Hell yeah, I mean a web rendering engine? Like we needed more of those... and frigging apple is involved! for god's sake, don't compare this to precious GCC...
It also means that bugs get fixed faster and that if mozilla stops supporting a platform someone else can, and that we can have things like swiftfox available, so I think it is a good trade.
But security through obscurity doesn't really work too well anyways...
For the sites I don't care about I use the same generic old password that I have used from 2003, I mean, if they are stolen I just risk a bunch of of dummy email addresses and other crappy services I don't really care too much about. For the things that matter I keep though and strong passwords that I better remember and not "write them down" or let a browser keep them... Often things that matter are just 3 so memory is not an obstacle...
right now Linspire is the easiest way to get a legal MP3 or DVD player for your Linux computer and that's unlikely to change in the near future.
The fact you live in a country with authorities dumb enough to approve stupid laws doesn't make something bad a good thing, either way I found that the same people you later mention as don't giving a flying crap about software licenses don't care about dubious laws either. Getting ubuntu and then downloading the codec the next time you double click on an mp3 seems easy enough to me.
Secondly, the market that Linspire is aiming towards doesn't give a flying crap about:
1) software licenses
2) patents
3) irrational hatred of Microsoft
It is not irrational, and it is not hatred either, it is founded fear of a company that obviously dislikes any competition and that from what we have seen is now buying distros in an indirect way to circumvent the GPL and then get FUD-tale whores or slaves or whatever that guys like novell and linspire have become, it is still useless for linspire users if there is such a thing like them.
I guess that according to your comment Linspire's target market is a bunch of people that at the same time don't want windows, yet they don't have any 'irrational hatred of Microsoft' but still, they would love to buy an OS that (because of previous linspire cost+the patent covenant) is more expensive than windows, yet it is very good at locking them in? So I am guessing the target market for Linspire are a bunch of stupid people?
Obviously many guys are worried about a compiler getting GPL3, they wouldn't be able to modify the compiler and then include the compiler in some tivo like device or whatever GPL3 would make GCC troublesome... Not really getting it, sounds as if some fudders want to call GPL3 dangerous whenever possible...
Let me guess, someone used to MS or apple made this article? Those are the only places where such a lame argument as "Choice is bad" could come from...
In what way do having multiple distros is actually a problem? If you are distributing software, you may simply target the rpm and deb based distros, those sum the job of 2 and then a "source package" when your software is popular enough, people will actually make the binary packages for their distros themselves... Not to mention the method the big closed source players use for distribution that seems to work for most distributions...
I, as many people don't seem to actually understand why would Novell or Linspire make this deal since so far there seems to be nothing convenient about it, I am not able to take those 2 seriously as bussiness since they seem to make these lame-ass covenants that certainly don't seem to give them any good. I laugh at Kevin Carmony's implying that linux needs "bussiness thinking" considering he signed such a dumb deal that doesn't seem to give his company any actual advantage besides the status of MS work drone.
MS said that they don't want to get "locked-in" with ODF... That's rather ironic, anyways:
Recipe for a good standard format:
A good specification (as, in the standard actually specifies things... as it anyone is able to implement it correctly after reading the specification...)
Minimalistic: Seriously, an standard should be as small as possible to let it be easy to implement.
Open: As in, you don't require patented code to read the format.
Unique : "More than one standard" would be the most retarded idea ever.
The fact you are the largest software company in the world shouldn't mean you should "own" any "standard". We don't need an standard that would function exactly the same as the defacto-standard from old office, that would be useless and will only make the world waste resources in the migration from one closed defacto-standard towards a closed "standard".
ISO will show a lot of incompetence if they actually approve two standards for exactly the same thing... If that happens we will have to replace ISO, really
No offense to MS, they make great products and all, but I would love to see people use their products because they are the best products and not because they are the only ones that implement their format correctly, I hate self-feeding monopolies.
Huh? Where are you getting that from? MS is not afraid of having to program software that has to save in ODF, they are more than capable of doing that, what MS is afraid of is that a format not invented by them would be the standard, because that simply means they won't be the only ones able to implement the format in a 100% accurate way (OOXML is all but a good specification, in order to keep the legacy they kept a bunch of BS, seriously) or the fact that software makers won't have to pay royalties in order to implement it, which is very bad for their self-feeding monopoly.
"Everytime" I read a sentence in your post I wanted to puke out of the nonsense. I mean, seriously it is so terrible , must have been modded off topic but if there was a -1 lame tag....
The trial version will only save in "open"Xml. And users will have to download a frigging "compatibility pack" (IF they notice that the free version of office is saving in bogus formats) Ain't it ridiculous such basic things like the translator are separate software? Most users will simply not use that thing nor recognize its existance... most users don't really know about this MS power trip to become a standard....
Should we really trust important details on human memory? I mean, even if it was trained and all the average human memory is not worth confidence, if it is weakened the harm is not as much as not being able to store giga bytes of info , cause afaik human memory was always fuzzy and had limited storage space....
I guess it is useful, make privacy threatening features to force people to use the closed encryption mechanisms that make you unable to dual boot, ain't that awesome?
You know, these things are not 'serious' or 'educated' enough to invade our holy elections, we cannot let it to get into the voters attention... they could listen to it. What's worse is that we have absolutely no control over it, some guy in his basement could make a video and submit it to youtube, at least with the other ways (the expensive ways) there's more control regarding who is able to spread political speech...
