To a contrat be valid, it must be an agreement between two parts. In the case of an EULA the consumer doesnt have any power of negociation, and in pratice cant change anything on the EULA.
The brazilian legislation also states that you cant be forced to agree with a contract that prejudice, or denies, any of your rights. This way no EULA can really be enforced here.
To support Linux, Google would have to support both KDE and GNOME... running on several different distributions, whith different libraries, and different versions. Of course there are several applications that can do it, Adobe Acrobat and Skype for example, but they don't quite integrate with the desktop.
Google could do it using a scripting language like perl, python or ruby, and have two frontends... one for Gnome and other for KDE. But this would expose their desktop search engine, and I guess they don't want that. But there is hope, as Sun and Google team together, there's a chance we'll see some of these Google apps ported to Gnome trought the JDS. Let's wait and see...
And, in the Mac front...
Come on! MacOSX already has almost every funcionality that Google's apps ofer! Theres sherlock and spotlight for search, iPhoto for picture sharing and organizing, iChat for messaging, and other several nice features.
Not trying to be a troll here, but why use Oracle when they won't support our Distro of choice (Debian)?
At work we have good experiences with Firebird, we have several databases, some over 1.6GB size, with more than 50 concurrent connections. And there was no downtime or corruption problems since the thing went to production, almost 3 years now.
Ok, Oracle has big advantages over Firebird. But they're worth moving away from Debian, a distro we trust and are confortable with? Are these advantages worth the extra money spent on licences for Oracle and it's supported Linux distros?
I work at a public institution, the healthcare department of Rio de Janeiro City, and there's barely enought money to run the hospitals, to buy medicine and such. Sure we could use this free Oracle, but we made such a long way until now using only OpenSource solutions. Why would we change now?
Not many things are cheaper to produce than gasoline. Coal, perhaps, and certain grasses. Methanol is made from natural gas, so, even if it's cheaper, it won't be for long.
Here at Brazil we produce Methanol from sugar-cane. So its cheaper, and easier to produce.
Since you have to grow large crops of sugar-cane to produce the Methanol, and these will consume large quantities of CO2. In the end, there will be no "new" CO2 released to the atmosphere, and the greenhouse effect will stop to increase.
Methanol is a good choice for fuelling cars too, since it generates more power than gasoline, less CO2 and it's cheaper to produce. The only problem is the oxidation it produces, but this will not be a issue when we switch over to eletric cars, powered by fuel cells!
The problem with fossil combustibles, like gasoline and diesel, is the oil they come from. Since it was trapped under the ground for millions of years, the CO2 contained on it is no longer part of the planet ecosystem. When we burn it, were injecting new CO2 to the atmosphere, and that's the main cause of the greenhouse effect.
Now, I'm not trying to be a troll. I just want to understand the reasons that make someone choose IIS over Apache, since (AFAIK) the later is more secure, more capable, and performs better under heavy load.
You shoud check out http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/ to see that BBC has an Open video codec project on the go, and Java APIs to play streamed media as well.
I guess that they will move from IE and WMV once their own technology is ready. After all, it makes no sense to develop a video coded if you're not planning to use it.
He can't understand what a development preview release is!
Of course there are things that are broken! They released the darn thing so you can find what's wrong and tell to the devellopers, so they can fix them.
If you don't want to deal with the bugs, fine, stick with hoary as it's the stable release. The Colony releases are for those who are willing to help find bugs.
As I could understand from the article, this whole new copy protection thing involves running some program automaticaly when the CD is inserted, and it's Windows only.
That's just pathetic!
Do they really think that it will prevent piracy? I guess not.
It won't even force people to buy an extra digital copy from their online store... Yes, I guess that Sony's original intent.
But I think that all those schemes from the big labes are a good thing! Here at Brasil the local, small labels are selling like they never did before. And our big artist are going indie too, because the prices praticed by the big labels are too expensive for our average consumer.
Uoops, I inserted the "MacOSX port" on the wrong paragraph!!! I consider it a must for OpenOffice! Not the other way round, as it sounds now.
-->hits himself in the head, to learn how to use the preview button--
Is Microsoft admiting that OpenOffice2 is as good as MSOffice12, exept for the ability to embend audio and video on the documents?
