I have been contemplating building a new machine for a while... While I don't guarantee that I'll buy a Dell, I am going to wait to see what they make available before I build my new machine. If it meets my needs, I'll buy it, if not, I will have looked into it and may recommend it a friend or relative. Dell still has to execute, but they are starting to disrupt the market again (just like they did when they started) and if they do execute, they will (justly) reap the rewards.
What they should do, is sell Dual Core systems with the option of having Windows XP installed in a VM (pick KVM, Xen, VMWare, whatever). That might be interesting to... well, to me anyway.:-)
If YouTube is the distribution media, and so we're suing the company that owns that media... Why don't we sue ISPs who provide the basic media for file sharing? In Canada, we already have a levy on blank media...
(I know it should be simple to argue the difference between hosting a complete work, and just having various bytes flowing through a network... but with the DMCA, if it is illegal to have a copy of DeCSS, maybe it should be illegal to have an Internet connection...)
But then, haven't people who host unmoderated forums already been found not responsible for what the users of the forums post?
I thought the law was based on reason... too bad the people who usually write them are so often rewarded for pandering to unreason.
If the government is truly accountable to you, then you have no need to fear a corporation.
Corporations only exist with the blessing and protection of government (witness the recent events in Venezuela, or what happened in the Third Reich, or any communist country).
It is important to get the government to pass and enforce meaningful privacy laws. But those laws applied to companies amount to little, if they do not also apply to government itself.
Government is the elephant in the room in the privacy debate. How happy are they to encourage companies to collect all sorts of information about individuals by having little restrictions on what they can do with it. Then, when they are in the midst of an investigation (witch hunt?), they can demand access (probably without a subpoena), brand someone a security risk, and lock him up, indefinitely, without charge.
Whatever laws constrain business, need to constrain government all the more vigorously.
I don't think corporations are the "worse possible enemy of privacy", that title properly belongs to the entity who by legal threat and use of force can already sweep privacy aside (say in the course of a murder investigation): the government.
what about beer? you know, I think you prove that you're not a *real* beer drinker if you use beer as the plural of beer... at least in Canada, its beers, eh
the exact word yes (a symbol or logo can be trademarked too), but if you had something that sounds like it (or looks like it)... you'll probably lose too: Lindows...
Linux has come a long way in the last two years... but still, if you're happy with Windows, why bother making the switch?
And that is the point: you can't say that Firefox is primarily successful (market share) because it installs easily and Linux does not... Firefox is primarily successful because it installs on Windows.
Linux installs easier than windows, no doubt. You compare the best case scenario for Windows (by the way, what programs do you get installed in 4 hours... and are all the updates installed... how many reboots... ) to the worst for Linux. (Who cares, right, just another guy's one-of experience, but I've installed Ubuntu, with everything you'd like in a couple hours... and long before then, like the default installation's 20 minutes, I've had a usable system for many tasks.) But again, how many people are going to install their OS anyway?
Lastly, ease of use? Yes, I know Linux + Gnome is a good user environment. My step father, my mother, my father, my sister, my wife have all used it, and still use it. Despite their imperfections, the DE's available today are usable, even, 'easy to use' (misunderstood concept that it is). And as too your:
Next->Typical Install->Next->Next->Finish->Start Menu->All Programs->Click the program name what is so hard about (since you already seem to know the app you want)
apt-get install app-name; app-name
or the equivalent GUI sequence?
Oh, it is a commercial application? If it is available on Linux, then you may get your installation wizard dream paradigm! Oh, so that's it, is it? Linux doesn't have some commercial application you want to use... Oh, so the main reason why Linux hasn't been adopted isn't because it is too hard to install (for an OS), or too hard to use (anymore), but because millions of computers are shipped every month with Windows pre-installed, a platform which few third-party developers don't support, and works pretty much the same as any computer you've touched since 1995... and to use Linux I have to install another platform?
