but I really don't understand what business the courts have interfering in voluntary contractual relationships.
Lets see.
Contractors work under contracts. A contract is a divorce agreement between 2 parties. And, when 2 parties disagree, this gets settled by a judge.
Looks like Microsoft and said CONTRACTors had a difference of opinion, and a court, interperting the law, decided Microsoft was in violation of the law.
What would you rather have? No law? Congress pass a law/edict? Some form of government allowing this guy to become in charge?
This will accomplish little except to raise prices and take jobs away from people. Errr, how can Microsoft raise prices on Windows when there are 'free' alternatives? Microsoft is VERY aware of price pressures. Look at the laughter of the $13000 price for NT 3.1. Then, look at how quickly NT 3.1 sales increased when the price wnet to $250.
And, if you listen to Brett Glass, the GPL is ment to take away jobs.
This court action will have no marked effect on prices or jobs.
If you want to cure an open relay problem, send the admins a message or contact ORBS. It's absolutely asinine for people to use other's systems without their approval.
Lets see. You advocate the use of ORBS, yet ORBS launches a 15+ test attack on a target machine WITHOUT the premission of the sysadmin of the machine who's accused annonymously of having an open relay.
If it is asinine to use anothers system without premission, then why advocate ORBS, who do exactly that....launch a 15+ probe attack VS a host without that sysadmins premission, all based on submissions which proof can not be provided for?
So who knows what the market penetration of any Open Source OS is? The 'problem' is these numbers are 'sold' (some of this selling is alledged) by varing orginizations. Some of the numbers would be more correct (say netcraft) VS others (say gardner group)
The Open Source solution to the problem would be to have web server logs go to a central database. However, tampering could not be stopped with such an effort. The next type of solution is to scan the entire IP space and see what kind of OS is out there. The last public project shows in April 1999 that the BSD/Linux ratio is 1:2 (more or less).
Places like google or yahoo would also have a large enough sample space to provide useful numbers. If they chose to enlighten us.
At the moment however, all that exists on/. is a common AC troll who keeps claiming that BSD's numbers are dropping, yet has never provided an actual link, or actual numbers. Said person is unwilling to post these numbers, because, well, said troll doesn't have them. This same troll USED to claim that Applixware knew that BSD was dying, and that is why there would never be an appixware 5.0. Yet look, Applixware 5.0. Another person claims a web site that counts the number of linux distros, and this link has yet to be seen.
I was kinda hoping calling linux doomed on/. would have gotten some actual links. But alas, no such luck.
How can anybody get reliable numbers? Buildiung to building searches looking for such installs?
(note how the BSD troll is responded to in kind. Numbers can be twisted any damn way a person wants. I'd like to see a %age breakdown of what each linux distro has. So, if you have a link to such a %age, please post it! About the only real point is when comparing BSD/Linux market share, FreeBSD has the advantage of market differentation vs the average Linux distro in the Open Source OS market. Otherwise, enjoy the flaming troll twisting of numbers in the spirit of the original AC's post. Merry Xmas!)
Bob Bruce of BSDi (previously of Walnut Creek) says FreeBSD's user amount is 20% of the size of the linux market.
If you consider FreeBSD and Linux all fighting for the same slice of the pie, how many of the 180+ linux distros have 20% marketshare? Lets see...given all distros have the same kernel, they are all alike. So the average market share for any linux distro is 0.55% or 1011 users per distro. So FreeBSD has a far greater marketshare and number of users than the average Linux distro for the Open Source OS market.
36400*5=182000 total linux users. counter.li.org says there are 162,680 Linux users. As you can see, the numbers presented as to why BSD is doomed are similar.
It looks like the individual linux companies, none of them strong enough to get any useful market share (1,011 users per distro) will doom the Open Source OS market to appear as a failure.
As you can see, Linux is very, VERY sick and its long term survival is very dim. And the stock prices of Linux companies show how doomed linux is. If Linux survives, it will be among OS hobbyists and die-hard users who read/. . But BSDi, having 20% market at present will rise to the top and become the default Open Source OS.
With the release of Apple's Mac OS X - based on BSD and selling 2 million units a quarter, you can see how just one quarter of Apple sales will outsell *ALL* of the Linux users.
The lawsuit idea is not new. And it *IS* doable, but requires people to work together. And, a bit of software. For the Open Source community, comming up with software is easy. To work together, and be willing to spend $100 to take a spammer to small claims court, now THAT is hard.
