I already see people up in arms about this https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/canonical-census/+question/120594
But, I think in the open source community -- assuming the package is open source -- an honest method can be created to give the vendor (Canonical) information they need to help them provide much better service and attention to platforms based on usage. The package can be removed as well, so I think Canonical is doing this in a pretty non-intrusive way. We can't expect the greatest achievements be made when all you have to go on is the wind in your own home town.
I disagree. These absurd "policies" are pushed from the top down. It's called "maximum return for shareholders." The moment companies took this philosophy, it was all downhill sense. Big, evil corporations are only concerned with maximum return, and they drive these principles within. It's just a teeny tiny example of the erosion within US corporations and finance. It's just a simple indication of why the "global crisis" happened. Pure greed.
I don't think you read the relevant bits. The project was put on hold a few years ago for patent legality research. And, they are doing a "soft migration" in which relevant open source applications are being installed on Windows to gear up the user base for the switch.
Just pulling the rug out from under all the users quickly is stupid and will generate nothing but backlash. I read the OSOR page, and it seems they know what they are doing and doing it well. I drive a Mercedes, and I can say that Germans don't half ass things.
Speculatively, I would say the cost is so high because the city most likely dug themselves a hole by developing loads of software that is Windows specific. But, they are doing the right thing here by getting their technology independence. In 10 years from now, their operating costs will be amazingly low since they will ditch millions in MS tax, have a user base acclimatized to Linux, flexible applications, and knowledgeable admins.
This should be an example and business case to other governments and large organizations that they too can save themselves tons of cash by just going through the pain of undoing "easy decisions".
Subs always use SONAR. However, they use passive SONAR. And, if two subs are at transit speeds, their passive SONAR is virtually blind, e.g. there is so much flow noise you would not be able to hear subtle things.
Trident submarines -- and almost all modern subs -- are so quiet that even when you know where they are it is almost impossible to detect and hear them. So, this is not a surprise they were not able to hear each other. What is surprising is with all that deep, deep ocean out there, two of them just happened right into each other.
I guess Microsoft's is "features" instead of performance. Hasn't the saying "what Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away" been proven true time and again?
You're surprised this is Republican?!?!?!?! What America have you lived in? Wake the fuck up you idiot.
The Republicans have always tried to protect American values -- and that includes protecting its citizens first. What do you think the whole Guantanamo military tribunal think is all about? And, oh, no surprisingly the Democratic administration has made it first business to tear that down as well.
You must really believe all CNN is telling you.
Well, that site can say what it wants. But, I know three different women that are using Ubuntu now, and they happen to really like it. That's pretty damn impressive. And, just a couple years back, it couldn't have been done.
Red Hat itself has made it public that the desktop market is a very difficult one. Ubuntu has made very decent inroads to the desktop market for Linux, but it is true they need to put much more effort on the server side to become truly competitive. I think they have done some good work, but look forward to see what the community can provide in the next couple years. It's very hard to start competing in a market that is already spoken for by a few big players.
I know we've had significant problems trying to roll out whole-disk encryption. Unless it's necessary, I'd say stay away from it. Of course, for sensitive information and travelling, it's almost a necessary evil these days.
Bollocks. Many of my RHEL servers have 0 downtime for 365 days. I can keep the entire server up to date without rebooting in almost all circumstances bar major libc or kernel updates. There are very few and far between remote kernel exploits. Almost all of them are local and easily mitigated.
Yes this is the part that some people don't seem to understand, but, I guess it is fair to do comparisons on default installs. It's also fair to say that it's obvious as time goes on and features are added that the default install will become slower. One thing that really got under my skin was the damn indexer in Hardy though. Other than that it's ok. I have big expectations for Intrepid. Keep up the good work Ubuntu!
I don't see any reason to go with something like this over HP blades, for instance. The price point is average at best and apparently no room for the quad core cpu. Does it support more than 32 Gb RAM per blade? Just get a nice blade system (HP/IBM) and a nice workstation for your visualization. What tool wants to run Windows on something like that, anyway? It's like putting a four banger in a Corvette.
ZFS is not only outstanding, administration is a breeze. Why would we not want it on Linux? The simple answer: CDDL. Sadly.
Competition is good. And, it's good to have btrfs. But, we have btrfs not for this reason. We have btrfs because of GPL versus everyone else wars.
Sometimes it's an absolute shame that the wheel must be reinvented -- and in many cases -- badly. I'm still waiting on the list of features from btrfs that will "leapfrog" ZFS.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the typical British response. The reason England is in the position it's in.
Women have more partners than men do! Sluts!
I already see people up in arms about this https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/canonical-census/+question/120594 But, I think in the open source community -- assuming the package is open source -- an honest method can be created to give the vendor (Canonical) information they need to help them provide much better service and attention to platforms based on usage. The package can be removed as well, so I think Canonical is doing this in a pretty non-intrusive way. We can't expect the greatest achievements be made when all you have to go on is the wind in your own home town.
