No, what I find ironic is that microsoft would buy $380 Million dollars worth of licenses for an open source operating system ostensibly in the interest of cross-platform interoperability and then not interoperate with it when they "open-source" their new "cross-platform" widget. To top it off, Microsoft and their shills still insist on trying to decieve people by saying that Silverdark is really cross-platform and open-source.
I apologize; that makes it dual platform. I was fooled there for a second. Too bad it won't run on some new Dell machines. And I'm sure that Microsoft will support it on the Mac every bit as much as they support MS Office.
And nice try attempting to make two operating systems look like five. Do you think the SilverDark support for the Mac will be as good as the Office 2007 support?
No, the spokesman quoted in the original wired "update" seems to have gotten it wrong. According to the latest entry, the hardware was changed to accomodate microsoft:
...will the project, which once seemed destined to put open-source software and development tools in the hands of millions of children, instead become a Trojan horse for Redmond to hook a new generation on closed-source Microsoft wares?
Jepsen acknowledges that the decision last year to add an SD slot to the machine was partially to accommodate what she diplomatically describe as "software that's not the most trim, svelte software in the world."
That's a good one -- "partially accomodate". Is that like getting a little bit pregnant?
There's some high-level dodging and spinning going on at OLPC, which is usually the case when a "relationship" with Microsoft is involved.
that increase in memory will also be very useful on the linux side.
How useful is the corresponding price increase?
Negroponte has screwed open source by nearly doubling the OLPC price so it can run Windows. He's just back-stabbed all the people who donated a lot of time and effort into putting together a low cost laptop and the free as in speech software to run it.
The OLPC project is now dead, just like every other venture that capitulates with Microsoft.
I'm neither defending CCA or even Universities......The University took the exact right action in this case.
It's funny to hear all the fear coming out of the IT shills. How many scholarships do you think that Universities could give for what they pay for this kind of easily bypassed software? The shills are terrified that people will start to ask, "why are you spending millions of dollars on all this IT software when it doesn't work?" or "how much of the latest tuition hike is really going towards paying for ineffective software?"
The shills never even touch the subject that the software is what's really fraudulent. They only say "the kid violated his service agreement, and needs to be severely punished with life-altering consequences." And,"the network is only for what IT says it's for, and IT doesn't have to explain shit to the user." The shills are terrified and will do anything to distract people from the fact that the high-priced software the University uses is dogshit. They'll even wreck a good kid's future.
All these shills remind me of the line in the Mel Brooks movie "Blazing Saddles". The part where the governor (Mel Brooks) says, "We've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs!"
But, he should have come forward to a professor or administrator first;
Yeah, well maybe you and all the others who self-righteously say this kid should have told someone in authority about his activity should have READ the fine article:
Additionally, he gave the program to several friends and one professor.
The University's IT department got it's ass kicked by a student -- a sophomore no less -- and now they are really embarrassed, as should be those who defend the University's actions. They are all money-grubbing IT shills afraid that the someone's going to bust their systems and show how full of shit they really are.
Their mantra: better that one student be ruined than our reputation suffer.
Muppet is a good description for the shills that spun the article. Skimming this article would make one think that Vista is just chock-full of helpful "features" to aid in application compatability. Reading it a little closer, and one finds that all of the "solutions" (holy puke! how can these clowns even call these cross-your-fingers-and-hope-it-works last ditch desperate workarounds "solutions"?) end up with the user rewriting portions of the problem application.
Funny how they never even address issues of copyright violation when they mention rewriting code, or using 3rd party tools to crack applications. I doubt that Microsoft would take kindly to me rewriting portions of Visio to run on Linux.
The authors of the fine article should start looking for good attorneys, because they've just greenlighted rewriting proprietary code for better compatability.
And, it is worth noting that the laws you allude to as being put in place by Bush are the same kind of laws sought by the RIAA. And a lot of democrats voted for those laws.