If so, that's great... because now the OpenOffice guys can concentrate their efforts on performance and stability, instead of trying to catch up with MSOffice implementing features I don't need. Not to mention a native MacOSX port!
I'm not saying that OpenOffice is near as bloated as MSOffice, but it would be nice to see it more lean and clean, and to be able to run it on some old computers. Also, it would be great if it could be more integrated into KDE, Gnome and even Windows, going beyond the look and feel.
I can only imagine what will happen to MSOffice when Microsoft realise that they can't compete with a better, free, cross-platform product. I know that it won't disapear, but their price will have to go down... and it will hurt them badly.
Also,
What do they mean with this "less functional" argument?
Last time I checked I could write, draw, do calculations and present with OpenOffice. And I can print all those things too. Witch functionality they're missing?
At work, at Rio de Janeiro City public health department, our users don't miss anything... mostly because they were unaware of those "extra functionalities" bundled with MSOffice.
Pehaps they're talking about the ability to hold a trojan playload? OpenOffice as far as I know don't support a single macro virus... Ha!
Even if that person used OOo I could get garbage; if they used the linux version, and I used the Windows version, the files got mangled.
Well... I guess that the Linux guy was using fonts unavaliable under your system, or vice-versa.
Also, when I'm writing something in collaboration with other people usually we choose a better format for interchange, as RTF or Plain Text.
Today, as it is, OpenOffice is good enougth for me. And when I need to exchange files with a friend, I simply offer to install a copy of OpenOffice on his computer.
Why depend on Microsoft to power products like this? As good as the hardware may be, if Intel don't control the OS, they don't control the final product.
Wouldn't make more sense to power it with MithTV, wich they can hack as they please and brand as a Intel only product?
Why depend on Microsoft? Hell, what's wrong with you Intel, Microsoft used to depend on you!
I had both Debian and YellowDog running on a PowerMac G3 system for a while. Debian at that time (Sarge/Testing) was superior, both in terms of number of avaliable packages and performance.
YellowDog 3 CDs just can't compete with the Debian repositories. There are 4 DVDs worth of software on Debian!
And now, with Ubuntu... I don't really see a reason to go with YellowDog as a Desktop distro.
Of course they offer support, and many companies depend on this "feature". But I guess they'll gladly support your PPC Debian systems if you ask (and pay) them to.
But, is your Logitec cam still avaliable at the stores? Worse, how can you garantee that it's the same hardware?!?!
Yes, it is true! Manufactures often change the chipset of a given model whitout puting a notice on the box! So you end with two cameras, with the same model name and number, but with different, and often incompatible, chipsets!!
I know that because here at work we planned to use USB Webcams on Linux for a project. And we literally tested EVERY ONE AVALIABLE at the local stores... Few worked out the box, many different models had the same chipset, and often the same models had different chipsets.
LINUX USB WEBCAM DRIVERS SUCK, OR ARE NON-EXISTANT
Ok, I know that firewire cameras are supposed to work just fine, but USB Webcams are cheaper and easier to find, at least here at Brasil.
I know it's not Linux fault, since there is no standart for video over USB, and many manufactures just don't care about releasing their hardware specs to open-source developers. So, belive me... it's a pain to find ONE webcam that barely works on linux.
I can't see how this will work without the cooperation from the drivers.
I mean, how the Monitor will know that the content of a certain window is a movie being played?
Also, if it's optional probably your old, drm-less, video drivers will work just fine...
I don't think Apple will adopt this DRM extension, due their past decisions favoring user rights... And I don't think the Xorg folks would cripple their drivers either.
Microsoft better be carefull, or they'll see lots of people buying a MacMini, or building a MithTV box, just to play their DivX.
Sorry to disagree with you... but you can't really compare System7 or MacOS8 to Solaris.
While Macs had a better interface, their OS was unstable as hell.
And Sun never targeted the desktop. CDE was more than enought for the engineers, physics, researchers, programmers or any other type of nerd 15 years ago.
They have a problem now because Linux (both kernel and OS) is a real player on the research/engineering/scientific field AND have better desktop environments.
Slashdot Mirror
How can Sony Music forbid MP3 ripping, when Sony Electronics sells MP3 players?
Insane.
At least here at Brazil.
To a contrat be valid, it must be an agreement between two parts. In the case of an EULA the consumer doesnt have any power of negociation, and in pratice cant change anything on the EULA.
