No, the spare computer is a P4 3.6ghz machine (with 2 gb of RAM). She only uses the internet (for her websites like funbrain and etc.) The built in games she likes quite well actually. But when a website (Playhouse Disney) started asking her to install flash, which she knew how to do very simply on the Windows machine. And could not duplicate in any reasonable fashion (she attempted to read and understand the directions for linux for 2 and a half hours). It took me honestly, roughly 2 hours to install flash for her, (to include switching accounts several times, and a trip through the Linux command line, which I give all Unix and Linux users my respect). This is when I know it is not ready for prime time. Again, for a programmer or a user who is skilled in Unix / Linux, I'm very sure it is a good OS. It does have some intriguing features, (some of which I wish were duplicated in Windows), but unless the system as a whole becomes easier to use it will have problems dominating the desktop.
On a side note, I persuaded her to try and use it again (at a rate of 2 dollars per hour) so maybe she will tough it out now...
I don't think its that simple. As an experiment I wiped a spare machine of Windows 2000 (which my 10 year old daughter was so fond of) and installed a copy of Ubuntu 7.10 on it. After 1 month of struggling with learning the machine, she won't even touch that computer. I'm not downing the OS though, but my point is, I am willing to pay for software (and probably so is many others) that is easy to use. A lot of you may say that Windows sucks, and that may be true (Vista is defintely not winning brownie points with me entirely), but a lot of people find it simple to use. This is not to say Microsoft is the world's best software company, or anything close. But what Microsoft and other for profit companies do better than FOSS systems and software is provide easy user interfaces, which can be learned fast. Anyone who has used any version of Windows, can fairly (with a 2 - 6 hour learning curve) get up and running with little to no hiccups.
And while I'll tough it out (to my extreme dismay) and learn Linux and other free systems, truthfully, I just don't like them. Simply because most of the time they have a "programmer's" feel to them and not a "user's" feel. On a postiive note though, going back to the Ubuntu OS, I do see promise and potential, and I don't say that lightly.
Whoa.. wait a sec. Who said there needs to be public ownership of data lines? Did the government pay for those lines you want to nationalize? If not, then fuck no. Let the government pay for the lines and labor involved and then lets see if you want to foot that bill thats gonna follow...
Your right, I did forget about Lotus buying them. However, my arguement still stands about not liking the current playing field, so you make your own. Companies do it all the time, the good ones (or rather the ones who are good at it) win. Others fall by the waste side. At that time it was Microsoft, now its new players. Its simple really. Whoever is on top is gonna be challenged for that top position.
See I look at it like this: If I am a little fish (Microsoft, circa 1989) and want to win marketshare, I create a standard and promote it. That may be hard for some to accept, but Microsoft acted smartly -- develop your own standard and get people to jump on the bandwagon. I remember Wordperfect it was great up to version 5.1 and then Microsoft bought Ami (a little French word processing company) shortly after releasing windows and tweaked it to make MS Word. While some may claim that Wordperfect was the best, the moment I touched Ms Word, I never touched Wordperfect again (even convinced many people to switch, which is easy when your 15 and computer savvy). It was a better product.
On a different note, creating a standard is nice, but if I don't like your standard, then I'll switch and promote one I do like. Whether its open or closed is irrelevant to most people, since most people truly don't want to get their hands dirty (so to speak) on arcane and seemingly (real or not) geek-appearing stuff (my apologies to all geeks). Crying foul, so many years later seems like a ploy to destroy a competitor who beat them with a proverbial better hand.
Like I said, I don't believe there is (or was) a noble reason for the war (my personal opinion), however, we are in a fight now and for better or worse, there will only be one victor. Again I ask the question: would you rather fight terrorists in Times Square or in their home country? Yes, Iraq is unfortinate situation, yes I've seen the tragedy upclose and personal, and yes I've seen both positive and negative effects of the "war". There really are individuals who hate the U.S. (both the people and the government) because of our apparent "secular and Christian" ways and want to see us all dead or converted to their religion. And if there was a better way to handle / navigate this fiasco (i.e. end the war), I'd be all for it. Short term however... no. If we pull out now, the country as fragile as it is would collapse.
