Java does not (!) satisfy the requirement of fast development; it doesn't even run fast.
It's like combining the extra loss of time by coding the thing in C/C++ with the extra loss in performance by coding the thing in Logo.
Java does not bring rapid development or blazing performance. The only things it brings are its dogmas about how everything should be purely bla bla, regardless whether it actually solves your problem.
"Hey, this new dog doesn't bark!"
"Doesn't matter, because it's an object-oriented dog that catches all mandatory exceptions and has MVC compliant action listeners in its ears! A dog like that doesn't need to be able to bark. It's perfect already!"
If getting Linux pre-installed were really a viable option, many more people would use it.
Further, if the HPs, Epsons and Canons of this world sold their products marked "Linux compatible" (it could be the same product as sold for Windows) and included their drivers and driver installation programs in the box, that would help a lot too. If users see the words "Windows compatible" and "Linux compatible" next to each other more regularly, it would reduce their fear for the unknown and confirm that Linux too is an operating system.
Another problem is the fact that there is no rapid application dev tool for Linux as there is for Windows. Of course you can say that people could use C/C++ for their sales order processing apps, but then, in the same logic, they could use assembler too. I personally think that VB is as much responsible for the commercial success of Windows as MsOffice.
As a matter of fact, I don't think that people are so tied to MsOffice, since most of the information processed in MsOffice is for one time consumption (and then saved and forgotten forever...) Therefore, I don't think that the average user cares so much of his existing data in MsOffice format. It's usually different applications (often mainframe or else client/server, but surprisingly,hardly ever web-applications) that really run the company.
If the data processed in MsOffice is important, you will find that most users simply file the hardcopy (and actually consider this hardcopy as their backup).
To conclude, I think that the following will make large number of people use Linux: (1) It comes pre-installed (2) Devices usually have drivers for Linux included in the box. (3) The VBers of this world can use an equivalently "rapid" tool on Linux.
Most Windows installations are on the PC already, when you get it.
That's why most people don't think it's difficult to install: they've never had to do it.
Windows is actually not easy to install, graphical installation routines or not, because as soon as you run into a piece of hardware that is not supported or mistaken for another, you probably will not be able to fix the problem (it becomes a graphical black box).
Unfortunately, not that many PC vendors seem to interested in selling Linux pre-installed hardware...
Imagine company X proprietarize your GPL code. There would be serious doubts about who is the copyright holder for the software.
This is the reason why you don't even need to sue company X. Instead you put their software up for download on your site (charging money or not) and encourage other people to do this as well.
Now company X will need to defend their copyright and sue you under the copyright laws.
Unfortunately for them, you may have sufficient proof that they are not the legitimate copyright holders of the software; or at least, of part of their software.
From a legal point of view, their own violation of the law invalidates any subsequent legal rights they may have:
fraus corrumpit omnia (fraude invalidates all legal consequences)
This principle holds in general: If you steal money from someone, and I steal it from you, you have no claim against me, because your property rights on the money were void in the first place.
Therefore, Company X are going to have a hard time trying to make you and other people cease and desist, let alone, collect on you.
... the impact of negative comments. Not that many Windows users (in proportion to the total population of Windows users) log on to Slashdot or any other site where Mr. Gates is not all too welcome. Nonetheless, the feeling is gradually spreading and taking over.
Windows and Microsoft are generally not considered "cool" any longer. They don't get the credit automatically, that they would get if those *nasty* sites didn't exist. In the end it will start depressing their sales, especially if there are *perceived* alternatives.
The bottom line is always that 1$ in negative marketing can hardly be offset with 100$ in positive marketing.
If the boycott continues for at least the time to make sure that the mainstream knows it exists, it will undoubtedly start eating into Amazon's future revenue stream and total stock capitalization.
RMS really fails to see why software and money are intertwined.
I believe in open source, because I feel I will regain quite a lot of control from the software houses, and that, in the end, my work will be the scarce resource they will be paying for. I just hate it, when I deploy a solution, to see Microsoft and Oracle make money from it, no effort at all. I can tell you: Linux, Postgress, Python, Apache, and no one will move in with per concurrent user licenses and steal my money.
It strikes me again and again that some people seem to be "intelligent" but not "clever", whatever that may mean.
