I see, so you are saying if I sue Microsoft for patent infringement on code you and I wrote based in part on MS code , I lose your patent protection too. I see no need for this, but it apparently has some value to you.
Like I said before, this has no distinction on small or large companies, only on the specific patent rights you lose. Your argument is basically I wouldn't sue the small holder and therefore its protection is toothless.
I guess I still am missing the point. I want the protection for the use of the patent, if I break the terms of use, i.e. sue the patent holder, I lose the use of their patent. I think this is more than fair.
You think I should lose the right to all patents covered under the license, as more of a deterrent. I can't actually picture ever suing anyone for patent infringement but, I can see that MS might.
All found with a very cursory Search on Google. If these are not enough you could always open a little program called OpenOffice and create one. Given how many of the above are crosslinked, You could find any number of people to host it.
I think though the proper place for your chart is probably at OSI itself
The MS-PL protects Microsoft and other big contributors who have patents but does nothing to establish a patent commons around the work to protect smaller contributors.
Wow, never, ever, ever, in a million years, thought I would be on Slashdot actually defending a MS license,
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
.....
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
(C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software.
I don't see a distinction between small and large contributors in here. Maybe I am misunderstanding your point.
1. Granting or inclined to grant permission; tolerant or lenient.
2. Permitting discretion; optional.
3. Archaic Not forbidden; permitted
Granted in terms of Normal MS licenses it is more permissive. But its not called the Microsoft more permissive than usual license.
It is not, it covers usage, not just distribution or modification. You are not permitted to USE this software if you do not accept this license. Mozilla and apache have similar wording which makes them incompatible with GPL as well. That is why MPL software is TriLicensed usually
The second is an even bigger joke. Open source licenses need to be compatible with other licenses to get approved now?
Yes it is recent, after a few years of trying to sort out what can be used with what, it behooves OSI to try to get as much compatibility as possible in the License before approval. Meaning if it is MS' goal to make it incompatible, OK, but if it isn't then they should make minor changes to fix it.
OSI run by anti-Mircosoft wankers
Um, no kidding the entire open source movement is anti proprietary, that is there mandate, No? Calling them wankers is a subjective opinion based on this decision and no actual contact with them and, I think, a little bit prickish. We all welcome Microsoft into the FLOSS community but under our terms not theirs. They've had it their way for many years and many lawsuits. If we are tougher on them then say SUN or IBM (which I don't think we are.) there is ample reason.
Having said All of that, I believe and have said in another thread, this is very close to a good license, Its short, It has Patent protections, A couple of very small changes and I would not be weary of using code under this license. I would probably never release anything new under it but I wouldn't be afraid to modify existing MS-PL code.
I'm still completely in the dark about why it's so incompatible.
The snag is right here.
This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software.
This is where the incompatible part is. GPL and other govern only distribution not usage. Here is relevant part of GPL
This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program.
Now that is what I call Permissive. MS-PL is not a license it is a EULA. It is not permissive.
Other than that, I am actually surprised at how Open this "License" is. Baby Steps to open source. I particularly like this bit, which I thought I'd never see from MS.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
Under Conditions and Limitations: (B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
Great First Draft. Tiny bit of tweaking and I would not shy away from code covered under this license.
We had a bit of nostalgia around here last night and went through a Thievery Install fest. Rediscovering (And Discovery for the young one) of the joys of sneaking around in the dark brought us much joy. Think I'll fire it up again right now.
http://www.thieveryut.com/ Runs great in wine. Total Conversion for Original Unreal Tournament, Give it a go if you haven't already. Thief multiplayer using UT = awesome.
FTFA:
Correction: The original story said the "sword-swinging" segments were only available during a "duel mode," however this is incorrect, as lightsaber action will be playable throughout the game.
