The only people who win are those who got their DVD, those that got the money, and those that post on or read from wikipedia, since the money will likely be used to help wikipedia.
You hit on a good point. An extreme to either side of the spectrum is dangerous. I think it will be healthy, for the future of software and operating systems, for Linux and Windows to survive together. This might be a bit off-topic, though.
And how much of your life is affected by those simple bits and bytes every day? How much control do you want others to have over those bits and bytes? How much would you like to have your simple computer habits restricted or controlled? It's a slippery slope.
Instead of complaining about their bosses and cramped cubes, maybe they should try to run the business and find out just how hard it is to make sure they have an income if they insist on staying purists.
I don't know, Red Hat makes plenty of money by staying purists.
Just install DB2 on your linux servers and forget about it all. Easy to install, easy to admin, easy to integrate in shell scripts, top performance. What more do you need?
I agree, it's good for FOSS when we see the adoption of any of the free rdbms. MySQL certainly is more popular than PostgreSQL, so it would be easier to get the boss to switch.
I wonder why MySQL has become so popular? Perhaps it could be that at one point it was much faster than PostgreSQL (which used to be slow), perhaps it could be GUI administration tools for it, perhaps both. I guess that's a bit off-topic though.
True, and MySQL can be alot cheaper as well. Still, the flexability PostgreSQL gives for future feature needs (without the need to migrate AGAIN) seems to appeal to me more than MySQL's features (or lack thereof).
Is it practical to switch from SQL Server to MySQL? MySQL doesn't even have views! I can't imagine any scenario where one would want to take the big hit in features, except if you absolutely needed more speed, and didn't have a need for the features. Still, it would make more sense to switch to PostgreSQL since it has as many, if not more, features than SQL Server.
For some (like me), the license is important. Although the text ads in the free-beer version of Opera is something I could get used to, when there is FF that has a free license, I think I'll stick with it, warts and all.
Slashdot Mirror
I think people need to look up the definition of FUD, and then use the acronym properly.
This is not FUD.
Not that much? You saying $180,000 for a t-shirt is cheap? You obviously haven't been to Wal-Mart.
The only people who win are those who got their DVD, those that got the money, and those that post on or read from wikipedia, since the money will likely be used to help wikipedia.
My cats want to sign a trade agreement with the military.
It's more like beer. The beer was all gone 2 years ago now all we get is the goopy vegamite at the bottom of the pot.
You hit on a good point. An extreme to either side of the spectrum is dangerous. I think it will be healthy, for the future of software and operating systems, for Linux and Windows to survive together. This might be a bit off-topic, though.
A return reply time worthy of a Debianaut.
And I just got finished compiling Gentoo too...
Not really. Have you seen the amount of comments for the last few news items? Have you seen the amount of moderation going on?
...it's April 1st.
I heard RMS committed seppuku after he heard of this. Anybody got a word on that?
Yes, it's all just bits and bytes.
And how much of your life is affected by those simple bits and bytes every day? How much control do you want others to have over those bits and bytes? How much would you like to have your simple computer habits restricted or controlled? It's a slippery slope.
You stole my perl script!
Money.
I agree, it's good for FOSS when we see the adoption of any of the free rdbms. MySQL certainly is more popular than PostgreSQL, so it would be easier to get the boss to switch.
I wonder why MySQL has become so popular? Perhaps it could be that at one point it was much faster than PostgreSQL (which used to be slow), perhaps it could be GUI administration tools for it, perhaps both. I guess that's a bit off-topic though.
How so? Is it because of dialectic or feature reasons?
True, and MySQL can be alot cheaper as well. Still, the flexability PostgreSQL gives for future feature needs (without the need to migrate AGAIN) seems to appeal to me more than MySQL's features (or lack thereof).
Is it practical to switch from SQL Server to MySQL? MySQL doesn't even have views! I can't imagine any scenario where one would want to take the big hit in features, except if you absolutely needed more speed, and didn't have a need for the features. Still, it would make more sense to switch to PostgreSQL since it has as many, if not more, features than SQL Server.
Ah, the all powerful dollar at work.
Ya, let's go back to the old days when 64k was all anybody ever needed!
For some (like me), the license is important. Although the text ads in the free-beer version of Opera is something I could get used to, when there is FF that has a free license, I think I'll stick with it, warts and all.
Honestly if they just put a few specs out there to differentiate chips it would make life a little easier.
Ya, let's use something everybody can understand...
How about clock speed?
In North Korea, only old people use KDE!
Wanna bet?