Then, take the 'middleware', bundle it with hacked-over versions of Tomcat, Log4J, J2EE, etc., into a 'suite' and call it some bicaptialized name like Web and some shape like Cube or Sphere or something, with each product named some two-letter acronym like AS for the application server, and MQ for the 'middleware', etc.
Finally, get sued by IBM for violating their patents and trademarks.;)
It's written in Flash, so that's pretty much a given especially considering that Adobe expects to have a version of Adobe Integrated Runtime (AIR) for Linux in the coming months.
The real questions are 1) Will it support OpenDocument Format, and if so, how good will its support be? and 2) Will it support OOXML, and if so, how good will its support be?
If these two questions are answered in the affirmative, then Adobe's office suite may be at least an OpenOffice.org or StarOffice killer, and possibly a Microsoft Office killer.
Exactly. The mechanics of washing your hands -- rubbing them together under running water -- kill 99.9% of the germs on your hands. Adding soap to the equation is only an aid in getting stuff off your hands. Adding anti-bacterial soap, as witnessed in TFA, is fscking pointless.
SOX only deals with financial reporting for publicly-traded companies. AFAICS, the company in question isn't publicly-traded, and neither are many hospitals, many of them being either public sector institutions or non-profits.
HIPPA laws are no joke. There are serious fines and even criminal penalties for letting confidential patient records out. It's so serious that companies working with health care data often have special training programs for their employees that handle any sort of hospital data -- even for IT workers.
Verus probably folded to keep from getting heavily penalized and/or to prevent its directors from being criminally prosecuted under HIPPA.
Linux must be better than Windows on the merits, disregarding the stocker price. The Thinkpad I'm typing this on came preloaded with XP Pro. It hasn't accumulated a day of runtime in the four years I have been using it. Guess that says how value I see in it.
And the problem is -- it is better. Look at modern desktop distros like Ubuntu. Nowadays they support a lot of hardware out of the box without having to do the work of loading a single driver. Everything is clean and well-integrated. Most applications that people need are installed right out of the box. It doesn't suffer from the maladies of spyware, adware, or viruses/worms/trojans or drive-by downloads.
Ugh. A flat network may be fine for something small, but for something as big and complex as an airport network, especially one at an airport the size of LAX? Unthinkable. Do these people hire idiots with no training or experience or what?
Would you think that LAX is running anything that out-of-date or crappy? Maybe, maybe not, but it does make a good case to run solid, proven and reliable network infrastructure hardware from a major manufacturer.
Oh yeah, and redundant-path network connections for critical portions of the network wouldn't hurt either.
Essentially, they can't. Novell doesn't own all the copyrights to the Unix source code. Some of the code was developed outside of AT&T by outside vendors. And then there's the whole BSDi case, which has already put the copyrights that Novell does own in a tenuous position. The judge in that case was about this *thumb and forefinger* close to invalidating AT&T's copyrights due to attribution requirements (remember, much of the old code was written before the U.S. signed onto the Berne Convention, which removed attribution requirements) and that's the real reason AT&T/Bell Labs settled with BSDi.
But, the ancient Unix V7 sources were already released under BSD long ago by none other than Caldera.
An update last week hosed by/boot partition. I haven't found any mention of this happening in any of the Ubuntu Forums. Anyone know if this could be related?
So what is making Vista "hell" for you? Can you make up something fast. He doesn't have to make up something. Have you ever used a corporate laptop? Oftentimes, companies who need to buy a lot of laptops buy them with as little system memory as possible. It's not at all unusual to come across a brand-new company laptop with only 512 MB or even 256 MB installed in it these days.
Vista has very high memory requirements, even if you aren't using Aero. On a machine with low memory, Vista will crawl, much worse than XP or 2000.
In addition the whole 'Allow' or 'Cancel' thing is a real pain.