In other words, if you're running an ER and you get somebody who's hemorrhaging, you don't treat him/her by breaking an arm.
Just because a person doesn't like the republicans is no excuse to let the democrats slide on this. If anything, they should raise more of an uproar about this, because it's taking place within their own camp.
No doubt. And all we ever hear from the democrats is "Bush is syping... Bush is eavesdropping.. Bush is monitoring financial transactions..," ad nauseum. And now, when the democrats sell out to the RIAA -- who want the legal right to impersonate people to obtain personal information in order to extort money, the RIAA that spies on people and whose members condone the use of rootkits to bug personal computers, the RIAA that wants to control all means of distributing any audio content in any form -- what will we hear from the two-faced hypocrites that claim to be the defenders of free speech and personal privacy?
Wow, you mean Ubuntu can do all this with one click and a password (from TFA):
... installs a rootkit to cloak itself, disables security software, steals confidential information from the PC and adds it to a bot army of compromised computers... the malware bundled with the spam is self-replicating, so it's able to sniff out e-mail addresses on infected PCs and send copies of itself to those recipients... The spam blast also includes a host of randomization and antidetection features, other researchers said. "E-mails are randomized with different filenames, different passwords and different binaries within the ZIP file to evade detection,"... "And once executed, the worm communicates over a private peer-to-peer (P2P) network to update itself."
If that's the case, I'm impressed with Ubuntu -- it would almost be as "good" as windows.
Orrin Hatch made similar commentary, that it should be legal to destroy the computers of copyright infringers.
Orrin's son Brent is an attorney for the infamous SCO, which would mean that if Orrin and Brent got their way, all computers running linux could be legally destroyed.
Slashdot Mirror
consumer gouge adds up to dead goat.
The topless babes are OK, though.
There's some high-level dodging and spinning going on at OLPC, which is usually the case when a "relationship" with Microsoft is involved.
Negroponte has screwed open source by nearly doubling the OLPC price so it can run Windows. He's just back-stabbed all the people who donated a lot of time and effort into putting together a low cost laptop and the free as in speech software to run it.
The OLPC project is now dead, just like every other venture that capitulates with Microsoft.
The shills never even touch the subject that the software is what's really fraudulent. They only say "the kid violated his service agreement, and needs to be severely punished with life-altering consequences." And,"the network is only for what IT says it's for, and IT doesn't have to explain shit to the user." The shills are terrified and will do anything to distract people from the fact that the high-priced software the University uses is dogshit. They'll even wreck a good kid's future.
All these shills remind me of the line in the Mel Brooks movie "Blazing Saddles". The part where the governor (Mel Brooks) says, "We've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs!"
Put that in your smug pipe and smoke it.
Additionally, he gave the program to several friends and one professor.
The University's IT department got it's ass kicked by a student -- a sophomore no less -- and now they are really embarrassed, as should be those who defend the University's actions. They are all money-grubbing IT shills afraid that the someone's going to bust their systems and show how full of shit they really are.
Their mantra: better that one student be ruined than our reputation suffer.
Kodak and Sun settled for $92 million.
Funny how they never even address issues of copyright violation when they mention rewriting code, or using 3rd party tools to crack applications. I doubt that Microsoft would take kindly to me rewriting portions of Visio to run on Linux.
The authors of the fine article should start looking for good attorneys, because they've just greenlighted rewriting proprietary code for better compatability.
So you mean it's like she never went to the RIAA in the first place?
Thanks for proving my point.
And, it is worth noting that the laws you allude to as being put in place by Bush are the same kind of laws sought by the RIAA. And a lot of democrats voted for those laws.
In other words, if you're running an ER and you get somebody who's hemorrhaging, you don't treat him/her by breaking an arm.
Just because a person doesn't like the republicans is no excuse to let the democrats slide on this. If anything, they should raise more of an uproar about this, because it's taking place within their own camp.
Not a fucking thing.
...can you run it on Linux?