BSD is lumped in the "other" category with about 1% of the market.
Really? You have proof of that? Less informed people like Tiger Software, Comdex and CompUSA have a 'linux section' with BSD placed there. How about Twocows placing BSD under a GPL license.
Maybe you should actually post something substantial
As opposed to what? The majority of/. posts?
To have the data the 20% number from Bob Bruce is based on, you'd have to post links to IDC, netcraft or other data. Data you pay $$ for. Links from/. to data people pay for...hrrmmm not gonna happen.
What is MORE interesting is this:
slashdot post Here a claim of 'falling IDC numbers', yet you have not posted calling THAT into question.
If you don't like "bad data", then why not a post to that reply.
Considering of the Open Source OS market, FreeBSD has 20% marketshare, and can run Linux binaries faster than Linux does, I don't consider that marginal.
But, I guess the kool-aide they give out at RedHat is rather good, if you consider 20% marketshare marginal.
He 'liked' the palm. And the Newton group had a palm-sized Newton with no expandability (just like a palm) at a under-$300 possible price point.
Rather than say 'we have this technology, we can't get palm, lets work with what we have' (this assumes you believe Apple should have been in the handheld space), Jobs worked to drive away almost all the Newton staff.
Statements like this at WWDC 1997:
Jobs - "What does Apple make?"
Jobs bootlickers - 'computers'
Jobs - "What do computers have?"
Jobs bootlickers - 'keyboards'
Jobs - "Than what is this?" and holds up a Newton.
Helped create this:
From the back of the room, MP 130's are turned on, dates is selected and a to-do task of 'find new job' is noted by Newton staff.
First Jobs fired Sandy over a rather bogus charge of 'releasing company secrets' (Sandy told the Newton staff that the spin-in was going to happen). And when the spin-in happened, 32 of the Newton engineers left in mass for palm. Jobs was then able to say to sockholders etc all that "We had to kill the product. We had no staff to build it". The people who remained were the ones who were the ones who did NCU. The NCU was 1.5 years late, would not work if you have over 2 gigs of free disk space, and only syncs with long-dead PIMs. (AKA Palm got the cream...)
Had jobs GOTTEN the palm product from 3com, the palm staff would have quit on Jobs again. Thus palm would be dead by now, and the handheld of choice would be Windows for Pen.
Except that the BSD base apple used deliveres a BETTER linux product than linux does.
Duke of URL shows FreeBSD runs Linux version of quake faster than linux does.
FreeBSD's FTP install/Package/ports adminning methodology is now a 'feature' of many linux distros.
And the testimonials of yahoo! and others show how well FreeBSD works.
You are defining the legality of a message after you receive it. This is arbitrary.
I did nothing of the sort. I called the idea of changing e-mail addresses when you get spam a flawed idea.
True spam is indistinguishable
Wrong again.
What part of BULK e-mail are you not understanding? What part of one message sent to one person unsolicited VS a 1,000,000 messages sent to a 1,000,000 people are you not understanding?
Good thing I don't write e-mail warez. That is special. You are special. Would you like a medal?
Good thing I don't use Linux - too easy to be a 1337 spam hack *shrug* That's nice. I didn't know that using Linux caused you to use numbers instead of letters for spelling. Another reason to not use one of the 180+ versions of linux then eh?
The value of the internet is interconnectivity. If every time you get bombarded with shit you have to move, how does this help the interconnectivity with the traffic you want?
Your proposal is flawed. But then, you are not a professional who uses the internet for communications, now do you?
There are many, many anti-spammers working on a solution, and if the solution to spam were this simple it would have been done years ago.
Why has this not been done? It requires work and co-operation. No one has created the perl scripts to parse the mail headder then create a report (the mail analysis part of the service)
Then you have to spend $0.34 to mail them a bill. And, do that a few times.
Then, you have to have a central place where people can sell the unpaid debt, so others can then BUY the debt and then take the debtor to court. (again, more software and bandwidth) And, the person buying the debt then needs to spend $$$ to take the spammer to court.