While this may be true (although, Windows is pretty good for developers too, and decently stable, now):
Bottom line - For a lot of things Linux is, more stable, more powerful, offers more fine control, and is simply a better OS for developers and sysadmins. it does not prove that Linux is unsuited for regular users, and my experience is that Linux + Gnome is suitable for regular users, except when some Windows-only application is the deal-breaker.
This is a bit of a red herring.
Firefox gained market share for a number of reasons, some that may be applicable to Linux as well.
But the single biggest reason for Firefox's market share is that you could install it on Windows.
I'm still looking for a Linux that's easy to install and use without having to "rebuild kernels, install hundreds of packages, etc". I tried Ubuntu and that never worked..."
Have you ever tried installing Windows from scratch? That is like two days effort (by the time you get all your drivers and programs installed, and everything set up as you like). I don't think Linux is worse than Windows, just different. And for certain setups, its better (consider all the good programs that are already available by most distros default install).
So, the main reason Firefox gained so much popularity compared to Linux, was that you could use it on whatever OS you were already using. Possibly this includes it being "so easy to install and use", but that is a misleading statement because you are implying a Linux distro isn't. Firefox installs like any other application on any supported OS, and is as usable as most mature programs. Linux distros are likely the easiest operating systems to install, but that doesn't really matter, because most people will never install an OS. Linux is quite usable, as long as you don't expect it to be the same as Windows or OSX and are willing to get used to it.
I agree! We *know* a lot of our what we do is terrible for our health and the health of the environment in general.
What really bugs me is that climate change is getting all the political attention, and therefore all the money. A lot of human activity is damaging the environment in ways which seem like they will have a much greater impact on us a lot sooner than climate change may have. We already *know* about depleted fish stocks, heavy medal accumulation at the top of food chains, deforestation, etc., etc..
Yet global warming is getting all the attention. 'Environmentalists' are recommending we build more fission power plants to cut our reliance on 'dirty' power. So instead of investing _millions_ to modernize coal plants and reduce CO2 emissions, we're going to change the local environment in whatever body of water is going to be used to cool the plant, and build up hazardous waste we have no idea how to dispose of at the cost of *billions*?
I think climate change 'promoters' are just as guilty of overlooking real problems in their mad rush to eradicate CO2 emissions as you say the 'debunkers' are to state that there is no problem.
I live in Canada. I still have sulfur in my gasoline, my provincial government (Ontario) wants to spend billions building new nuclear power plants, ground water contamination is in the news (in some new community) every few months... Yet all David Suzuki can write about in my local newspaper is how poor a job the government is doing w.r.t. climate change.
I'm not sure if this is true, but sometimes I feel that some are using Kyoto and climate change as a cover for not dealing with more pressing environmental issues. And what's worse, they've got the environmentalists to go along for the ride.
I wonder if it would be possible to "force the deal" by suing MS for some sort of slander? Certainly, if Linux were a person it could, I think. It is like MS saying, "Oh, don't let that Linux get near your family, he molested my children." If Ballmer said what he said about Linux about a person, with no evidence, he would likely end up in court. Is there a case here? Is it possible to have a case? I'd love to see someone (or better, a group of someones... but I think Red Hat may be the only one) take this up.
no I didn't RTFA but, doesn't this sound like the same criticisms that often get leveled against the global warming advocates? (I'm not making an opinion on either one, but maybe it just goes with the territory of making predictions.)
I switched to CS after a couple of years in a traditional engineering program. In the CS program we covered discrete math and statistics (everyone in science and engineering had to do first year calculus and algebra courses). We also had a special course in logic (we used SPARC assembly for assignments). But one topic that was not covered in CS, but I got in a second year engineering calculus course, was numerical methods (especially the 'gotchas' of machine math vs. real math). Maybe it is just the type of work I've done (structural analysis software, and compilers), but that is one topic that I really would have missed (although I probably wouldn't have known it) if I had done CS right from the beginning.
I may be wrong, but from what I recall from my 3rd year "software law" class (which has remained uncontradicted by what I've read to date), only trade mark puts any burden on owners to enforce their rights.
