Yes, for people who want to make easy money on work done by community people. GPL can mean protection. Protection that your work won't be stolen by sensless FOSS-opposing jerks and sold for money without giving credit.
And many of them would just be professionals with their feet on the ground. As surely as many Windows defenders are nothing but ignorant zealots. So what's your point ?
The "zealot" argument for dismissing some mass opinion doesn't hold ground for long now.
Their ingenuity lies both in being able to pick the right OS to go with and in being able to turn it to really suit their needs. Choosing Linux (or almost any free OS of that thime) let them have the right environment for customization and development. That's all that counts.
plenty of reasons for them to use Linux (or a BSD) without invoking massive technical superiority
I've always found the argumentation about Linux being only "good" because it's "free" absolutely ignorant. And besides that yes, there are plenty of professional and technical reasons to choose Linux/BSD/etc. for such a task over Windows or any/some closed sourced OSes of that time.
First, do you have some magic method you want to share for automatically logging into, and staying logged onto, an account-based service w/o cookies?
Actually many forums use storing/sending/receiving/checking session ids along with requests (...?sid=xxx to and fro) if cookies are disabled and/or e.g. firewalls make impossible correct cookie or session handling. It's nothing new.
Especially since many of us don't use itunes for listening to free'n'indie streamed radio feeds, Oh, wait, some people don't know what those are: you know, they are kinda like podcasts, but unlike the latter, they've been around for quite a long time and well, the words describing them... have a real meaning ?:P
The whole "podcast" "blogosphere" etc. word buzz made me remember a review someone wrote about the TRON movie on its anyversary not so long ago. The guy said it was the Matrix of the 80's... Right, so the www is well, the lbogosphere of the 90's. Now go get a life.
Linux does exactly the same with Direct3D when you use Wine or Cedega
No it does not. The guys try to make as fast and as compatible as possible wrapping. MS is not: they provide wrapping to ogl1.4 without extensions, which will mean the party crowd who buys Vista for the "great" looks (and you know they will be the larger crowd) won't be able to use the "wonderful" new desktop thourgh/with ogl. That's one of the points. Regarding games, I don't see much difference, you'll just use the card manufacturers' provided ogl drivers.
Ferom the linked "article" [i.e. one of those tone-weight pieces of smelling crap]: XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
Ok, tell me, which of you guys couldn't write such a short, pointless, ignorant piece of rant after a dozen beers on a deserted island without tv, women, football, electricity, books and weed ? Because, sincerely, no different circumstance could make me write and/or let be published such a useless piece of crap writing.
So as you don't misunderstand me: it's not what he says, it's how he says it.
Ok. There are always people who think they'll become cool for hating some company which is fashionably liked by the crowd and vice versa. I don't love no company for what it does or does not. They're just companies, they do whatever they see fit to make profit. But please leave me the right to very much disagree with certain ways of conduct I happen to see in a company's behavior, and very much more so if they also affect people's lives. And so far, guess which of them [i.e. MS and Google] has a bigger sack of rotting pieces.
But the truth is propriety software is quite well reviewed (there's an entire industry who makes it their business to review and recommend commercial software, usually somewhat usefully).
Oh come on. Please tell us, how many of such reviews have you read. And please tell us, hwo many of those read reviews were actually good, and not written by some fake ignorant "pro" with too much spare time and nothing else to do (yes that goes for quite many "professional" sites also, you'd be surprised).
Most of such reviews are good for nothing but wasting one's time for a useless piece of crap. True, the 6pack masses may find a good time reading them, but you really think people sane enough would base a millions $ drop based on such reviews ?
The entire article is about open source software, not all software. His statement is valid.
No it's not. The same can be said about commercial software too. Moreover, commercial software would also need such a rating system, since you'd better know what you pay for before it's too late.
I really like that we have Xandros. It's a distro you can show and give those Windows people around you. But thinking of it as a real step forward for Linux in general on the desktop, just doesn't feel right. I dont' think a real step forward for Linux is being more and more Windows-like and Windows-mimicking and Windows-compatible and Windows-... you go on. It's nice to have distros ('cause Xandros isn't the only one you know) which can make Windows 6packs' transition easier, but it would be nice to think twice next time before saying such things.
When I first heard about this, the only thing I could say was: no sh*t. After some time has passed, now the only thing that pops in about this has changed to something like: sh*t, now come on !
