They're stacked? Aside from patent issues, which are starting to get notice in the more mainstream organizations, we're talking about a movement that has no central authority. Once again, I would like to know HOW this differs.
More importantly, this is not laziness, any more than is NOT changing your stance every time the wind blows.
I believe FOSS will win out in the end, despite the efforts MS puts into their opposition of it. If you don't agree with that, I respect you for it, but I will respectfully disagree.
Well, I'd like to see how such a program would manage to install itself on the sly in Linux, and from then on run automatically every time the computer starts.
Spyware itself isn't the problem, it's the stealth-installing variety (in quantity) that does the crippling.
If you say so, but if we can code by someone else's libraries, why can't we live by someone else's words? Reinventing the wheel is not only a bad idea in software. If it works, then go with it.
More importantly, can you demonstrate the deviation from this pattern in this case?
SCO's got only so much time left (I think it was something along the line of 90 days) to prove they actually have an argument regarding Linux. And I don't think the court's buying it anymore; they are already telling SCO to start talking, or Summary Judgement will hit like a ton of bricks.
Once the Summary Judgement falls, SCO can kiss their Linux claims goodbye forever, leaving a contract dispute (which was begun as a direct result of the above claims). And it's pretty obvious what the finding will be; barring some macabre miracle.
Such prayers are like funerals. The dead's not going to care if he's buried in a box or in a cherrywood coffin. He's dead, and he's either In some afterlife or just doesn't exist consciously anymore.
Death is a tragedy for everyone but the deceased. If it makes a person feel better to make some spiritual note of respect for the deceased, why not allow for that? Whether prayers for the deceased do anything for his soul or not (and I'm sure there are religions out there that DO, in fact, believe this is possible), they do affect the person practicing that in much the same sense as donating to a charity or helping a little old lady across the street. It's an act of kindness that makes one feel better.
Your typical midrange PC is still in the vicinity of 2-4 hundred dollars. An XBox is about $150.
An XBox is much smaller than an average computer and has built-in hookups to a TV and sound system. With this operating system, you can actually reduce the size of your entire media center to a single small box.
Add network remote control and SSH connectivity to it, and it's any geek's dream.
There's a flaw in that logic: The human body would not be able to tolerate the 47 degree temperature that would signal the *beginning* of the hardening process.
The human body is a toasty 37 degree celsius (98.6 degrees fahrenheit). To take it to 47 degrees (116 degrees) would likely kill the person long before the hardening of the substance would.
Never mind the 75 (167) degrees...
Methinks that this might have some value as reinforcement for ceramic moulds.
Or... perhaps a form of cooking spray that would be guaranteed non-stick. Spray the liquid into the pan, bring the heat up until it's solid, cook until food is done, remove food, and let pan cool. Wash substance off and repeat process.
They are... haven't you noticed the plague of viruses that has been going around lately? You don't expect me to believe that people would have the skill to constantly bitch-smack a high-quality, bulletproof OS like Microsoft Windows, do you?
What level would be a high-end database server? What level would be a high-end rendering system? What level would be a high-end gaming system? What level would be a high-end workstation?
As I see it, those four requirements go in totally different directions in term of requirements, so cannot be put on a simple numbered system. Servers require high storage and availability, meaning improvements in storage. Rendering does intense computation meaning pure CPU performance. Gaming requires CPU, Video, and Memory performance, emphasis on video. Workstations would require a lot of RAM (concurrent productivity applications), quality input and output devices (one who works for hours at a console would thank you), and reliable connectivity.
Perhaps levels and classes together would be more appropriate?
GS1-GS10, SS1-SS10, CS1-CS10, PS1-PS10
GS for Gaming System SS for Serving System CS for Computation System PS for Productivity System
However, what were the standards that those figures were based on? Judging from what was originally entertaining reading material in the 1800s and what is common reading material now, I suspect the standards have slipped horribly over the years.
AOLers are literate. aftr l, u can read this n still understand what i m saying.
However, their definition of literacy and ours are vastly different. The same applies for literacy standards that statistics are based on.
Quoth the Twain: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
Libertarianism only strikes me as taking off whatever shackles currently restrain corporations from totally ass-fucking everyone they can to improve their stock price....however, in terms of the free market, there's also no such things as corporations; a corporation is a government construct to give entity status to a company. Under the Libertarians and the free market, the concept of a corporation will be abolished, and people will be responsible for their own actions once again.