Copyright and patents don't require you to do anything while other people trample all over your rights, and you can take them to court later on. (Isn't something like this what happened with gif?)
This is one of the problems with grouping trade mark, copyright, and patents together and calling them "intellectual property". They are each very different, and each have a different purpose and application.
Anyway, I don't think the MPAA will have any trouble going after GUBA, even if they let it continue for decades (I think that copyright in the US is protected for 75 years, or something dumb like that).
Our young son is happiest whenever he sees mommy and daddy kissing or hugging. He usually wants to join in too. The rest of the time, you've got to ask really nice for a hug, especially if he's in the middle of driving his tractors or "reading". But when he sees us hugging, he can't drop whatever he was doing fast enough to join in.
I think it is important for children to know that they are loved, but it at least as important that they know that the people who love them love each other. It kind of ties their whole universe together. And parents are the two most important (and most visible) people to a child, so they really need to see a strong relationship there. Before they're too old they'll know that mommy and daddy are *supposed* to love each other, and have probably heard them say it to each other too. If they see that relationship breaking down and missing love (or like I was as a child, told that mommy and daddy don't love each other any more), they'll feel a lot less secure about the love they're supposed to get from each parent, or from anyone else for that matter.
Of course I don't think it is *easy* to do this. Marriage takes work like any relationship, like any job. And often, that work doesn't seem as fun or as rewarding as your professional work (I can speak for myself here). Still there can only be two people to blame when any relationship breaks up (and usually they both deserve blame too).
What's the thought here anyway? Is IT really that much more demanding than other professions (doctor, lawyer, army personel, etc., etc.)? Anyways, its not the job's fault, its the person who chose the job over his or her spouse's fault.
Actually, the last I remember, the game industry was hurting. Lower than expected revenues, forcasts revised downward, MS starting the next gen. early... This is why the Wii, the DS, Spore, etc. are such big news. They are different, and might attract a new audience. I'm sure MS and Sony will adapt, they have the resources, but more and more it seems like they are on the wrong track and the train of the future is picking up speed and passing them by.
If Microsoft can't implement this for their own employees, any CTO looking at Vista would be foolish to think that he could in his company.
Others have given the example of XP, and so true.
If you have to manage Vista the same way you manage XP, that is one less reason to upgrade, and another reason to look at alternatives.
Look at Novell with their internal deployment of Suse. They've had to suffer for a while, but slowly they are starting to show it can be done, and have gained a bunch of knowledge doing so. Novell customers may actually believe them when they suggest they can deploy Suse for some systems instead of Windows. Who believes you can run Windows without adminstrative rights?
The appeal of Google's video ads might be dampened by controls that will prevent the messages from automatically streaming across a Web page. Google instead will display graphics promoting video ads that won't be played unless a viewer clicks on a play button.
The activation feature could discourage many advertisers from signing up for the new video service, said Jupiter Research analyst David Card. "This isn't going to be a game changer for Google, but it gives them a much richer palette." </FTA>
It really isn't that bad, although I don't know how many people are going to click the ads. I'm sure some will to start, just for the novalty, but over time, I doubt this will be a big revenue generator for Google (wasn't that an original opinion considering the quote from Mr. Card!).
I wonder if the video will work on *nix anyway, and if it doesn't, whose going to bother installing the codec and plugin to make it work?
Google could get themselves into trouble though, if they let those pictures be animated, but I'm sure they know not to do that, otherwise they would just have the video start automatically.
It can't really be the "cloud" that they're going to partition, that would require a major change of of the network infrastructure... oh, now I see... this is why the hardware firms are all for it.
Slashdot Mirror
don't forget, whatever you decide to do next, IBM did it on a mainframe 40 years ago, and it wasn't cool, even then
Welcome to the 21st century ... ethics by opinion polls!
The 20th century's politics by opinion polls was bad enough.
I have been contemplating building a new machine for a while ...
While I don't guarantee that I'll buy a Dell, I am going to wait to see what they make available before I build my new machine. If it meets my needs, I'll buy it, if not, I will have looked into it and may recommend it a friend or relative.
