> If you are right-wing Christian, doesn't that > involve _following_ your religion? The one that > supposedly had a man called Jesus who talked about > doing good, being good to everyone etc? > > That is the part that I do not understand.
Since when has "conservative" Christianity ever been about following the teachings of Jesus?
It's all about frightened persons (who don't want to think for themselves) preserving a backward looking and regressive morality.
Why else would a "conservative Christian" consider it acceptable to shoot to kill physicians, teachers, or indeed any public figure who dares to stand up publicly in favour of ideals that do not conform strictly to official "Biblical" doctrines?
> I'm a Mac and Linux user (I do have an old P233 Win 2k box in the > cupboard. I call it skeleton),
What an excellent name for a M$ Windows PC!:o)
> but I can see the benefits of Windows: More software, especially > games. It's pretty hard to find unsupported hardware, whereas buying > hardware for Mac or Linux requires some research or a specialist > dealer. You can buy local support easily (there are people with no > friendly Mac/Linux user to hand you know). Familiarity, as most > people who've used a computer have used Windows. The CD from your > ISP works and their tech support will actually support you. Not an > exhaustive list, but I'm sure you get the idea.
What you're citing are benefits of software being well known and/or prevalent.
They are not specifically benefits of "Microsoft software". Remember - when CP/M was the most commonly used Disc Operating System (this is before MS-DOS was even thought of by the person that MS eventually purchased it from) businesses could be fairly certain that they would get good support for CP/M, and that there would be plenty of software written for it and widely available for purchase.
So, again - what specific "benefits" are there to be gotten from "Microsoft software" that a user cannot, or could not, get from the use of software developed by other persons or organizations?
> How about the benefit of being able to waltz into your local > store (WalMart, Best Buy, whatever), pick up software or a > peripheral device and see that it is supported and can run > on your home machine? > > For some people that's the only benefit they care about.
It has been my experience that all hardware that I have installed into my desktop box has been supported perfectly without the need to look for any manufacturer-provided driver.
It has also been my experience that all the commercial software that I have purchased from stores such as Dick Smith Electronics, or Noel Leemings (I can't offer any comment about software sold in specialty stores such as WalMart or "Best Buy" because they don't exist in my country) has ended up either not being very good - ie very buggy - or has been too expensive for what it was.
It is my experience that Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office are overpriced - not to mention essentially unusable on the 64bit platform; and this is one of the reasons why I don't use them on any computer in my home (the other being that I like the Unix design philosophy).
I also find that I am more productive when using the K Desktop Environment than using the Redmond GUI - I know that things will just work without fault.
And then, I don't play the computer games - they're more for kids than adults, and I would prefer to encourage use of the board games and other puzzles that are in the cupboard - they're much more fun and socially interactive around the table.
Again - I am not totally convinced that what you are suggesting is a "benefit" of "Microsoft software".
> Well, the cheap C2D did rout AMD's 4X more expensibve > heavyweight by a 3rd on just about every meaningful > index. It did so at lower energy consumption.
None of that is "innovation" - merely refinement of a pre-existing product.
> No, you got that wrong. A "love it or leave > it" is not always an option
I didn't say "love it or leave it" - I said take ownership of the decisions that are made in your name! If you don't like what is done in your name then exercise your current right to petition for change - or even exercise your current right to vote for those who will put in place what you want.
Only after you have done that should you accept what the majority wishes to have, or leave for some other place that is more to your likeing.
Merely bleating on uselessly about things you don't like will not have an effect. You need to actively DO something or somebody else will get their own way.
1. Microsoft Office 2007 Nothing innovative here - GUI office productivity suites have been around for decades - MS Word was the innovation on the Apple MacIntosh - but that was before MS released a usable version of MS Windows!
2. Intel Core 2 Duo Where is the innovation here? The Intel Core 2 Duo is merely two CPUs on a single chip. Duo is neither the first 64bit processor, nor does it share resources between cores, nor does it have an onboard RAM controller. for all the above look to AMD's CPUs.
3. Parallels Desktop for Mac Running Windows software on the Mac is not a new thing - especially now that the Mac is being sold using Intel hardware. Neither is using virtualisation software to run Windows on other platforms. For years it has been possible to run Windows on Big Blue's mainframes, and on *nix using such applications as VMware.
4. Nintendo Wii Truly innovative interface - completely new design for use in a completely new way with a completely different range of games.
5. Samsung 32GB SSD Using Flash EPROM for mobile storage of user data is not new. Neither is the incrementing of the maximum size available. What is new is the replacement of a mechanical permanent storage device with a solid state storage device that may yet prove to be not yet as reliable as a HDD.