Well, your statement seemed to indicate "Linux" is too hard for your mom to setup and use. I say this is bullshit because windows is all but impossible to setup and administer for the average mother or ten yr old. Your implication that "Linux" is not ready for said 10yr old or mother because of this inability is bullshit strictly because your mother and my daughter CAN use windows. The Bullshit is Windows is ready for them because it IS setup by people with the requisite knowledge, Dell did not. Why is this same model not sufficient for "Linux"? It may not be ideal but saying its not viable is wrong as my example proves.
Dell is not a rinky dink operation. There is not a lack of FLOSS developers to hire to correctly deploy this solution. They have the money to fix the Media Codec issues for their distribution. And the synaptic mouse issue is a bonehead mistake also by Dell.
My statement about Live CDs should not be missed, Give your mom a copy of Puppy Linux, or Kubuntu, or Vector Linux, she will be surfing the web in under a minute from cold boot. (Media Codec issues may be the same, cannot be helped until Patent is over.)unless:
Linspire has most Codec issues solved and can be setup by an imbecile. Surely you think your mom is smarter than an imbecile.
Note. I do not endorse Linspire as a preffered Distro just pointing out its ease of use.
I also take exception to the use of the word Linux in a blanket statement covering all Distros when in fact only one was reviewed.
I think you miss the point of the comment entirely. It is not about better. Its about whiny complainers. This whole issue blows up over one guy's hurt feelings.
In my opinion all of this completely justifies Linus' decision on the matter.
If you do not understand the purpose of the Kernel you really should not be in charge of critical parts of it. Large chunks of the kernel source are unused and unneeded by almost any implementation. But they are there for when they are needed.
That is exactly the problem the parent is trying address. You were required to use your knowledge to setup the system properly. Linux needs to be straight forward enough that your 10year old daughter can set it up by herself, without daddy there walking here through the steps.
I call Bullshit, She couldn't setup windows either. She didn't watch me step by step, she turned it on and it worked, just like she used to with windows, which I also setup. Since then she can boot the live Kubuntu CD all by herself, if she borks her system and so can your mom.
My point here is that Dell is the agent using open source tools to sell a Laptop. The onus is really on them to do so in a way that your mom and my daughter can use it.
The process of setting up a working Desktop is even more difficult with windows than it is for Ubuntu. Driver, reboot, driver,reboot driver, reboot, driver, reboot, driver, update, reboot, update, update, reboot. Oh I forgot pray.
Think about all of those soccer mom's that don't have time to figure out the syntax for apt-get becuase they simply want to email the soccer pictures to their freinds.
apt-get? The reviewer used Ubuntu, which uses add remove utility, and auto update utility. Not just for the OS but for every package on the system. (You can use apt-get command line of course, but that is a feature not a bug.) Review had No complaints about email. Only 1 mention of a Kodak camera in conjunction with Ipod, the real problem.
FTFA:
Dell and Canonical tell me there are complex workarounds for some of the problems I encountered, and that built-in improvements are planned for others. But for now, I still advise mainstream, nontechnical users to avoid Linux.
My problem with the review is this quote. Stay away from Dell laptop w/Ubuntu preinstalled, would be a better conclusion. Stay away from linux OEMs who don't know what they are doing. Also unless you are a technical person familiar with windows stay away from purchasing a no OS system.
What matters isn't technical excellence, but a culture of usability. The Linux subculture is still based around the hacker ethics -- and that's why Linux remains an OS primarily for people who enjoy compiling programs and manipulating settings. That has to change. The culture needs to be one of taking a critical look at every stage in the process and presenting the user with a set of simple and consistent choices that let people use their computers rather than worrying about getting their machine in a usable state. Ubuntu's leaning in that direction, but they still have a long way to go.
NO wrong, Wrong, WRONG.
The Linux SubCulture needs to keep doing what it has always done: Solve technical problems as they arise. MP3 playback solved years ago, DVD playback solved years ago, Touchpads ditto. There are still some problems without answers yet and people are working on them, However I see none of them in this Review.
