Your just attacking his argument from an emotional standpoint and not addressing the meat of the parents comment.
The meat is that any study that uses reported vulnerabilities and released fixes is obviously going to be skewed against Linux. That is because it is a fact that in Linux all vulnerabilities that get discovered are reported. We cannot say the same for MS and Windows in fact its pretty much a given that Windows has vulnerabilities that MS knows about but decides not to inform the public about. The level of transparency in Linux makes it so these kinds of things can be hidden.
Just concentrate on fixing what is wrong with Linux when it's pointed out.
Any and all open source advocates/fans/users whatever have a right to point out the biased nature of these studies. Its clear to me that from your other posts you have been running around discrediting those who have pointed out the biased nature of this study by simply grabbing at emotional appeals and attacking what you perceive as zealotry to lesson the impact of what was said.
The entirety of the bible doesnt talk about Jesus as most of it was written prior to Jesus being born. You've been duped into thinking your reading the "bible" when all you were reading is the new testament which is probably about 10% of the bible.
Have you not read the other parts where it happens and is praised? You can just point at the new testament and say this is the sum of the bible cus its not. Take or leave the whole thing don't pick and choose.
Last incident? I thought we were talking about this lawsuit at hand cus gee whiz this comment seems to be in a forum about this specific lawsuit. So nope sorry you should have RTFA.
The other things were all reasonable which is why I ignored them. Easy access to guns was a cheap shot however. If your gonna go around and be anti-gun you should at least know what the hell it is you are talking about.
Can you put your "Smith & Wessen Compensator" back in it's holster now?
I'm not suprised at a GTA player killing people. Or a quake person going on columbine. Or a columbine obsessed person killing people at a mall.
And neither would I be surprised about a celibate recluse priest molesting children. I would also not be surprised at Christians murdering abortion doctors or abortion patients. I would not be surprised about towns folk stoning "sluts" to death in the town square after all isn't that what the bible is all about?
GTA is no more violent then that hate filled book you hippocrits worship...
No in other countries they have frivolous nanny-state laws. England comes to mind with its cameras, anti-gun stance, and more recently its anti-hunt laws. Also greece they banded video games not to long ago(well a year or something could have been repealed by now unsure) and that even included cell phone games for people just riding through, if you were caught playing a game on a train they took your phone...
Yeah I mean holy crap the cop had it sitting right there in his holster for the kid to take. Thats fucked up, if cops didn't have guns this would have been prevented.
Before you imply that easy access to guns was the culprit perhaps you should RTFA, or pull your head out of your ass, either way, come back to use when you have a clue.
Its FUD like this that makes the anti gun culture so dangerous/powerful.
First off, guns are used responsibly by the overwhelming majority of gun owners.
Gun violence will continue even if all guns our outlawed, why? Because criminals will still break the law and that means they will still use guns.
Personally I disagree with the nanny-state mentality that the British seem to love. Its not the governments job to protect me from me.
I own guns, and I don't live in fear. I happen to enjoy the recreation of shooting as it is a sport. My guns are locked away responsibly, ammo kept seperate of the firearms. Are you saying that responsible gun owners like me should be punished because of the mistakes of a few?
The problem with people like you is that you are the ones who are afraid. You are afraid of guns. The culture of fear is as much a part of anti gun sentiment(more in my opinion) as it is of pro gun sentiment.
someone violated an NDA and Apple has legal right to sue them for damages of fire them.
someone from the outside "stealing" them
In this case apple has a right to pursue them for damages, coporate espionage and all that.
In both situations Apple has legal right and standing. This is not about Apple silencing the press it is about Apple enforcing NDAs or discovering where the source of the leak is.
This has nothing to do with the first amendment, it has nothing to do with silencing people for talking about trade secrets in order to keep them secrets. It has to do with discovery of who violated the law, since revealing there sources will most certainly result in legal action...
If you disagree - tell me: How many of the typical DESKTOP applications that you use (web browser, word processor, email client,...) are written in Java?
I could ask you to tell me some of the typical DESKTOP applications that are written in C# and.NET because the answer would be the same as it is for Java.. NONE. IE, Office, Windows are C++/MFC with gobs of old C and some VB that the low level engineers and interns tossed in for good measure. We won't see the major move to.NET until(if ever) longhorn arrives. And in fact they won't do a complete rewrite, Office, Windows, IE will all still be by in large C/C++/VB. And lets see what third party developers are using now adays. Surprise surprise the majority of the highly visible apps are not using.NET or C#...