6. Sony Reader Truly innovative device that enables electronic texts to be read as easily and as casually if they were a proper book, and with a very easy UI. Only problem is that it uses a proprietary file format.
7. YouOS Using a browser for remote desktop access is not a new development.
8. Dell XPS M2010 Portable computers have been around for decades (predating even the Mac). Wireless keyboards are not new, nor is a DVD player, nor is a 20" flat screen. Nothing new there - except the hefty weight.
9. Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 750GB Yes - innovative method of writing data onto a HDD. But the fact of increased storage capacity is nothing new. HDDs have been increasing storage capacity for many decades.
10. T-Mobile Dash QWERTY keyboard not new. 1.3 megapixel camera - not new. Wireless - not new. Additional RAM storage - not new (but close). Amount of built in RAM - definitely not innovative.
11. Pioneer Inno In one form or another a "Real Live radio receiver" that can also record onto some sort of storage medium has been around since the '70s.
13. Sony BWU-100A Blu-Ray Disc Rewritable Drive Re-writeable optical discs - nothing new here.
14. Olympus EVolt E-330 Digital camera with LCD display - definitely nothing new here.
15. Google SketchUp 3D software is not new. Free (as in Libre or as in Beer) is also not new. Perhaps the ease of use is what is new.
16. Sony PlayStation 3 Games consoles have been around since the '70s.
17. RIM BlackBerry Pearl 8100 Two words... Palm Treo. Enough said.
18. Rhapsody 4.0 One word... Ipod.
19. Logitech NuLooq Different. Cross between a joystick and a mouse and a rollerball. I wouldn't mind trying it out if I ever came across one in a shop.
20. Shure E500PTH Sound Isolating Earphones Noice cancelling headsets have been around for years. Nothing new there.
So where is the true innovation? 19, 15, 9, 6, 4. That's only 5 out of 20.
Actually you did - implicitly by virtue of your citizenship in the USA.
The republic known as the United States of America passed a law requiring such device to be used. You are as responsible for the laws in the USA as any other USAan citizen is.
And as a citizen of the USA you implicitly agree to be bound by the laws as approved by the majority of it's citizens.
You don't like it? Get the law changed, or emigrate to some other English-speaking country.
It's worth noting that the USA has recently passed several sets of laws (to do with monitoring & detaining people) that are very similar to those laws that were enacted in Germany in the years immediately prior to the Second World War.
I have been happily using SuSE for the last several years - ever since it first recognized my partlcular sound card.
I do not like the "deal" between those two competing corporations. I see no need for Linux users to suffer this so-called improvement in interoperability at the expense of the true freedom of the software.
If I need to be able to network with a Windows PC I simply use Samba - software that will be released under the GPLv3 once that license has been formally published.
Otherwise NFS and FTP serve all my document interoperability needs.
MS *should* fully support the published interoperability standard for Office documents.
It is not right for the tail to wag the dog, and I would expect the ISO to reject Microsoft's application for an additional competing ISO standard. Anything other than this would be, frankly, a mockery of the whole purpose of having an approved standard.
As for Novell... I am reconsidering whether or not I want to continue using SuSE. I would have rather continued using it but I don't think that is now a realistic option due to the cloud that is the Microvell deal now hanging over users of Free software.:o(
> Windows customers expect the best, safest experience with their PCs > out of the box, especially around the web browser. We're investing > so much time and effort in IE in order to give Windows customers a > great, secure, default experience.
Generally speaking I would say that is not true.
People *expect* problems using M$ software. That is not to say they don't want those problems, but, as a result of their experience with using the M$ platforms (DOS, WinNT) they've learnt that their PC *will* have problems at some stage.
The reasons why Microsoft has been doing the work it has on M$IE is simply that: Firefox is definitely the better browser by a long shot - and people were noticing that fact; and also, it had become obvious that M$ had stopped development of IE after it had used it's dominance of the desktop OS market to effectively kill Netscape by pushing IE prominantly onto the desktop of every user who ever used M$ Windows.
If we compare this with other PC desktop/browser solutions such as KDE/Gnome on Linux and Firefox, then we find the expectation to be very different. People expect it to work - and to continue to work - without fault and without virus problems.
>> That is all it is - nothing more. Call it what it is. > > "podcast" is a lot easier to say than "a file sitting on a website with a > database back end and an RSS feed that lists what mp3/avi/etc files the > webmaster has put onto the server."
"audio" or "video" is much more descriptive - and very standard and non-proprietary.
Calling an MP3 or OGG or AVI or MPEG file (etc) a "podcast" is a joke.