The 'pecked to death by ducks' method is used by local religious groups, local community groups concerened about slum landlords or drugs and others.
I could not find a 'how to sue the local porn shop into non-existance' link, but I did find this part of the congressional record:
Link
Defendants are then compelled to settle for nuisance value. *smile* A spammer settling because of the nuisance they caused.
Remember Al Gore? At one time (8+ years ago) he tried floating a trial balloon of "government sponsered internet" ala what the internet USED to be before all this web-crap popped up.
Back when UseNet was the forum. And you had to have an acedemic reason to be on the Internet. And you knew that prep.ai.mit.edu had a good ftp site, and the new archie is how you hunted for a program.
This balloon, like government backed health care was rejected. What you see today is the result of that rejection years ago. So, what makes anyone believe a return to the old goverenment backed internet will happen?
If you *LIKE* the idea of the government stopping spam, then think about this. No need for any additional laws, just use the laws and methods that exist. And, instead of money going into the pockets of some goverenment body, it could end up in your pocket. Alas, you'd have to actually *WORK* to sue the spammers, and I doubht KTB will want to work.
Actually, because that is not part of the core business of Yahoo!, that could happen.
And because it is not part of Yahoo!'s core business, gahtering and processing this data would not be paid by Yahoo! either.
I have no idea as to whom you'd need to approach to get such information. Perhaps enough concerned admins could get together and insert output from their logs into a central database, who's sole goal it is to try and figure out this question of "who has the bigger OS"? Looking at tne 'results' of redhatisntolinux.org, the large number of slackware users show how results of 'concerned' sysadmins could cook the books.
The actual out-of-pocket costs is minimal to the spammer.
What will stop spam?
When the cost of spamming exceeds the benefit.
With the present US legal system, how can the cost of spamming be increased? Lawsuits.
How to do this?
1) everyone who wants to feed the local ambulance chasers/people who like small claims actions/ppl who hate spammers have to be willing to buy create and sell debt so the others can buy that debt and then can take spammers to court.
2) Software to act as auto-billing and clearing house for the mail analysis debt. (to make it easy for the spammed to help the local ppl to spammer to have to potential to make money)
3) people willing to change their mailers to note that this system accepts mis-configured mail messages and bills for it.
Spammer sends the mail to the host for analysis. Said target machine gets mail and sends 3 billing notices for $250. Then the $250 charge is placed into the 'database'. A local hater of spam/ambulance chaser buys the bad debt (unpaid $250) for a %age, or for $1-5. Local person drags spammer to small claims.
As more people sign up, and more spammers get dragged to court, the economic benifit to spam swings. It becomes a case where spam can cost $250+ court costs per message, + time in small claims court. And, if the local plaintiffs know the schedualed court dates of others, they can arrange court dates one a day.
A spammer getting hit $250+ a day, for 30+ days. Does this make spamming sound profitable?
End effect? Spam moves to sites outside the legal reach of suing countries for products outside the reach of suing countries. And, well, if I had to block all mail from russia or china to stop spam, I don't think I'd loose sleep:-)
Yes, there is alot of 'speculation' about the OpenSource market. And some facts would be nice. The closest thing to a 'fact' might be the Gardner group or similar such tracking firm's numbers.
Alas, the 'counter project' doesn't track the version of linux used. www.redhatisnotlinux.org did track the version. And, a grep -i bsd| wc -l shows 135 BSD users....with slackware having higher numbers of users VS RedHat. How many people here think there are more slackware users than redhat?
Somewhere out in cyberspace is a page that tracks the total number of linux distros, and a troll who claims netcraft has OS numbers for 'paying customers'. And, I'm usre someone has a %age breakdown for each linux distro. Yet, no URL's to ANY of this information.
I guesstimate that between 0.2% and 5% of all Linux users have registered with the Linux Counter. So the total number of Linux users is probablybetween 3,250,160 and 81,254,000 people.
Yea, 81 MILLION users. Right.
How about 'linux is #2 os' statement of the other day. What, the DOCUMENTED sales numbers of Apple are meaningless? Where did these numbers come from? If you believe the linux counter people, its no WONDER they are #2, with 81 million users.
So, other than Linux counter...does anyone have any meaningful numbers or URL's to meaningful numbers?
