-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Easy to duplicate? I think not. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v0.9.8 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE4IEh8KV5kReY9sP8RAn8JAKCZKGZ23q5U8NBxFrVyQ+ DNiYollQCfZ8vP pqUx8DUPME1AjzB1bqdDD08= =rvgZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Who in there right mind would USE NT's SAM to store web users info.
Let me clarify that a bit: Who in their right mind would use NT?
I mean, you're trying to apply rational decisions to people who are using something (NT) that they would not be using if they were thinking rationally.
So, yes, it seems quite possible that the kind of people who would use NT as a web server platform may well be using NT authentication. IIS/MS-SQL kind of steers you that way, too. The real question is whether this licensing applies anyhow, even if you're not using NT authentication (i.e., if you're using another auth scheme), which is not entirely clear. Or what if you're authenticating from another Microsoft-based source (i.e., from a table in SQL Server)?
Oh, and FYI, NT can take 24 hours or more to CHKDSK a large NTFS drive, under certain circumstances (I personally saw a 1.5 hour CHKDSK on a 4 MB partition).
At least for servers, there is no *(@#(*@ way you're going to convince me that the buggy black box that is Windows NT is cheaper to deploy and maintain than Linux.
NT is notorious for acquiring mysterious problems that invoke downtime and long, tedious sessions of trying to figure out what the proper chant is that will make the problem go away.
I've been here pretty much since the beginning (see my UID). I can tell you that the biggest "decline" I have seen in the relatively short history of Slashdot was about 8 months ago, when it began to be infested by Windows advocates.
When Slashdot started, it was pretty much a given that everyone had no use for Microsoft's rubbish, apart from playing games (I don't even use it for that). So, there were no real flamewars. For some reason, even Linux, BSD and Solaris users were able to get along all right at that time (for the most part).
Now, astroturfers and Bill Gates fanboys routinely whine about anti-MS bias. Get over it! You wanna read pro-MS stuff? Go to ZDNet.
Windows 2000 is the successor to NT 4, not Windows 98. Later in 2000, Microsoft is planning to ship "Millennium," the final DOS-based Windows product.
That said, you are exactly right; as PC prices continue to plummet, Microsoft is gradually pricing themselves out of the OEM market. If the reports about Corel Linux are correct, expect to see major gains in Linux OEM deals in 6 months to a year.
Linux is already beginning to own the ultra-low end (check pricewatch.com; they had to create a separate "PC - Linux" category because of this.
Oh, one more thing, at the risk of stating the obvious: you'd have to be high to use NT for web serving after this move. And, consider this: what do you think the license for NT 6 will be like, given that Microsoft has been gradually eliminating concurrent licensing?
Go to Preferences -> Customize Homepage, and there is a widget that lets you select what date format you want to use. Most of the options include the year.
Gasse promised to provide free copies to any PC manufacter willing to pre-install Be.
But it would be to risky to presume that that policy will continue indefinitely. With Linux, you need not have any such fear.
This announcement is simply the inevitable result of economic forces, and is a continuation of what we've seen for many months on the ultra-low end of the PC market (check pricewatch.com) PC makers are starting to preload Linux, in order to guarantee themselves $0 cost for OS licensing.
The big guys will probably make the install a bit more idiot-proof (KDM/KDE, predefined user account, no services enabled, StarOffice, icons on the desktop for all important stuff), but I'm pretty sure that this is where they are headed. They see the writing on the wall. You just can't make money selling low-end boxes with a $50-80 Windows license attached.
We already know Qt/Qtlib/KDE is non-DFSG compliant.
I'd just like to point out that this is only correct if you are talking about obsolete versions of Qt. Qt 2.x, which is the current released version, is licensed under the QPL, which *is* DFSG-compliant. Check out libqt2 2.0.2-0.1, which is *not* in non-free.
Re:Just what the hell is that supposed to mean?
on
Which BSD?
·
· Score: 2
I wasn't arguing that Linux supports as many architectures as NetBSD; I was simply trying to refute his statement (as I interpreted it) that Linux was limited to "WinTel hardware."
Maybe that's not what he meant; I'm just so used to reading anti-Linux flames in BSD-related threads that perhaps I'm too quick on the gun.
I don't understand why it seems that BSD users feel the need to constantly attack Linux and Linux users. They (BSDs and Linux) each have their uses.
