" The evidence is called a "ms windows site license.""
There is no such thing. MS does not sell "site licenses".
"MS has this silly little contractual requirement with all vendors licensed to ship ms-windows, the requirement is all machines must ship with *an* OS."
Dell sells PCs with no OS on them to businesses. Go to their web site and see for yourself before.
Honestly where do you get off sprouting off such bullshit? Do you really think none of us work for a business that buy MS licenses and PCs from dell?
first of all you have to figure that people browse on the web mostly during work hours. I for example am on the net pretty much full time for 8 hours at work while I only spend a couple of hours of my off time browsing or googling.
Secondly I am very curious about the 5% other figure. Since google breaks linux down to 1% they seem to be saying there are a whole shitload of "other" operating systems each with less then 1% of the hits and yet they all add up to 5%. Just doesn't make sense to me.
"but a lot of businesses already have a Windows site license."
There is no such thing as a windows site license. There are volume discounts but you still have to pay for each copy of windows you have. Depending on how you arranged your contract with Dell and MS the copy of windows that came with the Dell will count towards your select account. In other words dell will install windows for you for the same price you are paying under your volume discount.
There are companies that pay for windows twice (mainly because their CIO was a dumbass who didn't know how to say linux enough times to get a bargain from MS). I don't think any of theose companies would by dells with linux on them to save a few bucks though because the last I checked a Dell with linux actually cost more then a dell with windows. Besides I think you can get dells with DOS for less.
open secrets is a good place. There may be others...
A link to the top industries giving him money. He really is an industry whore BTW over 95% of the pac money given to him is from business.
Too bad he is in Utah though. People from Utah would rather stab themselves in the eye with a hot poker then vote for a democrat so he is all set. He might as well have a lifetime appointment.
"RMS could learn a lot about doing that, but he won't do that because he's too proud of his own acomplishments."
He has a lot to be proud of. What have you done that compares?
'I seriously don't understand the whole idea that RMS can do no wrong, the whole rest of the world is screwed up because they don't like him or disagree with him."
I didn't say he can do no wrong. I simply say that he has done more right then 99% of the people on this planet and that ought to be enough to cut him some slack because he chooses not to wear a fucking tie.
He has a vision of how to build a better world. He wakes up every day and goes to work trying to make that vision come true. He has hacked the copyright code in such a brilliant manner that it's impossible to invalidate the GPL without invalidating copyright. He knows the GPL is annoying the rich and the powerful and he is hoping that he causes them so much pain they get rid of copyrights. Needless to say this makes him many enemies.
The problem with his enemies are that they can't really argue with him on the merits so they resort to name calling. Too bad repeatedly calling him a smelly, fat hippie isn't going to make him go away anytime soon and neither will it invalidate the immense legacy he has built.
Mark my words. RMS will be remembered by history long after your remains have become worm shit.
I have studied the forest coverage charts put out by the US forrest service and I can tell you (and they) are lying. You are lying in a very clever way but you are lying nevertheless. If you were a politician your name would be Bill Clinton!.
Study the charts yourself you'll see. Do you really believe that 2/3rds of the forrests in lower 48 still exist?
"The example given is an example of someone threatening legal action even though they have no case. "
No not someone some corporation.
"Oh wait, a minute, someone can do the same thing to a GPL program and the open source coders who hate corporations and hence have no money will not be able to do anything about it"
The FSF is willing to defend the GPL and they have money and legal resources to do so.
"But I guess they'll still have their principles, and that's what matters, right?"
Only in America is it an ugly and unworthy thing to have principles. No wonder we are the scourge of the planet. Two hundred years and look where we ended up a bunch of bloodthirty immoral pigs with no principles or a sense of right and wrong.
None of what you said contradicts my point. People are not listening to what he says just that he does not look like them and therefore they don't care about what he says.
"I don't think that follows. It's possible that harvesting from private acreage is sustainable, just more expensive than the option of logging in national forests."
Saying that's it's possible but not profitable is the same as saying it's not possible. My gut feeling is that if it was possible to log in a sustainable manner it would have been done by now. Trees just grow too slow.
"Also keep in mind how much is spent fighting fires. A reasonable amount of logging might limit the spread of fires."
There is no evidence to support this conjecture. Loggers are interested in the oldest biggest trees which are more fire resistent. They take the big trees and they leave the saplings behind which are like kindling and burn hotter and faster.
"And those trees that are burned in these large fires might have actually helped provide someone with a home instead of turning to smoke."
Forest fires are good for the ecology. Years of fire surpression has made the forests very unstable and the only way to get them back to health is by controlled burning. This will burn off the saplings and leave the old growth alone. Nobody is going to build a house of saplings trust me.