No it isn't. It isn't even sligtly like that. Those OS'es all run on top of MS-DOS, or with MS-DOS running in 16bit process that is scheduled by the Windows "kernel". No, they don't run "on top of" MS-DOS. Again, read Unauthorized Windows 95 by Andrew Schulman. Essentially, MS-DOS boots, and then the Windows executable loads in the Windows kernel (yes, it's an OS kernel - it manages virtual machines, processes, memory, filesystems and I/O. What would you call it?), VMM386. From there, the kernel replaces the DOS kernel, throwing it into its own virtual 8086 machine (see the relevant Intel documentation, this is a VM).
Now bear with me. Unlike what you're claiming for VMWare (I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'm not saying that I necessarily buy into it, either), the kernel *does* call down to the DOS kernel virtual 8086 machine for some system functions, but not all and not even a majority.
So what I'm saying is, that although ESX places the Linux kernel in VM0, that doesn't mean it doesn't use the Linux kernel. Maybe VMWare says otherwise, but so did Microsoft in regard to Windows 95 (see Adrian King, Inside Windows 95 from Microsoft Press. The Schulman book mentioned above is basically a critique of that book with Schulman basically using reverse engineering techniques to show that King was lying about the OS not using DOS for anything more than a bootloader). It's possible, using Microsoft-patented techniques, for the OS kernel to call down to kernel that booted it. In fact, this technique was used in IBM mainframes years before Bill Gates uttered "give me a Macintosh on a PC" or some such to his employees.)
Now, assuming Hellwig knows what I'm saying to be true, it's possible that he himself has used reverse-engineering techniques on the VMWare ESX kernel and has discovered that VMWare is using exactly that technique.
Believe me or don't. I don't care. But if I were you, instead of calling Hellwig a blowhard loudmouth, maybe you should recognize him for the excellent kernel hacker that he his and give him the benefit of the doubt. Why you don't you try asking Hellwig yourself?
No, I'm not completely wrong. And yes, I have seen ESX in action. Linux loads VMkernel. VMKernel may, in turn, virtualize the same Linux kernel is a separate session, ala Windows 3.x/9x/Me with MS-DOS.
For Heaven's sake... service console by default only sees the virtual hardware and you have to fight with it to enable it to "see through" to the actual hardware on the box. Again, you mean just like Windows 3.x/9x/Me with MS-DOS. BTW--Microsoft and IBM both have patents related to this technology, so VMWare is treading a fine line here.
But, going back to the Windows/MS-DOS analogy, Windows does the same thing. But, it also relies on and requires the presence of the MS-DOS kernel to do certain things, not just boot.
How do you know that VMWare doesn't do this? It's a closed-source product. So unless you are a VMWare developer, you, sir, are the one that doesn't know what you're talking about.
For those who have no idea what I'm talking about with the Windows/MS-DOS connection, you should read Unauthorized Windows 95 by Andrew Schulman. It lays it all out.
At the point that vmkernel is loaded, it does a complex dance that means it is the "host" kernel and the Linux kernel becomes "hosted", as a special-case VM instance. Interesting. This is exactly how Windows 3.x/9x/Me work with MS-DOS. But Microsoft owns the copyright on both of those, VMWare doesn't own the Linux copyright, so...they are bound by the GPL.
Furthermore, if anybody on the Linux side of the equation would know if vmkernel depends on the Linux kernel, it would be Hellwig.
But my question is: how do you know any of this? VMWare is closed source, so unless you're a VMWare developer, you have no idea what you're talking about.
My point is that there is a difference between using an OS as a bootloader and integrating an OS kernel with another one. There is precedence for the former (Novell Netware) and also for the latter (Windows 3.x/9x/Me). Linux doesn't integrate with the BIOS. It doesn't need it, it can be loaded with ANYTHING that bootstraps into the kernel. ESX Server seems to require a poorly hacked Linux 2.4 kernel. Nothing else can boot it. That's the difference.
ye, linux kernel is a big binary blog load by the BIOS, it can't run without BIOS, so that makes it a derived work. You wanna make a bet on that? I can point you to severalinstancesof the Linux kernel that don't require a BIOS. In fact, even the x86 kernel will boot from EFI.