The whole money issue is part of reality, and will allways be, if we may believe economic theory; so I guess the only way to deal with it, is to confront it the way it is.
In the end, this kind of people tend to become beggars, and then what?
(1) Very strict enforcement of copyrights (no one, but absolutely no one uses illegal copies)
(2) The government, as an IT-consumer, must investigate first if Open source can do the job, before spending taxpayers' money on proprietary software.
It totally changes the ballgame. If, for example, the government standardizes their word processing requirements an open source package, it will raise a very serious challenge for MsOffice in that country.
Governments worldwide spend easily up to 50% of the gross domestic product. As IT consumers, they can definitely set the tone.
Combined with better law enforcement, aimed at stamping out the illegal use of Microsoft software, an open-source-first policy will make a significant difference.
Itanium (Merced) will be relevant right away...
on
News on Pentium IV
·
· Score: 5
I couldn't disagree more with what they write:
"Itanium won't be relevant for PCs until 2003 at the earliest, more likely 2005,"
Especially because their main argument is:
"Software has yet to be written or recompiled to accommodate a 64-bit processor. "
So, they really think that Microsoft will be able to hold back computer progress once again? Last time, there were no alternatives. You would run 16-bit dos, like it or not, but now we have choice and freedom.
If Microsoft doesn't move fast on this one, they'll be losing market shares on the server end of things in no time, and increasingly rapidly on the desktop too.
If they move fast, however, they will have to abandon their huge installed base and start at the same level as anyone else. It would be dangerous position for a company that has never excelled at quality and innovation.
I think 64-bit architectures may very well turn into Bill Gates' Waterloo; and it will all be over before we know it.
It's not because you know the chemical composition of the ink, that you understand what is written in that ink.
As I read it, these scientists have located the areas in which a defective spot of *ink* causes a particular disease. That doesn't mean that they understand what the sequences mean, or even better, that they have a means to actually change it.
Without any further evidence of these capabilities, most of the alarming implications you see are therefore unsubstantiated and more of the resort of science fiction than reality.
Most continental European countries that were conquered by Napoleon, before he was wiped out by the Russian winter, implemented while they were occupied the Code Civil; including Belgium, where I live.
The code civil basically bundles Roman Law with quite a lot of common law from the northern French provinces; quite a chunk of which dates back to the Lex Salica, the laws of the Teutonic tribe of the Francs, who conquered France in the early middle ages. After Napoleon's demise many of his ideas were reversed, but not the Code Civil.
Well, to cut a long story short, the Code Civil refuses to recognize gambling debts and mandates that any such claim be thrown out of court.
I really can't understand how the Bank Card Company (Visa, Mastercard) lend themselves to collecting gambling debts on behalf of casinos.
I think sooner or later we're going to be laughing when citizens of a continental European country gamble using their credit cards and the Bank Card Company unadvertedly try to collect. The directors of the honourable company may find themselves trying to fend off the imposition of astronomical fines and probably get very close to being incarcerated prison.
How much of a US$120,000 will be left after taxes?
If we're beginning to telecommute across the globe, this issue will become crucial.
Who is getting the proceeds of the taxes anyway, the US or Australia?
If technology enables employees to work and collaborate from wherever, they can optimize their financial situation by commuting out from the right places. That may eventually eat so much into the revenue of national states that it will gradually spell the end of the national income and payroll tax systems that you can find around the world.
It is obvious that the world cannot remain the same if a significant number of employees start telecommuting across national borders.
I think most people would only have sympathy for the goals of the linux community if it weren't for the religious zeal and obstinate intolerance with which linux believers preach their holy convictions.
I've got the idea that people, like the Ayatollah Stallman do more harm than good to the idea of Linux.
What? This loyal subject of His Majesty the King has been charged with *treason*? Lord Simpson himself, Earl of the West Coast Dominions? Has he been trading with the enemy? Or has he furthered the cause of overthrowing the eternal dynasty of the heavenly rulers over the twelve skies?
By going on, and on, and on, about it, you're amplifying the silly mistake that he made and the damage too. He's recanted, we all agree, and now shut up.
I don't need a union to bargain for me. As a contractor, I bargain for myself, and the outcome is: good money. What's more, I make more money than the bosses.