But the idea of dedicating a staff to improving and releasing to the world those improvements...
And who, pray tell, is requiring those improvements to release? The GPL, by far, the greatest stickler for releasing code, does not require internally-used code to be released, so long as that code is not being distributed.
That's not capitalism. Capitalism is the profit off your own work. A real capitalist would compensate others for their work, and THEN make a profit from their own work (such as marketing and sales).
I can spend my time burning and distributing CDs with OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird to Windows(tm)(r)-owning friends/relatives so that in a year or two their data will be out of Microsoft's(tm)(et-bloody-cetera) clutches.
Have you thought about just downloading and burning TheOpenCD?
I would imagine that would ease the way for a lot of disgruntled Windows users towards Linux, by first giving them a large number of FOSS programs that run in Windows, first.
That's probably a better set of upgrades than ANYTHING MS can come up with.
Actually, you're mistaken there. The market value of a product is the amount of money people are willing to pay for a product or service.
I'm laying odds that between the people who pay full price, those who buy upgrades at $99 due to its reasonable price, and those who pirate the product entirely, the value of the actual product (Windows XP) is probably somewhere in the vicinity of $50 to $100.
Nothing to do with ethics... MS simply publishes articles and studies that set off far more fanboys for the same money they would have had to spend for a dozen. It's called creative marketing.;)
...except that in the case of TCO, you have a choice of Windows(whose TCO is tied to ONLY one vendor), and 3: only one source of technical support, should something come up) or Linux (whose TCO is based in competition between several vendors)
In this case, Linux has the TCO advantage.
Why is it in Linux's favor? Because as any economist knows, competition drives down prices and increases value. When there's a single source of service for a specific system, there's less motivation in fixing problems and actually providing service, as opposed to focusing on markets where the monopoly ISN'T IN PLACE! This is known as a "Cash cow," which simply means they have a self-sustained source of cash that keeps them fed while they do something else. Examples of other markets would be the console market (Xbox), Video games (Age of Empires, Asheron's Call), and PDAs (PocketPC).
On the other hand, when an industry is split among multiple competing segments, there is hard competition, each trying to provide a better service or product than the others, at lower prices, with better service, and much more comprehensive support, because they know that if they do not provide, someone else will, and they lose out in their business. Who wins in this case? The consumer, or course! You and I do, since we have the benefit of a number of high-quality choices.
Now, Microsoft is dusting off their old competition machine, since it's been so long since they needed to really use it. And as any old machine, it's started set on the last setting they used, Monopoly leverage.
Yes, it is expensive in some ways to convert everything over to a Linux setup. That's because of MS's monopoly leverage; their de-facto standard. However, it's not working completely, so they adjust a dial that uses the same setting, but with a more veiled message: Total Cost of Ownership.
Yes, to MS, the TCO of a product is directly proportional as to it's distance from Microsoft Products. THAT is it's indicator. But it's still the monopoly leverage.
I hope they find something else to use, this old song and dance is getting boring.
Under normal circumstances, that would, in fact, be the case.
However, sometimes security is more important than even availability; perhaps you are storing information on your computer that is the blueprints for some massive new technology that will revolutionize some industry. Obviously, you don't want someone breaking in on a bet, and leaving with something that might just destroy you financially.
Or perhaps you're in one of two companies in a hotly contested industry; the last thing you need is the competition getting a whiff of your plans before you put them into action.
Or perhaps you're an intelligence agency whose job is to get the dirt on other competing nations. Now, I'm not getting into the politics of the thing here, but there is a DAMN essential requirement that enemy agents aren't going to compromise your line of communication.
The question is what you have to hide, who you're hiding it from, and the value of what you have to hide. And sometimes, even the most draconic of measures aren't enough.
Slashdot Mirror
They're stacked? Aside from patent issues, which are starting to get notice in the more mainstream organizations, we're talking about a movement that has no central authority. Once again, I would like to know HOW this differs.
More importantly, this is not laziness, any more than is NOT changing your stance every time the wind blows.
I believe FOSS will win out in the end, despite the efforts MS puts into their opposition of it. If you don't agree with that, I respect you for it, but I will respectfully disagree.
Well, I'd like to see how such a program would manage to install itself on the sly in Linux, and from then on run automatically every time the computer starts.