Also, ISPs have no legal obligation to help you find a spammer's real name/address
Sure you can. If a judge says so, they have to or face comtempt charges. The discovery process *IS* your friend.
out of the country Yup. Its a problem. Look though at the content of the out of country crap however. If it is not for a product to buy, why even send the spam? If it is "no longer a domestic problem" and is instead an "international issue", and the content is more 'crap' than 'legit' content, the argument about it being a "valued service" goes out the window. With less pro than con arguments on a national level, legislation-however well intended, will get passed in the name of stemming the flow of the spam.
If a few get wacked, and wacked over and over again in small claims court, others will think "do I want to run this risk - no". It won't STOP the problem, but it will put a dent in the problem.
What we need is individuals who:
1) Announce on the SMTP port that they offer a mail analysis service
2) All mail comming in is subject to the processing fee.
(snif, snif, smells like a shrink wrapped EULA)
3) Send the spammers a bill for $250 for each chunk of spam.
4) Sell off the un-paid debt, so that somone local can take that debt and "take a spammer to small claims court"
4a) Have 31 (or 30/29/28) seperate people take the spammer to small claims court...one each day for a month of small claims actions vs the spammer.
All grass roots effort, and all without any new laws.
Wouldn't it be worth $100 to harass a spammer back? (local fees for a small claims action here)
The long term effect.
on
Tux in Space
·
· Score: 2
If Star Trek has taught us anything, our satellite technologies get absorbed into new, super technology-thingies that then want to destroy us because we are not the prefection they now seek, or they are looking for their creator.
Will these resulting combinations honor the GPL and release their source? Can the FSF use lawyers to get source from V'ger or NOMAD?
Cool, scaling that you get more than a billion for 500 MW of electricity,
More on the avoided costs....
Internalising all these costs therefore must become a priority if a "level playing field" is to be created.
While it is extremely difficult to quantify the external costs of such pollution, and some simply cannot be quantified, several studies show them to be
substantial. For example, a German study concluded that the external costs (excluding global warming) of electricity generated from fossil-fuel plants
are in the range of 2.4-5.5 US c/kWh, while those from nuclear power plants are 6.1-3.1 c/kWh.
According to the another study sulphur dioxide from US coal burning plants is costing U.S. citizens USD 82 billion per year in additional health costs.
Reduced crop yields caused by air pollution is costing US farmers USD 7.5 billion per year. What is important on these US figures is the fact that US
citizens are actually paying between 109 billion and 260 billion dollars yearly in hidden energy costs. In other countries similar patterns can also be
found.
I said that it caused mercury pollution... And I remembered that the 'cause' of elevated mercury levels has been attributed to the burning of coal. Coal burned for electrial power.
The mercury comes from somewhere. Do you think it is batteries thrown in the water? The soil the water covers? Or, as many think, coal plants?
you totally change the kind of cells you need...
Cell? Who's talking about a cell? I was speaking of NON-PV technologies for the generation of electricity.
For example satellite solar cells use semi-conductors like GaAs (Gallium Arsenide), this isn't what I call non-toxic! Again, that is why I mentioned the stirling cycle engine. The only 'cell' might be the thermionic version.
Cool, scaling that you get more than a billion for 500 MW of electricity, And what about the avoided costs of 8 tons per year of air polution for a coal plant? Oh, that's right....who cares about the mercury, the acid rain, etc...so long as we can keep having childern and have electricity at the flip of a switch.
Nuke plants are expensive because the avoidance of the waste product isn't avoided.
And what about the (average) 25% line loss of getting that electrcity from the plant to your home VS the less than 1% loss of locally generated power?
Errr no. The soil has gold, silver, uranium, etc la in it. If that clod of dirt on your shoes has any quanity WORTH extracting, then somone will mine it.
What happens is Mercury is bound up in methylmercury and that bio-accumulates. The process doesn't CREATE the polution...it is already there. Take things at the TOP of the food chain out (like aggressive fish) and the mercury will go with them.
Solar power, although it looks "clean" also creates a lot of pollution because the solar cells are made of toxic chemicals.
Really? What toxic chemicals are in a stirling cycle engines using helium as the working fluid? Would you consider steam?
Or, do you oppose metal-working or mirrors for its toxic effects?
Costs: $25K for 10kW of electricity, and about 120kW of waste heat you got to get rid of. All the heat you can use:-)
How about thermionic process? Non-poluting enough for ya?
