It shouldn't really surprise you that Apple released a product that basically worked right and had the right UI the first time, and have made only very minor tweaks since, while Microsoft released a broken piece of shit and plans on taking at leas 3 major version releases before the product is halfway usable.
Here's your business case: ADAPT OR DIE, BITCHES!!
The fact is people are buying HDTVs in huge numbers and increasingly are demanding HD content.
After getting a 50" LCD RP HDTV 2 years ago, I find that about 40-50% of the content I watch now is HD, while less than 5% of the channels I get are HD. So if you want to either sell TV service or advertise products to people like me, you'd better get used to dealing with HDTV, producing HD content, selling advertising on HD channels and so on.
Funny, this happened frequently with FF 1.0 and 1.5 for me, but seems much less of a problem with FF 2.0, which fixed most of the worst, most repeatable memory leak issues for me. I'm not saying it's flawless, but I've never seen 900MB of RAM usage by Firefox 2.0.
Even some of the diehard FF users I know are considering switching to another browser because they seem to feel FF has started to become bloated and FF's performance is suffering.
This strikes me as so factually inaccurate I can't believe it. FF 2.0 may be more featureful, but it's far faster than FF 1.5 on every piece of hardware I've tried it on. And it has fewer memory leak issues.
You can argue about FF getting too much feature-bloat if you want, but unless you have some specific benchmarks to prove your point about FF getting slower, that claim strikes me as terribly wrong-headed.
Re: the community goodwill - that was my whole point - the community goodwill blown in this incident was obviously not factored into his equation. Clearly if it had been, he wouldn't have done it. The way he saw it (not recognizing the extent of that impact), he was doing right by his shareholders.
Assuming you believe Hovsepian's letter and he's not concealing something, nothing they signed opened up any special door for that whatsoever - it was a standard patent cross-licensing deal, with large cash payments to Novell because they were licensing much more IP to MS than MS was licensing to Novell. At least, such is the theory Hovsepian claims. If anything, it reduces the ability of MS to sue them and their customers in the future greatly. Thus the theory that he was representing his customers' best interests and maximizing shareholder value.
And your understanding of fiduciary responsibilities of management is absolutely wrong. Fiduciary duty obligations are only enforced by courts for egregious violations, that is definitely correct. But that wasn't my point. A top executive still has such a duty, and a CEO can absolutely be held to account for his duty to maximize shareholder value by his Board of Directors. As an honest executive, representing the best interests of shareholders is always one of the top things on your mind if you want to keep your job for very long.
Your suggestion about Microsoft seems unlikely. They are certainly more aggressive and amoral in their use of the courts, but if they never negotiated with customers, acquisition targets, etc. in good faith, they'd have lost in the market a long time ago.
The tax system in the US combined with the natural tendency towards sloth among many born to too much privilege (not all, obviously) tend to undermine Marx's predictions to a large extent in the modern US. Furthermore, the unabashed capitalism he was looking at isn't really what's practiced here in the US today.
Capitalism has been immensely successful long after the days of Marx. In the first part of the 20th century, these gains in overall wealth and productivity made people happier in the US (more leisure time, more conveniences of modern life, less hunger and disease, etc.). However, in he second half of the 20th century, gains in wealth and productivity have continued but we have failed to become happier as a whole in our society.
So you could perhaps argue that capitalism has taken us as far as it can and we need to look to other strategies to improve our happiness and well-being that work as a complement to as better replacements for the variety of capitalism we currently practice here. Portions of Europe seem to do a pretty good job of blending capitalism with the happier parts of socialism, though with their much simpler social structure and homogeneous ethnic makeups, these systems are much more naturally stable than they would be here in the US.
But I see no evidence of Marx's predictions becoming true in a democratic society like the US. When the people get restive, they vote out Congress and replace them with a more liberal group that will throttle back the collective id of capitalism and impose some super ego on it.
In fact, the word "antipope" has an actual, and historically interesting meaning. There have been several so-called antipopes in history, generally when there was a dispute over the legitimate papal succession in the Catholic Church which led to two separate popes being installed by different groups simultaneously.
The most famous of these were the Avignon popes that arose out of the Great Schism in the late 1300s.
The funny thing is that all of the antipopes generally considered themselves the legitimate popes, and it was really only after the fact that the Church and historians decided which ones were popes and which ones were pretenders, or "antipopes".