It could be viewed that Linus' statements constitute a verbal license. Licenses don't always need to be granted in writing. A license is a permission. I lend you my car, I don't necessarily need to write you a note saying that it's okay to borrow my car for such-and-such time period for the purposes of so-and-so...I just say "Here, borrow my car. Here's the keys." That's a permission, and that's exactly what a copyright license is - a permission to do something normally reserved for the copyright holder. So the GPL is a license, but so is Linus saying "You can write a binary driver so long as it can stand on its own without the kernel".
Christopher Hellwig has been on about this for about over a year now. No one from VMWare has responded. The fact is, that the vmkernel is a big binary blob loaded by a Linux kernel module. It can't run without Linux, so that makes it a derived work. Yes, nVidia and ATI get a free ride because their drivers are largely derived from the Windows drivers, they can stand on their own, so Linus says that they get a break. I don't agree with Linus, but then again, I'm not the copyright holder on the Linux kernel, so who am I to say anything? Especially when I'm directly benefiting from nVidia's driver.
Slashdot Mirror
Then, take the 'middleware', bundle it with hacked-over versions of Tomcat, Log4J, J2EE, etc., into a 'suite' and call it some bicaptialized name like Web and some shape like Cube or Sphere or something, with each product named some two-letter acronym like AS for the application server, and MQ for the 'middleware', etc.
;)
Finally, get sued by IBM for violating their patents and trademarks.
The spec is open. It just can't be used in free/libre software due to patent restrictions.
It's written in Flash, so that's pretty much a given especially considering that Adobe expects to have a version of Adobe Integrated Runtime (AIR) for Linux in the coming months.
The real questions are 1) Will it support OpenDocument Format, and if so, how good will its support be? and 2) Will it support OOXML, and if so, how good will its support be?
If these two questions are answered in the affirmative, then Adobe's office suite may be at least an OpenOffice.org or StarOffice killer, and possibly a Microsoft Office killer.
Exactly. The mechanics of washing your hands -- rubbing them together under running water -- kill 99.9% of the germs on your hands. Adding soap to the equation is only an aid in getting stuff off your hands. Adding anti-bacterial soap, as witnessed in TFA, is fscking pointless.
SOX only deals with financial reporting for publicly-traded companies. AFAICS, the company in question isn't publicly-traded, and neither are many hospitals, many of them being either public sector institutions or non-profits.
I doubt it. I'm 35 and still working on my career as a console radio repair tech.
HIPPA laws are no joke. There are serious fines and even criminal penalties for letting confidential patient records out. It's so serious that companies working with health care data often have special training programs for their employees that handle any sort of hospital data -- even for IT workers.
Verus probably folded to keep from getting heavily penalized and/or to prevent its directors from being criminally prosecuted under HIPPA.
And the problem is -- it is better. Look at modern desktop distros like Ubuntu. Nowadays they support a lot of hardware out of the box without having to do the work of loading a single driver. Everything is clean and well-integrated. Most applications that people need are installed right out of the box. It doesn't suffer from the maladies of spyware, adware, or viruses/worms/trojans or drive-by downloads.
This is the company that turned a CP/M clone for the Intel 8086 into a multibillion-dollar empire. What do you think?
He's posting on Slashdot, and so are we. What does that say about us?
Why yes, yes you are.
Ugh. A flat network may be fine for something small, but for something as big and complex as an airport network, especially one at an airport the size of LAX? Unthinkable. Do these people hire idiots with no training or experience or what?
Would you think that LAX is running anything that out-of-date or crappy? Maybe, maybe not, but it does make a good case to run solid, proven and reliable network infrastructure hardware from a major manufacturer.
Oh yeah, and redundant-path network connections for critical portions of the network wouldn't hurt either.
Essentially, they can't. Novell doesn't own all the copyrights to the Unix source code. Some of the code was developed outside of AT&T by outside vendors. And then there's the whole BSDi case, which has already put the copyrights that Novell does own in a tenuous position. The judge in that case was about this *thumb and forefinger* close to invalidating AT&T's copyrights due to attribution requirements (remember, much of the old code was written before the U.S. signed onto the Berne Convention, which removed attribution requirements) and that's the real reason AT&T/Bell Labs settled with BSDi.
