There are varied opinions on how different GUIs compare to each other.
The point of GP, IMHO, was that you need to learn the interface. Which is perfectly true.
GUIs do improve the start-up time to learn, usually at the cost of efficiency later on.
But that is true of all GUIs (although some are better than others).
GP didn't say (or imply) "Your to stupid to use a computer".
Linux has a reputation for being hard to use - but that's unfair. Linux GUIs are no harder to use than Windows GUIs - but there are differences.
Someone coming from Windows needs to learn those differences. GP was pointing out that you need to learn how to use it.
"... But I think now, two to three years into this, we're seeing these issues around cost and reliability coming up such that, we now know we need to go back to the basics on how we evaluate a platform and choose it."
So instead of smearing Linux like they used to, there recommending that IT managers actually use metrics and eveluate the platforms. WTF?
"First and foremost, we are looking to understand some of the scenarios like why customers are considering Linux, and making sure we have the right offerings for the marketplace."
Let me help you: The main reasons are:
Avoiding vendor lock-in. This is a long-term cost reducing strategy, because it increases competition.
Increasing agility. Many companies are now actually modifying the platfom to meet their needs. There are different levels of this - many don't involve changing software.
Reducing licensing costs. This is really a small issue for most businesses.
The problem is that Microsoft cannot compete on the first two points.
"It was all very complex, and some of the seams of the Linux architecture were beginning to show."
Show us the money! This is an easy claim to make...
"... Because of the brittle nature of the platform, when you do that, other things break.... It's about Red Hat, it's about Novell, it's about IBM...really looking for ways to monetize sets of things around Linux. In some ways, this is a good thing for customers because things are more black-and-white now, and it allows us to have a very balanced conversation with them around these key issues."
Bait and switch? "Don't use Linux it's brittle."... but... "It's about issues of cost and vendor now."
Don't give any evidence that Linux actually IS brittle. And it's nonsense. Linux is more agile than any Windows OS.
"The GPL is a very complex licensing agreement"
Has he ever read one of Microsoft's EULAs???! What a dick.
"... people should have the ability to monetize that and build on top of it."
That's the choice of the author. Microsoft will choose differently than RedHat.
"and there's been a lot of innovation (in the last decade or so) in the software industry where patents exist and are enforced in so many countries."
His implying that in europe, software has been hampered because software patents exists, but are unenforceable.
"We spend close to $6.8 billion in research and development; it really comes in a variety of areas."
I totally agree.
The licenses are prepared by an authority on copyright law, and it's history.
They're simple to understand.
I don't know what his beef is...
OK now I'll go RTA!
It does however indicate that women feel more comfortable with their DVRs than with their VCRs.
That's a whole lot more interesting and useful than comparing how a woman feels about her remote than how a man does.
Still, it'll probably lead to DVRs being "positioned" more for women than they have been up to now. Take a next to worthless statistic and turn it into Marketing Magic TM.
I'm British: I drink and move my mouse with my pinkie sticking out (it's the gentleman's way) and I've been buying the Mirror or the Sun newspapers with naked female breasts since I was 9.
(And later the Sunday Sport - whoah!)
The RIAA were lobbying congress for a law entitling them to attack "copyright infringers"
IIRC they were requesting the right to attack and do $xxx worth of damage whilst being protected under the proposed legislation from ANY recrinimation - even in the cases that they were wrong (they didn't own the copyrights) or a third party received damage.
So absolutely it sets a terrible precedent.
They have also been using companies to spread "poisoned" files with the same name/tracker id/keywords/whatever to disrupt P2P networks. This I believe falls squarely within the DDOS boundary - but I doubt anyone trying to download RIAA matterial is going to try to sue.
I doubt those downloading files they are legally entitled to would sue if they were poisoned. It would be a PITA to prove.
Plus is plain wrong and immoral - or don't these things matter? They matter to me.
And many distro's are working towards a single standard.
Remember, because the software is free software the vendors don't feel compelled to "embrace and extend" to differentiate their products. They are less inclined to compete on a feature by feature basis. They compete more on services and other criteria.
So working towards standards is a win-win, and is inevitable.
Here's why I'd choose Linux over Windows every time - and why I advise all my non-geek friends to get a Mac:
Microsoft lobbies congress to remove our freedoms. I'd rather shoot myself than give them more money. Buy a computer from a company not ruled by Microsoft.
Windows still sucks, and Longhorn will make matters worse by making it even harder to switch.
Microsoft spend more money breaking things than fixing them. "Embrace, extend and extinguish". They've done it to APIs, file formats, protocols, the Java JVM.
If they actually innovated, they'd have a decent operating system.
Microsoft have abused their power to destroy other companies. The harm this has done to all of us is impossible to measure, but for an example, if Netscape had not been destroyed by Microsoft's illegal activities, web standards compliant browsers would be ubiquitous, and developing web sites would be far simpler than it is.