My popularity point is still valid. Among developers as a whole Java is more popular than C# despite what you would like to believe about C# and the desktop.
If you develop software for a customer, the customer wants it fast. And RAD can help you do that.
When you are developing software for a customer that really implies that you are under contract to them. Which is hardly the typical desktop apps you were referring to before. Java leads you here, a huge amount of the private in house software apps are now Java or is moving to Java.
If you need further proof, intro to CS classes generally provide a good idea of whats "popular" or wanted or useful. Since Java has become the default intro to CS programming language that should tell you something. There hasn't been a push to make the default language C#. C# like J++ will die out and not take prominence like you seem to think it already has.
Concerning your other points: They are valid; but I was mainly talking about commercial software, not Open Source.
Your distinction between Commercial and Open Source shows a fundamental misunderstanding of software development since you cannot envision companies using Open Source software commercially. Which IBM is doing currently and is very successful at it.
Notice Java being the most popular language according to that chart.
I notice that a common theme here is that Mono is needed because RAD(rapid application development) is lacking in Linux. RAD seems to be a sticking point for tons of people who for all I can tell are more concerned with rapidly churning out apps than having correct/good implementations. Or for that matter people who prefer to have quality clean libraries where objects and inheritence aren't creating ugly masses of difficult to maintain code.
My opinion: if you want RAD thats fine, but to suggest that its "necessary" to compete with Windows is just plain foolish. Linux didn't get where it is today by succumbing to the ever increasing move to OO(object oriented). There is no data suggesting Linux has hit a plateau, on the contrary it is growing, without the help of RAD/OO and all these concepts that in my mind are contrary to GOOD programming practice.
Furthermore nothing about the open source model should be described as rapid. Open source development should be slow & methodical, having hundreds/thousands of people hammering away at each others ideas. Introducing these bloated libraries designed as RAD can only result in one outcome in my opinion. A fork. Where the RAD group with there C# or whatever language of the week has there fun in the sun for a few years but eventually die out as the ansi-C programs keep on plodding along, slowly but confident in the fact they are not a passing fad.
Great. Now you should realize that what websters says has little bearing on whats enumerated in law. And honestly thats what matters not your definition, not mine and not websters(however websters may be close(r)). The lawful wording of theft is probably signifigantly different, enough so that talking about dictionary definitions because a moot point.
Anyone has an idea of how big this user base is already?
No idea but I can garuntee its about to explode in growth or is about to "go live"( as in not be beta anymore). My reason for thinking that is I was handed 50 invites the other day.
I see nothing wrong with this....P2P piracy is a more pressing problem.
Except that P2P isn't a real problem just one made up by the RIAA, MPAA to account for theoretical sales that in all likelyhood WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED ANYWAY.
For the most part people who steal music would have just went without, P2P has not changed the buying habits for the worse, on the contrary studies show P2P has even elevated sales in some cases.
You should probably take into account that the current MPAA, RIAA situation is bad for consumers(and artists alike) and that this should be considered a valid way for forcing change. The musicians/filmmakers are hurt more by the RIAA/MPAA than P2P users could ever dream of impacting them. My advice, "steal" as much as you want they deserve it.
Hey bad work deserves those adjectives, I'm not going to sugarcoat the truth because peoples feelings will be hurt. Fact: many man pages are poorly written and extremely out of date. Good documentation is well written and up to date so therefore documentation that fails those criteria is bad/horrid/terrible whatever adjective you like. Poor grammar, convoluted language or was written(poorly) by a non native english speaker is in fact "disgusting" as in it disgusts me to rely on such poor documentation.
Obviously, a lot of people put a lot of work into that code, and calling it that just makes you look like an asshole.
Very well, but me being an asshole doesn't change the fact that X has been poorly maintained and NEEDS a rewrite or discarding in favor for something new(this is my preference). The amount/quality of the work is diminished by the poor job in which the code was added and maintained making what we have today. Which is in fact a disgusting hackjob. The linux kernel was kept clean, organized even through major additions failing to do so with X makes it undesirable and in my opinion unsavable. X is a hackjob. because features and changes were "hacked" in without any thought or care as to the future maintainability and without a clear vision of good structure.
