I said it two years ago, Microsoft will buy this company out. Not because their extensions to Microsofts operating system is a good thing, but because Microsoft doesnt have it. And frankly it doesnt matter wheather or not they do, because somebody that wants to run Solaris, will run Solaris. Same be it with Linux. But the irony is that people havent believed me before. Well here you are.
Now, to the product itself. Or actually to all of you that worry that Microsoft will conquer the market with this thing. Let me remind you that its not the cost of the operating system. Its the source code that makes Linux what it is. Microsoft will never release its code, and if it will, it will still not match that of the flexibilty with Linux. Regardless of Unix95 compliance. Now it does invite NT administrators that are already running NT to run GNU software at their boxes. This is considered a good thing for the GNU generation. So hail the victory! Here she comes!
As much as I hate to admit it, people are simple beings of extremely low levels of intelligence it would appear. I am not talking about the one individual, but about the acts of entire groups of people. Especially this scenario where somebody feels very competent to register a trademark for something evolving as the big thing. Hey folks! I hear GM is going to start selling a lot of cars in Abu Dhabi, so I am going there to start a company and register a trademark called Chevrolet. What in the world is wrong with these people, one might think? I suppose it is greed and silly minds that make up for these idiotic schemes. Don't get me wrong, I would love to make money, but this is rather stupid.
What is intellectual property? I don't think even Shakespeare had such a vocabulary. People today, and especially people with conquering minds, make up the funniest things. Idealists say that you can't own a tree, because it is a living thing. Yet people sell trees in the rain forests. Or better yet, occupy the land that less equipped/hostile people live on. Then it is chopped up and sold to others as "properties". World of wonder. I have lost enough faith in man kind to grasp the thought of being a proprietor over a tree or a dog (even though it is fundamentally sickening). But I have yet far to go to understand how any group of people can own somebody elses intellect.
Let's put it into calculation. Five people own a "company". This company, or these five people help eachother make money by contributing in various ways. Two persons write software code. One person handles the bills, and the remaining two sell the software. Who owns the software? Or should I say, who owns the fruit of the programmers minds? Before you go about answering this swiftly according to laws and all those legal matters, ponder it. I am sure it will amuse you as much as it does me.
I read on slashdot that there was an alledged `secret joint venture' between Siemens and Micorsoft. Are they perhaps making a groundlevel marketing issue here before they `unveil' their new distribution?
Regardless of my paranoia, I am very glad to see that the charts are looking better for Linux. However, speed in my job, however very important, is not the main thing. Performance in my eyes are 80% stability/reliability, and the remaining 20% are speed and versatility. But thats my book.
Anyway, nice to see that the hard work from the kernel hackers is turning out nicely.
This thin client drama that has emerged recently, is in fact quite astonishing to me. How can anybody remember history and still make it sound so new? Let me make my point here.
I remember a long time ago when computers were extremely expensive things. They designed computers with software meant to be mult-user because it was the only way one could make computing efficient. The way one would communicate and interact with the computer was through a node or a `terminal'. These often got called _dumb_ terminals, because they were essentially a screen, a keyboard and some kind of interface to the computer system. It so showed that these systems were extremely efficient and stable, because all the effort of making it stable was put on the back end. The risk of a monitor getting a hickup wasn't all that great. In fact, in many places these kinds of computing scenarios are still in place and far from being exchanged.
Then came the PC from IBM. The PC was the breakthrough because it was cheap and reasonably efficient. Now each employee could have their own computer. Since most data was processed through linefeed printing rather than databases, this was a good thing. People liked having `their own' computer. They could finally keep their data to themselves. Microsoft tried to mimic the file and directory structure of the Unix filesystem (UFS), but failed immensely.
Ever since, the PC has been just that. A _personal_ computer. Each person has one. This becomes expensive since each person makes a claim of a computer for at least $1200. Calculate that with a 100 people and that is well over a million bucks. Then you still need a server to all of the sudden _SHARE_ data. This is of course a salutation because most organizations today make use of databases and printer sharing, but still. Computing is still computing. Wheather people today like pretty mouse cursors and colorful buttons, better than a green and black monitor. Actually, even I can understand that... Now Sun and many other companies have solved this by using X-terminals. A screen with a little box with rendering capabilities. The thought here is once again to move all processing to the backend, thus making the need for a desktop computer less important. It is also better for upgrades because your X-terminal doesn't go out of style. We still use X-terminals from 1989 and they work great. Wanna speed up things? Upgrade _ONE_ server.
But as soon as Microsoft announces something (not entirely) new, the TERMINAL Server version of NT, this gets out of hand. Let me tell people that this has been around for ages. No longer can we remind people that Microsoft is using old and thought-through technologies, but lets name them _thin-clients_. A thin client is still a PC. With a slightly smaller demand for hardware, but still has a CPU, a VGA board, a possible sound card, a harddrive and memory. IT IS STILL A PC! A cheaper one perhaps, but still. Moving semaphores and most of the computation to the backend is merely a fallback to the old and tested way of doing it.
