The problem is simple: Microsoft has a Marketing Department. Linux does not. I for one don't beleive Microsoft is willing to get rid of it's Marketing Department, or seriously reduce it's control over the development process, just to produce better code... but I could be wrong.
Hmm, what was that old Microsoft anti-open source argument? That open source doesn't innovate, it is simply copying Microsoft technology? Looks like the shoe in on the other foot, and the foot is firmly planted in the M$ mouth now, doesn't it?
Part of their study has been on how Linux has been able to maintain a high level of consistency in the kernel while groups around it maintain maximum flexibility.
Just a guess, but offhand I'd say it through design driven by software developers, versus design driven by marketing and artificial deadlines. In other words, in any organization, the behaviours that get rewarded the most increase, while those that get punished decrease. MS apparently does not reward consistent, flexible design or implementation.
So all IBM has to say is "Yep, you got us... we DID copy that code from Linux to SCO Unix..." and not only is IBM off the hook, but now SCO Unix is now infringing on Linux copyrights? Seems like one heck of a risk for McBride & co. to take, doesn't it?
Never had a problem with cats chewing wires. Did live with a cat who used to jump up on the keyboard every time she saw me in front of the computer in a ploy for attention -- which is probably what your kitten will do when it gets older.
We have trees in Oregon, too... it's a 14 acre parcel way up on the side of a hill. Fortunately, all the trees that can block my view are located on my property. They took $50,000 in timber off it just before I bought it, but that was a selective cut that left most of the trees. The sad thing is, there are 50 year old stumps on the property that run in the 4-5 diameter range. I'm probably exagerating about the number of cell towers, but wireless reception is definately not a problem, and it is line of site to towers in Forest Grove, Hillsboro, Beaverton, event Portland West Hills.
Let's all send a large box of manure to D-Squared headquarters, with a note inside saying "For only $29.95, you can stop these illegal and unwanted mailings forever!" Or better yet, disable the damn message service! Or even better still -- run Linux.
No, I don't think ANYBODY should subsidize the $10,000 run cable to my old residence (incidentally, that's just for digging a trench a quarter mile, then filling it back in again after the cable is laid.) The point is, it doesn't make economic sense to run cable when a $500 wireless box on the side of my house (I've got line of sight to dozens of cellular towers) or an even cheaper power line modem would do just fine -- except for the fact that noone is willing to provide me with these services.
Uh, wouldn't it be a better idea to keep the pets out of the computer rooms? Last time I checked, having your dog pee on your motherboard wasn't really good for it. I've also know birds to chew through power cords, but they usually only do it once...
Ok, let's rephrase that then: wouldn't it make more sense to simply require broadband over powerline to not emit any significant energy in the HF spectrum?
Wouldn't those places where HF is the only viable communication medium be the same places where THEY HAVE NO POWER LINES?!? On the other hand, if they allowed broadband over power lines, wouldn't they have a more reliable communication medium, i.e. Voice Over IP over Broadband over powerlines?
FEMA: "Broadband over power lines will interfere with radio... let's force everybody rural areas to use the only remaining alternative, wireless broadband, instead!" Anybody else see the flaw in this logic?
I have a rural property that's too far from the switching office to get DSL, and they're not even thinking about running cable (but if they did, I'd have to pay ~$10,000 to run the cable from the property line to the house.) They're doing everything they can to discourage ISDN use (e.g. charging a $200 connection fee), and even POTS dial-up won't connect at better than 28.8. My viable choices for broadband are wireless or power line (I even have my own transformer). I wish they would hurry up and support one or the other. All the wireless broadband trials seemed to have concluded they couldn't make any money and have been discontinued. What are we supposed to do, all move to the city if we want decent internet access?
No, EVERYBODY should be able to use it. But perhaps the idiots that didn't have the foresight to fund the development in the first place shouldn't be telling the people who did have the foresight how to use it. Remember, the ITU are the people who developed the ISO protocol stack to replace TCP/IP, which was so superior to TCP/IP that now everybody has switched to it and nobody uses TCP/IP anymore...
Or put it this way: who would you rather have specifying your protocols: engineers who do multiple test implementations before finalizing a spec, or bureaucrats who design protocols through several years of arguing and political comprise, then throw it over the wall to the engineers (who were locked out of the debate) and say "Here, implement this!"?
My CreativeLabs Nomad Jukebox Zen Xtra came with a dozen songs preloaded, so it's obviously not "blank media". Don't most of the MP3 players come with an intro pre-loaded? Seems like you'd want to test them at least once before shipping, and it easier to not delete the test mp3, isn't it?
When you realize we do not live in a binary world where everything is either purely good or purely evil, then, grasshopper, you will have acheived enlightenment. And when you realize that that is no one universal slashdot group-think, then you will be able to post without all your comments having score: -1!
Remember, if you advocate killing cops in a Rap song, that's protected free speech! But if you advocate killing a particular group of people in a videogame, that has to be against the law! (Of course, I'm sure these same people would probably like to make offensive songs and movies illegal too, but unfortunately the record and motion picture industries have more powerful lobbying groups.)
I mean, besides the fact that we have no reason to send people long distances through space at the moment? Where would you prefer Darl McBride be: 1) In Utah, or 2) En route to Alpha Centauri? Just don't make the mistake of assuming some people (like the telephone sanitizers) are dispensable when they really are not. Let's face it, we've got to start exporting lawyers to SOMEWHERE, and Siberia won't take 'em!
Re:The answer to unemployment!
on
Sub-Zero Squirrels
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Chances are your skill set would be obsolete by the time somebody thaws you out... heck, if I sleep more than 8 hours a night I fall behind the technology curve!