The brazilian legislation also states that you cant be forced to agree with a contract that prejudice, or denies, any of your rights. This way no EULA can really be enforced here.
Just my 2c.
Let's be realistic...
To support Linux, Google would have to support both KDE and GNOME... running on several different distributions, whith different libraries, and different versions. Of course there are several applications that can do it, Adobe Acrobat and Skype for example, but they don't quite integrate with the desktop.
Google could do it using a scripting language like perl, python or ruby, and have two frontends... one for Gnome and other for KDE. But this would expose their desktop search engine, and I guess they don't want that. But there is hope, as Sun and Google team together, there's a chance we'll see some of these Google apps ported to Gnome trought the JDS. Let's wait and see...
And, in the Mac front...
Come on! MacOSX already has almost every funcionality that Google's apps ofer! Theres sherlock and spotlight for search, iPhoto for picture sharing and organizing, iChat for messaging, and other several nice features.
I'll not touch it.
Not trying to be a troll here, but why use Oracle when they won't support our Distro of choice (Debian)?
At work we have good experiences with Firebird, we have several databases, some over 1.6GB size, with more than 50 concurrent connections. And there was no downtime or corruption problems since the thing went to production, almost 3 years now.
Ok, Oracle has big advantages over Firebird. But they're worth moving away from Debian, a distro we trust and are confortable with? Are these advantages worth the extra money spent on licences for Oracle and it's supported Linux distros?
I work at a public institution, the healthcare department of Rio de Janeiro City, and there's barely enought money to run the hospitals, to buy medicine and such. Sure we could use this free Oracle, but we made such a long way until now using only OpenSource solutions. Why would we change now?
Just my 2c.
You can make Methanol from Ethanol... its just a matter of get rid of that extra carbon.
Since you have to grow large crops of sugar-cane to produce the Methanol, and these will consume large quantities of CO2. In the end, there will be no "new" CO2 released to the atmosphere, and the greenhouse effect will stop to increase.
Methanol is a good choice for fuelling cars too, since it generates more power than gasoline, less CO2 and it's cheaper to produce. The only problem is the oxidation it produces, but this will not be a issue when we switch over to eletric cars, powered by fuel cells!
The problem with fossil combustibles, like gasoline and diesel, is the oil they come from. Since it was trapped under the ground for millions of years, the CO2 contained on it is no longer part of the planet ecosystem. When we burn it, were injecting new CO2 to the atmosphere, and that's the main cause of the greenhouse effect.
Now, I'm not trying to be a troll. I just want to understand the reasons that make someone choose IIS over Apache, since (AFAIK) the later is more secure, more capable, and performs better under heavy load.
Can anyone point me some?
That's easy.. It's just a matter of Microsoft fix IE, or kill it.
Internet Explorer is the root cause of all webpages compatibility problems.
You shoud check out http://www.bbc.co.uk/opensource/ to see that BBC has an Open video codec project on the go, and Java APIs to play streamed media as well. I guess that they will move from IE and WMV once their own technology is ready. After all, it makes no sense to develop a video coded if you're not planning to use it.
Then the Music Industry is f*****. The iPod is what makes the ITMS work, and not the other way around.
There won't be other ITMS unless another iPod appears on the market.
He can't understand what a development preview release is!
Of course there are things that are broken! They released the darn thing so you can find what's wrong and tell to the devellopers, so they can fix them.
If you don't want to deal with the bugs, fine, stick with hoary as it's the stable release. The Colony releases are for those who are willing to help find bugs.
What if they bought one copy of every book they're scanning?
So,
As I could understand from the article, this whole new copy protection thing involves running some program automaticaly when the CD is inserted, and it's Windows only.
That's just pathetic!
Do they really think that it will prevent piracy? I guess not.
It won't even force people to buy an extra digital copy from their online store... Yes, I guess that Sony's original intent.
But I think that all those schemes from the big labes are a good thing! Here at Brasil the local, small labels are selling like they never did before. And our big artist are going indie too, because the prices praticed by the big labels are too expensive for our average consumer.
Uoops, I inserted the "MacOSX port" on the wrong paragraph!!! I consider it a must for OpenOffice! Not the other way round, as it sounds now. -->hits himself in the head, to learn how to use the preview button--
Is Microsoft admiting that OpenOffice2 is as good as MSOffice12, exept for the ability to embend audio and video on the documents?
