It's not that people here think the GPL is the greatest invention ever which gets you moderated down. It's that you continually attack the GPL in a trollish fashion that gets you moderated down.
Wow, not only do GPV zealots try to redefine the word 'free' to suit their ends, they now also redefine 'trollish' to mean 'accurate' too.
to help it target -- for reeducation -- the most teed-off of its fed-up fliers (Emphasis mine.)
Well, ain't that typical? "Reeducate" people who may have problems with your outfit. Don't bother fixing the bloody problem that generated the "bad attitude."
Whatever did actually happen with the Northwest "sickout" anyway? What proof was there? (I recall it happening in the middle of flu season that was in the news.. hrmmm). And what of the hard drive siezure/searches? Yep, *THOSE* sure were needed to collect things from web boards & usenet postings, weren't they?
I'm not pro-union, but I am pro-freedom and anti-stupidity.
Great! Now I'll have that other hand free for... well, you know.
Jokes aside, a one-handed (which a one-fingered is as well) keyboard would be useful. The other hand may be on a mouse/trackball/trackpad. Or holding a telephone handset.. or a slice of pizza.. or a fork.. or..
It's not the regular keys that are problem, generally. One can use a QWERTY keyboard one-fingered with hunt-n-peck, but combination keystrokes (those with shift, control, and alt) can be a very real stretch. Yes, I know, the right way is to just get the heck away from the keyboard when something (such as supper) would limit use to one hand.
Another, much more serious application of 'one-finger' keying would be for those who can only type with a unicorn stick strapped to their forehead. The less travel required would be a Good Thing, and while voice recognition may be good, it still needs correction and that means typing.
The idea is not fiction. It was done, at least experimentally, early in the 20th century. There was at least one article/chapter about such things in one of the ATM (Amateur Telescope Making) books that was edited by A. Ingalls. They also mentioned, in another place, use of a pool of fluid for getting a flat reference surface.
If I recall the ATM text correctly the earth's curvature becomes a factor for "flat" fluid-based optical surfaces in only a few meters. I'd expect a similar, though perhaps lesser, effect on curved fluid surfaces.
A thin coating of an oil or such to reduce mercury evaporation was also suggested. I'd expect the safety aspect would be the biggest hurdle. A non-paraboliodal curve can be corrected with additional optical elements.
Maybe five whole blocks is a lot of distance to you. Maybe you have ready access to good public transit. Or maybe you're an idiot. Any combintion is possible.
Where I am there is a bus system of sort for the small town. The rail line is used strictly for freight. Getting to a city of any size means a one hour drive at minimum. To be realistic and have choice, two hours. I'm here as here is where the job is.
Come on out to the midwest, the real midwest, not a 'population center' (gak!) like Chicago and then see how enthuisiastic you are about high fuel prices. Will you be as thrilled when the high fuel prices translate into higher food prices, too? Tractors need fuel, as do semi-trucks (ok, deisel, not gasoline, but both ahve gone up in price). Why not raise ALL petroleum prices? Of course that has other effects - the natural gas heat and driers (yes, some crops need to be dried, not just tobacco) will cost more too. And home heating.. and it make coal more fiscally attractive.
Sure, the best way is to use less, but just rasing prices (most readily accomplished by overzealous taxation) will accomplish the wrong things. Do you really expect the additional revenue would go to the right place? The best way to run a government is too run it on as a lean mixture as possible.
I may be out here in 'flyover country' but some simple questions remain, which are very midwestern and you had better be able to answer folks out here as they WILL ask them and demand an answer: Who the hell are you to tell me (or anyone other than yourself) how to live? What makes you think you know what we need better than we do? maybe we should decide NYC policies from here, too, hrmmm?
Much has been made of an effect: the putting up of a web site of, shall we say, questionable taste.
But this is just an effect. There must have been a cause for that to happen. Seems that if the casue were treated properly, the effect would not have resulted.
Once again, the effect is focused on, a symptom "treated" but the actual disease left to fester.