You also misunderstand labour: it is a commodity like any other thing they buy! And I like it that way. I don't need and don't want to hear the human resource crap about how all of us should be cosy.
There's something fundamentally wrong with my colleague techies. If your company can bill $175/hr for your services, how can you settle for 5% of it? Who has the knowledge and who is actually doing the work?
Grow up! If you don't want to do the counting, be sure that someone else will. And in the end, he will be making all the money. . Hourly pay feels very temporary. Everything is temporary, until it changes again. And mind you, it's not what people feel that makes the world go round, it's the hard cash. And if you don't learn to count, you will never have any.
Hey, I don't think that I *should* get more money than the managing director. I've just said: let the markets decide. And what do you see? Well, the markets equilibrium hourly rate for my services *is* higher than the one for the managing director.
It's only fair to let the market decide, regardless of the outcome.
>>you can have a guaranteed minimum nr of hours >>you can work. So there's not as much risk involved.
As a contractor the risk is even less, because you have a contract that says how many hours you will be working over months of the contracts.
A contract for 6 months lasts for 6 months. The company can give an employee his notice, but not the contractor.
>>A second difference between freelance and >>hourly paid employee is employee benefits. As >>an employee of a larger company, you often have >>benefits that freelancers don't have.
Let's look at the dollar value of those benefits. Remember that you can buy all of those benefits on the open market: they do have a dollar value.
Add up the dollar value of all those benefits and then tell me how much.
Since the average contractor makes easily 3 times more than the person doing the same job as an employee, you are telling me that those benefits are worth at least 2 salaries?
What gives you the most security: an implicit promise from a company or, rather, sitting on a good pile of cash? I'm a contractor, and I've saved up a pile of cash, stashed away in mutual funds. That gives me a really secure feeling, because I don't have to work for 5 years, and I could still pay all my bills.
Slashdot Mirror
Java does not (!) satisfy the requirement of fast development; it doesn't even run fast.
It's like combining the extra loss of time by coding the thing in C/C++ with the extra loss in performance by coding the thing in Logo.
Java does not bring rapid development or blazing performance. The only things it brings are its dogmas about how everything should be purely bla bla, regardless whether it actually solves your problem.
"Hey, this new dog doesn't bark!"
"Doesn't matter, because it's an object-oriented dog that catches all mandatory exceptions and has MVC compliant action listeners in its ears! A dog like that doesn't need to be able to bark. It's perfect already!"
If getting Linux pre-installed were really a viable option, many more people would use it.
Further, if the HPs, Epsons and Canons of this world sold their products marked "Linux compatible" (it could be the same product as sold for Windows) and included their drivers and driver installation programs in the box, that would help a lot too. If users see the words "Windows compatible" and "Linux compatible" next to each other more regularly, it would reduce their fear for the unknown and confirm that Linux too is an operating system.
Another problem is the fact that there is no rapid application dev tool for Linux as there is for Windows. Of course you can say that people could use C/C++ for their sales order processing apps, but then, in the same logic, they could use assembler too. I personally think that VB is as much responsible for the commercial success of Windows as MsOffice.
As a matter of fact, I don't think that people are so tied to MsOffice, since most of the information processed in MsOffice is for one time consumption (and then saved and forgotten forever...) Therefore, I don't think that the average user cares so much of his existing data in MsOffice format. It's usually different applications (often mainframe or else client/server, but surprisingly,hardly ever web-applications) that really run the company.
If the data processed in MsOffice is important, you will find that most users simply file the hardcopy (and actually consider this hardcopy as their backup).
To conclude, I think that the following will make large number of people use Linux:
(1) It comes pre-installed
(2) Devices usually have drivers for Linux included in the box.
(3) The VBers of this world can use an equivalently "rapid" tool on Linux.
Hey, there. The guy *is* right. Open-source has benefits for developers, but indeed, not for users.
If you want them to start using Linux, you should first start with finding out what they actually want.
Yep, that is the key issue: What do those masses of non-developer users out there want?
Most Windows installations are on the PC already, when you get it.
...
That's why most people don't think it's difficult to install: they've never had to do it.
Windows is actually not easy to install, graphical installation routines or not, because as soon as you run into a piece of hardware that is not supported or mistaken for another, you probably will not be able to fix the problem (it becomes a graphical black box).
