They should optimize their process and then rewrite their software to match it, using modern languages with proper decoupling of all the various calculations. Replacing the old system will only be difficult if they base it on the existing software, which is most likely the usual tangles mess of poorly written COBOL. The sad part is that defining the full requirements is actually pretty difficult in itself.
What finally did it for me was the "you shouldn't even be allowed to have widgets or themes" attitude of the Gnome devs. I'd tolerated Gnome shell despite its flaws up until then. With that kind of vision, we're eventually going to be very much at odds eventually, as I think Linux is all about options, and I like configuring my desktop to look and work the way *I* want. It's the same as iOS. If you think you'll be always be happy with someone elses' design, then by all means, stick with it, otherwise, get out as soon as you can.
I moved to KDE and wish I'd done so earlier. It's fantastic, and doesn't get the attention it deserves from the Linux community.
Rear wheel drive is not a problem. Read wheel drive with all the weight over the front wheels is a problem, especially in low traction situations. Ideal is really all wheel drive with weight distributed close to evenly.
The FOSS community could quite easy come up with a signing organization, but is unlikely to give computer manufacturers a discount on their OS (or charge more for it) if they don't implement it. This is admittedly just a suspicion, but it does match with the history of what has happened with things like the EEE notebooks.
SecureBoot is designed to make that exit more difficult. You can get past it if you know what you're doing, but giving someone a Linux distro to install themselves via a USB boot no longer as easy as it was.
... unless there's another signature verification of the download with signature sent via HTTPS. Seems off though since Google does almost everything via HTTPS these days.
The sad part is that both of the two big languages for web development are like this (with JavaScript) being the other one. When you need to write software that's reasonably maintainable, flexible and secure, having a language that's consistent and predictable is pretty much required.
In Gnome 2 there were several widgets like Caffeine that would also let you disable it via the tool bar. Not sure if there's anything available since the unity/Gnome3 insanity.
It's the intentions behind it. Switching to GPL3 means it is much more restrictive in how it can be used in commercial products. As a general guideline, if there's ever a question about Oracle's motivations when it comes to a choice between advancing open source and trying to force more people to their proprietary products, he answer is pretty straight forward.
I think a better goal would be to start adding to the language, to replace phonetic combinations such as Sh, Th (which existed before), and to start using more phonetically consistent letters, like "K" for the hard C sound, and C for the soft (no nore CK required). This also frees up S to be used as the SH phonem. English spelling really is ridiculous, and could use a good refactoring.
If the deals violated the fundamental rights of EU citizens, people should probably be asking how they were made in the first place as well. Something is obviously broken.
I like to actively try to stop people from giving money to companies that are reducing my chances of having open platforms available to me in the future. I think it's extremely important. Just letting things go in the direction they are and saying "oh well" will probably end badly for me, and eventually most others as well. Sometime a little idealism is required. Perhaps not to the point of RMS, but enough to point out that if we keep allowing locked down platforms to succeed that eventually only locked down platforms will be readily available. As with freedom and many other things, most don't miss it until they realize it's gone.
I'm not addressing other companies here, I'm addressing Apple, and someone (who is probably trolling, but has been modde insightful by the faithful) thinks they care about his security. Security is not the primary reason they've locked down their platform. It bothers me that people think it is as now Microsoft and other are foaming at the mouth now they they have a good shot at locking their platforms and demanding a cut of all software installed as well.
Apple doesn't care about your security, it cares about your money. There are pirated apps in the Apple store by the way, and developers have recently been complaining about it. As Apple gets their cut regardless of whether or not the app has been pirated it's not at the top of their priority list.
The "specific technology" one is a big one though. As someone who has been forced to use a lot of IBM "technology", I'm of the opinion that there is nothing to fear but WebSphere itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, seven million lines of COBOL is about what it takes to write a Sudoku solver in COBOL.
They should optimize their process and then rewrite their software to match it, using modern languages with proper decoupling of all the various calculations. Replacing the old system will only be difficult if they base it on the existing software, which is most likely the usual tangles mess of poorly written COBOL. The sad part is that defining the full requirements is actually pretty difficult in itself.
