At any rate, my point is that any unfair business practices on MS's part are pretty weak. I use IBM as an example because the shit they pulled in the 80s (especially early 80s) is about as bad as it gets and makes MS look like a saint. Now they are looked at by the F/OSS community as some wonderful and benevolent entity that is here to bring us all together so we can smile and hold hands.
Like most people on Slashdot, I am a hobbyist. I enjoy the different/challenging on that merit alone. Why let Windows set up my sound and video while I miss out on the joys of configuring alsa and xf86? Interestingly, this is the same reason I used MS DOS/Windows Intel boxes rather than Apple Macintoshes throughout the 80s and 90s.
Just read up about IBM's history with the FTC. They do what they think will make them money, just like MS. Don't think for a minute they are morally superior.
So you think it is reasonable to assume that there are a significant number of Windows users compiling Gaim from source? How can Gaim be used without it first being downloaded in some form or another? Since I seem to be woefully deficient of the alternative distribution methods, please enlighten me.
If you are not trying to argue that Gaim is more popular, do you have any aim other than trolling?
Perhaps you should shoot CNET an email and tell them that Download.com's list of "Most Popular" software is not accurate.
Don't read too much into the anti-MS propaganda of Slashdot. Some of Linux's biggest backers are guilty of far worse than MS. Companies like IBM might give you the warm and fuzzies now because of their attitude toward Linux, but that is only because they feel it is the best way for them to make money. If OS/2 had taken off, it would not be at all surprising if IBM were looked at in the same way as MS on Slashdot.
The number of times a piece of software is downloaded when its primary (or even only) form of distribution is via download is perfectly germane to an assessment of its popularity. What metric exists that you think indicates Gaim is more popular? There can not possibly be more people using Gaim than have downloaded it. Yet many more people use any one of the major IM services than people that have downloaded Gaim. Think about that rather than just making some half-baked "downloads do not equal popularity" argument.
My point is that the only available data points to Gaim being not too popular.
When talking about things like the most popular software programs, I have never met anyone who considers it to be a subjective argument. We are not talking about the most popular girl at school. Honestly, it does not matter what people like -- it matters what they use. Gaim does not get extra popularity points for having a fanatic user base that *really* likes it.
Do you believe there is a realistic possibility that Gaim is the most popular IM client? Given that less than 1 million people have downloaded the latest version compared to the many millions of people on instant messenger services, how can you say that it is widely used or widely liked?
Given that the web site is Google-centric (not F/OSS- or Linux-centric) and the article makes no mention of GNU/Linux or Open source, it is not reasonable.
So you agree with TFA that Gaim is the most popular IM client? It's one thing to say it is better than the services' supplied closed-source clients, but to go as far as to believe it is more popular is one hell of a stretch. As I said before, there is no data to show how many people use each of the various clients, but I can't imagine anyone informed making an educated guess that Gaim is the most popular.
Good. Then you can show me the data to back up the claim that Gaim is the most popular. AFAIK, MSN and AIM are the most popular IM services. Given that roughly 95% of personal computing is done on Windows, how can Gaim beat out the standard AIM and Yahoo clients? Gaim 1.5.0 for Windows was only download roughly 600k times. I can easily imagine the latest AIM or Yahoo client downloads beating that.
Additionally, Webster's complete definition of "popular" is:
Pronunciation: 'pä-py&-l&r Function: adjective Etymology: Latin popularis, from populus the people, a people 1 : of or relating to the general public 2 : suitable to the majority: as a : adapted to or indicative of the understanding and taste of the majority b : suited to the means of the majority : INEXPENSIVE 3 : frequently encountered or widely accepted 4 : commonly liked or approved synonym see COMMON
Effectively, yes. Given that there is no data to support which IM client is used for connectivity the most, the best metric is which client is installed on the most computers.
TFA says, "Sean is the main developer of Gaim, the most popular IM client." I somehow doubt that. MSN Messenger is preinstalled on just about every news Windows box. Plus, the standard AIM client has been around for a very long time.
I know its fishy. The problem is that web server logs are subject to falsification. I hope that a single line in an HTTP access log is not the only evidence he has.
In other words, from the accounting standpoint, the variable product costs are $40/unit. There are also fixed product costs, period costs, overhead, etc. Intel certainly has profit margins, but they are sure as hell nowhere near what the blurb or article would lead one to think.
I would actually think that their margins are lower than AMD's, though their profits would of course be higher due to shear to volume.
I did RTFA. This supports his claim that Ortiz pointed his telescope at the same location as Brown. TFA did not mention if Brown had any documentation supporting his claim that he had in fact found the object. I would hope he has something more substantial than a web server log.
The debate is who found it first. Brown says he has logs that Ortiz visited his web site with information on his telescope's position right before he made the discovery. I don't think its as much an allegation of stolen data as much as lack of integrity.
Thanks a lot asshole. I was sitting outside of a Starbucks with my laptop and WiFi connection across from a KFC when I followed your instructions and now I have a fried chicken wing lodged in my rectum.
Slashdot Mirror
At any rate, my point is that any unfair business practices on MS's part are pretty weak. I use IBM as an example because the shit they pulled in the 80s (especially early 80s) is about as bad as it gets and makes MS look like a saint. Now they are looked at by the F/OSS community as some wonderful and benevolent entity that is here to bring us all together so we can smile and hold hands.
