Yeah, it's fast and supports transactions. BUT, at least in the last stable release, there were still some nasty catches. One I do recall was that the database could have no more than 1023 tables of the gemini type.
The post was not about whether NuSphere had anything wonderful to offer, but instead about their right to take another project's name to promote their own add-on. It would be like some kid who patched slashcode taking Slashdot.com to promote it. He should use his own name, or the name of his add-on, but not the name of someone else's project.
That's just the price we pay for a first-come-first-serve brand of freedom, though.
NASA has always battled with public relations. They had to make their astronauts into celebrities and even heroes in order to convince the taxpayers that spending jillions of dollars to hop from one orbiting piece of rock to another was really a good idea.
Unfortunately, they haven't really done anything since then to grab the public's interest, except for blowing up a school teacher. There's a space station, but that's less interesting than, say, a moon colony, or a manned flight to mars, or what have you.
NASA has gotten boring, and boring things seldom get public support. See Also: Department of Agriculture.
Now that everyone has pretty much given up on Netscape, Microsoft has consented to letting up on IE.
It's brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
Netscape is dead, but now Microsoft is the good guy, and there's no way that their monopolizing tactics of the past are going to be punished because they've got halos over their head now.
ICANN was subsequently selected
by the United States Government from among several proposals submitted
precisely because it was open, consensus-based, and rooted in the Internet
community. (Consensus my left butt cheek)
This commitment to
a unique and authoritative root is a key part of the broader public
trust - to carry out the Internet's central coordination functions
for the public good - that is ICANN's reason for existence. (Is this a technological organization or a religious movement?)
"As Internet names
increasingly have commercial value, the decision to add new top-level
domains cannot be made on an ad hoc basis by entities or individuals
that are not formally accountable to the Internet community." (Now, if only we could get ICANN to be accountable to the Internet community...)
The success
of the Internet and the guarantee of Internet stability rest on the
cooperative activities of thousands, even millions, of people and institutions
collaborating worldwide towards a common end. (...yet ICANN holds all the cards).
ICANN -
in deference to its public trust - will continue to collaborate
with these citizens of the Internet community to advance the notions
of a unique root system as a prerequisite to Internet stability, and
to ensure that community-based policies take precedence. (Translation: We only give TLDs to the highest bidder; Anything else would cause instability.)
Well, obviously the one thing that makes this a tad different is that it's the post office. I don't know what the Canadian post office is like, but in the US, it's an unfunded government agency. That would make the fraud implications a little more serious than just a dot-com going bankrupt.
How, exactly?
(It's not that I don't understand, I just think that it's a weak argument and needs better justification.)
The whole "Free FOO for Life" advertising scheme has been blown many times in the history of the internet. Dot coms are perfectly willing to offer free services for life as long as their banner ads are keeping all the CEOs in shiny new cars, but when that stopped happening, the "Free FOO for Life" thing fell apart.
False advertising? Yes.
Will it be judged as such in court? Nah. Lifetime services are expected by insurance companies, but that's about it. No court in the nation is going to force a company to give free internet for life. It's absurd. This isn't news.
If NASA would simply start shipping people like Tito back and forth to space, or letting corporate representatives perform experiments in space, they could easily make up the difference in funding.
The problem with NASA is that it's a juggernaut. It uses outdated technologies and procedures, and has a spending mentality that goes back to the sixties. Instead of trying to be tight and practical, they're asking for vast quantities of money to throw at poorly-realized projects.
They need to take a lesson from Aerospace corporations who have learned the hard way to slim down their operations and work more efficiently.
The important battle was still won.
The important battle was the one that got IT managers looking at alternatives instead of blindly choosing a Microsoft product.
The important battle was one that got Microsoft's internal documents out on the Internet for all to see and read. These showed how Microsoft's goal was domination with IE. (Never mind that, in the end, they did make a better browser than Netscape.)
The important battle got Linux thousands of headlines and millions of dollars in IPO money and venture capital.
The important battle was the one that got the phrase "open source" in the vocabulary of millions of people.
The important battle was the one that IBM joined -- Linux as a viable server alternative.
The other important battle was the one that got embedded Linux rolling. I love my TiVO, and I don't have to worry about anything dealing with regular Linux -- I can just sit back and let it record for me. That's what consumers want, and Linux delivered.
Folks, it ain't over. Linux has the mindshare now. Linux has IBM. Microsoft has been forced to make a really stable OS (2000) to compete.
Competition is a good thing. Microsoft sees the threat on its horizon. Even if Linux dies (which I don't think it will), Microsoft will have changed dramatically. Microsoft now is competing on features and stability, not on "well, everyone buys our product anyway, so we can afford to make it crappy."
In short, don't forget how far Linux has come, or how far it can go. Don't get caught up in these "anti-open-source" agendas; they are meant to take away from the real issue. Some of the best programs in the world are released as open-source, some are not. It's not the issue. The issue is that Linux/Apache/etc. has started to be taken seriously. This is a good thing.