But, the ancient Unix V7 sources were already released under BSD long ago by none other than Caldera.
s/by/my
An update last week hosed by /boot partition. I haven't found any mention of this happening in any of the Ubuntu Forums. Anyone know if this could be related?
Vista has very high memory requirements, even if you aren't using Aero. On a machine with low memory, Vista will crawl, much worse than XP or 2000.
In addition the whole 'Allow' or 'Cancel' thing is a real pain.
Now bear with me. Unlike what you're claiming for VMWare (I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I'm not saying that I necessarily buy into it, either), the kernel *does* call down to the DOS kernel virtual 8086 machine for some system functions, but not all and not even a majority.
So what I'm saying is, that although ESX places the Linux kernel in VM0, that doesn't mean it doesn't use the Linux kernel. Maybe VMWare says otherwise, but so did Microsoft in regard to Windows 95 (see Adrian King, Inside Windows 95 from Microsoft Press. The Schulman book mentioned above is basically a critique of that book with Schulman basically using reverse engineering techniques to show that King was lying about the OS not using DOS for anything more than a bootloader). It's possible, using Microsoft-patented techniques, for the OS kernel to call down to kernel that booted it. In fact, this technique was used in IBM mainframes years before Bill Gates uttered "give me a Macintosh on a PC" or some such to his employees.)
Now, assuming Hellwig knows what I'm saying to be true, it's possible that he himself has used reverse-engineering techniques on the VMWare ESX kernel and has discovered that VMWare is using exactly that technique.
Believe me or don't. I don't care. But if I were you, instead of calling Hellwig a blowhard loudmouth, maybe you should recognize him for the excellent kernel hacker that he his and give him the benefit of the doubt. Why you don't you try asking Hellwig yourself?
But, going back to the Windows/MS-DOS analogy, Windows does the same thing. But, it also relies on and requires the presence of the MS-DOS kernel to do certain things, not just boot.
How do you know that VMWare doesn't do this? It's a closed-source product. So unless you are a VMWare developer, you, sir, are the one that doesn't know what you're talking about.
For those who have no idea what I'm talking about with the Windows/MS-DOS connection, you should read Unauthorized Windows 95 by Andrew Schulman. It lays it all out.
Furthermore, if anybody on the Linux side of the equation would know if vmkernel depends on the Linux kernel, it would be Hellwig.
But my question is: how do you know any of this? VMWare is closed source, so unless you're a VMWare developer, you have no idea what you're talking about.
My point is that there is a difference between using an OS as a bootloader and integrating an OS kernel with another one. There is precedence for the former (Novell Netware) and also for the latter (Windows 3.x/9x/Me). Linux doesn't integrate with the BIOS. It doesn't need it, it can be loaded with ANYTHING that bootstraps into the kernel. ESX Server seems to require a poorly hacked Linux 2.4 kernel. Nothing else can boot it. That's the difference.
It's obvious to anyone with an IQ over 70? But, he said his father was an executive at Fortune 50 company...oh wait, nevermind... I see your point.
It could be viewed that Linus' statements constitute a verbal license. Licenses don't always need to be granted in writing. A license is a permission. I lend you my car, I don't necessarily need to write you a note saying that it's okay to borrow my car for such-and-such time period for the purposes of so-and-so...I just say "Here, borrow my car. Here's the keys." That's a permission, and that's exactly what a copyright license is - a permission to do something normally reserved for the copyright holder. So the GPL is a license, but so is Linus saying "You can write a binary driver so long as it can stand on its own without the kernel".
Note that IANAL.
Christopher Hellwig has been on about this for about over a year now. No one from VMWare has responded. The fact is, that the vmkernel is a big binary blob loaded by a Linux kernel module. It can't run without Linux, so that makes it a derived work. Yes, nVidia and ATI get a free ride because their drivers are largely derived from the Windows drivers, they can stand on their own, so Linus says that they get a break. I don't agree with Linus, but then again, I'm not the copyright holder on the Linux kernel, so who am I to say anything? Especially when I'm directly benefiting from nVidia's driver.