But it still falls short when it comes to rendering and printing docs and having them look the same as in MS Office.
The.doc file is not meant to be used to communicate freely. It is meant to be used to communicate with other Microsoft product users exclusively and to the detriment of all other users. The point of the OO.org proprietary file importing is to get it imported. You can leave the formatting errors alone, do your part and return the document.
I'm surprised you haven't discovered how inconsistently Word formats its own.doc documents. I haven't bothered to track where the whole thing breaks down, but when my high maintenance users complain, I tell them it's Microsoft's fault the document from Company Z doesn't format right and there is no fix.
You've got it exactly backwards. The first thing to get rid of is the Microsoft activedirectory. There's lots of commercially supported versions of samba from lots of companies. Novell has a good one. I'm sure redhat does too. From there, anything is possible.
I'm running two AD domains with Linux servers getting their authentication from the AD machines. It's easy and works flawlessly despite microsoft's nasty hacks to both LDAP and kerberos.
1. install kerberos client. 2. A couple of changes to some files in pam.d. 3. Join server to domain. 4. Replicate AD users. (just the one's you want)
I admin a bunch of XP desktops including my work machine. The rest of them I'll let Microsoft have their way, but I want to know what's happening when they update, so I always do a manual update. IE7 was endlessly offered a few different ways every time I ran a manual updates on my machine.
E7's "are you sure?" endlessly maddening "security" model is the antithesis of innovation and Genuine Disadvantage (dude that's funny!) is not the deal maker here.
I think investors are tired of hearing about browser alternatives and are dragging out the bag of old tricks to maintain their monopoly.
If this is true, which ATFA, we won't ever know because it's a secret, you are right on. Linux has vastly superior auditing tools to the win32 world, it is only a matter of lazy admins _not_ using them.
Nice work on the call to action. Not enough of that on/.
I would have loved to see a horse race with the entertainment conglomerates, google and the telcos. Sadly, the entertainment conglomerates can't see the forest through the trees and would abuse consumers just as much as the telcos.
Telcos win, consumers lose. Same story different day.
Another FYI: Sure Asus appears to be made in Taiwan. But assembly costs are still 1/2 or less of Taiwan's in China. I'll bet the last dollar in my pocket that Asus, like every major Taiwanese manufacturer is practically building the laptop in China.
Technically it may say Made in Taiwan, but practically, it's not. It just can't be. The wikipedia says so: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASUS
I think the more important lesson is your unfounded faith in facts. Facts are carefully defined propaganda first. Second, they communicate who/what/when/where/why. Let's take Walt's Ubuntu FIRST in-depth opinion.
"...it is full of little complications and hassles that will quickly frustrate most people who just want to use their computers, not maintain or tweak them." That may be a fact to him, but my Dad and family and another 5-6 desktops I've installed have no such experience. And no, I didn't need to tweak the installs. Touchpads and all. Who's got the fact right?
Here's the closer which displays much of Redmond's influence. "nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product," Nobody? Not even Dell? A simple observation of all OSS projects shows that every one of them has a leader! Shocking but true. So which "fact" is right? Walt's or mine? My opinion is that editorial like that displays Walt's consistently spoon-fed propaganda that has no basis in reality.
Keep shouting me down, because that's much easier than even considering the possibility that the system works differently than you believe. I think it's sufficient to say there's lots of different and clever ways to skin a cat.
A for-profit company that emphasizes public good over profit? If the organization's goals are not profit-taking then why did they set up a for-profit organization?
More to the point, they've got a great technical lead in there right now to commercialize their mail client some more. But at some point they'll bring in a business manager if they get good market traction with the mail product.
Then mozilla has a for-profit entity that, probably will alter the direction of the mozilla foundation. "Impossible!" you say. Well, take a look at the departments that generate the most donations/research funds at Universities as an example. You can deny it all you want, but money and the accompanying power often has unintended effects.