I've seen several comments here (that have been moderated up) that attack as childish the idea that non-free software is not worth using.
Some people feel that Linux is gaining popularity not because of its Freeness, but because of hype.
Others, who have adopted Linux because of its Freeness, have apparently forgotten why proprietary software is bad. That's not to say that it should never be used; it's simply to be avoided when possible and practical.
Remember these bad things about proprietary operating systems:
The user is at the mercy of the vendor for bug fixes
The user is at the mercy of the vendor for continued development
The user is at the mercy of the vendor for support
The user cannot use the software however he/she wishes; he/she must use it within the confines of the EULA
The user cannot share the software with others
Well, these all apply to individual programs as well as operating systems, folks.
So, the question isn't whether one should use proprietary software on a Free operarting system when it is most practical (i.e., if there were a proprietary Quicken for Linux, and one needed online banking functionality). The question is whether one should use proprietary software when a perfectly good Free alternative exists.
For me, the answer is no. I may not agree with RMS on everything, but I do think he's right about the direction we should be moving. And I'm never going to move back in the direction of proprietary software.
In addition to what the other posters have said here about GnuPG support in mutt, keep in mind that you can use GnuPG with just about any PGP 2.6-capable program by using the PGP wrapper, pgpgpg.
BSD has always been an open source license, except in the eye's of FSF, which cannot dictate as OSI has approved the BSDL and the community approves OSI's definition of open source.
This is patently untrue, as anyone who has actually read What is Free Software? knows. The only criticisms the FSF has of the BSD license are:
It doesn't keep the software free (i.e., it can be proprietarized at any time, without the consent of the authors).
It previously had the "obnoxious advertising clause," which lives on in software licensed under older versions of the BSD license.
The FSF has always conceded that the BSD license is a Free Software license; it's just not a copyleft license.
Of course, there is no way to know for sure, but I believe that had Microsoft not monopolized the industry, there would have been a more money made, and a healthier industry.
Why is this story posted on slashdot? Is it simply to provide people with a forum to make snide remarks about Microsoft? Aren't there enough legitimate opportunities to do that already?
Uhh...*you* may not have a sense of humor, but the richest company in the US getting no takers on its offer of licenses for warez is pretty amusing to most people.
In case you don't realize this guys, 20000 geeks' livelihoods depend directly upon Microsoft. Twenty thousand employees and their families are directly influenced by software piracy.
Oh, gee, get out the hankie. Excuse me while I puke.
Did you ever stop to think about how many careers Microsoft *destroyed* with its illegal tactics?
I don't use proprietary software. I don't think people should pirate. But I really don't care what happens to Microsoft, its employees, or the mindless lemmings who have built it into the monstrosity it is.
Interesting side-discussion (maybe): I mean, a little bit of everything. My CD collection ranges from all of the above, through Johnny Cash, and back around to The Cure. How many c0derZ have similarly wide-ranging tastes (i.e. not just listening to one style of music)?
I suspect quite a few; most people I work with have a pretty wide range of musical tastes. People often comment on the CDs on my desk, which include Wesley Willis, Jean-Luc Ponty, Ween, The Judds, Camper van Beethoven, Anthrax, Joe Satriani, Robert Johnson and King's X.
I also like Beastie Boys, Rush...and Bluegrass.:-)
About the only music I don't like is pop, adult contemporary and hip-hop.
Well, I think there are few serious people who would not concede that NT is good for *something*.
And, it kind of makes sense, doesn't it, that with Microsoft's concern for things like DirectX on NT (Yes, I realize Quake uses OpenGL), that NT *would* make a good development platform for *games*?
Of course, many of us have to do other things with our machines (particularly servers) than gaming (bummer, eh?). In those cases, there are few areas where NT really excels, IMHO.
It does have a pretty decent interface (though not as good as OS/2's), but the inconsistency of its behavior makes it unsuitable for most server tasks, IMO. The most frustrating thing with NT is how installing one program seems to incur a 20% chance of breaking something, somewhere in the system. Example: a guy who installed SQL Server, and it broke his InterDev menus. Just weird stuff like that.
And, there is one thing that I know from having to maintain NT machines for the past 3 years: Blue Screens Happen. Not on every machine, but consistently on some. And situations like the horrific SP2 release make it hazardous to even install fixes.