Spyware itself isn't the problem, it's the stealth-installing variety (in quantity) that does the crippling.
If you say so, but if we can code by someone else's libraries, why can't we live by someone else's words? Reinventing the wheel is not only a bad idea in software. If it works, then go with it.
More importantly, can you demonstrate the deviation from this pattern in this case?
No, a) should read: Windows should fix the problems that allow such programs to be necessary.
First, they ignore you. Complete.
Then, they laugh at you. Complete.
Then, they fight you. In progress.
Then, you win. Pending.
Well, a huge number of the keys do have a very spiffy frontend, although the frontend isn't Microsoft's...
http://www.x-setup.net/
The man is vicious, not stupid.
SCO's got only so much time left (I think it was something along the line of 90 days) to prove they actually have an argument regarding Linux. And I don't think the court's buying it anymore; they are already telling SCO to start talking, or Summary Judgement will hit like a ton of bricks.
Once the Summary Judgement falls, SCO can kiss their Linux claims goodbye forever, leaving a contract dispute (which was begun as a direct result of the above claims). And it's pretty obvious what the finding will be; barring some macabre miracle.
Such prayers are like funerals. The dead's not going to care if he's buried in a box or in a cherrywood coffin. He's dead, and he's either In some afterlife or just doesn't exist consciously anymore.
Death is a tragedy for everyone but the deceased. If it makes a person feel better to make some spiritual note of respect for the deceased, why not allow for that? Whether prayers for the deceased do anything for his soul or not (and I'm sure there are religions out there that DO, in fact, believe this is possible), they do affect the person practicing that in much the same sense as donating to a charity or helping a little old lady across the street. It's an act of kindness that makes one feel better.
You whelps knock it off? I'm trying to... uh...
What was I saying?
Doesn't matter, I'm going to sleeee......zzzzzzzzzzz
Is it unoriginality, or consistency? You might also notice the phrase "It's good to be the king" outside of "History of the World, Part 1?"
Your typical midrange PC is still in the vicinity of 2-4 hundred dollars. An XBox is about $150.
An XBox is much smaller than an average computer and has built-in hookups to a TV and sound system. With this operating system, you can actually reduce the size of your entire media center to a single small box.
Add network remote control and SSH connectivity to it, and it's any geek's dream.
Oh yeah, and it plays video games, too!
There's a flaw in that logic: The human body would not be able to tolerate the 47 degree temperature that would signal the *beginning* of the hardening process.
The human body is a toasty 37 degree celsius (98.6 degrees fahrenheit). To take it to 47 degrees (116 degrees) would likely kill the person long before the hardening of the substance would.
Never mind the 75 (167) degrees...
Methinks that this might have some value as reinforcement for ceramic moulds.
Or... perhaps a form of cooking spray that would be guaranteed non-stick. Spray the liquid into the pan, bring the heat up until it's solid, cook until food is done, remove food, and let pan cool. Wash substance off and repeat process.
They are... haven't you noticed the plague of viruses that has been going around lately? You don't expect me to believe that people would have the skill to constantly bitch-smack a high-quality, bulletproof OS like Microsoft Windows, do you?
What level would be a high-end database server?
What level would be a high-end rendering system?
What level would be a high-end gaming system?
What level would be a high-end workstation?
As I see it, those four requirements go in totally different directions in term of requirements, so cannot be put on a simple numbered system. Servers require high storage and availability, meaning improvements in storage. Rendering does intense computation meaning pure CPU performance. Gaming requires CPU, Video, and Memory performance, emphasis on video. Workstations would require a lot of RAM (concurrent productivity applications), quality input and output devices (one who works for hours at a console would thank you), and reliable connectivity.
Perhaps levels and classes together would be more appropriate?
GS1-GS10, SS1-SS10, CS1-CS10, PS1-PS10
GS for Gaming System
SS for Serving System
CS for Computation System
PS for Productivity System
One solution, four words:
One Year Patent Term.
One year is a long time for business these days, and it's also a good standard for obsolescence.
Incentive to make money without incentive to make a monopoly.
However, what were the standards that those figures were based on? Judging from what was originally entertaining reading material in the 1800s and what is common reading material now, I suspect the standards have slipped horribly over the years.
AOLers are literate. aftr l, u can read this n still understand what i m saying.