My daughter is 10 1/2 yrs old. She has never compiled anything. However, she has been a happy Kubuntu user for almost 2 yrs now. She did not set her OS up, obviously. It was pre-installed, By me. In this example I am Dell and she is the user. I knew she would need mp3 support. I knew she would needs DVD support, I knew she would need Camera Support. I set them up and she is none the wiser. Just like if you go to DELL and buy a new machine bundle. Everything is pre-installed. Dell should be taking the money they are saving on MS license and use a portion of it to enable these features. Pay a MP3 license, pay a DVD license. They did not.
It's perfectly possible to make a UNIX OS be usable by the masses -- Apple's done that with OS X. The difference is that Apple "cheats" -- they only support a certain range of hardware, all of which is a known quantity to them. They're not dealing with the issues of a Frankencomputer made from whatever bits of hardware happen to show up.
See you already stated the obvious. This laptop is not a "Frankencomputer". It is a known set of hardware. DELL is APPLE in your analogy not Linux or Ubuntu. (K)(X)Ubuntu is doing a fine job of giving system builders the tools to deploy a Linux Desktop to almost any computer on the market, but the tweaking must be done on a per PC and sometimes per User basis.
This article is not a critique of Linux or Ubuntu, it is a critique of DELL. This man purchased a laptop from dell that was not setup properly. END OF STORY.
Why is it so many people equate Linux as all inclusive? Linux is not a product. A PC is a product, an OS is a product. Linux is a kernel. Combined with hardware and a ton of other utilities it can be a either a unbootable mess or a damn fine Desktop or Server.
It seems profoundly stupid to stress out the BSD license as the "most important" feature of this new software.
GPL may not be as free as BSD-license, but one needs to be a real zealot to switch based primarily on this reason. I hope, FreeBSD will wait for it to work on other platforms and only switch because it is "leaner, lighter, and faster".
Call me a zealot then. leaner, lighter, faster does not mean better. leaner usually means less features, lighter usually means skimped, faster usually means shortcutted, Granted on a new program it can be made faster, lighter, leaner, without these drawbacks. But GCC is a very, very mature piece of software. The easiest way to be faster, lighter, and leaner than GCC, is to be inferior to it. GPL vs BSD, My professional and personal opinion is GPL is better. Since I do not use *BSD, I guess I have a hard time understanding the need. Even if i did, it sure sound like a bunch of whining that compiling an entire operating system is too time consuming. waaaaanh! I build embedded systems for a living, where changing 1 line of code sometimes can start a very long recompile. This is as it should be.
So is there an Arm-Linux-Pcc? CrossCompiler? Will I have to change my code?
Then the answer is no. I may be alone in the world but I'm perfectly happy with the gcc compiler and have been for years. It does what its supposed to, It is FREE, It is crossplatform (MingW), and it annoys the BSD guys.
Clear Winner. GCC
It has been pointed out here, that people who choose a compiler based on its license are idiots. Well if I'm working on windows I use MingW specifically because of its license. If I'm working in Linux and I usually am, I choose GPL above all others. Count me as an Idiot if you like, But you can shove the alternatives. I know what I am getting and have a reasonable expectation what is coming in the future, and if I need to modify it (Heaven Forbid) I can. BSD is a fine license for people who NEED it. I don't. When given the choice I choose GPL. GCC Slower, maybe so. Code works and I get paid. If it takes 3 hrs for QT to compile. I bill for 3Hrs.
Sorry but, I'm a pragmatist in all things except freedom. I've been burned enough. (Admittedly, I've personally never been burned by BSD code, unless you count Windows.)
Nintendo Korea said that it filed a suit with the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seoul against an unidentified number of users who it claims uploaded copied Nintendo software on peer-to-peer file-sharing or Webhard sites. It is the first time for Nintendo to bring to court a copyright infringement case in South Korea.
Thing is, anyone can be rational when they're the ones defining the word. Dawkins, by traditional reasoning, not all that rational.
traditional reasoning? What like Religious Traditions? Lets do some basic homework, shall we?