So, there's your history lesson on "antipopes". So to anybody familiar with the actual meaning of the word, it's not particular anti-Catholic, though it may be generally suggestive of opposition to the official Church line.
And for a company that broke even last year on an operating income of $100M and has a total market cap of about $2B dollars, that payment was not at all a trivial matter. Hovsepian would have been remiss to his shareholders to not sign it. Patent cross-licensing agreements are pretty damned commonplace.
I think the Novell guys probably realized there was some bad PR potential, but didn't see anything particularly bad in the agreement and saw lots and lots of greenbacks, plus the opportunity to use MS as a distribution channel. This seemed like a sweet deal when they looked at it. I just don't think they realized quite how negative the reaction would be.
Umm... go back up a few levels, there were a bunch of posts from people who seemed to be confused about which artwork they were looking at.
I was *agreeing* with the parent poster when he said: > The artwork you keep linking to isn't what was turned down, it's the artwork for the damn release.
And adding that if you look at those pics next to a Dapper Drake screenshot, they look extremely similar.
So let's recap. The article says that the submitted artwork for Edgy Eft was turned down, and they polished up the Dapper Drake artwork and released it. Several places in this story, people posted links to Eft artwork. Many people misinterpreted that as the *rejected* artwork. kernelpanicked's post pointed out that they were misunderstanding. I agreed with kernelpanick, and pointed out that if you looked at the *specific images* linked to by adrenalinekick and several other posters in this story, they looked almost exactly like Drake - thus it should be clear to any Ubuntu user that those were in fact not the images of the rejected artwork.
Everyone participating in this conversation, with the possible exception of yourself, fully understood that there was a set of artwork that was rejected and a replacement set made from incrementally modifying Drake's artwork. We were addressing the question of which images were being linked to. Other threads did actually link to the rejected artwork, so it was a relevant point to bring up.
Like I said, please brush up on your reading comprehension before you continue to harp on your own inability to follow a thread of conversation. It's frustrating in the extreme to have to explain in baby steps why your original comment demonstrated a misunderstanding on your part. You'd be best served at this point by just acknowledging that you didn't read the comment in context and that you were mistaken in your interpretation of it.
Well, this is one of those cases where government intervention would actually be useful. If there were a mandatory penalty of $10 per record lost, plus the requirement that the company covers identity theft protection insurance for at least 2 years for all affected customers, well, you wouldn't ever see 11 million records leave the office, period.
When the customers have low bargaining power due to a natural oligopoly market scenario with few large, powerful competitors, the government needs to provide some protections from this sort of abusive behavior.
This is a basic characteristic of quantum entanglement that any person with a degree in physics could tell you, and you could find in any second semester quantum mechanics textbook. I don't think a piece of common knowledge in a field needs much in the way of peer review.
Nice job reading the post! What part of this sentence don't you understand: "I immediately knew from looking at it that this must be the boring, incrementally modified theme since it looks incredibly similar to what was there before.".
But thanks for reiterating my point, with a snide tone that just makes you look like a dimshit. Next time, you might not want to check your reading comprehension skills at the door if you're going to be a dick.
Furthermore, it looks extremely similar to the Dapper Drake artwork. I haven't seen Edgy Eft yet, but I immediately knew from looking at it that this must be the boring, incrementally modified theme since it looks incredibly similar to what was there before.
That huge target logo that you referred to is on the roof of a Target in Queens right by LaGuardia airport - so kind of makes sense to put it there, that's an awful lot of planes going right by it on their approach vectors.
Ummm, I live in a 26th floor apartment in Manhattan. So your proposal is irrelevant. I said "apartments" in my post. And yes, I have done the "drill through the wall" approach in an office/warehouse building before, and where it's possible, it's fairly easy.
Second, the floorplan here is long and winding, and wiring it up with ethernet would be quite a project. I was being rhetorical when I said "I have no idea how to do it" - I simply mean that it is non-trivial for a normal, basic, semi-handy guy to do it, not that I am clueless, effete or can't stand to get my hands dirty. It would require taking out floorboards in one place to run underneath the hallway, and then putting those 7-slat square floorboards back together again, piece by piece. And punching through and running wire through 5 separate long wall segments. I've discussed it with a guy who does wiring stuff and he confirmed that it would be a big pain in the ass.