People should call them what they are - audio or video files!
They are not broadcast, or even narrowcast - as that term is traditionally understood to mean. They simply sit on a server until a person goes to that website and downloads that file.
Calling them a "podcast" is tantamount to calling all vaccuum cleaners "electrolux" - it's just marketing a brand.
> Regardless, I don't think Linus will back down and accept it any time in > the future. He has been very clear that the kernel is to be licensed under > GPLv2 and GPLv2 exclusively.
However, if the compiler that they use to compile the binary versions of the Kernel is licenced under the GPL v3, then wouldn't the Kernel also need to be licenced under the GPL v3?
Surely GNU/Linux is an ecosystem, and the Kernel is but one part of that ecosystem that would not be able to function without all the rest of the system - at least sufficient to produce an interactive system that people would be able to use.
... removing from users all responsibility for how they use their computers.
This is an example of M$ "helping" people who cannot think for themselves and who cannot take responsibility for their own actions.
Surely if a user wanted to keep previous versions of a document than said user would save the newer version with a different file name!
Just imagine what would happen to free space on the server once there starts to be multiple versions of multiple documents being kept by the operating system - and even when the user deletes the document!
Slashdot Mirror
"Limited" accounts are NORMAL accounts.
Administrators/root-users need extra-ordinary access.
Userland software - including games - should work without requiring that extra access.
> If you are right-wing Christian, doesn't that
> involve _following_ your religion? The one that
> supposedly had a man called Jesus who talked about
> doing good, being good to everyone etc?
>
> That is the part that I do not understand.
Since when has "conservative" Christianity ever been about following the teachings of Jesus?
It's all about frightened persons (who don't want to think for themselves) preserving a backward looking and regressive morality.
Why else would a "conservative Christian" consider it acceptable to shoot to kill physicians, teachers, or indeed any public figure who dares to stand up publicly in favour of ideals that do not conform strictly to official "Biblical" doctrines?
> I'm a Mac and Linux user (I do have an old P233 Win 2k box in the
:o)
> cupboard. I call it skeleton),
What an excellent name for a M$ Windows PC!
> but I can see the benefits of Windows: More software, especially
> games. It's pretty hard to find unsupported hardware, whereas buying
> hardware for Mac or Linux requires some research or a specialist
> dealer. You can buy local support easily (there are people with no
> friendly Mac/Linux user to hand you know). Familiarity, as most
> people who've used a computer have used Windows. The CD from your
> ISP works and their tech support will actually support you. Not an
> exhaustive list, but I'm sure you get the idea.
What you're citing are benefits of software being well known and/or prevalent.
They are not specifically benefits of "Microsoft software". Remember - when CP/M was the most commonly used Disc Operating System (this is before MS-DOS was even thought of by the person that MS eventually purchased it from) businesses could be fairly certain that they would get good support for CP/M, and that there would be plenty of software written for it and widely available for purchase.
So, again - what specific "benefits" are there to be gotten from "Microsoft software" that a user cannot, or could not, get from the use of software developed by other persons or organizations?
> How about the benefit of being able to waltz into your local
> store (WalMart, Best Buy, whatever), pick up software or a
> peripheral device and see that it is supported and can run
> on your home machine?
>
> For some people that's the only benefit they care about.
It has been my experience that all hardware that I have installed into my desktop box has been supported perfectly without the need to look for any manufacturer-provided driver.
It has also been my experience that all the commercial software that I have purchased from stores such as Dick Smith Electronics, or Noel Leemings (I can't offer any comment about software sold in specialty stores such as WalMart or "Best Buy" because they don't exist in my country) has ended up either not being very good - ie very buggy - or has been too expensive for what it was.
It is my experience that Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office are overpriced - not to mention essentially unusable on the 64bit platform; and this is one of the reasons why I don't use them on any computer in my home (the other being that I like the Unix design philosophy).
I also find that I am more productive when using the K Desktop Environment than using the Redmond GUI - I know that things will just work without fault.
And then, I don't play the computer games - they're more for kids than adults, and I would prefer to encourage use of the board games and other puzzles that are in the cupboard - they're much more fun and socially interactive around the table.
Again - I am not totally convinced that what you are suggesting is a "benefit" of "Microsoft software".
> So Markoff doesn't like the benefits of running
> Microsoft software. So what?
What benefits?
I am not totally convinced that automated silent virus/malware installation is a "benefit".
I always thought the ECMA was something to be purchased. ;o)
So it's a small ship engine eh?
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_c ost.txt
:o(
Read that and prepare to be surprised to the extent that MS has gone to implement DRM.
