You may have been marked funny, and perhaps even writing in jest or indeed poking fun at us! But I think when it comes down to it that's one of the big obstacles to converting people to Linux and I am one of the people who's all for converting more people to Linux. market share = application writer attention = better for all of us.
I think a port of MS Office to Linux is likely one of the later ports that will happen, but applications like Flash and other general productivity ones will keep up the interest of all other software houses. There are dozens of big name applications I'd like to see released for Linux. They don't necessarily have to be open source themselves either. Imagine if Linux had a 50% market share just because Macromedia, Adobe, Microsoft and others released big name apps? that would be twenty times the user base we have now, twenty times the coders and twenty times the gamers and twenty times the bug reports.
How much better could Linux get if it were that popular? Unstoppably so
Maybe referring to "The Linux Crowd" isn't the right way to go about it.
Perhaps the current "Linux Crowd" may not want flash, but there may be other reasons they want to go to linux, like the same reasons many other companies are. It's an open, extensible and stable platform with no licensing issues like Windows.
If flash, word, excel, dreamweaver and photoshop came to Linux, the "Linux Crowd" would be a whole lot larger, market share would of course be improved, and developers worldwide would have a much nicer platform to code on than the existing majority player.
This miht be a silly question, but is this a usual case of Windows version only without specifically mentioning it is?
Or are the Mac and Linux versions also gold? The article didn't specifically mention, but when that happens I usually suspect it referring to window's only
You know, I'm not very big on perl coding, but I do really like the language. Your point about never having gone with the best methods of coding is something I noticed however.
I too wouldn't put perl as a "technically" best way to code ANYTHING, but it is however an intensely easy and powerful set of hacks, joined together quite well, and with a consistency that matches my own disorganised brain!.
I'm good for that. Getting something technically 'correct' in the coding world seems to me to be revolved around far more efficient use of resources and cpu speed than perl does. In my job however we have thousands of fast PCs, and only so many good coders. I go for whatever supports the coders, and for many of us that's perl
The long lost art of Good Documentation. There's been quite a case made lately (read ESR's CUPS rant for an example) for software that doesn't need documentation, when its method of use is made obvious merely by it's design. I think for consumer software that's just meant to be used one or two ways sure that's a good idea.
But for something like Perl, it's all in the documentation. Here's to writers like Damian Conway not only providing summaries for new releases, but writing the original documentation!. If only it paid well!
That been said O'Reilly would sell a good deal less books if the original docos were all they should be cracked up to be. Guess it doesn't have to be that good! There's nothing like getting a new fresh O'Reilly title in the mail.
I skipped by most mention of teleconferencing utils as it seemed faddish to me. No 'videophones' ever really worked or sold, most people just don't want them in a home environment.
But for internal workflow, after having used an ichat based system I'm really taken by the idea. Being able to jump into a quick conversation instead of emailing, then jumping back out to get work done clicks with me so much better. Maybe it's that I don't have to think about spelling grammar typing and formatting when talking face to face!.
I've yet to check out this version of gm, but seriously give it a go, especially if interemployee communication is a necessary part of business.
Maybe if autozone were using those libraries in their system (which seems is not the case) then they'd be in trouble, since the way SCO has worked in the past, they don't license stuff free to use in any way
It may be that autozone were allowed to use SCO IP (such as the OS, the libraries with it, etc) under a license that restricts the use of such libraries in any way other than under an SCO OS
I guess I see that if I can release software under the GPL and require that if anyone uses it in any other software, it too must be GPLd, then SCO can also quite fairly licence their code out to people and require that they only use it in a certain way
It's restrictive yes but it seems to me only fair. Bad in the end, but legally fair.
Since AutoZone aren't using that code then it doesn't matter in the end
Can we all email our local reporters and carriers of this story and inform them that SCO isn't suing over linux, but is suing over a small separate licensing matter that just happens to include linux?
Maybe the reason they all get away with such loose journalism is that nobody challenges it. I've already emailed four. Their stories seem basically correct but still carry the SCO party line as an undertone, and especially in headlines:(
but wouldn't something like this be better based on Gentoo? If it's going to be modular and simple to use for the majority I think it'd be better off with package management more along the gentoo line, instead of debian, which while good is more suited to hackish, more finely grained options?
I don't really fear this too much. If there's a drastic difference between reviews of a book it's obvious something odd is going on, and a quick google will usually find what people truly think. More often than not a publication that's been out for months already has hundreds of reviews online, and nobody can get to ALL of those reviewers. The net is just like that.