Wikipedia:
Rationality as a term is related to the idea of reason, a word which following Webster's may be derived as much from older terms referring to thinking itself as from giving an account or an explanation. This lends the term a dual aspect. One aspect associates it with comprehension, intelligence, or inference, particularly when an inference is drawn in ordered ways (thus a syllogism is a rational argument in this sense). The other part associates rationality with explanation, understanding or justification, particularly if it provides a ground or a motive. 'Irrational', therefore, is defined as that which is not endowed with reason or understanding.
Rationality contra logic
A logical argument is sometimes described as "rational" if it is logically valid. However, rationality is a much broader term than logic, as it includes "uncertain but sensible" arguments based on probability, expectation, personal experience and the like, whereas logic deals principally with provable facts and demonstrably valid relations between them.
Dictionary.com:
rational -adjective
1. agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible: a rational plan for economic development.
2. having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense: a calm and rational negotiator.
3. being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason; sane; lucid: The patient appeared perfectly rational.
4. endowed with the faculty of reason: rational beings.
5. of, pertaining to, or constituting reasoning powers: the rational faculty.
6. proceeding or derived from reason or based on reasoning: a rational explanation.
Sounds like an apt description of Professor Dawkins to me. Maybe you could point me to some evidence of his irrationality? I have this great clip of Pastor Ted from "The Root of All Evil?" giving a classic example of Irrational behavior if you need a reference. I have a ton of material from Professor Dawkins that is extremely rational, according to above descriptions.
Richard Dawkins is about as rational as any of the hoplophobes at the VPC
Wow never heard that term. Quick search, The term sheeple has also come to be used to describe hoplophobes and other similar persons - people with an illogical fear of weapons, fire, cars, machinery etc, and certain other things such as men in camouflage or ethnic minorities. In this sense it is used particularly amongst gun and knife enthusiasts.
You must be kidding. From the Wikipedia
Clinton Richard Dawkins (born March 26, 1941) is a British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and popular science writer who holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.
Dawkins moved to England with his parents at the age of eight, and attended Oundle School. He then studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was tutored by Nobel Prize-winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen. He gained a BA degree in zoology in 1962, followed by MA and DPhil degrees in 1966, and a DSc in 1989.
From 1967 to 1969, Dawkins was an assistant professor of zoology in the University of California, Berkeley. In 1970 he was appointed a lecturer, and in 1990 a reader in zoology in the University of Oxford. In 1995, he was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford, a position endowed by Charles Simonyi with an express intention that Dawkins be its first holder. He has been a fellow of New College, Oxford since 1970.
Berkley, Oxford, Yep they churn out and promote as many irrational people as Liberty U. Pfft.
Anyone who professes to be an atheist has voided any claim at rationality, period
Umm, I profess it, and for purely rational reasons. Ever do any comparative religion studies. No, I thought not. That would be rational, for you to explore the alternatives and weigh out the evidence rather than blindly follow what you were told.
It requires just as much, if not more, blind faith as any actual religion.
No, actually it requires critical thinking, reasoning, and consideration of the presented evidence. Have you done so? Do you have some new theological supernatural evidence for me to consider? I'll wait.
....
...
...
Maybe some evidence backing up your claim that I require blind faith to come to my conclusions.
Obviously I could go on all day, just with video links. I could very easily bury you in a mountain of books and papers. And your counter "evidence" is always going to be just one fictional book.
Evolution is almost enough evidence of the non-existence of a supernatural GOD. This is why it frightens so many creationist. Tough.
Most people are atheist with respect to all the other religions of the world. I just go one GOD more.
Overall not really that expensive, but what is a computer without information (i.e. access to the Internet)?
As important as the cheap computer is, the target market will still need affordable Internet access.
Are any plans being made to toward this ?
The laptops operate as a mesh network. Every laptop extends the network to the next.