However, their definition of literacy and ours are vastly different. The same applies for literacy standards that statistics are based on.
Quoth the Twain: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
Libertarianism only strikes me as taking off whatever shackles currently restrain corporations from totally ass-fucking everyone they can to improve their stock price. ...however, in terms of the free market, there's also no such things as corporations; a corporation is a government construct to give entity status to a company. Under the Libertarians and the free market, the concept of a corporation will be abolished, and people will be responsible for their own actions once again.
How limited IS this time?
What was once limited is now limiting.
But the idea of dedicating a staff to improving and releasing to the world those improvements...
And who, pray tell, is requiring those improvements to release? The GPL, by far, the greatest stickler for releasing code, does not require internally-used code to be released, so long as that code is not being distributed.
That's not capitalism. Capitalism is the profit off your own work. A real capitalist would compensate others for their work, and THEN make a profit from their own work (such as marketing and sales).
Otherwise, it's either slavery or theft.
I can spend my time burning and distributing CDs with OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird to Windows(tm)(r)-owning friends/relatives so that in a year or two their data will be out of Microsoft's(tm)(et-bloody-cetera) clutches.
Have you thought about just downloading and burning TheOpenCD?
I would imagine that would ease the way for a lot of disgruntled Windows users towards Linux, by first giving them a large number of FOSS programs that run in Windows, first.
That's probably a better set of upgrades than ANYTHING MS can come up with.
Actually, you're mistaken there. The market value of a product is the amount of money people are willing to pay for a product or service.
I'm laying odds that between the people who pay full price, those who buy upgrades at $99 due to its reasonable price, and those who pirate the product entirely, the value of the actual product (Windows XP) is probably somewhere in the vicinity of $50 to $100.
Nothing to do with ethics... MS simply publishes articles and studies that set off far more fanboys for the same money they would have had to spend for a dozen. It's called creative marketing. ;)
...except that in the case of TCO, you have a choice of Windows(whose TCO is tied to ONLY one vendor), and 3: only one source of technical support, should something come up) or Linux (whose TCO is based in competition between several vendors)
In this case, Linux has the TCO advantage.
Why is it in Linux's favor? Because as any economist knows, competition drives down prices and increases value. When there's a single source of service for a specific system, there's less motivation in fixing problems and actually providing service, as opposed to focusing on markets where the monopoly ISN'T IN PLACE! This is known as a "Cash cow," which simply means they have a self-sustained source of cash that keeps them fed while they do something else. Examples of other markets would be the console market (Xbox), Video games (Age of Empires, Asheron's Call), and PDAs (PocketPC).
On the other hand, when an industry is split among multiple competing segments, there is hard competition, each trying to provide a better service or product than the others, at lower prices, with better service, and much more comprehensive support, because they know that if they do not provide, someone else will, and they lose out in their business. Who wins in this case? The consumer, or course! You and I do, since we have the benefit of a number of high-quality choices.
Now, Microsoft is dusting off their old competition machine, since it's been so long since they needed to really use it. And as any old machine, it's started set on the last setting they used, Monopoly leverage.
Yes, it is expensive in some ways to convert everything over to a Linux setup. That's because of MS's monopoly leverage; their de-facto standard. However, it's not working completely, so they adjust a dial that uses the same setting, but with a more veiled message: Total Cost of Ownership.
Yes, to MS, the TCO of a product is directly proportional as to it's distance from Microsoft Products. THAT is it's indicator. But it's still the monopoly leverage.
I hope they find something else to use, this old song and dance is getting boring.
Under normal circumstances, that would, in fact, be the case.
However, sometimes security is more important than even availability; perhaps you are storing information on your computer that is the blueprints for some massive new technology that will revolutionize some industry. Obviously, you don't want someone breaking in on a bet, and leaving with something that might just destroy you financially.
Or perhaps you're in one of two companies in a hotly contested industry; the last thing you need is the competition getting a whiff of your plans before you put them into action.
Or perhaps you're an intelligence agency whose job is to get the dirt on other competing nations. Now, I'm not getting into the politics of the thing here, but there is a DAMN essential requirement that enemy agents aren't going to compromise your line of communication.
The question is what you have to hide, who you're hiding it from, and the value of what you have to hide. And sometimes, even the most draconic of measures aren't enough.