If so, that's great... because now the OpenOffice guys can concentrate their efforts on performance and stability, instead of trying to catch up with MSOffice implementing features I don't need. Not to mention a native MacOSX port!
I'm not saying that OpenOffice is near as bloated as MSOffice, but it would be nice to see it more lean and clean, and to be able to run it on some old computers. Also, it would be great if it could be more integrated into KDE, Gnome and even Windows, going beyond the look and feel.
I can only imagine what will happen to MSOffice when Microsoft realise that they can't compete with a better, free, cross-platform product. I know that it won't disapear, but their price will have to go down... and it will hurt them badly.
This will hurt them... and hurt them bad.
Whe people realize this, they'll just turn to other brands. Or will buy "no-brand" cartridges that can be reffiled at will.
Also, What do they mean with this "less functional" argument? Last time I checked I could write, draw, do calculations and present with OpenOffice. And I can print all those things too. Witch functionality they're missing? At work, at Rio de Janeiro City public health department, our users don't miss anything... mostly because they were unaware of those "extra functionalities" bundled with MSOffice. Pehaps they're talking about the ability to hold a trojan playload? OpenOffice as far as I know don't support a single macro virus... Ha!
Also, when I'm writing something in collaboration with other people usually we choose a better format for interchange, as RTF or Plain Text.
Today, as it is, OpenOffice is good enougth for me. And when I need to exchange files with a friend, I simply offer to install a copy of OpenOffice on his computer.
Why depend on Microsoft to power products like this? As good as the hardware may be, if Intel don't control the OS, they don't control the final product.
Wouldn't make more sense to power it with MithTV, wich they can hack as they please and brand as a Intel only product?
Why depend on Microsoft? Hell, what's wrong with you Intel, Microsoft used to depend on you!
Well,
I had both Debian and YellowDog running on a PowerMac G3 system for a while. Debian at that time (Sarge/Testing) was superior, both in terms of number of avaliable packages and performance.
YellowDog 3 CDs just can't compete with the Debian repositories. There are 4 DVDs worth of software on Debian!
And now, with Ubuntu... I don't really see a reason to go with YellowDog as a Desktop distro.
Of course they offer support, and many companies depend on this "feature". But I guess they'll gladly support your PPC Debian systems if you ask (and pay) them to.
Ok, I see your point.
But, is your Logitec cam still avaliable at the stores? Worse, how can you garantee that it's the same hardware?!?!
Yes, it is true! Manufactures often change the chipset of a given model whitout puting a notice on the box! So you end with two cameras, with the same model name and number, but with different, and often incompatible, chipsets!!
I know that because here at work we planned to use USB Webcams on Linux for a project. And we literally tested EVERY ONE AVALIABLE at the local stores... Few worked out the box, many different models had the same chipset, and often the same models had different chipsets.
A real mess.
Sorry to be the first to point this out, but...
LINUX USB WEBCAM DRIVERS SUCK, OR ARE NON-EXISTANT
Ok, I know that firewire cameras are supposed to work just fine, but USB Webcams are cheaper and easier to find, at least here at Brasil.
I know it's not Linux fault, since there is no standart for video over USB, and many manufactures just don't care about releasing their hardware specs to open-source developers. So, belive me... it's a pain to find ONE webcam that barely works on linux.
I can't see how this will work without the cooperation from the drivers.
I mean, how the Monitor will know that the content of a certain window is a movie being played?
Also, if it's optional probably your old, drm-less, video drivers will work just fine...
I don't think Apple will adopt this DRM extension, due their past decisions favoring user rights... And I don't think the Xorg folks would cripple their drivers either.
Microsoft better be carefull, or they'll see lots of people buying a MacMini, or building a MithTV box, just to play their DivX.
Sorry to disagree with you... but you can't really compare System7 or MacOS8 to Solaris.
While Macs had a better interface, their OS was unstable as hell.
And Sun never targeted the desktop. CDE was more than enought for the engineers, physics, researchers, programmers or any other type of nerd 15 years ago.
They have a problem now because Linux (both kernel and OS) is a real player on the research/engineering/scientific field AND have better desktop environments.