Privacy is good. Anonymity is sometimes essential
on
Privacy vs. Anonymity
·
· Score: 1
It seems that there is general consensus at least that privacy is a Good Thing. Some seem to think anonymity is automatically a Bad Thing because it has the potential to be mis-used. Well, so does fire. It can heat, cook, or burn your house down. Shall we ban it?
I just saw a story on 'net stalking' which would seem to be an arguement for doing away with anonymity. It is also, though unsaid, a powerful arguemnt for preserving anonymity - or making discovery of identity very non-trivial. Suppose you are a 'stalkee'? Two examples leap to mind. One is a whistle-blower -- who can do great good if allowed to speak, and the whistle will blow upon those that who really want it not to blow at all. The other would be a victim of abuse. Finding a 'safe' community on the net to aid in recovery, and being able to keep safe by anonymity isn't a luxury, but a necessity. (The anonymity, that is. There may be other groups, but some aren't near any large groups and some places word spreads fast, so...)
Sure there are trade-offs. What to do? Just like real life, take precautions (like locking doors) but don't presume guilt (like arresting someone for just walking by the house, as they might be considering a break-in).
Problems exist with and without anonymity. No matter how bad they may be, the others are worse so I'll take the problems associated with freedom, thank you.
Ok, so the 'trick' is that a full pulse can be reconstructed from a tiny bit of leading edge, the result of which just happens to look like a superluminal effect.
Nevermind superluminal effects, can something like this be used to reconstruct a full pulse on the far end, full information, with just the leading part actually sent? Sort of like how an AM signal can be reconstructed from a single-sideband transmission? And would any speed increase be worthwhile? If you have to send faster than you can send, it would seem nothing would be gained. Right now, it seems that the full pulse must be sent, or an energy deficit occurs.
The reason is very simple. It's easy to check and compare prices and for items like well known CDs, buying 'unseen' is no big deal.
Stores near universities can no longer count on mere proximity to generate sales. They now have to compete on value. What makes a music store stand out now? Not just having the common items that can be ordered from anywhere, but having less common items or knowing how to get them. A really outstanding store would have used CDs and even allow potential customers to listen to them before purchasing. I've only seen this once, but I made a point of going back to that place. As for service, they "got it." Less risk of buying something for one track only discover all the other tracks are lousy.
As for Napster.. maybe it hurts some, maybe it helps some. It's probably irrelevent overall. College dorms are a places where CD and tapes are borrowed and dubbed already.
...make sure the contact surface area is improved.
The thing not mentioned in the article is that flat surfaces aren't needed, as you've noted with flexible materials, but matching surfaces. Two flat surfaces will do, but so will two spheroidal surfaces with the same radius of curvature. Or perhaps I should say opposite since one will need to be concave and the other convex.
The Truly Devoted (or Truly Mad) could go as far as abandoning the micrometer and going to optical tests and optician's methods for working the surfaces if they were sufficiently careful.
Myself, I'd use the heat sink compound and not go that far, but that's just me. There is a point of diminshing returns. Amateur Telescope Making Book I, Book II and Book III, edited by Ingalls, have much detailed information on shaping optical surfaces. I recall that Books I & II would be the more likely for this. The contact will get much better with optical working techniques. This can become a problem as the two surface worked against each other can become wedged with their adhesion if the material between them is permitted to dry out. I have wedged and unwedge glass disks. I'd not want to have to do the unwedging with a relatively expensive and small processor.
A note for anyone going to check out those books: They were written/editted with a 'revised' spelling, so 'technique' is spelled 'technic' amongst other oddities.
"High school chemistry textbooks have the same information, maybe we should censor those too?"
This has already happened. Whether it was intended or coincidence I can't say for sure, but I have my suspicions. Probably, "But if we publish that we could be sued if some idiot ignores the warnings and..."
Find a textbook from the mid-1950s. Say, Modern Chemistry by Dulle, Brooks, & Metcalfe. Turn to the chapter on nitrates. Read. Read the warnings, too. Now go look at a recent chemistry text. Notice that something isn't there?
Warning: Off-topicness follows.