(BTW, I realise this is a bit of a chicken/egg problem, however the laptop is obviously the egg here)
Slashdot Mirror
Like I said before, this has no distinction on small or large companies, only on the specific patent rights you lose. Your argument is basically I wouldn't sue the small holder and therefore its protection is toothless.
I guess I still am missing the point. I want the protection for the use of the patent, if I break the terms of use, i.e. sue the patent holder, I lose the use of their patent. I think this is more than fair.
You think I should lose the right to all patents covered under the license, as more of a deterrent. I can't actually picture ever suing anyone for patent infringement but, I can see that MS might.
You mean like this
http://www.petefreitag.com/item/533.cfm
or http://pgl.yoyo.org/lqr/
or http://www.croftsoft.com/library/tutorials/opensource/
or http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000833.html
All found with a very cursory Search on Google. If these are not enough you could always open a little program called OpenOffice and create one. Given how many of the above are crosslinked, You could find any number of people to host it.
I think though the proper place for your chart is probably at OSI itself
Wow, never, ever, ever, in a million years, thought I would be on Slashdot actually defending a MS license,
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically. (C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software. I don't see a distinction between small and large contributors in here. Maybe I am misunderstanding your point.
Permissive is a definitive term.
1. Granting or inclined to grant permission; tolerant or lenient.
2. Permitting discretion; optional.
3. Archaic Not forbidden; permitted
Granted in terms of Normal MS licenses it is more permissive. But its not called the Microsoft more permissive than usual license.
It is not, it covers usage, not just distribution or modification. You are not permitted to USE this software if you do not accept this license. Mozilla and apache have similar wording which makes them incompatible with GPL as well. That is why MPL software is TriLicensed usually
The second is an even bigger joke. Open source licenses need to be compatible with other licenses to get approved now?
Yes it is recent, after a few years of trying to sort out what can be used with what, it behooves OSI to try to get as much compatibility as possible in the License before approval. Meaning if it is MS' goal to make it incompatible, OK, but if it isn't then they should make minor changes to fix it.
OSI run by anti-Mircosoft wankers
Um, no kidding the entire open source movement is anti proprietary, that is there mandate, No? Calling them wankers is a subjective opinion based on this decision and no actual contact with them and, I think, a little bit prickish. We all welcome Microsoft into the FLOSS community but under our terms not theirs. They've had it their way for many years and many lawsuits. If we are tougher on them then say SUN or IBM (which I don't think we are.) there is ample reason.
Having said All of that, I believe and have said in another thread, this is very close to a good license, Its short, It has Patent protections, A couple of very small changes and I would not be weary of using code under this license. I would probably never release anything new under it but I wouldn't be afraid to modify existing MS-PL code.
The snag is right here.
This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software.
This is where the incompatible part is. GPL and other govern only distribution not usage. Here is relevant part of GPL
This License explicitly affirms your unlimited permission to run the unmodified Program.
Now that is what I call Permissive. MS-PL is not a license it is a EULA. It is not permissive.
Other than that, I am actually surprised at how Open this "License" is. Baby Steps to open source. I particularly like this bit, which I thought I'd never see from MS.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
Under Conditions and Limitations:
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
Great First Draft. Tiny bit of tweaking and I would not shy away from code covered under this license.
http://www.thieveryut.com/ Runs great in wine. Total Conversion for Original Unreal Tournament, Give it a go if you haven't already. Thief multiplayer using UT = awesome.
Your problem is easily solved with KrANDr. Sits in the taskbar,right click, under Orientation, click upsideDown.
Piece of cake.
Excellent...
