Why is it when some one does something stupid on UNIX and screws their HDD, its the user that is blamed but when the user CHOOSES to run Windows and CHOOSES to run MSN and CHOOSES to have their default browser to be Internet Explorer, for some reason they're immune to this barrage of RTFM and instead it is Microsoft who gets the blame.
Sure, I love the Microsoft bashing mosh pit just as much as the next Mac/FreeBSD user, however, in all honesty, when is the end user going to take responsibility for their actions? doesn't this sound like the a-typical senario in the "real world", something bad happens and the government is blamed for not stopping the idiot from hurting themself.
The fact remains that the end user does VERY little to protect themselves. Sure, we'll have a chorus of ranters claiming that in their zyx operating system world, they would *NEVER* need that and through some miracle, some how their operating system of choice is immune to all vunerabilities.
The fact remains that no matter what operating system you run, you HAVE to take precautions. Run an anti-virus, make sure your software and virus definitions are updated, run a GOOD firewall and actually learn how to use the computer so that you can set up the firewall so that is it beneficial rather than a hindrance.
If you follow these VERY basic precautions, I would be VERY surprised if you get infected.
In a perfect world, one WOULDN'T need to take these precautions, software would be bug free, everyone would be honest Joe's and Jane's, however, that isn't the case, the fact is, the world is filled with losers, script kiddies and other parasites and unfortunately the only way to defeat these people is to make their conquests so meaningless that they'll go back to nicking car badges off cars and boasting to their friends about what level of "Rainbow Islands" they got up to on their SEGA.
The person simoniker class the whole episode as "Netscape murdered by AOL", the fact remains that the sooner Mozilla moves away from AOL and towards being a non-profit organisation that is user centric rather than buzz word centric the better.
The unfortunate thing is that there is now a lack of developers but hopefully with the new political structure, more developers can be encouraged to help out with the same vigor and determination ones sees in other projects, for example, FreeBSD or the Linux kernel.
Firebird is a nice browser and hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now.
With that being said, one could quesiton whether Mozilla has a relevance outside developing a rendering engine. GNOME has standardised on Epiphany for the browser and Evolution for the eMail/Contact manager, so where does the Mozilla foundation fit in.
In some ways, this will be good. If they can instead concerntrate on the guts and gore and let the various projects like kmeleon, Epiphany and Camino concerntrate on the native front end, hopefully development will pick up and some of those really old render bugs in Mozilla's bugzilla are fixed.
lose sight of the fact that Linux isn't the one that isn't ready, it is the distributors who aren't integrating the various OSS projects with in a consistant manor. They're the source of the problem.
When you pay for Red Hat Linux, you don't pay for the software but for the time and investment the likes of Red Hat make IMPROVING the bundled software and ensuring that there aren't any issues when running the software in tandem with other pieces of software.
In otherwords, the distributors are like a resturant, they choose the integredients and it is up to us to pay for the work done.
What is also holding Linux back is a lack of third party developers. Sure, we have people here who just love to hate Microsoft but lets be completely honest, what is Microsofts greatest asset? its strong developer base which is created through good development tools and leadership.
Just look at Red hat, they refused to pay a piddly $10 per-unit fee to SUN for the ability to bundle StarOffice 6/7. To me, it simply re-enforces the notion that we have distributors unwilling to make the necessary investments to get the ISV partners onside.
Just look at the developer conference and how much time was spent EDUCATING their partners, great and small, about the merits of their future product range. Love them or hate them, you can't take away the fact that they do provide great leadership when required.
As much as I hate the annual MSDN developer crusades that sweep through towns and have people who speak with the same pasion of Billy Graham, the fact remains, the people who will make the decisions over whether to get behind Linux are the same who are impressed with flashy shows, fast talking buzz word compliant spokes persons and great corporate boxes at the local sporting fixture.
What really kills me about outsourcing is that companies don't realize just how they are damaging their future in so many ways. I will give just two.
1) You lay someone off here in the U.S. as an example. Guess what, that is money that is not going to be used to buy products that most likely the parent company makes to some degree. Does someone in India buy dishwashers, tablesaw, etc. Not to be mean but not in the volume as here.
Have you actually thought that maybe that most companies who operate out of the US make most of their profits overseas? Microsoft and a few other are *VERY* rare exceptions. SUN Microsystems for example makes over 50% of their profits from their overseas operations. If there is a drop in demand in the US but a rise overseas, is the company worse off? nope. They're making the same amount of money.
2) Tribal knowledge that is desperately needed to stay within a company for future development. That is all gone, and personally the quality that comes from an outsourced job is short of atrocious. That comes from watching quite a few projects at two different companies go completey down in flames.
And yet, when we had other companies doing it, the IT community kept quiet. As I said in previous post, it isn't until the reality hits home when we have people changing their opinions. Its the story of "everyone else should upgrade" but when reality hits the IT world, there is this sudden demand for protectionism.
Sorry, outsourcing is going to tear this economy in the U.S. to pieces. Quick short-term gain for a long-term failure!!!!
Funny, and even after PDL outsourced their product line to China, the quality of the product has gone up and the prices are now competitive with imported products.
