I agree with Martin Taylor that transitioning software on a Linux platform can be difficult. I also believe transitioning software on ANY platform is difficult. If it wasn't, none of us would have jobs.
I also agree with Martin Taylor that going to a Linux platform may prove more costly than first expected. I also know from experience that Microsoft roll-outs have additional cost.
For Example: MS Exchange server compared to SuSE OpenExchange (now Netline OpenExchange). Similar Products. Exchange is cheaper out of the box until you add Spam Control, Virus Control, etc... Also, Exchange counts licenses by CAL connection, OpenExchange is Licensed by concurrent connections - much cheaper. If you want you can even download the Netline Open-Xchange for free with no license restrictions.
Martin Taylor is correct on many points. Unfortunately his logic breaks down because those points are universal and not specific to OSS.
I am glad to see that Dan did not kowtow to MS despite being a speaker. MS cannot smoke and mirror us into believing the "Windows is secure mantra" by merely providing good, believable speakers. His comparing apples to apples was also a jab at the MS statistical spin machine.
Before there was a "requirement" to share lines, many ILECs (Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers) withheld valuable technology from the public. Bellsouth had DSL capability for years but releasing to the home user would have cannibalized their business T1 subscriptions. Even with "requirements" to share lines and invite competition, ILECs tend to drag their feet and construct obstacles for CLECs (Competitive Local Exchange Carriers) to enter the market.
Creative Commons looks like a cafeteria style copyright. It does not seem to cover any new ground by what it does or does not cover, but it is innovative in the flexibility it offers under one umbrella.
I like Firefox, I have deployed Firefox as the defacto browser in my company and it is my primary browser.
That being said, it is sad when only (a questionable) 10% usage rate is viewed as any type of challenge to IE. Have we lowered our standards for what real competition should be?
It only makes sense that Greasemonkey would provide a rich medium for exploits. However, let's not throw out the baby with bathwater with reactionism. This is an obstacle / opportunity to help Greasemonkey to evolve, perhaps to Grease-Neanderthal.
I would like to add, once again Lynx proves itself the uber-browser.
Although I like the look and concept of Zeta, where does it fit into the OS ecosystem? Unfortunately it does not. Zeta may be doomed to a novel hobby OS. It has several disadvantages in competing with other operating systems. (Assuming it is competing.) 1. Look and Feel - OSX hands down is better. Dare I say, even Windows XP is better? 2. Drivers, Support, Compatibility - Windows XP 3. Cost - Linux 4. Stability - Linux, OSX 5. Security - I'll give Zeta this category, only because there would only be a few niche virus writers / crackers who would even attempt compromising a specialized system like this. 6. Interoperability - OSX and Linux are better
I am glad to see someone attempting to compete (assuming they are competing) on the desktop, but to succeed they will need a contemporary OS, not a circa 2001 OS.
Microsoft is playing a dangerous game. Most of their Hotmail users will not understand why they are not receiving their emails or how to remedy it. They will blame Hotmail.
Microsoft, hoisted by their own proprietary petard.
That being said, I believe this is the beginning of a trend. As our culture(s) become more technologically savvy it would follow that the age of entry into computer knowledge would continue to drop.
Ask many people in a first world country about how a car works and most would be able to give you a decent explanation. 100 years ago that knowledge would have belonged to an elite group.
The barrier to entry in the computer sciences is dropping and the elite are disappearing, get used to it.
I know this is a common argument, but what if we applied the same patent rules to Brick and Mortar? Can we restrict people and businesses from using common business practices and logic? I.e. I patent "How may I help you?" as a lead question. Now no one can use that line. I know it is ridiculous.
I am in favor of people protecting their unique inventions and developments, but securing patents for the obvious and mundane is a typical symptom of US litigious culture.
I can afford a Corolla but not a Ferrari, no matter how much better and appealing the Ferrari is.
Unreal T. runs on my machine. Doom does not.
A little Doomed Poetry
Doom requires a GPU that I can't afford anywho,
Cycles and Ram beyond comprehension,
Hardware upgrade is their intention.
Perhaps when I get that fat raise,
I will sing ID's Praise.
Until that Day with my Pay I will stay with my current hardware array.
I am not sure "toppling the 800 pound Red Gorilla" needs to be the only impetus for developing another distro. Redhat certainly has done quite a bit to bolster the server / enterprise side of Linux, however they are not a desktop or end user player. Ubuntu is focused on the desktop / end user and seems to have a better grasp of UI, Ease of use, and intuitive design for the non-Linux savvy than most (including RedHat).
Your conclusions on Ubuntu's motives and goals was quite a stretch.
Shouldn't the some of the onus be on the manufacturer to make the device come with some security enabled? I know they want to appeal to the least common denominator, but they are not doing any service for their customers by leaving them wide open to exploitation. Couldn't the installation interface have some explanation of risks in layman's terms. Does every XYZ wirless router have to come with the username "admin" and pw "XYZ"? Don't let it transmit until it has been secured.
Open Source Software is more than Operating Systems. What about companies (in the US and Japan) using MySql, Apache, Ethereal, etc...) Linux, BSD et al.. are great for companies to adopt, but the reality is the greatest infiltration of OSS will come from applications which can run on Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with Martin Taylor that transitioning software on a Linux platform can be difficult. I also believe transitioning software on ANY platform is difficult. If it wasn't, none of us would have jobs.
I also agree with Martin Taylor that going to a Linux platform may prove more costly than first expected. I also know from experience that Microsoft roll-outs have additional cost.
For Example: MS Exchange server compared to SuSE OpenExchange (now Netline OpenExchange). Similar Products. Exchange is cheaper out of the box until you add Spam Control, Virus Control, etc... Also, Exchange counts licenses by CAL connection, OpenExchange is Licensed by concurrent connections - much cheaper. If you want you can even download the Netline Open-Xchange for free with no license restrictions.
