I agree. The article was exceptionally poor on describing what they intended to do. I can only assume that they are talking about modifying Mozilla to interpret more than strait HTML. I suppose this would make it useful for internal applications for companies that extensively use Oracle but all it will really do is mask the poor programing skills of coders who cannot write a good enough application to work within the limits of HTML. The end result will be applications that are not internet ready and have all the wierd bugs that comes with client side code execution. Don't even get me started on the fact that your probably going to have to let end users connect directly to your database. But of course Oracle is unhackable:)
This tool looks like it benefits the student greatly. If plagarism is detected it looks like it returns that to the student not the professor. Don't/.ers realize that most plagarism is unintentional. I for one used to get all my papers read over by as many proofreaders as possible before turning them in. How is this different than having a TA do a preliminary review? As for making money off your work, boy, thats what colledge is about. Get the sheepskin then we'll see what your ideas are worth. Otherwise, you might as well write for/.:)
So Why isn't SCO going after BSD's
on
BSD For Linux Users
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Yes, I know about the AT&T agreement.
But my point is to a desktop user the differences are invisable. You would really have to look under the hood a bit to tell what you are running. So I don't think that the real issue lies here.
On the server side of things, there is no doubt that BSD has been doing it longer and for a good while was doing it better than Linux. But the Open Source explosion we are seeing is centered around Linux and the GPL'ed applications, not BSD. I believe (as does Linus) that Open Development in the less structured (bazaar) method of Linux is superior to the structured (cathedral) methods of BSD. As a result Linux has done the real grabbing of market share in the enterprise. This is not because BSD is bad. BSD is very good and Linux owes a huge debt. But Linux is better. SCO's original claims centered on the idea that it could not have come so far so fast without stealing. What they failed to understand was the incredible power of its development model.
I for one am glad that BSD exists and have used it for many purposes. Without the flexability of its license Apple would probably never have ventured into the Open Source waters. But I am much more grateful for Linux. For my servers, I will use Linux, because it now surpasses any of the BSD's for enterprise systems. I don't think we will see Microsoft sweating over TCO comparisons with BSD for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
It already takes me forever to enter names and phone numbers on a cell keypad. I am going to love finding how to do a % or a @.
I agree. The article was exceptionally poor on describing what they intended to do. I can only assume that they are talking about modifying Mozilla to interpret more than strait HTML. I suppose this would make it useful for internal applications for companies that extensively use Oracle but all it will really do is mask the poor programing skills of coders who cannot write a good enough application to work within the limits of HTML. The end result will be applications that are not internet ready and have all the wierd bugs that comes with client side code execution. Don't even get me started on the fact that your probably going to have to let end users connect directly to your database. But of course Oracle is unhackable :)
This tool looks like it benefits the student greatly. If plagarism is detected it looks like it returns that to the student not the professor. Don't /.ers realize that most plagarism is unintentional. I for one used to get all my papers read over by as many proofreaders as possible before turning them in. How is this different than having a TA do a preliminary review? /. :)
As for making money off your work, boy, thats what colledge is about. Get the sheepskin then we'll see what your ideas are worth. Otherwise, you might as well write for
Yes, I know about the AT&T agreement. But my point is to a desktop user the differences are invisable. You would really have to look under the hood a bit to tell what you are running. So I don't think that the real issue lies here. On the server side of things, there is no doubt that BSD has been doing it longer and for a good while was doing it better than Linux. But the Open Source explosion we are seeing is centered around Linux and the GPL'ed applications, not BSD. I believe (as does Linus) that Open Development in the less structured (bazaar) method of Linux is superior to the structured (cathedral) methods of BSD. As a result Linux has done the real grabbing of market share in the enterprise. This is not because BSD is bad. BSD is very good and Linux owes a huge debt. But Linux is better. SCO's original claims centered on the idea that it could not have come so far so fast without stealing. What they failed to understand was the incredible power of its development model. I for one am glad that BSD exists and have used it for many purposes. Without the flexability of its license Apple would probably never have ventured into the Open Source waters. But I am much more grateful for Linux. For my servers, I will use Linux, because it now surpasses any of the BSD's for enterprise systems. I don't think we will see Microsoft sweating over TCO comparisons with BSD for a while.
... Didn't he sing "Bridge over Troubled Water"?