As was said on the MSNBC article covering this ruling (or rather, it was a link to other antitrust cases in history, eg: AT&T, IBM, etc) these cases are usually drawn out for DECADES before they're either given up or ruled on. IBM's case started in 1969 and didn't end until the 80's, and AT&T's case lasted almost as long too. Considering Microsoft's case started in 1998, we've got atleast 8 more years of this in the courts before they get around to doing something meaningful..
The thing that's really too bad is Judge Jackson did this to himself-- if he'd kept his mouth shut, not appeared on TV and in the media making public remarks about the case, there's a decent chance he'd have atleast been able to continue presiding as Judge over the case. Now they're handing it to a different Judge, possibly one that will be more in line with what Microsoft's lawyers want.
Face it, the Judge lost the case, not the prosecution. If he wasn't so obviously biased in his choice of Court advisors, allowances to the prosecution, or flapping his big frigging mouth off after the trial but before the ultimate resolution.
The fact is Justice should have pursued this when it really mattered, back when 95 was coming onto the scene. Back when there were alternatives to Windows on the desktop.
If they want to help the computer industry now they need to fight to ensure there remains competition in the server side of the market. (the desktop war is over, the victims have already been buried)
Get some regulations out there to protect the privacy and information of individuals. Protect their freedom on the net by preventing companies from locking up the world.
PS: It didn't hurt MS's case that Netscape/AOL merged with Time Warner, kind of rendered a lot of the future predicitions made by prosecution pointless.
Microsoft did the best thing they could -- stall. They knew they wouldn't win the case, so they waited and put their weight into the appeals process. Now the whole thing is going back to trial, and the media is going to keep a close eye on the new judge for any bias against Microsoft, however slight it might be.
Of course, that just throws the bias in Microsoft's favor, since the new judge will be afraid to say anything bad about Bill Gates or the corporation itself.
In addition, it's unlikely under the current presidential administration that anything drastic will happen to Microsoft. We've entered into a Big Business-friendly era, and Microsoft is feeling right at home.
I remember that day, sitting in front of a 486 in a community college computer lab, reading Happy Puppy trying to find the latest crappy shareware demo, when suddenly I realized that there was more to life than Pac-Man clones.
I remember this: "What are they thinking? Why would they give something like this away for free?"
It's a shame that Slashdot asks for the opinions of @home users, but then moderators shoot them down if they don't follow the "DCMA is Evil! Rah rah rah!" party line.
I use @home, and (like many who were modded down before me) I think that they were completely within their rights to restrict access to newsgroups known to be carrying illegal material.
So mod me down too, and continue on in your blissful rant mode.
Slashdot Mirror
The post was not about whether NuSphere had anything wonderful to offer, but instead about their right to take another project's name to promote their own add-on. It would be like some kid who patched slashcode taking Slashdot.com to promote it. He should use his own name, or the name of his add-on, but not the name of someone else's project.
That's just the price we pay for a first-come-first-serve brand of freedom, though.
You mean Geekaustin actually has editorial standards? Maybe I should bookmark it...
Unfortunately, they haven't really done anything since then to grab the public's interest, except for blowing up a school teacher. There's a space station, but that's less interesting than, say, a moon colony, or a manned flight to mars, or what have you.
NASA has gotten boring, and boring things seldom get public support. See Also: Department of Agriculture.
Geez, how many times is this story going to be posted?
It's brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
Netscape is dead, but now Microsoft is the good guy, and there's no way that their monopolizing tactics of the past are going to be punished because they've got halos over their head now.
- ICANN was subsequently selected
by the United States Government from among several proposals submitted
precisely because it was open, consensus-based, and rooted in the Internet
community. (Consensus my left butt cheek)
- This commitment to
a unique and authoritative root is a key part of the broader public
trust - to carry out the Internet's central coordination functions
for the public good - that is ICANN's reason for existence. (Is this a technological organization or a religious movement?)
- "As Internet names
increasingly have commercial value, the decision to add new top-level
domains cannot be made on an ad hoc basis by entities or individuals
that are not formally accountable to the Internet community." (Now, if only we could get ICANN to be accountable to the Internet community...)
- The success
of the Internet and the guarantee of Internet stability rest on the
cooperative activities of thousands, even millions, of people and institutions
collaborating worldwide towards a common end. (...yet ICANN holds all the cards).
- ICANN -
in deference to its public trust - will continue to collaborate
with these citizens of the Internet community to advance the notions
of a unique root system as a prerequisite to Internet stability, and
to ensure that community-based policies take precedence. (Translation: We only give TLDs to the highest bidder; Anything else would cause instability.)
Yeesh.Uh, shouldn't that be their commitment to 'ICANN as the Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS'?
Funny how that works. Ask the authorities, and the authorities will tell you, "Of course we should be the authorities!" No bias there, eh?
How, exactly?
