I must say it's rather interesting to see Linux users happily promoting a proprietary format like Real Audio/Video. I would've figured that there'd be cries of "Open source!" or "Down with Real! Up with " I guess monopolies are okay if they give Linux a player for it?
Pretty good point, Real Player is filled with worthless gunk advertising. And if you try to get rid of them by compacting the player..well some options dissapear. Joy oh joy. Windows media player on the other hand is clean cut, has no useless features (that I can see) and embeds into IE quite nicely. Best advice for alternate OS users is to eitether develop their own player, or ask microsoft for a port.
First off, it is very thoughtful of Slashdot editors to tell us who is right and who is wrong, without their expertise we might actually have to form our own opinions on the matter.
This is quite simple in my opinion, AOL provides the IM message service which it AFAIK created. In return for this free service AOL recieves money from the advertising banner it flashes across the screen. The key issue here is this. This is _AOL'S_ software. Other companies want to walk in, grab a hold of their large userbase, and walk away with it. Now if these companies were half as inventive as they were greedy, they'd create their own chat network. But of course not. The scream of "Open standards" quickly rallies slashdotters into a frenzy before they look at the issue here. AOL _created and maintain AIM_ it is _theirs_ nobody has the right to tell them what standards they should and shouldn't use. Now if these companies wish to make an open standard for their _own_ chat network, heck, more power to them. Personally I must say that AIM is one of the best pieces of software I've ever seen, it's fast, it's not filled with useless options, the advertisemens aren't annoying popups, etc.
What Linux is _now_ is irrelevant. It started out as what? A personal project by Linus to make a unix like OS for a 386 as he couldn't afford a commercially licensed one? What if someone had told Linus that he is a fool and should stick to Minix? (Or whatever else was floating around that time) Our NT hating friend believes that no new operating systems have the right to enter the market, luring developers from his precious linux. That _is_ the problem. >> "We (Linux) have grown, and it is now our believe that all other projects out there are useless, so we shall label them as foolish ideas as we all know Linux is the way of the future" Sooner or later this will blow up in Linux's face, a lot of BeOS users have already been alienated by Eric Raymond's comment a few months ago. If this trend continues then sooner or later a chunk of Linux's developers will pack up and leave. I certainly wouldn't want to be part of a movement that dictates what I should and shouldn't do.
Uh exactly what babble is this you're spewing? "People in the lame NT world?" There is quite a large number of intelligent NT users, much like there is a large number of clueless Linux users. Save your self styled eliteness for someone who cares.
Secondly think for a minute, if people followed your suggestion and stuck to a single "Free OS" you'd be in front of a *BSD machine right now instead of your precious Linux. Interesting thought, ne?
I see, because my operating system is proprietary (and thank you for pointing that out, I thought it was open source until you enlightened me) Mozilla won't run on it. So I take it Mozilla runs perfectly on Linux and beats the pants off IE in terms of functionality, stability, and ease of use?
It's very simple, 31337 kiddies want all their software free, warez, open source, whatever. The idea of paying for software is a strange one to them. This is why I predict Q3 for Linux sales will be miniscule. Open source != Better, If that was true then Gimp would be the industry standard for graphics manipulation..but it's not, Photoshop is. Open source simply breeds "we want everything free" tendancies.
Mozilla is a success? This is news to me as Mozilla can barely draw a window for itself under BeOS. Please tell me where I can enable the "success" option in the source code
Of course if people had actually read the story before shouting "Down with Intel, buy AMD they never have problems with their cpu" or "Hur hur dem windowz luzerz have it tough" They'd realize that no customers have so far reported this problem. It cropped up during a lab test and nowhere else (at the moment) Also in the event that this does happen to you, the solution is simple, hit the power button one more time and it will boot.
Remember Shimmer, this is Linuxdot, news for Linux users, nobody else matters. In order to achieve our bright future where Linux users stomp over the broken bodies of stupid Microsoft product using idiots we must blah blah and that is why the editorial staff needs to form our opinions for us. Of course I will be given a "troll" rating for this post.