As some millions of people have already realized, somewhat restricted hardware choices are sometimes not too much of a burden when you get a really really really better OS in return, especialyl when for most people 2ghz or 3ghz isn't a real issue. The question never was whether a single provider (be that MS or Apple) lets you have freedom of choice among it's own products, they don't. The freedom lies in your having the chance to choose between MS and Apple and others.
Can someone explain to me how Linux has been "locked-out" from users? It's widely available to be used on a system with Windows (dual boot).
And you got insightful for that. You're simply numb, dumb, or a combination of those. It's because you're not in the 99% of pc buying sixpack population that can't tell apples from oranges when talking about OSes. You can choose, they can't (yes, can not, because they simply don't have enough knowledge to choose). And the cash that MS locks into his pocket comes from those 99%, not from you. MS is using his 20 years of lockin to maintain this situation. Now that's what sticks some of us a brick in the nose, instead of that brick going someplace else.
I don't want no drm'd bios. Or if they do it, let's start thinking about ways of replacing with custom bios chips/flashes with openfirmware. If they see that people don't like the idea of drm on the application level, well, they take it down to the bios, where most people won't be able to do anything about. No matter if one doesn't do anything illegal on their machines, drm'ing it is still not any a likeable concept on any level. Looks like the hackers of tomorrow will turn out to be really some digital freedom fighters.
Slashdot Mirror
Becase, really, if you want code to be just out there for folk to use you could make it public domain
Yes, to use, not to sell, without having been no contribution initially. Now that's what leeching is IMO.
It's called free as in "no strings attached"
Yes, for people who want to make easy money on work done by community people. GPL can mean protection. Protection that your work won't be stolen by sensless FOSS-opposing jerks and sold for money without giving credit.
to deploy a massive broadband satellite
Does anyone wonder why Open Source and Linux in general have a bad rep?
Lemme guess, because ignorant folk like you stand up in the hundreds shouting it sucks ?
Google, having engineered their solution on their own without a vendor
Sometimes, having good talents, and trusting them to make the job, can make miracles.
100$ certainty
I couldn't have said it better. No, really. Intentional or not, that dollar sign there just gives the meaning.
And many of those people would be Linux zealots.
And many of them would just be professionals with their feet on the ground. As surely as many Windows defenders are nothing but ignorant zealots. So what's your point ?
The "zealot" argument for dismissing some mass opinion doesn't hold ground for long now.
Their ingenuity lies both in being able to pick the right OS to go with and in being able to turn it to really suit their needs. Choosing Linux (or almost any free OS of that thime) let them have the right environment for customization and development. That's all that counts.
plenty of reasons for them to use Linux (or a BSD) without invoking massive technical superiority
I've always found the argumentation about Linux being only "good" because it's "free" absolutely ignorant. And besides that yes, there are plenty of professional and technical reasons to choose Linux/BSD/etc. for such a task over Windows or any/some closed sourced OSes of that time.
Slashdot. The place on this planet where ignorance can get you insightful.
How would it sound if someone said to them, yeah but doesn't your search technology run on Windows?
... ridiculous ? lame ?
First, do you have some magic method you want to share for automatically logging into, and staying logged onto, an account-based service w/o cookies?
Actually many forums use storing/sending/receiving/checking session ids along with requests (...?sid=xxx to and fro) if cookies are disabled and/or e.g. firewalls make impossible correct cookie or session handling. It's nothing new.
but the iTunes top 20 is hardly representative of
:P
Especially since many of us don't use itunes for listening to free'n'indie streamed radio feeds, Oh, wait, some people don't know what those are: you know, they are kinda like podcasts, but unlike the latter, they've been around for quite a long time and well, the words describing them... have a real meaning ?
The whole "podcast" "blogosphere" etc. word buzz made me remember a review someone wrote about the TRON movie on its anyversary not so long ago. The guy said it was the Matrix of the 80's... Right, so the www is well, the lbogosphere of the 90's. Now go get a life.
Since some in the slashdot crowd still don't like Windows XP because it has too much eyecandy
I don't think too much eye candy would hurt, but crappy borking bork default looks does alright.
Linux does exactly the same with Direct3D when you use Wine or Cedega
No it does not. The guys try to make as fast and as compatible as possible wrapping. MS is not: they provide wrapping to ogl1.4 without extensions, which will mean the party crowd who buys Vista for the "great" looks (and you know they will be the larger crowd) won't be able to use the "wonderful" new desktop thourgh/with ogl. That's one of the points. Regarding games, I don't see much difference, you'll just use the card manufacturers' provided ogl drivers.