This could be from fear of litigation and such, or it could be from high schools, in the USA anyway, trying to teach chemistry by the theory, as in colleges, rather than 'descriptive chemistry' as in the 1950s. The 1950s text is a good text. Reading it one gets a 'feel' for the subject, the detailed theory can (and should) come later, to answer to nagging "but why does.." questions. I have a suspicion that the subject is considered difficult and boring today as it is first taught in a boring and difficult manner.
Sounds a little like the games once(?) played on univeristy Vax accounts left unattended too long. The nastier people would really trash things, or maybe mail the files to the same account and then wipe out all but the mail. But the nicer had a less nasty way to get the point across...
They made a.login file (the old version left alone) which would clear the terminal screen, display a message about deleting files, lock the keyboard, then wait several seconds. Then it'd release the terminal, display a message about logging out and what Bad Things could really happen. Finally, it deleted the message file and the new.login (itself), leaving the account owner wondering how it was done.
Those who knew how weren't the one leaving terminals unattended.
It's the 1950s. The United States of America. WWII is over, and the U.S.A. is, relatively, unscathed.
RADAR scans the skies, new antibiotics are making diseases less threatening at the least and there's even a vaccine for polio actually works. Optimism all around. Aside from the Red Menace. And we have The Bomb. A solution to be used.. but no problem that it properly fits. Deterrence is understood, but that's tense, nerve wracking, and not as 'satisfying' as just blowing something up.
So the bomb was, and might still be, the hammer. And there aren't real nails for it.
Good thing that was somehow realized. Detonating a nuke on the moon shows power. Broadcasting live TV from the moon shows power too, but applied with some finesse.
(ok, who does this, huh? I mean, viewing a gif or clicking a URL, but running a strange program? The mind boggles).
If I read the attack information right, the user would see an HTML file.. to many, just another web site. Now, even if it wasn't such, who would press on and get zapped?
Likely the click-happy, who don't see an odd extension as one or such, but just click reflexively, as they've always done. One more reason I loathe attachments. (I was getting emails at work that were just attachments, no explanation, not even a sbject. Someone got offended when I replied "Deleted: Unread, not important enough for sender to identify, not important enough to read.")
Microsoft/HotMail? Yes, left a door unlocked. They really should lock it properly. But an unlocked door doesn't get opened by itself.
Some crackerd00d wannabe? Yes, that person opens the door, or at least puts up the sign on it suggesting that it be opened. But even this person hasn't done the real damage.
The first two set up conditions for the rest. The ones who don't see what they look at and just click, just like always, not pausing to inspect.
There was(is) a hole, and someone has exploited it... but, in the recent "LoveBug" case, there were a surprising number of accomplices all over the globe.
Blasphemy? Maybe to some. But it is a valid choice to keep source closed. Sure, there are benefits to be had by opening it. But that isn't in itself why some places have a poor reputation.
If a program does what I need without being clunky, slow, or buggy I really don't care whether the source is open or not. Some closed source programs are even good enough I'll pay for them. Most are not. Maybe they do have something to hide.
If a program, open or closed source, is bloated, slow and buggy I avoid it if I can. Microsoft, for example, has a bad reputation as the software is just good enough to get accepted by managers and purchasing types but not good enough that it doesn't thoroughly irk the people who must use it. Nevermind monopoly, if the software was as great as the advertising lead some to believe, there'd be less antagonism toward its producer.
Open source may swing my opinion some, but it isn't a 'go - no go' criterion. Does the software do the job I want without causing frustration? That is the number one criterion. The rest is details.
Time and again we've seen Microsoft "bashed." Most of the time they've earned it. But when another company does something not considered right (say, nVidia) it gets somewhat better treatment.
Now, I trust Microsfoft not as far one can comfortably spit a rat, but was there any call yet to verify if this was a lapse? "Slap on the usual license.." or such? I didn't see one. Not one, or just missed it. No astroturf, even.
I'm thinking it isn't a lapse and is something will have to sorted out by careful means. That is, the information obtained in a way that is legal enough to pass the lawyers, lest we have another DeCSS thing, the story of which drags on, despite the information having spread beyond any hope of containment.