Anyway, now that this is out of the way..it is rather odd that they'd use 98 for such a device, I would've thought Windows CE would've been the more efficient choice. After all wouldn't 98 take up a horrendous amount of space? (Just speculating here since most handhelds run palmos or win ce)
Re:But this is really an *economic* argument
on
ESR talks in Dublin
·
· Score: 1
This is an opinion based on Windows Now (Price remains the same forever) and Linux Tommorow (It will get easier to use) There is however a flaw in this reasoning, while undoubtably sooner or later Linux will become easy enough for the average office worker to use, this doesn't mean Windows will always be priced the same. Microsoft has no incentive to lower the price on their OS as the market has no real alternatives at the moment. I'm sure that if alternatives arise then Microsoft will hurry and slash their prices. Suddenly for the average office worker that free Linux install may not seem as attractive as the $20 Windows install. Also remember that OEM manufacters get windows at a discount. Microsoft may be incompetent in court, but they're hardly buisness idiots
This is very neat, but there are some problems, first why is the card not 10/100? I think most people now are running 100Mb networks, or would at least like that feature for future expansion. Second..what is up with that price? The hardware itself can't cost more then $250, a reasonable price would be around $400-500. Charging what they're charging is asking for trouble.
Funny how the system fails to work both ways
on
ESR talks in Dublin
·
· Score: 2
It's very interesting to see ESR predict the demise of Windows 2000, has he tried the latest candidate release? Or is this simply well wishing from his part? I find this extremely amusing since if a similar statement was issued by someone in the Microsoft camp then it would be considered "FUD" "The seven bullets linux must dodge to survive" Can you imagine the outrage and the shouts of "Troll! Fud!" ? The only valid point I'll give him is the price of Microsoft products. Linux is the only way of the future? Well we know that ESR has already stated that BeOS is doomed to die(tm) as it is evil(tm) closed source. Do the *BSDs also fall into that category now?
Dear god! A buisness doing something for profit. Well this is definately a shocker. I suppose they need to donate all their profits to starving children in third world countries like Redhat is doing..oh no..wait..they're not.
As much as I think the Bo2K designers are 31337 wankers with too much time on their hands I'm a bit tied on the issue. On one hand yes, the gun analogy applies here. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. However gun manufacturers are regulated by government laws. So far 31337 script kiddie distributors are not. Now if we had a "tagging" system in place to keep track of denial of service/cracker offenders and were able to prohibit distributions of such programs to them..that would be something. Of course that's not going to happen any time soon.
Slashdot Mirror
I see, the Real Audio/Video protocols are fully open on the other hand?
I must say it's rather interesting to see Linux users happily promoting a proprietary format like Real Audio/Video. I would've figured that there'd be cries of "Open source!" or "Down with Real! Up with " I guess monopolies are okay if they give Linux a player for it?
Pretty good point, Real Player is filled with worthless gunk advertising. And if you try to get rid of them by compacting the player..well some options dissapear. Joy oh joy. Windows media player on the other hand is clean cut, has no useless features (that I can see) and embeds into IE quite nicely. Best advice for alternate OS users is to eitether develop their own player, or ask microsoft for a port.
Can I have his share? :)
It may be a right choice in your opinion, but not necessarily one for everyone else
Excuse me, but running and supporting this is just as bad as doing the same for "closed source only software" The "choice" option is eliminated.
First off, it is very thoughtful of Slashdot editors to tell us who is right and who is wrong, without their expertise we might actually have to form our own opinions on the matter.
This is quite simple in my opinion, AOL provides the IM message service which it AFAIK created. In return for this free service AOL recieves money from the advertising banner it flashes across the screen. The key issue here is this. This is _AOL'S_ software. Other companies want to walk in, grab a hold of their large userbase, and walk away with it. Now if these companies were half as inventive as they were greedy, they'd create their own chat network. But of course not. The scream of "Open standards" quickly rallies slashdotters into a frenzy before they look at the issue here. AOL _created and maintain AIM_ it is _theirs_ nobody has the right to tell them what standards they should and shouldn't use. Now if these companies wish to make an open standard for their _own_ chat network, heck, more power to them. Personally I must say that AIM is one of the best pieces of software I've ever seen, it's fast, it's not filled with useless options, the advertisemens aren't annoying popups, etc.
What Linux is _now_ is irrelevant. It started out as what? A personal project by Linus to make a unix like OS for a 386 as he couldn't afford a commercially licensed one? What if someone had told Linus that he is a fool and should stick to Minix? (Or whatever else was floating around that time) Our NT hating friend believes that no new operating systems have the right to enter the market, luring developers from his precious linux. That _is_ the problem. >> "We (Linux) have grown, and it is now our believe that all other projects out there are useless, so we shall label them as foolish ideas as we all know Linux is the way of the future" Sooner or later this will blow up in Linux's face, a lot of BeOS users have already been alienated by Eric Raymond's comment a few months ago. If this trend continues then sooner or later a chunk of Linux's developers will pack up and leave. I certainly wouldn't want to be part of a movement that dictates what I should and shouldn't do.
Uh exactly what babble is this you're spewing?