It would be nice if what you are saying is true. Unfortunately, I've had first-hand experience some time ago of what I claim. The first-hand experience was with national publications. That's publications with an "s" on the end.
all kinds of paranoid bullshit.. Call me all the names you want, but it doesn't change the facts, as they happened, to me. Your insults are distasteful and prevent any kind of discussion of the facts. They also reflect poorly on you and expose your unfounded personal bias in this situation.
WSJ did write unfavorable reviews It's not an unfavorable review. Dings, nitpicks, whatever you want to call them are sprinkled throughout the review. Just enough to firmly place the product in the also-ran category. No, there's no quid-pro-quo, but our fine representatives in the House and Senate would say that there aren't any quid-pro-quo's there either.
Payoffs like this can't be kept secret Here's a tip. How/Why do you think Steve Jobs and Bill Gates end up at his fine high-priced seminar event this year? http://d5.allthingsd.com/20070531/d5-gates-jobs-transcript/ Is there a smoking gun somewhere? No, probably not. Does it look like elephant sh!t? Does it smell like elephant sh!t? Based on my first-hand experience, it looks and smells like it.
you're too insignificant for them to be concerned with. You are right in a way beyond your shallow personal attack. -I don't buy/read the WSJ, nor do I consume buy, much less read equipment reviews anywhere else because of my first-hand experience in PR. I'm not a customer, they don't want to hear from me.
I've got another crazy story for you: It's 1986 and a plane full of weapons crashes in Nicaragua. The pilot claims the CIA is involved. Based on your very personal, emotional response, it's reasonable to believe you would call him a crackpot too. Don't give it another thought. Except you just missed the political story of the decade.
This is off topic, but I think it deserves a mention.
I RTFA'd and I'm wondering how it is all of the most negative comments about Ubuntu/Linux are modded way up? Reasonable comments that ding Ubuntu and Walt are barely modded and comments that heavily ding Walt aren't modded up at all.
Full disclosure: I dinged Walt, but I'm not talking about my comment specifically. It's all of the others too.
Sadly, some joker already tagged this article haha. Please consider all of the points below.
1. Walt & the WSJ doesn't much like change, or new ideas in a big PR money category. Playing two PR reps and their big-budget companies off one another is preferred. A third wheel screws the whole thing up no matter how much money Shuttleworth throws at the WSJ. 2. Walt's fundamentally a very imperious sort of fellow. So a GUI like OSX is more up his alley. 3. Walt can't piss off Microsoft or Apple. They are major WSJ advertisers. Who knows what else they provide for Walt.
I think it was a very bad idea on Shuttleworth's part to drive for a WSJ review. Anyone with some PR experience would have told him that it was going to go badly because of at least 2 of my points above. If Shuttleworth/Dell ever get another crack at it, it will be more of the same kind of nonsensical dings that red headed step child brands typically get in the PR big-leagues.
The point is not that it can't be done. The point is it's a sufficient barrier to simple file sharing.
A reasonable guess is some combination of PHB's at Apple and the Media cartels are driving this kind of totally wasteful resource allocation.
It also is important to understand that the typical executive demanding these features:
1. Don't have a clue. 2. Wield so much power and money they are surrounded by yes-people. 3. Typical power personality lives in a reality distortion field that includes dismissing an informed opinion that is counter to their very basic drive for power and control.
For those that don't want to read through it, it's classic PHB scumbag B.S. They're running exchange on one side, so there's going to be trouble finding a compromise unless the disks are taken out of production.
The buzzword B.S. level is so high I think I threw-up in my mouth a little.
Let's pause for a moment to inject a dose of engineering reality.
1. We're talking about a low-power device with very limited programming capacity. That's different from the storage capacity. 2. How, in technical terms will files be shared?
Let's say a hacker can use the wireless+dhcp client. Then what? A bonjour client perhaps? Maybe, but bonjour just advertises services. So, put an ftp server behind that maybe? Great! The hacker will need, Bonjour libraries and all the underlying dependencies, an ftp server and an ftp client and enough cpu/memory to run it all. It reminds me of a line from the remade Oceans 11, "Let's say you rob Terry Benedict's casino. You're still in the middle of the f*cking desert!"