As far as name association goes lets try one on you. We can infer from your name that you are small, slimy. Traditionally using newt as a descriptor of a person was an insult which could basically be equivalent to dim-witted. So thats my assessment you are small, slimy and dim-witted.
And mods, PP was not informative, it was a troll. (Did you look at the guy's user name?)
What does my user name have to do with the quality or content of my post? It's people like you who mod based on username or sig that make/. moderation the horribly biased and awkward system that it is.
I find it funny I'm branded troll for offering my opinion that man pages are inadequate. When someone says RTFM they more generally mean go online and look for real documentation as man pages rarely if ever cut it.
I wonder how I'd be branded if I further voice my opinion that xwindows needs to be replaced by something newer and fresher because the X code base is a disgusting hackjob. But hey my opinions shouldn't be judged on merit they should instead be judged on my user name, uid, race, religion, creed, political affiliation, sig, anything else you can use to toss a label on me.
man pages are notoriously bad, and are all but useless unless you want a haphazard and incomplete list of features without proper examples(this is key in my opinion).
If anything in the OSS/Linux world needs some more thought it is the horrid man pages.
Why is travelling to Hubble and fixing it much less risky than traveling to Mars. Somehow in my mind the great distance and the boundless possibilities for something to go wrong on such a long invovled trip is much more than going up to repair hubble.
Now I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist but there has to be some reason why we don't want Hubble up there anymore. Hell instead of de orbiting it why not say hey china you want some toy we don't like anymore? You guys will need to service it and be responsible for it here are the keys have fun. No instead we are simply going to destroy it... Why?
Let me know when "Windows XP Security Administration: The Missing Manual" gets published. I'll buy twenty copies and have my Christmas shopping for next year done (for my PC-owning friends and relatives, anyway.)
Cool, I'm sure your pals will all love a book about how to use features that don't exist.
I agree that virgin soil has really no intrinsic value that we need to keep but I happen to disagree with a few of your other points, and i'll explain why.
I'd argue that beavers building huge dams and creating gigantic ponds/lakes/starting small ecosystems themsleves aren't "natural".
First off there are controls over the beaver population. Predators for instance and competitors. This prevents the beavers from spreading so wildly that they dam up all streams and rivers and slowly create a giant desert(yes this will happen, improper irrigation techniques by humans can in fact create deserts so i suspect that thousands of unchecked beavers could probably do the same).
I wonder what point in human evolution we became "unnatural";
I think its obvious that at the point where our population went from sustainable pockets of people who dealt with predators, competitors and whose populations swelled and died down based on trends in climate or trends in animal herds to what they are now which happens to be a ballooning population with absolutely no competitors aside from ourselves.
and the "naturalist" will tell you it's never time to move forward.
I think a true naturalist seeks a return to a more managble and reasonable society. Its obvious that we need to control our growth somehow and eventually reduce the population signifigantly to allow another period of rapid growth to take place in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
The meat is that any study that uses reported vulnerabilities and released fixes is obviously going to be skewed against Linux. That is because it is a fact that in Linux all vulnerabilities that get discovered are reported. We cannot say the same for MS and Windows in fact its pretty much a given that Windows has vulnerabilities that MS knows about but decides not to inform the public about. The level of transparency in Linux makes it so these kinds of things can be hidden.
Just concentrate on fixing what is wrong with Linux when it's pointed out.
Any and all open source advocates/fans/users whatever have a right to point out the biased nature of these studies. Its clear to me that from your other posts you have been running around discrediting those who have pointed out the biased nature of this study by simply grabbing at emotional appeals and attacking what you perceive as zealotry to lesson the impact of what was said.
The entirety of the bible doesnt talk about Jesus as most of it was written prior to Jesus being born. You've been duped into thinking your reading the "bible" when all you were reading is the new testament which is probably about 10% of the bible.
Have you not read the other parts where it happens and is praised? You can just point at the new testament and say this is the sum of the bible cus its not. Take or leave the whole thing don't pick and choose.
The other things were all reasonable which is why I ignored them. Easy access to guns was a cheap shot however. If your gonna go around and be anti-gun you should at least know what the hell it is you are talking about.
Can you put your "Smith & Wessen Compensator" back in it's holster now?
A/S/L?
