I would say just the opposite. For me, it's all about the community which RMS had a big part in building. Linux is just a kernel; I use Debian, and GNU, and other Free Software, that's well engineered, developed in public, supported in public, etc. As far as the kernel underneath it all goes, I really don't care if it's Linux or HURD or some BeOS clone, or something else, as long as it's under a Free license.
evolution of a 100% free software-based Italian publisher.
The use some proprietary language called "Italian."
I think italian is a small price to pay, considering that this must be the first example of a fully functional publisher based in software, and Free Software at that! AI of this magnitude is revolutionary, not evolutionary.
Actually, when the ODF thing was starting in MA, Peter Quinn stated that one of the criteria an MS solution would have to meet would be an open, standardised development process that was NOT steered by one company. So, if they stick to that, embrace and extend would (should, asssuming it's written and enforced well) be impossible.
The question here is... whose investment is it really? Microsofts? No. Not when they're a monopoly; not when they've been convicted in court of hurting society, and continue to flout that ruling. Microsoft is the kind of company that refuses to lower prices for basic software from a MONTH's wages in developing countries, and then gives a little back to that country when the politicians and other people who can further Microsoft's monopoly are looking.
They've got a lot of money, sure, but it's OUR money, and it's our technology their hampering to further their own R&D.
Please don't fall into their game of using the word "piracy" for sharing data with other people in your society. We can debate all we like about whether that sharing is right, and we may even argue that it morally amounts to theft, but the *act* is sharing, and that's what it should be called. Regardless of the origins of the word piracy, it has a negative and unhelpful connotation.
The thing about the internet is that it opens up the media, and gives us the ability to hear directly from industry insiders. In contrast, the mainstream media has stagnated, settling for a relatively small ring of sources, interpreted, filtered and censored by an even smaller ring of reporters and media channels.
The question for me though is, how many of the people who read "internet news" are actively tracking down information from sources they respect (though not necessarily trust) vs. those who simply read Yahoo or Google or MSN(BC)'s news feed.
I think by dead, the author means that microsoft is failing to move forward; to grow; to thrive. Microsoft having fully decomposed and been recycled in the form of some more benevolent creatures is a nice dream, but failing to continue their strides towards monopolistic practices is good enough for a while:)
The problem (apart from the microsoft-induced part, with useless and/or closed formats) is word processing itself. What we all need to do is move towards document processing, which will represent data in a way that is meaningful to computers (titles, sections, subsections, addresses, names, code, haiku, etc.), and format it for printing WHEN printing, automatically. This way, you can easily load it into another program, and you don't have to worry about whether the page is too big or too small, or if it'll print the same as it did for the other person; because, an address is still an address, and a section is still a section. If you print it in your organisation, it can be printed in the format YOUR organisation likes, not the sender's organisation's format. Of course, there is still PDF etc. for exact layouts, but that is solving an entirely different issue.
If anyone is still confused about all this, I'd recommend a few days' playing around with LyX.
It's not just nicer from a "human point of view"; it's simply more appropriate, technically, for the data it contains. Microsoft's half-hearted attempt at an XML format is like storing cars on a keyring with more keyrings attached: you can put all the parts on there, if you try hard enough, but it just makes no sense, for man OR machine.
Maybe they figured that questioning an honest man's integrity, costing him his job, and risking his mental wellbeing when he's not used to media pressure was enough for a little while. Don't worry, Microsoft will be back to playing hardball on this soon though.
"Linux" still doesn't have a working Flash at all, actually. "Linux/x86" does, but that's only a (dwindling) subset of the wider Linux platform, which includes Linux/PowerPC, Linux/AMD-64, etc.
MSNBC is a Microsoft shill. They're also the ones that started the completely lie that Linux would be just as plagued by viruses as Windows is, if it ever became as widely used. This has no foundation in reality, and belies the fact that Windows is constantly adding unix-like security features, just to try to catch up.
I don't know about fearmongering, but it's certainly going to some trouble to make a false accusation. Either it slipped through their "detection grid", or it was detected and ignored. It can't have been both.
You're almost certainly joking, but it's worth pointing out that a lot of corruptions start with well-intended abuse. It may seem reasonable to encourage a politician to do the right thing by unorthodox means, but that only leads to further corruption. What we need to do is expose any failures in the system that lead to politicians doing the wrong thing.
I don't know if I'd call this advertising. Democracy Player *seems* to be a non-commercial project. The code is open, and the development model is relatively open too. I'm not quite convinced of their openness and intentions though, since their channel guide seems to be closed. If it remains closed, it's a way for them to lock-in customers, AND producers, by building up a large database of media that no one else can put into their own products. More importantly, the channel guide URL can't be changed in the software, so users can't set it to an independent channel guide that they might prefer. They have a lot of work on their plates right now though, so I'll give them a little more time to sort this all out before I judge them too harshly:)
The last windows version was pretty bad. However, the linux version at least uses different user interface technology, and the last release was largely focused on stability. I just used it for a few hours on Linux, and for a first version, it's pretty good. Not without its faults, but download it, try it, file bug reports, and keep on using it 'til they're fixed; I'm sure you won't be disappointed:)
That's certainly true, because Microsoft don't consider webservices a basic part of servers in the internet age, so the mugs that use insecure windows OS's have to pay extra (often for a limited number of clients). Meanwhile, real IT professionals (read: unix people) know exactly what a webserver is, and can build their own if it comes right down to it. Except, we don't; instead, we cooperate and share technology, like mature professionals do.
Slashdot Mirror
I would say just the opposite. For me, it's all about the community which RMS had a big part in building. Linux is just a kernel; I use Debian, and GNU, and other Free Software, that's well engineered, developed in public, supported in public, etc. As far as the kernel underneath it all goes, I really don't care if it's Linux or HURD or some BeOS clone, or something else, as long as it's under a Free license.