The diskless workstation point is VERY valid. Too bad the parent will stay at 1.:-(
The trick is to have the varied PC software base on the 390. And that trick won't be easy and won't happen soon. Why? Look at how hard it is to get vendors to move off of shrink-wrapped X86 compatible binaries. Windows NT (mips/alpha/ppc) and how many shrink-wrapped non X86 Linux programs are there? (few to none)
Software: Pagekeeper
EULA return policy: The place where you bought it, or us for full refund.
So, I wrote an e-mail...and got no response. Called, and was told there was no way to return the software. Asked for names, then asked to speak to a supervisor.
Said supervisor said they would call back. VP called back in 2 hours, said "no". Asked him to place that in writing, and mail that "no" to me.
3 days later, VP called back and gave me the address to send the software back to.:-)
Sending back software is a good idea, but it takes alot of time and effort to obtain the end goal. And some (Microsoft) won't take its software back.
And a letter from Sega saying cease and desist
on
Dreamcast Runs Linux
·
· Score: 1
Would *NOT* have a chilling effect on such a port?
Look at how simple a cue:cat is, and yet legal staff threw about all kinds of letters, helping to prevent cue:cat code distro.
If EVERY OTHER developer needed to sign a NDA, and the nature of the NDA would stop the creation of BSD/Linux distro running on a Dreamcast, do you think a judge will believe this distro had *NO* help from NDA'd documents?
Given the major linux distros like fighting for marketshare, none of them will agree on a format.
Rather than try to get all the Linux distros to play nice together, it would be eaiser to point to an outside source of Linux compatibility and declare that the standard. This is a BETTER solution than declaring one distro your 'standard'.
Lo and behold, such a platform exists. FreeBSD and the Linux compatibility layer.
Think of this: If your code works with the BSD compatibility layer (BTW, Quake runs FASTER {ok, not much faster} on FreeBSD's compatibility layer than it does on RedHat 7.0), and it doesn't work on a 'linux distro' or your configuration, exactly how compatible is said distro/your configuration?
The only other way is to ship a distro on the game disk and claim that is the SUPPORTED version. All others are unsupported.
RPM does NOT solve the issues with the 150 or more linux distros, nor the different kernels. RPM is a RedHat solution, and there are a whole bunch of other Linux distros that don't think RedHat *IS* linux, just *A* linux.
Yes, but only when the BSD code is used as the example.
Windows "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux "Where do you want to go tomarrow?"
BSD "Hey, are you guys comming or what?"
It may *NOT* matter if this port exists or not....depending on how the IP was obtained to make the port, it *MAY* be in violation of the contracts signed to develop for the dreamcast.
The gamming market is a 'sell at a loss market, make it up selling games' market. Selling a Dreamcast then loading it with a X term CD using BSD or Linux as the base isn't going to thrill the staff at Sega.
Hopefully someone who has seen the contracts for doing Sega development will be able to comment on how hard getting a BSD or Linux version to 'ship pubically' on a Dreamcast.
1980's - 1 k SRAM chips VS 32K and 64K bubble memory. 256 K and 512 K was projected.
Now...how did this all turn out for Intel?
Memtech bought out all of Intel's patents/technology. They are no longer being made by memtech, however they will repair them for you:-)
Will IBM fare better? If the goal is to target servers with 256 mb chips, I wouldn't go out and buy IBM stock based on this revelation. I'm sure this technology has a place in the market, I just don't share the optimisim of the ZD author of this RAM being a server RAM replacement.
However HP moving to an open linux would show some commitment.
Commitment to what?
Open Source?
Can't they show that committment to Open Source by releasing parts (or the whole) of HP/UX as source? How about print drivers? What if HP said 'We will embrace BSD for Pa-RISC boxes - would that not be a commitment?
What if HP took the linux kernel and placed SAM on top of it? (Linux for HP/UX admins) And added their own lodable modules/userspace. HAving YET ANOTHER linux distro helps exactly how?
Changing the way a WHOLE company thinks about source code, with seperate divisions, etc la is a hard task. And, unless the CEO is 110% behind the decision, it is not gonna happen. Bruce Perens is going to have his work cut out for him.
>Unless you actually hate OpenBSD, I don't see any reason to wish for its demise.
Hate, no. Wonder about the long term positioning, yes. If the functions of OpenBSD (a default secure install mode as an example) is put into another BSD, the idea of a secure BSD distro is further justified, but the market share will slip to the preceived stronger BSD distro.
