Academics aren't profit driven. Any for-profit company is not going to spend money and time to develop software then give it away to competitors. That is not only stupid, but it's illegal, and warrants a lawsuit by the shareholders.
What needs to happen is a bunch of people, preferably businesses, with similar interests should hire programmers and developers to work together with a common goal in mind... and that goal shouldn't be to "sell software" either. It should be to build the tool that works the way they need it to work.
Why are competitors going to want to help each other, exactly?
It also puts then a a big disadvantage: the few hundred thousand they spent to develop it that their competitors don't have to pay. I don't understand why OSS advocates can't understand this very simple point. This is the primary reason why there will never be very many industry-specific OSS applications.
non-functional unless I pay somebody money for them.
Yeah, so? I don't begrudge paying people for their work. It's kinda' how the world works. Obviously, based on Linux's mind blowing, astounding, progress all the way to a high of 2.8% market share for one short period, in one medium-sized market, after more than a decade, that a few other people agree with me as well.
Regardless of what other people are doing, you're still whining about having to compensate other people for their work. Cry me a fuckin' river.
Having to have my laptop fan all of the time to account for a bad chip is an unacceptable fix. It's loud, it takes more electricity to run, and it shortens the life of the fan, and possibly the whole computer as a result.
It's more responsible for a company to be profitable and be able to provide steady employment for its employees, than to get them gadgets. After the business is successful, THEN it can take care of its employees. A company that wastes cash does its employees no favors.
Of course it means something. It's attitude. The company is badly run because the management sees fit to waste tons of money before a single nickel is generated. It's bad management, plain and simple. The VC's, if they were smart, should be outraged.
Count yourself as one of the few people that want to continue managing your own data. I'm outsourcing data storage as soon as bandwidth is as reliable as POTS. A company that specializaes it knows more about uptime, redundancy, backing up, indexing, etc. than I ever could. Besides, letting somebody else deal with it also offloads a good bit of liability.
The only reason I can see keeping data storage in-house is if it's super-critical, or super-secret. In which case, you've got a whole IT team babysitting it for you, already.
Granted, I'm not in IT any more, but I've never seen anybody using wireless for anything remotely important in a business. I know I certainly won't. I'm paying electricians a good bit of $$ to run Cat 5 in a new location right now. I can't imagine there'd be a lot of Office users who'd use wireless.
It's a business decision. What's so hard to understand?
Here's a simple explanation for all of you geeks who have no idea how business works: Remember the part in Fight Club where Tyler Durden has that discussion with himself on the plane about auto recalls and whether or not it's worth it? Same thing here. If the handful of Linux users doesn't make it worth it for them to support Linux, then they don't.
As opposed to every idiot who pays their cable company for the privilege of watching ads in the first place? Ha! People with TIVOs are twice as dumb. They pay the cable/satellite company to watch ads, (even though the whole idea behind cable initially was if you paid cash, that would make up for the advertising you weren't seeing), then you pay again to NOT watch the ads. Uuuh. I don't get it.
I did see the movie. I wasn't impressed. Story lines that went nowhere. A script that literally made me laugh out loud on occasion. Good for little kids or dull adults.
Re:Harvey to Two Face felt forced
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I don't have the time or interest in going through a list of movies that were good this year. You wouldn't know the difference. My response was intended to have at least a few geeks go outside their comfort zone of comic books and anime crap to explore other aspects of cinema that warrant more attention and praise than this Hollywood fluff.
Typical Hollywood action flick. Looks like a video game. No script to speak of. No story to speak of. So yes, most people would consider it a "good" movie.
Amazon's not much better. Their fee (last I checked) was something ridiculous like 15% (INCLUDING SHIPPING). Bah. There's less and less reason to buy through these aggregators online, since just about anybody can open their own online store.
I bet that Yahoo's got to be kicking themselves for shutting down their auction site in the past few weeks. Too bad. I liked their system *much* more than the mess that is eBay.
As a manager/owner, I'd rather have somebody that codes for the money. They'll do what I ask them to do without any kind of touch-feely emotional/philosophical bullshit to get in the way of getting the job done. Whether they like doing it or not is largely irrelevant. Most people don't "enjoy" their jobs. That's why it's called "work".
Slashdot Mirror
Academics aren't profit driven. Any for-profit company is not going to spend money and time to develop software then give it away to competitors. That is not only stupid, but it's illegal, and warrants a lawsuit by the shareholders.
What needs to happen is a bunch of people, preferably businesses, with similar interests should hire programmers and developers to work together with a common goal in mind... and that goal shouldn't be to "sell software" either. It should be to build the tool that works the way they need it to work.
Why are competitors going to want to help each other, exactly?