I find this whole spitting and cursing quite funny. A few years ago we had people losing jobs in the manufacturing industry and all I heard from IT professionals was, "oh, why don't they up skill like us", well, here we are, and no longer are India and China the "T-Shirt" making haven of corporate America. Corporate America now see that these countries not only have cheaper labour but also, the people are just as qualified and just as many people "there" who can produce new and exciting ideas and products when given less R&D dollars.
What I find funny is when I hear people complain about this shift off shore. Its the old story, when your neighbour loses their job it is called a recession, when you lose your job it is called a depression.
Yeah... after I enabled filevault (back before 7B85 was even officially released!) and had to sell my soul to get it disabled and my data back out of a shambles (I have backups, but that thing corrupted everything), I'm also going to wait until enabling filevault.
I'm not surprised. If it is new, it will most likely have issues unfortunately due to the size of Microsoft noise making community, aka Paul Therrot, any problems that do exist in the Windows world are blamed on a voodoo curse, possible "virus" from linux users and right down the list, behind accusing Al Qaeda, will be, "possibly a bug, will be fixed in the next service pack".
Most people I know don't really need to use it, unless you're a teenager with a massive porn collection and you don't want your parents to find out OR you're a "International man of mystery", most users will find very little use for it.
Thats the thing, they don't choose it. Most of the time companies only keep with something this tragic if they need the legacy support, however, with that being said, Solaris does support *some* UnixWare binaries, if they improve their support to a decent level and offer "competitive upgrades", I am sure every man and their dog will move.
SCO has to stratergy for the long term. Their viability as an organisation is dead regardless of the outcome of this whole SCO vs. IBM trial. The fact is that the so-called "features" they accuse IBM of adding have existed in the kernel since the very early 2.4 betas. If I was the judge I would question why it has taken SCO 2-3 years to come out and say something? are they so desperate for cash, they're willing to sue all and sundry in a vein of hope of leaving with some sort of "legacy"?
I'm not Linux fan, heck, I run FreeBSD, MacOS X and Solaris, however, if one wants to compete with Linux, there must be a compelling reason. Solaris 10 has some outstanding features that will push it ahead of Linux. That is how you compete, by creating a better product, not going around and threating companies like SCO is doing right now.
The Linux kernel specifically requires gcc because it uses gcc extensions. But it should be possible to recompile the usermode code with the Intel's compiler. Even glibc may be worth trying (if you bought the compiler).
Not to sound negative about Linux and the developers who spend a good amount of time working on perfecting it, however, why isn't there a move by the coders to move away from using those extensions? I can understand the rational behind the whole use of it, however, I am sure that the speed penalty could be worked around eventually.
Is there someone here who can lay out what extensions are actually used and what those extensions do.
The name was called "True Bliss", then a group of blokes created "True Piss" which did a hard rock version of all True Bliss's songs. The Australian version was called Bordeaux and so the rubbish continued to spread.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it when some one does something stupid on UNIX and screws their HDD, its the user that is blamed but when the user CHOOSES to run Windows and CHOOSES to run MSN and CHOOSES to have their default browser to be Internet Explorer, for some reason they're immune to this barrage of RTFM and instead it is Microsoft who gets the blame.
Sure, I love the Microsoft bashing mosh pit just as much as the next Mac/FreeBSD user, however, in all honesty, when is the end user going to take responsibility for their actions? doesn't this sound like the a-typical senario in the "real world", something bad happens and the government is blamed for not stopping the idiot from hurting themself.
The fact remains that the end user does VERY little to protect themselves. Sure, we'll have a chorus of ranters claiming that in their zyx operating system world, they would *NEVER* need that and through some miracle, some how their operating system of choice is immune to all vunerabilities.
The fact remains that no matter what operating system you run, you HAVE to take precautions. Run an anti-virus, make sure your software and virus definitions are updated, run a GOOD firewall and actually learn how to use the computer so that you can set up the firewall so that is it beneficial rather than a hindrance.
If you follow these VERY basic precautions, I would be VERY surprised if you get infected.
In a perfect world, one WOULDN'T need to take these precautions, software would be bug free, everyone would be honest Joe's and Jane's, however, that isn't the case, the fact is, the world is filled with losers, script kiddies and other parasites and unfortunately the only way to defeat these people is to make their conquests so meaningless that they'll go back to nicking car badges off cars and boasting to their friends about what level of "Rainbow Islands" they got up to on their SEGA.
Btw, does any one remember that game?
The person simoniker class the whole episode as "Netscape murdered by AOL", the fact remains that the sooner Mozilla moves away from AOL and towards being a non-profit organisation that is user centric rather than buzz word centric the better. The unfortunate thing is that there is now a lack of developers but hopefully with the new political structure, more developers can be encouraged to help out with the same vigor and determination ones sees in other projects, for example, FreeBSD or the Linux kernel. Firebird is a nice browser and hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now. With that being said, one could quesiton whether Mozilla has a relevance outside developing a rendering engine. GNOME has standardised on Epiphany for the browser and Evolution for the eMail/Contact manager, so where does the Mozilla foundation fit in. In some ways, this will be good. If they can instead concerntrate on the guts and gore and let the various projects like kmeleon, Epiphany and Camino concerntrate on the native front end, hopefully development will pick up and some of those really old render bugs in Mozilla's bugzilla are fixed.
lose sight of the fact that Linux isn't the one that isn't ready, it is the distributors who aren't integrating the various OSS projects with in a consistant manor. They're the source of the problem.
