Apple is pretty much driving this one now. I think this quote from TFA is telling, "its improvements had become difficult to move back into KHTML"
Apple is free to do what they want within the confines of the licenses provided. The problems will arise when projects rely on Apple for their features. Specifically, the features apple is willing to share. One of the problems is Apple has no interest in keeping a GPL'd webkit fully functioning with tidy entry/exits for whatever proprietary things Apple wants to add. I can easily imagine Apple's GPL CUPS suffering the same fate.
More on this point, somewhere long ago the companies collecting data lumped all sales of the branded systems running Windows and compared them to Apple's sales. If you disaggregated the data one would find:
1. Apple is consistently top-5 against all other brands sold. It varied from 3-to-5 when I saw the numbers. 2. #1 in laptop sales in the U.S.
What would be *far* more interesting to track is the financial performance PC brands like Dell and HP do as Vista ramps up. I predict they will do very badly as microsoft's role as a price-maker ruins their business.
Anyone that's done any business in government would anonymously back me up when I say that this whole project moved into mass production so quickly I find it hard to believe. From the olpc wiki, they list some countries.
Anyone that's worked government IT would tell you that it's incredibly difficult to get paid in a timely manner. On top of *just* getting paid, they've been paid so much the entire OEM chain is ready to mass-produce?
Someone somewhere has a lot of influence (e.g. money) to get this going because OEM's certainly don't work for free and governments rarely, if ever, are enlighted enough to see a good thing an let it pass. Who's pushing this and where's the money coming from?
I find it very telling that there's very little of the usual/. moral outrage associated with spam.
It's clearly okay for corporations to collect and maintain detailed records of individual consumer preferences, financial records and medical records. And yet, when identity theft stories appear, there is the usual hue and cry "something must be done!"
It seems to me that few people understand the two go together like beer and potato chips.
But the problem applying this to broadcasted content is that the principal is rarely adhered to.
In one way, it is shear stupidity that we need to have this kind of rule. There's a race to the bottom in most entertainment. Keeping swear words out of bottom feeding entertainment (Jackass anyone?) is a good idea. I would be most concerned if more resources were given to the FCC to enforce this kind of thing.
Like the parent post, it's at home and when she's legitimately angry she might use some curse words. When she does it's okay because we do it too. It's explicitly not okay to use them in the course of conversation. It's explicitly not okay to do do it around other people/kids.
Pretty simple rules that are easy to follow. Easy to enforce. It takes away the excitement around using something that's forbidden. Most of all they are consistent with the world around her. We certainly swear when we are mad. She's allowed to use the words we use, We do not use f-bombs at all. Lots of damns and variations on crap.
Your logic may make you feel better, but it has no application in the real world.
First, "security" software in win32 is not impermeable.
Second, let me reassure you if the Feds considered you and I "persons of interest" they have the tools necessary to collect information on your online activities regardless of firewalls and antivirus software.
This isn't some kind of conspiracy. It's a matter of fact and it has been this way for at least a decade. If that seems implausible, then you need to readjust your beliefs.
I know this site is a big echo chamber but the simple fact of the matter is Federal law enforcement coordinates very closely with every computer vendor that has anything of interest to them. The coordination efforts are expressly for purposes like this. I seem to recall photochop will throw an error if you try to scan U.S. currency. It's like that, only everywhere and no error messages.
Law enforcement is very deep into every aspect of computer activity. It's been this way for more than a decade.
The/. moral outrage rings very hollow because no one will fight for anything different.
sometimes there's just little slowdowns along the way that they can't control.
That my friend is the nature of the beast when it comes to voip. While the goal of a 1:1 translation of POTS service/quality is commendable, most consumers will gladly exchange lower quality calls for some combination of lower prices and more service.
Comparing Slashdot to VOIP is a really bad comparison because one requires very low lag times, while the other could care less.
No. The disconnect for you may be that you have experience-based expectations of some lag when going to/. You don't have the same experience-base with phone calls. But many people have similar expectations. Especially ones that have grown up with mobile phones as "the phone" versus POTS. People ARE caring less about their phone call quality.