What finally did it for me was the "you shouldn't even be allowed to have widgets or themes" attitude of the Gnome devs. I'd tolerated Gnome shell despite its flaws up until then. With that kind of vision, we're eventually going to be very much at odds eventually, as I think Linux is all about options, and I like configuring my desktop to look and work the way *I* want. It's the same as iOS. If you think you'll be always be happy with someone elses' design, then by all means, stick with it, otherwise, get out as soon as you can.
I moved to KDE and wish I'd done so earlier. It's fantastic, and doesn't get the attention it deserves from the Linux community.
... and frequently bribery ... I mean marketing.
Rear wheel drive is not a problem. Read wheel drive with all the weight over the front wheels is a problem, especially in low traction situations. Ideal is really all wheel drive with weight distributed close to evenly.
The FOSS community could quite easy come up with a signing organization, but is unlikely to give computer manufacturers a discount on their OS (or charge more for it) if they don't implement it. This is admittedly just a suspicion, but it does match with the history of what has happened with things like the EEE notebooks.
SecureBoot is designed to make that exit more difficult. You can get past it if you know what you're doing, but giving someone a Linux distro to install themselves via a USB boot no longer as easy as it was.
what you are booting is signed by someone you trust
Or Microsoft.
... unless there's another signature verification of the download with signature sent via HTTPS. Seems off though since Google does almost everything via HTTPS these days.
That's good to know, I'd always assumed it was HTTPS.
The sad part is that both of the two big languages for web development are like this (with JavaScript) being the other one. When you need to write software that's reasonably maintainable, flexible and secure, having a language that's consistent and predictable is pretty much required.
No, but all are excellent reasons to switch to an open-source OS.
In Gnome 2 there were several widgets like Caffeine that would also let you disable it via the tool bar. Not sure if there's anything available since the unity/Gnome3 insanity.
Missing features and crashes? Have you even used Linux?
You may have Python confused with Perl.
Asking who they consider adversaries is excellent journalism. I'd actually like to hear an answer to that question.
It's the intentions behind it. Switching to GPL3 means it is much more restrictive in how it can be used in commercial products. As a general guideline, if there's ever a question about Oracle's motivations when it comes to a choice between advancing open source and trying to force more people to their proprietary products, he answer is pretty straight forward.
I think a better goal would be to start adding to the language, to replace phonetic combinations such as Sh, Th (which existed before), and to start using more phonetically consistent letters, like "K" for the hard C sound, and C for the soft (no nore CK required). This also frees up S to be used as the SH phonem. English spelling really is ridiculous, and could use a good refactoring.
If the deals violated the fundamental rights of EU citizens, people should probably be asking how they were made in the first place as well. Something is obviously broken.
I like to actively try to stop people from giving money to companies that are reducing my chances of having open platforms available to me in the future. I think it's extremely important. Just letting things go in the direction they are and saying "oh well" will probably end badly for me, and eventually most others as well. Sometime a little idealism is required. Perhaps not to the point of RMS, but enough to point out that if we keep allowing locked down platforms to succeed that eventually only locked down platforms will be readily available. As with freedom and many other things, most don't miss it until they realize it's gone.
I'm not addressing other companies here, I'm addressing Apple, and someone (who is probably trolling, but has been modde insightful by the faithful) thinks they care about his security. Security is not the primary reason they've locked down their platform. It bothers me that people think it is as now Microsoft and other are foaming at the mouth now they they have a good shot at locking their platforms and demanding a cut of all software installed as well.
Apple doesn't care about your security, it cares about your money. There are pirated apps in the Apple store by the way, and developers have recently been complaining about it. As Apple gets their cut regardless of whether or not the app has been pirated it's not at the top of their priority list.
That's hilarious ... I've been saying exactly that for years.
The "specific technology" one is a big one though. As someone who has been forced to use a lot of IBM "technology", I'm of the opinion that there is nothing to fear but WebSphere itself.
These people are frequently paid to do so. You get three guesses at who's paying the bills.