Martin Taylor is correct on many points. Unfortunately his logic breaks down because those points are universal and not specific to OSS.
I am glad to see that Dan did not kowtow to MS despite being a speaker. MS cannot smoke and mirror us into believing the "Windows is secure mantra" by merely providing good, believable speakers. His comparing apples to apples was also a jab at the MS statistical spin machine.
Will this fix the /. post delay?
Astaro http://www.astaro.ca/ offers a good all -in-one appliance.
I believe SuSE Desktop comes with OpenOffice. It ends up being much less than it's MS counterpart.
Although I am a fan of SuSE, I am concerned with Novell's distribution methods. Getting the Open Source download has become difficult.
Ironically, the alwayson-network.com has been /.ed.
Before there was a "requirement" to share lines, many ILECs (Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers) withheld valuable technology from the public. Bellsouth had DSL capability for years but releasing to the home user would have cannibalized their business T1 subscriptions. Even with "requirements" to share lines and invite competition, ILECs tend to drag their feet and construct obstacles for CLECs (Competitive Local Exchange Carriers) to enter the market.
Creative Commons looks like a cafeteria style copyright. It does not seem to cover any new ground by what it does or does not cover, but it is innovative in the flexibility it offers under one umbrella.
I like Firefox, I have deployed Firefox as the defacto browser in my company and it is my primary browser.
That being said, it is sad when only (a questionable) 10% usage rate is viewed as any type of challenge to IE. Have we lowered our standards for what real competition should be?
Does anyone know how much code is shared between OS/2 & NT 4.0?
I always thought they were cousins, am I correct?
...a bad feeling about this."
It only makes sense that Greasemonkey would provide a rich medium for exploits. However, let's not throw out the baby with bathwater with reactionism. This is an obstacle / opportunity to help Greasemonkey to evolve, perhaps to Grease-Neanderthal. I would like to add, once again Lynx proves itself the uber-browser.
Although I like the look and concept of Zeta, where does it fit into the OS ecosystem? Unfortunately it does not. Zeta may be doomed to a novel hobby OS. It has several disadvantages in competing with other operating systems. (Assuming it is competing.)
1. Look and Feel - OSX hands down is better. Dare I say, even Windows XP is better?
2. Drivers, Support, Compatibility - Windows XP
3. Cost - Linux
4. Stability - Linux, OSX
5. Security - I'll give Zeta this category, only because there would only be a few niche virus writers / crackers who would even attempt compromising a specialized system like this.
6. Interoperability - OSX and Linux are better
I am glad to see someone attempting to compete (assuming they are competing) on the desktop, but to succeed they will need a contemporary OS, not a circa 2001 OS.
I prefer 8-track.
Microsoft is playing a dangerous game. Most of their Hotmail users will not understand why they are not receiving their emails or how to remedy it. They will blame Hotmail.
Microsoft, hoisted by their own proprietary petard.
Why won't IBM release OS/2 into the wild as Open Source? It is (was) a great Operating System.
Goodbye OS/2,
I will miss you,
Goodbye to your cousin NT 4.0 too,
Boo Hoo, Boo Hoo
First of all, congratulations to her.
That being said, I believe this is the beginning of a trend. As our culture(s) become more technologically savvy it would follow that the age of entry into computer knowledge would continue to drop.
Ask many people in a first world country about how a car works and most would be able to give you a decent explanation. 100 years ago that knowledge would have belonged to an elite group.
The barrier to entry in the computer sciences is dropping and the elite are disappearing, get used to it.
I know this is a common argument, but what if we applied the same patent rules to Brick and Mortar? Can we restrict people and businesses from using common business practices and logic? I.e. I patent "How may I help you?" as a lead question. Now no one can use that line. I know it is ridiculous.
I am in favor of people protecting their unique inventions and developments, but securing patents for the obvious and mundane is a typical symptom of US litigious culture.
Does this mean I can I recompile it? Do I get the source? What if it shows up in SCO code?
I know what I'll be reading next Friday night.
I can afford a Corolla but not a Ferrari, no matter how much better and appealing the Ferrari is.
Unreal T. runs on my machine. Doom does not.
A little Doomed Poetry
Doom requires a GPU
that I can't afford anywho,
Cycles and Ram beyond comprehension,
Hardware upgrade is their intention.
Perhaps when I get that fat raise,
I will sing ID's Praise.
Until that Day with my Pay
I will stay with my current hardware array.
But can it allow me to put people on hold and force them to enjoy my musical selections?
Will they have a Tom Jones edition?
These are the burning questions.
I am not sure "toppling the 800 pound Red Gorilla" needs to be the only impetus for developing another distro. Redhat certainly has done quite a bit to bolster the server / enterprise side of Linux, however they are not a desktop or end user player. Ubuntu is focused on the desktop / end user and seems to have a better grasp of UI, Ease of use, and intuitive design for the non-Linux savvy than most (including RedHat).
Your conclusions on Ubuntu's motives and goals was quite a stretch.
Shouldn't the some of the onus be on the manufacturer to make the device come with some security enabled? I know they want to appeal to the least common denominator, but they are not doing any service for their customers by leaving them wide open to exploitation. Couldn't the installation interface have some explanation of risks in layman's terms. Does every XYZ wirless router have to come with the username "admin" and pw "XYZ"? Don't let it transmit until it has been secured.
Open Source Software is more than Operating Systems. What about companies (in the US and Japan) using MySql, Apache, Ethereal, etc...) Linux, BSD et al.. are great for companies to adopt, but the reality is the greatest infiltration of OSS will come from applications which can run on Windows.