And neither would I be surprised about a celibate recluse priest molesting children. I would also not be surprised at Christians murdering abortion doctors or abortion patients. I would not be surprised about towns folk stoning "sluts" to death in the town square after all isn't that what the bible is all about?
GTA is no more violent then that hate filled book you hippocrits worship...
No in other countries they have frivolous nanny-state laws. England comes to mind with its cameras, anti-gun stance, and more recently its anti-hunt laws. Also greece they banded video games not to long ago(well a year or something could have been repealed by now unsure) and that even included cell phone games for people just riding through, if you were caught playing a game on a train they took your phone...
Yeah I mean holy crap the cop had it sitting right there in his holster for the kid to take. Thats fucked up, if cops didn't have guns this would have been prevented.
Before you imply that easy access to guns was the culprit perhaps you should RTFA, or pull your head out of your ass, either way, come back to use when you have a clue.
First off, guns are used responsibly by the overwhelming majority of gun owners.
Gun violence will continue even if all guns our outlawed, why? Because criminals will still break the law and that means they will still use guns.
Personally I disagree with the nanny-state mentality that the British seem to love. Its not the governments job to protect me from me.
I own guns, and I don't live in fear. I happen to enjoy the recreation of shooting as it is a sport. My guns are locked away responsibly, ammo kept seperate of the firearms. Are you saying that responsible gun owners like me should be punished because of the mistakes of a few?
The problem with people like you is that you are the ones who are afraid. You are afraid of guns. The culture of fear is as much a part of anti gun sentiment(more in my opinion) as it is of pro gun sentiment.
Anyone who stores his/her laptop in a fridge deserves to have it stolen.
Yes because without WINE users no one would be around to use Microsoft products.
someone violated an NDA and Apple has legal right to sue them for damages of fire them.
someone from the outside "stealing" them
In this case apple has a right to pursue them for damages, coporate espionage and all that.
In both situations Apple has legal right and standing. This is not about Apple silencing the press it is about Apple enforcing NDAs or discovering where the source of the leak is.
This has nothing to do with the first amendment, it has nothing to do with silencing people for talking about trade secrets in order to keep them secrets. It has to do with discovery of who violated the law, since revealing there sources will most certainly result in legal action...
I could ask you to tell me some of the typical DESKTOP applications that are written in C# and .NET because the answer would be the same as it is for Java.. NONE. IE, Office, Windows are C++/MFC with gobs of old C and some VB that the low level engineers and interns tossed in for good measure. We won't see the major move to .NET until(if ever) longhorn arrives. And in fact they won't do a complete rewrite, Office, Windows, IE will all still be by in large C/C++/VB. And lets see what third party developers are using now adays. Surprise surprise the majority of the highly visible apps are not using .NET or C#...
My popularity point is still valid. Among developers as a whole Java is more popular than C# despite what you would like to believe about C# and the desktop.
If you develop software for a customer, the customer wants it fast. And RAD can help you do that.
When you are developing software for a customer that really implies that you are under contract to them. Which is hardly the typical desktop apps you were referring to before. Java leads you here, a huge amount of the private in house software apps are now Java or is moving to Java.
If you need further proof, intro to CS classes generally provide a good idea of whats "popular" or wanted or useful. Since Java has become the default intro to CS programming language that should tell you something. There hasn't been a push to make the default language C#. C# like J++ will die out and not take prominence like you seem to think it already has.
Concerning your other points: They are valid; but I was mainly talking about commercial software, not Open Source.
Your distinction between Commercial and Open Source shows a fundamental misunderstanding of software development since you cannot envision companies using Open Source software commercially. Which IBM is doing currently and is very successful at it.
Wow you could not be more wrong. My "Proof"
Notice Java being the most popular language according to that chart.
I notice that a common theme here is that Mono is needed because RAD(rapid application development) is lacking in Linux. RAD seems to be a sticking point for tons of people who for all I can tell are more concerned with rapidly churning out apps than having correct/good implementations. Or for that matter people who prefer to have quality clean libraries where objects and inheritence aren't creating ugly masses of difficult to maintain code.
My opinion: if you want RAD thats fine, but to suggest that its "necessary" to compete with Windows is just plain foolish. Linux didn't get where it is today by succumbing to the ever increasing move to OO(object oriented). There is no data suggesting Linux has hit a plateau, on the contrary it is growing, without the help of RAD/OO and all these concepts that in my mind are contrary to GOOD programming practice.