And yes, thank you very much, I *could* afford to get it done properly. And if I had a week of free time (hahaha) I *could* do it myself, pain in the ass or no.
But there's no need to do any of this because HPNA does the job fantastically well and is a far cheaper, easier solution than wiring up a legacy home with ethernet. Which was my whole point in the first place.
I disagree with this. Try HPNA 2.0, it does absolutely work, even with less than ideal wiring. It's far superior to powerline networking in that sense, which claims completely unrealistic bandwidth numbers.
You may be right that in a really old home with really crappy wiring, it wouldn't work as well, but I've used HPNA in a couple of apartments with absolutely no problems.
Of course, this is all 10Mbps HPNA 2.0, because no mainstream manufacturers have ever seen fit to support HPNA 3.0, so I don't know how well a higher bandwidth version of phoneline networking would hold up, and whether they'd be able to meet the numbers they are claiming in normal, non-laboratory environments.
Your suggestion that wiring up a home is "easy" is a strange one. I have no idea how to do this properly, and I've been the CTO of several software companies. You think even most tech saavy people can do this? You need to punch lots and lots of holes in the wall to thread those wires from one end of a home to another, then patch all those walls and repaint them to mint condition. This is not just a 1-2 hour deal unless you are going from one end of the room to another, in which case you'd not bother wiring it up anyway. Try to get a quote from a company to do this all properly, and it will cost you a couple grand.
Eh? A round trip through two HPNA 2.0 bridges adds about 2ms of latency to a packet from my empirical observations.
While I obviously wouldn't use a home networking standard for ultra performance critical networking applications, the latency of HPNA 2.0 is not something I ever perceptually notice, and I use it every day.
I can't even buy HPNA 2.0 hardware anymore. I use the old Netgear PE102 bridges to extend my ethernet across my Manhattan apartment and it is far and away the best technology for this. Wireless is great for using my laptop in the living room, but for my desktop in my bedroom it would suck - latency, intermittent interference, and the difficulty getting transmission through multiple structural walls in an apartment building make wireless useless for this purpose.
HPNA 2.0 is great, but is 1) only 10Mbps, so not so impressive for higher bandwidth file transmission within my apartment and 2) no longer supported by ANY manufacturer because they mistakenly think that there is no demand due to wifi.
802.11b/g/a serve a totally different and complementary purpose to HPNA, which is great for bridging more distant rooms in a house or apartment that would cost thousands to properly wire for ethernet. Two 100 dollar bridges do the trick beautifully.
Powerline networking sucks in comparison - it was way overhyped and actual throughput is usually a fraction of the advertised throughput, whereas HPNA 2.0 worked exactly as promised and the PE102 boxes I use are so reliable it's sick.
I would absolutely love to see even a 50 or 100 Mbps HPNA standard that some manufacturer will support!
Please, that is the least insightful post under this entire thread - pure flamebait.
In fact, there are tons of conservatives here on Slashdot. Just not very many social conservatives or authoritarians. Most of them are of a more libertarian bent.
In any case, I know plenty of conservatives who think it was way past time for Rumsfeld to go. Including my friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Authority and US Embassy in Iraq for a year and a half (and just went back over there working as a liaison for the British government).
I'm a moderate Democrat, but I'll trust my friend's judgment on Rumsfeld over your flamebait any day.
I see several posts about how it's impossible to buy a Dell with no OS on it or that it is always the same price. While this may be the case for their laptops (where perhaps the market for Linux-based laptops is too small for them to concern themselves with), it's definitely not for their server boxes.
My company just bought several Dell Poweredge 2950s. Dell offers 3 options - no O/S, Redhat Enterprise Linux, and Windows. We didn't want to pay for RHEL when we don't really want their "support", and we've had generally bad experiences with RPM-based distros and RPM dependency hell.
So we went with the no O/S option and saved a couple hundred bucks over the RHEL option and at least a decent amount cheaper than Windows. We installed Ubuntu 64-bit server 6.06LTS on the servers, and I felt very good about not paying an OS tax.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because we all know that handguns are for hunting.
It shouldn't really surprise you that Apple released a product that basically worked right and had the right UI the first time, and have made only very minor tweaks since, while Microsoft released a broken piece of shit and plans on taking at leas 3 major version releases before the product is halfway usable.