If you want a good analogy watch the last two seasons of Stargate. (I miss the show, but it drew a frightening similarity to the current war on terror, in some aspects).
Bottom line however, is if a robot can save lives, I'm all for it. I'd rather a fucked up piece of metal than to ever smell or see the sight of twisted and burning flesh and bone ever again.
You know normally I don't comment on military matters (even though I am a Marine), but for you I'll make an exception...
Here is a reason I (and most people) always find interesting... people who want to kill you because they don't like you. People who want to kill you because your way of life is simply intolerable to them (even though you are over half a planet away). I'm not saying the war is noble or anything like that, because its not. However, I would rather take the fight to the enemy, rather than him take the fight to me and my family over here. (Simple, compelling reasons enough)?
If we are gonna spend the resources on anything lets spend it on either negotiation or negation of the threat, so we can please move on to my obtaining a hydrogen powered car (or flying car).
However, unless I'm wrong a distinctive disadvantage of a solid state drive (i.e. flash drives are slower (at least currently) than their magnetic disk counterparts). Granted for some that won't be a big deal, but if your working with audio / video applications or playing games, it defintely will suck big time.
To me it is a very big deal. Simply, I do not want to be tracked everywhere I go. My personal preference (probably a lot of people's personal preference). The government does not need to know what I am accessing or where i am going 24/7. If I'm using a government service or such. Sure track THAT usage. But my travel habits, my literary preferences, my financal prowness (or lack thereof) is a PRIVATE matter.
How can one be free, if I'm monitored all of the time, like I if I was in prison. Simple answer, you aren't free if you allow that to happen. (Though one could say they freely put a leash around their necks, willingly).
Its better to be free and struggle, then to be caged and stagnant.
As the USPTO defines a patent: "A patent [is] for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor." In otherwords, if I invent a method and create software to execute said name invention (meaning I created the code as well) why should I not be able to patent it?
I respect your argument, but looking at the university, you are paying for the knowledge and ideas (packaged in a form the student will understand). Granted, anyone who is willing to do the legwork, could eventually learn on their own. Would you have paid to go to undergraduate, graduate and take the bar exam, if you did know that at the end you were going to reap rewards of being able to bill clients at (for purposes of this example, 2 - 500 dollars an hour)? Considering the opportunity cost(s) and all.
An idea may be easy at first light, but fleshing out the idea, taking it from concept to production, all of this cost money and time. I'm just not willing to devote either, if I know that Joe Schmuckatelli in his basement or wherever is gonna just copy my idea and undercut whatever price I sell it at.
The two are not inseparatanle concepts. If my method of "finding the digits of PI" is superior than the current standard or someone else's idea and I want to make money off of that, why should I not be allowed to do so? I can't do that, if EVERYBODY has the code which enables that function. But I can if I patent it and demand payment to use my code. This is no different from a physical invention, save that it is easier to mass produce.
Without buying both a bottle of NyQuill and its knock-off, I can't honestly compare the two (i.e. apples to apples). Name recoginition is extremely important, it is one's brand. Which makes it an investment; and one only invests in something they intend on gaining a return on. True, there are some people who truly beileve that we should all share, but let us be honest. Nothing in life is fair. I don't feel sorry when someone does not have the same benefits as I, nor do I feel sorry for myself if I see something I would like to have that someone else has.
Realizing this may sound like a flame, its not. Its time more technical types understand that ideas are worth something (usually money, forget recognition and comaraderie). Patents are a good thing, they allow individuals to profit (for taking the time to create something) and they allow consumers the benefits of having something that (if applicable) makes their lives easier. I'll say it again, altruristic motives (such as free and goodwill) have to be paid for by somebody. Remove software patents and the quality of work goes down, because nobody wants to feel like they have worked for nothing. (Which is what will go in their pockets if you do so.)
So let me get this straight... some of you actually believe that one should not be able to patent software after
1) spending an inordinate amount of time learning how to design, develop (to include programming), test software.
2) spending (nowdays) insane amounts of money to go to a good university (unless you happen to be there on scholarship, where you are spending an insane amount of someone else's money.