Furthermore nothing about the open source model should be described as rapid. Open source development should be slow & methodical, having hundreds/thousands of people hammering away at each others ideas. Introducing these bloated libraries designed as RAD can only result in one outcome in my opinion. A fork. Where the RAD group with there C# or whatever language of the week has there fun in the sun for a few years but eventually die out as the ansi-C programs keep on plodding along, slowly but confident in the fact they are not a passing fad.
Great. Now you should realize that what websters says has little bearing on whats enumerated in law. And honestly thats what matters not your definition, not mine and not websters(however websters may be close(r)). The lawful wording of theft is probably signifigantly different, enough so that talking about dictionary definitions because a moot point.
No idea but I can garuntee its about to explode in growth or is about to "go live"( as in not be beta anymore). My reason for thinking that is I was handed 50 invites the other day.
Except that P2P isn't a real problem just one made up by the RIAA, MPAA to account for theoretical sales that in all likelyhood WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED ANYWAY.
For the most part people who steal music would have just went without, P2P has not changed the buying habits for the worse, on the contrary studies show P2P has even elevated sales in some cases.
You should probably take into account that the current MPAA, RIAA situation is bad for consumers(and artists alike) and that this should be considered a valid way for forcing change. The musicians/filmmakers are hurt more by the RIAA/MPAA than P2P users could ever dream of impacting them. My advice, "steal" as much as you want they deserve it.
Obviously, a lot of people put a lot of work into that code, and calling it that just makes you look like an asshole.
Very well, but me being an asshole doesn't change the fact that X has been poorly maintained and NEEDS a rewrite or discarding in favor for something new(this is my preference). The amount/quality of the work is diminished by the poor job in which the code was added and maintained making what we have today. Which is in fact a disgusting hackjob. The linux kernel was kept clean, organized even through major additions failing to do so with X makes it undesirable and in my opinion unsavable. X is a hackjob. because features and changes were "hacked" in without any thought or care as to the future maintainability and without a clear vision of good structure.
As far as name association goes lets try one on you. We can infer from your name that you are small, slimy. Traditionally using newt as a descriptor of a person was an insult which could basically be equivalent to dim-witted. So thats my assessment you are small, slimy and dim-witted.
What does my user name have to do with the quality or content of my post? It's people like you who mod based on username or sig that make /. moderation the horribly biased and awkward system that it is.
I find it funny I'm branded troll for offering my opinion that man pages are inadequate. When someone says RTFM they more generally mean go online and look for real documentation as man pages rarely if ever cut it.
I wonder how I'd be branded if I further voice my opinion that xwindows needs to be replaced by something newer and fresher because the X code base is a disgusting hackjob. But hey my opinions shouldn't be judged on merit they should instead be judged on my user name, uid, race, religion, creed, political affiliation, sig, anything else you can use to toss a label on me.
OH SNAP!
If anything in the OSS/Linux world needs some more thought it is the horrid man pages.
Few if any /. comments result in my laughing outloud, my hat goes off to you.
Now I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist but there has to be some reason why we don't want Hubble up there anymore. Hell instead of de orbiting it why not say hey china you want some toy we don't like anymore? You guys will need to service it and be responsible for it here are the keys have fun. No instead we are simply going to destroy it... Why?
And admit why you want it, because you are too lazy to read a thorough review.
Cool, I'm sure your pals will all love a book about how to use features that don't exist.
I'd argue that beavers building huge dams and creating gigantic ponds/lakes/starting small ecosystems themsleves aren't "natural".
First off there are controls over the beaver population. Predators for instance and competitors. This prevents the beavers from spreading so wildly that they dam up all streams and rivers and slowly create a giant desert(yes this will happen, improper irrigation techniques by humans can in fact create deserts so i suspect that thousands of unchecked beavers could probably do the same).
I wonder what point in human evolution we became "unnatural";
I think its obvious that at the point where our population went from sustainable pockets of people who dealt with predators, competitors and whose populations swelled and died down based on trends in climate or trends in animal herds to what they are now which happens to be a ballooning population with absolutely no competitors aside from ourselves.
and the "naturalist" will tell you it's never time to move forward.
I think a true naturalist seeks a return to a more managble and reasonable society. Its obvious that we need to control our growth somehow and eventually reduce the population signifigantly to allow another period of rapid growth to take place in the future.