I manage an office that's 100% NATed voip over a T1 with cisco phones. Echo? Low-quality calls? Dropped calls? Yes to all of them with voip. Service and quality are far worse than the Nortels I used to admin, but the cost is **way** cheaper.
What could a third party VOIP telco really do to make a more reliable service when they don't control the line.
First of all, good for you for throwing some ideas out. What most people fail to understand is the VOIP protocol is **loaded** with features. The clients (and vonage) simply haven't caught up in most cases.
Second, the whole notion that a voip provider doesn't "own the lines" is a joke. Yes, somewhere lots of telco promoters are using this crazy idea to inject FUD into the notion that consumers can get their telephony needs met elsewhere. Because the argument is being used at the highest classes of investors, it has special effectiveness. Kind of like when the NY Times runs a story. It's somehow more believable. In point of fact, you don't "own the line" to./ and it works well right? In one way, the same is true for voip.
That the telco provider can shape traffic in clear violation of common carrier status is easily addressed in some ways. But don't run with that idea because you need to understand how a voip session works to see that shaping peer-to-peer traffic is a bit more difficult than it seems. I'm not a routing genius, so I'd love to hear some opinions either way on this comment.
Third, this is a relatively new market. (we're talking Wall Street scale) Investors typically hand their money over, watch the share price rise and expect no dividends. This kind of flame-out and others to follow are pretty typical.
Starting a project as GPL is probably best because you'll get an idea how useful your application can be. It definitely makes it really hard to make money until you can run a Free red-headed step-child project and make people pay for the commercial version that's the belle of the ball. Another way to do it is to limit the GPL-ness of the project. Maybe by dual-licensing the code?
It's still not easy though. Getting customers to open their wallets when there are much bigger companies like RedHat and Microsoft is tough anyway. That's why sales people are so valuable.
I want to believe frustrations got the better of the person in question at that moment.
Premise is Dead Wrong
on
Patents Don't Pay
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've only worked for small companies and every single one of them (six?) have been dragged through courts on patent/trademark issues. Usually both. Usually from the leader of the industry.
I also suspect he can't possibly quantify the amount of money submarine patent owners are making. After all they are taking on the biggest of the big companies in the U.S. The money to lawyer-up doesn't just appear.
So, it does pay. It puts small companies at a perpetual disadvantage. Considering the author's publisher, it will probably get way more consideration than it should.
I didn't bother reading TFA, so mod me down if it doesn't matter.
I have a similar background and tackled it the way you are considering and found it to be a huge waste of time, extraordinary stress on the marraige and a big-money sink.
Step 1: Get to a Senior management position first. You will need to burn a few personal relationships in the transitions. Surely a manager will disagree with me, but they will _never_ see it that way. Step 2: Get a lot of management experience preferrably at multiple companies. Step 3: Get MBA. Step 4: Profit!
Going at it from the bottom has a very low probability of success. The only exception I can think of is an MBA from an East coast Ivy League school. Stanford is the only viable West Coast school big corporations consider valuable.
is what kind of ethernet card does the system have.
True story: a guy says, "I got a 100MB connection into my office but it's slow." Go to his office test his desktop. Yup slow. (1.5mb or so) Eventually test all the way back to the adapter. Holy smoke! 100MB at the adapter.
Two problems: 1. Turns out he bought the "top of the line" Netgear switch at Best Buy. 2. Win32 NIC is configured to auto, which apparently chose the slowest possible speed.
Today's Lesson: Windows and vanilla hardware are their own impediments to fast networks.
This distro isn't ready for production equipment like Debian. Ubuntu is like AOL way back in the day. It's usefulness is limited and it's easy to out-grow. Try Debian if you get frustrated with AOL/Ubuntu.
This word "outdated" in your context suggests an irrelevance. A kind of uselessness. However, that context has practically no meaning.
1. Does my production equipment reliably provide it's services? Then it's not "outdated." 2. Is the production equipment code in the security patch support window? Then it's not "outdated."