Actually that's not quite true. The big paper companies do have large forests that they try to manage but they cut trees much faster then they are being replenished. This is why there is relentless pressure to log the national forests. If the harvest from private acreage was sustainable they would never need to log the national forests.
These days companies like champion and plum creek are finding that it's more profitable to sell the logged areas then to replant them. For example in maine and montana.
It's more profitable to sell land (especially waterfront land) and then log the federally subsidized national forests.
No matter how much MS spends money on advertising reality does not change. People who have ever used linux know what the deal is. For example ZDNET australia once published a study showing that an average linux sysadmin controlled many more servers then an average windows sysadmin. Until MS makes windows easier to manage en masse this fact will not change.
The real problem with MS is not TCO. It's that the people don't need to go through a procurement process to download and install free software. No approvals, no delays, no beuracracy. Admins are much more likely to slap a linux box to do something if the alternative is to fill out paperwork and have five managers give their OK to spend $500.00.
Freedom is important to corporations (and corporate drones) too.
I hate to give you the bad news but releasing your code under the BSD is whoring yourself to corporations. If the corporations then want to fuck you they can. You are their bitch.
Rhetoric? What rhetoric. He simply expressed an opinion. The problem is that people who hate him will always jump up and down screaming every time he speaks. They call him smelly , dirty, hippie, commie or whatever no matter what he says. If he said "I like ham sandwitches" people like you would start on your tirades.
I guess it's easier to call somebody a hippie then to get up every day and fight for something you believe in.
Slashdot Mirror
" The evidence is called a "ms windows site license.""
There is no such thing. MS does not sell "site licenses".
"MS has this silly little contractual requirement with all vendors licensed to ship ms-windows, the requirement is all machines must ship with *an* OS."
Dell sells PCs with no OS on them to businesses. Go to their web site and see for yourself before.
Honestly where do you get off sprouting off such bullshit? Do you really think none of us work for a business that buy MS licenses and PCs from dell?
Really? Go to the dell web site and see if you can buy a PC with linux on it.
"People" can't do it at all you have to be a business.
You can't get linux pre-installed on any dell business desktop. You can order one without an operating system but you can't get one with linux.
You can only get servers with linux installed on them. That's it.
Sorry to burst your bubble with facts.
I am a little leary of the google numbers.
first of all you have to figure that people browse on the web mostly during work hours. I for example am on the net pretty much full time for 8 hours at work while I only spend a couple of hours of my off time browsing or googling.
Secondly I am very curious about the 5% other figure. Since google breaks linux down to 1% they seem to be saying there are a whole shitload of "other" operating systems each with less then 1% of the hits and yet they all add up to 5%. Just doesn't make sense to me.
"but a lot of businesses already have a Windows site license."
There is no such thing as a windows site license. There are volume discounts but you still have to pay for each copy of windows you have. Depending on how you arranged your contract with Dell and MS the copy of windows that came with the Dell will count towards your select account. In other words dell will install windows for you for the same price you are paying under your volume discount.
There are companies that pay for windows twice (mainly because their CIO was a dumbass who didn't know how to say linux enough times to get a bargain from MS). I don't think any of theose companies would by dells with linux on them to save a few bucks though because the last I checked a Dell with linux actually cost more then a dell with windows. Besides I think you can get dells with DOS for less.
Utah? Vote for a democrat? I don't think they would vote for a democrat if Jesus himself came back and ran as one.
open secrets is a good place. There may be others...
A link to the top industries giving him money. He really is an industry whore BTW over 95% of the pac money given to him is from business.
Too bad he is in Utah though. People from Utah would rather stab themselves in the eye with a hot poker then vote for a democrat so he is all set. He might as well have a lifetime appointment.
LOL. I knew windows users were stupid but I didn't know that were THAT stupid.
Thanks for the laugh.
For all the king Cromson fans there is elephant talk
would five instances running on a 2 cpu machine require 10 cpu licences? It would seem so...
All I know is that their price keeps coming down!. It's now cheaper then SQL server. W00t!
"RMS could learn a lot about doing that, but he won't do that because he's too proud of his own acomplishments."
He has a lot to be proud of. What have you done that compares?
'I seriously don't understand the whole idea that RMS can do no wrong, the whole rest of the world is screwed up because they don't like him or disagree with him."
I didn't say he can do no wrong. I simply say that he has done more right then 99% of the people on this planet and that ought to be enough to cut him some slack because he chooses not to wear a fucking tie.