You wouldn't have to bend over to Microsoft to get your banking done.
Microsoft don't deserve anything from us. They deserve dissolution. There past and current activities call for nothing less - why do some people support them? They are immoral and unethical. They have slowed innovation in this industry to a crawl. And they are attacking us directly and indirectly. What gives folks?
Windows does not have a decent method of reporting errors. When Linux or an app running under Linux throws an exception, I can figure out what's screwed up. Windows does an awful job of providing information to the user, or a diagnostician.
Windows prejudges us as criminals. It assumes that if we aren't controlled, we'll infringe copyrighted material, or something insidious. Before you can even install it, you have to call up and prove to their satisfaction you have a legally obtained copy.
Linux treats us as an important part of a growing community. It provides tools, and a welcoming environment. It even encourages us to copy, modify and even redistribute it's very source code.
It treats us like respectable adults.
Even if Windows didn't suck, I'd still choose Linux.
Firstly, the question is whether there are enough check and balances.
The partiot act, for example, removes judical review of many things. This means that when the system is abused, and, say, political agenda is monitored (instead of terrorist activity), nobody finds out.
Strange, I've never seen anyone code a ladder of instanceof tests.
Whoever coded it should be shot.
You can't blame Java itself. Anyway, Smalltalk has a similar NotImplemented exception.
Such decisions are often a trade off. Like the fact that the stl uses an informal idea of an interface. Look at the iterator. No type safety to ensure that an object really behaves as an interface. Java's interfaces (like Iterator) ensure that you have the necessary methods.
The other way to have "optional" methods would be to have an interface for each logical group of optional methods, but that doesn't recommend those methods to implementers.
The fact that a class has a (probably abstract) method to be overriden at least acts as a hint to the coder that the method should be implemented.
It certainly isn't standard practice to fill all mandated methods with "throw new MethodNotSupportedException(...)"
It also doesn't mean that the OOness of the language is totally broken.
In every OO language you can quite easily build flat procedural code. And you can avoid implementing methods by throwing exceptions.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm allowed, I'm not from Microsoft.
The point of GP, IMHO, was that you need to learn the interface. Which is perfectly true.
GUIs do improve the start-up time to learn, usually at the cost of efficiency later on.
But that is true of all GUIs (although some are better than others).
GP didn't say (or imply) "Your to stupid to use a computer".
Linux has a reputation for being hard to use - but that's unfair. Linux GUIs are no harder to use than Windows GUIs - but there are differences. Someone coming from Windows needs to learn those differences. GP was pointing out that you need to learn how to use it.
No overhead there.
Microsoft even recommends running each app on it's own box.
It's no wonder IBM pushes multiple vitrual Linux systems on a single mainframe (zSeries, or even iSeries).
So instead of smearing Linux like they used to, there recommending that IT managers actually use metrics and eveluate the platforms. WTF?
Let me help you: The main reasons are:
- Avoiding vendor lock-in. This is a long-term cost reducing strategy, because it increases competition.
- Increasing agility. Many companies are now actually modifying the platfom to meet their needs. There are different levels of this - many don't involve changing software.
- Reducing licensing costs. This is really a small issue for most businesses.
The problem is that Microsoft cannot compete on the first two points.Show us the money! This is an easy claim to make...
Bait and switch? "Don't use Linux it's brittle." ... but ... "It's about issues of cost and vendor now."
Has he ever read one of Microsoft's EULAs???! What a dick. That's the choice of the author. Microsoft will choose differently than RedHat. His implying that in europe, software has been hampered because software patents exists, but are unenforceable. It's a shame it doesn't show in the products.Don't give any evidence that Linux actually IS brittle. And it's nonsense. Linux is more agile than any Windows OS.
His statement implies that Windows has caught up with Linux.
That's a very telling implication - and not at all true, of course.
Thanks. So it appears that Rockstar were trying to minimize the issue. Can't say I blame them.
Although, I'll bet they left it in there as a invitation - knowing it would increase publicity.
People are MODIFYING THE GAME!
The fact that some material was on the disk is totally beside the point. If the user plays the game without hacking it, no such content is available.
If someone wanted to, they could create a patch that turns Pacman into a hopping erect dick. Would that require Pacman to get a AO rating?
I'm sorry, aren't we talking about GRAND THEFT AUTO here?
I totally agree. The licenses are prepared by an authority on copyright law, and it's history. They're simple to understand. I don't know what his beef is... OK now I'll go RTA!
iPod, mePod, youPod, shePod
Can you explain your sig? I don't get it.
It does however indicate that women feel more comfortable with their DVRs than with their VCRs.
That's a whole lot more interesting and useful than comparing how a woman feels about her remote than how a man does.
Still, it'll probably lead to DVRs being "positioned" more for women than they have been up to now. Take a next to worthless statistic and turn it into Marketing Magic TM.
The word "naked" has mildly negative connotations - deviod or exposed.
I have no problem with my 7-year old son seeing nude females (or males for that matter).