Theo and Co. win the ideological battle. Yet they could end up with no market share. And, at the point where Theo can't sell enough CD's to support the project, does the project stop, or become parttime?
> linux is the only thing that actually works with IA-64, that can't but help linux though
Let me get this straight.
The X86 based present stock of Intel chips kinda suck.
But, if linux works on the new chip, this helps linux, because the new chip will suck less.
Errrrrr.....there are already other processors that linux run on. MIPS/PA-RISC/SPARC/PPC and Alpha. Yet, what is the leading shrink-wrapped option? X86.
Are the non X86 processors driving the adoption of Open Source OSes? No. And the I64 will effect Open Source OS sales about as much as Alpha does.
Once the IA-64 makes it to a mass market, then it will matter. Untill then, the adoption will be about the same as for the non X86 processors.
What a wonderful set of links. But they don't bash Unix as much as they bash Linux. Esp. your last link.
Next time, if you are going to 'pick' on Unix, try using BSD as the basis of your attack. Oh, wait. That means you'd have to WORK to pick on Unix if you use BSD as the example. And your employer Micro$oft is paying you to worry about Linux...not BSD.
All 6 of your 'examples' are non-issues with BSD.
ftpd : The version of ftpd shipped with all versions of FreeBSD since 2.2.0 is not vulnerable to this problem
RPC : FreeBSD is not vulnerable to this problem.
Proper stack : FreeBSD-For a remote attacker, the scope of the attack is severely limited by the requirement to complete a TCP connection with the victim machine, meaning the IP address of the attacking machine is disclosed, and as such the attack can be effectively responded to through the use of tracing, filtering and legal mechanisms.
Kerberos : NetBSD-not-for-export "secr" sets are vulnerable to some of the problems cited in the advisory. (ahhh, them dangerous munitions)
BIND : All versions of FreeBSD after 4.0-RELEASE are not vulnerable to this bug
Netscape : no BSD mention
Perhaps one day Linux will become useful like BSD
on
An RPM Port Of APT
·
· Score: 2
One of the things that make using BSD a joy is the ability to pick a package (or ports), start the install of said program, and, (assuming the maintainter has done their job) get all the dependancies installed auto-magicaly.
And, when some linux distro (odds are Debian, because they had the taste to copy the proven success of the BSD package management. Debian even had the taste to suggest a BSD kernel patched into their userspace.) starts tracking the kernel (and other parts) in a CVS, Linux might have a chance of approaching the quality of BSD for system administration.
If the BSD OpenPorts project ever ships working code, given the liberal BSD license, some Linux distro will pick it up/create some form of rpm/apt patch. I doubt it will be RedHat or Debian 1st. Simple programmers ego prevents them from being 1st.
Given the desire to audit code before it makes it into OpenBSD, and the limited number of people who find joy in code audits, do you feel that OpenBSD will eventually end up so far behind to be eventually considered a historic footmark, like 386BSD?
Do you feel that others opinion of you hurts the progress of the OpenBSD project? (if honey attracts flies {bugs}, does your vinegar nature keep the bugs away?)
At 2 million or so units sold a quarter, and Mac OS X will ship on every one of them, assuming Apple keeps selling 2 mil a quarter and Linux has 10 million units, in less than a year and a half, Apple will have more units (therefore overtaking linux).
If you count 2 million BSD users, BSD outstrips Linux units in one year.
Part of the thrashing of the stock market is lesser demand for PCs.....and more than a few Apple users don't want Mac OS X. So Apple has a wall of worry to climb. But, unless Linux has some bundling deal that can get it in at best buy/CompUSA/Sears, the total number of boxes shipped with Mac OS X will surpass Linux. In one quarter, Apple will send out more units than most Linux distros. And, in 2 quarters, pass up its BSD brethern.
And odds are neither one of us have access to the code from IBM's big-nasty-frame division so we could look at what is proposed to be changed and pass judgement.
>completely different code in the official kernel source for Big Iron, just as we have for different architectures, different hardware, etc.
But someone's head needs to wrap around all of it. Given the source code control is in Linus's head.....do you expect he'd be able to juggle additional code bits he doesn't really care about?
And, you are assuming that it would be a simple code addition...not a major re-write. A re-write that just might be of a large portion of Linus's OWN code.
Hopefully someone who has more real details on this matter will follow up and enlighten....
Slashdot Mirror
but I really don't understand what business the courts have interfering in voluntary contractual relationships.