Just because you think that it is an idea somebody EVENTUALLY would have come up with? Or the tired arguement that structures and or algorithms involved are prior art?
Does that even make sense, logically? Altruism, while nice I'm sure, along with sharing is caring and all that other happy-happy nonsense, does not pay the bills, put food on the table, or even cover the gas in one's car at the end of the day. When you have individuals who feel they should get something for free, (I'm sorry you feel you should have the choice of free -- which its not (see item 1)) then you need a patent to say no... no I worked too dammed hard just to have the value (real or percieved) pissed away because somebody can't afford it so they want it for free.
Not trying to sound mean or cruel, but honestly that is a lot of time and money loss just to say, you can't patent it because others need to be able to copy it. Bullshit. Nothing is free but air and water (and even that is not free). (And no beer is not free, somebody had to pay for it.)
"...being happy with what you do is far more important than earning more money." And this is the mindset which keeps most programmers and engineers out of the board room. You care about being happy doing what you do. They care more about the money -- and for some of them they are happy when chasing that big paycheck.
As always, it pays to keep life in perspective, you will accomplish as much (or as little) as you choose to.
I don't know if you can do this in BBY, but when I go to Circuit City, if I see an item (say 4 GB Sandisk Micro Sticks) and if the price is xx.99, I then go to one of their computers which has internet access and then go to their web store and see if its cheaper. I know it works because the store I went to (in Jacksonville, NC) had its price $45 dollars higher then the retail store. I bought it online and picked up in the store. Of course, the evil looks on the store salespeople's faces is always fun. But then they shouldn't try to rip off the customer with higher markups.
Granted, I know retail is a different animal then the internet, and profit margins are getting slimmer all the time, but I think the savy shopper is gonna look (or should look) online first and see if they can save money. Every little bit helps I think.
The SSN is for my social security benefits, not my dammed identification. If they want to make a national identification number (after debating the pros and cons of such) later than that is fine. But to use the SSN for purposes that it was not intended for is foolish at best and dangerous at worse. One day I actually may have to claim those benefits (sad, as that may be), and don't want it tied into or tied up by any company's Bull****.
Hmmm.... seems plausable, since if my memory serves me correctly, all matter gives off a distinct waveform. Just one question (or problem?), what happens if the crazy terrorist (er.. freedom fighter) decides to make a trigger which works off of radio waves (or whatever particular radio wave) said name future machine may use?
but I've never had malware attack (trojan, virii, worm, spyware, etc.) that I have not done myself (and I've been using Windows OS computers since 1991). My computer has never been owned or any other stupid idiotic nonsense. Perhaps I know not to open unsolicited emails or go to websites I am not sure of... perhaps its just plain common sense.
In otherwords, my question becomes where the hell do you (you being the individuals who've had these issues) go to get these problems? I want to actually see one for once, because I personally believe that its either a bunch of "bravo sierra" or the users truly have no clue on what to do (or not do) on a computer.
I'm not saying Windows is necessarly better, as for my own personal knowledge, I'm cutting my teeth on Fedora Core 6, and hating positively HATING the fact I've had to do 4 installs (1 initial and 3 re-installs) just to get it up and running, but I'll try it because I always like being fair) but having said that I do not see really any viable alterative software that Linux provides that 1) looks as nice as Windows, 2) operates in a relatively simple manner -- this can be chalked up to my not knowing the system however, and 3) not having to touch the command line or reworking source code. EVER.
In the end while I believe the author is well intentioned, for individuals who just want the computer to work (with a minimal learning curve), Windows is still the champ in that area (even though, some individuals / groups claim it makes it easier for malware authors to operate as well).
