... with anyone trying to directly steal their business from them...
Hello, is that you BSA, MPAA, RIAA?
I am afraid that it is not their business. What they do is offer something that is in demand. It is the right of everyone to offer an alternative. And if someone else offers a better and/or cheaper alternative, they do not steal anything.
Unless you are Balmer and believe there is a God given (or nature) law that forces all cosumers to buy your products, however broken and/or expensive they may be.
OpenOffice makes me (and all my colleagues) consistently more productive than MS-Office (less time to assemble a document).
As I am the IT guy, I don't keep any licenses, that I have to keep in the case of MS-Office. I don't have to keep track which computer has which license.
I don't have to keep the invoices of purchase either (yes, this mandatory in my country).
All the 20 or so computers we have, have OpenOffice installed, whether it is used or not (we used to have 3 MS-Office licenses and sometimes we had to change computers in order to write something).
The money which is now not spent for licenses, make us more competitive in the market.
I don't have to register (or enter codes) during the installation, and so our competitors do not, somehow, learn what software we use (yes this has happened to us with AutoCad many years ago).
When a new version is out, I just install it. I don't have to go to endless meetings to get the budget. No money is spent.
But, please, continue to use MS-Office. It certainly gives us the edge.
Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?
The geek factor, obviously.
Besides, you can use it to make fun. Just imagine a new student, or a secretary, trying to comprehend what is wrong, when they try (against the policy of the institute) to install their favorite game/chat/other distraction.
Just as an afterthought, in case that my very intelligent fellow Americans (in the justice department) miss the meaning of my previous comment.
My previous comment was heavily ironic and I declare that I never thought that the American revolution was a bad thing.
Armadillo completed the challenge several months ago, but their landing accuracy was slightly worse than Masten's attempt. Masten completed the challenge only one day before the expiration of the contest, and was able to do it only because another competitor failed and the X prize foundation allowed Masten to use their launch window (they'd earlier used up their scheduled time slots without doing a successful flight). Armadillo didn't have time or launch permits to go back and improve their accuracy.
John Carmack was understandably disappointed in losing the $500K but is taking the long view that Masten needs the money more than they do, and they've already moved on to new projects.
Not only that. Carmack's vehicle was bigger and thus closer to the real thing, and more difficult to handle. However the control was so accurate that the vehicle hardly oscillated or rotated at all. Much better than Masten's vehicle - even an amateur like me could see it.
IMO Carmack should get the 1st prize. Mastens did also very good job, and would deserve the 1st prize, if Carmack's vehicle were absent.
I have about 20 computers at my job. Every single one of them has OpenOffice installed. It has cost the company nothing to get it. I don't have to keep records about which computer has which license (I do that for Windows, AutoCad etc.). When I change the hardware, I simply reinstall OpenOffice. I don't have to look for S/N and activation keys and so. When a new version comes I simply install it. No conferences to decide if we should pay the money to upgrade. We use the savings in money for other needs (hardware) and the savings in time to do real work.
We use open office to write technical documents. The equations do not translate well to Word, but If we want to send a document to someone else, we save it as pdf. Or we send a copy of OpenOffice along with the document (the usual response is surprise that it works).
But, please, continue using MS-Office. It surely makes us more competitive.
On the contrary. My experience says that opening a.ppt of an older MS-Office is a PITA. What I do is to open the.ppt with OpenOffice and save it again. Almost always, this does the trick.
This trick is old news. I have been doing this since 1999, since StarOffice and MS-Office 95.
Mac is like a high maintenance mistress, Windows is like a pricey Girlfriend, Ubuntu is like a wife.
Funny that you said that. You are married to windows and mac os. You have a contract with them. You have paid for them. You have obligations and commitments (EULA). And you will pay again when Windows 8 comes.
On the other hand I am using SuSE linux now. Tomorrow I will use Ubuntu (it installs in half an hour full with applications). And tomorrow night I will have Mandriva or Fedora or Debian with me. No commitments. Just play. Hardy a marriage.
I have no experience with 64bit vista or 7.
But XP64 just sucked. It did not have the drivers for a lot of hardware. It gave random errors with 32bit applications. I returned the license and got a 32bit one, which worked as usual.
Contrast this with 64bit Linux (SuSE) which has worked flawlessly since 2005, full with 64bit applications (gcc, python, gimp etc). And it made a difference when I had to load almost 3GB satellite images 4 years ago.
And, you know, the installation of Linux plus all the applications took half an a hour (please try to do this with windows).
When I buy bread there is a sticker which says "best consumed before 2009/10/13".
This has exactly zero to do with with the bread's ability to be eaten. The lack of such a sticker does not mean that the bread is not capable of being eaten, it simply means that the bread has not been certified to be eaten be everyone.