Here's your business case: ADAPT OR DIE, BITCHES!!
The fact is people are buying HDTVs in huge numbers and increasingly are demanding HD content.
After getting a 50" LCD RP HDTV 2 years ago, I find that about 40-50% of the content I watch now is HD, while less than 5% of the channels I get are HD. So if you want to either sell TV service or advertise products to people like me, you'd better get used to dealing with HDTV, producing HD content, selling advertising on HD channels and so on.
Funny, this happened frequently with FF 1.0 and 1.5 for me, but seems much less of a problem with FF 2.0, which fixed most of the worst, most repeatable memory leak issues for me. I'm not saying it's flawless, but I've never seen 900MB of RAM usage by Firefox 2.0.
Even some of the diehard FF users I know are considering switching to another browser because they seem to feel FF has started to become bloated and FF's performance is suffering.
This strikes me as so factually inaccurate I can't believe it. FF 2.0 may be more featureful, but it's far faster than FF 1.5 on every piece of hardware I've tried it on. And it has fewer memory leak issues.
You can argue about FF getting too much feature-bloat if you want, but unless you have some specific benchmarks to prove your point about FF getting slower, that claim strikes me as terribly wrong-headed.
And in some countries, $33/day is enough to lead a respectable, middle class lifestyle. Not in the US or Canada, but in India - definitely.
Re: the community goodwill - that was my whole point - the community goodwill blown in this incident was obviously not factored into his equation. Clearly if it had been, he wouldn't have done it. The way he saw it (not recognizing the extent of that impact), he was doing right by his shareholders.
Assuming you believe Hovsepian's letter and he's not concealing something, nothing they signed opened up any special door for that whatsoever - it was a standard patent cross-licensing deal, with large cash payments to Novell because they were licensing much more IP to MS than MS was licensing to Novell. At least, such is the theory Hovsepian claims. If anything, it reduces the ability of MS to sue them and their customers in the future greatly. Thus the theory that he was representing his customers' best interests and maximizing shareholder value.
And your understanding of fiduciary responsibilities of management is absolutely wrong. Fiduciary duty obligations are only enforced by courts for egregious violations, that is definitely correct. But that wasn't my point. A top executive still has such a duty, and a CEO can absolutely be held to account for his duty to maximize shareholder value by his Board of Directors. As an honest executive, representing the best interests of shareholders is always one of the top things on your mind if you want to keep your job for very long.
Your suggestion about Microsoft seems unlikely. They are certainly more aggressive and amoral in their use of the courts, but if they never negotiated with customers, acquisition targets, etc. in good faith, they'd have lost in the market a long time ago.
The tax system in the US combined with the natural tendency towards sloth among many born to too much privilege (not all, obviously) tend to undermine Marx's predictions to a large extent in the modern US. Furthermore, the unabashed capitalism he was looking at isn't really what's practiced here in the US today.
Capitalism has been immensely successful long after the days of Marx. In the first part of the 20th century, these gains in overall wealth and productivity made people happier in the US (more leisure time, more conveniences of modern life, less hunger and disease, etc.). However, in he second half of the 20th century, gains in wealth and productivity have continued but we have failed to become happier as a whole in our society.
So you could perhaps argue that capitalism has taken us as far as it can and we need to look to other strategies to improve our happiness and well-being that work as a complement to as better replacements for the variety of capitalism we currently practice here. Portions of Europe seem to do a pretty good job of blending capitalism with the happier parts of socialism, though with their much simpler social structure and homogeneous ethnic makeups, these systems are much more naturally stable than they would be here in the US.
But I see no evidence of Marx's predictions becoming true in a democratic society like the US. When the people get restive, they vote out Congress and replace them with a more liberal group that will throttle back the collective id of capitalism and impose some super ego on it.
In fact, the word "antipope" has an actual, and historically interesting meaning. There have been several so-called antipopes in history, generally when there was a dispute over the legitimate papal succession in the Catholic Church which led to two separate popes being installed by different groups simultaneously.
The most famous of these were the Avignon popes that arose out of the Great Schism in the late 1300s.
The funny thing is that all of the antipopes generally considered themselves the legitimate popes, and it was really only after the fact that the Church and historians decided which ones were popes and which ones were pretenders, or "antipopes".