No part of Microsoft's Digital Restrictions Management is "opt-in".
Vista is a dog.
> We like videogames (and films and TV drama series) simply
> because we lead exceedingly boring lives, whether we
> realize it or not.
[camp]
Speak for yourself, Ducky.
[/camp]
> Well, the cheap C2D did rout AMD's 4X more expensibve
> heavyweight by a 3rd on just about every meaningful
> index. It did so at lower energy consumption.
None of that is "innovation" - merely refinement of a pre-existing product.
> No, you got that wrong. A "love it or leave
> it" is not always an option
I didn't say "love it or leave it" - I said take ownership of the decisions that are made in your name! If you don't like what is done in your name then exercise your current right to petition for change - or even exercise your current right to vote for those who will put in place what you want.
Only after you have done that should you accept what the majority wishes to have, or leave for some other place that is more to your likeing.
Merely bleating on uselessly about things you don't like will not have an effect. You need to actively DO something or somebody else will get their own way.
Lets look at this list...
1. Microsoft Office 2007
Nothing innovative here - GUI office productivity suites have been around for decades - MS Word was the innovation on the Apple MacIntosh - but that was before MS released a usable version of MS Windows!
2. Intel Core 2 Duo
Where is the innovation here? The Intel Core 2 Duo is merely two CPUs on a single chip. Duo is neither the first 64bit processor, nor does it share resources between cores, nor does it have an onboard RAM controller. for all the above look to AMD's CPUs.
3. Parallels Desktop for Mac
Running Windows software on the Mac is not a new thing - especially now that the Mac is being sold using Intel hardware. Neither is using virtualisation software to run Windows on other platforms. For years it has been possible to run Windows on Big Blue's mainframes, and on *nix using such applications as VMware.
4. Nintendo Wii
Truly innovative interface - completely new design for use in a completely new way with a completely different range of games.
5. Samsung 32GB SSD
Using Flash EPROM for mobile storage of user data is not new. Neither is the incrementing of the maximum size available. What is new is the replacement of a mechanical permanent storage device with a solid state storage device that may yet prove to be not yet as reliable as a HDD.
6. Sony Reader
Truly innovative device that enables electronic texts to be read as easily and as casually if they were a proper book, and with a very easy UI. Only problem is that it uses a proprietary file format.
7. YouOS
Using a browser for remote desktop access is not a new development.
8. Dell XPS M2010
Portable computers have been around for decades (predating even the Mac). Wireless keyboards are not new, nor is a DVD player, nor is a 20" flat screen. Nothing new there - except the hefty weight.
9. Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 750GB
Yes - innovative method of writing data onto a HDD. But the fact of increased storage capacity is nothing new. HDDs have been increasing storage capacity for many decades.
10. T-Mobile Dash
QWERTY keyboard not new. 1.3 megapixel camera - not new. Wireless - not new.
Additional RAM storage - not new (but close). Amount of built in RAM - definitely not innovative.
11. Pioneer Inno
In one form or another a "Real Live radio receiver" that can also record onto some sort of storage medium has been around since the '70s.
13. Sony BWU-100A Blu-Ray Disc Rewritable Drive
Re-writeable optical discs - nothing new here.
14. Olympus EVolt E-330
Digital camera with LCD display - definitely nothing new here.
15. Google SketchUp
3D software is not new. Free (as in Libre or as in Beer) is also not new. Perhaps the ease of use is what is new.
16. Sony PlayStation 3
Games consoles have been around since the '70s.
17. RIM BlackBerry Pearl 8100
Two words... Palm Treo. Enough said.
18. Rhapsody 4.0
One word... Ipod.
19. Logitech NuLooq
Different. Cross between a joystick and a mouse and a rollerball. I wouldn't mind trying it out if I ever came across one in a shop.
20. Shure E500PTH Sound Isolating Earphones
Noice cancelling headsets have been around for years. Nothing new there.
So where is the true innovation? 19, 15, 9, 6, 4. That's only 5 out of 20.
Actually you did - implicitly by virtue of your citizenship in the USA.
The republic known as the United States of America passed a law requiring such device to be used. You are as responsible for the laws in the USA as any other USAan citizen is.
And as a citizen of the USA you implicitly agree to be bound by the laws as approved by the majority of it's citizens.
You don't like it? Get the law changed, or emigrate to some other English-speaking country.
It's worth noting that the USA has recently passed several sets of laws (to do with monitoring & detaining people) that are very similar to those laws that were enacted in Germany in the years immediately prior to the Second World War.
Wake up USA. Wake up!
SuSE is arguably the friendliest distro of all the RPM based distros - and it's KDE based.
