Duplicate comments are not made intentionally. Its very good to know that now you are keeping check on this problem because sometimes a commenter...
"the very significant number of users" and "many (most) of us" - you have no evidence for these statements. It is a fact that most users are saying...
Another grammar faux pas is the improper use of "you". When sitting down down in a restaurant, for example, I get cringe when the waitress...
And NOW, folks, for Canonical's next trick...
Kubuntu is late.
Here's a pencil. Draw your own conclusions.
cf.:...
@kevinmchapman. The discussion here reflects the very significant number of users who really do like the traditional menu system and who wish to...
Er, no... It is an efficient means of finding the application/file/setting you need in one place. The icons are a simply a fallback for when you...
Isn't the provision of a text based search an admission by the developers that the mass of icons approach does not work? I don't need to use a...
"Unity and GNOME 3 both abandon the old text-based cascading menus in favour of a graphical icon-driven system."
Point truly missed. Both use a...
whs001 - Thank you, I'm glad you liked the article.
I absolutely agree with you on your first point. I should perhaps have made it clearer that...
If we allow corporate interest to dictate the way our government circumvents due process against foreign entities then we should accept the same...
I totally dislike pirating of works, I fear that artists will be deterred from creating works if they think that they are going to get ripped off....
How dare film makers, artists or anybody that invests in creativity stop us pirating their works for free. I want to be able to walk into my local...
@GrueMaster. I prefer horses for courses rather than one size fits all. I, and I suspect most other computer users, do not really wish to have...
The product that scares me every time I have to use it is the Office 2007 version of Excel.
The first bug that I found was applying the median...
Nice review and very informative. One thing I'd like to add (in reply to whs001's 1st question), the main reason to have the same interface from...
I'be been using Mint 12 since the RC came out, and I am far more happy with the Cinnamon, the Mate, and, yes (with extensions), theGnome 3...
Excellent article. One small correction, though--although a fresh installation of Linux Mint 12 will, indeed, provide the user with a version of...
In related news, the ISPs club together to get the members of the Home Affairs Select Committee (ya goofed on that part, ZDNet UK) copies of "The...
In related news, the ISPs club together to get the members of the Home Affairs Select Committee (ya goofed on that part, ZDNet UK) copies of "The...
For Gnome 2 die-hards, it is possible to add icons to the bottom panel (or top top panel, if you prefer) which provide the exact Gnome 2...
Talkback
As an MD, mr Mc Cabe should know that the goal of any order/organisation, is to deepen the control, enhance the flexibility, encourage the interraction, as well as lower the costs of all aspects relating to the order's/organisation's operating environment.
The above, as fundamentals, are simple requirements governing survival/prosperity and that is why government orders will give preferential control to "Open" Source.
In recognition of the community based philosophy that forms the foundation and therefore is the motivation behind open source activity, governments understand that the pool of talent in the "open market" shall remain the same, at least in the short term, and that all that changes, is the ability to efficiently interrelate demand/"demand type" with supply/"supply type" in a manner that increases the efficiency of the overall system and not just parts of the system.
Efficiency, in itself, requires better relationships between factors of consumption and production -the latter manifest in the overall productivity of the environment.
For governments, directly spending 30 miillion per annum on acquiring well "defined" productivity software, as end products in themselves, with complex, diverse and limitiing exceptions tied to individual contracts, offers less advantages than employing 600 individual programmers who interrelate with multiples of the above number under libre licences and with freedom to continually "tie" deployed products to operating environments thereby directly enhancing productivity.
Enhancements made and delivered freely to consumers of all types/"society", governments are well aware, can enhace the productivity of participants in their economic spheres. This is said with an understanding that government activity, of the above type, yield derived benefits related to the indirect conversion of expenditure in to social profit - Though the latter may not directly yield an increase in the quantity of capital expenditure/capital receipts, it can definately yield an increase in the quality of such expenditure/receipts -i.e, efficiency, the latter manifest in better control of the overall system.
One would have thought that the simple nature of the above should have been clear to any person in Mr Mc Cabe's position. I guess this is why we all should be careful about what exactly it is we do in fact choose to presume...
From WatchDogWatch.Org
The Need For More Open Source Watchdogs
The security problems associated with proprietary software products have been well documented. Thanks to the efforts of countless IT watchdogs, security flaws in Microsoft Windows XP and other proprietary software packages have been exposed and patched. However, there are fewer watchdogs focusing on the many "open source" software programs that are in widespread use. The most important IT watchdog, Carnegie Mellon University's CERT Coordination Center, has identified security vulnerabilities in two popular open source programs, Sendmail, an e-mail program, and OpenSSH, a software tool used by network managers "to log in remotely and gain encrypted access to computers..." The Sendmail flaw was described by one security expert as "an extremely serious vulnerability" while the OpenSSH vulnerability was considered more theoretical although "it might prove to be exploitable." A CERT official said that if the flaw were exploitable, it would be serious since, "a user would not need privileges to log on to the machine to run the exploit." A number of major name software vendors sell products incorporating the vulnerable OpenSSH program including: IBM, Sun Microsystems and Red Hat. Hewlett Packard, IBM and Red Hat sell products that could be affected by the Sendmail security flaw. An internet security specialist explained that both programs "are commonly used at large companies, making them an attractive target to hackers." Also noted was that "In any given year there have been just as many vulnerabilities in the open-source community as there have been with Microsoft." In that open source software is being increasingly used in critical business and government applications, there is a clear need for additional watchdogs to monitor the security of open source products. Furthermore, Winston has a question regarding open source programs. When there is a problem with an Apple or Microsoft product, he knows who is responsible for patching them, but who is responsible for fixing software that nobody is responsible for writing in the first place?
This question is of sufficient importance that a discussion thread on the issue has been established on CyberActivist.US. Please click here to comment.
Click to read CNET News article.
Click to read CERT Advisory for OpenSSH.
Click to read CERT Advisory for Sendmail.
Victory In A Battle, Not The
I have been writing software since 1987 and, like most hardcore programmers, am a strong proponant of open source.
This "researcher" needs to focus his criticism on countering the specific arguments for mandated open source, rather than making vague statements like "rediculous". Such statements are effectively meaningless.
I actually disagree with any such blanket requirement, although certainly there are areas where open source ought to be required. In any event, open and free standards would make a great deal of sense to mandate. I can also see a strong argument to mandate file formats and communications protocols for which Free software support exists.
Government processes that should be transpearant, should be open source--otherwise they cannot be fully transpearant. This might include how financial and voting information are collected, manipulated, and reported.
Information, applications, and such that is made available to the public electronically, should not mandate that citizens unnecessarily buy a particular company's product.
I stand against these groups for trying to broadly mandate that governments use open source. However, the debate over the problems for which they are trying to solve is healthy.
Microsoft, in particular, currently holds the power to rig elections and legislation the world over. If they merely had the desire to do so. But Microsoft is be no means the only ones who could. Should that, at a minimum, be ignored?
Matthew
All this from a man who once said Linux would not make inroads into the enterprise.
He is also formally Gartner Group Australia Research Director and a know Microserf...
Not very credible if you ask me.