You can even make ice with the sun if you want to.
1) If linux is "the unix defragger", why is there 180 seperate Linux distros?
2) If you followed the workings of the X86open project. Their goal: A common Unix binary for X86 processors. Linux ELF was declared the winner.
It will esculate the trend for developers to only write code for Linux (when writing *nix stuff of course).
GOOD coders write code with portability in mind. What you are pointing out is there is a whole bunch of lazy/amature coders out there.
Now, given BSD/SCO/Solaris/QNX/etc all can run 'linux programs' on X86, a vendor can opt to produce 2 shrink-wrapped binaries. One for Windows, and the other for 'linux' and have almost 100% of the X86 market. (and, with the LINE project, you could have just one binary.)
For a company wanting to write once....they could. But the 'linux world' needs to declare SOMETHING a standard. LSB has proven to be useless due to infighting between the 180 linux versions. The simple solution: Point to an emulated environment and declare that the standard. (The famly wants to fight....go outside the family)
but this is indicative of Linux taking over the *nix ma What, with the power of fragmentation?
Slashdot Mirror
Regardless I think you need to take a look at
http://www.netcraft.com/survey/ BSD isn't even close to Linux.
Really? What page? I see a 404 error.
BSD is lumped in the "other" category with about 1% of the market.
Really? You have proof of that? Less informed people like Tiger Software, Comdex and CompUSA have a 'linux section' with BSD placed there. How about Twocows placing BSD under a GPL license.
Why would the garder group be better?
I would think most people would agree that Linux is (for now) the more popular desktop system compared to any of the BSD variants
I don't agree.
Which of the 180 versions (called distros by others) is more popular?
Simple statistics says the majority of linux distros have less marketshare than FreeBSD.
If you like lumping seperate versions together, then after Mac OS X ships for a year, its volume will outstrip the 180 linux versions.
Maybe you should actually post something substantial
/. posts?
/. to data people pay for...hrrmmm not gonna happen.
As opposed to what? The majority of
To have the data the 20% number from Bob Bruce is based on, you'd have to post links to IDC, netcraft or other data. Data you pay $$ for. Links from
What is MORE interesting is this:
slashdot post
Here a claim of 'falling IDC numbers', yet you have not posted calling THAT into question.
If you don't like "bad data", then why not a post to that reply.
I find it disheartening that people actually believe things without researching them.
Find it all the dishearting you want.
give some quantitative proof of your claim
I was told this by Bob Bruce, the gent who's Walnut Creek was bought by BSDi.
Really, inflammatory remarks are exactly that
Silly me, for thinking the data from a BSDi staffer would be 'inflammatory'. But hey, obviously you have better data. So, post it.
Since BSD is more of a server operating system
Really? Then can you explain this product?
FreeBSD the desktop version
The problem is that BSD is marginal.
Considering of the Open Source OS market, FreeBSD has 20% marketshare, and can run Linux binaries faster than Linux does, I don't consider that marginal.
But, I guess the kool-aide they give out at RedHat is rather good, if you consider 20% marketshare marginal.
Newton never recovered from Steve Jobs
Agreed.
He 'liked' the palm. And the Newton group had a palm-sized Newton with no expandability (just like a palm) at a under-$300 possible price point.
Rather than say 'we have this technology, we can't get palm, lets work with what we have' (this assumes you believe Apple should have been in the handheld space), Jobs worked to drive away almost all the Newton staff.
Statements like this at WWDC 1997:
Jobs - "What does Apple make?"
Jobs bootlickers - 'computers'
Jobs - "What do computers have?"
Jobs bootlickers - 'keyboards'
Jobs - "Than what is this?" and holds up a Newton.
Helped create this:
From the back of the room, MP 130's are turned on, dates is selected and a to-do task of 'find new job' is noted by Newton staff.
First Jobs fired Sandy over a rather bogus charge of 'releasing company secrets' (Sandy told the Newton staff that the spin-in was going to happen). And when the spin-in happened, 32 of the Newton engineers left in mass for palm. Jobs was then able to say to sockholders etc all that "We had to kill the product. We had no staff to build it". The people who remained were the ones who were the ones who did NCU. The NCU was 1.5 years late, would not work if you have over 2 gigs of free disk space, and only syncs with long-dead PIMs. (AKA Palm got the cream...)