Unfortunately, not that many PC vendors seem to interested in selling Linux pre-installed hardware
Imagine company X proprietarize your GPL code. There would be serious doubts about who is the copyright holder for the software.
This is the reason why you don't even need to sue company X. Instead you put their software up for download on your site (charging money or not) and encourage other people to do this as well.
Now company X will need to defend their copyright and sue you under the copyright laws.
Unfortunately for them, you may have sufficient proof that they are not the legitimate copyright holders of the software; or at least, of part of their software.
From a legal point of view, their own violation of the law invalidates any subsequent legal rights they may have:
fraus corrumpit omnia
(fraude invalidates all legal consequences)
This principle holds in general: If you steal money from someone, and I steal it from you, you have no claim against me, because your property rights on the money were void in the first place.
Therefore, Company X are going to have a hard time trying to make you and other people cease and desist, let alone, collect on you.
... the impact of negative comments. Not that many Windows users (in proportion to the total population of Windows users) log on to Slashdot or any other site where Mr. Gates is not all too welcome. Nonetheless, the feeling is gradually spreading and taking over.
Windows and Microsoft are generally not considered "cool" any longer. They don't get the credit automatically, that they would get if those *nasty* sites didn't exist. In the end it will start depressing their sales, especially if there are *perceived* alternatives.
The bottom line is always that 1$ in negative marketing can hardly be offset with 100$ in positive marketing.
If the boycott continues for at least the time to make sure that the mainstream knows it exists, it will undoubtedly start eating into Amazon's future revenue stream and total stock capitalization.
... is paved with good intentions.
RMS really fails to see why software and money are intertwined.
I believe in open source, because I feel I will regain quite a lot of control from the software houses, and that, in the end, my work will be the scarce resource they will be paying for. I just hate it, when I deploy a solution, to see Microsoft and Oracle make money from it, no effort at all. I can tell you: Linux, Postgress, Python, Apache, and no one will move in with per concurrent user licenses and steal my money.
It strikes me again and again that some people seem to be "intelligent" but not "clever", whatever that may mean.
The whole money issue is part of reality, and will allways be, if we may believe economic theory; so I guess the only way to deal with it, is to confront it the way it is.
In the end, this kind of people tend to become beggars, and then what?
This is what I've always wanted to see:
(1) Very strict enforcement of copyrights (no one, but absolutely no one uses illegal copies)
(2) The government, as an IT-consumer, must investigate first if Open source can do the job, before spending taxpayers' money on proprietary software.
It totally changes the ballgame. If, for example, the government standardizes their word processing requirements an open source package, it will raise a very serious challenge for MsOffice in that country.
Governments worldwide spend easily up to 50% of the gross domestic product. As IT consumers, they can definitely set the tone.
Combined with better law enforcement, aimed at stamping out the illegal use of Microsoft software, an open-source-first policy will make a significant difference.
I couldn't disagree more with what they write:
"Itanium won't be relevant for PCs until 2003 at the earliest, more likely 2005,"
Especially because their main argument is:
"Software has yet to be written or recompiled to accommodate a 64-bit processor. "
So, they really think that Microsoft will be able to hold back computer progress once again? Last time, there were no alternatives. You would run 16-bit dos, like it or not, but now we have choice and freedom.
If Microsoft doesn't move fast on this one, they'll be losing market shares on the server end of things in no time, and increasingly rapidly on the desktop too.
If they move fast, however, they will have to abandon their huge installed base and start at the same level as anyone else. It would be dangerous position for a company that has never excelled at quality and innovation.
I think 64-bit architectures may very well turn into Bill Gates' Waterloo; and it will all be over before we know it.
Who's that more reasonable public? You?
It's not because you know the chemical composition of the ink, that you understand what is written in that ink.
As I read it, these scientists have located the areas in which a defective spot of *ink* causes a particular disease. That doesn't mean that they understand what the sequences mean, or even better, that they have a means to actually change it.
Without any further evidence of these capabilities, most of the alarming implications you see are therefore unsubstantiated and more of the resort of science fiction than reality.
Most continental European countries that were conquered by Napoleon, before he was wiped out by the Russian winter, implemented while they were occupied the Code Civil; including Belgium, where I live.