And if it's a new book I'm buying with only a few reviews? It's probably one I've been waiting for expectantly and any number of reviews won't matter. Besides, it's not like my only source for decision making on buying something is amazon reviews.
dude, the latest version of mandrake can't even detect an ATI rage 128 card properly, it boots right into a red screen with pixels swapping around so one line of graphics is two! I got caught writing up how good it was forgetting I needed to manualise kernel parameters to get a good graphics mode and it catches out the people I recommend it to in the same way because I forgot that! Maybe it's now we're close to being useful all the time that I'm seeing how annoying these little things are but they need to be fixed. hahah I used to think user's were morons if they couldn't use a shell, but boy has my mind been changed.
Even easier than putting into directories is using a portfolio type application, like Picasa (the original version of Apple's iPhoto btw) which allows simple drag and drop library creation. You can have pictures in multiple libraries, it just takes a small few moments to drop photos into their correct places and they are sorted as need be. If you want wedding photos, look in there if you want photos of janine, kate or benson look in their respective folders.
It doesnt need to be a morass of embedded folder after folder either, as humans have mental acuity unlike a computer. You may have uncle bob who is photographed a lot and auntie beryl who isn't, but all the photos of beryl you may know will contain bob. We can store a surprising amount of information, and perhaps 5 to 10 libraries is all you will need for most peoples collections.
Special occasions get their own. It just takes moments after downloading the photos.
I can get around searching for "wedding photos" because I remember the date. 3 special days, and hundreds of wedding photos appear.
It's part of being human that we don't necessarily remember the phrase "wedding photos" but we may remember many other tiny pieces of data about a shoot that are unique to us, and the time and date are one of those. I can be certain the post 9pm photos done on those days are pretty embarassing.
Just concentrating on "Wedding Photos" is useful if someone else is searching my picture archive, but that's not useful to me
Couldn't napster provide an alternative model something like what they used to do?
Now, they were involved in distributing music for free (let's not mince words, they did aid unlicensed distribution for whatever good or bad that was) and they managed to make money there. How? They sold napster branded products and used advertisements on their site. After all I think the RIAA makes music not just on the music they sell BUT ON THE BRANDED PRODUCTS that go with those artists!. What if napster sold Britney shorts? or Justin Timberlake keyrings? or tickets, the whole music paraphernalya?
Why can't the same be done? The name is still cool, it still means "screw the man" but now it's something legal. It may not make millions on it own, but it's capable of aiding their business a little bit.
I see it as a concept that may make people understand the idea of 'copyright'. It stuns me to see how many people DON'T understand the idea. A case is on my web site I have an area where people can download music. It's also copyrighted music.
I've lost count of the number of times I've been emailed about it, from anonymous do gooders making sure that I know they know I'm serving copyrighted goods online, and that it's illegal, and that I could get in some great trouble. Even had one guy argue with me until he broke down into swearing and abuse insisting the RIAA would have my balls on a platter.
The punchline? It's music I've written, I've recorded, I hold copyright over, but as part of that copyright I allow my music to be downloaded.
I learned LOGO and BASIC as a kid, then grew into Cobol and C, and learned a little assembly in the process. I now use C++, Perl, and (shudder) Visual Basic (when the need arises). My introduction to programming at a young age through very simple languages really helped to whet my appetite, but I think that my intermediate experiences with low level languages helps me to write code that is a lot tighter than some of my peers.
I'm with you there. I learned C, C++ and assembler while at university, and came out with the ability to jump into anything. Give me any language and I can guarantee I'll be churning out useful code in a VERY short amount of time.
Compare this to my brother, 12 years younger than me who has just completed the same comp.sci course at the same uni, and knows only one language; Java. Things change, not always for the better. I know many courses haven't gone to the dogs as much as that, but many have. I'm not surprised the idea of teaching coders how the computer works is considered 'novel'.
I can see a great benefit for humanity the closer computers move to 'thinking' like people, for people. But that's just not done at the hardware level, it's done higher. The people who can bring that to the world are coders, and as far as I'm concerned thinking in the same way as the hardware works is absolutely essential for comp.sci. Less so for IT.
Exactly. It's a bit of an apple fanboy story, something I doubt the veracity of. It didn't have to be an iPod , didn't have to be a G4 laptop, and didn't have to be a cinema display. Telling us the equipment used for the film is quite irrelevant.
Would it have been the same story if it was a Dell DJ, on a Dell laptop, with a Dell monitor? No it wouldn't. I don't see what the fuss is about
'those machines can do just about anything: run software for Mac, Unix, or Windows, using either a GUI or the command line. And they're secure out of the box.'
