I've been driving a Honda Civic Hybrid with a CVT (automatic) transmission for 2 years. While I haven't sat down and run numbers, I've found that it costs about as a much as a regular Civic. The advantages are that the car is much smoother, quiter, has climate control, and easily accelerates to 95MPH. (The regular Civic 4-speed automatic runs out of power at about 75MPH) I feel like I'm driving a car that's worth more then the money than I paid for it.
To put it simply, the advantage of hybrids isn't the fuel savings, it's the simple fact that they're a joy to drive.
It's kind of risky to end up owning something that you were hired to create if the company will continue to use it after you leave. If you end up using something that you created on this job for another company, you could get into hot water with both employers. Federal law, (I believe Title 17,) is very explicit that IP generated by an employee is owned by the employer. If you really want to own the IP that you create on a job, you'll need to be an independant contracter who provides a service.
Don't forget to add that programs use inconsistant rules for passwords. Some programs are case-sensitive, others aren't. Some programs don't allow special charaters, some require them. What's worse are programs that require a numerical password. For example, I refuse to use Verizon's online system because instead of using a username/password combination, I have to use an account number and a randomly-generated PIN.
Machine Learning is a hot topic in software engineering jobs that involve factory automation. AI is a hot topic if you ever program for NASA. These classes are only irrelevant if you're just going to be a menial grunt-work coder.
Your solution is easier said then done. Not all web developers are as technicaly-savy as you are, nor do they care as much about their work as you do. Once when I was working as a contractor, I pointed out a huge security hole in another developer's project, and he just didn't care.
2. Aid workers are busy setting up computers for these people to use to contact relatives and fill out aid forms. They are not getting free Dell computers or free Windows licenses. They are setting up older computers that have been donated and may not run IE 6.
... You'd be surprised. Large tech companies are donating modern equipment and expertise. For example, Intel sent a team with 400 IBM thinkpads and wireless networking equipment to the Astrodome.
... Not yet. I believe the iPod mini is rather TV-friendly, and ATI's graphics cards support HDTV (via component video) with a cheap dongle. Personally, my HDTV has an RGBHV in, which can take a VGA source by merely using an adaptor cable. I plug my laptop directly into my TV, and it works with any resolutions that have 480 lines in the Y-axis at 60hz. Because the TV is widescreen, I need to use programs like Zoom Player (for Windows) to eliminate distortion.
Make sure you know the IDE(s) that you'll have to use. When I went to my first competition, I was only familar with Borland's C++ IDE. Unfortunatly, I could only use Visual Studio. If it wasn't for my partner being familar with Visual Studio, I would have lost time getting used to it.
I read this company's plan and it's completly feasable, except that they transposed a digit in their projected year of completion. They really plan to be on Mars in 2205, not 2025.;)
I was able to tell that a fraternity brother of mine was addicted to Evercrack based on his answer to "Where's brother Joe?" "He's in [insert some random Evercrack location]" We ended up blocking Evercrack in our router because of the problem. At least he wasn't an alcoholic.
Point me to a store where I can buy a desktop computer with Linux pre-installed! Show me an article that describes ordinary people buying Linux-based computers. So far all I can do is order a laptop online. I've been hearing your argument for the last eight years, but I've never seen Linux pre-installed on a desktop in a store. You're either blowing hot air at me, or you should be able to give me many examples of where I can buy a Linux-based desktop computer as a way of backing up your assertions of its popularity.
ALL CAPS is yelling. Bolding is to make a statement stand out without yelling, so you can read it first if you choose.
The problem is that every advantage that you've stated about Linux on the desktop can not be proven. Even the cost advantage can be negated if Apple or Microsoft decide to lower their prices.
My point is strictly about marketing, not technical merits. I suspect that you're unfamilar with how companies market technology, and thus would you please explain your experience in and knowledge about how companies get consumers to choose their product?