Maybe it depends what you do. In math/science fields, there's a ton of Linux stuff.
That's because those apps are written by academics.
It also puts then a a big disadvantage: the few hundred thousand they spent to develop it that their competitors don't have to pay. I don't understand why OSS advocates can't understand this very simple point. This is the primary reason why there will never be very many industry-specific OSS applications.
non-functional unless I pay somebody money for them.
Yeah, so? I don't begrudge paying people for their work. It's kinda' how the world works. Obviously, based on Linux's mind blowing, astounding, progress all the way to a high of 2.8% market share for one short period, in one medium-sized market, after more than a decade, that a few other people agree with me as well.
Regardless of what other people are doing, you're still whining about having to compensate other people for their work. Cry me a fuckin' river.
Having to have my laptop fan all of the time to account for a bad chip is an unacceptable fix. It's loud, it takes more electricity to run, and it shortens the life of the fan, and possibly the whole computer as a result.
It's more responsible for a company to be profitable and be able to provide steady employment for its employees, than to get them gadgets. After the business is successful, THEN it can take care of its employees. A company that wastes cash does its employees no favors.
Sure. Wireless makes sense there. Are there lots of forklift operators working on Office documents?
Of course it means something. It's attitude. The company is badly run because the management sees fit to waste tons of money before a single nickel is generated. It's bad management, plain and simple. The VC's, if they were smart, should be outraged.
I don't get it, why would I want to trust Microsoft, or anyone, with all my files?
I dunno. Maybe because your data is backed up in probably 10 places for you?
Count yourself as one of the few people that want to continue managing your own data. I'm outsourcing data storage as soon as bandwidth is as reliable as POTS. A company that specializaes it knows more about uptime, redundancy, backing up, indexing, etc. than I ever could. Besides, letting somebody else deal with it also offloads a good bit of liability.
The only reason I can see keeping data storage in-house is if it's super-critical, or super-secret. In which case, you've got a whole IT team babysitting it for you, already.
Granted, I'm not in IT any more, but I've never seen anybody using wireless for anything remotely important in a business. I know I certainly won't. I'm paying electricians a good bit of $$ to run Cat 5 in a new location right now. I can't imagine there'd be a lot of Office users who'd use wireless.
It's a business decision. What's so hard to understand?
Here's a simple explanation for all of you geeks who have no idea how business works: Remember the part in Fight Club where Tyler Durden has that discussion with himself on the plane about auto recalls and whether or not it's worth it? Same thing here. If the handful of Linux users doesn't make it worth it for them to support Linux, then they don't.
You're right. Snorting coke on your desk doesn't effect anybody else. That's an unconstitutional law.
Keeping a network that you don't own hostage is serious, and impacts other people.
As opposed to every idiot who pays their cable company for the privilege of watching ads in the first place? Ha! People with TIVOs are twice as dumb. They pay the cable/satellite company to watch ads, (even though the whole idea behind cable initially was if you paid cash, that would make up for the advertising you weren't seeing), then you pay again to NOT watch the ads. Uuuh. I don't get it.
I did see the movie. I wasn't impressed. Story lines that went nowhere. A script that literally made me laugh out loud on occasion. Good for little kids or dull adults.
I don't have the time or interest in going through a list of movies that were good this year. You wouldn't know the difference. My response was intended to have at least a few geeks go outside their comfort zone of comic books and anime crap to explore other aspects of cinema that warrant more attention and praise than this Hollywood fluff.
"Well, we're still here, which means they haven't pushed the button."
Yeah, that's deep. You probably also thought that the Matrix was thought provoking, huh?
First I want to say I loved it, easily the best movie I've seen this year.
You really need to see more movies. Wow.
Typical Hollywood action flick. Looks like a video game. No script to speak of. No story to speak of. So yes, most people would consider it a "good" movie.
Windows cannot ever compete with free.
Reality tends to disagree with you.
I don't really get the point of this. What does this accomplish that XP Pro doesn't accomplish, except taking a LOT more time and money?
Amazon's not much better. Their fee (last I checked) was something ridiculous like 15% (INCLUDING SHIPPING). Bah. There's less and less reason to buy through these aggregators online, since just about anybody can open their own online store.
I bet that Yahoo's got to be kicking themselves for shutting down their auction site in the past few weeks. Too bad. I liked their system *much* more than the mess that is eBay.
As a manager/owner, I'd rather have somebody that codes for the money. They'll do what I ask them to do without any kind of touch-feely emotional/philosophical bullshit to get in the way of getting the job done. Whether they like doing it or not is largely irrelevant. Most people don't "enjoy" their jobs. That's why it's called "work".