Well, your statement seemed to indicate "Linux" is too hard for your mom to setup and use. I say this is bullshit because windows is all but impossible to setup and administer for the average mother or ten yr old. Your implication that "Linux" is not ready for said 10yr old or mother because of this inability is bullshit strictly because your mother and my daughter CAN use windows. The Bullshit is Windows is ready for them because it IS setup by people with the requisite knowledge, Dell did not. Why is this same model not sufficient for "Linux"? It may not be ideal but saying its not viable is wrong as my example proves. Dell is not a rinky dink operation. There is not a lack of FLOSS developers to hire to correctly deploy this solution. They have the money to fix the Media Codec issues for their distribution. And the synaptic mouse issue is a bonehead mistake also by Dell. My statement about Live CDs should not be missed, Give your mom a copy of Puppy Linux, or Kubuntu, or Vector Linux, she will be surfing the web in under a minute from cold boot. (Media Codec issues may be the same, cannot be helped until Patent is over.)unless: Linspire has most Codec issues solved and can be setup by an imbecile. Surely you think your mom is smarter than an imbecile. Note. I do not endorse Linspire as a preffered Distro just pointing out its ease of use. I also take exception to the use of the word Linux in a blanket statement covering all Distros when in fact only one was reviewed.
In my opinion all of this completely justifies Linus' decision on the matter.
If you do not understand the purpose of the Kernel you really should not be in charge of critical parts of it. Large chunks of the kernel source are unused and unneeded by almost any implementation. But they are there for when they are needed.
Thank You Good Sir Daedone.
and MMUless processors
and X86s
and SPARCs
and Desktops
and Servers
and Laptops
and Routers
and Watches
and SetTop Boxes
and Spa Controls
and Mobile Phones
and Internet Radio Devices
and PDAs
Just imagine the endless possibilities that would be served by Forking the Kernel.
We've been pidgeonholed for too long, geeks unite and divide.
I'm sure you could get Con to be the scheduler maintainer for your new Fork. (I'm going to dub it LUNIX or maybe LooniC)
And there was much rejoicing.
I call Bullshit, She couldn't setup windows either. She didn't watch me step by step, she turned it on and it worked, just like she used to with windows, which I also setup. Since then she can boot the live Kubuntu CD all by herself, if she borks her system and so can your mom.
My point here is that Dell is the agent using open source tools to sell a Laptop. The onus is really on them to do so in a way that your mom and my daughter can use it.
The process of setting up a working Desktop is even more difficult with windows than it is for Ubuntu. Driver, reboot, driver,reboot driver, reboot, driver, reboot, driver, update, reboot, update, update, reboot. Oh I forgot pray.
Think about all of those soccer mom's that don't have time to figure out the syntax for apt-get becuase they simply want to email the soccer pictures to their freinds.
apt-get? The reviewer used Ubuntu, which uses add remove utility, and auto update utility. Not just for the OS but for every package on the system. (You can use apt-get command line of course, but that is a feature not a bug.) Review had No complaints about email. Only 1 mention of a Kodak camera in conjunction with Ipod, the real problem.
FTFA: Dell and Canonical tell me there are complex workarounds for some of the problems I encountered, and that built-in improvements are planned for others. But for now, I still advise mainstream, nontechnical users to avoid Linux.
My problem with the review is this quote. Stay away from Dell laptop w/Ubuntu preinstalled, would be a better conclusion. Stay away from linux OEMs who don't know what they are doing. Also unless you are a technical person familiar with windows stay away from purchasing a no OS system.
NO wrong, Wrong, WRONG.
The Linux SubCulture needs to keep doing what it has always done: Solve technical problems as they arise. MP3 playback solved years ago, DVD playback solved years ago, Touchpads ditto. There are still some problems without answers yet and people are working on them, However I see none of them in this Review.
My daughter is 10 1/2 yrs old. She has never compiled anything. However, she has been a happy Kubuntu user for almost 2 yrs now. She did not set her OS up, obviously. It was pre-installed, By me. In this example I am Dell and she is the user. I knew she would need mp3 support. I knew she would needs DVD support, I knew she would need Camera Support. I set them up and she is none the wiser. Just like if you go to DELL and buy a new machine bundle. Everything is pre-installed. Dell should be taking the money they are saving on MS license and use a portion of it to enable these features. Pay a MP3 license, pay a DVD license. They did not.