Besides, I've never been trying to prove that Linux on the desktop is better or worse then another operating system, which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm trying to explain that all of the advantages that you've stated are either temporary, irrelevant, unproven, or blatently wrong; and that in order for Linux on the desktop to be more then a cheap knock-off, it has to have features that will be attractive to people who will pay a few more dollars to stick with a brand (Windows or Mac) that they are comfortable with.
Linux becoming popular doesn't mean that it's making a sizable dent in Window's market share. Commercial Unixes like SCO and Solaris were the biggest victim of Linux.
Prove the argument on Linux attracting developers for desktop applications. I don't believe it. Every developer who I know, including people who are die-hard Linux users, loves working with Microsoft Visual Studio.Net. With regard to developing desktop applications, give me an example of a popular development environment on Linux? Remember, GCC is just a compiler, personal versions of VS.Net are free, and the Mono project provides some support for applications written in VS.Net on Linux.
The open standards argument doesn't apply here. You can run software that adheres to open standards on Windows. You can run other browsers and other office suites on Windows. (There was an alternate Word Processor bundled with my laptop.) Open Office runs on Windows and Mac. There is no garuntee that Microsoft will not support open office standards in the future.
With regard to content protection on Vista, it is primarily implemented in hardware and exists to appease the movie industry and to help keep documents secret. Given that restricted content will only exist if people create it and consume it, I've decided to take a wait-and-see attitude on this subject. Besides, what garuntee exists that a desktop Linux distro will not support content protection someday?
I don't think that it's a good strategy to sell a Linux-based desktop computer by calling Microsoft evil. Do you? Is "moral right" a good selling point?
Please put your comments on Vista on hold. We're talking about how to sell a desktop computer with Linux, not how to sell a desktop computer with Vista.
You can not walk into Walmart and buy a desktop computer with Linspire. They are only available off of Walmart's web site.
Again, before continuing a technical debate, I'd like to know how much experience you have in marketing. My original "knock-off" statement only had to do with marketing, and not Linux's technical merits, which I really prefer to avoid because its merits do make it desirable in markets other then the desktop.
I'm going to assume that you agree with the following statement: "Linux is popular on servers and in education because its advantages are desirable in those markets." I also agree that Linux on the desktop can do essentially everything needed on a desktop OS. (Word processesing, web, email, games) I hope you understand that my point will have nothing to do with Linux's existing merits.
Let's put the virus/spyware argument on hold. Windows malware might be able to slip onto a Linux computer through Wine or another emulation layer. There is no garuntee that a malware author will not target Linux in the future.
So now to start to establish my point: Let's think of a hypothetical situation where someone can walk into a store like Best Buy and choose from three similarly equiped computers, one being Mac with Office, one being Windows with Office, and one being Linux with Open Office. (The Windows computer has suffient malware protection for the sake of this argument.) In this situation, the Linux computer is the cheapest.
Just because the Linux computer does everything that people want, (web, email, ect,) and is cheaper doesn't mean that it will sell well. (I tried to prove this with the Nomad/iPod and automatic transmission examples)
My point: Linux on the desktop needs a good desirable feature to differentiate it from Windows and Mac. This could be a game that's unique to the platform, a new killer app that doesn't have a good clone on Windows or Mac, or even very-stylish cases. The salesperson needs to be able to point to something cool in order to sell a Linux-based desktop computer; price, lack of malware, flexibility, and open-source are not convincing enough. Do you understand my point? It has nothing to do with Linux's existing merits.
With regard to my experience with Linux: I try it every few years but I've never found any features compelling enough to switch. Windows 2000/XP are stable, secure, and customizable enough for me.
You called into question the nature of my membership and said bad things about an article of mine that was linked to on Slashdot. You are free to say what you want, but the article that started this thread is not about me. I will gladly address anything you want, including your opinion of my merits, IN EMAIL.
Please respond publicly only if you wish to continue discussing Linux and not my merits.
If you want to continue this, I suggest using email. (I couldn't find your email or web page.) This discussion isn't meant for a public forum. You know how to contact me.
