it seems obvious to me that some reporters at zdnet have figured out that if you piss off the open source community, they get LOTS of hits
this means $$$$$ for them from their advertisers !!
if you keep slashdotting them, they will not go away; you are becoming part of their bottom line. please stop including references to zdnet articles, people ! we all know they are ignorant and annoying -- we do not need to pay them for it.
okay, i have not looked at the site yet.. it does not seem to be working for me at this precise moment..
but anyway, from what i remember, none of the distributions -are- linux.. linux is a kernel, not an OS.. the OS is mostly GNU.
also, red hat is a company, it is not linux nor an operating system at all, so i dont see any problem with the phrase "red hat is not linux"..
on the other hand, gnu.org (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html) has been preaching this message for several years already, so it is not really news.
i got stuck with a renewal fee from netsol during the time that i was attempting to transfer from netsol to a tucows registrar.. i sent them a nasty email saying that i never agreed to renew and they agreed to let me transfer without charging me.. i suggest you do the same thing if they want you to pay a late fee like that !! if you look around you can find tucows registrars for as low as $10/an. -- its all i use now -abf.
i suggest, perhaps, that you get a dictionary and stop being so emotional.
verisign is, indeed, a monopoly even though perhaps it is not "politically correct" to call them such.
a monopoly is a company which employs such practices as simply buying their competition when their competition is ripe enough to be worthwhile (or competitive) instead of attempting to overcome their competition by more conventional means such as lower prices, better services, etc.
verisign did exactly this with thawte and there is nothing stopping them from doing it again when someone else comes along hoping to compete with them
on the other hand, NSI is likely to become less of a monopoly because they are being forced to co-operate with such entities as openSRS which is sponsoring domain registrars which are, in turn, selling domains for as low as $10 per year -- no kidding, they exist today.
i have been sysadmin for quite a few commercial sites which use a similar setup, namely the linux/apache/mod_ssl/openssl combination.
it works quite well, is 100% free (though you will still need a CA certificate from verisign or thawte or whomever) and is completely legal.
unfortunately, though, because of the legal restrictions in the USA, there are very few easily implemented ssl packages.. i strongly suggest openssl (formerly SSLeay) used in combination with the standard apache mod_ssl -- for all the info on this, you should definately check out the apache server mod_ssl documentation at http://www.apache.org/related_projects.html#modssl which tells you everything you need to know.
i understand that if my servers were based in the USA, i would have to pay the big bucks for this instead of being able to just download openssl, but i am not american and neither are you, so rejoice !
at least, i have been able to resist the magnetic pull to "silicon valley" thus far (unlike the majority of my former room-mates) and hopefully i will remain canadian until the RSA patent wears off !:)
although this sounds at first like it is just a boasting of the higher standards that linux has over microsoft systems, it is actually somewhat of a concern -- i was going to download the UT server myself and give it a try, but now i am giving it second thoughts.
if the UT server actually "crashes" the system in any way, this would not be acceptable because, try as i may, all of my linux servers are never free of important tasks of some kind or another and, frankly, i find it hard to believe that this is asking for much.
if the program kills itself for no apparant reason or does not perform acceptably; this i can deal with -- (i have dealt with netscape for years!).. but, if it starts to interfere with the rest of my system then i will happily wait until the next version.
thanks, haven, for the reality check.. i am going to wait on this one for now
i have wanted to make a "universal language" for as long as i can remember, but i still have not found the time...
anyway, the real reason that esperanto is not successful is that it still has stupid rules -- for example, nouns still have gender which means that there are still too many pronouns and you still can not complete a sentence without knowing the gender of the subject.
not to say that esperanto is bad, but we all know that esperanto is just spanish V2.0 and no one will admit it.
a truly universal language must be written from scratch with all of the "fluff" removed. people say that you will lose the poetic qualities and you will lose the innuendo and colloqualism -- i say, that these people are pathetic whiners who are trained to be cynical of anything which could be considered progress. "poetic quality" and innuendo has _nothing_ to do with the language which it is written in. you might prefer german opera to italian, but it does not make one any "better" than the other. either way, you could still write your poetry in the language of your choice -- and, thanks to the UNL, people will still know what youre talking about.