"This is as easy as clicking a mouse!" (yeah, right...)
In my experience it is easy. My son was able to install SuSE Linux 64 (KDE 3.x) when he was 6 years old (now he is 7). Linux installation includes ALL drivers and ALL applications. My son didn't have to install OpenOffice, Firefox, Gimp, Python etc. after Linux installation, and he didn't have to install any drivers. Everything was installed in half an hour.
OTOH, I can't say the same about Windows (XP) installation (and I mean the 32bit XP; 64bit XP has few drivers).
I don't know about Windows Vista nor Windows 7. I have never used them, let alone install them:)
The basic problem with CPython is that, being a naive interpreter, it has to check for
the hard cases every time. "n = n + 1" ought to be a few machine instructions, maybe only one.
But Python has to check for n being a float, n being a string, n being an object
This is actually a feature. It is called polymorphism - everywhere. It is far simpler than the alternatives (C++ i.e. polymorphism - on condition), and in my opinion it is worth the sacrifice in speed.
Python is actually a good general-purpose programming language, not just a "scripting language". The big problem is slow execution.
I don't think it is, in the majority of cases. 0.01 sec to 0.7 sec is 70 times faster, but to a human being it is almost the same. And actually the difference is not so big in real applications. It is more likely 1 to 3 taking IO into account.
Python gives a huge advantage in code readability and developing time.
Why should you have the right to use my programs for free?
Normally you would have a point. But:
Why do I have to pay TV contribution when I don't have a working TV?
Why do I have to pay compensation for local copyright holders' when I buy a photocopier? I use it explicitly for my job (replication of technical studies done by me).
My cousin has a traditional morning cafe. Why did he have to pay compensation for the local RIAA? He did not have a radio in his cafe until recently.
There is a, state owned, special newspaper which publishes all the new laws that are made by the parliament. We do I have to pay for it (much more than a few euros which is the printing cost)? Do they have the right to copyright, when they are paid by my tax to do what they do (law making)?
There is a tendency to outlaw P2P software because it can be abused. If this sounds rational to anyone, then, by the same rationale, the right to copyright should be outlawed because it is very often abused.
My thought was that if patents killed Linux, they would also kill BSDs. On the other hand, SUN (SUN had not yet been acquired 2 years ago) could use their big patent portofolio to protect Solaris.
Imagine a computer that does not run Windows. One that is not able to run Windows!
I want one. Now. (I assume that it runs a full Linux distro of course).
Yes. I tried Nexenta OpenSolaris 2 or 3 years ago in Pentium II-400MHz with 256MB RAM, with equally old NVIDIA graphics card.
It wiped the hard disk (it couldn't live with Linux it said), but I didn't mind since it was an old computer. It took some time to install, and it took longer time to boot than Linux. But:
It recognized graphics card, monitor, disk, network adapter, everything.
The resolution of the monitor was 1600x1200 crystal clear (better than Linux).
It found automatically the network and connected to the Internet.
It had OpenOffice, Firefox etc. right out of the box.
It had Synaptic and many packages to download (gcc, g77, python, midnight commander, etc).
The response was actually better than Linux (SuSE Linux with KDE on the same hardware).
I was so thrilled that I decided to make it my new desktop OS, but then I had to abandon it because I could not mount SMB shares, which I needed to access the company's server. I actually mailed Nexenta about this, and they said that this was really a Kernel thing, and they just made the distribution, not the kernel. Another problem was poor support for Greek.
But overall a refreshing desktop experience. I even fantasized all distributions switch to OpenSolaris kernel if SCO (remember SCO?) was successful killing the Linux kernel:)
Not at all obvious. MSOffice is such a PITA. For example try to run a presentation to another computer with different version of powerpoint or different windows (home/prof/sp1/sp2/sp999 etc)
For example, if both MS Office and OO were both free, which would people choose?
But example. I would choose OO. MSOffice is such a PITA.
With the exception of these star applications (apache, linux, etc.) the real reason for using FOSS is that it's free.
A "genuine" advantage. Remember when Microsoft was small and no good for "serious" work in contrast with the then high Unix machines? Yet MSDOS+PCs sold like hot cakes, because they were far cheaper.
Slashdot Mirror
... with anyone trying to directly steal their business from them ...
Hello, is that you BSA, MPAA, RIAA?
I am afraid that it is not their business. What they do is offer something that is in demand. It is the right of everyone to offer an alternative. And if someone else offers a better and/or cheaper alternative, they do not steal anything.
Unless you are Balmer and believe there is a God given (or nature) law that forces all cosumers to buy your products, however broken and/or expensive they may be.
Please continue to use MS-Office.
OpenOffice makes me (and all my colleagues) consistently more productive than MS-Office (less time to assemble a document).