So, there's your history lesson on "antipopes". So to anybody familiar with the actual meaning of the word, it's not particular anti-Catholic, though it may be generally suggestive of opposition to the official Church line.
There is only one contribution you can make which will have any lasting effect at all, and I'll let you work out what that is for yourself.
Must.... BREEEEEEEEEDD!!!
And for a company that broke even last year on an operating income of $100M and has a total market cap of about $2B dollars, that payment was not at all a trivial matter. Hovsepian would have been remiss to his shareholders to not sign it. Patent cross-licensing agreements are pretty damned commonplace.
I think the Novell guys probably realized there was some bad PR potential, but didn't see anything particularly bad in the agreement and saw lots and lots of greenbacks, plus the opportunity to use MS as a distribution channel. This seemed like a sweet deal when they looked at it. I just don't think they realized quite how negative the reaction would be.
Yeah, but how is it actually enforced? That's the real issue.
Still you guys over in the UK seem to be a bit ahead of us here in the US on this issue...
Umm... go back up a few levels, there were a bunch of posts from people who seemed to be confused about which artwork they were looking at.
I was *agreeing* with the parent poster when he said:
> The artwork you keep linking to isn't what was turned down, it's the artwork for the damn release.
And adding that if you look at those pics next to a Dapper Drake screenshot, they look extremely similar.
So let's recap. The article says that the submitted artwork for Edgy Eft was turned down, and they polished up the Dapper Drake artwork and released it. Several places in this story, people posted links to Eft artwork. Many people misinterpreted that as the *rejected* artwork. kernelpanicked's post pointed out that they were misunderstanding. I agreed with kernelpanick, and pointed out that if you looked at the *specific images* linked to by adrenalinekick and several other posters in this story, they looked almost exactly like Drake - thus it should be clear to any Ubuntu user that those were in fact not the images of the rejected artwork.
Everyone participating in this conversation, with the possible exception of yourself, fully understood that there was a set of artwork that was rejected and a replacement set made from incrementally modifying Drake's artwork. We were addressing the question of which images were being linked to. Other threads did actually link to the rejected artwork, so it was a relevant point to bring up.
Like I said, please brush up on your reading comprehension before you continue to harp on your own inability to follow a thread of conversation. It's frustrating in the extreme to have to explain in baby steps why your original comment demonstrated a misunderstanding on your part. You'd be best served at this point by just acknowledging that you didn't read the comment in context and that you were mistaken in your interpretation of it.
Well, this is one of those cases where government intervention would actually be useful. If there were a mandatory penalty of $10 per record lost, plus the requirement that the company covers identity theft protection insurance for at least 2 years for all affected customers, well, you wouldn't ever see 11 million records leave the office, period.
When the customers have low bargaining power due to a natural oligopoly market scenario with few large, powerful competitors, the government needs to provide some protections from this sort of abusive behavior.
This is a basic characteristic of quantum entanglement that any person with a degree in physics could tell you, and you could find in any second semester quantum mechanics textbook. I don't think a piece of common knowledge in a field needs much in the way of peer review.
Nice job reading the post! What part of this sentence don't you understand: "I immediately knew from looking at it that this must be the boring, incrementally modified theme since it looks incredibly similar to what was there before.".
But thanks for reiterating my point, with a snide tone that just makes you look like a dimshit. Next time, you might not want to check your reading comprehension skills at the door if you're going to be a dick.
Furthermore, it looks extremely similar to the Dapper Drake artwork. I haven't seen Edgy Eft yet, but I immediately knew from looking at it that this must be the boring, incrementally modified theme since it looks incredibly similar to what was there before.
That huge target logo that you referred to is on the roof of a Target in Queens right by LaGuardia airport - so kind of makes sense to put it there, that's an awful lot of planes going right by it on their approach vectors.
I personally prefer "Alpha Geek".
Ummm, I live in a 26th floor apartment in Manhattan. So your proposal is irrelevant. I said "apartments" in my post. And yes, I have done the "drill through the wall" approach in an office/warehouse building before, and where it's possible, it's fairly easy.
Second, the floorplan here is long and winding, and wiring it up with ethernet would be quite a project. I was being rhetorical when I said "I have no idea how to do it" - I simply mean that it is non-trivial for a normal, basic, semi-handy guy to do it, not that I am clueless, effete or can't stand to get my hands dirty. It would require taking out floorboards in one place to run underneath the hallway, and then putting those 7-slat square floorboards back together again, piece by piece. And punching through and running wire through 5 separate long wall segments. I've discussed it with a guy who does wiring stuff and he confirmed that it would be a big pain in the ass.