Dell still has to execute, but they are starting to disrupt the market again (just like they did when they started) and if they do execute, they will (justly) reap the rewards.
What they should do, is sell Dual Core systems with the option of having Windows XP installed in a VM (pick KVM, Xen, VMWare, whatever). ... :-)
That might be interesting to
well, to me anyway.
Is there an open source alternative to Microsoft and Adobe?
Or is Flash an open standard, and we're just waiting for a good open source implementaion.
I would rather not wait 10 years until Microsoft has undermined Flash so that Adobe "open sources" it before we have an open source choice.
If YouTube is the distribution media, and so we're suing the company that owns that media ... ...
... but with the DMCA, if it is illegal to have a copy of DeCSS, maybe it should be illegal to have an Internet connection ...)
... too bad the people who usually write them are so often rewarded for pandering to unreason.
Why don't we sue ISPs who provide the basic media for file sharing? In Canada, we already have a levy on blank media
(I know it should be simple to argue the difference between hosting a complete work, and just having various bytes flowing through a network
But then, haven't people who host unmoderated forums already been found not responsible for what the users of the forums post?
I thought the law was based on reason
A dedicated programmer can write Fortran in any language.
If the government is truly accountable to you, then you have no need to fear a corporation. Corporations only exist with the blessing and protection of government (witness the recent events in Venezuela, or what happened in the Third Reich, or any communist country).
It is important to get the government to pass and enforce meaningful privacy laws. But those laws applied to companies amount to little, if they do not also apply to government itself.
Government is the elephant in the room in the privacy debate. How happy are they to encourage companies to collect all sorts of information about individuals by having little restrictions on what they can do with it. Then, when they are in the midst of an investigation (witch hunt?), they can demand access (probably without a subpoena), brand someone a security risk, and lock him up, indefinitely, without charge.
Look at the recent revelations: Gonzales, Mueller Admit FBI Broke Law
Whatever laws constrain business, need to constrain government all the more vigorously.
I don't think corporations are the "worse possible enemy of privacy", that title properly belongs to the entity who by legal threat and use of force can already sweep privacy aside (say in the course of a murder investigation): the government.
try that again just before service pack 1 ...
oh, try to install office too, around the same time
what about beer?
you know, I think you prove that you're not a *real* beer drinker if you use beer as the plural of beer...
at least in Canada, its beers, eh
the exact word yes (a symbol or logo can be trademarked too), ... you'll probably lose too: Lindows ...
but if you had something that sounds like it (or looks like it)
When I said Windows from scratch ... I meant all the applications you need to have a productive system.
that is more than 4 hours.
Linux has come a long way in the last two years ... but still, if you're happy with Windows, why bother making the switch?
And that is the point: you can't say that Firefox is primarily successful (market share) because it installs easily and Linux does not ... Firefox is primarily successful because it installs on Windows.
Linux installs easier than windows, no doubt. You compare the best case scenario for Windows (by the way, what programs do you get installed in 4 hours ... and are all the updates installed ... how many reboots ... ) to the worst for Linux. (Who cares, right, just another guy's one-of experience, but I've installed Ubuntu, with everything you'd like in a couple hours ... and long before then, like the default installation's 20 minutes, I've had a usable system for many tasks.) But again, how many people are going to install their OS anyway?
Lastly, ease of use? Yes, I know Linux + Gnome is a good user environment. My step father, my mother, my father, my sister, my wife have all used it, and still use it. Despite their imperfections, the DE's available today are usable, even, 'easy to use' (misunderstood concept that it is). And as too your:
Next->Typical Install->Next->Next->Finish->Start Menu->All Programs->Click the program name what is so hard about (since you already seem to know the app you want) or the equivalent GUI sequence?Oh, it is a commercial application? If it is available on Linux, then you may get your installation wizard dream paradigm! Oh, so that's it, is it? Linux doesn't have some commercial application you want to use ... Oh, so the main reason why Linux hasn't been adopted isn't because it is too hard to install (for an OS), or too hard to use (anymore), but because millions of computers are shipped every month with Windows pre-installed, a platform which few third-party developers don't support, and works pretty much the same as any computer you've touched since 1995 ... and to use Linux I have to install another platform?
