You can get the warrant retroactively through the FISA courts. If you happen to be polling, and run across something critical, you file the paperwork, BAM, warrant. If you happen to not, the data is purged.
I do, and it has 256MB. Mind you, I don't run GNOME or KDE on it, but for basic xfce and E17, it does a fine job. Also, do not use the onboard IDE for more than your/boot or you'll feel the PAIN! PCI SATA control card FTW!
They play hardball, hit them with a DMCA letter, pull all of the work down or else, and of course file for the maximum penalty per-hit on the stock images. They don't want to play nice, then don't play nice. "
That is the sound of a hundred thousand firewall maintainers pulling their hair out, of a hundred thousand company connections having their bandwidth sucked up, of a hundred thousand managers wondering what happened to their deadlines...
There is the difference tho. Solaris, SPARC, MySQL are all open source, and would continue development with Sun gone. This really does little to hurt Suns open source market. I just wish someone would get a consumer-grade SPARC out there. It's more than possible, just nobody's done it.
HP sold Alpha off to Intel, which is the root of the licenses being discussed. Incidentally, the SPARC is open to license, and has already a well developed toolchain as well as a huge support base to work from, and is native 64-bit with the V9.
Nothing about Ghz/Mhz or that jazz. Yes, we have twice the transistor count we did two years ago, more cores per-chip, since we hit a wall in regards to frequency. If you can't go up, you go out.
Open Source, due to it's open nature, means more people able to repair vulnerabilities much faster. Look at the years it took microsoft to patch vulnerabilities that would enable critical systems to be taken over remotely. Microsoft has a finite crew to find and report bugs, holes and vulnerabilities. I work tech support. Want to know how many people fall victim to virii that exploit vulnerbilities that date back to Windows 98? Open Source also means that when things go wrong, the buck stops here. You can repair it, or work with someone to repair it, while with Microsoft you are victim to their schedule, their level of priority. Your vulnerability not critical enough, bottom of the pile you go.
I can count on 1 hand the number of Linux vulnerabilities that, once discovered, took over a month to repair. I cannot count on both hands + feet the number of Windows vulnerabilities that continue to plague us over a decade after discovery.
Because Windows is an OS, Linux isn't. Linux is a kernel, around which hundreds of OS's, commonly called "Distributions" have been built. If you apply that logic to the Windows Kernel, you are dealing with a lot more OS's as well, from Windows NT 3.1 to Windows Server 2008 and even OS/2 Warp 3.0 for Networks.
Now, you are closer with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Edubuntu, the main difference is that there are no features being "turned off" or "turned on" with any of them, just repackaging of which front-end apps you desire upon initial install. The differences between them is more clear from a consumer standpoint as they actually changed the names. They see Ubuntu and Kubuntu, they know they are different. They see Windows Vista... they don't know if it's Home Basic or Home Premium or what. If they went Pindows vs Hindows, instant recognition that something is different.
Absolutely untrue, as all drivers connect to the main unifying force within Linux... the kernel! All Linux distributions have this kernel, meaning all drivers work with all distributions. In addition, the core API's are the same with all distributions, meaning all games can work with all distributions. End result, total win, for our power is not in being exclusive, but being inclusive. You like this gee-whiz bangup feature from Redhat, you use it. Like that feature from Kubuntu, use it. The power is all you!
>Support for relevant applications, out of the box - not via a separate repository that must be enabled. (Key word, - relevant)
Then you become dependent on a single source for what applications are available. By allowing, and enabling multiple repositories means that you can offer more choice, and choice is good. Imagine a world with only Coke products. No Coffee, no Tea, no 12 year aged Scotch Whisky, just Coke. Do you complain that you need to go to a seperate grocery store to some products?
>A single API for applications so that "Linux" is one platform, not many that must be supported for many versions. Without this, >all efforts to make Linux the mainstream are thinned, customers get confused which leads to less adoption.
A single API is a security exploit waiting to happen. And how would customers get confused, as they don't, in general, program.
>A single desktop, so that Linux is one desktop, not several. Otherwise the other efforts, such as the help desk, marketing and >research all multiply their efforts making everything impractical.
Absolutely incorrect. I work for a very large, public company, which does sell Linux based products. We manage to handle the differences between the various desktops quickly and easily, even those among us in the support department that do not use Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Except.....
You can get the warrant retroactively through the FISA courts. If you happen to be polling, and run across something critical, you file the paperwork, BAM, warrant. If you happen to not, the data is purged.
I do, and it has 256MB. Mind you, I don't run GNOME or KDE on it, but for basic xfce and E17, it does a fine job. Also, do not use the onboard IDE for more than your /boot or you'll feel the PAIN! PCI SATA control card FTW!
I run an Ultra 10 and I concur with this statement.
