Yeah evil scientists and their philosophy plot to take over the world. Could you please give me a referal where anybody claims "philosophy is science"? A google search for such thing gives quite unrelated results.
Dude, did you miss the whole "fast track" part? Err, what do you mean by nothing? That was not true for a while, and quite a ton of geeks do care hence they like webkit. Either way, firefox3 and many other browsers and engines do get more than 69% in that test, not to mention the 98%+ ones, which in comparison to what happened with office and OOXML is quite a great result.
So my question is: Is your question coming from the missing-the-point department?
I can't believe this piece of BS got to the home page. Let me list the issues here:
FOUR links to olpcnews (Intel) . That's the equivalent to using fox news as a reference during the US elections...
The news bit is coming 3 months later? wtf
There are known fixes, and you can actually buy yourself an USB keyboard, which you should have done if you are freaking rich geek adult buying something with keyboard designed for kids.
The summary mentions no support infraestructure as a reason for not believing it could succeed on undeveloped countries, it fails to mention there is such a thing on the target countries.
No figures, no statistics, the summary is implying the problem is widespread and everyone is suffering from it, but no data.
He's totally right, science in academia should be more about discussing what you believe and less about what science people have found out after observation and experimentation.
For example the other day when my chemistry teacher told me that material stuff is made of atoms, I really couldn't believe him. I think I should have been given the right back then to discuss with them about my theory that everything is conformed by milk derivatives.
I shouldn't really have to prove my theory or even get the smallest amount of evidence pointing to the certainty of my theory before being given the opportunity to have kids at school discuss about it.
And all what I said in this post is the truth, because if you read this post you may lose your job.
It's lame that this article got to the main page. It is disinformation at its best and tries to promote a new name "OXML" as an attempt to cover the bad adverts for OOXML. This said, infecting ODF with this garbage is lame.
Call things by its name, it is MSOOXML, ISO has not taken any control of it.
Uh oh, why are you taking this personally enough to incur to personal insults? You have already done so twice.
Anyways, the word "pro" is all about intentions. When you say "pro open source step" you are talking about the step's intention, not about the effects of the step (which in this case don't really aid open source specifically, btw).
Oh yes, sorry. I shouldn't have doubted Microsoft's good will. They released a couple of unknown projects with some OS license! That makes them pro open source. God forbid I insult our benevolent leaders.
I'd say releasing 1 project under open source license is a "pro open source step".
Well, you are wrong. Taking the chance to license something with some OSI approved license just because you don't care is more of hypocrisy or a PR stunt than anything else.
They do not release the.net framework under an OSI approved license (btw let's assume MS' wacko anti-GPL license does not really count as OSI approved) They do not release office, windows, SQLserver under those licenses.
Regardless, if you want me to call you pro-open source, I shall judge your actions and not the fact that you released "thousands" (tens?) of source code with a "liberal" license. All of MS actions so far have been anti open source, most specially this year. Let me remind you of the "This is free for open source developers, and when we say open source developers we mean FREEWARE developers" fiasco as a quick example.
So, is your perception relating Open source to non-commercial/non-profitable caused by plain ignorance of the existence of Sun, IBM, Redhat, Mozilla and many others or are you just a flamebait?
I love the new address bar. I also think that people that don't like it have just rushed to their conclussion after the first hour they tried it. Cause I initially didn't see much sense on it.
Hints:
If you want to force it to just remember a URL type "http://"
For titles, don't type http:
Use the star to give priorities to more important pages
If you just want to type the URL, just do as always, it doesn't prevent you from doing so
If it is too big for you, there's an addon to make it look like a tiny autocomplete but keep the smartness (I however prefer to be able to see both title and URL, some pages got silly URLs like "http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=509004&cid=22942946"
Actually use it for a while before judging, it needs to learn your ways some time before it gets really useful
I have personally been inept at using history or bookmarks before, this thing has really made me begin to use that stuff, finding a page you last visited is easier than ever, you just need to remember something about the title or the URL or both. Using the history was always hard until this. This thing can replace bookmarks, history and address bar, so it is minimalistic in design, which means I like it. I just wish there was an icon to remove the entry from history that would then mean it has also replaced autocomplete manage:)
Linux *does* have a strong position in the server market, and for practical reasons Microsoft *has* to be able to interoperate with at least *some* Linux distros. This isn't a position that they are super happy to be in, and the fact that they made this deal to support operation with Suse should be seen as a *victory* by Linux in the marketplace.
And you would be right, if you weren't totally wrong, this is no victory for Linux, if anything it is a point of shame, all the little interoperability Novell won by this was coming anyways after the recent fight the EU got with MS (ask samba) All Novell has made is make a deal that allows MS to portray themselves as owners of all the Linux IP and forces Linux (SLED) users to pay a MS tax, not to mention that Novell has mostly become MS' personal bitch after it. With all the Silverlight debacle and the OOXML debacle for which Novell is a big responsible for what just happened with ISO recently.
Not to forget that the reason Novell helps Linux so much is because it gives them a free platform where they can build the MONO dependent OS they would love to see.
Microsoft is trying to do damage control by positioning some Linux vendors as partners instead of competitors. If Linux becomes any more successful than it is, you can expect to see Microsoft try to make deals with other Linux vendors like Red Hat, to try to insure that Linux is used in *conjunction* with Microsoft server products, rather than risk having Microsoft be cut out of the market entirely.
Novell apologetic is harming FLOSS like no other wrong attitude, the deal has only been negative for Linux, period. You may try to make it look like something good or proof of Linux success, as a matter of fact it does prove MS was really afraid of FLOSS, however the rresult of the deal has only been a negative effect after another. BTW redhat has multiple times stated they actually got dignity and they won't make such deals with MS.
