Mac users expect things to just work. Selling Cedega to them would mean lots of pissed off customers who've realised it doesn't actually let you play many games properly.
Yes, most likely. Also note that "optimised" is a relative word, which constitutes a meaningless marketing lie, unless actually compared with real numbers. Last I checked, cedega was slow as hell compared to raw windows, not "optimised".
The problem with windows is that it allows people to use a networked computer without learning anything about security. This is false simplicity, much like allowing someone to begin drive a car on an empty road is false simplicity, when that empty road leads to crowded city junctions.
Linspire following the fundamentally flawed (and now abandoned) windows model of using root accounts for normal users is just dumb.
Actually, it's very FLOSS-unfriendly. The EU courts just recently concluded that MS, as such a big IT company, has absolutely no legitimate reason for not being more open with its APIs. This is AFTER many states and countries imposing fines and other sanctions against MS for its anti-competitive behaviour. Windows gets the job done, but MS uses its product like a weedkiller, nuking the entire ecosystem of software development until nothing is left but concrete with a few holes and their own 1 or 2 favourite plants. At such a critical time in IT's history, this is no way for the majority of IT desktops to be governed. Hence, people hate Microsoft. Hence, dumb-ass Microsoft-pushed articles like this one trying to combat it without actually addressing the real issues.
I'm not sure, but I think dual licensing wouldn't matter. If you're posting your code with an Copyleft license on a site like this, then it's the Free license you're dealing with there. There might be an identical version of the code out there under a different license, or at a different site, but that's no different from selling a bespoke product to different people with different features.
You're right, users make it a problem. However, users are a known issue, which can be and usually are factored in when deciding what to turn on by default. ActiveX is flawed in that it has little or no isolation from the OS (NOT a good thing for a browser, no matter how much in-browser functionality is desired). Moreover, the crazy (non-)security defaults in IE allowed these things to be installed without verification for years, inviting hackers to take over systems. Anyone who understands what activeX is, and how easily it can be abused when browsing with a windows machine, would not buy anything online using a windows desktop that they hadn't personally gone through and locked down with a fine-tooth comb.
That's probably because you didn't read the instructions -- especially the big warning that it would do that, unless you choose option X.
Cures already available
on
Growing Insulin
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
There are multiple cures already available, but they haven't been widely performed for numerous reasons. Pancreas transplants are considered too risky to do unless there is already a major operation (such as kidney transplant) required. Islet cell replacement required cells from aborted foetuses, last I heard.
I understand that each group of researchers will have their own specialisations, and that not everyone COULD work on a cure, even if there was no need for improved/cheaper insulin (which there is). I heartily agree with the grandparent poster though; insulin is a poor substitute for a normal life, and a cure would be MUCH better, so it would be nice to see the main focus going on that. The medical fees that entire nations pay for insulin, needles, swabs, glucometers, diagnostics strips, tablets, etc. -- often four or more of most of these things per day, per patient, at £0.50 per diagnostic strip alone, must make up a pretty large profit for medical companies. I really don't mean to accuse people of being motivated by money, but I do often wonder if this doesn't sometimes subtly cloud their sense of what's really best for the sufferers.
Yes, good point on servers. On the point of computer science though... hmm. I think the point of all science is understanding, which may lead to efficient use, abandonment, or almost any other course of action.
Hmm.. I agree with the need for research and progress, of course. However, I also agree with the parent poster (relative to your post) in the sense that, as far as fighting spam itself goes... if something isn't broke, it's silly to fix it. Most technological progress does cost something in terms of society and the happiness of simplicity, and sometimes that price isn't worth paying.
I guess for me the question is... "what KIND of efficiency are we talking about here? Simplicity for the CPU? Simplicity for developers? Or simplicity for users?"
Perhaps we'll find more insidious forms of spam in future that require this technology to efficiently fight it though, and then it will (assuming it lives up to the hype, which is quite an assumption) undoubtedly be better.
On movies being "luxury products" though, I tend to disagree. It has become quite commonplace for people to discuss movies etc. in the workplace, or to use movie references in general conversation etc. Therefore, to fully participate in society, you almost need to experience the popular movies and songs that others experience. Taking that to its conclusion, we can see that those who can and cannot afford to watch all these things, or perhaps feel uncomfortable in the tight quarters of a movie theatre, for instance, could be second class citizens if forced to deny the existence of simple, modern ways to access this stuff.
I never said anything about it being "invented by big corporations". That's your meme that you're spreading, not mine. Moreover, what you understood about the politics of terminology as a child is no basis for responsible decisions in the modern world of global internet communications.
Is that the word "piracy" is loaded, and that by using it, any writer immediately not only shows bias or misunderstanding of the issues, but also becomes a puppet in big corporations' propaganda show. It's much like the use of the word "war" in reference to the illegal invasion of iraq.