Had jobs GOTTEN the palm product from 3com, the palm staff would have quit on Jobs again. Thus palm would be dead by now, and the handheld of choice would be Windows for Pen.
that would explain why BSDI has less than 2% of the server market.
Yet, this 'archaic' OS has more machines in NetCraft's top 50 uptime than any other OS.
Some people like stable. Others, like the BSD troll are just mentally unstable.
Except that the BSD base apple used deliveres a BETTER linux product than linux does.
Duke of URL shows FreeBSD runs Linux version of quake faster than linux does.
FreeBSD's FTP install/Package/ports adminning methodology is now a 'feature' of many linux distros.
And the testimonials of yahoo! and others show how well FreeBSD works.
Open source is just shit.
Oh, you are so right.
Look at TCP/IP. Why, if Microsoft wasn't using BSD code in Windows, windows would not have a working TCP/IP.
grass clippings
See methane co-generation. Some waste plants do that. Most don't.
You are defining the legality of a message after you receive it. This is arbitrary.
I did nothing of the sort. I called the idea of changing e-mail addresses when you get spam a flawed idea.
True spam is indistinguishable
Wrong again.
What part of BULK e-mail are you not understanding? What part of one message sent to one person unsolicited VS a 1,000,000 messages sent to a 1,000,000 people are you not understanding?
Good thing I don't write e-mail warez.
That is special. You are special. Would you like a medal?
Good thing I don't use Linux - too easy to be a 1337 spam hack
*shrug* That's nice. I didn't know that using Linux caused you to use numbers instead of letters for spelling. Another reason to not use one of the 180+ versions of linux then eh?
The value of the internet is interconnectivity. If every time you get bombarded with shit you have to move, how does this help the interconnectivity with the traffic you want?
Your proposal is flawed. But then, you are not a professional who uses the internet for communications, now do you?
There are many, many anti-spammers working on a solution, and if the solution to spam were this simple it would have been done years ago.
Why has this not been done? It requires work and co-operation. No one has created the perl scripts to parse the mail headder then create a report (the mail analysis part of the service)
Then you have to spend $0.34 to mail them a bill. And, do that a few times.
Then, you have to have a central place where people can sell the unpaid debt, so others can then BUY the debt and then take the debtor to court. (again, more software and bandwidth) And, the person buying the debt then needs to spend $$$ to take the spammer to court.
Also, ISPs have no legal obligation to help you find a spammer's real name/address
Sure you can. If a judge says so, they have to or face comtempt charges. The discovery process *IS* your friend.
out of the country
Yup. Its a problem. Look though at the content of the out of country crap however. If it is not for a product to buy, why even send the spam? If it is "no longer a domestic problem" and is instead an "international issue", and the content is more 'crap' than 'legit' content, the argument about it being a "valued service" goes out the window. With less pro than con arguments on a national level, legislation-however well intended, will get passed in the name of stemming the flow of the spam.
If a few get wacked, and wacked over and over again in small claims court, others will think "do I want to run this risk - no". It won't STOP the problem, but it will put a dent in the problem.
We do not need laws VS spamming.
What we need is individuals who:
1) Announce on the SMTP port that they offer a mail analysis service
2) All mail comming in is subject to the processing fee.
(snif, snif, smells like a shrink wrapped EULA)
3) Send the spammers a bill for $250 for each chunk of spam.
4) Sell off the un-paid debt, so that somone local can take that debt and "take a spammer to small claims court"
4a) Have 31 (or 30/29/28) seperate people take the spammer to small claims court...one each day for a month of small claims actions vs the spammer.
All grass roots effort, and all without any new laws.
Wouldn't it be worth $100 to harass a spammer back? (local fees for a small claims action here)
If Star Trek has taught us anything, our satellite technologies get absorbed into new, super technology-thingies that then want to destroy us because we are not the prefection they now seek, or they are looking for their creator.
Will these resulting combinations honor the GPL and release their source? Can the FSF use lawyers to get source from V'ger or NOMAD?
Cool, scaling that you get more than a billion for 500 MW of electricity,
More on the avoided costs....
Internalising all these costs therefore must become a priority if a "level playing field" is to be created.