And, being less charitable and more suspicious, try this on. Suppose the content is only partly right, by design. It will need verifying, or there will be much disinformation distributed, with a resulting more insidious incompatibility.
I was looking for a cheap (ideally free, yes as in beer, like most folks think when you say 'free'), light word processor after I had gotten a 32bit Win* box set up. A few searches gave a few candidates, most pricy or with what looked like irksome interfaces. Then I saw AbiWord.
The price was certainly right. The cross platform was good (Hey, I could also use this on that old HP) and the size was decent. That it used XML was bonus. I looked at a silly test file in a text editor just to see. Nice. No stupid blank boxes of who knows what formatting info, no silly extras, just readable formatting - that could probably be stripped out with an HTML to text program if really needed.
I then spent part of an Easter break getting a Word document viewer going for my father. All the time silently muttering to myself about folks sending Word docs when a text file would suffice. Sure, you *can* open one in text editor, but you can't read it very well.
I certainly hope XML takes over, but that depends on those making word processors and office suites seeing it being to their advantage to support and to *primarily* support. Of course I also hope lean software takes over, too...
Run both for a little while to see how each behaves.
Now remove Konqueror from the Linux box and remove IE from the Windows box. To be fair, reboot both systems. Explore each system again.
Does removing Konqueror have the same effect on Linux with KDE as removing IE from Windows does? If so, then there is a case. Now, not having run the experimnet myself, I don't *know* the result... but I know which way I'd bet.
Slashdot Mirror
...is eternal vigilance.
Better to treat every alarm as the real thing than to ignore the wrong alarm.
Disgree? Then get rid of your CO monitor and smoke detector.
Still disagree?
It's not that people here think the GPL is the greatest invention ever which gets you moderated down. It's that you continually attack the GPL in a trollish fashion that gets you moderated down.
Wow, not only do GPV zealots try to redefine the word 'free' to suit their ends, they now also redefine 'trollish' to mean 'accurate' too.
to help it target -- for reeducation -- the most teed-off of its fed-up fliers (Emphasis mine.)
Well, ain't that typical? "Reeducate" people who may have problems with your outfit. Don't bother fixing the bloody problem that generated the "bad attitude."
Whatever did actually happen with the Northwest "sickout" anyway? What proof was there? (I recall it happening in the middle of flu season that was in the news.. hrmmm). And what of the hard drive siezure/searches? Yep, *THOSE* sure were needed to collect things from web boards & usenet postings, weren't they?
I'm not pro-union, but I am pro-freedom and anti-stupidity.
Great! Now I'll have that other hand free for... well, you know.
Jokes aside, a one-handed (which a one-fingered is as well) keyboard would be useful. The other hand may be on a mouse/trackball/trackpad. Or holding a telephone handset.. or a slice of pizza.. or a fork.. or..
It's not the regular keys that are problem, generally. One can use a QWERTY keyboard one-fingered with hunt-n-peck, but combination keystrokes (those with shift, control, and alt) can be a very real stretch. Yes, I know, the right way is to just get the heck away from the keyboard when something (such as supper) would limit use to one hand.
Another, much more serious application of 'one-finger' keying would be for those who can only type with a unicorn stick strapped to their forehead. The less travel required would be a Good Thing, and while voice recognition may be good, it still needs correction and that means typing.
The idea is not fiction. It was done, at least experimentally, early in the 20th century. There was at least one article/chapter about such things in one of the ATM (Amateur Telescope Making) books that was edited by A. Ingalls. They also mentioned, in another place, use of a pool of fluid for getting a flat reference surface.
If I recall the ATM text correctly the earth's curvature becomes a factor for "flat" fluid-based optical surfaces in only a few meters. I'd expect a similar, though perhaps lesser, effect on curved fluid surfaces.
A thin coating of an oil or such to reduce mercury evaporation was also suggested. I'd expect the safety aspect would be the biggest hurdle. A non-paraboliodal curve can be corrected with additional optical elements.
Maybe five whole blocks is a lot of distance to you. Maybe you have ready access to good public transit. Or maybe you're an idiot. Any combintion is possible.