And yes, thank you very much, I *could* afford to get it done properly. And if I had a week of free time (hahaha) I *could* do it myself, pain in the ass or no.
But there's no need to do any of this because HPNA does the job fantastically well and is a far cheaper, easier solution than wiring up a legacy home with ethernet. Which was my whole point in the first place.
Networking that is not Ethernet generally fails.
I disagree with this. Try HPNA 2.0, it does absolutely work, even with less than ideal wiring. It's far superior to powerline networking in that sense, which claims completely unrealistic bandwidth numbers.
You may be right that in a really old home with really crappy wiring, it wouldn't work as well, but I've used HPNA in a couple of apartments with absolutely no problems.
Of course, this is all 10Mbps HPNA 2.0, because no mainstream manufacturers have ever seen fit to support HPNA 3.0, so I don't know how well a higher bandwidth version of phoneline networking would hold up, and whether they'd be able to meet the numbers they are claiming in normal, non-laboratory environments.
Your suggestion that wiring up a home is "easy" is a strange one. I have no idea how to do this properly, and I've been the CTO of several software companies. You think even most tech saavy people can do this? You need to punch lots and lots of holes in the wall to thread those wires from one end of a home to another, then patch all those walls and repaint them to mint condition. This is not just a 1-2 hour deal unless you are going from one end of the room to another, in which case you'd not bother wiring it up anyway. Try to get a quote from a company to do this all properly, and it will cost you a couple grand.
Eh? A round trip through two HPNA 2.0 bridges adds about 2ms of latency to a packet from my empirical observations.
While I obviously wouldn't use a home networking standard for ultra performance critical networking applications, the latency of HPNA 2.0 is not something I ever perceptually notice, and I use it every day.
I can't even buy HPNA 2.0 hardware anymore. I use the old Netgear PE102 bridges to extend my ethernet across my Manhattan apartment and it is far and away the best technology for this. Wireless is great for using my laptop in the living room, but for my desktop in my bedroom it would suck - latency, intermittent interference, and the difficulty getting transmission through multiple structural walls in an apartment building make wireless useless for this purpose.
HPNA 2.0 is great, but is 1) only 10Mbps, so not so impressive for higher bandwidth file transmission within my apartment and 2) no longer supported by ANY manufacturer because they mistakenly think that there is no demand due to wifi.
802.11b/g/a serve a totally different and complementary purpose to HPNA, which is great for bridging more distant rooms in a house or apartment that would cost thousands to properly wire for ethernet. Two 100 dollar bridges do the trick beautifully.
Powerline networking sucks in comparison - it was way overhyped and actual throughput is usually a fraction of the advertised throughput, whereas HPNA 2.0 worked exactly as promised and the PE102 boxes I use are so reliable it's sick.
I would absolutely love to see even a 50 or 100 Mbps HPNA standard that some manufacturer will support!
Please, that is the least insightful post under this entire thread - pure flamebait.
In fact, there are tons of conservatives here on Slashdot. Just not very many social conservatives or authoritarians. Most of them are of a more libertarian bent.
In any case, I know plenty of conservatives who think it was way past time for Rumsfeld to go. Including my friend who worked for the Coalition Provisional Authority and US Embassy in Iraq for a year and a half (and just went back over there working as a liaison for the British government).
I'm a moderate Democrat, but I'll trust my friend's judgment on Rumsfeld over your flamebait any day.
I see several posts about how it's impossible to buy a Dell with no OS on it or that it is always the same price. While this may be the case for their laptops (where perhaps the market for Linux-based laptops is too small for them to concern themselves with), it's definitely not for their server boxes.
My company just bought several Dell Poweredge 2950s. Dell offers 3 options - no O/S, Redhat Enterprise Linux, and Windows. We didn't want to pay for RHEL when we don't really want their "support", and we've had generally bad experiences with RPM-based distros and RPM dependency hell.
So we went with the no O/S option and saved a couple hundred bucks over the RHEL option and at least a decent amount cheaper than Windows. We installed Ubuntu 64-bit server 6.06LTS on the servers, and I felt very good about not paying an OS tax.