In production environments the only advantages it has is opendirectory and a performant JVM. Java on linux and freebsd is still not that great and setting up ldap and kerberos on linux is still a pain.
Other then that though it's probably better to stick to linux or freebsd for a server solution.
FOr a thousand reasons but mainly because darwinports is nowhere near as nice as the freebsd ports.
In reality to do anything non trivial you need to go mess the config files anyway so it doesn't really offer anything above and beyond freebsd. Oh and once you touch the config files by hand you should never ever thoush the gui tools again.
"MS is not going to be a company to sue without good reason"
What are you talking about. Both Ballmer and Gates have said publicly that they intend to "defend their intellectual property vigorously". That's CEO speak for we are going to sue. Furthermore according to Perens MS has told HP that they intend sue open source projects for patents and sendmail was mentioned by name.
Finally just google. Ms has sued many people for intellectual property violations. Remember Mike Rowe? If Ms is willing to sue a 16 year old boy you think they are not going to sue for patent infrigement?
When I read a post like this I always feel so happy. The freepers used to argue that global warming wasn't happening. Now they are simply arguing "sure it's happening but it's not my fault".
"This is similar reasoning as some religious arguments. "Science can't explain X but our model of God can, therefore we got it right.""
Hmmmm. that's an interesting theory. Statistical analysis is the same as religious arguments.
'Has it not occured to anyone that perhaps their models aren't accurate."
Apparently not. Thousands of scientists are too stupid to realize what you have.
'For instance, it could all be due to solar activity and their model of how solar activity affects climate is wrong."
WOW. I bet they never thought to study solar activity when researching global warming.
'They could even have the greenhouse model completely wrong and it gives the right answers because building the models in the first place was based off of calibrating it against real data."
Brilliant!. The whole model could be wrong but giving the right answers!. Yes that must be it.
'This is partially from my own experience. I've developed calibrations for complicated systems and I know that the calibration algorithms do their best to fit the model to the data, even if the model is wrong."
Obviously no scientist has your level of experience in calibrating complicated systems.
"It seems to build back up towards the end of the sunny season there (There's a clue there boys and girls...)- and seems to ebb down (as in reappear...) during the nighttime season. Clue for you all: Ozone is produced by UV irradiation, something that doesn't happen during nighttime and the poles are subjected to a six month night!"
Wow. How did the climatologists and the meteorologists miss that? Who knew UV radiation produced ozone? I didn't and I bet none of those scientists did either.
I suggest you send a link about that subject to the NOAA. You have figured this ozone layer thing out and they are spreading false information in all those scientific journals.
You should definately educate those ignorant scientists, I mean how can anybody call themselves a climatologist and not know about UV rays and freon?
You have nailed it my friends. You have figured out what all those scientists have not.
Just amazingly brilliant. Do you think you will win a nobel prize for your slashdot analysis? You certainly deserve one.
Imagine that, hundreds of scientists doing fancy things like experiments, research, reading, and mathematics and still being wrong. You on the other hand did none of that and you are right. Just by exercizing your brainpower.
Brilliant, genious, amazing. I am humbled. They should fire all those scientists and replace them with you!
"Yes, ice cores don't deliver the same data, and the data it does provide is based on several assumptions and indirect measurements, which makes it inherently less accurate."
Again. Do you believe that you are the only person that has realized this brilliant idea. Do you believe that somehow all those climatologists and meteorologists are too dumb to take any of that into account.
Did you know that there are scientists that believe in creationism? There are also scientists that believe that the earths crust will shift massively pretty soon now. I know that there are several scientits that belive that the world is being visited by alien creatures.
YOu can always find a scientist that believes in something nutty. Of course.000000001% of the time one of those nutty scientists is right but mostly they are just nutty scientists.
So the question remains. Why do you believe in the minority of the scientists on this subject but not the majority of scientists.
Hmmm. Interesting you are saying there is an organized conspiracy by scientists to commit fraud upon the entire planet. It's amazing how these scientists have been able to co-operate on such a massive scale. All over the world the scientists are working hard to carry out their conspiracy and are doing it very effectively.
"I remember one NOAA model that came out a few years ago showing a sudden upturn in temperatures just about to happen"
There was an uptrun in tempratures. Species are suffering, the ice caps are melting, the glaciers have all but gone away. I guess none of that qualifies as a calamity in your book though.
"I thought that my reply was a comment about how too many people think that because a statement comes from a scientist that it's 100% indisputable. "
Right. We should completely throw out all statements from scientists.
All in all it's much better to listen to radio talk show hosts, TV commentators and industry leaders; especially when it comes to global warming. I mean who knows more about global warming a fine writer like Michael Crichton (he wrote jurrasic park you know) or some stupid scientist?
BTW I don't want to pick on just climatologists here. I think we should ignore all scientists. I mean just because some scientists says that the world moves around the sun that does mean they are 100% correct. Anybody can just and see that the sun is going around the earth!. And don't even get me started on doctors!
"And I would not put data collected from ice cores on par with data recorded from weather stations in recent years."
Why not? Do you have a theoretical or a scientific explanation for this line of reasoning?