Where I am there is a bus system of sort for the small town. The rail line is used strictly for freight. Getting to a city of any size means a one hour drive at minimum. To be realistic and have choice, two hours. I'm here as here is where the job is.
Come on out to the midwest, the real midwest, not a 'population center' (gak!) like Chicago and then see how enthuisiastic you are about high fuel prices. Will you be as thrilled when the high fuel prices translate into higher food prices, too? Tractors need fuel, as do semi-trucks (ok, deisel, not gasoline, but both ahve gone up in price). Why not raise ALL petroleum prices? Of course that has other effects - the natural gas heat and driers (yes, some crops need to be dried, not just tobacco) will cost more too. And home heating.. and it make coal more fiscally attractive.
Sure, the best way is to use less, but just rasing prices (most readily accomplished by overzealous taxation) will accomplish the wrong things. Do you really expect the additional revenue would go to the right place? The best way to run a government is too run it on as a lean mixture as possible.
I may be out here in 'flyover country' but some simple questions remain, which are very midwestern and you had better be able to answer folks out here as they WILL ask them and demand an answer: Who the hell are you to tell me (or anyone other than yourself) how to live? What makes you think you know what we need better than we do? maybe we should decide NYC policies from here, too, hrmmm?
"C-store" -- used to store characters (or other 8 bit data) into an 8-bit Forth variable.
...was the suggested name I've heard proposed for this sort of thing. So very apt.
Wait, wait, isn't that illegal copying?
:)
Seeling our data again, and keeping it, is hardly 'fair use' now is it?
Hey, it has to work or both ways, or not at all.
No 'legal diodes'... though there are a few things that need rectification.
Odd, I'm quite used to '#' being 'sharp.'
But then I'm also used to '@' being 'fetch' and '!' being store, too.
is indeed referred to as his (or her) 'fist'.
And decoding/copying someone with a 'bad fist' is very difficult, while a 'good fist' is much much easier.
Being told, while using a straight key (the kind most most people think of) that one has a good fist is quite a compliment.
Much has been made of an effect: the putting up of a web site of, shall we say, questionable taste.
But this is just an effect. There must have been a cause for that to happen. Seems that if the casue were treated properly, the effect would not have resulted.
Once again, the effect is focused on, a symptom "treated" but the actual disease left to fester.
It seems that there is general consensus at least that privacy is a Good Thing. Some seem to think anonymity is automatically a Bad Thing because it has the potential to be mis-used. Well, so does fire. It can heat, cook, or burn your house down. Shall we ban it?
I just saw a story on 'net stalking' which would seem to be an arguement for doing away with anonymity. It is also, though unsaid, a powerful arguemnt for preserving anonymity - or making discovery of identity very non-trivial. Suppose you are a 'stalkee'? Two examples leap to mind. One is a whistle-blower -- who can do great good if allowed to speak, and the whistle will blow upon those that who really want it not to blow at all. The other would be a victim of abuse. Finding a 'safe' community on the net to aid in recovery, and being able to keep safe by anonymity isn't a luxury, but a necessity. (The anonymity, that is. There may be other groups, but some aren't near any large groups and some places word spreads fast, so...)
Sure there are trade-offs. What to do? Just like real life, take precautions (like locking doors) but don't presume guilt (like arresting someone for just walking by the house, as they might be considering a break-in).
Problems exist with and without anonymity. No matter how bad they may be, the others are worse so I'll take the problems associated with freedom, thank you.
Ok, so the 'trick' is that a full pulse can be reconstructed from a tiny bit of leading edge, the result of which just happens to look like a superluminal effect.
Nevermind superluminal effects, can something like this be used to reconstruct a full pulse on the far end, full information, with just the leading part actually sent? Sort of like how an AM signal can be reconstructed from a single-sideband transmission? And would any speed increase be worthwhile? If you have to send faster than you can send, it would seem nothing would be gained. Right now, it seems that the full pulse must be sent, or an energy deficit occurs.
Just another odd musing...
As Hemos said, many can and will buy online now.
