K
Klaatu
Demonstrating that, not only was FDR a socialist, he was also an idiot.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Demonstrating that, not only was FDR a socialist, he was also an idiot.
R
Richard Kistler
Harvey Van Sickle said:Interesting article in today's "Technology" supplement in the
Guardian, about some of the limitations of open source as an
approach --
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,16376,1660763,00.ht
ml
It struck me as an intelligent discussion by someone who doesn't
sound like a corporate shill -- either MS or anybody else).
Not really all that intelligent. Its just more opinion. OpenOffice.org is
big and slow. Everybody who uses it knows that. The "bugs" that he lists
seem to be personal preference items that he wants. The comparison test he
quotes is one spreadsheet that sounds like it is large and complex. Memory
usage of MS Office is low because it is so integrated into the operating
system.
He uses this one application for an overall criticism of open source
software. 50,000 bugs and eighty-some percent are fixed. Doesn't sound all
that bad. How many bugs in Microsoft Office. What is their correction rate?
100 Sun programmers vs how many Microsoft programmers.
OpenOffice is free. If it suits your needs, use it. If not, use something
else. It is not exactly a world revolution. It also doesn't cost $500.
Dick Kistler
K
kenny
I did not steal from FDR. Humans have things that they use as a point of
reference, thus "as we know it" stands until something else that can be
proved better takes its place.
You cannot do otherwise. We do not know the entirety of the universe and its
laws.. so we have to say "as we know it" or else we claim to know
everything.
If you claim that one cannot state a phrase like "as we know it" because
perception of reality is not a constant, I have to say that whatever the
perception of reality humans have, the reality is one and we can only strive
to be closer to it.
Finally As we know it, and can see from your low intelligence; you are a
total idiot.
reference, thus "as we know it" stands until something else that can be
proved better takes its place.
You cannot do otherwise. We do not know the entirety of the universe and its
laws.. so we have to say "as we know it" or else we claim to know
everything.
If you claim that one cannot state a phrase like "as we know it" because
perception of reality is not a constant, I have to say that whatever the
perception of reality humans have, the reality is one and we can only strive
to be closer to it.
Finally As we know it, and can see from your low intelligence; you are a
total idiot.
G
Gary R. Schmidt
So prove that your previous assumptions were right!kenny said:I do have a couple of decades experience in this area, but experience is NOT
an indication of connection with reality.
Insight and the ability to perceive what will happen in the future has some
connection with experience, but it is not everything.
Oh no... don't mix me up with those other fools that said those things.
I on the contrary know have a keen instinct on what will work or what will
not in technology, and I have never been proven wrong!
Some of us have had computers communicating well before BBSes - do youI never ever said that mainframe computers would die, and I from even BEFORE
there were PC's knew that small cost effective computing was a part of the
future, I HAD ONE! lol... and you know what else? From the time of the first
BBS's I KNEW there would be a global network, when Bill Gates was thinking
that
the internet would just go away.
remember what an acoustic coupler looked like?
Never claimed to be.So don't try to to push your age or your knowledge on me as if you are
superior. Because you are not.
More likely a combination of grids, supercomputers, super-minis, minis,In fact I think the computer networks of the future will be a combination of
mainframe and PC computers.
and what-we-will-call a PC. Pretty much old-hat in terms of prediction,
it's been referred to as a "grid of grids" for, oh, fifteen years, if
not more.
You can see my current site (it will not be online in this form for long
since I will be changing it completely), where I talk about the computer.
www.computerboom.com
Not bad - but really just basic tech, hardly anything world shaking (at
least in my world), probably more of interest to those who think that a
computer is just something you use for word-processing and email, not
those of us who've done thick Ethernet and token ring and so forth.
Okay, you're begging the question here - what _change_ do you see? AndI stand by my claim... in the future... (I am talking not in 5 years but
more) there will be no (or very little) opensource (as we know it now).
I mean in some detail, not just "It goes away".
I see an increase in the co-operative development model. Primarily, of
course, because I have already seen an increase in the co-operative
development model over the last couple of decades.
The increase of available computing power, combined with the on-going
development of easier to use programming languages practically
guarantees it.
Macro languages in spreadsheets are a very good example of this - there
are financial types, 'Er Indoors is a good example, who do things with
Excel that leave me blinking, but have no conception of what the
underlying hardware does.
I have a lot to base this assumption on. But most of all I do not base this
on technology, but on an understanding HUMAN NATURE.
But "human nature" is the most fickle and changeable things to base an
assumption on. Maybe we should arrange a sealed envelope to be opened
in twenty or fifty years, and we'll see just how right each of us is.
(Frankly, I'd bet on us _both_ being wrong.)
Cheers,
Gary B-)