I may collect the operating system version for demographic reasons but I can not record an account name, IP number, or other PII with that information
I still don't see how that should make Windows users feel secure.
History has repeatedly shown it's quite easy for Microsoft to argue in court they don't "collect" PII despite the fact they most likely do. Anecdotes abound of Judges and cases where technical fiction often passes as fact.
Judging by the number of times my windows box phoned home on a daily basis, I'd say they have an excellent idea who I am and what I'm doing. The rest is arbitrary legal fiction.
You are definitely right about the bios + partitioning + boot loader.
The rest of your comments have no merit.
It's probably not the way someone should install Linux if they're actually planning on using it as their main setup
Wrong. The boot loader manages windows and linux beautifully. It's the best way to use Debian as their main setup too.
the whole installation (nearly) is all on one folder in the Windows partition Wrong again. The debian installer should resize the ntfs partition to give Debian disk space. Debian makes this all very easy so you don't need to know if you don't care.
"Uninstalling" is possible by repairing your win32 installation first to put microsoft's boot loader back in. From there, just delete the partition in Windows.
WGA works the same here as it does in China. The notion that they collect "no personal information" is very clever, but untrue.
Microsoft can easily associate your pc with a record in their backend because each pc generates a unique signature. They don't have your name at the moment, but that doesn't mean they don't know who's using their OS when and where. Given the number of times a windows box phones home when it goes online, I'd say there's plenty they know about you.
This is exactly like the story some months ago where AOL gave out search data that was supposedly private. Same situation, bigger fish.
BTW, if you are still married to a microsoft OS, your software firewall should be good enough to alert you when it attempts these connections. My Kerio firewall at work does it. And marriage is the right word for it because sometimes you wonder what the hell you got yourself into.
The Win32 loader is a new feature in the Debian installation CD. It makes it even easier to install Debian.
The installation of Debian may be a challenge for some who are afraid of changing the disk boot order in bios. Since bios menus vary, it's practically impossible to make good documentation about getting a CD to boot when it doesn't by default. More subtly, it addresses that weird fear that windows really isn't going away when you install Debian. Personally, I think the distro will be more popular now that the installation cd stops dropping you on a command line where you had to figure out what to type to start the installation process.
FYI: Debian's graphical installer is way, way ahead of the ubuntu installer u-bug-quity in terms of features and functionality. This is one of the many great things going on in Debian right now.
The likely scenario is they have a "person of interest." One way or another, they have some correspondence from this person. (think search warrant, warrant for arrest, etc) Then they go backwards through the application and associate anonymous content to the person of interest. I don't see a logical way to go at it from the another direction.
What's so awful about the whole idea is the unlikely event the evidence, or the method used to collect it is ever scrutinized.
For those of you still convinced huntin' fer terrists from an arm chair is a good thing, please consider the following. Let's pretend Mrs. Clinton is the next president. She'll have the same powers as GWB. Is it still a good thing?
Between the death-trap phrase "find your passion and the rest will take care of itself" and the anecdotes for and against, this is a point that is lost, over and over again.
So many of us don't have to waste time wading through this non-story. Domestic spying is bad. Except this is some kind of bizarre propaganda because domestic (U.S.) spying is patting itself on the back for the whole episode in Germany.
It's okay to complain, but don't do anything like say, write a letter to your representatives demanding more information about the programs. (No doubt there are many) In fact, write it by hand and sign it. Now, how many./'ers would even consider this much less do it?
It's a democracy, you are supposed to participate. Except they probably don't teach that any more.
Slashdot Mirror
But it still falls short when it comes to rendering and printing docs and having them look the same as in MS Office.
.doc file is not meant to be used to communicate freely. It is meant to be used to communicate with other Microsoft product users exclusively and to the detriment of all other users. The point of the OO.org proprietary file importing is to get it imported. You can leave the formatting errors alone, do your part and return the document.