That's a good point actually. Based on that, I'd retract what I said and agree with you. You did demonise my points a bit with words like "dream show" and "flood", which was disappointing, but yeah, good point overall:)
Well, there are people in the IT industry, who keep up to date with technology, study new ideas, learn from security mistakes that others in the industry have made etc., and then there are people who got hired to run windows servers because they were the best in the office at running scandisk, and had the time to do a certification. This kind of article is aimed at educating those who SHOULD know better if they are paid to do a sysadmin job, but don't.
Time for a more flexible solution?
on
Freedb.org Ending
·
· Score: 1
Maybe, with this change, and other changes such as individual track downloads and other media mp3 players, DVD-Audio, etc., it's time for something better than a CD-Audio database? Aren't all the tools available now to recognise the actual songs' "fingerprints"? Couldn't a more flexible database, with lyrics etc. be built with that technology?
It's a terrible analogy. It's suitable for a introducing a complete beginner to how their email gets sent or something, should they ask. But when you're deciding on how the technology will be governed in future, a much higher level of understanding (and indeed a much more diligent effort to understand) is required. The internet is not about pipes. It's a packet-based, switching network, with smart routers, quality of service, etc. Moreover, it's a new frontier for social communications, like writing, phones, radio and TV, with every decision having vast social implications. No one without a deep understanding of ALL of these concepts should be making decisions on the future of the net. In the absence of such people in government (which may be the case for a generation or more), I'd rather have politicians stay out of it. Given the presence of greedy corporations trying to manipulate the lack of government expertise however, neutrality seems like a good stop-gap measure.
Well, no. You read it that way, and I agree it could be interpreted that way, but I think to actually choose that interpretation from the other more reasonable interpretations is to stretch beyond what I actually said.
Well, that's not such a bad idea. Viewers certainly want an enhanced sense of realism in their movies/TV, and it has been argued (and personally, I agree) that the reason violence on TV is so popular is that it's NOT realistic enough. That is, by seeing people shot on TV, but not seeing the horrible aftermath, like crying friends and devastated families etc., the attack isn't seen to do the harm that it really does. Perhaps if viewers understood the situations that such things lead to a little more, they'd be less likely to see it as glamorous. This probably applies to army recruitment too;)
Slashdot Mirror
"taking as long as they want" is what they do in the release/support phase.
Mac users expect things to just work. Selling Cedega to them would mean lots of pissed off customers who've realised it doesn't actually let you play many games properly.
Yes, most likely. Also note that "optimised" is a relative word, which constitutes a meaningless marketing lie, unless actually compared with real numbers. Last I checked, cedega was slow as hell compared to raw windows, not "optimised".
As long as it deserves to, probably ;)
:)
But, I'm glad to hear that I (as another poster who mentioned this) was wrong, and it's been fixed
Didn't Bill say that he wanted to put a turd on every desktop?
The problem with windows is that it allows people to use a networked computer without learning anything about security. This is false simplicity, much like allowing someone to begin drive a car on an empty road is false simplicity, when that empty road leads to crowded city junctions.
Linspire following the fundamentally flawed (and now abandoned) windows model of using root accounts for normal users is just dumb.
Actually, it's very FLOSS-unfriendly. The EU courts just recently concluded that MS, as such a big IT company, has absolutely no legitimate reason for not being more open with its APIs. This is AFTER many states and countries imposing fines and other sanctions against MS for its anti-competitive behaviour. Windows gets the job done, but MS uses its product like a weedkiller, nuking the entire ecosystem of software development until nothing is left but concrete with a few holes and their own 1 or 2 favourite plants. At such a critical time in IT's history, this is no way for the majority of IT desktops to be governed. Hence, people hate Microsoft. Hence, dumb-ass Microsoft-pushed articles like this one trying to combat it without actually addressing the real issues.
I'm not sure, but I think dual licensing wouldn't matter. If you're posting your code with an Copyleft license on a site like this, then it's the Free license you're dealing with there. There might be an identical version of the code out there under a different license, or at a different site, but that's no different from selling a bespoke product to different people with different features.
What you don't seem to realise is that IE is embedded in microsoft's email clients, and they therefore share most of the same issues.
You're right, users make it a problem. However, users are a known issue, which can be and usually are factored in when deciding what to turn on by default. ActiveX is flawed in that it has little or no isolation from the OS (NOT a good thing for a browser, no matter how much in-browser functionality is desired). Moreover, the crazy (non-)security defaults in IE allowed these things to be installed without verification for years, inviting hackers to take over systems. Anyone who understands what activeX is, and how easily it can be abused when browsing with a windows machine, would not buy anything online using a windows desktop that they hadn't personally gone through and locked down with a fine-tooth comb.
That's probably because you didn't read the instructions -- especially the big warning that it would do that, unless you choose option X.