They're only secure because, with such a minimal share, nobody cares about breaking into one. Apple have had several fixes just in the last few months fixing remote root access vulnerabilities. They're just as insecure as any other OS out there.
If they could be easily hacked into running Linux, it might be worth contacting Virginia Tech. Make the mac heads eat their words! 3rd biggest suppercomputer in the world for $108,900!
I have the new critter in a test environment where we conducted a preliminary and rudimentary functionality and threat analysis...I have played with the date, etc, but still no activity directed toward www.sco.com." The link also includes disassembly and analysis of the worm code."
So basically, SCO being down right now is Yet Another Big Lie from SCO. Nice to see them shown up as spreaders of misinformation yet again. I'm sure the FBI will love to hear their excuses as to why they're pretending to be down, especially if they're attempting to blame the worm. Fascinating
They very easily could. The way I see it, and perhaps the way the virus writers see it, is that SCO WILL NOT STOP. They are running the company into the ground, they are losing genuine sales, they are in a public relations nightmare, staff of theirs that I know are feeling the PR pinch, and their leader is on a mission to do one thing: badmouth Linux until the day he is forced not to.
Who else releases press releases deriding competitors or about lawsuits for a year straight, with NO press releases regarding actual real products?
Their goal is spreading FUD, and while they are the SCO group and are allowed to do so, they will keep doing it. If this court case with IBM, and the one with Novell, go on for another 3 years, all through that SCO will release statement after statement to the press speaking rubbish about Linux and threatening normal users. They won't stop until they are made to.
Since the law protects them and allows them to keep making these statements, the only thing that will stop them is something like a DDoS, and that's the situation we have.
Slashdot Mirror
You may have been marked funny, and perhaps even writing in jest or indeed poking fun at us! But I think when it comes down to it that's one of the big obstacles to converting people to Linux and I am one of the people who's all for converting more people to Linux. market share = application writer attention = better for all of us.
I think a port of MS Office to Linux is likely one of the later ports that will happen, but applications like Flash and other general productivity ones will keep up the interest of all other software houses. There are dozens of big name applications I'd like to see released for Linux. They don't necessarily have to be open source themselves either. Imagine if Linux had a 50% market share just because Macromedia, Adobe, Microsoft and others released big name apps? that would be twenty times the user base we have now, twenty times the coders and twenty times the gamers and twenty times the bug reports.
How much better could Linux get if it were that popular? Unstoppably so
The uncrackable mac
Maybe referring to "The Linux Crowd" isn't the right way to go about it.
Perhaps the current "Linux Crowd" may not want flash, but there may be other reasons they want to go to linux, like the same reasons many other companies are. It's an open, extensible and stable platform with no licensing issues like Windows.
If flash, word, excel, dreamweaver and photoshop came to Linux, the "Linux Crowd" would be a whole lot larger, market share would of course be improved, and developers worldwide would have a much nicer platform to code on than the existing majority player.
Mac OSX tips, desktops and scripts
> But will it run on Linux?
Yes
> Thought not.
That makes no sense. Yes it does run on Linux
> Yet, this same crowd who hates Microsoft with a passion still
> love the precious windows games.
Yes I hate windows, I havent run it this century. I'm still an intense gamer. I don't play Windows games
> Hypocrites.
Having a little argument with yourself there Mr. Slow minded?
webalizer - thousands served daily
This miht be a silly question, but is this a usual case of Windows version only without specifically mentioning it is?
Or are the Mac and Linux versions also gold? The article didn't specifically mention, but when that happens I usually suspect it referring to window's only
OSX desktops, hints and gaming
You know, I'm not very big on perl coding, but I do really like the language. Your point about never having gone with the best methods of coding is something I noticed however.
I too wouldn't put perl as a "technically" best way to code ANYTHING, but it is however an intensely easy and powerful set of hacks, joined together quite well, and with a consistency that matches my own disorganised brain!.
I'm good for that. Getting something technically 'correct' in the coding world seems to me to be revolved around far more efficient use of resources and cpu speed than perl does. In my job however we have thousands of fast PCs, and only so many good coders. I go for whatever supports the coders, and for many of us that's perl
webalizer stats. thousands served monthly
The long lost art of Good Documentation. There's been quite a case made lately (read ESR's CUPS rant for an example) for software that doesn't need documentation, when its method of use is made obvious merely by it's design. I think for consumer software that's just meant to be used one or two ways sure that's a good idea.
But for something like Perl, it's all in the documentation. Here's to writers like Damian Conway not only providing summaries for new releases, but writing the original documentation!. If only it paid well!