.doc documents. I haven't bothered to track where the whole thing breaks down, but when my high maintenance users complain, I tell them it's Microsoft's fault the document from Company Z doesn't format right and there is no fix.
The
I'm surprised you haven't discovered how inconsistently Word formats its own
You've got it exactly backwards. The first thing to get rid of is the Microsoft activedirectory. There's lots of commercially supported versions of samba from lots of companies. Novell has a good one. I'm sure redhat does too. From there, anything is possible.
I'm running two AD domains with Linux servers getting their authentication from the AD machines. It's easy and works flawlessly despite microsoft's nasty hacks to both LDAP and kerberos.
1. install kerberos client.
2. A couple of changes to some files in pam.d.
3. Join server to domain.
4. Replicate AD users. (just the one's you want)
I admin a bunch of XP desktops including my work machine. The rest of them I'll let Microsoft have their way, but I want to know what's happening when they update, so I always do a manual update. IE7 was endlessly offered a few different ways every time I ran a manual updates on my machine.
E7's "are you sure?" endlessly maddening "security" model is the antithesis of innovation and Genuine Disadvantage (dude that's funny!) is not the deal maker here.
I think investors are tired of hearing about browser alternatives and are dragging out the bag of old tricks to maintain their monopoly.
If this is true, which ATFA, we won't ever know because it's a secret, you are right on. Linux has vastly superior auditing tools to the win32 world, it is only a matter of lazy admins _not_ using them.
/.
Nice work on the call to action. Not enough of that on
I would have loved to see a horse race with the entertainment conglomerates, google and the telcos. Sadly, the entertainment conglomerates can't see the forest through the trees and would abuse consumers just as much as the telcos.
Telcos win, consumers lose. Same story different day.
For the geographically challenged moderators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China
Another FYI: Sure Asus appears to be made in Taiwan. But assembly costs are still 1/2 or less of Taiwan's in China. I'll bet the last dollar in my pocket that Asus, like every major Taiwanese manufacturer is practically building the laptop in China.
Technically it may say Made in Taiwan, but practically, it's not. It just can't be. The wikipedia says so: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASUS
If Dell/HP have to pay vista-like prices for the XP licenses I could see Microsoft having no problems at all.
I think the more important lesson is your unfounded faith in facts. Facts are carefully defined propaganda first. Second, they communicate who/what/when/where/why. Let's take Walt's Ubuntu FIRST in-depth opinion.
"...it is full of little complications and hassles that will quickly frustrate most people who just want to use their computers, not maintain or tweak them." That may be a fact to him, but my Dad and family and another 5-6 desktops I've installed have no such experience. And no, I didn't need to tweak the installs. Touchpads and all. Who's got the fact right?
Here's the closer which displays much of Redmond's influence. "nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product," Nobody? Not even Dell? A simple observation of all OSS projects shows that every one of them has a leader! Shocking but true. So which "fact" is right? Walt's or mine? My opinion is that editorial like that displays Walt's consistently spoon-fed propaganda that has no basis in reality.
Keep shouting me down, because that's much easier than even considering the possibility that the system works differently than you believe. I think it's sufficient to say there's lots of different and clever ways to skin a cat.
A for-profit company that emphasizes public good over profit? If the organization's goals are not profit-taking then why did they set up a for-profit organization?
More to the point, they've got a great technical lead in there right now to commercialize their mail client some more. But at some point they'll bring in a business manager if they get good market traction with the mail product.
Then mozilla has a for-profit entity that, probably will alter the direction of the mozilla foundation. "Impossible!" you say. Well, take a look at the departments that generate the most donations/research funds at Universities as an example. You can deny it all you want, but money and the accompanying power often has unintended effects.
Support gnuzilla! http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
It would be nice if what you are saying is true. Unfortunately, I've had first-hand experience some time ago of what I claim. The first-hand experience was with national publications. That's publications with an "s" on the end.
all kinds of paranoid bullshit..