the fact of the matter is, effective worldwide communication is a much more serious matter than an old-fashioned idea of what is "good" poetry. poetry will persist so long as there are good poets; we do not need to acomodate them with prissy, "romantic" languages. this just makes it easier for unskilled drunks to make more sappy, bad poetry.
as they say, you have to crack some eggs to make an omelette. i say thanks to UNU for cracking some eggs, and to everyone that thinks they can improve upon any of the current languages, please stop picking eggs out of the trash.
let me first say, that i had no intention to flame the journalist.
however, concluding that windows is superior because he had more difficulty installing caldera than windows is nothing short of stupid.
and it -is- your responsibility to be aware of your options. you do not have to use caldera to install linux and you do not have to use a command line to operate it.
even the journalist himself noted that his installation would have been easier if he had chosen a more user friendly package such as redhat.
and further, i have been programming for over 15 years and i do not recall ever admiring microsoft for anything. maybe some people do, but it gives me some serious claustrophobia working within its limited scope and unreliable "conveniences".
perhaps persons like yourself, who have no motivation to find out for themselves what is available out there, appreciate microsoft because it has been impaled into your cranium several million times and has become an easy name to remember.
just because someone has a larger advertising budget does not mean that they are better. honest. i know that it is anti-american to say so, but even the most successful companies have flaws too.
Slashdot Mirror
it seems obvious to me that some reporters at zdnet have figured out that if you piss off the open source community, they get LOTS of hits
this means $$$$$ for them from their advertisers !!
if you keep slashdotting them, they will not go away; you are becoming part of their bottom line. please stop including references to zdnet articles, people ! we all know they are ignorant and annoying -- we do not need to pay them for it.
okay, i have not looked at the site yet .. it does not seem to be working for me at this precise moment ..
.. linux is a kernel, not an OS .. the OS is mostly GNU.
..
but anyway, from what i remember, none of the distributions -are- linux
also, red hat is a company, it is not linux nor an operating system at all, so i dont see any problem with the phrase "red hat is not linux"
on the other hand, gnu.org (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html) has been preaching this message for several years already, so it is not really news.
i got stuck with a renewal fee from netsol during the time that i was attempting to transfer from netsol to a tucows registrar .. i sent them a nasty email saying that i never agreed to renew and they agreed to let me transfer without charging me .. i suggest you do the same thing if they want you to pay a late fee like that !! if you look around you can find tucows registrars for as low as $10/an. -- its all i use now -abf.
i suggest, perhaps, that you get a dictionary and stop being so emotional.
verisign is, indeed, a monopoly even though perhaps it is not "politically correct" to call them such.
a monopoly is a company which employs such practices as simply buying their competition when their competition is ripe enough to be worthwhile (or competitive) instead of attempting to overcome their competition by more conventional means such as lower prices, better services, etc.
verisign did exactly this with thawte and there is nothing stopping them from doing it again when someone else comes along hoping to compete with them
on the other hand, NSI is likely to become less of a monopoly because they are being forced to co-operate with such entities as openSRS which is sponsoring domain registrars which are, in turn, selling domains for as low as $10 per year -- no kidding, they exist today.
-abf.
i was wondering why, when testing file server performance, the clients are always microsoft clients ...
if this is truely an unbiased test, why is it that we can not see the results when using linux clients (or 3rd party clients) ??
i would think that this sort of data is pretty critical when presenting a scientifically unbiased study.
but maybe i just do not know anything.
-abf.
i have been sysadmin for quite a few commercial sites which use a similar setup, namely the linux/apache/mod_ssl/openssl combination.