Lets see.
Contractors work under contracts. A contract is a divorce agreement between 2 parties. And, when 2 parties disagree, this gets settled by a judge.
Looks like Microsoft and said CONTRACTors had a difference of opinion, and a court, interperting the law, decided Microsoft was in violation of the law.
What would you rather have? No law? Congress pass a law/edict? Some form of government allowing this guy to become in charge?
This will accomplish little except to raise prices and take jobs away from people.
Errr, how can Microsoft raise prices on Windows when there are 'free' alternatives? Microsoft is VERY aware of price pressures. Look at the laughter of the $13000 price for NT 3.1. Then, look at how quickly NT 3.1 sales increased when the price wnet to $250.
And, if you listen to Brett Glass, the GPL is ment to take away jobs.
This court action will have no marked effect on prices or jobs.
If you want to cure an open relay problem, send the admins a message or contact ORBS. It's absolutely asinine for people to use other's systems without their approval.
Lets see. You advocate the use of ORBS, yet ORBS launches a 15+ test attack on a target machine WITHOUT the premission of the sysadmin of the machine who's accused annonymously of having an open relay.
If it is asinine to use anothers system without premission, then why advocate ORBS, who do exactly that....launch a 15+ probe attack VS a host without that sysadmins premission, all based on submissions which proof can not be provided for?
So who knows what the market penetration of any Open Source OS is?
/. is a common AC troll who keeps claiming that BSD's numbers are dropping, yet has never provided an actual link, or actual numbers. Said person is unwilling to post these numbers, because, well, said troll doesn't have them. This same troll USED to claim that Applixware knew that BSD was dying, and that is why there would never be an appixware 5.0. Yet look, Applixware 5.0. Another person claims a web site that counts the number of linux distros, and this link has yet to be seen.
/. would have gotten some actual links. But alas, no such luck.
The 'problem' is these numbers are 'sold' (some of this selling is alledged) by varing orginizations. Some of the numbers would be more correct (say netcraft) VS others (say gardner group)
The Open Source solution to the problem would be to have web server logs go to a central database. However, tampering could not be stopped with such an effort. The next type of solution is to scan the entire IP space and see what kind of OS is out there. The last public project shows in April 1999 that the BSD/Linux ratio is 1:2 (more or less).
Places like google or yahoo would also have a large enough sample space to provide useful numbers. If they chose to enlighten us.
At the moment however, all that exists on
I was kinda hoping calling linux doomed on
How can anybody get reliable numbers?
Buildiung to building searches looking for such installs?
(note how the BSD troll is responded to in kind. Numbers can be twisted any damn way a person wants. I'd like to see a %age breakdown of what each linux distro has. So, if you have a link to such a %age, please post it! About the only real point is when comparing BSD/Linux market share, FreeBSD has the advantage of market differentation vs the average Linux distro in the Open Source OS market. Otherwise, enjoy the flaming troll twisting of numbers in the spirit of the original AC's post. Merry Xmas!)
/. . But BSDi, having 20% market at present will rise to the top and become the default Open Source OS.
Bob Bruce of BSDi (previously of Walnut Creek) says FreeBSD's user amount is 20% of the size of the linux market.
If you consider FreeBSD and Linux all fighting for the same slice of the pie, how many of the 180+ linux distros have 20% marketshare? Lets see...given all distros have the same kernel, they are all alike. So the average market share for any linux distro is 0.55% or 1011 users per distro. So FreeBSD has a far greater marketshare and number of users than the average Linux distro for the Open Source OS market.
36400*5=182000 total linux users. counter.li.org says there are 162,680 Linux users. As you can see, the numbers presented as to why BSD is doomed are similar.
It looks like the individual linux companies, none of them strong enough to get any useful market share (1,011 users per distro) will doom the Open Source OS market to appear as a failure.
As you can see, Linux is very, VERY sick and its long term survival is very dim. And the stock prices of Linux companies show how doomed linux is. If Linux survives, it will be among OS hobbyists and die-hard users who read
With the release of Apple's Mac OS X - based on BSD and selling 2 million units a quarter, you can see how just one quarter of Apple sales will outsell *ALL* of the Linux users.
(So there. Nahy!)
The lawsuit idea is not new. And it *IS* doable, but requires people to work together. And, a bit of software. For the Open Source community, comming up with software is easy. To work together, and be willing to spend $100 to take a spammer to small claims court, now THAT is hard.
