forcing microsoft to compete is not good for the rest of us. anything which encourages microsoft to develop a better product will just result in more time for the riaa and the dhs to strengthen their hold over us.
...which is, of course, a load of crap. cheap computers running open-source software is exactly what the industry needs to get back to being creative with interesting hardware. chip manufacturers have stagnated for long enough due to forced binary compatibility with ancient designs.
apple may have enough fanbois which buy any new product apple makes, but that isn't really enough in apple's world. the company needs to expand and for that reason i don't think apple can afford to be too unfriendly to software writers.
it is nevertheless amusing what happens with closed-source software.
that's the problem with closed-source software. absolutely nobody has a clue how it was designed or optimized, you just have to take the company's word for it.
you're absolutely right, foss would benefit far less than closed-source software would. this is because the source code of closed-source software just isn't available and being able to copy a binary is not as valuable as having free access to the source code and being able to do what ever you want with it. for this reason stallman suggests compulsory opening of code when the copyright expires and a copyright length of 10 years.
if i look through your rhetoric you are saying "linux requires much more innate knowledge of how a computer works because you have to look at the packaging to see if what you are buying is compatible with it".
your argument is weak. i imagine apple users have to do the same thing.
as jonathan schwarz said, if you build a server that can do twice as much work for half the cost you will end up making twice as much money with it and not half as much.
of course, sun isn't a monopoly and it's competing in a market without any real monopolies at the moment.
"While I also agree with Open Office's agenda, it will never gain market share if new users think they have to "do something special" every time they save a file in order to remain compatible with the software that their business associates use, Microsoft Office."
and yet openoffice.org is gaining market share at a great rate.
what you are basically presupposing is that following mentality exists:
"if it looks like something that works on a computer, it will work on mine."
i for one do not think this. i do not expect hardware or software to work on windows, os x, linux, *bsd, solaris or on any other operating system. i always look on the box or check on the download site to make sure.
(btw. there is still a large amount of professional software out there that only runs on unix systems)
"You're not treated like you're stupid by the community for getting frustrated with the shortcomings of OS X 10.2."
this is because updating to a newer version of windows or OS X costs money and your hardware may not support it. these are not reasons not to update a gnu/linux system.
actually i do install ubuntu fresh every time a new version comes out. my data is on another partition and i know that (almost all) the software i want to use is just one apt-get command away, so installing it and getting back to where i was takes about an hour.
OEM copies come with all the drivers for one particular computer. if you install it on another computer you have problems. if you have added something to your computer you have problems.
the ubuntu people do sometimes remaster the cds, btw. someone else has already told you about apt-cache, so i won't explain that.
i know you're just a troll, so i'm writing this to inform anybody who may not be aware of these facts.
you don't need to defrag ext2. it doesn't get fragmented
if you do not distribute software licensed under the gpl, you do not need to supply source code. this means, if you use gpl-ed software internally, you do not need to inform people of the fact and offer downloads on your website.
the license for the gnu compiler collection is even less restrictive. you do not need to release the source of programs compiled using the gnu compiler collection, even if you do distribute this software. this means you can use the gcc to compile proprietary software.
20 billion trillion watt per square centimeter = 2x10^26 Wm^-2
300 terawatt of power = 3x10^14 W
1.3 micron wide = ca. 1.7x10^-12 m^2 (for a square shape)
30 femtosecond = 3x10^-14 s
seeing as i've never seen a blueray disk or a blueray player i really don't know if this is true, but usb ports on computers are labelled quite clearly in the advertising if they are 1.1 or 2.0 or whatever. is this the case with usb players and disks? does the disk have written on it "i am a version 1.1 disk" and does it say on the box for the player "this is a version 1.0 player"?
microsoft is dying. they are making huge amounts of money, but they are not successful.
this may be a strange idea for many people who equate wealth with success. microsoft has shown that if they are the only game in town, they can afford to make 75% profit on their office suite. however, the sales figures for vista are, as a percentage of total computers sold, lower than xp and openoffice.org is making huge inroads into europe, not to mention increased adoption of gnu/linux (ubuntu) and apple. 5 years ago it would have been unthinkable that most of the kids at a school would have changed to a gnu/linux distribution and placed sufficient pressure on the IT department, that they had to follow suite. but a pupil of mine (who himself is no geek) has just told me that that has happened.
microsoft is swimming in money and monopoly power. but that's all they have. they have less mindshare over our youth than at any time in the last 20 years. they well gradually turn into a hugely rich but utterly unimportant company.
a company which makes 20 billion profit a year with 100000 employees cannot make a stable operating system, where as a couple of guys in their mother's basement (linux programmers) can.