Enough about history, and to the point. What is Compaq's goal with this? Are they making a Linux version just for the hell of it, or are they in fact going to do some work on it? Are they looking to integrate the Windows CE version with the NT Terminal Server and the Linux version with their AlphaServers on Tru64? As far as i understand, if this is supposed to be called a thin client in the sense of it being a `terminal', it must be integrated with some other product for the backend...
Let us just say that Compaq is a company. So Compaq bought Digital. It so happens that this is something that very much seems to be former Digital employees work. Second of all, the success of Compaq's work these days are hype. Wheather this hype is `let-us-create-yet-another-cool-thing-that-runs-on -linux' or if it is the latest and greatest tune of Intel hardware is not important. In order for Compaq to increase market share today, they have to obide by Linux. Yes, they made this compiler a reality, and such also with a RAID driver. So what? I agree with some previous comments. Why not integrate the code into GCC? Such as how SGI does with it's XFS in a sense. (Yes I know XFS is a filesystem and not a compiler, but it is GPL and will integrate with the Linux kernel)
Yes this is pretty much critisism, and much of it is just plain and sheer paranoia, but still. Let us make Compaq understand that software for Linux is good. And it is even better if we get it in GPL. If this is a step in the direction of getting this compiler's optimization code into GCC and thus making it GPL, I WILL eat my words in public if so desired. But for now, some public synicism should be shown in order to bring it correct.
I do expect to get a lot of comments on this and I will check back and read it all. Just please be at least a bit constructive when arguing with me. I like to learn of new views. GNU is all about sharing information. I shared my views with you, please share yours with me.
I do not wish to propose anything but the fact that I work with highly consolidated environments such as Advanced Vector Clustering (AVC) technologies from SGI etc. I want to make clear that to me and to many of the people in my line of work where data and storage facilities are critical, force feedback joysticks and those purple little teddy bears are totally superflous. I actually started to take your reply seriously though, before I realised that you appear to not have any sense of making a discussion reality. Instead you end your reply, with the implication that I am selectedly incapable of having an opinion on the matter. It was not making your stocks go up a few points.
But if you care to discuss the matter, you can find my e-mail address at: traci@lords.com.
I really want Microsoft to start producing these things. Regardless if they contain Intel or AMD processors. I want them to compete with Sun about Java. I want them to pick up the bat and try to swing at Unix vendors. You people must think I am insane for saying this. And here is yet another oxymoron, I want them to do all this because I detest the bare thought of Microsoft. Think about it. What does Microsoft produce? Citedly robust and cheap and featuristic server operating systems, ALONGSIDE with force feedback joysticks and Interactive Barney(TM). This for sure makes it sound like they are the ACME of computing, since they do manufacture items used specifically for leisure and not for system dependent datastructures. I would love to see yet another worthless product in their arsenal, because soon people would realise that they are in fact manufacturing nothing but useless products. And there is another aspect. I want them to step on as many toes as they can, and preferably with large companies, because this will eventually bring them to consolidate against Microsoft and finish them off once and for all. This will of course take time, but I know it can be done. I know it will BE done. And therefor I pleed all with all the joy in my heart to Microsoft that they succeed with launching this zoo product into the market. Sincerely, Alex
People may say that this is bullshit all the way, or they may just love anything that comes in a shrinkwrap saying Microsoft on it. Personally I don't think that anybody who has their sound mind intact will implement this until it is standardized and proved working on all platforms. I can't really see where this would be beneficiary at all. So Unix admins, be calm. And remember that Microsoft is scared. It must do these things. It will backfire upon them eventually though. Right now, I don't believe that anybody will implement anything until it is proven.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, to the product itself. Or actually to all of you that worry that Microsoft will conquer the market with this thing. Let me remind you that its not the cost of the operating system. Its the source code that makes Linux what it is. Microsoft will never release its code, and if it will, it will still not match that of the flexibilty with Linux. Regardless of Unix95 compliance. Now it does invite NT administrators that are already running NT to run GNU software at their boxes. This is considered a good thing for the GNU generation. So hail the victory! Here she comes!
Sincerely, Alexander
Sincerely, Alexander
I guess that makes you a part of society. Realistically, you can't own anything according to the idealists. I asked them, so I know. =)
Let's put it into calculation. Five people own a "company". This company, or these five people help eachother make money by contributing in various ways. Two persons write software code. One person handles the bills, and the remaining two sell the software. Who owns the software? Or should I say, who owns the fruit of the programmers minds? Before you go about answering this swiftly according to laws and all those legal matters, ponder it. I am sure it will amuse you as much as it does me.
I hope this spins off a good discussion.
Sincerely,
Alexander
Regardless of my paranoia, I am very glad to see that the charts are looking better for Linux. However, speed in my job, however very important, is not the main thing. Performance in my eyes are 80% stability/reliability, and the remaining 20% are speed and versatility. But thats my book.