When you pay for Red Hat Linux, you don't pay for the software but for the time and investment the likes of Red Hat make IMPROVING the bundled software and ensuring that there aren't any issues when running the software in tandem with other pieces of software.
In otherwords, the distributors are like a resturant, they choose the integredients and it is up to us to pay for the work done.
What is also holding Linux back is a lack of third party developers. Sure, we have people here who just love to hate Microsoft but lets be completely honest, what is Microsofts greatest asset? its strong developer base which is created through good development tools and leadership.
Just look at Red hat, they refused to pay a piddly $10 per-unit fee to SUN for the ability to bundle StarOffice 6/7. To me, it simply re-enforces the notion that we have distributors unwilling to make the necessary investments to get the ISV partners onside.
Just look at the developer conference and how much time was spent EDUCATING their partners, great and small, about the merits of their future product range. Love them or hate them, you can't take away the fact that they do provide great leadership when required.
As much as I hate the annual MSDN developer crusades that sweep through towns and have people who speak with the same pasion of Billy Graham, the fact remains, the people who will make the decisions over whether to get behind Linux are the same who are impressed with flashy shows, fast talking buzz word compliant spokes persons and great corporate boxes at the local sporting fixture.
Have you actually thought that maybe that most companies who operate out of the US make most of their profits overseas? Microsoft and a few other are *VERY* rare exceptions. SUN Microsystems for example makes over 50% of their profits from their overseas operations. If there is a drop in demand in the US but a rise overseas, is the company worse off? nope. They're making the same amount of money.
2) Tribal knowledge that is desperately needed to stay within a company for future development. That is all gone, and personally the quality that comes from an outsourced job is short of atrocious. That comes from watching quite a few projects at two different companies go completey down in flames.And yet, when we had other companies doing it, the IT community kept quiet. As I said in previous post, it isn't until the reality hits home when we have people changing their opinions. Its the story of "everyone else should upgrade" but when reality hits the IT world, there is this sudden demand for protectionism.
Sorry, outsourcing is going to tear this economy in the U.S. to pieces. Quick short-term gain for a long-term failure!!!!Funny, and even after PDL outsourced their product line to China, the quality of the product has gone up and the prices are now competitive with imported products.
I find this whole spitting and cursing quite funny. A few years ago we had people losing jobs in the manufacturing industry and all I heard from IT professionals was, "oh, why don't they up skill like us", well, here we are, and no longer are India and China the "T-Shirt" making haven of corporate America. Corporate America now see that these countries not only have cheaper labour but also, the people are just as qualified and just as many people "there" who can produce new and exciting ideas and products when given less R&D dollars.
What I find funny is when I hear people complain about this shift off shore. Its the old story, when your neighbour loses their job it is called a recession, when you lose your job it is called a depression.
I'm not surprised. If it is new, it will most likely have issues unfortunately due to the size of Microsoft noise making community, aka Paul Therrot, any problems that do exist in the Windows world are blamed on a voodoo curse, possible "virus" from linux users and right down the list, behind accusing Al Qaeda, will be, "possibly a bug, will be fixed in the next service pack".
Most people I know don't really need to use it, unless you're a teenager with a massive porn collection and you don't want your parents to find out OR you're a "International man of mystery", most users will find very little use for it.
Thats the thing, they don't choose it. Most of the time companies only keep with something this tragic if they need the legacy support, however, with that being said, Solaris does support *some* UnixWare binaries, if they improve their support to a decent level and offer "competitive upgrades", I am sure every man and their dog will move.
SCO has to stratergy for the long term. Their viability as an organisation is dead regardless of the outcome of this whole SCO vs. IBM trial. The fact is that the so-called "features" they accuse IBM of adding have existed in the kernel since the very early 2.4 betas. If I was the judge I would question why it has taken SCO 2-3 years to come out and say something? are they so desperate for cash, they're willing to sue all and sundry in a vein of hope of leaving with some sort of "legacy"?
I'm not Linux fan, heck, I run FreeBSD, MacOS X and Solaris, however, if one wants to compete with Linux, there must be a compelling reason. Solaris 10 has some outstanding features that will push it ahead of Linux. That is how you compete, by creating a better product, not going around and threating companies like SCO is doing right now.
Not to sound negative about Linux and the developers who spend a good amount of time working on perfecting it, however, why isn't there a move by the coders to move away from using those extensions? I can understand the rational behind the whole use of it, however, I am sure that the speed penalty could be worked around eventually.
Is there someone here who can lay out what extensions are actually used and what those extensions do.
The name was called "True Bliss", then a group of blokes created "True Piss" which did a hard rock version of all True Bliss's songs. The Australian version was called Bordeaux and so the rubbish continued to spread.