.. i strongly suggest openssl (formerly SSLeay) used in combination with the standard apache mod_ssl -- for all the info on this, you should definately check out the apache server mod_ssl documentation at http://www.apache.org/related_projects.html#modssl
:)
it works quite well, is 100% free (though you will still need a CA certificate from verisign or thawte or whomever) and is completely legal.
unfortunately, though, because of the legal restrictions in the USA, there are very few easily implemented ssl packages
which tells you everything you need to know.
i understand that if my servers were based in the USA, i would have to pay the big bucks for this instead of being able to just download openssl, but i am not american and neither are you, so rejoice !
at least, i have been able to resist the magnetic pull to "silicon valley" thus far (unlike the majority of my former room-mates) and hopefully i will remain canadian until the RSA patent wears off !
-abf.
> "If MS went after WINE ..."
if WINE is in any violation of any MS copyright, then i would have to assume that MS is in violation for both DOS (UNIX) and Windows (Macintosh)
i think you might find that this is the real reason that there are no lawsuits here
-abf.
although this sounds at first like it is just a boasting of the higher standards that linux has over microsoft systems, it is actually somewhat of a concern -- i was going to download the UT server myself and give it a try, but now i am giving it second thoughts.
.. but, if it starts to interfere with the rest of my system then i will happily wait until the next version.
.. i am going to wait on this one for now
if the UT server actually "crashes" the system in any way, this would not be acceptable because, try as i may, all of my linux servers are never free of important tasks of some kind or another and, frankly, i find it hard to believe that this is asking for much.
if the program kills itself for no apparant reason or does not perform acceptably; this i can deal with -- (i have dealt with netscape for years!)
thanks, haven, for the reality check
-abf.
i have wanted to make a "universal language" for as long as i can remember, but i still have not found the time ...
anyway, the real reason that esperanto is not successful is that it still has stupid rules -- for example, nouns still have gender which means that there are still too many pronouns and you still can not complete a sentence without knowing the gender of the subject.
not to say that esperanto is bad, but we all know that esperanto is just spanish V2.0 and no one will admit it.
a truly universal language must be written from scratch with all of the "fluff" removed. people say that you will lose the poetic qualities and you will lose the innuendo and colloqualism -- i say, that these people are pathetic whiners who are trained to be cynical of anything which could be considered progress. "poetic quality" and innuendo has _nothing_ to do with the language which it is written in. you might prefer german opera to italian, but it does not make one any "better" than the other. either way, you could still write your poetry in the language of your choice -- and, thanks to the UNL, people will still know what youre talking about.
the fact of the matter is, effective worldwide communication is a much more serious matter than an old-fashioned idea of what is "good" poetry. poetry will persist so long as there are good poets; we do not need to acomodate them with prissy, "romantic" languages. this just makes it easier for unskilled drunks to make more sappy, bad poetry.
as they say, you have to crack some eggs to make an omelette. i say thanks to UNU for cracking some eggs, and to everyone that thinks they can improve upon any of the current languages, please stop picking eggs out of the trash.
-abf.
You can register a US Domain at http://www.nic.us/ -- they also have all the information that you could possibly want about the .us domain
If you are not american, you can go to IANA (http://www.iana.org/) to find out the URL of your countries top level domain registrar.
-abf.
let me first say, that i had no intention to flame the journalist.
however, concluding that windows is superior because he had more difficulty installing caldera than windows is nothing short of stupid.
and it -is- your responsibility to be aware of your options. you do not have to use caldera to install linux and you do not have to use a command line to operate it.
even the journalist himself noted that his installation would have been easier if he had chosen a more user friendly package such as redhat.
and further, i have been programming for over 15 years and i do not recall ever admiring microsoft for anything. maybe some people do, but it gives me some serious claustrophobia working within its limited scope and unreliable "conveniences".
perhaps persons like yourself, who have no motivation to find out for themselves what is available out there, appreciate microsoft because it has been impaled into your cranium several million times and has become an easy name to remember.
just because someone has a larger advertising budget does not mean that they are better. honest. i know that it is anti-american to say so, but even the most successful companies have flaws too.
-abf.