Now, now... Before we...
Next time, please, don't speculate. On the other hand, you've given another example of decodnig an article to mean the opposite. Good job.
How would the EU enforce breaking up a United States company?
Ok, let's turn that over: how would the US enforce anything on non-US anybody ? I won't go further with that.
If you actually thought about this for at least 5 seconds, you should have seen the simple fact that
Your argument looses every point if _you_ think about that a linux distro enough to only boot and run your game would probbaly fit under 128megs.
Ferom the linked "article" [i.e. one of those tone-weight pieces of smelling crap]:
XP is such a joy when it comes to simply connecting a device and watching the pretty little bubble detecting it and saying "its installed and ready for use" makes the slightly high price absolutely worth it. In Linux, you have to recompile a kernel if you want to so much as change your modem! Give me a break guys, Linux is light years behind Windows XP and I am sure it will be further back biting the dust when Longhorn (now Vista) comes out.
Ok, tell me, which of you guys couldn't write such a short, pointless, ignorant piece of rant after a dozen beers on a deserted island without tv, women, football, electricity, books and weed ? Because, sincerely, no different circumstance could make me write and/or let be published such a useless piece of crap writing.
So as you don't misunderstand me: it's not what he says, it's how he says it.
Ok. There are always people who think they'll become cool for hating some company which is fashionably liked by the crowd and vice versa. I don't love no company for what it does or does not. They're just companies, they do whatever they see fit to make profit. But please leave me the right to very much disagree with certain ways of conduct I happen to see in a company's behavior, and very much more so if they also affect people's lives. And so far, guess which of them [i.e. MS and Google] has a bigger sack of rotting pieces.
But the truth is propriety software is quite well reviewed (there's an entire industry who makes it their business to review and recommend commercial software, usually somewhat usefully).
Oh come on. Please tell us, how many of such reviews have you read. And please tell us, hwo many of those read reviews were actually good, and not written by some fake ignorant "pro" with too much spare time and nothing else to do (yes that goes for quite many "professional" sites also, you'd be surprised).
Most of such reviews are good for nothing but wasting one's time for a useless piece of crap. True, the 6pack masses may find a good time reading them, but you really think people sane enough would base a millions $ drop based on such reviews ?
The entire article is about open source software, not all software. His statement is valid.
No it's not. The same can be said about commercial software too. Moreover, commercial software would also need such a rating system, since you'd better know what you pay for before it's too late.
I really like that we have Xandros. It's a distro you can show and give those Windows people around you. But thinking of it as a real step forward for Linux in general on the desktop, just doesn't feel right. I dont' think a real step forward for Linux is being more and more Windows-like and Windows-mimicking and Windows-compatible and Windows-... you go on. It's nice to have distros ('cause Xandros isn't the only one you know) which can make Windows 6packs' transition easier, but it would be nice to think twice next time before saying such things.
When I first heard about this, the only thing I could say was: no sh*t. After some time has passed, now the only thing that pops in about this has changed to something like: sh*t, now come on !
Apple is a worse
As some millions of people have already realized, somewhat restricted hardware choices are sometimes not too much of a burden when you get a really really really better OS in return, especialyl when for most people 2ghz or 3ghz isn't a real issue. The question never was whether a single provider (be that MS or Apple) lets you have freedom of choice among it's own products, they don't. The freedom lies in your having the chance to choose between MS and Apple and others.
Can someone explain to me how Linux has been "locked-out" from users? It's widely available to be used on a system with Windows (dual boot).
And you got insightful for that. You're simply numb, dumb, or a combination of those. It's because you're not in the 99% of pc buying sixpack population that can't tell apples from oranges when talking about OSes. You can choose, they can't (yes, can not, because they simply don't have enough knowledge to choose). And the cash that MS locks into his pocket comes from those 99%, not from you. MS is using his 20 years of lockin to maintain this situation. Now that's what sticks some of us a brick in the nose, instead of that brick going someplace else.
I don't want no drm'd bios. Or if they do it, let's start thinking about ways of replacing with custom bios chips/flashes with openfirmware. If they see that people don't like the idea of drm on the application level, well, they take it down to the bios, where most people won't be able to do anything about. No matter if one doesn't do anything illegal on their machines, drm'ing it is still not any a likeable concept on any level. Looks like the hackers of tomorrow will turn out to be really some digital freedom fighters.