I'll be happy if they could make a it so I could have glasses (even though I have 20/10 vision), that would allow me to see normally, and had a light opaque computer screen which would serve as a monitor. HUDs displays won't be good until that feature happens seamlessly I think.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the spare computer is a P4 3.6ghz machine (with 2 gb of RAM). She only uses the internet (for her websites like funbrain and etc.) The built in games she likes quite well actually. But when a website (Playhouse Disney) started asking her to install flash, which she knew how to do very simply on the Windows machine. And could not duplicate in any reasonable fashion (she attempted to read and understand the directions for linux for 2 and a half hours). It took me honestly, roughly 2 hours to install flash for her, (to include switching accounts several times, and a trip through the Linux command line, which I give all Unix and Linux users my respect). This is when I know it is not ready for prime time. Again, for a programmer or a user who is skilled in Unix / Linux, I'm very sure it is a good OS. It does have some intriguing features, (some of which I wish were duplicated in Windows), but unless the system as a whole becomes easier to use it will have problems dominating the desktop.
On a side note, I persuaded her to try and use it again (at a rate of 2 dollars per hour) so maybe she will tough it out now...
I'll give this one a shot, perhaps she will have a better experience with it.
I don't think its that simple. As an experiment I wiped a spare machine of Windows 2000 (which my 10 year old daughter was so fond of) and installed a copy of Ubuntu 7.10 on it. After 1 month of struggling with learning the machine, she won't even touch that computer. I'm not downing the OS though, but my point is, I am willing to pay for software (and probably so is many others) that is easy to use. A lot of you may say that Windows sucks, and that may be true (Vista is defintely not winning brownie points with me entirely), but a lot of people find it simple to use. This is not to say Microsoft is the world's best software company, or anything close. But what Microsoft and other for profit companies do better than FOSS systems and software is provide easy user interfaces, which can be learned fast. Anyone who has used any version of Windows, can fairly (with a 2 - 6 hour learning curve) get up and running with little to no hiccups.
And while I'll tough it out (to my extreme dismay) and learn Linux and other free systems, truthfully, I just don't like them. Simply because most of the time they have a "programmer's" feel to them and not a "user's" feel. On a postiive note though, going back to the Ubuntu OS, I do see promise and potential, and I don't say that lightly.
Whoa.. wait a sec. Who said there needs to be public ownership of data lines? Did the government pay for those lines you want to nationalize? If not, then fuck no. Let the government pay for the lines and labor involved and then lets see if you want to foot that bill thats gonna follow...
Your right, I did forget about Lotus buying them. However, my arguement still stands about not liking the current playing field, so you make your own. Companies do it all the time, the good ones (or rather the ones who are good at it) win. Others fall by the waste side. At that time it was Microsoft, now its new players. Its simple really. Whoever is on top is gonna be challenged for that top position.
See I look at it like this: If I am a little fish (Microsoft, circa 1989) and want to win marketshare, I create a standard and promote it. That may be hard for some to accept, but Microsoft acted smartly -- develop your own standard and get people to jump on the bandwagon. I remember Wordperfect it was great up to version 5.1 and then Microsoft bought Ami (a little French word processing company) shortly after releasing windows and tweaked it to make MS Word. While some may claim that Wordperfect was the best, the moment I touched Ms Word, I never touched Wordperfect again (even convinced many people to switch, which is easy when your 15 and computer savvy). It was a better product.
On a different note, creating a standard is nice, but if I don't like your standard, then I'll switch and promote one I do like. Whether its open or closed is irrelevant to most people, since most people truly don't want to get their hands dirty (so to speak) on arcane and seemingly (real or not) geek-appearing stuff (my apologies to all geeks). Crying foul, so many years later seems like a ploy to destroy a competitor who beat them with a proverbial better hand.
Like I said, I don't believe there is (or was) a noble reason for the war (my personal opinion), however, we are in a fight now and for better or worse, there will only be one victor. Again I ask the question: would you rather fight terrorists in Times Square or in their home country? Yes, Iraq is unfortinate situation, yes I've seen the tragedy upclose and personal, and yes I've seen both positive and negative effects of the "war". There really are individuals who hate the U.S. (both the people and the government) because of our apparent "secular and Christian" ways and want to see us all dead or converted to their religion. And if there was a better way to handle / navigate this fiasco (i.e. end the war), I'd be all for it. Short term however... no. If we pull out now, the country as fragile as it is would collapse.
If you want a good analogy watch the last two seasons of Stargate. (I miss the show, but it drew a frightening similarity to the current war on terror, in some aspects).