I really don't like taking cheap shots at specific people in public. To be honest, I joined Slashdot because I've been reading it for so long that I felt it was time to have a real account. Perhaps if you read my post, you'd notice that it was aimed at Linux on the desktop, although in retropect I should have added, "Linux has proven itself to have some valuable advantages as a server and in education, where it is quite popular." I managed to stay in school long enough to be able to have a few homeworks that involved Linux kernal hacking.
Look, I am a professional software engineer for a major player in the technology industry. I've hobnobed with successful technology entrepuneures and attended seminars on how to get new technology accepted. There is a very good chance that at some point in the future you will use a device that is touched by software that I've written. (If you would like my resume to back up my claim, send me an email. http://www.andrewrondeau.com/ I can say for certain that Linux does not meet the criteria required for it to make any kind of dent in the market of consumer operating systems.
If a PC manufacturer is pushy enough to get a Linux-based computer for sale in a store like Best Buy or Wal-mark, it won't be very successful even in its current state. The computer might be $100-$500 cheaper, but that won't make much of a difference. The IPod is kicking the Nomad's ass in sales, yet the Nomad does everything an IPod does for significantly less money. (I am a proud owner of a Nomad, but all of my non-technical friends laugh at me for being too cheap to buy an IPod.) The same applies for cars, (I'm assuming you're American,) even though manual transmissions are $1000 cheaper, so few Americans want them that they're even being phased out of budget cars. Spyware and Viruses will become a problem on any popular consumer operating system, and thus assuming that Linux doesn't have a malware problem or is immune to malware is irresponsible. Many of Linux's features over Windows (Unix-based, open-source kernel,) are already present on OS X, which is very successful in the consumer desktop market.
The only way for Linux to be able to make a dent in Window's market share is for it to have *unique* "must-have" features that Windows and Macintosh lack. The fact that Apple makes unique and desirable applications for the Macintosh is what keeps it in business. The real reason why the DOS-based PC became popular was because it had VisiCalc back in the early 80s, which no one else had. All of Linux's advantages are not important in the desktop market.
Look, Linux has been around for about 14 years, and I've been hearing the same arguments as to why it's the best thing since sliced bread for the last 8 years. (The person who first got me try Linux is now a proud Mac owner.) I think the fact that the first successful consumer desktop operating system based on an open-source kernel (OS X) used BSD says quite a bit.
Your "little brother" statement is certainly true about Linux on the desktop. It offers no significant advantage over Windows, and at best is nothing more then a cheap knock-off. When Linux on the desktop can offer must-have features that matter to non-technical people, then it'll stand a chance.
Slashdot Mirror
To put it simply, the advantage of hybrids isn't the fuel savings, it's the simple fact that they're a joy to drive.
It's kind of risky to end up owning something that you were hired to create if the company will continue to use it after you leave. If you end up using something that you created on this job for another company, you could get into hot water with both employers. Federal law, (I believe Title 17,) is very explicit that IP generated by an employee is owned by the employer. If you really want to own the IP that you create on a job, you'll need to be an independant contracter who provides a service.
I can live with that, but when they add full QWERTY keyboards, then I'll expect true passwords.
Don't forget to add that programs use inconsistant rules for passwords. Some programs are case-sensitive, others aren't. Some programs don't allow special charaters, some require them. What's worse are programs that require a numerical password. For example, I refuse to use Verizon's online system because instead of using a username/password combination, I have to use an account number and a randomly-generated PIN.
Machine Learning is a hot topic in software engineering jobs that involve factory automation. AI is a hot topic if you ever program for NASA. These classes are only irrelevant if you're just going to be a menial grunt-work coder.
How soon until someone proposes that we not worry about the return trip and leave the astronauts there permenently?
Your solution is easier said then done. Not all web developers are as technicaly-savy as you are, nor do they care as much about their work as you do. Once when I was working as a contractor, I pointed out a huge security hole in another developer's project, and he just didn't care.
... But then you have to know the arguments to the compiler, which can differ greatly.