Call me all the names you want, but it doesn't change the facts, as they happened, to me. Your insults are distasteful and prevent any kind of discussion of the facts. They also reflect poorly on you and expose your unfounded personal bias in this situation.
WSJ did write unfavorable reviews
It's not an unfavorable review. Dings, nitpicks, whatever you want to call them are sprinkled throughout the review. Just enough to firmly place the product in the also-ran category. No, there's no quid-pro-quo, but our fine representatives in the House and Senate would say that there aren't any quid-pro-quo's there either.
Payoffs like this can't be kept secret
Here's a tip. How/Why do you think Steve Jobs and Bill Gates end up at his fine high-priced seminar event this year? http://d5.allthingsd.com/20070531/d5-gates-jobs-transcript/ Is there a smoking gun somewhere? No, probably not. Does it look like elephant sh!t? Does it smell like elephant sh!t? Based on my first-hand experience, it looks and smells like it.
you're too insignificant for them to be concerned with.
You are right in a way beyond your shallow personal attack.
-I don't buy/read the WSJ, nor do I consume buy, much less read equipment reviews anywhere else because of my first-hand experience in PR. I'm not a customer, they don't want to hear from me.
I've got another crazy story for you: It's 1986 and a plane full of weapons crashes in Nicaragua. The pilot claims the CIA is involved. Based on your very personal, emotional response, it's reasonable to believe you would call him a crackpot too. Don't give it another thought. Except you just missed the political story of the decade.
This is off topic, but I think it deserves a mention.
I RTFA'd and I'm wondering how it is all of the most negative comments about Ubuntu/Linux are modded way up? Reasonable comments that ding Ubuntu and Walt are barely modded and comments that heavily ding Walt aren't modded up at all.
Full disclosure: I dinged Walt, but I'm not talking about my comment specifically. It's all of the others too.
Sadly, some joker already tagged this article haha. Please consider all of the points below.
1. Walt & the WSJ doesn't much like change, or new ideas in a big PR money category. Playing two PR reps and their big-budget companies off one another is preferred. A third wheel screws the whole thing up no matter how much money Shuttleworth throws at the WSJ.
2. Walt's fundamentally a very imperious sort of fellow. So a GUI like OSX is more up his alley.
3. Walt can't piss off Microsoft or Apple. They are major WSJ advertisers. Who knows what else they provide for Walt.
I think it was a very bad idea on Shuttleworth's part to drive for a WSJ review. Anyone with some PR experience would have told him that it was going to go badly because of at least 2 of my points above. If Shuttleworth/Dell ever get another crack at it, it will be more of the same kind of nonsensical dings that red headed step child brands typically get in the PR big-leagues.
The point is not that it can't be done. The point is it's a sufficient barrier to simple file sharing.
A reasonable guess is some combination of PHB's at Apple and the Media cartels are driving this kind of totally wasteful resource allocation.
It also is important to understand that the typical executive demanding these features:
1. Don't have a clue.
2. Wield so much power and money they are surrounded by yes-people.
3. Typical power personality lives in a reality distortion field that includes dismissing an informed opinion that is counter to their very basic drive for power and control.
Numbers 2 and 3 create a death-spiral too.
It's an explitive laced how-to, but installing Amarok not hard to do. http://www.junkthatrocks.com/archives/000294.php
That transcript is a black-hat's wet dream.
For those that don't want to read through it, it's classic PHB scumbag B.S. They're running exchange on one side, so there's going to be trouble finding a compromise unless the disks are taken out of production.
The buzzword B.S. level is so high I think I threw-up in my mouth a little.
Well said. It should happen more often.
Let's pause for a moment to inject a dose of engineering reality.
1. We're talking about a low-power device with very limited programming capacity. That's different from the storage capacity.