Bottom line however, is if a robot can save lives, I'm all for it. I'd rather a fucked up piece of metal than to ever smell or see the sight of twisted and burning flesh and bone ever again.
May I suggest turning off the automatic update feature? This way you can update Windows as you choose.
You know normally I don't comment on military matters (even though I am a Marine), but for you I'll make an exception...
Here is a reason I (and most people) always find interesting... people who want to kill you because they don't like you. People who want to kill you because your way of life is simply intolerable to them (even though you are over half a planet away). I'm not saying the war is noble or anything like that, because its not. However, I would rather take the fight to the enemy, rather than him take the fight to me and my family over here. (Simple, compelling reasons enough)?
If we are gonna spend the resources on anything lets spend it on either negotiation or negation of the threat, so we can please move on to my obtaining a hydrogen powered car (or flying car).
However, unless I'm wrong a distinctive disadvantage of a solid state drive (i.e. flash drives are slower (at least currently) than their magnetic disk counterparts). Granted for some that won't be a big deal, but if your working with audio / video applications or playing games, it defintely will suck big time.
To me it is a very big deal. Simply, I do not want to be tracked everywhere I go. My personal preference (probably a lot of people's personal preference). The government does not need to know what I am accessing or where i am going 24 /7. If I'm using a government service or such. Sure track THAT usage. But my travel habits, my literary preferences, my financal prowness (or lack thereof) is a PRIVATE matter.
How can one be free, if I'm monitored all of the time, like I if I was in prison. Simple answer, you aren't free if you allow that to happen. (Though one could say they freely put a leash around their necks, willingly).
Its better to be free and struggle, then to be caged and stagnant.
As the USPTO defines a patent: "A patent [is] for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor." In otherwords, if I invent a method and create software to execute said name invention (meaning I created the code as well) why should I not be able to patent it?
I respect your argument, but looking at the university, you are paying for the knowledge and ideas (packaged in a form the student will understand). Granted, anyone who is willing to do the legwork, could eventually learn on their own. Would you have paid to go to undergraduate, graduate and take the bar exam, if you did know that at the end you were going to reap rewards of being able to bill clients at (for purposes of this example, 2 - 500 dollars an hour)? Considering the opportunity cost(s) and all.
An idea may be easy at first light, but fleshing out the idea, taking it from concept to production, all of this cost money and time. I'm just not willing to devote either, if I know that Joe Schmuckatelli in his basement or wherever is gonna just copy my idea and undercut whatever price I sell it at.
Not entirely true...AOL Messenger and ICQ come to mind, though your probably right that the userbase is the real objective.
The two are not inseparatanle concepts. If my method of "finding the digits of PI" is superior than the current standard or someone else's idea and I want to make money off of that, why should I not be allowed to do so? I can't do that, if EVERYBODY has the code which enables that function. But I can if I patent it and demand payment to use my code. This is no different from a physical invention, save that it is easier to mass produce.
Without buying both a bottle of NyQuill and its knock-off, I can't honestly compare the two (i.e. apples to apples). Name recoginition is extremely important, it is one's brand. Which makes it an investment; and one only invests in something they intend on gaining a return on. True, there are some people who truly beileve that we should all share, but let us be honest. Nothing in life is fair. I don't feel sorry when someone does not have the same benefits as I, nor do I feel sorry for myself if I see something I would like to have that someone else has.
Realizing this may sound like a flame, its not. Its time more technical types understand that ideas are worth something (usually money, forget recognition and comaraderie). Patents are a good thing, they allow individuals to profit (for taking the time to create something) and they allow consumers the benefits of having something that (if applicable) makes their lives easier. I'll say it again, altruristic motives (such as free and goodwill) have to be paid for by somebody. Remove software patents and the quality of work goes down, because nobody wants to feel like they have worked for nothing. (Which is what will go in their pockets if you do so.)
So let me get this straight... some of you actually believe that one should not be able to patent software after
1) spending an inordinate amount of time learning how to design, develop (to include programming), test software.