I have Skype on my Android. Works mint!
Be prepared for an increase in tariffs and other hidden fees.
Screw with your gov't overlords.....then prepare to be punished.
another Android app to install. Sigh.
I disagree. These absurd "policies" are pushed from the top down. It's called "maximum return for shareholders." The moment companies took this philosophy, it was all downhill sense. Big, evil corporations are only concerned with maximum return, and they drive these principles within. It's just a teeny tiny example of the erosion within US corporations and finance. It's just a simple indication of why the "global crisis" happened. Pure greed.
I don't think you read the relevant bits. The project was put on hold a few years ago for patent legality research. And, they are doing a "soft migration" in which relevant open source applications are being installed on Windows to gear up the user base for the switch. Just pulling the rug out from under all the users quickly is stupid and will generate nothing but backlash. I read the OSOR page, and it seems they know what they are doing and doing it well. I drive a Mercedes, and I can say that Germans don't half ass things. Speculatively, I would say the cost is so high because the city most likely dug themselves a hole by developing loads of software that is Windows specific. But, they are doing the right thing here by getting their technology independence. In 10 years from now, their operating costs will be amazingly low since they will ditch millions in MS tax, have a user base acclimatized to Linux, flexible applications, and knowledgeable admins. This should be an example and business case to other governments and large organizations that they too can save themselves tons of cash by just going through the pain of undoing "easy decisions".
Subs always use SONAR. However, they use passive SONAR. And, if two subs are at transit speeds, their passive SONAR is virtually blind, e.g. there is so much flow noise you would not be able to hear subtle things. Trident submarines -- and almost all modern subs -- are so quiet that even when you know where they are it is almost impossible to detect and hear them. So, this is not a surprise they were not able to hear each other. What is surprising is with all that deep, deep ocean out there, two of them just happened right into each other.
This.
I guess Microsoft's is "features" instead of performance. Hasn't the saying "what Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away" been proven true time and again?
You're surprised this is Republican?!?!?!?! What America have you lived in? Wake the fuck up you idiot. The Republicans have always tried to protect American values -- and that includes protecting its citizens first. What do you think the whole Guantanamo military tribunal think is all about? And, oh, no surprisingly the Democratic administration has made it first business to tear that down as well. You must really believe all CNN is telling you.
Fuckin' A. Smack that bitch up. You never know -- it might turn her on and you'll be the next Fark headline maker. Some chicks are crazy like that.
Well, that site can say what it wants. But, I know three different women that are using Ubuntu now, and they happen to really like it. That's pretty damn impressive. And, just a couple years back, it couldn't have been done.
I doubt that will pay their bills though. No?
Installed it in a vm already. Don't see much worth shouting about myself. No libmapi...
Red Hat itself has made it public that the desktop market is a very difficult one. Ubuntu has made very decent inroads to the desktop market for Linux, but it is true they need to put much more effort on the server side to become truly competitive. I think they have done some good work, but look forward to see what the community can provide in the next couple years. It's very hard to start competing in a market that is already spoken for by a few big players.
I know we've had significant problems trying to roll out whole-disk encryption. Unless it's necessary, I'd say stay away from it. Of course, for sensitive information and travelling, it's almost a necessary evil these days.
Bollocks. Many of my RHEL servers have 0 downtime for 365 days. I can keep the entire server up to date without rebooting in almost all circumstances bar major libc or kernel updates. There are very few and far between remote kernel exploits. Almost all of them are local and easily mitigated.
Yes this is the part that some people don't seem to understand, but, I guess it is fair to do comparisons on default installs. It's also fair to say that it's obvious as time goes on and features are added that the default install will become slower. One thing that really got under my skin was the damn indexer in Hardy though. Other than that it's ok. I have big expectations for Intrepid. Keep up the good work Ubuntu!
at an exponential rate. This isn't even PhD material. Yawn.
s/quad/six/
I don't see any reason to go with something like this over HP blades, for instance. The price point is average at best and apparently no room for the quad core cpu. Does it support more than 32 Gb RAM per blade? Just get a nice blade system (HP/IBM) and a nice workstation for your visualization. What tool wants to run Windows on something like that, anyway? It's like putting a four banger in a Corvette.
ZFS is not only outstanding, administration is a breeze. Why would we not want it on Linux? The simple answer: CDDL. Sadly. Competition is good. And, it's good to have btrfs. But, we have btrfs not for this reason. We have btrfs because of GPL versus everyone else wars. Sometimes it's an absolute shame that the wheel must be reinvented -- and in many cases -- badly. I'm still waiting on the list of features from btrfs that will "leapfrog" ZFS.