Slashdot Mirror
what will happen is that governments will require documents to be written in a format so that they are not beholden to one foreign company.
they don't have to pay manufacturers to put windows on these devices, they just have to threaten to renegotiate their current contract.
forcing microsoft to compete is not good for the rest of us. anything which encourages microsoft to develop a better product will just result in more time for the riaa and the dhs to strengthen their hold over us.
close
OLPC: education project for the third world
Classmate: attempt to continue and strengthen colonialism
eee: small business laptop for the first world
...which is, of course, a load of crap. cheap computers running open-source software is exactly what the industry needs to get back to being creative with interesting hardware. chip manufacturers have stagnated for long enough due to forced binary compatibility with ancient designs.
apple may have enough fanbois which buy any new product apple makes, but that isn't really enough in apple's world. the company needs to expand and for that reason i don't think apple can afford to be too unfriendly to software writers.
it is nevertheless amusing what happens with closed-source software.
that's the problem with closed-source software. absolutely nobody has a clue how it was designed or optimized, you just have to take the company's word for it.
you're absolutely right, foss would benefit far less than closed-source software would. this is because the source code of closed-source software just isn't available and being able to copy a binary is not as valuable as having free access to the source code and being able to do what ever you want with it. for this reason stallman suggests compulsory opening of code when the copyright expires and a copyright length of 10 years.
not quite. keeping version 1.0 of linux under copyright would be expensive. version 2.6.25 would however be almost free
if i look through your rhetoric you are saying "linux requires much more innate knowledge of how a computer works because you have to look at the packaging to see if what you are buying is compatible with it".
your argument is weak. i imagine apple users have to do the same thing.
as jonathan schwarz said, if you build a server that can do twice as much work for half the cost you will end up making twice as much money with it and not half as much.
of course, sun isn't a monopoly and it's competing in a market without any real monopolies at the moment.
as someone who uses gnu/linux i can only say that it all sounds very complicated to me
"While I also agree with Open Office's agenda, it will never gain market share if new users think they have to "do something special" every time they save a file in order to remain compatible with the software that their business associates use, Microsoft Office."
and yet openoffice.org is gaining market share at a great rate.
what you are basically presupposing is that following mentality exists:
"if it looks like something that works on a computer, it will work on mine."
i for one do not think this. i do not expect hardware or software to work on windows, os x, linux, *bsd, solaris or on any other operating system. i always look on the box or check on the download site to make sure.
(btw. there is still a large amount of professional software out there that only runs on unix systems)
"You're not treated like you're stupid by the community for getting frustrated with the shortcomings of OS X 10.2."
this is because updating to a newer version of windows or OS X costs money and your hardware may not support it. these are not reasons not to update a gnu/linux system.
actually i do install ubuntu fresh every time a new version comes out. my data is on another partition and i know that (almost all) the software i want to use is just one apt-get command away, so installing it and getting back to where i was takes about an hour.
OEM copies come with all the drivers for one particular computer. if you install it on another computer you have problems. if you have added something to your computer you have problems.
the ubuntu people do sometimes remaster the cds, btw. someone else has already told you about apt-cache, so i won't explain that.
you always ask intonation questions?
20 billion trillion watt per square centimeter = 2x10^26 Wm^-2
300 terawatt of power = 3x10^14 W
1.3 micron wide = ca. 1.7x10^-12 m^2 (for a square shape)
30 femtosecond = 3x10^-14 s
hope that clarifies things.
seeing as i've never seen a blueray disk or a blueray player i really don't know if this is true, but usb ports on computers are labelled quite clearly in the advertising if they are 1.1 or 2.0 or whatever. is this the case with usb players and disks? does the disk have written on it "i am a version 1.1 disk" and does it say on the box for the player "this is a version 1.0 player"?
I got rather tired of picking and choosing what I need, just to get faster boot times.
maybe the original poster was saying that there are sometimes other reasons to compile your own kernel.
microsoft is dying. they are making huge amounts of money, but they are not successful.
this may be a strange idea for many people who equate wealth with success. microsoft has shown that if they are the only game in town, they can afford to make 75% profit on their office suite. however, the sales figures for vista are, as a percentage of total computers sold, lower than xp and openoffice.org is making huge inroads into europe, not to mention increased adoption of gnu/linux (ubuntu) and apple. 5 years ago it would have been unthinkable that most of the kids at a school would have changed to a gnu/linux distribution and placed sufficient pressure on the IT department, that they had to follow suite. but a pupil of mine (who himself is no geek) has just told me that that has happened.
microsoft is swimming in money and monopoly power. but that's all they have. they have less mindshare over our youth than at any time in the last 20 years. they well gradually turn into a hugely rich but utterly unimportant company.
oh come on, the linux kernel has run much better on my desktop and laptop machines for the last 5 years than windows has.
if you try to install aix on an ultrasparc you won't get very far either.
just pick hardware which works with the operating system you want to use.
oh boo-hoo!
a company which makes 20 billion profit a year with 100000 employees cannot make a stable operating system, where as a couple of guys in their mother's basement (linux programmers) can.
forgive my incredulity here.