2) spending (nowdays) insane amounts of money to go to a good university (unless you happen to be there on scholarship, where you are spending an insane amount of someone else's money.
Just because you think that it is an idea somebody EVENTUALLY would have come up with? Or the tired arguement that structures and or algorithms involved are prior art?
Does that even make sense, logically? Altruism, while nice I'm sure, along with sharing is caring and all that other happy-happy nonsense, does not pay the bills, put food on the table, or even cover the gas in one's car at the end of the day. When you have individuals who feel they should get something for free, (I'm sorry you feel you should have the choice of free -- which its not (see item 1)) then you need a patent to say no... no I worked too dammed hard just to have the value (real or percieved) pissed away because somebody can't afford it so they want it for free.
Not trying to sound mean or cruel, but honestly that is a lot of time and money loss just to say, you can't patent it because others need to be able to copy it. Bullshit. Nothing is free but air and water (and even that is not free). (And no beer is not free, somebody had to pay for it.)
"...being happy with what you do is far more important than earning more money." And this is the mindset which keeps most programmers and engineers out of the board room. You care about being happy doing what you do. They care more about the money -- and for some of them they are happy when chasing that big paycheck. As always, it pays to keep life in perspective, you will accomplish as much (or as little) as you choose to.
I don't know if you can do this in BBY, but when I go to Circuit City, if I see an item (say 4 GB Sandisk Micro Sticks) and if the price is xx.99, I then go to one of their computers which has internet access and then go to their web store and see if its cheaper. I know it works because the store I went to (in Jacksonville, NC) had its price $45 dollars higher then the retail store. I bought it online and picked up in the store. Of course, the evil looks on the store salespeople's faces is always fun. But then they shouldn't try to rip off the customer with higher markups.
Granted, I know retail is a different animal then the internet, and profit margins are getting slimmer all the time, but I think the savy shopper is gonna look (or should look) online first and see if they can save money. Every little bit helps I think.
The SSN is for my social security benefits, not my dammed identification. If they want to make a national identification number (after debating the pros and cons of such) later than that is fine. But to use the SSN for purposes that it was not intended for is foolish at best and dangerous at worse. One day I actually may have to claim those benefits (sad, as that may be), and don't want it tied into or tied up by any company's Bull****.
Hmmm.... seems plausable, since if my memory serves me correctly, all matter gives off a distinct waveform. Just one question (or problem?), what happens if the crazy terrorist (er.. freedom fighter) decides to make a trigger which works off of radio waves (or whatever particular radio wave) said name future machine may use?
but I've never had malware attack (trojan, virii, worm, spyware, etc.) that I have not done myself (and I've been using Windows OS computers since 1991). My computer has never been owned or any other stupid idiotic nonsense. Perhaps I know not to open unsolicited emails or go to websites I am not sure of... perhaps its just plain common sense.
In otherwords, my question becomes where the hell do you (you being the individuals who've had these issues) go to get these problems? I want to actually see one for once, because I personally believe that its either a bunch of "bravo sierra" or the users truly have no clue on what to do (or not do) on a computer.
I'm not saying Windows is necessarly better, as for my own personal knowledge, I'm cutting my teeth on Fedora Core 6, and hating positively HATING the fact I've had to do 4 installs (1 initial and 3 re-installs) just to get it up and running, but I'll try it because I always like being fair) but having said that I do not see really any viable alterative software that Linux provides that 1) looks as nice as Windows, 2) operates in a relatively simple manner -- this can be chalked up to my not knowing the system however, and 3) not having to touch the command line or reworking source code. EVER.
In the end while I believe the author is well intentioned, for individuals who just want the computer to work (with a minimal learning curve), Windows is still the champ in that area (even though, some individuals / groups claim it makes it easier for malware authors to operate as well).
Gee can we say Fantastic Four anyone... (hope they got a hot chick to play Sue Richards)...
I'll be happy if they could make a it so I could have glasses (even though I have 20/10 vision), that would allow me to see normally, and had a light opaque computer screen which would serve as a monitor. HUDs displays won't be good until that feature happens seamlessly I think.
lol a faux pas indeed, but thats probably true too.