The reason is very simple. It's easy to check and compare prices and for items like well known CDs, buying 'unseen' is no big deal.
Stores near universities can no longer count on mere proximity to generate sales. They now have to compete on value. What makes a music store stand out now? Not just having the common items that can be ordered from anywhere, but having less common items or knowing how to get them. A really outstanding store would have used CDs and even allow potential customers to listen to them before purchasing. I've only seen this once, but I made a point of going back to that place. As for service, they "got it." Less risk of buying something for one track only discover all the other tracks are lousy.
As for Napster.. maybe it hurts some, maybe it helps some. It's probably irrelevent overall. College dorms are a places where CD and tapes are borrowed and dubbed already.
The thing not mentioned in the article is that flat surfaces aren't needed, as you've noted with flexible materials, but matching surfaces. Two flat surfaces will do, but so will two spheroidal surfaces with the same radius of curvature. Or perhaps I should say opposite since one will need to be concave and the other convex.
The Truly Devoted (or Truly Mad) could go as far as abandoning the micrometer and going to optical tests and optician's methods for working the surfaces if they were sufficiently careful.
Myself, I'd use the heat sink compound and not go that far, but that's just me. There is a point of diminshing returns. Amateur Telescope Making Book I, Book II and Book III, edited by Ingalls, have much detailed information on shaping optical surfaces. I recall that Books I & II would be the more likely for this. The contact will get much better with optical working techniques. This can become a problem as the two surface worked against each other can become wedged with their adhesion if the material between them is permitted to dry out. I have wedged and unwedge glass disks. I'd not want to have to do the unwedging with a relatively expensive and small processor.
A note for anyone going to check out those books: They were written/editted with a 'revised' spelling, so 'technique' is spelled 'technic' amongst other oddities.
"High school chemistry textbooks have the same information, maybe we should censor those too?"
This has already happened. Whether it was intended or coincidence I can't say for sure, but I have my suspicions. Probably, "But if we publish that we could be sued if some idiot ignores the warnings and..."
Find a textbook from the mid-1950s. Say, Modern Chemistry by Dulle, Brooks, & Metcalfe. Turn to the chapter on nitrates. Read. Read the warnings, too. Now go look at a recent chemistry text. Notice that something isn't there?
Warning: Off-topicness follows.
This could be from fear of litigation and such, or it could be from high schools, in the USA anyway, trying to teach chemistry by the theory, as in colleges, rather than 'descriptive chemistry' as in the 1950s. The 1950s text is a good text. Reading it one gets a 'feel' for the subject, the detailed theory can (and should) come later, to answer to nagging "but why does.." questions. I have a suspicion that the subject is considered difficult and boring today as it is first taught in a boring and difficult manner.
I'm wondering how soon some virus writer will work out a (time delayed?) FTP install of a different OS.
OS bigotry run amok.
Sounds a little like the games once(?) played on univeristy Vax accounts left unattended too long. The nastier people would really trash things, or maybe mail the files to the same account and then wipe out all but the mail. But the nicer had a less nasty way to get the point across...
.login file (the old version left alone) which would clear the terminal screen, display a message about deleting files, lock the keyboard, then wait several seconds. Then it'd release the terminal, display a message about logging out and what Bad Things could really happen. Finally, it deleted the message file and the new .login (itself), leaving the account owner wondering how it was done.
They made a
Those who knew how weren't the one leaving terminals unattended.
"When your only tool is a hammer..."
It's the 1950s. The United States of America. WWII is over, and the U.S.A. is, relatively, unscathed.
RADAR scans the skies, new antibiotics are making diseases less threatening at the least and there's even a vaccine for polio actually works. Optimism all around. Aside from the Red Menace. And we have The Bomb. A solution to be used.. but no problem that it properly fits. Deterrence is understood, but that's tense, nerve wracking, and not as 'satisfying' as just blowing something up.
So the bomb was, and might still be, the hammer. And there aren't real nails for it.
Good thing that was somehow realized. Detonating a nuke on the moon shows power. Broadcasting live TV from the moon shows power too, but applied with some finesse.