The code civil basically bundles Roman Law with quite a lot of common law from the northern French provinces; quite a chunk of which dates back to the Lex Salica, the laws of the Teutonic tribe of the Francs, who conquered France in the early middle ages. After Napoleon's demise many of his ideas were reversed, but not the Code Civil.
Well, to cut a long story short, the Code Civil refuses to recognize gambling debts and mandates that any such claim be thrown out of court.
I really can't understand how the Bank Card Company (Visa, Mastercard) lend themselves to collecting gambling debts on behalf of casinos.
I think sooner or later we're going to be laughing when citizens of a continental European country gamble using their credit cards and the Bank Card Company unadvertedly try to collect. The directors of the honourable company may find themselves trying to fend off the imposition of astronomical fines and probably get very close to being incarcerated prison.
How much of a US$120,000 will be left after taxes?
If we're beginning to telecommute across the globe, this issue will become crucial.
Who is getting the proceeds of the taxes anyway, the US or Australia?
If technology enables employees to work and collaborate from wherever, they can optimize their financial situation by commuting out from the right places. That may eventually eat so much into the revenue of national states that it will gradually spell the end of the national income and payroll tax systems that you can find around the world.
It is obvious that the world cannot remain the same if a significant number of employees start telecommuting across national borders.
You c*nt--! His objections were perfectly valid and your reply sucks like a 2-dollar prostitute.
I think most people would only have sympathy for the goals of the linux community if it weren't for the religious zeal and obstinate intolerance with which linux believers preach their holy convictions.
I've got the idea that people, like the Ayatollah Stallman do more harm than good to the idea of Linux.
It simply scares off the silent majority.
What? This loyal subject of His Majesty the King has been charged with *treason*? Lord Simpson himself, Earl of the West Coast Dominions? Has he been trading with the enemy? Or has he furthered the cause of overthrowing the eternal dynasty of the heavenly rulers over the twelve skies?
The traitor!
By going on, and on, and on, about it, you're amplifying the silly mistake that he made and the damage too. He's recanted, we all agree, and now shut up.
I don't need a union to bargain for me. As a contractor, I bargain for myself, and the outcome is: good money. What's more, I make more money than the bosses.
You also misunderstand labour: it is a commodity like any other thing they buy! And I like it that way. I don't need and don't want to hear the human resource crap about how all of us should be cosy.
They're in it for the money, and so am I.
There's something fundamentally wrong with my colleague techies. If your company can bill $175/hr for your services, how can you settle for 5% of it? Who has the knowledge and who is actually doing the work?
Grow up! If you don't want to do the counting, be sure that someone else will. And in the end, he will be making all the money. . Hourly pay feels very temporary. Everything is temporary, until it changes again. And mind you, it's not what people feel that makes the world go round, it's the hard cash. And if you don't learn to count, you will never have any.
Hey, I don't think that I *should* get more money than the managing director. I've just said: let the markets decide. And what do you see? Well, the markets equilibrium hourly rate for my services *is* higher than the one for the managing director.
It's only fair to let the market decide, regardless of the outcome.
14.50/hr?
Are we talking about an illiterate junior with mental disabilities?
>>you can have a guaranteed minimum nr of hours >>you can work. So there's not as much risk involved.
As a contractor the risk is even less, because you have a contract that says how many hours you will be working over months of the contracts.
A contract for 6 months lasts for 6 months. The company can give an employee his notice, but not the contractor.
>>A second difference between freelance and >>hourly paid employee is employee benefits. As >>an employee of a larger company, you often have >>benefits that freelancers don't have.
Let's look at the dollar value of those benefits. Remember that you can buy all of those benefits on the open market: they do have a dollar value.
Add up the dollar value of all those benefits and then tell me how much.
Since the average contractor makes easily 3 times more than the person doing the same job as an employee, you are telling me that those benefits are worth at least 2 salaries?
You get paid, but how much?
What gives you the most security: an implicit promise from a company or, rather, sitting on a good pile of cash? I'm a contractor, and I've saved up a pile of cash, stashed away in mutual funds. That gives me a really secure feeling, because I don't have to work for 5 years, and I could still pay all my bills.