Also do you think that the climatologists have somehow missed this bit of knowledge when they were taking the ice core measurements into account? Surely there would be at least one or two scientists who have thought of taking into account some of the hazards of dealing with ice core data. It's hard to believe you are the only one who has thought of this.
According to this link http://www.solcomhouse.com/poverty.htm
The top 3 richest people in the world have wealth greater than the combined Gross Domestic Product (the value of all goods and services) of the world's 48 poorest nations.
And that the world's richest 225 people have combined assets equal to the combined annual income of the world's 2.5 billion poorest people.
This tells me that something is out of whack. This guy could probably singlehandedly wipe out hunger in the world instead he wants to spend all that money trying to build a hotel in space.
The idea of the GPL is to create a self healing commons. The idea is that the GPL allows for a commons to grow and flourish because the people who take from the commons are also forced to give something back.
The BSD commons is a one way street. It's a commons that could stagnate or even decay because nobody who takes from it is forced to give back to it.
The BSD is pretty much like public domain. It's charity work. When you release code under the BSD license you are in effect an unpaid employee of anybody who wants to use that code.
In the end nobody is holding a gun to your head. YOu don't have to use BSD code or GPLed code.
Oh and I forgot, you could always write your own code too.
Why do you think I laid down FUD. Everything I said is 100% true.
"Regardless Ms still owns patents on the numerous.NET technologies"
100% true.
"both Ballmer and Gates have repeatedly said they intend to defend their intellectual property vigorously."
100% true.
'Be Aware that your company can be sued for USING patent infringing technology."
100% true.
'If you company has deep pockets Ms could come after you. If for no other reason then to make you stop using.NET on a non windows platform."
Ok speculative but certainly plausable given the above given premises.
If you are using mono and have not considered the fact that MS has patents on it and both the CEO and the president of the company both have said they intend to defend their intellectual property then I submit you are not making an intelligent decision.
Slashdot Mirror
In production environments the only advantages it has is opendirectory and a performant JVM. Java on linux and freebsd is still not that great and setting up ldap and kerberos on linux is still a pain.
Other then that though it's probably better to stick to linux or freebsd for a server solution.
It's OK. I prefer freebsd myself.
FOr a thousand reasons but mainly because darwinports is nowhere near as nice as the freebsd ports.
In reality to do anything non trivial you need to go mess the config files anyway so it doesn't really offer anything above and beyond freebsd. Oh and once you touch the config files by hand you should never ever thoush the gui tools again.
That would be convincing argument if MS only sued mike rowe or only sued for trademark.
Sorry not the case. they have filed lots of IP suits.
"MS is not going to be a company to sue without good reason"
What are you talking about. Both Ballmer and Gates have said publicly that they intend to "defend their intellectual property vigorously". That's CEO speak for we are going to sue. Furthermore according to Perens MS has told HP that they intend sue open source projects for patents and sendmail was mentioned by name.
Finally just google. Ms has sued many people for intellectual property violations. Remember Mike Rowe? If Ms is willing to sue a 16 year old boy you think they are not going to sue for patent infrigement?
Yea so he is just like Rush Limbaugh. What's the big deal?
When I read a post like this I always feel so happy. The freepers used to argue that global warming wasn't happening. Now they are simply arguing "sure it's happening but it's not my fault".
Progress indeed.
"This is similar reasoning as some religious arguments. "Science can't explain X but our model of God can, therefore we got it right.""
Hmmmm. that's an interesting theory. Statistical analysis is the same as religious arguments.
'Has it not occured to anyone that perhaps their models aren't accurate."
Apparently not. Thousands of scientists are too stupid to realize what you have.
'For instance, it could all be due to solar activity and their model of how solar activity affects climate is wrong."
WOW. I bet they never thought to study solar activity when researching global warming.
'They could even have the greenhouse model completely wrong and it gives the right answers because building the models in the first place was based off of calibrating it against real data."
Brilliant!. The whole model could be wrong but giving the right answers!. Yes that must be it.
'This is partially from my own experience. I've developed calibrations for complicated systems and I know that the calibration algorithms do their best to fit the model to the data, even if the model is wrong."
Obviously no scientist has your level of experience in calibrating complicated systems.
"It seems to build back up towards the end of the sunny season there (There's a clue there boys and girls...)- and seems to ebb down (as in reappear...) during the nighttime season. Clue for you all: Ozone is produced by UV irradiation, something that doesn't happen during nighttime and the poles are subjected to a six month night!"
Wow. How did the climatologists and the meteorologists miss that? Who knew UV radiation produced ozone? I didn't and I bet none of those scientists did either.
I suggest you send a link about that subject to the NOAA. You have figured this ozone layer thing out and they are spreading false information in all those scientific journals.
You should definately educate those ignorant scientists, I mean how can anybody call themselves a climatologist and not know about UV rays and freon?
Why you are brilliant!.
You have nailed it my friends. You have figured out what all those scientists have not.
Just amazingly brilliant. Do you think you will win a nobel prize for your slashdot analysis? You certainly deserve one.