Instead, you and others like you casually throw out the term to disguise the fact the production code base you run on is less tested.
You also conveniently ignore the fact very few of us genuinely **need** to run newer code. In some cases newer code has a feature in there you need. But this is the exception, not the rule. Therefore, the decision to use Ubuntu rarely, if ever has anything to do with "bleeding edge."
You are married to your distro because the honeymoon is on for Ubuntu. I've been around long enough to remember when Red Hat pissed off a huge number of users with Fedora. Canonical will do it too. It's only a matter of time. (and money) Then what?
I think that if it could be made Photoshop's equal (at least in factory features
Making a photoshop equal is a fools errand. 1. That kind of me-too thinking won't help anyone and positions GIMP as the perpetual Yugo of the American auto market.
2. You wouldn't switch with Gimpshop. How about if GIMP implemented all of Adobe's half-baked gui? No, you wouldn't. You could do quite a bit of professional work in gimp, but you won't because you don't want to.
3. Posting comments like "if only GIMP was more like photoshop" and "if only the name were different" is disingenuous at best and very annoying to people like me who move easily between the two applications. GIMP is a good tool for the work it can handle. Please learn to distinguish between your strong personal bias and objective capabilities of the applications in question.
The difference between Canonical and the Debian giant it stands on is Mark is flushing money down the drain promoting his distro. That includes a healthy PR budget, government sales people and the corruption taxes that Canonical pays to land contracts and distribution deals like Dell.
What happens when Mark gets tired of sinking money into the project? Right now it's not going to happen because mark understands it's a money sucking blood bath getting to that #1 distro slot. But what happens when the honeymoon is over?
I completely agree with another post that claims that the Canonical distros are nothing special. As a 24-7 sysadmin that likes getting sleep on a regular basis, I'll never move a ubuntu distro into production.
Maybe a bigger problem will be that you can't instrument what GIMP doesn't do: CMYK, Color Management, look/work just like the industry standard..
1. When did the GIMP project's first goal become world domination? 2. Yes, GIMP does support color managment. No, not to your satisfaction. http://www.khk.net/color/color_manager.html 3. Yes, GIMP does have some CMYK features. No, not to your satisfaction
GIMP is a great tool for many. Judging by your hysterical comments, it is not a good tool for you.
If it's free and it works, why isn't EVERYBODY using it?
There are a number of logical failures with this line of reasoning. Free has little to do with the reason "everybody" uses something. Most times, it is the product that has enough money to shout the loudest.
graphical applications are meant to be used.. Ranting about the GIMP really doesn't get your point across. For some of us the GIMP is great. For you, it sounds like you want to use Adobe products. Go for it.
I don't think the GIMP project primary goals include world domination.
To be successful, Gimp must surpass it in more than one way There is a huge entertainment industry segment using FilmGimp and GIMP so, it already surpasses whatever else is out there right now in some segments. I would argue that it is quite successful anyway.
But it is neither a Photoshop replacement There will never be a day when Photoshop is the equivalent of GIMP and vice versa. GIMP is excellent and stands on it's own merits. The print shop natives are getting quite restless now anyway considering Adobe put a hard link to Kinkos in Acrobat Reader. http://www.printondemand.com/MT/archives/011197.ht ml Scribus, Inkscape and GIMP on a Linux desktop, I'd say they have some good Free alternatives out there to promote to their customers. GNU Preflight software anyone???
I don't need adobe products and there are many people throwing money away on proprietary products when the GIMP has way more tools than they can possibly use.
Slashdot Mirror
My bias is pretty obvious. I sincerely hope that you are right.
Apple is pretty much driving this one now. I think this quote from TFA is telling, "its improvements had become difficult to move back into KHTML"
Apple is free to do what they want within the confines of the licenses provided. The problems will arise when projects rely on Apple for their features. Specifically, the features apple is willing to share. One of the problems is Apple has no interest in keeping a GPL'd webkit fully functioning with tidy entry/exits for whatever proprietary things Apple wants to add. I can easily imagine Apple's GPL CUPS suffering the same fate.