Once the politicians begin to "protect" the citizens from certain kind of speeches or media...
Slashdot Mirror
I can't run bounzibuddy or Gator in Kubuntu! IT is not a good competitor to windows!
Playing violent video games makes you violent
Eating fish makes you love anime.
Lack of pirates is the cause of global warming
etc
I guess some apple fan boys got mod powers, like I care about your karma ...
Hell yeah, I mean a web rendering engine? Like we needed more of those... and frigging apple is involved! for god's sake, don't compare this to precious GCC...
"You art cannot be as good as ma art!"
It also means that bugs get fixed faster and that if mozilla stops supporting a platform someone else can, and that we can have things like swiftfox available, so I think it is a good trade.
But security through obscurity doesn't really work too well anyways...
I actually think gp is right to one extent.
For the sites I don't care about I use the same generic old password that I have used from 2003, I mean, if they are stolen I just risk a bunch of of dummy email addresses and other crappy services I don't really care too much about. For the things that matter I keep though and strong passwords that I better remember and not "write them down" or let a browser keep them... Often things that matter are just 3 so memory is not an obstacle...
It is not irrational, and it is not hatred either, it is founded fear of a company that obviously dislikes any competition and that from what we have seen is now buying distros in an indirect way to circumvent the GPL and then get FUD-tale whores or slaves or whatever that guys like novell and linspire have become, it is still useless for linspire users if there is such a thing like them.
I guess that according to your comment Linspire's target market is a bunch of people that at the same time don't want windows, yet they don't have any 'irrational hatred of Microsoft' but still, they would love to buy an OS that (because of previous linspire cost+the patent covenant) is more expensive than windows, yet it is very good at locking them in? So I am guessing the target market for Linspire are a bunch of stupid people?
Obviously many guys are worried about a compiler getting GPL3, they wouldn't be able to modify the compiler and then include the compiler in some tivo like device or whatever GPL3 would make GCC troublesome... Not really getting it, sounds as if some fudders want to call GPL3 dangerous whenever possible...
Oh no! kids might use it for porn! the project is evil!
But slashdot and junk articles are not mutually exclusive ...
Let me guess, someone used to MS or apple made this article? Those are the only places where such a lame argument as "Choice is bad" could come from...
In what way do having multiple distros is actually a problem? If you are distributing software, you may simply target the rpm and deb based distros, those sum the job of 2 and then a "source package" when your software is popular enough, people will actually make the binary packages for their distros themselves... Not to mention the method the big closed source players use for distribution that seems to work for most distributions...
I, as many people don't seem to actually understand why would Novell or Linspire make this deal since so far there seems to be nothing convenient about it, I am not able to take those 2 seriously as bussiness since they seem to make these lame-ass covenants that certainly don't seem to give them any good. I laugh at Kevin Carmony's implying that linux needs "bussiness thinking" considering he signed such a dumb deal that doesn't seem to give his company any actual advantage besides the status of MS work drone.
Hey better let MS implement it than google, I mean, google might succeed in doing so...
MS said that they don't want to get "locked-in" with ODF... That's rather ironic, anyways:
Recipe for a good standard format:
The fact you are the largest software company in the world shouldn't mean you should "own" any "standard". We don't need an standard that would function exactly the same as the defacto-standard from old office, that would be useless and will only make the world waste resources in the migration from one closed defacto-standard towards a closed "standard".
ISO will show a lot of incompetence if they actually approve two standards for exactly the same thing... If that happens we will have to replace ISO, really
No offense to MS, they make great products and all, but I would love to see people use their products because they are the best products and not because they are the only ones that implement their format correctly, I hate self-feeding monopolies.
Huh? Where are you getting that from? MS is not afraid of having to program software that has to save in ODF, they are more than capable of doing that, what MS is afraid of is that a format not invented by them would be the standard, because that simply means they won't be the only ones able to implement the format in a 100% accurate way (OOXML is all but a good specification, in order to keep the legacy they kept a bunch of BS, seriously) or the fact that software makers won't have to pay royalties in order to implement it, which is very bad for their self-feeding monopoly.
oh my gawd somebody give this guy a -2 dontfeedthetroll tag.
"Everytime" I read a sentence in your post I wanted to puke out of the nonsense. I mean, seriously it is so terrible , must have been modded off topic but if there was a -1 lame tag....
The trial version will only save in "open"Xml. And users will have to download a frigging "compatibility pack" (IF they notice that the free version of office is saving in bogus formats) Ain't it ridiculous such basic things like the translator are separate software? Most users will simply not use that thing nor recognize its existance... most users don't really know about this MS power trip to become a standard....
Should we really trust important details on human memory? I mean, even if it was trained and all the average human memory is not worth confidence, if it is weakened the harm is not as much as not being able to store giga bytes of info , cause afaik human memory was always fuzzy and had limited storage space....
I guess it is useful, make privacy threatening features to force people to use the closed encryption mechanisms that make you unable to dual boot, ain't that awesome?
You know, these things are not 'serious' or 'educated' enough to invade our holy elections, we cannot let it to get into the voters attention... they could listen to it. What's worse is that we have absolutely no control over it, some guy in his basement could make a video and submit it to youtube, at least with the other ways (the expensive ways) there's more control regarding who is able to spread political speech...
Once the politicians begin to "protect" the citizens from certain kind of speeches or media...