There are multiple cures already available, but they haven't been widely performed for numerous reasons. Pancreas transplants are considered too risky to do unless there is already a major operation (such as kidney transplant) required. Islet cell replacement required cells from aborted foetuses, last I heard.
I understand that each group of researchers will have their own specialisations, and that not everyone COULD work on a cure, even if there was no need for improved/cheaper insulin (which there is). I heartily agree with the grandparent poster though; insulin is a poor substitute for a normal life, and a cure would be MUCH better, so it would be nice to see the main focus going on that. The medical fees that entire nations pay for insulin, needles, swabs, glucometers, diagnostics strips, tablets, etc. -- often four or more of most of these things per day, per patient, at £0.50 per diagnostic strip alone, must make up a pretty large profit for medical companies. I really don't mean to accuse people of being motivated by money, but I do often wonder if this doesn't sometimes subtly cloud their sense of what's really best for the sufferers.
Yes, good point on servers. On the point of computer science though... hmm. I think the point of all science is understanding, which may lead to efficient use, abandonment, or almost any other course of action.
It's an awkward thing that people used to use before Broadcatching. There was also a very short-lived marketing upgrade for it, known as HDTV.
Hmm.. I agree with the need for research and progress, of course. However, I also agree with the parent poster (relative to your post) in the sense that, as far as fighting spam itself goes... if something isn't broke, it's silly to fix it. Most technological progress does cost something in terms of society and the happiness of simplicity, and sometimes that price isn't worth paying.
I guess for me the question is... "what KIND of efficiency are we talking about here? Simplicity for the CPU? Simplicity for developers? Or simplicity for users?"
Perhaps we'll find more insidious forms of spam in future that require this technology to efficiently fight it though, and then it will (assuming it lives up to the hype, which is quite an assumption) undoubtedly be better.
Good point, on photos in a shop.
On movies being "luxury products" though, I tend to disagree. It has become quite commonplace for people to discuss movies etc. in the workplace, or to use movie references in general conversation etc. Therefore, to fully participate in society, you almost need to experience the popular movies and songs that others experience. Taking that to its conclusion, we can see that those who can and cannot afford to watch all these things, or perhaps feel uncomfortable in the tight quarters of a movie theatre, for instance, could be second class citizens if forced to deny the existence of simple, modern ways to access this stuff.
I never said anything about it being "invented by big corporations". That's your meme that you're spreading, not mine. Moreover, what you understood about the politics of terminology as a child is no basis for responsible decisions in the modern world of global internet communications.
Hopefully their ability to enjoy sex hasn't been going downhill since 12
Is that the word "piracy" is loaded, and that by using it, any writer immediately not only shows bias or misunderstanding of the issues, but also becomes a puppet in big corporations' propaganda show. It's much like the use of the word "war" in reference to the illegal invasion of iraq.
That's a good point actually. Based on that, I'd retract what I said and agree with you. You did demonise my points a bit with words like "dream show" and "flood", which was disappointing, but yeah, good point overall :)
Well, there are people in the IT industry, who keep up to date with technology, study new ideas, learn from security mistakes that others in the industry have made etc., and then there are people who got hired to run windows servers because they were the best in the office at running scandisk, and had the time to do a certification. This kind of article is aimed at educating those who SHOULD know better if they are paid to do a sysadmin job, but don't.
Maybe, with this change, and other changes such as individual track downloads and other media mp3 players, DVD-Audio, etc., it's time for something better than a CD-Audio database? Aren't all the tools available now to recognise the actual songs' "fingerprints"? Couldn't a more flexible database, with lyrics etc. be built with that technology?
It's a terrible analogy. It's suitable for a introducing a complete beginner to how their email gets sent or something, should they ask. But when you're deciding on how the technology will be governed in future, a much higher level of understanding (and indeed a much more diligent effort to understand) is required. The internet is not about pipes. It's a packet-based, switching network, with smart routers, quality of service, etc. Moreover, it's a new frontier for social communications, like writing, phones, radio and TV, with every decision having vast social implications. No one without a deep understanding of ALL of these concepts should be making decisions on the future of the net. In the absence of such people in government (which may be the case for a generation or more), I'd rather have politicians stay out of it. Given the presence of greedy corporations trying to manipulate the lack of government expertise however, neutrality seems like a good stop-gap measure.
Well, no. You read it that way, and I agree it could be interpreted that way, but I think to actually choose that interpretation from the other more reasonable interpretations is to stretch beyond what I actually said.
Well, that's not such a bad idea. Viewers certainly want an enhanced sense of realism in their movies/TV, and it has been argued (and personally, I agree) that the reason violence on TV is so popular is that it's NOT realistic enough. That is, by seeing people shot on TV, but not seeing the horrible aftermath, like crying friends and devastated families etc., the attack isn't seen to do the harm that it really does. Perhaps if viewers understood the situations that such things lead to a little more, they'd be less likely to see it as glamorous. This probably applies to army recruitment too ;)