More on this point, somewhere long ago the companies collecting data lumped all sales of the branded systems running Windows and compared them to Apple's sales. If you disaggregated the data one would find:
1. Apple is consistently top-5 against all other brands sold. It varied from 3-to-5 when I saw the numbers.
2. #1 in laptop sales in the U.S.
What would be *far* more interesting to track is the financial performance PC brands like Dell and HP do as Vista ramps up. I predict they will do very badly as microsoft's role as a price-maker ruins their business.
Anyone that's done any business in government would anonymously back me up when I say that this whole project moved into mass production so quickly I find it hard to believe. From the olpc wiki, they list some countries.
* 2.1 Romania--No
* 2.2 Argentina--Yes
* 2.3 Brazil--Yes
* 2.4 Korea---driven by a few citizens
* 2.5 Libya--Yes
* 2.6 Nigeria--Yes
* 2.7 India--No
* 2.8 Uruguay--Yes
* 2.9 Rwanda--Yes
* 2.10 USA--Talking
Anyone that's worked government IT would tell you that it's incredibly difficult to get paid in a timely manner. On top of *just* getting paid, they've been paid so much the entire OEM chain is ready to mass-produce?
Someone somewhere has a lot of influence (e.g. money) to get this going because OEM's certainly don't work for free and governments rarely, if ever, are enlighted enough to see a good thing an let it pass. Who's pushing this and where's the money coming from?
Interesting.
/. moral outrage associated with spam.
I find it very telling that there's very little of the usual
It's clearly okay for corporations to collect and maintain detailed records of individual consumer preferences, financial records and medical records. And yet, when identity theft stories appear, there is the usual hue and cry "something must be done!"
It seems to me that few people understand the two go together like beer and potato chips.
But the problem applying this to broadcasted content is that the principal is rarely adhered to.
In one way, it is shear stupidity that we need to have this kind of rule. There's a race to the bottom in most entertainment. Keeping swear words out of bottom feeding entertainment (Jackass anyone?) is a good idea. I would be most concerned if more resources were given to the FCC to enforce this kind of thing.
Like the parent post, it's at home and when she's legitimately angry she might use some curse words. When she does it's okay because we do it too. It's explicitly not okay to use them in the course of conversation. It's explicitly not okay to do do it around other people/kids.
Pretty simple rules that are easy to follow. Easy to enforce. It takes away the excitement around using something that's forbidden. Most of all they are consistent with the world around her. We certainly swear when we are mad. She's allowed to use the words we use, We do not use f-bombs at all. Lots of damns and variations on crap.
Your logic may make you feel better, but it has no application in the real world.
First, "security" software in win32 is not impermeable.
Second, let me reassure you if the Feds considered you and I "persons of interest" they have the tools necessary to collect information on your online activities regardless of firewalls and antivirus software.
This isn't some kind of conspiracy. It's a matter of fact and it has been this way for at least a decade. If that seems implausible, then you need to readjust your beliefs.
I know this site is a big echo chamber but the simple fact of the matter is Federal law enforcement coordinates very closely with every computer vendor that has anything of interest to them. The coordination efforts are expressly for purposes like this. I seem to recall photochop will throw an error if you try to scan U.S. currency. It's like that, only everywhere and no error messages.
/. moral outrage rings very hollow because no one will fight for anything different.
Law enforcement is very deep into every aspect of computer activity. It's been this way for more than a decade.
The
sometimes there's just little slowdowns along the way that they can't control.
/. You don't have the same experience-base with phone calls. But many people have similar expectations. Especially ones that have grown up with mobile phones as "the phone" versus POTS. People ARE caring less about their phone call quality.
That my friend is the nature of the beast when it comes to voip. While the goal of a 1:1 translation of POTS service/quality is commendable, most consumers will gladly exchange lower quality calls for some combination of lower prices and more service.
Comparing Slashdot to VOIP is a really bad comparison because one requires very low lag times, while the other could care less.