As I am the IT guy, I don't keep any licenses, that I have to keep in the case of MS-Office. I don't have to keep track which computer has which license.
I don't have to keep the invoices of purchase either (yes, this mandatory in my country).
All the 20 or so computers we have, have OpenOffice installed, whether it is used or not (we used to have 3 MS-Office licenses and sometimes we had to change computers in order to write something).
The money which is now not spent for licenses, make us more competitive in the market.
I don't have to register (or enter codes) during the installation, and so our competitors do not, somehow, learn what software we use (yes this has happened to us with AutoCad many years ago).
When a new version is out, I just install it. I don't have to go to endless meetings to get the budget. No money is spent.
But, please, continue to use MS-Office. It certainly gives us the edge.
Why would I want a perfectly good Linux machine to look like a Windows machine?
The geek factor, obviously.
Besides, you can use it to make fun. Just imagine a new student, or a secretary, trying to comprehend what is wrong, when they try (against the policy of the institute) to install their favorite game/chat/other distraction.
Just as an afterthought, in case that my very intelligent fellow Americans (in the justice department) miss the meaning of my previous comment.
My previous comment was heavily ironic and I declare that I never thought that the American revolution was a bad thing.
brazenly did shit that was completely illegal. I am glad they got hit for it.
Armadillo completed the challenge several months ago, but their landing accuracy was slightly worse than Masten's attempt. Masten completed the challenge only one day before the expiration of the contest, and was able to do it only because another competitor failed and the X prize foundation allowed Masten to use their launch window (they'd earlier used up their scheduled time slots without doing a successful flight). Armadillo didn't have time or launch permits to go back and improve their accuracy.
John Carmack was understandably disappointed in losing the $500K but is taking the long view that Masten needs the money more than they do, and they've already moved on to new projects.
Not only that. Carmack's vehicle was bigger and thus closer to the real thing, and more difficult to handle. However the control was so accurate that the vehicle hardly oscillated or rotated at all. Much better than Masten's vehicle - even an amateur like me could see it.
IMO Carmack should get the 1st prize. Mastens did also very good job, and would deserve the 1st prize, if Carmack's vehicle were absent.
This is an example of media control gone nuts. Didn't someone in jest say about 3 years ago that this would happen, somewhere in the world?
RMS did, but for books not songs.
Please continue using MS-Office.
I have about 20 computers at my job. Every single one of them has OpenOffice installed. It has cost the company nothing to get it. I don't have to keep records about which computer has which license (I do that for Windows, AutoCad etc.). When I change the hardware, I simply reinstall OpenOffice. I don't have to look for S/N and activation keys and so. When a new version comes I simply install it. No conferences to decide if we should pay the money to upgrade. We use the savings in money for other needs (hardware) and the savings in time to do real work.
We use open office to write technical documents. The equations do not translate well to Word, but If we want to send a document to someone else, we save it as pdf. Or we send a copy of OpenOffice along with the document (the usual response is surprise that it works).
But, please, continue using MS-Office. It surely makes us more competitive.
On the contrary. My experience says that opening a .ppt of an older MS-Office is a PITA. What I do is to open the .ppt with OpenOffice and save it again. Almost always, this does the trick.
This trick is old news. I have been doing this since 1999, since StarOffice and MS-Office 95.
Mac is like a high maintenance mistress, Windows is like a pricey Girlfriend, Ubuntu is like a wife.
Funny that you said that. You are married to windows and mac os. You have a contract with them. You have paid for them. You have obligations and commitments (EULA). And you will pay again when Windows 8 comes.
On the other hand I am using SuSE linux now. Tomorrow I will use Ubuntu (it installs in half an hour full with applications). And tomorrow night I will have Mandriva or Fedora or Debian with me. No commitments. Just play. Hardy a marriage.
Octave is NOT an alternative for most of Matlab.
But python/fortran/numerical recipes is.
Is it only me that I see a w (the 23rd letter)?
This makes sense. Thanks.
I have no experience with 64bit vista or 7.
But XP64 just sucked. It did not have the drivers for a lot of hardware. It gave random errors with 32bit applications. I returned the license and got a 32bit one, which worked as usual.
Contrast this with 64bit Linux (SuSE) which has worked flawlessly since 2005, full with 64bit applications (gcc, python, gimp etc). And it made a difference when I had to load almost 3GB satellite images 4 years ago.
And, you know, the installation of Linux plus all the applications took half an a hour (please try to do this with windows).
When I buy bread there is a sticker which says "best consumed before 2009/10/13".
This has exactly zero to do with with the bread's ability to be eaten. The lack of such a sticker does not mean that the bread is not capable of being eaten, it simply means that the bread has not been certified to be eaten be everyone.