Like most people on Slashdot, I am a hobbyist. I enjoy the different/challenging on that merit alone. Why let Windows set up my sound and video while I miss out on the joys of configuring alsa and xf86? Interestingly, this is the same reason I used MS DOS/Windows Intel boxes rather than Apple Macintoshes throughout the 80s and 90s.
Just read up about IBM's history with the FTC. They do what they think will make them money, just like MS. Don't think for a minute they are morally superior.
So you think it is reasonable to assume that there are a significant number of Windows users compiling Gaim from source? How can Gaim be used without it first being downloaded in some form or another? Since I seem to be woefully deficient of the alternative distribution methods, please enlighten me.
If you are not trying to argue that Gaim is more popular, do you have any aim other than trolling?
Perhaps you should shoot CNET an email and tell them that Download.com's list of "Most Popular" software is not accurate.
Not really. IIRC, he is stepping aside for the most part in Perl 6's development.
Hopefully this will help Perl 6 in being released at some point soon. My favorite programming language seems to be lagging behind quite a bit.
http://www.funroll-loops.org/
Don't read too much into the anti-MS propaganda of Slashdot. Some of Linux's biggest backers are guilty of far worse than MS. Companies like IBM might give you the warm and fuzzies now because of their attitude toward Linux, but that is only because they feel it is the best way for them to make money. If OS/2 had taken off, it would not be at all surprising if IBM were looked at in the same way as MS on Slashdot.
The number of times a piece of software is downloaded when its primary (or even only) form of distribution is via download is perfectly germane to an assessment of its popularity. What metric exists that you think indicates Gaim is more popular? There can not possibly be more people using Gaim than have downloaded it. Yet many more people use any one of the major IM services than people that have downloaded Gaim. Think about that rather than just making some half-baked "downloads do not equal popularity" argument.
My point is that the only available data points to Gaim being not too popular.
When talking about things like the most popular software programs, I have never met anyone who considers it to be a subjective argument. We are not talking about the most popular girl at school. Honestly, it does not matter what people like -- it matters what they use. Gaim does not get extra popularity points for having a fanatic user base that *really* likes it.
Do you believe there is a realistic possibility that Gaim is the most popular IM client? Given that less than 1 million people have downloaded the latest version compared to the many millions of people on instant messenger services, how can you say that it is widely used or widely liked?
Given that the web site is Google-centric (not F/OSS- or Linux-centric) and the article makes no mention of GNU/Linux or Open source, it is not reasonable.
So you agree with TFA that Gaim is the most popular IM client? It's one thing to say it is better than the services' supplied closed-source clients, but to go as far as to believe it is more popular is one hell of a stretch. As I said before, there is no data to show how many people use each of the various clients, but I can't imagine anyone informed making an educated guess that Gaim is the most popular.
Good. Then you can show me the data to back up the claim that Gaim is the most popular. AFAIK, MSN and AIM are the most popular IM services. Given that roughly 95% of personal computing is done on Windows, how can Gaim beat out the standard AIM and Yahoo clients? Gaim 1.5.0 for Windows was only download roughly 600k times. I can easily imagine the latest AIM or Yahoo client downloads beating that.
Additionally, Webster's complete definition of "popular" is:
Pronunciation: 'pä-py&-l&r
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin popularis, from populus the people, a people
1 : of or relating to the general public
2 : suitable to the majority: as a : adapted to or indicative of the understanding and taste of the majority b : suited to the means of the majority : INEXPENSIVE
3 : frequently encountered or widely accepted
4 : commonly liked or approved
synonym see COMMON
Effectively, yes. Given that there is no data to support which IM client is used for connectivity the most, the best metric is which client is installed on the most computers.
TFA says, "Sean is the main developer of Gaim, the most popular IM client." I somehow doubt that. MSN Messenger is preinstalled on just about every news Windows box. Plus, the standard AIM client has been around for a very long time.
Check out Debian's jigdo. It allows you to assemble CD images by downloading packages.
I know its fishy. The problem is that web server logs are subject to falsification. I hope that a single line in an HTTP access log is not the only evidence he has.
In other words, from the accounting standpoint, the variable product costs are $40/unit. There are also fixed product costs, period costs, overhead, etc. Intel certainly has profit margins, but they are sure as hell nowhere near what the blurb or article would lead one to think.
I would actually think that their margins are lower than AMD's, though their profits would of course be higher due to shear to volume.
I did RTFA. This supports his claim that Ortiz pointed his telescope at the same location as Brown. TFA did not mention if Brown had any documentation supporting his claim that he had in fact found the object. I would hope he has something more substantial than a web server log.
The debate is who found it first. Brown says he has logs that Ortiz visited his web site with information on his telescope's position right before he made the discovery. I don't think its as much an allegation of stolen data as much as lack of integrity.
Shouldn't Dr. Brown have some documentation of his find other than the direction his telescope was pointed in, or at least witnesses to back him up?
Amazing how the importance of typing one-handed has never evaded software engineers.
Such corrections seem to be beyond the capabilities of most Slashdot editors. I wonder how much editing actually goes on for any story submission.
You must be new here.
Thanks a lot asshole. I was sitting outside of a Starbucks with my laptop and WiFi connection across from a KFC when I followed your instructions and now I have a fried chicken wing lodged in my rectum.