Imagine that, hundreds of scientists doing fancy things like experiments, research, reading, and mathematics and still being wrong. You on the other hand did none of that and you are right. Just by exercizing your brainpower.
Brilliant, genious, amazing. I am humbled. They should fire all those scientists and replace them with you!
"Yes, ice cores don't deliver the same data, and the data it does provide is based on several assumptions and indirect measurements, which makes it inherently less accurate."
Again. Do you believe that you are the only person that has realized this brilliant idea. Do you believe that somehow all those climatologists and meteorologists are too dumb to take any of that into account.
Did you know that there are scientists that believe in creationism? There are also scientists that believe that the earths crust will shift massively pretty soon now. I know that there are several scientits that belive that the world is being visited by alien creatures.
.000000001% of the time one of those nutty scientists is right but mostly they are just nutty scientists.
YOu can always find a scientist that believes in something nutty. Of course
So the question remains. Why do you believe in the minority of the scientists on this subject but not the majority of scientists.
Ooops sorry. I thought I was talking to a rational human smarter then a couple of dead flies.
I now find out I am talking to an idiot freeper.
SOrry.
Interesting. Maybe it's kind of like when we get a fever. The human body heats up to try and kill the viruses that are making it sick.
The earth has a fever!
"We don't have thousands and thousands of years of climate data, let alone multiple periods' worth"
Yes we do. Read the article and then post.
Hmmm. Interesting you are saying there is an organized conspiracy by scientists to commit fraud upon the entire planet. It's amazing how these scientists have been able to co-operate on such a massive scale. All over the world the scientists are working hard to carry out their conspiracy and are doing it very effectively.
"I remember one NOAA model that came out a few years ago showing a sudden upturn in temperatures just about to happen"
There was an uptrun in tempratures. Species are suffering, the ice caps are melting, the glaciers have all but gone away. I guess none of that qualifies as a calamity in your book though.
"I thought that my reply was a comment about how too many people think that because a statement comes from a scientist that it's 100% indisputable. "
Right. We should completely throw out all statements from scientists.
All in all it's much better to listen to radio talk show hosts, TV commentators and industry leaders; especially when it comes to global warming. I mean who knows more about global warming a fine writer like Michael Crichton (he wrote jurrasic park you know) or some stupid scientist?
BTW I don't want to pick on just climatologists here. I think we should ignore all scientists. I mean just because some scientists says that the world moves around the sun that does mean they are 100% correct. Anybody can just and see that the sun is going around the earth!. And don't even get me started on doctors!
In other parts of the world they study other things like corals. Follow the link and read the story. It's not just about ice cores.
Brilliant!.
You are sooooo much smarter then those silly scientists that are studying all this. I bet they never thought of any of that.
"And I would not put data collected from ice cores on par with data recorded from weather stations in recent years."
Why not? Do you have a theoretical or a scientific explanation for this line of reasoning?
Also do you think that the climatologists have somehow missed this bit of knowledge when they were taking the ice core measurements into account? Surely there would be at least one or two scientists who have thought of taking into account some of the hazards of dealing with ice core data. It's hard to believe you are the only one who has thought of this.
According to this link http://www.solcomhouse.com/poverty.htm
The top 3 richest people in the world have wealth greater than the combined Gross Domestic Product (the value of all goods and services) of the world's 48 poorest nations.
And that the world's richest 225 people have combined assets equal to the combined annual income of the world's 2.5 billion poorest people.
This tells me that something is out of whack. This guy could probably singlehandedly wipe out hunger in the world instead he wants to spend all that money trying to build a hotel in space.
To each his own I guess.
The idea of the GPL is to create a self healing commons. The idea is that the GPL allows for a commons to grow and flourish because the people who take from the commons are also forced to give something back.
The BSD commons is a one way street. It's a commons that could stagnate or even decay because nobody who takes from it is forced to give back to it.
The BSD is pretty much like public domain. It's charity work. When you release code under the BSD license you are in effect an unpaid employee of anybody who wants to use that code.
In the end nobody is holding a gun to your head. YOu don't have to use BSD code or GPLed code.
Oh and I forgot, you could always write your own code too.
" The world is big, and obtaining a license from an author you might not even find is a hard thing to do."
Oh it's hard to do. Yes we should all make it as easy as possible for businesses to exploit our labor without paying for it.
No sense in making things hard for a business that stands to profit from your code.
Not allowing you to use a free service is not the same as having a stranglehold on you.
You can always host on savannah if you want.
Word!.
Why do you think I laid down FUD. Everything I said is 100% true.
.NET technologies"
.NET on a non windows platform."
"Regardless Ms still owns patents on the numerous
100% true.
"both Ballmer and Gates have repeatedly said they intend to defend their intellectual property vigorously."
100% true.
'Be Aware that your company can be sued for USING patent infringing technology."
100% true.
'If you company has deep pockets Ms could come after you. If for no other reason then to make you stop using
Ok speculative but certainly plausable given the above given premises.
If you are using mono and have not considered the fact that MS has patents on it and both the CEO and the president of the company both have said they intend to defend their intellectual property then I submit you are not making an intelligent decision.