days, doesn't it?
Yeap, give hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to those who created a financial crisis.
Something I just thought of, what if those billions had been used to build solar and wind farms? How many jobs would be created? Mind you, generally I oppose subsidies but if they are handed out I'd rather see the money get into the hands of working blue collar stiffs.
Falcon
Well, the people on the planet now (including us) did not create the problem.
We, and I include myself in that, maybe making things worse. As someone once said, "if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem."
At the moment, the idea is to determine what the best course of action is. To me, it seems like the best way to handle the situation is to get as much low hanging fruit as possible (change light bulbs, etc, etc) in the short term. Things like this reduce energy usage and also don't really add an economic cost.
As happened to me, many others are finding out making some changes actually saves them money.
In the long term, switching to nuclear power would probably be the best way to go.
I haven't been convinced nuclear power is needed never mind the best way to go. Some say it's needed as a baseload, however geothermal energy [pdf warning] might be used as a baseload as well. And without subsidies nuclear power wouldn't be profitable. The Free Market CATO Institute has this article from the business and investment magazine "Forbes" on "Why conservatives should join the left's campaign against nuclear power", "Hooked on Subsidies".
Falcon
lately I've been hearing 'global climate change' rather than warming.
I don't know if this is why climate change is being used instead of global warming but there's a good reason to use climate change. Global Warming makes it sound like it will warm up everywhere. However while the average temp will rise not everyplace will get warmer, some can actually get colder. Extreme weather conditions can also increase. Rainfall patterns can change so an area that is now wet can dry and what is dry can flood.
Falcon