I hope id continues to use NT, as long as it really is the best solution for them. But, I hope they keep looking at Linux, because it will surpass NT in even these areas in a few years.
Slashdot Mirror
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Easy to duplicate? I think not. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v0.9.8 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE4IEh8KV5kReY9sP8RAn8JAKCZKGZ23q5U8NBxFrVyQ+ DNiYollQCfZ8vP pqUx8DUPME1AjzB1bqdDD08= =rvgZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Let me clarify that a bit: Who in their right mind would use NT?
I mean, you're trying to apply rational decisions to people who are using something (NT) that they would not be using if they were thinking rationally.
So, yes, it seems quite possible that the kind of people who would use NT as a web server platform may well be using NT authentication. IIS/MS-SQL kind of steers you that way, too. The real question is whether this licensing applies anyhow, even if you're not using NT authentication (i.e., if you're using another auth scheme), which is not entirely clear. Or what if you're authenticating from another Microsoft-based source (i.e., from a table in SQL Server)?
Oh, and FYI, NT can take 24 hours or more to CHKDSK a large NTFS drive, under certain circumstances (I personally saw a 1.5 hour CHKDSK on a 4 MB partition).
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
NT is notorious for acquiring mysterious problems that invoke downtime and long, tedious sessions of trying to figure out what the proper chant is that will make the problem go away.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
When Slashdot started, it was pretty much a given that everyone had no use for Microsoft's rubbish, apart from playing games (I don't even use it for that). So, there were no real flamewars. For some reason, even Linux, BSD and Solaris users were able to get along all right at that time (for the most part).
Now, astroturfers and Bill Gates fanboys routinely whine about anti-MS bias. Get over it! You wanna read pro-MS stuff? Go to ZDNet.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Windows 2000 is the successor to NT 4, not Windows 98. Later in 2000, Microsoft is planning to ship "Millennium," the final DOS-based Windows product.
That said, you are exactly right; as PC prices continue to plummet, Microsoft is gradually pricing themselves out of the OEM market. If the reports about Corel Linux are correct, expect to see major gains in Linux OEM deals in 6 months to a year.
Linux is already beginning to own the ultra-low end (check pricewatch.com; they had to create a separate "PC - Linux" category because of this.
Oh, one more thing, at the risk of stating the obvious: you'd have to be high to use NT for web serving after this move. And, consider this: what do you think the license for NT 6 will be like, given that Microsoft has been gradually eliminating concurrent licensing?
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
AFAIK, .nsf file extensions are used by Lotus Domino. Maybe that's what they were using before, and that was a stale link?
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Go to Preferences -> Customize Homepage, and there is a widget that lets you select what date format you want to use. Most of the options include the year.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
But it would be to risky to presume that that policy will continue indefinitely. With Linux, you need not have any such fear.
This announcement is simply the inevitable result of economic forces, and is a continuation of what we've seen for many months on the ultra-low end of the PC market (check pricewatch.com) PC makers are starting to preload Linux, in order to guarantee themselves $0 cost for OS licensing.
The big guys will probably make the install a bit more idiot-proof (KDM/KDE, predefined user account, no services enabled, StarOffice, icons on the desktop for all important stuff), but I'm pretty sure that this is where they are headed. They see the writing on the wall. You just can't make money selling low-end boxes with a $50-80 Windows license attached.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
I'd just like to point out that this is only correct if you are talking about obsolete versions of Qt. Qt 2.x, which is the current released version, is licensed under the QPL, which *is* DFSG-compliant. Check out libqt2 2.0.2-0.1, which is *not* in non-free.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Maybe that's not what he meant; I'm just so used to reading anti-Linux flames in BSD-related threads that perhaps I'm too quick on the gun.
I don't understand why it seems that BSD users feel the need to constantly attack Linux and Linux users. They (BSDs and Linux) each have their uses.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Linux is the "WinTel hardware world"?!?
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several platforms that Linux runs on:
- PPC
- x86
- ARM
- SPARC
- Alpha
You BSD guys just never give it a rest, do you?--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Even http://www.kdeforum.org/ is asking for a username/password.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
What?!? Did you really just say that?
Roman Catholics, Unitarians, Pentecostals, Mormons, Coptics, Presbyterians and Anglicans are pretty homogenous?