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is simple: Microsoft has a Marketing Department. Linux does not. I for one don't beleive Microsoft is willing to get rid of it's Marketing Department, or seriously reduce it's control over the development process, just to produce better code... but I could be wrong.
Hmm, what was that old Microsoft anti-open source argument? That open source doesn't innovate, it is simply copying Microsoft technology? Looks like the shoe in on the other foot, and the foot is firmly planted in the M$ mouth now, doesn't it?
Just a guess, but offhand I'd say it through design driven by software developers, versus design driven by marketing and artificial deadlines. In other words, in any organization, the behaviours that get rewarded the most increase, while those that get punished decrease. MS apparently does not reward consistent, flexible design or implementation.
Hey! That's MY line!
Maybe somebody took Linux code and put it in SCO...
So all IBM has to say is "Yep, you got us... we DID copy that code from Linux to SCO Unix..." and not only is IBM off the hook, but now SCO Unix is now infringing on Linux copyrights? Seems like one heck of a risk for McBride & co. to take, doesn't it?
Never had a problem with cats chewing wires. Did live with a cat who used to jump up on the keyboard every time she saw me in front of the computer in a ploy for attention -- which is probably what your kitten will do when it gets older.
We have trees in Oregon, too... it's a 14 acre parcel way up on the side of a hill. Fortunately, all the trees that can block my view are located on my property. They took $50,000 in timber off it just before I bought it, but that was a selective cut that left most of the trees. The sad thing is, there are 50 year old stumps on the property that run in the 4-5 diameter range. I'm probably exagerating about the number of cell towers, but wireless reception is definately not a problem, and it is line of site to towers in Forest Grove, Hillsboro, Beaverton, event Portland West Hills.
Let's all send a large box of manure to D-Squared headquarters, with a note inside saying "For only $29.95, you can stop these illegal and unwanted mailings forever!" Or better yet, disable the damn message service! Or even better still -- run Linux.
No, I don't think ANYBODY should subsidize the $10,000 run cable to my old residence (incidentally, that's just for digging a trench a quarter mile, then filling it back in again after the cable is laid.) The point is, it doesn't make economic sense to run cable when a $500 wireless box on the side of my house (I've got line of sight to dozens of cellular towers) or an even cheaper power line modem would do just fine -- except for the fact that noone is willing to provide me with these services.
Uh, wouldn't it be a better idea to keep the pets out of the computer rooms? Last time I checked, having your dog pee on your motherboard wasn't really good for it. I've also know birds to chew through power cords, but they usually only do it once...
Ok, let's rephrase that then: wouldn't it make more sense to simply require broadband over powerline to not emit any significant energy in the HF spectrum?
Wouldn't those places where HF is the only viable communication medium be the same places where THEY HAVE NO POWER LINES?!? On the other hand, if they allowed broadband over power lines, wouldn't they have a more reliable communication medium, i.e. Voice Over IP over Broadband over powerlines?
FEMA: "Broadband over power lines will interfere with radio... let's force everybody rural areas to use the only remaining alternative, wireless broadband, instead!" Anybody else see the flaw in this logic?
I have a rural property that's too far from the switching office to get DSL, and they're not even thinking about running cable (but if they did, I'd have to pay ~$10,000 to run the cable from the property line to the house.) They're doing everything they can to discourage ISDN use (e.g. charging a $200 connection fee), and even POTS dial-up won't connect at better than 28.8. My viable choices for broadband are wireless or power line (I even have my own transformer). I wish they would hurry up and support one or the other. All the wireless broadband trials seemed to have concluded they couldn't make any money and have been discontinued. What are we supposed to do, all move to the city if we want decent internet access?
The problem e-voting is designed to solve is obvious: elections were getting too hard to fix.
Uh... drink it?
Dvorak is both a moron and a whore who says whatever companies pay him to say. I wouldn't make any decisions based on what he says.
Or put it this way: who would you rather have specifying your protocols: engineers who do multiple test implementations before finalizing a spec, or bureaucrats who design protocols through several years of arguing and political comprise, then throw it over the wall to the engineers (who were locked out of the debate) and say "Here, implement this!"?
My CreativeLabs Nomad Jukebox Zen Xtra came with a dozen songs preloaded, so it's obviously not "blank media". Don't most of the MP3 players come with an intro pre-loaded? Seems like you'd want to test them at least once before shipping, and it easier to not delete the test mp3, isn't it?
When you realize we do not live in a binary world where everything is either purely good or purely evil, then, grasshopper, you will have acheived enlightenment. And when you realize that that is no one universal slashdot group-think, then you will be able to post without all your comments having score: -1!
Remember, if you advocate killing cops in a Rap song, that's protected free speech! But if you advocate killing a particular group of people in a videogame, that has to be against the law! (Of course, I'm sure these same people would probably like to make offensive songs and movies illegal too, but unfortunately the record and motion picture industries have more powerful lobbying groups.)
How is going through the booth with an empty card any different than going through the booth with no card at all?
I mean, besides the fact that we have no reason to send people long distances through space at the moment? Where would you prefer Darl McBride be: 1) In Utah, or 2) En route to Alpha Centauri? Just don't make the mistake of assuming some people (like the telephone sanitizers) are dispensable when they really are not. Let's face it, we've got to start exporting lawyers to SOMEWHERE, and Siberia won't take 'em!
Chances are your skill set would be obsolete by the time somebody thaws you out... heck, if I sleep more than 8 hours a night I fall behind the technology curve!