The 'pecked to death by ducks' method is used by local religious groups, local community groups concerened about slum landlords or drugs and others.
I could not find a 'how to sue the local porn shop into non-existance' link, but I did find this part of the congressional record:
Link
Defendants are then compelled to settle for nuisance value. *smile* A spammer settling because of the nuisance they caused.
Remember Al Gore? At one time (8+ years ago) he tried floating a trial balloon of "government sponsered internet" ala what the internet USED to be before all this web-crap popped up.
Back when UseNet was the forum. And you had to have an acedemic reason to be on the Internet. And you knew that prep.ai.mit.edu had a good ftp site, and the new archie is how you hunted for a program.
This balloon, like government backed health care was rejected. What you see today is the result of that rejection years ago. So, what makes anyone believe a return to the old goverenment backed internet will happen?
If you *LIKE* the idea of the government stopping spam, then think about this. No need for any additional laws, just use the laws and methods that exist. And, instead of money going into the pockets of some goverenment body, it could end up in your pocket. Alas, you'd have to actually *WORK* to sue the spammers, and I doubht KTB will want to work.
Actually, because that is not part of the core business of Yahoo!, that could happen.
And because it is not part of Yahoo!'s core business, gahtering and processing this data would not be paid by Yahoo! either.
I have no idea as to whom you'd need to approach to get such information. Perhaps enough concerned admins could get together and insert output from their logs into a central database, who's sole goal it is to try and figure out this question of "who has the bigger OS"? Looking at tne 'results' of redhatisntolinux.org, the large number of slackware users show how results of 'concerned' sysadmins could cook the books.
Why do people spam?
:-)
The actual out-of-pocket costs is minimal to the spammer.
What will stop spam?
When the cost of spamming exceeds the benefit.
With the present US legal system, how can the cost of spamming be increased? Lawsuits.
How to do this?
1) everyone who wants to feed the local ambulance chasers/people who like small claims actions/ppl who hate spammers have to be willing to buy create and sell debt so the others can buy that debt and then can take spammers to court.
2) Software to act as auto-billing and clearing house for the mail analysis debt. (to make it easy for the spammed to help the local ppl to spammer to have to potential to make money)
3) people willing to change their mailers to note that this system accepts mis-configured mail messages and bills for it.
Spammer sends the mail to the host for analysis. Said target machine gets mail and sends 3 billing notices for $250. Then the $250 charge is placed into the 'database'. A local hater of spam/ambulance chaser buys the bad debt (unpaid $250) for a %age, or for $1-5. Local person drags spammer to small claims.
As more people sign up, and more spammers get dragged to court, the economic benifit to spam swings. It becomes a case where spam can cost $250+ court costs per message, + time in small claims court. And, if the local plaintiffs know the schedualed court dates of others, they can arrange court dates one a day.
A spammer getting hit $250+ a day, for 30+ days. Does this make spamming sound profitable?
End effect? Spam moves to sites outside the legal reach of suing countries for products outside the reach of suing countries. And, well, if I had to block all mail from russia or china to stop spam, I don't think I'd loose sleep
Yes, there is alot of 'speculation' about the OpenSource market. And some facts would be nice. The closest thing to a 'fact' might be the Gardner group or similar such tracking firm's numbers.
Alas, the 'counter project' doesn't track the version of linux used. www.redhatisnotlinux.org did track the version. And, a grep -i bsd| wc -l shows 135 BSD users....with slackware having higher numbers of users VS RedHat. How many people here think there are more slackware users than redhat?
Somewhere out in cyberspace is a page that tracks the total number of linux distros, and a troll who claims netcraft has OS numbers for 'paying customers'. And, I'm usre someone has a %age breakdown for each linux distro. Yet, no URL's to ANY of this information.
I guesstimate that between 0.2% and 5% of all Linux users have registered with the Linux Counter. So the total number of Linux users is probablybetween 3,250,160 and 81,254,000 people.
Yea, 81 MILLION users. Right.
How about 'linux is #2 os' statement of the other day. What, the DOCUMENTED sales numbers of Apple are meaningless? Where did these numbers come from? If you believe the linux counter people, its no WONDER they are #2, with 81 million users.
So, other than Linux counter...does anyone have any meaningful numbers or URL's to meaningful numbers?