> up to four drinks per day in men and two drinks per day in
> women -- reduces the risk of death from any cause by roughly
> 18 percent,
How can that be? 100% of all persons die. Death is a statistical certainty.
I have been happily using SuSE for the last several years - ever since it first recognized my partlcular sound card.
:o(
I do not like the "deal" between those two competing corporations. I see no need for Linux users to suffer this so-called improvement in interoperability at the expense of the true freedom of the software.
If I need to be able to network with a Windows PC I simply use Samba - software that will be released under the GPLv3 once that license has been formally published.
Otherwise NFS and FTP serve all my document interoperability needs.
MS *should* fully support the published interoperability standard for Office documents.
It is not right for the tail to wag the dog, and I would expect the ISO to reject Microsoft's application for an additional competing ISO standard. Anything other than this would be, frankly, a mockery of the whole purpose of having an approved standard.
As for Novell... I am reconsidering whether or not I want to continue using SuSE. I would have rather continued using it but I don't think that is now a realistic option due to the cloud that is the Microvell deal now hanging over users of Free software.
> Windows customers expect the best, safest experience with their PCs
> out of the box, especially around the web browser. We're investing
> so much time and effort in IE in order to give Windows customers a
> great, secure, default experience.
Generally speaking I would say that is not true.
People *expect* problems using M$ software. That is not to say they don't want those problems, but, as a result of their experience with using the M$ platforms (DOS, WinNT) they've learnt that their PC *will* have problems at some stage.
The reasons why Microsoft has been doing the work it has on M$IE is simply that: Firefox is definitely the better browser by a long shot - and people were noticing that fact; and also, it had become obvious that M$ had stopped development of IE after it had used it's dominance of the desktop OS market to effectively kill Netscape by pushing IE prominantly onto the desktop of every user who ever used M$ Windows.
If we compare this with other PC desktop/browser solutions such as KDE/Gnome on Linux and Firefox, then we find the expectation to be very different. People expect it to work - and to continue to work - without fault and without virus problems.
> When OS X Leopard comes out, it will look very professional
> when placed side-by-side with Vista, which looks like a toy.
But isn't that because it *is* a toy? And a slow(er than XP) bloated toy at that.
Can you have more than one person logged in and using their desktop GUI at the same time in Windows Vista?
You can in any version of *nix - and have been able to do that for years.
M$ WinNTx has always been a 1-user/1-program-at-a-time system, and it struggles to pretend otherwise.
>> That is all it is - nothing more. Call it what it is.
>
> "podcast" is a lot easier to say than "a file sitting on a website with a
> database back end and an RSS feed that lists what mp3/avi/etc files the
> webmaster has put onto the server."
"audio" or "video" is much more descriptive - and very standard and non-proprietary.
> It's not just the file, it's the distribution method.
It's a file sitting on a website with a database back end and an RSS feed that lists what mp3/avi/etc files the webmaster has put onto the server.
That is all it is - nothing more. Call it what it is.
Or do you call your toaster a "Black & Decker" or a "Sunbeam" and you call toast by the brand name of the appliance that toasted the bread?
Calling an MP3 or OGG or AVI or MPEG file (etc) a "podcast" is a joke.
People should call them what they are - audio or video files!
They are not broadcast, or even narrowcast - as that term is traditionally understood to mean. They simply sit on a server until a person goes to that website and downloads that file.
Calling them a "podcast" is tantamount to calling all vaccuum cleaners "electrolux" - it's just marketing a brand.
What could *Microsoft* teach Mozilla about security...
that is, other than what _not_ to do!!
> Just because an office suite might be under the GPL, that does not
> mean documents created by it are under the GPL.
True - agreed.
But what if the "output" of your program was something that statically linked to a library?
> Regardless, I don't think Linus will back down and accept it any time in
> the future. He has been very clear that the kernel is to be licensed under
> GPLv2 and GPLv2 exclusively.
However, if the compiler that they use to compile the binary versions of the Kernel is licenced under the GPL v3, then wouldn't the Kernel also need to be licenced under the GPL v3?
Surely GNU/Linux is an ecosystem, and the Kernel is but one part of that ecosystem that would not be able to function without all the rest of the system - at least sufficient to produce an interactive system that people would be able to use.
... removing from users all responsibility for how they use their computers.
This is an example of M$ "helping" people who cannot think for themselves and who cannot take responsibility for their own actions.
Surely if a user wanted to keep previous versions of a document than said user would save the newer version with a different file name!
Just imagine what would happen to free space on the server once there starts to be multiple versions of multiple documents being kept by the operating system - and even when the user deletes the document!