That been said O'Reilly would sell a good deal less books if the original docos were all they should be cracked up to be. Guess it doesn't have to be that good! There's nothing like getting a new fresh O'Reilly title in the mail.
Mac desktops, OSX hints, scripts and more
I skipped by most mention of teleconferencing utils as it seemed faddish to me. No 'videophones' ever really worked or sold, most people just don't want them in a home environment.
But for internal workflow, after having used an ichat based system I'm really taken by the idea. Being able to jump into a quick conversation instead of emailing, then jumping back out to get work done clicks with me so much better. Maybe it's that I don't have to think about spelling grammar typing and formatting when talking face to face!.
I've yet to check out this version of gm, but seriously give it a go, especially if interemployee communication is a necessary part of business.
vidio grab bag
Maybe if autozone were using those libraries in their system (which seems is not the case) then they'd be in trouble, since the way SCO has worked in the past, they don't license stuff free to use in any way
It may be that autozone were allowed to use SCO IP (such as the OS, the libraries with it, etc) under a license that restricts the use of such libraries in any way other than under an SCO OS
I guess I see that if I can release software under the GPL and require that if anyone uses it in any other software, it too must be GPLd, then SCO can also quite fairly licence their code out to people and require that they only use it in a certain way
It's restrictive yes but it seems to me only fair. Bad in the end, but legally fair.
Since AutoZone aren't using that code then it doesn't matter in the end
Can we all email our local reporters and carriers of this story and inform them that SCO isn't suing over linux, but is suing over a small separate licensing matter that just happens to include linux?
:(
Maybe the reason they all get away with such loose journalism is that nobody challenges it. I've already emailed four. Their stories seem basically correct but still carry the SCO party line as an undertone, and especially in headlines
but wouldn't something like this be better based on Gentoo? If it's going to be modular and simple to use for the majority I think it'd be better off with package management more along the gentoo line, instead of debian, which while good is more suited to hackish, more finely grained options?
Don't you find it hypocritical after 20 years of trying to tell us all that a computer doesn't need a CLI that mac user's are trying to use one now?
Kind of put's it all in perspective doesn't it *:o)
I don't really fear this too much. If there's a drastic difference between reviews of a book it's obvious something odd is going on, and a quick google will usually find what people truly think. More often than not a publication that's been out for months already has hundreds of reviews online, and nobody can get to ALL of those reviewers. The net is just like that.
And if it's a new book I'm buying with only a few reviews? It's probably one I've been waiting for expectantly and any number of reviews won't matter. Besides, it's not like my only source for decision making on buying something is amazon reviews.
dude, the latest version of mandrake can't even detect an ATI rage 128 card properly, it boots right into a red screen with pixels swapping around so one line of graphics is two! I got caught writing up how good it was forgetting I needed to manualise kernel parameters to get a good graphics mode and it catches out the people I recommend it to in the same way because I forgot that! Maybe it's now we're close to being useful all the time that I'm seeing how annoying these little things are but they need to be fixed. hahah I used to think user's were morons if they couldn't use a shell, but boy has my mind been changed.
This is all distraction to keep people's minds off the fact there's no new AmigaOS 4 yet!.
Hurry up guys. The Amiga's little brother has caught up and gone past!
I have it on good authority (from an ex apple store employee) that Apple's stores in the US also use these tags, and frequently.
Of course I don't expect to see a negative view of that here, being Apple and all.
Even easier than putting into directories is using a portfolio type application, like Picasa (the original version of Apple's iPhoto btw) which allows simple drag and drop library creation. You can have pictures in multiple libraries, it just takes a small few moments to drop photos into their correct places and they are sorted as need be. If you want wedding photos, look in there if you want photos of janine, kate or benson look in their respective folders.
It doesnt need to be a morass of embedded folder after folder either, as humans have mental acuity unlike a computer. You may have uncle bob who is photographed a lot and auntie beryl who isn't, but all the photos of beryl you may know will contain bob. We can store a surprising amount of information, and perhaps 5 to 10 libraries is all you will need for most peoples collections.
Special occasions get their own. It just takes moments after downloading the photos.
nude geekgrrls
I can get around searching for "wedding photos" because I remember the date. 3 special days, and hundreds of wedding photos appear.
It's part of being human that we don't necessarily remember the phrase "wedding photos" but we may remember many other tiny pieces of data about a shoot that are unique to us, and the time and date are one of those. I can be certain the post 9pm photos done on those days are pretty embarassing.