Apart from the common belief in Jesus Christ as the Savior, I see quite a bit of heterogeny.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Some people feel that Linux is gaining popularity not because of its Freeness, but because of hype.
Others, who have adopted Linux because of its Freeness, have apparently forgotten why proprietary software is bad. That's not to say that it should never be used; it's simply to be avoided when possible and practical.
Remember these bad things about proprietary operating systems:
- The user is at the mercy of the vendor for bug fixes
- The user is at the mercy of the vendor for continued development
- The user is at the mercy of the vendor for support
- The user cannot use the software however he/she wishes; he/she must use it within the confines of the EULA
- The user cannot share the software with others
Well, these all apply to individual programs as well as operating systems, folks.So, the question isn't whether one should use proprietary software on a Free operarting system when it is most practical (i.e., if there were a proprietary Quicken for Linux, and one needed online banking functionality). The question is whether one should use proprietary software when a perfectly good Free alternative exists.
For me, the answer is no. I may not agree with RMS on everything, but I do think he's right about the direction we should be moving. And I'm never going to move back in the direction of proprietary software.
For a refresher: http://www.gnu.org/
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
In addition to what the other posters have said here about GnuPG support in mutt, keep in mind that you can use GnuPG with just about any PGP 2.6-capable program by using the PGP wrapper, pgpgpg.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
This is patently untrue, as anyone who has actually read What is Free Software? knows. The only criticisms the FSF has of the BSD license are:
- It doesn't keep the software free (i.e., it can be proprietarized at any time, without the consent of the authors).
- It previously had the "obnoxious advertising clause," which lives on in software licensed under older versions of the BSD license.
The FSF has always conceded that the BSD license is a Free Software license; it's just not a copyleft license.--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Do you want to restart now?
Yes -- No
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Sendmail is still necessary for certain special cases, like when you need BITNET support, or something else out of the ordinary.
But, I think for most users, Exim is a better choice.
If you haven't played with Exim before, you really ought to check it out.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Of course, there is no way to know for sure, but I believe that had Microsoft not monopolized the industry, there would have been a more money made, and a healthier industry.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Uhh...*you* may not have a sense of humor, but the richest company in the US getting no takers on its offer of licenses for warez is pretty amusing to most people.
In case you don't realize this guys, 20000 geeks' livelihoods depend directly upon Microsoft. Twenty thousand employees and their families are directly influenced by software piracy.
Oh, gee, get out the hankie. Excuse me while I puke.
Did you ever stop to think about how many careers Microsoft *destroyed* with its illegal tactics?
I don't use proprietary software. I don't think people should pirate. But I really don't care what happens to Microsoft, its employees, or the mindless lemmings who have built it into the monstrosity it is.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
I suspect quite a few; most people I work with have a pretty wide range of musical tastes. People often comment on the CDs on my desk, which include Wesley Willis, Jean-Luc Ponty, Ween, The Judds, Camper van Beethoven, Anthrax, Joe Satriani, Robert Johnson and King's X.
I also like Beastie Boys, Rush...and Bluegrass. :-)
About the only music I don't like is pop, adult contemporary and hip-hop.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Tree my ass in front of me and my cash money!
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
And, it kind of makes sense, doesn't it, that with Microsoft's concern for things like DirectX on NT (Yes, I realize Quake uses OpenGL), that NT *would* make a good development platform for *games*?
Of course, many of us have to do other things with our machines (particularly servers) than gaming (bummer, eh?). In those cases, there are few areas where NT really excels, IMHO.
It does have a pretty decent interface (though not as good as OS/2's), but the inconsistency of its behavior makes it unsuitable for most server tasks, IMO. The most frustrating thing with NT is how installing one program seems to incur a 20% chance of breaking something, somewhere in the system. Example: a guy who installed SQL Server, and it broke his InterDev menus. Just weird stuff like that.
And, there is one thing that I know from having to maintain NT machines for the past 3 years: Blue Screens Happen. Not on every machine, but consistently on some. And situations like the horrific SP2 release make it hazardous to even install fixes.
I hope id continues to use NT, as long as it really is the best solution for them. But, I hope they keep looking at Linux, because it will surpass NT in even these areas in a few years.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
Maybe I'm spoiled, because I have a Matrox Millennium G200, but XFree86 works great!
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page