These MS shills comparing the cost of online storage, to the cost of local storage, must think we're idiots.
Why not compare apples to apples?
Compare google cloud storage, with other cloud storage. Maybe google will win, maybe not. But at least that is a valid comparison.
You MS shills are so transparent.
There have been several recent postings about MS dumping it's price for it's OS. Why not bitch about that?
Why not compare the price of google cloud storage, with the cost of cloud storage from google competitors?
Don't you think that would be a meaningful comparison?
I don't want to get all my stuff loaded on google, and then have them jack up the price.
Yes, I can come up with a thousand free market answers. And yes, that pretty much answers your question.
Would you buy a vehicle from any company whatsoever if you knew that parts were difficult to acquire? A manufacturer can play a game with parts availability only if they don't plan to stay in business.
Maybe we should go back to renting our phones from ATT as well.
How does that help raise salaries for techies? Seems to me it would do the opposite.
Unless you believe that bullshit about h1bs creating jobs for Americans (even though h1bs are not legally allowed to do that).
The Washington Post reports that Microsoft officials were handing out promotional materials for this purpose this Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), an annual conference for conservative activists and elected official in the United States."
Link to Original Source
I am sorry, but I don't understand: why is it okay for Microsoft to use to BSD code, without giving BSD any credit, but not Linux?
My understanding is: the ISC, MIT and BSD-licenses allow for sublicensing without making any modifications so the Linux devs are perfectly within the license when they sublicense the original code under the GPL. Theo de Raadt is wrong here.
Also, my understanding is: Theo is wrong about the license change only affecting source changes. It also affects the original source code because the licenses explicitly allow for this. If the licenses did not explicitly allow for this, he might have had a point here.
Also, I am not sure that Theo is justified in ranting about "the Linux people" when this was one incident that happened about 15 years ago, and was corrected.
It would be cool if we could track the trackers, and post their location on maps in real time; showing where they troll for cars, where they park at night, what donut stores they frequent. After all, the license plate trackers are plainly visible, anybody could see them and remember where and and when they did.
Theo de Raadt: why the bitching about BSD code put in GPL?
And that's not the only article I've seen about BSD advocates bitching about BSD code being put into GPL code.
I don't get it. BSD advocates are fine with MS taking BSD code, and claiming it as MS code, and releasing only in binary. But, the BSD advocates bitch about BSD code being put into GPL open-source? WTF?
As I understand it, BSD is almost public domain. I can take BSD code, and relicense it any way I please. If I don't want my code relicensed, then I shouldn't release it BSD.
When you release your code BSD, you allow relicensing. That's why MS prefers the BSD license.
I just don't get it. If you want kernel improvements to be implemented back, why license your code under the BSD to begin with?
I took a look at the BSD license, and I don't see anything prohibiting anybody from taking BSD code and putting into a GPL project.
If BSD advocates want to thump their chests about their licence being so free, then why do they bitch when Linux - but not Microsoft - takes them up on their offer?
It does not seem to make sense to me.
Unknown to many slashdot posters (apparently).
For about 40 years now:
1) There have been versions of BASIC that can be complied
2) BASIC has had FOR loops, WHILE loops, procedures, and functions
3) Line numbers have not been needed in many versions of BASIC
Sadly, most slashdot posters do not know BASIC beyond GW-BASIC.
BTW: for over 20 years, there have been object-oriented versions of BASIC.
BTW also: other languages also have GOTOs.
BASIC is not perfect, but then, what is?
Thanks for letting me know, it's even worse than I thought.
Maybe women want no part of IT because women are smarter than men.
Why do only Muslims get this special treatment.
1) have thousands of people scream and cry about racism (never mind that Islam is not a race)
2) routinely kill people who are critical of your beliefs.
3) do both of the above all the time.
4) make the world think that *you* are the victim (not too hard to do with all the PC mush-heads we have).
5) have billions in oil money to grease the right palms.