... Not yet. I believe the iPod mini is rather TV-friendly, and ATI's graphics cards support HDTV (via component video) with a cheap dongle. Personally, my HDTV has an RGBHV in, which can take a VGA source by merely using an adaptor cable. I plug my laptop directly into my TV, and it works with any resolutions that have 480 lines in the Y-axis at 60hz. Because the TV is widescreen, I need to use programs like Zoom Player (for Windows) to eliminate distortion.
Make sure you know the IDE(s) that you'll have to use. When I went to my first competition, I was only familar with Borland's C++ IDE. Unfortunatly, I could only use Visual Studio. If it wasn't for my partner being familar with Visual Studio, I would have lost time getting used to it.
I read this company's plan and it's completly feasable, except that they transposed a digit in their projected year of completion. They really plan to be on Mars in 2205, not 2025. ;)
I miss ANSI BBSs and external modems. Web message boards simply just don't do the trick.
Point me to a store where I can buy a desktop computer with Linux pre-installed! Show me an article that describes ordinary people buying Linux-based computers. So far all I can do is order a laptop online. I've been hearing your argument for the last eight years, but I've never seen Linux pre-installed on a desktop in a store. You're either blowing hot air at me, or you should be able to give me many examples of where I can buy a Linux-based desktop computer as a way of backing up your assertions of its popularity.
The problem is that every advantage that you've stated about Linux on the desktop can not be proven. Even the cost advantage can be negated if Apple or Microsoft decide to lower their prices.
My point is strictly about marketing, not technical merits. I suspect that you're unfamilar with how companies market technology, and thus would you please explain your experience in and knowledge about how companies get consumers to choose their product?
Besides, I've never been trying to prove that Linux on the desktop is better or worse then another operating system, which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm trying to explain that all of the advantages that you've stated are either temporary, irrelevant, unproven, or blatently wrong; and that in order for Linux on the desktop to be more then a cheap knock-off, it has to have features that will be attractive to people who will pay a few more dollars to stick with a brand (Windows or Mac) that they are comfortable with.
And now back to the technical debate.
With regard to security, everything you've said about Windows is also true about Linux. http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2002-27.html http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml ?articleID=51200210 Yes, Linux historically has less issues, but it is not immune, and given Microsoft's recent attention to security, I find this argument moot for now. (BTW, Wine is not the only Windows compatibility layer.)
Linux becoming popular doesn't mean that it's making a sizable dent in Window's market share. Commercial Unixes like SCO and Solaris were the biggest victim of Linux.
Prove the argument on Linux attracting developers for desktop applications. I don't believe it. Every developer who I know, including people who are die-hard Linux users, loves working with Microsoft Visual Studio .Net. With regard to developing desktop applications, give me an example of a popular development environment on Linux? Remember, GCC is just a compiler, personal versions of VS.Net are free, and the Mono project provides some support for applications written in VS.Net on Linux.
The open standards argument doesn't apply here. You can run software that adheres to open standards on Windows. You can run other browsers and other office suites on Windows. (There was an alternate Word Processor bundled with my laptop.) Open Office runs on Windows and Mac. There is no garuntee that Microsoft will not support open office standards in the future.
With regard to content protection on Vista, it is primarily implemented in hardware and exists to appease the movie industry and to help keep documents secret. Given that restricted content will only exist if people create it and consume it, I've decided to take a wait-and-see attitude on this subject. Besides, what garuntee exists that a desktop Linux distro will not support content protection someday?
I don't think that it's a good strategy to sell a Linux-based desktop computer by calling Microsoft evil. Do you? Is "moral right" a good selling point?
Please put your comments on Vista on hold. We're talking about how to sell a desktop computer with Linux, not how to sell a desktop computer with Vista.
You can not walk into Walmart and buy a desktop computer with Linspire. They are only available off of Walmart's web site.
Again, before continuing a technical debate, I'd like to know how much experience you have in marketing. My original "knock-off" statement only had to do with marketing, and not Linux's technical merits, which I really prefer to avoid because its merits do make it desirable in markets other then the desktop.