The diskless workstation point is VERY valid. Too bad the parent will stay at 1. :-(
The trick is to have the varied PC software base on the 390. And that trick won't be easy and won't happen soon. Why? Look at how hard it is to get vendors to move off of shrink-wrapped X86 compatible binaries. Windows NT (mips/alpha/ppc) and how many shrink-wrapped non X86 Linux programs are there? (few to none)
Software: Pagekeeper
:-)
EULA return policy: The place where you bought it, or us for full refund.
So, I wrote an e-mail...and got no response. Called, and was told there was no way to return the software. Asked for names, then asked to speak to a supervisor.
Said supervisor said they would call back. VP called back in 2 hours, said "no". Asked him to place that in writing, and mail that "no" to me.
3 days later, VP called back and gave me the address to send the software back to.
Sending back software is a good idea, but it takes alot of time and effort to obtain the end goal. And some (Microsoft) won't take its software back.
Would *NOT* have a chilling effect on such a port?
Look at how simple a cue:cat is, and yet legal staff threw about all kinds of letters, helping to prevent cue:cat code distro.
If EVERY OTHER developer needed to sign a NDA, and the nature of the NDA would stop the creation of BSD/Linux distro running on a Dreamcast, do you think a judge will believe this distro had *NO* help from NDA'd documents?
Given the major linux distros like fighting for marketshare, none of them will agree on a format.
Rather than try to get all the Linux distros to play nice together, it would be eaiser to point to an outside source of Linux compatibility and declare that the standard. This is a BETTER solution than declaring one distro your 'standard'.
Lo and behold, such a platform exists. FreeBSD and the Linux compatibility layer.
Think of this: If your code works with the BSD compatibility layer (BTW, Quake runs FASTER {ok, not much faster} on FreeBSD's compatibility layer than it does on RedHat 7.0), and it doesn't work on a 'linux distro' or your configuration, exactly how compatible is said distro/your configuration?
The only other way is to ship a distro on the game disk and claim that is the SUPPORTED version. All others are unsupported.
RPM does NOT solve the issues with the 150 or more linux distros, nor the different kernels. RPM is a RedHat solution, and there are a whole bunch of other Linux distros that don't think RedHat *IS* linux, just *A* linux.
The 2X00 was 2.1 version of the Newton OS.
And, yes, the 2.0 version of Newton Intelligence was the start of workable handwriting (120/130) on the Newton line.
>Total world domination!
Yes, but only when the BSD code is used as the example.
Windows "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux "Where do you want to go tomarrow?"
BSD "Hey, are you guys comming or what?"
It may *NOT* matter if this port exists or not....depending on how the IP was obtained to make the port, it *MAY* be in violation of the contracts signed to develop for the dreamcast.
The gamming market is a 'sell at a loss market, make it up selling games' market. Selling a Dreamcast then loading it with a X term CD using BSD or Linux as the base isn't going to thrill the staff at Sega.
Hopefully someone who has seen the contracts for doing Sega development will be able to comment on how hard getting a BSD or Linux version to 'ship pubically' on a Dreamcast.
Or on a Playstation, or N64.
1980's - 1 k SRAM chips VS 32K and 64K bubble memory. 256 K and 512 K was projected.
:-)
Now...how did this all turn out for Intel?
Memtech bought out all of Intel's patents/technology. They are no longer being made by memtech, however they will repair them for you
Will IBM fare better? If the goal is to target servers with 256 mb chips, I wouldn't go out and buy IBM stock based on this revelation. I'm sure this technology has a place in the market, I just don't share the optimisim of the ZD author of this RAM being a server RAM replacement.
However HP moving to an open linux would show some commitment.
Commitment to what?
Open Source?
Can't they show that committment to Open Source by releasing parts (or the whole) of HP/UX as source? How about print drivers? What if HP said 'We will embrace BSD for Pa-RISC boxes - would that not be a commitment?
What if HP took the linux kernel and placed SAM on top of it? (Linux for HP/UX admins) And added their own lodable modules/userspace. HAving YET ANOTHER linux distro helps exactly how?
Changing the way a WHOLE company thinks about source code, with seperate divisions, etc la is a hard task. And, unless the CEO is 110% behind the decision, it is not gonna happen. Bruce Perens is going to have his work cut out for him.
>Unless you actually hate OpenBSD, I don't see any reason to wish for its demise.
Hate, no. Wonder about the long term positioning, yes. If the functions of OpenBSD (a default secure install mode as an example) is put into another BSD, the idea of a secure BSD distro is further justified, but the market share will slip to the preceived stronger BSD distro.