While this may be true (although, Windows is pretty good for developers too, and decently stable, now):
Bottom line - For a lot of things Linux is, more stable, more powerful, offers more fine control, and is simply a better OS for developers and sysadmins. it does not prove that Linux is unsuited for regular users, and my experience is that Linux + Gnome is suitable for regular users, except when some Windows-only application is the deal-breaker.This is a bit of a red herring. Firefox gained market share for a number of reasons, some that may be applicable to Linux as well. But the single biggest reason for Firefox's market share is that you could install it on Windows.
Have you ever tried installing Windows from scratch? That is like two days effort (by the time you get all your drivers and programs installed, and everything set up as you like). I don't think Linux is worse than Windows, just different. And for certain setups, its better (consider all the good programs that are already available by most distros default install).
So, the main reason Firefox gained so much popularity compared to Linux, was that you could use it on whatever OS you were already using. Possibly this includes it being "so easy to install and use", but that is a misleading statement because you are implying a Linux distro isn't. Firefox installs like any other application on any supported OS, and is as usable as most mature programs. Linux distros are likely the easiest operating systems to install, but that doesn't really matter, because most people will never install an OS. Linux is quite usable, as long as you don't expect it to be the same as Windows or OSX and are willing to get used to it.
I agree! We *know* a lot of our what we do is terrible for our health and the health of the environment in general.
...
What really bugs me is that climate change is getting all the political attention, and therefore all the money. A lot of human activity is damaging the environment in ways which seem like they will have a much greater impact on us a lot sooner than climate change may have. We already *know* about depleted fish stocks, heavy medal accumulation at the top of food chains, deforestation, etc., etc..
Yet global warming is getting all the attention. 'Environmentalists' are recommending we build more fission power plants to cut our reliance on 'dirty' power. So instead of investing _millions_ to modernize coal plants and reduce CO2 emissions, we're going to change the local environment in whatever body of water is going to be used to cool the plant, and build up hazardous waste we have no idea how to dispose of at the cost of *billions*?
I think climate change 'promoters' are just as guilty of overlooking real problems in their mad rush to eradicate CO2 emissions as you say the 'debunkers' are to state that there is no problem.
I live in Canada. I still have sulfur in my gasoline, my provincial government (Ontario) wants to spend billions building new nuclear power plants, ground water contamination is in the news (in some new community) every few months
Yet all David Suzuki can write about in my local newspaper is how poor a job the government is doing w.r.t. climate change.
I'm not sure if this is true, but sometimes I feel that some are using Kyoto and climate change as a cover for not dealing with more pressing environmental issues. And what's worse, they've got the environmentalists to go along for the ride.
I wonder if it would be possible to "force the deal" by suing MS for some sort of slander? ... but I think Red Hat may be the only one) take this up.
Certainly, if Linux were a person it could, I think. It is like MS saying, "Oh, don't let that Linux get near your family, he molested my children." If Ballmer said what he said about Linux about a person, with no evidence, he would likely end up in court.
Is there a case here? Is it possible to have a case? I'd love to see someone (or better, a group of someones
no I didn't RTFA but, doesn't this sound like the same criticisms that often get leveled against the global warming advocates?
(I'm not making an opinion on either one, but maybe it just goes with the territory of making predictions.)
I switched to CS after a couple of years in a traditional engineering program.
In the CS program we covered discrete math and statistics (everyone in science and engineering had to do first year calculus and algebra courses).
We also had a special course in logic (we used SPARC assembly for assignments).
But one topic that was not covered in CS, but I got in a second year engineering calculus course, was numerical methods (especially the 'gotchas' of machine math vs. real math).
Maybe it is just the type of work I've done (structural analysis software, and compilers), but that is one topic that I really would have missed (although I probably wouldn't have known it) if I had done CS right from the beginning.