"People in the lame NT world?" There is quite a large number of intelligent NT users, much like there is a large number of clueless Linux users. Save your self styled eliteness for someone who cares.
Secondly think for a minute, if people followed your suggestion and stuck to a single "Free OS" you'd be in front of a *BSD machine right now instead of your precious Linux. Interesting thought, ne?
I see, because my operating system is proprietary (and thank you for pointing that out, I thought it was open source until you enlightened me) Mozilla won't run on it. So I take it Mozilla runs perfectly on Linux and beats the pants off IE in terms of functionality, stability, and ease of use?
I still fail to see what defines Mozilla's success? The fact that it's open source?
It's very simple, 31337 kiddies want all their software free, warez, open source, whatever. The idea of paying for software is a strange one to them. This is why I predict Q3 for Linux sales will be miniscule. Open source != Better, If that was true then Gimp would be the industry standard for graphics manipulation..but it's not, Photoshop is. Open source simply breeds "we want everything free" tendancies.
Mozilla is a success? This is news to me as Mozilla can barely draw a window for itself under BeOS. Please tell me where I can enable the "success" option in the source code
Read the posts by slashdotters ;) so much for that theory ne? It's either
"NT sucks durhurhur linux is much more secure but we feel that we are above paying for testing for certification"
or
"Durdurdur Linux is more secure, NT sucks, this proves nothing, M$ is stupid"
I see, so does this mean all the anti-microsoft "FUD" will come to an end? Or is this merely a call to put an end to anti-linux fud?
Of course if people had actually read the story before shouting "Down with Intel, buy AMD they never have problems with their cpu" or "Hur hur dem windowz luzerz have it tough" They'd realize that no customers have so far reported this problem. It cropped up during a lab test and nowhere else (at the moment) Also in the event that this does happen to you, the solution is simple, hit the power button one more time and it will boot.
Bleh, hard drive space requirements rather ;)
I think someone mentioned the hard drive being 430 megs, although I could be wrong. I was reffering to space requirements.
Remember Shimmer, this is Linuxdot, news for Linux users, nobody else matters. In order to achieve our bright future where Linux users stomp over the broken bodies of stupid Microsoft product using idiots we must blah blah and that is why the editorial staff needs to form our opinions for us. Of course I will be given a "troll" rating for this post.
Anyway, now that this is out of the way..it is rather odd that they'd use 98 for such a device, I would've thought Windows CE would've been the more efficient choice. After all wouldn't 98 take up a horrendous amount of space? (Just speculating here since most handhelds run palmos or win ce)
This is an opinion based on Windows Now (Price remains the same forever) and Linux Tommorow (It will get easier to use) There is however a flaw in this reasoning, while undoubtably sooner or later Linux will become easy enough for the average office worker to use, this doesn't mean Windows will always be priced the same. Microsoft has no incentive to lower the price on their OS as the market has no real alternatives at the moment. I'm sure that if alternatives arise then Microsoft will hurry and slash their prices. Suddenly for the average office worker that free Linux install may not seem as attractive as the $20 Windows install. Also remember that OEM manufacters get windows at a discount. Microsoft may be incompetent in court, but they're hardly buisness idiots
Yes but part of a laptop's cost is the display, this system has none.
This is very neat, but there are some problems, first why is the card not 10/100? I think most people now are running 100Mb networks, or would at least like that feature for future expansion. Second..what is up with that price? The hardware itself can't cost more then $250, a reasonable price would be around $400-500. Charging what they're charging is asking for trouble.
It's very interesting to see ESR predict the demise of Windows 2000, has he tried the latest candidate release? Or is this simply well wishing from his part? I find this extremely amusing since if a similar statement was issued by someone in the Microsoft camp then it would be considered "FUD" "The seven bullets linux must dodge to survive" Can you imagine the outrage and the shouts of "Troll! Fud!" ? The only valid point I'll give him is the price of Microsoft products. Linux is the only way of the future? Well we know that ESR has already stated that BeOS is doomed to die(tm) as it is evil(tm) closed source. Do the *BSDs also fall into that category now?
Dear god! A buisness doing something for profit. Well this is definately a shocker. I suppose they need to donate all their profits to starving children in third world countries like Redhat is doing..oh no..wait..they're not.
As much as I think the Bo2K designers are 31337 wankers with too much time on their hands I'm a bit tied on the issue. On one hand yes, the gun analogy applies here. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. However gun manufacturers are regulated by government laws. So far 31337 script kiddie distributors are not. Now if we had a "tagging" system in place to keep track of denial of service/cracker offenders and were able to prohibit distributions of such programs to them..that would be something. Of course that's not going to happen any time soon.