Theo and Co. win the ideological battle. Yet they could end up with no market share. And, at the point where Theo can't sell enough CD's to support the project, does the project stop, or become parttime?
> linux is the only thing that actually works with IA-64, that can't but help linux though
Let me get this straight.
The X86 based present stock of Intel chips kinda suck.
But, if linux works on the new chip, this helps linux, because the new chip will suck less.
Errrrrr.....there are already other processors that linux run on. MIPS/PA-RISC/SPARC/PPC and Alpha. Yet, what is the leading shrink-wrapped option? X86.
Are the non X86 processors driving the adoption of Open Source OSes? No. And the I64 will effect Open Source OS sales about as much as Alpha does.
Once the IA-64 makes it to a mass market, then it will matter. Untill then, the adoption will be about the same as for the non X86 processors.
What a wonderful set of links. But they don't bash Unix as much as they bash Linux. Esp. your last link.
Next time, if you are going to 'pick' on Unix, try using BSD as the basis of your attack. Oh, wait. That means you'd have to WORK to pick on Unix if you use BSD as the example. And your employer Micro$oft is paying you to worry about Linux...not BSD.
All 6 of your 'examples' are non-issues with BSD.
ftpd : The version of ftpd shipped with all versions of FreeBSD since 2.2.0 is not vulnerable to this problem
RPC : FreeBSD is not vulnerable to this problem.
Proper stack : FreeBSD-For a remote attacker, the scope of the attack is severely limited by the requirement to complete a TCP connection with the victim machine, meaning the IP address of the attacking machine is disclosed, and as such the attack can be effectively responded to through the use of tracing, filtering and legal mechanisms.
Kerberos : NetBSD-not-for-export "secr" sets are vulnerable to some of the problems cited in the advisory. (ahhh, them dangerous munitions)
BIND : All versions of FreeBSD after 4.0-RELEASE are not vulnerable to this bug
Netscape : no BSD mention
One of the things that make using BSD a joy is the ability to pick a package (or ports), start the install of said program, and, (assuming the maintainter has done their job) get all the dependancies installed auto-magicaly.
And, when some linux distro (odds are Debian, because they had the taste to copy the proven success of the BSD package management. Debian even had the taste to suggest a BSD kernel patched into their userspace.) starts tracking the kernel (and other parts) in a CVS, Linux might have a chance of approaching the quality of BSD for system administration.
If the BSD OpenPorts project ever ships working code, given the liberal BSD license, some Linux distro will pick it up/create some form of rpm/apt patch. I doubt it will be RedHat or Debian 1st. Simple programmers ego prevents them from being 1st.
Given the desire to audit code before it makes it into OpenBSD, and the limited number of people who find joy in code audits, do you feel that OpenBSD will eventually end up so far behind to be eventually considered a historic footmark, like 386BSD?
Do you feel that others opinion of you hurts the progress of the OpenBSD project? (if honey attracts flies {bugs}, does your vinegar nature keep the bugs away?)
>I'm not sure if OSX will overtake linux;
At 2 million or so units sold a quarter, and Mac OS X will ship on every one of them, assuming Apple keeps selling 2 mil a quarter and Linux has 10 million units, in less than a year and a half, Apple will have more units (therefore overtaking linux).
If you count 2 million BSD users, BSD outstrips Linux units in one year.
Part of the thrashing of the stock market is lesser demand for PCs.....and more than a few Apple users don't want Mac OS X. So Apple has a wall of worry to climb. But, unless Linux has some bundling deal that can get it in at best buy/CompUSA/Sears, the total number of boxes shipped with Mac OS X will surpass Linux. In one quarter, Apple will send out more units than most Linux distros. And, in 2 quarters, pass up its BSD brethern.
And odds are neither one of us have access to the code from IBM's big-nasty-frame division so we could look at what is proposed to be changed and pass judgement.
>completely different code in the official kernel source for Big Iron, just as we have for different architectures, different hardware, etc.
But someone's head needs to wrap around all of it. Given the source code control is in Linus's head.....do you expect he'd be able to juggle additional code bits he doesn't really care about?
And, you are assuming that it would be a simple code addition...not a major re-write. A re-write that just might be of a large portion of Linus's OWN code.
Hopefully someone who has more real details on this matter will follow up and enlighten....