I'm going to assume that you agree with the following statement: "Linux is popular on servers and in education because its advantages are desirable in those markets." I also agree that Linux on the desktop can do essentially everything needed on a desktop OS. (Word processesing, web, email, games) I hope you understand that my point will have nothing to do with Linux's existing merits.
Let's put the virus/spyware argument on hold. Windows malware might be able to slip onto a Linux computer through Wine or another emulation layer. There is no garuntee that a malware author will not target Linux in the future.
So now to start to establish my point: Let's think of a hypothetical situation where someone can walk into a store like Best Buy and choose from three similarly equiped computers, one being Mac with Office, one being Windows with Office, and one being Linux with Open Office. (The Windows computer has suffient malware protection for the sake of this argument.) In this situation, the Linux computer is the cheapest.
Just because the Linux computer does everything that people want, (web, email, ect,) and is cheaper doesn't mean that it will sell well. (I tried to prove this with the Nomad/iPod and automatic transmission examples)
My point: Linux on the desktop needs a good desirable feature to differentiate it from Windows and Mac. This could be a game that's unique to the platform, a new killer app that doesn't have a good clone on Windows or Mac, or even very-stylish cases. The salesperson needs to be able to point to something cool in order to sell a Linux-based desktop computer; price, lack of malware, flexibility, and open-source are not convincing enough. Do you understand my point? It has nothing to do with Linux's existing merits.
With regard to my experience with Linux: I try it every few years but I've never found any features compelling enough to switch. Windows 2000/XP are stable, secure, and customizable enough for me.
Please respond publicly only if you wish to continue discussing Linux and not my merits.
If you want to continue this, I suggest using email. (I couldn't find your email or web page.) This discussion isn't meant for a public forum. You know how to contact me.
Look, I am a professional software engineer for a major player in the technology industry. I've hobnobed with successful technology entrepuneures and attended seminars on how to get new technology accepted. There is a very good chance that at some point in the future you will use a device that is touched by software that I've written. (If you would like my resume to back up my claim, send me an email. http://www.andrewrondeau.com/ I can say for certain that Linux does not meet the criteria required for it to make any kind of dent in the market of consumer operating systems.
If a PC manufacturer is pushy enough to get a Linux-based computer for sale in a store like Best Buy or Wal-mark, it won't be very successful even in its current state. The computer might be $100-$500 cheaper, but that won't make much of a difference. The IPod is kicking the Nomad's ass in sales, yet the Nomad does everything an IPod does for significantly less money. (I am a proud owner of a Nomad, but all of my non-technical friends laugh at me for being too cheap to buy an IPod.) The same applies for cars, (I'm assuming you're American,) even though manual transmissions are $1000 cheaper, so few Americans want them that they're even being phased out of budget cars. Spyware and Viruses will become a problem on any popular consumer operating system, and thus assuming that Linux doesn't have a malware problem or is immune to malware is irresponsible. Many of Linux's features over Windows (Unix-based, open-source kernel,) are already present on OS X, which is very successful in the consumer desktop market.
The only way for Linux to be able to make a dent in Window's market share is for it to have *unique* "must-have" features that Windows and Macintosh lack. The fact that Apple makes unique and desirable applications for the Macintosh is what keeps it in business. The real reason why the DOS-based PC became popular was because it had VisiCalc back in the early 80s, which no one else had. All of Linux's advantages are not important in the desktop market.
Look, Linux has been around for about 14 years, and I've been hearing the same arguments as to why it's the best thing since sliced bread for the last 8 years. (The person who first got me try Linux is now a proud Mac owner.) I think the fact that the first successful consumer desktop operating system based on an open-source kernel (OS X) used BSD says quite a bit.
Your "little brother" statement is certainly true about Linux on the desktop. It offers no significant advantage over Windows, and at best is nothing more then a cheap knock-off. When Linux on the desktop can offer must-have features that matter to non-technical people, then it'll stand a chance.
It's very easy to generate pdfs from Office using the free tool pdf995. This will not require that MA moves away from Office at all.
How soon until they rename it the Firefox project?