It's perfectly possible to make a UNIX OS be usable by the masses -- Apple's done that with OS X. The difference is that Apple "cheats" -- they only support a certain range of hardware, all of which is a known quantity to them. They're not dealing with the issues of a Frankencomputer made from whatever bits of hardware happen to show up.
See you already stated the obvious. This laptop is not a "Frankencomputer". It is a known set of hardware. DELL is APPLE in your analogy not Linux or Ubuntu. (K)(X)Ubuntu is doing a fine job of giving system builders the tools to deploy a Linux Desktop to almost any computer on the market, but the tweaking must be done on a per PC and sometimes per User basis.
This article is not a critique of Linux or Ubuntu, it is a critique of DELL. This man purchased a laptop from dell that was not setup properly. END OF STORY.
Why is it so many people equate Linux as all inclusive? Linux is not a product. A PC is a product, an OS is a product. Linux is a kernel. Combined with hardware and a ton of other utilities it can be a either a unbootable mess or a damn fine Desktop or Server.
Call me a zealot then. leaner, lighter, faster does not mean better. leaner usually means less features, lighter usually means skimped, faster usually means shortcutted, Granted on a new program it can be made faster, lighter, leaner, without these drawbacks. But GCC is a very, very mature piece of software. The easiest way to be faster, lighter, and leaner than GCC, is to be inferior to it. GPL vs BSD, My professional and personal opinion is GPL is better. Since I do not use *BSD, I guess I have a hard time understanding the need. Even if i did, it sure sound like a bunch of whining that compiling an entire operating system is too time consuming. waaaaanh! I build embedded systems for a living, where changing 1 line of code sometimes can start a very long recompile. This is as it should be.
Then the answer is no. I may be alone in the world but I'm perfectly happy with the gcc compiler and have been for years. It does what its supposed to, It is FREE, It is crossplatform (MingW), and it annoys the BSD guys.
Clear Winner. GCC
It has been pointed out here, that people who choose a compiler based on its license are idiots. Well if I'm working on windows I use MingW specifically because of its license. If I'm working in Linux and I usually am, I choose GPL above all others. Count me as an Idiot if you like, But you can shove the alternatives. I know what I am getting and have a reasonable expectation what is coming in the future, and if I need to modify it (Heaven Forbid) I can. BSD is a fine license for people who NEED it. I don't. When given the choice I choose GPL. GCC Slower, maybe so. Code works and I get paid. If it takes 3 hrs for QT to compile. I bill for 3Hrs.
Sorry but, I'm a pragmatist in all things except freedom. I've been burned enough. (Admittedly, I've personally never been burned by BSD code, unless you count Windows.)
My only question is, where are the links?
I was thinking consistently an ass, at least in his public comments, but that is why I intentionally left up to the reader.
traditional reasoning? What like Religious Traditions? Lets do some basic homework, shall we?
Wikipedia: Rationality as a term is related to the idea of reason, a word which following Webster's may be derived as much from older terms referring to thinking itself as from giving an account or an explanation. This lends the term a dual aspect. One aspect associates it with comprehension, intelligence, or inference, particularly when an inference is drawn in ordered ways (thus a syllogism is a rational argument in this sense). The other part associates rationality with explanation, understanding or justification, particularly if it provides a ground or a motive. 'Irrational', therefore, is defined as that which is not endowed with reason or understanding.
Rationality contra logic A logical argument is sometimes described as "rational" if it is logically valid. However, rationality is a much broader term than logic, as it includes "uncertain but sensible" arguments based on probability, expectation, personal experience and the like, whereas logic deals principally with provable facts and demonstrably valid relations between them.
Dictionary.com:
rational -adjective
1. agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible: a rational plan for economic development.
2. having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense: a calm and rational negotiator.
3. being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason; sane; lucid: The patient appeared perfectly rational.