While it is extremely difficult to quantify the external costs of such pollution, and some simply cannot be quantified, several studies show them to be
substantial. For example, a German study concluded that the external costs (excluding global warming) of electricity generated from fossil-fuel plants
are in the range of 2.4-5.5 US c/kWh, while those from nuclear power plants are 6.1-3.1 c/kWh.
According to the another study sulphur dioxide from US coal burning plants is costing U.S. citizens USD 82 billion per year in additional health costs.
Reduced crop yields caused by air pollution is costing US farmers USD 7.5 billion per year. What is important on these US figures is the fact that US
citizens are actually paying between 109 billion and 260 billion dollars yearly in hidden energy costs. In other countries similar patterns can also be
found.
I said that it caused mercury pollution...
And I remembered that the 'cause' of elevated mercury levels has been attributed to the burning of coal. Coal burned for electrial power.
The mercury comes from somewhere. Do you think it is batteries thrown in the water? The soil the water covers? Or, as many think, coal plants?
you totally change the kind of cells you need...
Cell? Who's talking about a cell? I was speaking of NON-PV technologies for the generation of electricity.
For example satellite solar cells use semi-conductors like GaAs (Gallium Arsenide), this isn't what I call non-toxic!
Again, that is why I mentioned the stirling cycle engine. The only 'cell' might be the thermionic version.
Cool, scaling that you get more than a billion for 500 MW of electricity,
And what about the avoided costs of 8 tons per year of air polution for a coal plant? Oh, that's right....who cares about the mercury, the acid rain, etc...so long as we can keep having childern and have electricity at the flip of a switch.
Nuke plants are expensive because the avoidance of the waste product isn't avoided.
And what about the (average) 25% line loss of getting that electrcity from the plant to your home VS the less than 1% loss of locally generated power?
Oh, and alot of the mercury comes from coal fired power plants.
creates mercury pollution
:-)
Errr no. The soil has gold, silver, uranium, etc la in it. If that clod of dirt on your shoes has any quanity WORTH extracting, then somone will mine it.
What happens is Mercury is bound up in methylmercury and that bio-accumulates. The process doesn't CREATE the polution...it is already there. Take things at the TOP of the food chain out (like aggressive fish) and the mercury will go with them.
Solar power, although it looks "clean" also creates a lot of pollution because the solar cells are made of toxic chemicals.
Really? What toxic chemicals are in a stirling cycle engines using helium as the working fluid? Would you consider steam?
Or, do you oppose metal-working or mirrors for its toxic effects?
Costs: $25K for 10kW of electricity, and about 120kW of waste heat you got to get rid of. All the heat you can use
How about thermionic process? Non-poluting enough for ya?
You can even make ice with the sun if you want to.
PicoBSD
FUD?
(points to the Virgin Webplayer)
See that? It was shipped with Linux, YET the license it came with said I can't even disassemble the source.
And they won't give up the code.
No FUD at all. I just don't have the same blind faith you seem to have is all.
1) If linux is "the unix defragger", why is there 180 seperate Linux distros?
2) If you followed the workings of the X86open project. Their goal: A common Unix binary for X86 processors. Linux ELF was declared the winner.
It will esculate the trend for developers to only write code for Linux (when writing *nix stuff of course).
GOOD coders write code with portability in mind. What you are pointing out is there is a whole bunch of lazy/amature coders out there.
Now, given BSD/SCO/Solaris/QNX/etc all can run 'linux programs' on X86, a vendor can opt to produce 2 shrink-wrapped binaries. One for Windows, and the other for 'linux' and have almost 100% of the X86 market. (and, with the LINE project, you could have just one binary.)
For a company wanting to write once....they could. But the 'linux world' needs to declare SOMETHING a standard. LSB has proven to be useless due to infighting between the 180 linux versions. The simple solution: Point to an emulated environment and declare that the standard. (The famly wants to fight....go outside the family)
but this is indicative of Linux taking over the *nix ma
What, with the power of fragmentation?
If you look around at some of the embedded Linux pages out there it becomes clear that Linux is fast becoming
Errr, if you go to linux pages looking for linux info...that is what you will see.
BSD has all the benefits for the embedded world but doesn't have the FORCED 'sharing' of the GPL.