They wanted two standards, I say give them two standards. Microsoft should immediately support ODF and ISO OOXML , right now office supports neither of them, office should be able to open both formats without any translator or complication, Microsoft must implement both formats correctly following the specs closely, and ODF must be the default, since it is the default for office formats while OOXML is, like they said many times, is the default for legacy documents.
Microsoft have stated multiple times how they want freedom of choice, so now they should try following all the things they said. They hope we would forget all of this soon, but that's ought not to be the case.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah evil scientists and their philosophy plot to take over the world. Could you please give me a referal where anybody claims "philosophy is science"? A google search for such thing gives quite unrelated results.
So my question is: Is your question coming from the missing-the-point department?
It looks like.
He's totally right, science in academia should be more about discussing what you believe and less about what science people have found out after observation and experimentation.
For example the other day when my chemistry teacher told me that material stuff is made of atoms, I really couldn't believe him. I think I should have been given the right back then to discuss with them about my theory that everything is conformed by milk derivatives.
I shouldn't really have to prove my theory or even get the smallest amount of evidence pointing to the certainty of my theory before being given the opportunity to have kids at school discuss about it.
And all what I said in this post is the truth, because if you read this post you may lose your job.
Call things by its name, it is MSOOXML, ISO has not taken any control of it.
You know, all sites containing citations were also DNS hijacked by the Venezuelan-Illuminati influenced ISPs over the world.
How about this one, for example? : http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#ms-rl
Uh oh, why are you taking this personally enough to incur to personal insults? You have already done so twice.
Anyways, the word "pro" is all about intentions. When you say "pro open source step" you are talking about the step's intention, not about the effects of the step (which in this case don't really aid open source specifically, btw).
Oh yes, sorry. I shouldn't have doubted Microsoft's good will. They released a couple of unknown projects with some OS license! That makes them pro open source. God forbid I insult our benevolent leaders.
They do not release the .net framework under an OSI approved license (btw let's assume MS' wacko anti-GPL license does not really count as OSI approved) They do not release office, windows, SQLserver under those licenses.
Regardless, if you want me to call you pro-open source, I shall judge your actions and not the fact that you released "thousands" (tens?) of source code with a "liberal" license. All of MS actions so far have been anti open source, most specially this year. Let me remind you of the "This is free for open source developers, and when we say open source developers we mean FREEWARE developers" fiasco as a quick example.
The internet was not really designed for ISPs to offer amounts of bandwidth they can't provide! What a shocker!
So, is your perception relating Open source to non-commercial/non-profitable caused by plain ignorance of the existence of Sun, IBM, Redhat, Mozilla and many others or are you just a flamebait?
Hmnn I didn't know releasing a couple of minor projects with open source licenses was considered a pro open source step.
This almost looks like google saying "won't feed the trolls"
And your post would be 100% correct if it wasn't sarcasm.
It is awesome BTW, Microsoft should probably make "Microsoft (r) Logic" a new ISO standard.
1. Open source is popular.
2. Most open source is written in a portable way hence they run in many platforms including windows.
3. There are a lot of windows users out there.
4. (miss the point)
----
.: Windows is a popular open source platform!
It ought to be Office opening and saving ODF by default (And correctly, for god's sake), anything else, is mockery.
I love the new address bar. I also think that people that don't like it have just rushed to their conclussion after the first hour they tried it. Cause I initially didn't see much sense on it.
Hints:- If you want to force it to just remember a URL type "http://"
- For titles, don't type http:
- Use the star to give priorities to more important pages
- If you just want to type the URL, just do as always, it doesn't prevent you from doing so
- If it is too big for you, there's an addon to make it look like a tiny autocomplete but keep the smartness (I however prefer to be able to see both title and URL, some pages got silly URLs like "http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=509004&cid=22942946"
- Actually use it for a while before judging, it needs to learn your ways some time before it gets really useful
I have personally been inept at using history or bookmarks before, this thing has really made me begin to use that stuff, finding a page you last visited is easier than ever, you just need to remember something about the title or the URL or both. Using the history was always hard until this. This thing can replace bookmarks, history and address bar, so it is minimalistic in design, which means I like it. I just wish there was an icon to remove the entry from history that would then mean it has also replaced autocomplete manage:)And you would be right, if you weren't totally wrong, this is no victory for Linux, if anything it is a point of shame, all the little interoperability Novell won by this was coming anyways after the recent fight the EU got with MS (ask samba) All Novell has made is make a deal that allows MS to portray themselves as owners of all the Linux IP and forces Linux (SLED) users to pay a MS tax, not to mention that Novell has mostly become MS' personal bitch after it. With all the Silverlight debacle and the OOXML debacle for which Novell is a big responsible for what just happened with ISO recently.
Not to forget that the reason Novell helps Linux so much is because it gives them a free platform where they can build the MONO dependent OS they would love to see.
Novell apologetic is harming FLOSS like no other wrong attitude, the deal has only been negative for Linux, period. You may try to make it look like something good or proof of Linux success, as a matter of fact it does prove MS was really afraid of FLOSS, however the rresult of the deal has only been a negative effect after another. BTW redhat has multiple times stated they actually got dignity and they won't make such deals with MS.They wanted two standards, I say give them two standards. Microsoft should immediately support ODF and ISO OOXML , right now office supports neither of them, office should be able to open both formats without any translator or complication, Microsoft must implement both formats correctly following the specs closely, and ODF must be the default, since it is the default for office formats while OOXML is, like they said many times, is the default for legacy documents.
Microsoft have stated multiple times how they want freedom of choice, so now they should try following all the things they said. They hope we would forget all of this soon, but that's ought not to be the case.
Didn't docs come before office live?
It's bigger than that, it would mean ISO gets as irrelevant as ECMA. I wonder if citizen is gonna submit its own standard for time measurement units.