Anyway, nice to see that the hard work from the kernel hackers is turning out nicely.
Sincerely,
Alexander
I remember a long time ago when computers were extremely expensive things. They designed computers with software meant to be mult-user because it was the only way one could make computing efficient. The way one would communicate and interact with the computer was through a node or a `terminal'. These often got called _dumb_ terminals, because they were essentially a screen, a keyboard and some kind of interface to the computer system. It so showed that these systems were extremely efficient and stable, because all the effort of making it stable was put on the back end. The risk of a monitor getting a hickup wasn't all that great. In fact, in many places these kinds of computing scenarios are still in place and far from being exchanged.
Then came the PC from IBM. The PC was the breakthrough because it was cheap and reasonably efficient. Now each employee could have their own computer. Since most data was processed through linefeed printing rather than databases, this was a good thing. People liked having `their own' computer. They could finally keep their data to themselves. Microsoft tried to mimic the file and directory structure of the Unix filesystem (UFS), but failed immensely.
Ever since, the PC has been just that. A _personal_ computer. Each person has one. This becomes expensive since each person makes a claim of a computer for at least $1200. Calculate that with a 100 people and that is well over a million bucks. Then you still need a server to all of the sudden _SHARE_ data. This is of course a salutation because most organizations today make use of databases and printer sharing, but still. Computing is still computing. Wheather people today like pretty mouse cursors and colorful buttons, better than a green and black monitor. Actually, even I can understand that... Now Sun and many other companies have solved this by using X-terminals. A screen with a little box with rendering capabilities. The thought here is once again to move all processing to the backend, thus making the need for a desktop computer less important. It is also better for upgrades because your X-terminal doesn't go out of style. We still use X-terminals from 1989 and they work great. Wanna speed up things? Upgrade _ONE_ server.
But as soon as Microsoft announces something (not entirely) new, the TERMINAL Server version of NT, this gets out of hand. Let me tell people that this has been around for ages. No longer can we remind people that Microsoft is using old and thought-through technologies, but lets name them _thin-clients_. A thin client is still a PC. With a slightly smaller demand for hardware, but still has a CPU, a VGA board, a possible sound card, a harddrive and memory. IT IS STILL A PC! A cheaper one perhaps, but still. Moving semaphores and most of the computation to the backend is merely a fallback to the old and tested way of doing it.
Enough about history, and to the point. What is Compaq's goal with this? Are they making a Linux version just for the hell of it, or are they in fact going to do some work on it? Are they looking to integrate the Windows CE version with the NT Terminal Server and the Linux version with their AlphaServers on Tru64? As far as i understand, if this is supposed to be called a thin client in the sense of it being a `terminal', it must be integrated with some other product for the backend...
Sincerely,
Alexander
Yes this is pretty much critisism, and much of it is just plain and sheer paranoia, but still. Let us make Compaq understand that software for Linux is good. And it is even better if we get it in GPL. If this is a step in the direction of getting this compiler's optimization code into GCC and thus making it GPL, I WILL eat my words in public if so desired. But for now, some public synicism should be shown in order to bring it correct.
I do expect to get a lot of comments on this and I will check back and read it all. Just please be at least a bit constructive when arguing with me. I like to learn of new views. GNU is all about sharing information. I shared my views with you, please share yours with me.
But if you care to discuss the matter, you can find my e-mail address at: traci@lords.com.
I really want Microsoft to start producing these things. Regardless if they contain Intel or AMD processors. I want them to compete with Sun about Java. I want them to pick up the bat and try to swing at Unix vendors. You people must think I am insane for saying this. And here is yet another oxymoron, I want them to do all this because I detest the bare thought of Microsoft. Think about it. What does Microsoft produce? Citedly robust and cheap and featuristic server operating systems, ALONGSIDE with force feedback joysticks and Interactive Barney(TM). This for sure makes it sound like they are the ACME of computing, since they do manufacture items used specifically for leisure and not for system dependent datastructures. I would love to see yet another worthless product in their arsenal, because soon people would realise that they are in fact manufacturing nothing but useless products. And there is another aspect. I want them to step on as many toes as they can, and preferably with large companies, because this will eventually bring them to consolidate against Microsoft and finish them off once and for all. This will of course take time, but I know it can be done. I know it will BE done. And therefor I pleed all with all the joy in my heart to Microsoft that they succeed with launching this zoo product into the market. Sincerely, Alex
People may say that this is bullshit all the way, or they may just love anything that comes in a shrinkwrap saying Microsoft on it. Personally I don't think that anybody who has their sound mind intact will implement this until it is standardized and proved working on all platforms. I can't really see where this would be beneficiary at all. So Unix admins, be calm. And remember that Microsoft is scared. It must do these things. It will backfire upon them eventually though. Right now, I don't believe that anybody will implement anything until it is proven.