I believe that was a joke GP made ... ...
hmmm, you're line could be a joke too
but why on Earth are you modded informative!!!
to the post about this not being digg - yeah, this is slashdot, only the mods are made up!
I may be wrong, but from what I recall from my 3rd year "software law" class (which has remained uncontradicted by what I've read to date), only trade mark puts any burden on owners to enforce their rights.
Copyright and patents don't require you to do anything while other people trample all over your rights, and you can take them to court later on.
(Isn't something like this what happened with gif?)
This is one of the problems with grouping trade mark, copyright, and patents together and calling them "intellectual property". They are each very different, and each have a different purpose and application.
Anyway, I don't think the MPAA will have any trouble going after GUBA, even if they let it continue for decades (I think that copyright in the US is protected for 75 years, or something dumb like that).
I'm from the same situation (devorced parents).
Our young son is happiest whenever he sees mommy and daddy kissing or hugging. He usually wants to join in too. The rest of the time, you've got to ask really nice for a hug, especially if he's in the middle of driving his tractors or "reading". But when he sees us hugging, he can't drop whatever he was doing fast enough to join in.
I think it is important for children to know that they are loved, but it at least as important that they know that the people who love them love each other. It kind of ties their whole universe together. And parents are the two most important (and most visible) people to a child, so they really need to see a strong relationship there. Before they're too old they'll know that mommy and daddy are *supposed* to love each other, and have probably heard them say it to each other too. If they see that relationship breaking down and missing love (or like I was as a child, told that mommy and daddy don't love each other any more), they'll feel a lot less secure about the love they're supposed to get from each parent, or from anyone else for that matter.
Of course I don't think it is *easy* to do this. Marriage takes work like any relationship, like any job. And often, that work doesn't seem as fun or as rewarding as your professional work (I can speak for myself here). Still there can only be two people to blame when any relationship breaks up (and usually they both deserve blame too).
What's the thought here anyway?
Is IT really that much more demanding than other professions (doctor, lawyer, army personel, etc., etc.)?
Anyways, its not the job's fault, its the person who chose the job over his or her spouse's fault.
Actually, the last I remember, the game industry was hurting. ...
Lower than expected revenues, forcasts revised downward, MS starting the next gen. early
This is why the Wii, the DS, Spore, etc. are such big news. They are different, and might attract a new audience.
I'm sure MS and Sony will adapt, they have the resources, but more and more it seems like they are on the wrong track and the train of the future is picking up speed and passing them by.
If Microsoft can't implement this for their own employees, any CTO looking at Vista would be foolish to think that he could in his company.
Others have given the example of XP, and so true.
If you have to manage Vista the same way you manage XP, that is one less reason to upgrade, and another reason to look at alternatives.
Look at Novell with their internal deployment of Suse. They've had to suffer for a while, but slowly they are starting to show it can be done, and have gained a bunch of knowledge doing so. Novell customers may actually believe them when they suggest they can deploy Suse for some systems instead of Windows. Who believes you can run Windows without adminstrative rights?
The appeal of Google's video ads might be dampened by controls that will prevent the messages from automatically streaming across a Web page. Google instead will display graphics promoting video ads that won't be played unless a viewer clicks on a play button.
The activation feature could discourage many advertisers from signing up for the new video service, said Jupiter Research analyst David Card. "This isn't going to be a game changer for Google, but it gives them a much richer palette."
</FTA>
It really isn't that bad, although I don't know how many people are going to click the ads. I'm sure some will to start, just for the novalty, but over time, I doubt this will be a big revenue generator for Google (wasn't that an original opinion considering the quote from Mr. Card!).
I wonder if the video will work on *nix anyway, and if it doesn't, whose going to bother installing the codec and plugin to make it work?
Google could get themselves into trouble though, if they let those pictures be animated, but I'm sure they know not to do that, otherwise they would just have the video start automatically.
It can't really be the "cloud" that they're going to partition, that would require a major change of of the network infrastructure ... oh, now I see ... this is why the hardware firms are all for it.