(ok, who does this, huh? I mean, viewing a gif or clicking a URL, but running a strange program? The mind boggles).
If I read the attack information right, the user would see an HTML file.. to many, just another web site. Now, even if it wasn't such, who would press on and get zapped?
Likely the click-happy, who don't see an odd extension as one or such, but just click reflexively, as they've always done. One more reason I loathe attachments. (I was getting emails at work that were just attachments, no explanation, not even a sbject. Someone got offended when I replied "Deleted: Unread, not important enough for sender to identify, not important enough to read.")
Microsoft/HotMail? Yes, left a door unlocked. They really should lock it properly. But an unlocked door doesn't get opened by itself.
Some crackerd00d wannabe? Yes, that person opens the door, or at least puts up the sign on it suggesting that it be opened. But even this person hasn't done the real damage.
The first two set up conditions for the rest. The ones who don't see what they look at and just click, just like always, not pausing to inspect.
There was(is) a hole, and someone has exploited it... but, in the recent "LoveBug" case, there were a surprising number of accomplices all over the globe.
Blasphemy? Maybe to some. But it is a valid choice to keep source closed. Sure, there are benefits to be had by opening it. But that isn't in itself why some places have a poor reputation.
If a program does what I need without being clunky, slow, or buggy I really don't care whether the source is open or not. Some closed source programs are even good enough I'll pay for them. Most are not. Maybe they do have something to hide.
If a program, open or closed source, is bloated, slow and buggy I avoid it if I can. Microsoft, for example, has a bad reputation as the software is just good enough to get accepted by managers and purchasing types but not good enough that it doesn't thoroughly irk the people who must use it. Nevermind monopoly, if the software was as great as the advertising lead some to believe, there'd be less antagonism toward its producer.
Open source may swing my opinion some, but it isn't a 'go - no go' criterion. Does the software do the job I want without causing frustration? That is the number one criterion. The rest is details.
Time and again we've seen Microsoft "bashed." Most of the time they've earned it. But when another company does something not considered right (say, nVidia) it gets somewhat better treatment.
Now, I trust Microsfoft not as far one can comfortably spit a rat, but was there any call yet to verify if this was a lapse? "Slap on the usual license.." or such? I didn't see one. Not one, or just missed it. No astroturf, even.
I'm thinking it isn't a lapse and is something will have to sorted out by careful means. That is, the information obtained in a way that is legal enough to pass the lawyers, lest we have another DeCSS thing, the story of which drags on, despite the information having spread beyond any hope of containment.
And, being less charitable and more suspicious, try this on. Suppose the content is only partly right, by design. It will need verifying, or there will be much disinformation distributed, with a resulting more insidious incompatibility.
I was looking for a cheap (ideally free, yes as in beer, like most folks think when you say 'free'), light word processor after I had gotten a 32bit Win* box set up. A few searches gave a few candidates, most pricy or with what looked like irksome interfaces. Then I saw AbiWord.
The price was certainly right. The cross platform was good (Hey, I could also use this on that old HP) and the size was decent. That it used XML was bonus. I looked at a silly test file in a text editor just to see. Nice. No stupid blank boxes of who knows what formatting info, no silly extras, just readable formatting - that could probably be stripped out with an HTML to text program if really needed.
I then spent part of an Easter break getting a Word document viewer going for my father. All the time silently muttering to myself about folks sending Word docs when a text file would suffice. Sure, you *can* open one in text editor, but you can't read it very well.
I certainly hope XML takes over, but that depends on those making word processors and office suites seeing it being to their advantage to support and to *primarily* support. Of course I also hope lean software takes over, too...
I've not done this, but it may be informative.
Install a Windows98 or NT4 (sp6a) or W2K system.
Install a Linux system, with KDE. Add Konqueror.
Run both for a little while to see how each behaves.
Now remove Konqueror from the Linux box and remove IE from the Windows box. To be fair, reboot both systems. Explore each system again.
Does removing Konqueror have the same effect on Linux with KDE as removing IE from Windows does? If so, then there is a case. Now, not having run the experimnet myself, I don't *know* the result... but I know which way I'd bet.