Just concentrating on "Wedding Photos" is useful if someone else is searching my picture archive, but that's not useful to me
nude geekgrrls
Couldn't napster provide an alternative model something like what they used to do?
Now, they were involved in distributing music for free (let's not mince words, they did aid unlicensed distribution for whatever good or bad that was) and they managed to make money there. How? They sold napster branded products and used advertisements on their site. After all I think the RIAA makes music not just on the music they sell BUT ON THE BRANDED PRODUCTS that go with those artists!. What if napster sold Britney shorts? or Justin Timberlake keyrings? or tickets, the whole music paraphernalya?
Why can't the same be done? The name is still cool, it still means "screw the man" but now it's something legal. It may not make millions on it own, but it's capable of aiding their business a little bit.
nude geekgrrls
I see it as a concept that may make people understand the idea of 'copyright'. It stuns me to see how many people DON'T understand the idea. A case is on my web site I have an area where people can download music. It's also copyrighted music.
I've lost count of the number of times I've been emailed about it, from anonymous do gooders making sure that I know they know I'm serving copyrighted goods online, and that it's illegal, and that I could get in some great trouble. Even had one guy argue with me until he broke down into swearing and abuse insisting the RIAA would have my balls on a platter.
The punchline? It's music I've written, I've recorded, I hold copyright over, but as part of that copyright I allow my music to be downloaded.
I learned LOGO and BASIC as a kid, then grew into Cobol and C, and learned a little assembly in the process. I now use C++, Perl, and (shudder) Visual Basic (when the need arises). My introduction to programming at a young age through very simple languages really helped to whet my appetite, but I think that my intermediate experiences with low level languages helps me to write code that is a lot tighter than some of my peers.
I'm with you there. I learned C, C++ and assembler while at university, and came out with the ability to jump into anything. Give me any language and I can guarantee I'll be churning out useful code in a VERY short amount of time.
Compare this to my brother, 12 years younger than me who has just completed the same comp.sci course at the same uni, and knows only one language; Java. Things change, not always for the better. I know many courses haven't gone to the dogs as much as that, but many have. I'm not surprised the idea of teaching coders how the computer works is considered 'novel'.
I can see a great benefit for humanity the closer computers move to 'thinking' like people, for people. But that's just not done at the hardware level, it's done higher. The people who can bring that to the world are coders, and as far as I'm concerned thinking in the same way as the hardware works is absolutely essential for comp.sci. Less so for IT.
Exactly. It's a bit of an apple fanboy story, something I doubt the veracity of. It didn't have to be an iPod , didn't have to be a G4 laptop, and didn't have to be a cinema display. Telling us the equipment used for the film is quite irrelevant.
Would it have been the same story if it was a Dell DJ, on a Dell laptop, with a Dell monitor? No it wouldn't. I don't see what the fuss is about
'those machines can do just about anything: run software for Mac, Unix, or Windows, using either a GUI or the command line. And they're secure out of the box.'
They're only secure because, with such a minimal share, nobody cares about breaking into one. Apple have had several fixes just in the last few months fixing remote root access vulnerabilities. They're just as insecure as any other OS out there.
There's just not enough of them to care about.
If they could be easily hacked into running Linux, it might be worth contacting Virginia Tech. Make the mac heads eat their words! 3rd biggest suppercomputer in the world for $108,900!
I have the new critter in a test environment where we conducted a preliminary and rudimentary functionality and threat analysis...I have played with the date, etc, but still no activity directed toward www.sco.com." The link also includes disassembly and analysis of the worm code."
So basically, SCO being down right now is Yet Another Big Lie from SCO. Nice to see them shown up as spreaders of misinformation yet again. I'm sure the FBI will love to hear their excuses as to why they're pretending to be down, especially if they're attempting to blame the worm. Fascinating
They very easily could. The way I see it, and perhaps the way the virus writers see it, is that SCO WILL NOT STOP. They are running the company into the ground, they are losing genuine sales, they are in a public relations nightmare, staff of theirs that I know are feeling the PR pinch, and their leader is on a mission to do one thing: badmouth Linux until the day he is forced not to.
Who else releases press releases deriding competitors or about lawsuits for a year straight, with NO press releases regarding actual real products?
Their goal is spreading FUD, and while they are the SCO group and are allowed to do so, they will keep doing it. If this court case with IBM, and the one with Novell, go on for another 3 years, all through that SCO will release statement after statement to the press speaking rubbish about Linux and threatening normal users. They won't stop until they are made to.
Since the law protects them and allows them to keep making these statements, the only thing that will stop them is something like a DDoS, and that's the situation we have.