(It's not that I don't understand, I just think that it's a weak argument and needs better justification.)
False advertising? Yes.
Will it be judged as such in court? Nah. Lifetime services are expected by insurance companies, but that's about it. No court in the nation is going to force a company to give free internet for life. It's absurd. This isn't news.
The problem with NASA is that it's a juggernaut. It uses outdated technologies and procedures, and has a spending mentality that goes back to the sixties. Instead of trying to be tight and practical, they're asking for vast quantities of money to throw at poorly-realized projects.
They need to take a lesson from Aerospace corporations who have learned the hard way to slim down their operations and work more efficiently.
If unsolicited SMS messages are illegal, does that mean we have to call someone to ask their permission to send them a text message?
It's not news until it hits IMDB. Until then, it's just vaporcinema.
...but I'm busy trying to figure what anime this was ripped-off from.
- An ominous headline
- A set of unverified trivia.
- A conspiracy theory
- A mention of Linux
- A mention of Microsoft's feelings toward Open Source
- A sarcastic closing remark.
The script even begins populating the discussion with lengthy posts from the same account both extolling the virtues of and deriding Microsoft.Boy Scouts of America? Geez...Microsoft is more sinister than I thought....
If there was anything wrong with monopolies, we could actually use Brand X routers. But we can't. There is only Cisco.
The important battle was still won.
The important battle was the one that got IT managers looking at alternatives instead of blindly choosing a Microsoft product.
The important battle was one that got Microsoft's internal documents out on the Internet for all to see and read. These showed how Microsoft's goal was domination with IE. (Never mind that, in the end, they did make a better browser than Netscape.)
The important battle got Linux thousands of headlines and millions of dollars in IPO money and venture capital.
The important battle was the one that got the phrase "open source" in the vocabulary of millions of people.
The important battle was the one that IBM joined -- Linux as a viable server alternative.
The other important battle was the one that got embedded Linux rolling. I love my TiVO, and I don't have to worry about anything dealing with regular Linux -- I can just sit back and let it record for me. That's what consumers want, and Linux delivered.
Folks, it ain't over. Linux has the mindshare now. Linux has IBM. Microsoft has been forced to make a really stable OS (2000) to compete.
Competition is a good thing. Microsoft sees the threat on its horizon. Even if Linux dies (which I don't think it will), Microsoft will have changed dramatically. Microsoft now is competing on features and stability, not on "well, everyone buys our product anyway, so we can afford to make it crappy."
In short, don't forget how far Linux has come, or how far it can go. Don't get caught up in these "anti-open-source" agendas; they are meant to take away from the real issue. Some of the best programs in the world are released as open-source, some are not. It's not the issue. The issue is that Linux/Apache/etc. has started to be taken seriously. This is a good thing.
As was said on the MSNBC article covering this ruling (or rather, it was a link to other antitrust cases in history, eg: AT&T, IBM, etc) these cases are usually drawn out for DECADES before they're either given up or ruled on. IBM's case started in 1969 and didn't end until the 80's, and AT&T's case lasted almost as long too. Considering Microsoft's case started in 1998, we've got atleast 8 more years of this in the courts before they get around to doing something meaningful..
The thing that's really too bad is Judge Jackson did this to himself-- if he'd kept his mouth shut, not appeared on TV and in the media making public remarks about the case, there's a decent chance he'd have atleast been able to continue presiding as Judge over the case. Now they're handing it to a different Judge, possibly one that will be more in line with what Microsoft's lawyers want.
Face it, the Judge lost the case, not the prosecution. If he wasn't so obviously biased in his choice of Court advisors, allowances to the prosecution, or flapping his big frigging mouth off after the trial but before the ultimate resolution. The fact is Justice should have pursued this when it really mattered, back when 95 was coming onto the scene. Back when there were alternatives to Windows on the desktop. If they want to help the computer industry now they need to fight to ensure there remains competition in the server side of the market. (the desktop war is over, the victims have already been buried) Get some regulations out there to protect the privacy and information of individuals. Protect their freedom on the net by preventing companies from locking up the world. PS: It didn't hurt MS's case that Netscape/AOL merged with Time Warner, kind of rendered a lot of the future predicitions made by prosecution pointless.
Here's the decision: http://cnnfn.cnn.com/2001/06/28/microsoft_file/dec ision.pdf
Of course, that just throws the bias in Microsoft's favor, since the new judge will be afraid to say anything bad about Bill Gates or the corporation itself.
In addition, it's unlikely under the current presidential administration that anything drastic will happen to Microsoft. We've entered into a Big Business-friendly era, and Microsoft is feeling right at home.
Just like the Borgias.
I remember this: "What are they thinking? Why would they give something like this away for free?"
Where were you when Quake was released?
I use @home, and (like many who were modded down before me) I think that they were completely within their rights to restrict access to newsgroups known to be carrying illegal material.
So mod me down too, and continue on in your blissful rant mode.