Of course, that depends on the pose and the activity.
I am far more concerned with the amount of violence he has seen on TV.
Some people are so preoccupied with the notion that skin is something to hide and be ashamed of.
Classic Is it considered impolite to wet your pants laughing?
(And later the Sunday Sport - whoah!)
I thank you!
Hey! What have you people got against CARPETS?
Geez, I'm switching to hardwood... mutter...
IIRC they were requesting the right to attack and do $xxx worth of damage whilst being protected under the proposed legislation from ANY recrinimation - even in the cases that they were wrong (they didn't own the copyrights) or a third party received damage.
So absolutely it sets a terrible precedent.
They have also been using companies to spread "poisoned" files with the same name/tracker id/keywords/whatever to disrupt P2P networks. This I believe falls squarely within the DDOS boundary - but I doubt anyone trying to download RIAA matterial is going to try to sue.
I doubt those downloading files they are legally entitled to would sue if they were poisoned. It would be a PITA to prove.
Plus is plain wrong and immoral - or don't these things matter? They matter to me.
Even regardles of collateral damage, it's plain wrong, immoral and either illegal or it should be.
IMHO standards are key.
And many distro's are working towards a single standard.
Remember, because the software is free software the vendors don't feel compelled to "embrace and extend" to differentiate their products. They are less inclined to compete on a feature by feature basis. They compete more on services and other criteria.
So working towards standards is a win-win, and is inevitable.
What kind of idiotic rhetoric is this?
I've used Linux on the desktop for over 5 years.
And it was ready long before that.
Now it's ahead of Windows.
Does it have to be easier than OS/X and more widely supported by app authors than Windows to be considered ready??
Geez, are you biased or what?
Here's why I'd choose Linux over Windows every time - and why I advise all my non-geek friends to get a Mac:
- Microsoft lobbies congress to remove our freedoms. I'd rather shoot myself than give them more money. Buy a computer from a company not ruled by Microsoft.
- Windows still sucks, and Longhorn will make matters worse by making it even harder to switch.
- Microsoft spend more money breaking things than fixing them. "Embrace, extend and extinguish". They've done it to APIs, file formats, protocols, the Java JVM.
- Microsoft have abused their power to destroy other companies. The harm this has done to all of us is impossible to measure, but for an example, if Netscape had not been destroyed by Microsoft's illegal activities, web standards compliant browsers would be ubiquitous, and developing web sites would be far simpler than it is.
- Microsoft don't deserve anything from us. They deserve dissolution. There past and current activities call for nothing less - why do some people support them? They are immoral and unethical. They have slowed innovation in this industry to a crawl. And they are attacking us directly and indirectly. What gives folks?
- Windows does not have a decent method of reporting errors. When Linux or an app running under Linux throws an exception, I can figure out what's screwed up. Windows does an awful job of providing information to the user, or a diagnostician.
- Windows prejudges us as criminals. It assumes that if we aren't controlled, we'll infringe copyrighted material, or something insidious. Before you can even install it, you have to call up and prove to their satisfaction you have a legally obtained copy.
- Linux treats us as an important part of a growing community. It provides tools, and a welcoming environment. It even encourages us to copy, modify and even redistribute it's very source code.
Even if Windows didn't suck, I'd still choose Linux.If they actually innovated, they'd have a decent operating system.
You wouldn't have to bend over to Microsoft to get your banking done.
It treats us like respectable adults.
The partiot act, for example, removes judical review of many things. This means that when the system is abused, and, say, political agenda is monitored (instead of terrorist activity), nobody finds out.
Remember Watergate?
Secondly, the stated example is:
This is nonsense since a device of this type would have been activated long before they had any chance of stopping it.Plus such a system could simply use a heartbeat - and trigger whenever the heartbeat quit.
They are aware of these issues, so the stated purpose is obviously not the real purpose.
Hence all the debate.
Whoever coded it should be shot.
You can't blame Java itself. Anyway, Smalltalk has a similar NotImplemented exception.
Such decisions are often a trade off. Like the fact that the stl uses an informal idea of an interface. Look at the iterator. No type safety to ensure that an object really behaves as an interface. Java's interfaces (like Iterator) ensure that you have the necessary methods.
The other way to have "optional" methods would be to have an interface for each logical group of optional methods, but that doesn't recommend those methods to implementers.
The fact that a class has a (probably abstract) method to be overriden at least acts as a hint to the coder that the method should be implemented.
It certainly isn't standard practice to fill all mandated methods with "throw new MethodNotSupportedException(...)"
It also doesn't mean that the OOness of the language is totally broken.
In every OO language you can quite easily build flat procedural code. And you can avoid implementing methods by throwing exceptions.
Bad coding is the fault of the coder.
- It was aimed at a saturated market that wasn't about to make a big-time investment in changing architecture.
- The slow momentum gave it a bad name.
Of the two, I believe the latter is the more damaging.