They play hardball, hit them with a DMCA letter, pull all of the work down or else, and of course file for the maximum penalty per-hit on the stock images. They don't want to play nice, then don't play nice. "
> If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
Yes I can, and Yes I am!
Different jobs entirely. Would you run your Athlon off of AAA batts? My current ARM system does just that.
You mean like this?
Where's my Battlemech?
The dance between malware writers and the security experts seeking to thwart them continues ever on.
That is the sound of a hundred thousand firewall maintainers pulling their hair out, of a hundred thousand company connections having their bandwidth sucked up, of a hundred thousand managers wondering what happened to their deadlines...
A new version of IE, new blatantly obvious security holes to infect our systems with, yay!
There is the difference tho. Solaris, SPARC, MySQL are all open source, and would continue development with Sun gone. This really does little to hurt Suns open source market. I just wish someone would get a consumer-grade SPARC out there. It's more than possible, just nobody's done it.
They have, it's called the ARM.
HP sold Alpha off to Intel, which is the root of the licenses being discussed. Incidentally, the SPARC is open to license, and has already a well developed toolchain as well as a huge support base to work from, and is native 64-bit with the V9.
been 8 years so far, haven't thrown my hands up yet. Of course, being able to throw a dozen CPU's at emulating a single one does help, a lot.
Helps if you know Moores Law:
Transistor count will double every two years.
Nothing about Ghz/Mhz or that jazz. Yes, we have twice the transistor count we did two years ago, more cores per-chip, since we hit a wall in regards to frequency. If you can't go up, you go out.
Ah, so you're a MIPS fan!
Or SPARC perhaps?
And where are the lawsuits against Digital Cameras, USB Flash Drives, portable HDD's, the iPod....
You are incorrect. Win9x did not use a kernel properly, it was built on top of DOS.
NT and Vista both use the OS/2 kernel jointly developed by Microsoft and IBM in the 80's.
More than that my friend, more than that.
Open Source, due to it's open nature, means more people able to repair vulnerabilities much faster. Look at the years it took microsoft to patch vulnerabilities that would enable critical systems to be taken over remotely. Microsoft has a finite crew to find and report bugs, holes and vulnerabilities. I work tech support. Want to know how many people fall victim to virii that exploit vulnerbilities that date back to Windows 98? Open Source also means that when things go wrong, the buck stops here. You can repair it, or work with someone to repair it, while with Microsoft you are victim to their schedule, their level of priority. Your vulnerability not critical enough, bottom of the pile you go.
I can count on 1 hand the number of Linux vulnerabilities that, once discovered, took over a month to repair. I cannot count on both hands + feet the number of Windows vulnerabilities that continue to plague us over a decade after discovery.
Because Windows is an OS, Linux isn't. Linux is a kernel, around which hundreds of OS's, commonly called "Distributions" have been built. If you apply that logic to the Windows Kernel, you are dealing with a lot more OS's as well, from Windows NT 3.1 to Windows Server 2008 and even OS/2 Warp 3.0 for Networks.
Now, you are closer with the Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Edubuntu, the main difference is that there are no features being "turned off" or "turned on" with any of them, just repackaging of which front-end apps you desire upon initial install. The differences between them is more clear from a consumer standpoint as they actually changed the names. They see Ubuntu and Kubuntu, they know they are different. They see Windows Vista... they don't know if it's Home Basic or Home Premium or what. If they went Pindows vs Hindows, instant recognition that something is different.
Absolutely untrue, as all drivers connect to the main unifying force within Linux... the kernel! All Linux distributions have this kernel, meaning all drivers work with all distributions. In addition, the core API's are the same with all distributions, meaning all games can work with all distributions. End result, total win, for our power is not in being exclusive, but being inclusive. You like this gee-whiz bangup feature from Redhat, you use it. Like that feature from Kubuntu, use it. The power is all you!
Offer each of the people a free upgrade to Windows 7!
Let us analyze the following:
>Support for relevant applications, out of the box - not via a separate repository that must be enabled. (Key word, - relevant)
Then you become dependent on a single source for what applications are available. By allowing, and enabling multiple repositories means that you can offer more choice, and choice is good. Imagine a world with only Coke products. No Coffee, no Tea, no 12 year aged Scotch Whisky, just Coke. Do you complain that you need to go to a seperate grocery store to some products?
>A single API for applications so that "Linux" is one platform, not many that must be supported for many versions. Without this, >all efforts to make Linux the mainstream are thinned, customers get confused which leads to less adoption.
A single API is a security exploit waiting to happen. And how would customers get confused, as they don't, in general, program.
>A single desktop, so that Linux is one desktop, not several. Otherwise the other efforts, such as the help desk, marketing and >research all multiply their efforts making everything impractical.
Absolutely incorrect. I work for a very large, public company, which does sell Linux based products. We manage to handle the differences between the various desktops quickly and easily, even those among us in the support department that do not use Linux.