He has a vision of how to build a better world. He wakes up every day and goes to work trying to make that vision come true. He has hacked the copyright code in such a brilliant manner that it's impossible to invalidate the GPL without invalidating copyright. He knows the GPL is annoying the rich and the powerful and he is hoping that he causes them so much pain they get rid of copyrights. Needless to say this makes him many enemies.
The problem with his enemies are that they can't really argue with him on the merits so they resort to name calling. Too bad repeatedly calling him a smelly, fat hippie isn't going to make him go away anytime soon and neither will it invalidate the immense legacy he has built.
Mark my words. RMS will be remembered by history long after your remains have become worm shit.
I have studied the forest coverage charts put out by the US forrest service and I can tell you (and they) are lying. You are lying in a very clever way but you are lying nevertheless. If you were a politician your name would be Bill Clinton!.
Study the charts yourself you'll see. Do you really believe that 2/3rds of the forrests in lower 48 still exist?
If the forests could be harvested sustainably they would be. The fact is that they are not. We are using them faster then they can be replenished.
So while trees are theoretically renewable in practice the demand is too high.
Actually they were not. They were set aside as gifts to future generations.
"The example given is an example of someone threatening legal action even though they have no case. "
No not someone some corporation.
"Oh wait, a minute, someone can do the same thing to a GPL program and the open source coders who hate corporations and hence have no money will not be able to do anything about it"
The FSF is willing to defend the GPL and they have money and legal resources to do so.
"But I guess they'll still have their principles, and that's what matters, right?"
Only in America is it an ugly and unworthy thing to have principles. No wonder we are the scourge of the planet. Two hundred years and look where we ended up a bunch of bloodthirty immoral pigs with no principles or a sense of right and wrong.
None of what you said contradicts my point. People are not listening to what he says just that he does not look like them and therefore they don't care about what he says.
"I don't think that follows. It's possible that harvesting from private acreage is sustainable, just more expensive than the option of logging in national forests."
Saying that's it's possible but not profitable is the same as saying it's not possible. My gut feeling is that if it was possible to log in a sustainable manner it would have been done by now. Trees just grow too slow.
"Also keep in mind how much is spent fighting fires. A reasonable amount of logging might limit the spread of fires."
There is no evidence to support this conjecture. Loggers are interested in the oldest biggest trees which are more fire resistent. They take the big trees and they leave the saplings behind which are like kindling and burn hotter and faster.
"And those trees that are burned in these large fires might have actually helped provide someone with a home instead of turning to smoke."
Forest fires are good for the ecology. Years of fire surpression has made the forests very unstable and the only way to get them back to health is by controlled burning. This will burn off the saplings and leave the old growth alone. Nobody is going to build a house of saplings trust me.
Plan E:
Wait till you are fired and file a wrongful discharge suit citing management pressure to do a crappy job and stressful work environment.
Actually that's not quite true. The big paper companies do have large forests that they try to manage but they cut trees much faster then they are being replenished. This is why there is relentless pressure to log the national forests. If the harvest from private acreage was sustainable they would never need to log the national forests.
These days companies like champion and plum creek are finding that it's more profitable to sell the logged areas then to replant them. For example in maine and montana.
It's more profitable to sell land (especially waterfront land) and then log the federally subsidized national forests.
Your tax dollars at work!
Here is the real TCO.
No matter how much MS spends money on advertising reality does not change. People who have ever used linux know what the deal is. For example ZDNET australia once published a study showing that an average linux sysadmin controlled many more servers then an average windows sysadmin. Until MS makes windows easier to manage en masse this fact will not change.
The real problem with MS is not TCO. It's that the people don't need to go through a procurement process to download and install free software. No approvals, no delays, no beuracracy. Admins are much more likely to slap a linux box to do something if the alternative is to fill out paperwork and have five managers give their OK to spend $500.00.
Freedom is important to corporations (and corporate drones) too.
I hate to give you the bad news but releasing your code under the BSD is whoring yourself to corporations. If the corporations then want to fuck you they can. You are their bitch.
Rhetoric? What rhetoric. He simply expressed an opinion. The problem is that people who hate him will always jump up and down screaming every time he speaks. They call him smelly , dirty, hippie, commie or whatever no matter what he says. If he said "I like ham sandwitches" people like you would start on your tirades.
I guess it's easier to call somebody a hippie then to get up every day and fight for something you believe in.
Now you know why all those commie, pinko, liberal, dirty hippies were protesting the WTO.
I can't speak for everybody but if Darl picks this fight next I will indeed love him. Well maybe forgive him for every other thing he has done.
And by going cheap the industry subjected itself to countless security breakdowns, hacks, and lost data. I wonder if it was worth it in the end.
Of course this is an industry that re-invents lisp and smalltalk every five years so I shouldn't ask questions like that.