2. How, in technical terms will files be shared?
Let's say a hacker can use the wireless+dhcp client. Then what? A bonjour client perhaps? Maybe, but bonjour just advertises services. So, put an ftp server behind that maybe? Great! The hacker will need, Bonjour libraries and all the underlying dependencies, an ftp server and an ftp client and enough cpu/memory to run it all. It reminds me of a line from the remade Oceans 11, "Let's say you rob Terry Benedict's casino. You're still in the middle of the f*cking desert!"
Wait a minute.
I may collect the operating system version for demographic reasons but I can not record an account name, IP number, or other PII with that information
I still don't see how that should make Windows users feel secure.
History has repeatedly shown it's quite easy for Microsoft to argue in court they don't "collect" PII despite the fact they most likely do. Anecdotes abound of Judges and cases where technical fiction often passes as fact.
Judging by the number of times my windows box phoned home on a daily basis, I'd say they have an excellent idea who I am and what I'm doing. The rest is arbitrary legal fiction.
You are definitely right about the bios + partitioning + boot loader.
The rest of your comments have no merit.
It's probably not the way someone should install Linux if they're actually planning on using it as their main setup
Wrong. The boot loader manages windows and linux beautifully. It's the best way to use Debian as their main setup too.
the whole installation (nearly) is all on one folder in the Windows partition
Wrong again. The debian installer should resize the ntfs partition to give Debian disk space. Debian makes this all very easy so you don't need to know if you don't care.
"Uninstalling" is possible by repairing your win32 installation first to put microsoft's boot loader back in. From there, just delete the partition in Windows.
WGA works the same here as it does in China. The notion that they collect "no personal information" is very clever, but untrue.
Microsoft can easily associate your pc with a record in their backend because each pc generates a unique signature. They don't have your name at the moment, but that doesn't mean they don't know who's using their OS when and where. Given the number of times a windows box phones home when it goes online, I'd say there's plenty they know about you.
This is exactly like the story some months ago where AOL gave out search data that was supposedly private. Same situation, bigger fish.
BTW, if you are still married to a microsoft OS, your software firewall should be good enough to alert you when it attempts these connections. My Kerio firewall at work does it. And marriage is the right word for it because sometimes you wonder what the hell you got yourself into.
The Win32 loader is a new feature in the Debian installation CD. It makes it even easier to install Debian.
The installation of Debian may be a challenge for some who are afraid of changing the disk boot order in bios. Since bios menus vary, it's practically impossible to make good documentation about getting a CD to boot when it doesn't by default. More subtly, it addresses that weird fear that windows really isn't going away when you install Debian. Personally, I think the distro will be more popular now that the installation cd stops dropping you on a command line where you had to figure out what to type to start the installation process.
FYI: Debian's graphical installer is way, way ahead of the ubuntu installer u-bug-quity in terms of features and functionality. This is one of the many great things going on in Debian right now.
The likely scenario is they have a "person of interest." One way or another, they have some correspondence from this person. (think search warrant, warrant for arrest, etc) Then they go backwards through the application and associate anonymous content to the person of interest. I don't see a logical way to go at it from the another direction.
What's so awful about the whole idea is the unlikely event the evidence, or the method used to collect it is ever scrutinized.
For those of you still convinced huntin' fer terrists from an arm chair is a good thing, please consider the following. Let's pretend Mrs. Clinton is the next president. She'll have the same powers as GWB. Is it still a good thing?
Hear! Hear!
Between the death-trap phrase "find your passion and the rest will take care of itself" and the anecdotes for and against, this is a point that is lost, over and over again.
Very nice job identifying the subtle misuse of grammar.
The story is easily identified as propaganda anyway. Headline needs to be edited according to the parent post.
So many of us don't have to waste time wading through this non-story. Domestic spying is bad. Except this is some kind of bizarre propaganda because domestic (U.S.) spying is patting itself on the back for the whole episode in Germany.
./'ers would even consider this much less do it?
It's okay to complain, but don't do anything like say, write a letter to your representatives demanding more information about the programs. (No doubt there are many) In fact, write it by hand and sign it. Now, how many
It's a democracy, you are supposed to participate. Except they probably don't teach that any more.