No. The disconnect for you may be that you have experience-based expectations of some lag when going to
I manage an office that's 100% NATed voip over a T1 with cisco phones. Echo? Low-quality calls? Dropped calls? Yes to all of them with voip. Service and quality are far worse than the Nortels I used to admin, but the cost is **way** cheaper.
What could a third party VOIP telco really do to make a more reliable service when they don't control the line.
./ and it works well right? In one way, the same is true for voip.
First of all, good for you for throwing some ideas out. What most people fail to understand is the VOIP protocol is **loaded** with features. The clients (and vonage) simply haven't caught up in most cases.
Second, the whole notion that a voip provider doesn't "own the lines" is a joke. Yes, somewhere lots of telco promoters are using this crazy idea to inject FUD into the notion that consumers can get their telephony needs met elsewhere. Because the argument is being used at the highest classes of investors, it has special effectiveness. Kind of like when the NY Times runs a story. It's somehow more believable. In point of fact, you don't "own the line" to
That the telco provider can shape traffic in clear violation of common carrier status is easily addressed in some ways. But don't run with that idea because you need to understand how a voip session works to see that shaping peer-to-peer traffic is a bit more difficult than it seems. I'm not a routing genius, so I'd love to hear some opinions either way on this comment.
Third, this is a relatively new market. (we're talking Wall Street scale) Investors typically hand their money over, watch the share price rise and expect no dividends. This kind of flame-out and others to follow are pretty typical.
Starting a project as GPL is probably best because you'll get an idea how useful your application can be. It definitely makes it really hard to make money until you can run a Free red-headed step-child project and make people pay for the commercial version that's the belle of the ball. Another way to do it is to limit the GPL-ness of the project. Maybe by dual-licensing the code?
It's still not easy though. Getting customers to open their wallets when there are much bigger companies like RedHat and Microsoft is tough anyway. That's why sales people are so valuable.
I want to believe frustrations got the better of the person in question at that moment.
I've only worked for small companies and every single one of them (six?) have been dragged through courts on patent/trademark issues. Usually both. Usually from the leader of the industry.
I also suspect he can't possibly quantify the amount of money submarine patent owners are making. After all they are taking on the biggest of the big companies in the U.S. The money to lawyer-up doesn't just appear.
So, it does pay. It puts small companies at a perpetual disadvantage. Considering the author's publisher, it will probably get way more consideration than it should.
I didn't bother reading TFA, so mod me down if it doesn't matter.
I have a similar background and tackled it the way you are considering and found it to be a huge waste of time, extraordinary stress on the marraige and a big-money sink.
Step 1: Get to a Senior management position first. You will need to burn a few personal relationships in the transitions. Surely a manager will disagree with me, but they will _never_ see it that way.
Step 2: Get a lot of management experience preferrably at multiple companies.
Step 3: Get MBA.
Step 4: Profit!
Going at it from the bottom has a very low probability of success. The only exception I can think of is an MBA from an East coast Ivy League school. Stanford is the only viable West Coast school big corporations consider valuable.
This article seems to tell a different story. http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/05/05/12/1555240.s html
It's from two years ago, that's for sure, so maybe it is better now. Thanks.
is what kind of ethernet card does the system have.
True story: a guy says, "I got a 100MB connection into my office but it's slow." Go to his office test his desktop. Yup slow. (1.5mb or so) Eventually test all the way back to the adapter. Holy smoke! 100MB at the adapter.
Two problems:
1. Turns out he bought the "top of the line" Netgear switch at Best Buy.
2. Win32 NIC is configured to auto, which apparently chose the slowest possible speed.
Today's Lesson: Windows and vanilla hardware are their own impediments to fast networks.
This service sounds suspiciously similar to running p0f. http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f.shtml
OT Question: is p0f the cat's meow or has it been bested?
Here's a few with their installer:
k agebugs-search?field.distribution=ubuntu&field.sou rcepackagename=ubiquity&search=Search [launchpad.net]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubiquity [launchpad.net]
No. I mean *these* bugs:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-installer/+pac
This distro isn't ready for production equipment like Debian. Ubuntu is like AOL way back in the day. It's usefulness is limited and it's easy to out-grow. Try Debian if you get frustrated with AOL/Ubuntu.