Yep. It's a terrible situation. But at least we can take heart, knowing that our countries all have something in common
Actually, this is more commonly known as version control. It was around way before MS Office implemented it, and their implementation is pretty poor.
I think italian is a small price to pay, considering that this must be the first example of a fully functional publisher based in software, and Free Software at that! AI of this magnitude is revolutionary, not evolutionary.
Actually, when the ODF thing was starting in MA, Peter Quinn stated that one of the criteria an MS solution would have to meet would be an open, standardised development process that was NOT steered by one company. So, if they stick to that, embrace and extend would (should, asssuming it's written and enforced well) be impossible.
The question here is... whose investment is it really? Microsofts? No. Not when they're a monopoly; not when they've been convicted in court of hurting society, and continue to flout that ruling. Microsoft is the kind of company that refuses to lower prices for basic software from a MONTH's wages in developing countries, and then gives a little back to that country when the politicians and other people who can further Microsoft's monopoly are looking.
They've got a lot of money, sure, but it's OUR money, and it's our technology their hampering to further their own R&D.
Please don't fall into their game of using the word "piracy" for sharing data with other people in your society. We can debate all we like about whether that sharing is right, and we may even argue that it morally amounts to theft, but the *act* is sharing, and that's what it should be called. Regardless of the origins of the word piracy, it has a negative and unhelpful connotation.
The thing about the internet is that it opens up the media, and gives us the ability to hear directly from industry insiders. In contrast, the mainstream media has stagnated, settling for a relatively small ring of sources, interpreted, filtered and censored by an even smaller ring of reporters and media channels.
The question for me though is, how many of the people who read "internet news" are actively tracking down information from sources they respect (though not necessarily trust) vs. those who simply read Yahoo or Google or MSN(BC)'s news feed.
That's because you're not watching the big picture, which is EXACTLY what that statement was intended to warn about.
I think by dead, the author means that microsoft is failing to move forward; to grow; to thrive. Microsoft having fully decomposed and been recycled in the form of some more benevolent creatures is a nice dream, but failing to continue their strides towards monopolistic practices is good enough for a while :)
You mean, for you? It depends on how interested you are. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
The problem (apart from the microsoft-induced part, with useless and/or closed formats) is word processing itself. What we all need to do is move towards document processing, which will represent data in a way that is meaningful to computers (titles, sections, subsections, addresses, names, code, haiku, etc.), and format it for printing WHEN printing, automatically. This way, you can easily load it into another program, and you don't have to worry about whether the page is too big or too small, or if it'll print the same as it did for the other person; because, an address is still an address, and a section is still a section. If you print it in your organisation, it can be printed in the format YOUR organisation likes, not the sender's organisation's format. Of course, there is still PDF etc. for exact layouts, but that is solving an entirely different issue.
If anyone is still confused about all this, I'd recommend a few days' playing around with LyX.
It's not just nicer from a "human point of view"; it's simply more appropriate, technically, for the data it contains. Microsoft's half-hearted attempt at an XML format is like storing cars on a keyring with more keyrings attached: you can put all the parts on there, if you try hard enough, but it just makes no sense, for man OR machine.
Maybe they figured that questioning an honest man's integrity, costing him his job, and risking his mental wellbeing when he's not used to media pressure was enough for a little while. Don't worry, Microsoft will be back to playing hardball on this soon though.
You must be new to real IT circles. Welcome.
"Linux" still doesn't have a working Flash at all, actually. "Linux/x86" does, but that's only a (dwindling) subset of the wider Linux platform, which includes Linux/PowerPC, Linux/AMD-64, etc.
Welcome to the lovely new human endeavour called marketing
MSNBC is a Microsoft shill. They're also the ones that started the completely lie that Linux would be just as plagued by viruses as Windows is, if it ever became as widely used. This has no foundation in reality, and belies the fact that Windows is constantly adding unix-like security features, just to try to catch up.
Yep, retrovirus. Except, when MSNBC is writing about it, it's a self-referential document.
I don't know about fearmongering, but it's certainly going to some trouble to make a false accusation. Either it slipped through their "detection grid", or it was detected and ignored. It can't have been both.
You're almost certainly joking, but it's worth pointing out that a lot of corruptions start with well-intended abuse. It may seem reasonable to encourage a politician to do the right thing by unorthodox means, but that only leads to further corruption. What we need to do is expose any failures in the system that lead to politicians doing the wrong thing.
I don't know if I'd call this advertising. Democracy Player *seems* to be a non-commercial project. The code is open, and the development model is relatively open too. I'm not quite convinced of their openness and intentions though, since their channel guide seems to be closed. If it remains closed, it's a way for them to lock-in customers, AND producers, by building up a large database of media that no one else can put into their own products. More importantly, the channel guide URL can't be changed in the software, so users can't set it to an independent channel guide that they might prefer. They have a lot of work on their plates right now though, so I'll give them a little more time to sort this all out before I judge them too harshly :)
The last windows version was pretty bad. However, the linux version at least uses different user interface technology, and the last release was largely focused on stability. I just used it for a few hours on Linux, and for a first version, it's pretty good. Not without its faults, but download it, try it, file bug reports, and keep on using it 'til they're fixed; I'm sure you won't be disappointed :)
Depends. Who is doing the calling? Other professional admins, them, or microsoft?
That's certainly true, because Microsoft don't consider webservices a basic part of servers in the internet age, so the mugs that use insecure windows OS's have to pay extra (often for a limited number of clients). Meanwhile, real IT professionals (read: unix people) know exactly what a webserver is, and can build their own if it comes right down to it. Except, we don't; instead, we cooperate and share technology, like mature professionals do.