"This is as easy as clicking a mouse!" (yeah, right...)
In my experience it is easy. My son was able to install SuSE Linux 64 (KDE 3.x) when he was 6 years old (now he is 7). Linux installation includes ALL drivers and ALL applications. My son didn't have to install OpenOffice, Firefox, Gimp, Python etc. after Linux installation, and he didn't have to install any drivers. Everything was installed in half an hour. :)
OTOH, I can't say the same about Windows (XP) installation (and I mean the 32bit XP; 64bit XP has few drivers).
I don't know about Windows Vista nor Windows 7. I have never used them, let alone install them
The basic problem with CPython is that, being a naive interpreter, it has to check for the hard cases every time. "n = n + 1" ought to be a few machine instructions, maybe only one. But Python has to check for n being a float, n being a string, n being an object
This is actually a feature. It is called polymorphism - everywhere. It is far simpler than the alternatives (C++ i.e. polymorphism - on condition), and in my opinion it is worth the sacrifice in speed.
Python is actually a good general-purpose programming language, not just a "scripting language". The big problem is slow execution.
I don't think it is, in the majority of cases. 0.01 sec to 0.7 sec is 70 times faster, but to a human being it is almost the same. And actually the difference is not so big in real applications. It is more likely 1 to 3 taking IO into account.
Python gives a huge advantage in code readability and developing time.
Why should you have the right to use my programs for free?
Normally you would have a point. But:
Why do I have to pay TV contribution when I don't have a working TV?
Why do I have to pay compensation for local copyright holders' when I buy a photocopier? I use it explicitly for my job (replication of technical studies done by me).
My cousin has a traditional morning cafe. Why did he have to pay compensation for the local RIAA? He did not have a radio in his cafe until recently.
There is a, state owned, special newspaper which publishes all the new laws that are made by the parliament. We do I have to pay for it (much more than a few euros which is the printing cost)? Do they have the right to copyright, when they are paid by my tax to do what they do (law making)?
There is a tendency to outlaw P2P software because it can be abused. If this sounds rational to anyone, then, by the same rationale, the right to copyright should be outlawed because it is very often abused.
I have a better idea. Let's ban Windows because they are used to download illegal games/music etc. A computer without Windows is useless, isn't it?
My thought was that if patents killed Linux, they would also kill BSDs. On the other hand, SUN (SUN had not yet been acquired 2 years ago) could use their big patent portofolio to protect Solaris.
Imagine a computer that does not run Windows. One that is not able to run Windows!
I want one. Now. (I assume that it runs a full Linux distro of course).
Yes. I tried Nexenta OpenSolaris 2 or 3 years ago in Pentium II-400MHz with 256MB RAM, with equally old NVIDIA graphics card. It wiped the hard disk (it couldn't live with Linux it said), but I didn't mind since it was an old computer. It took some time to install, and it took longer time to boot than Linux. But:
:)
It recognized graphics card, monitor, disk, network adapter, everything.
The resolution of the monitor was 1600x1200 crystal clear (better than Linux).
It found automatically the network and connected to the Internet.
It had OpenOffice, Firefox etc. right out of the box.
It had Synaptic and many packages to download (gcc, g77, python, midnight commander, etc).
The response was actually better than Linux (SuSE Linux with KDE on the same hardware).
I was so thrilled that I decided to make it my new desktop OS, but then I had to abandon it because I could not mount SMB shares, which I needed to access the company's server. I actually mailed Nexenta about this, and they said that this was really a Kernel thing, and they just made the distribution, not the kernel. Another problem was poor support for Greek.
But overall a refreshing desktop experience. I even fantasized all distributions switch to OpenSolaris kernel if SCO (remember SCO?) was successful killing the Linux kernel
Congrats to Carmack and Diamandis. We need more people like you.
I mean, when instead of Gimp, you can get this: http://btjunkie.org/search?q=adobe%20master
Then who cares about Gimp?
I, for one, would. 64bit Gimp plus 64bit Linux (SuSE) with 4GB RAM back in 2006 (or 2005) and an almost 3GB satellite image which opened in seconds.
And instead of OpenOffice, you get this: http://btjunkie.org/search?q=microsoft+office
I mean, it's obvious.
Not at all obvious. MSOffice is such a PITA. For example try to run a presentation to another computer with different version of powerpoint or different windows (home/prof/sp1/sp2/sp999 etc)
For example, if both MS Office and OO were both free, which would people choose?
But example. I would choose OO. MSOffice is such a PITA.
With the exception of these star applications (apache, linux, etc.) the real reason for using FOSS is that it's free.
A "genuine" advantage. Remember when Microsoft was small and no good for "serious" work in contrast with the then high Unix machines? Yet MSDOS+PCs sold like hot cakes, because they were far cheaper.