This word "outdated" in your context suggests an irrelevance. A kind of uselessness. However, that context has practically no meaning.
1. Does my production equipment reliably provide it's services? Then it's not "outdated."
2. Is the production equipment code in the security patch support window? Then it's not "outdated."
Instead, you and others like you casually throw out the term to disguise the fact the production code base you run on is less tested.
You also conveniently ignore the fact very few of us genuinely **need** to run newer code. In some cases newer code has a feature in there you need. But this is the exception, not the rule. Therefore, the decision to use Ubuntu rarely, if ever has anything to do with "bleeding edge."
You are married to your distro because the honeymoon is on for Ubuntu. I've been around long enough to remember when Red Hat pissed off a huge number of users with Fedora. Canonical will do it too. It's only a matter of time. (and money) Then what?
I think that if it could be made Photoshop's equal (at least in factory features
Making a photoshop equal is a fools errand.
1. That kind of me-too thinking won't help anyone and positions GIMP as the perpetual Yugo of the American auto market.
2. You wouldn't switch with Gimpshop. How about if GIMP implemented all of Adobe's half-baked gui? No, you wouldn't. You could do quite a bit of professional work in gimp, but you won't because you don't want to.
3. Posting comments like "if only GIMP was more like photoshop" and "if only the name were different" is disingenuous at best and very annoying to people like me who move easily between the two applications. GIMP is a good tool for the work it can handle. Please learn to distinguish between your strong personal bias and objective capabilities of the applications in question.
The difference between Canonical and the Debian giant it stands on is Mark is flushing money down the drain promoting his distro. That includes a healthy PR budget, government sales people and the corruption taxes that Canonical pays to land contracts and distribution deals like Dell.
What happens when Mark gets tired of sinking money into the project? Right now it's not going to happen because mark understands it's a money sucking blood bath getting to that #1 distro slot. But what happens when the honeymoon is over?
I completely agree with another post that claims that the Canonical distros are nothing special. As a 24-7 sysadmin that likes getting sleep on a regular basis, I'll never move a ubuntu distro into production.
Pick one or the other.
Maybe a bigger problem will be that you can't instrument what GIMP doesn't do: CMYK, Color Management, look/work just like the industry standard..
1. When did the GIMP project's first goal become world domination?
2. Yes, GIMP does support color managment. No, not to your satisfaction. http://www.khk.net/color/color_manager.html
3. Yes, GIMP does have some CMYK features. No, not to your satisfaction
GIMP is a great tool for many. Judging by your hysterical comments, it is not a good tool for you.
If it's free and it works, why isn't EVERYBODY using it?
There are a number of logical failures with this line of reasoning. Free has little to do with the reason "everybody" uses something. Most times, it is the product that has enough money to shout the loudest.
graphical applications are meant to be used..
Ranting about the GIMP really doesn't get your point across. For some of us the GIMP is great. For you, it sounds like you want to use Adobe products. Go for it.
Today, Photoshop is the industry leader...
t ml Scribus, Inkscape and GIMP on a Linux desktop, I'd say they have some good Free alternatives out there to promote to their customers. GNU Preflight software anyone???
I don't think the GIMP project primary goals include world domination.
To be successful, Gimp must surpass it in more than one way
There is a huge entertainment industry segment using FilmGimp and GIMP so, it already surpasses whatever else is out there right now in some segments. I would argue that it is quite successful anyway.
But it is neither a Photoshop replacement
There will never be a day when Photoshop is the equivalent of GIMP and vice versa. GIMP is excellent and stands on it's own merits. The print shop natives are getting quite restless now anyway considering Adobe put a hard link to Kinkos in Acrobat Reader. http://www.printondemand.com/MT/archives/011197.h
I don't need adobe products and there are many people throwing money away on proprietary products when the GIMP has way more tools than they can possibly use.