4. endowed with the faculty of reason: rational beings.
5. of, pertaining to, or constituting reasoning powers: the rational faculty.
6. proceeding or derived from reason or based on reasoning: a rational explanation.
--Synonyms 2. intelligent, wise, judicious, sagacious, enlightened. 6. See reasonable.
--Antonyms 2. stupid. 3. insane.
Sounds like an apt description of Professor Dawkins to me. Maybe you could point me to some evidence of his irrationality? I have this great clip of Pastor Ted from "The Root of All Evil?" giving a classic example of Irrational behavior if you need a reference. I have a ton of material from Professor Dawkins that is extremely rational, according to above descriptions.
I mean can't we all just get along.
Say what you want about Theo, At least he's consistent.
Richard Dawkins is about as rational as any of the hoplophobes at the VPC
Wow never heard that term. Quick search, The term sheeple has also come to be used to describe hoplophobes and other similar persons - people with an illogical fear of weapons, fire, cars, machinery etc, and certain other things such as men in camouflage or ethnic minorities. In this sense it is used particularly amongst gun and knife enthusiasts.
You must be kidding. From the Wikipedia
Clinton Richard Dawkins (born March 26, 1941) is a British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and popular science writer who holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.
Dawkins moved to England with his parents at the age of eight, and attended Oundle School. He then studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was tutored by Nobel Prize-winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen. He gained a BA degree in zoology in 1962, followed by MA and DPhil degrees in 1966, and a DSc in 1989.
From 1967 to 1969, Dawkins was an assistant professor of zoology in the University of California, Berkeley. In 1970 he was appointed a lecturer, and in 1990 a reader in zoology in the University of Oxford. In 1995, he was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford, a position endowed by Charles Simonyi with an express intention that Dawkins be its first holder. He has been a fellow of New College, Oxford since 1970.
Berkley, Oxford, Yep they churn out and promote as many irrational people as Liberty U. Pfft. Anyone who professes to be an atheist has voided any claim at rationality, period
Umm, I profess it, and for purely rational reasons. Ever do any comparative religion studies. No, I thought not. That would be rational, for you to explore the alternatives and weigh out the evidence rather than blindly follow what you were told. It requires just as much, if not more, blind faith as any actual religion.
No, actually it requires critical thinking, reasoning, and consideration of the presented evidence. Have you done so? Do you have some new theological supernatural evidence for me to consider? I'll wait.
....
...
... Maybe some evidence backing up your claim that I require blind faith to come to my conclusions.
No, Well I have some for you. http://video.google.com/url?docid=-5036418388026112799&esrc=sr1&ev=v&len=625&q=Atheism%3A%2BA%2BRough%2BHistory%2Bof%2BDisbelief&srcurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DuhsMKQF1ROE&vidurl=%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D-5036418388026112799%26q%3DAtheism%253A%2BA%2BRough%2BHistory%2Bof%2BDisbelief%26total%3D33%26start%3D0%26num%3D10%26so%3D0%26type%3Dsearch%26plindex%3D0&usg=AL29H21-PwyzEntJXt5TFWxNQ_OtK85sCw
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1579120088897504565
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgKTVPNW2kE
Obviously I could go on all day, just with video links. I could very easily bury you in a mountain of books and papers. And your counter "evidence" is always going to be just one fictional book. Evolution is almost enough evidence of the non-existence of a supernatural GOD. This is why it frightens so many creationist. Tough.
Most people are atheist with respect to all the other religions of the world. I just go one GOD more.
BTW, Have you actually read anythi
As important as the cheap computer is, the target market will still need affordable Internet access.
Are any plans being made to toward this ?
The laptops operate as a mesh network. Every laptop extends the network to the next.
(BTW, I realise this is a bit of a chicken/egg problem, however the laptop is obviously the egg here)
In this case, the XO is the chicken and the egg.
According to Google Calculator
188 U.S. dollars = 92.7204577 British pounds