On the Desktop
Linux in the news
All in one big page
See also: last week's Letters page.
Letters to the editor should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. Preference will be given to letters which are short, to the point, and well written. If you want your email address "anti-spammed" in some way please be sure to let us know. We do not have a policy against anonymous letters, but we will be reluctant to include them.
March 29, 2001
From: Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk> To: email@example.com Subject: "Who really is the leading distributor?" Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 16:59:54 +0100 This article should really have been called "Who really is the leading retail distributon?". The article is all about retail, not distribution. For example, Debian would not appear in your list, even if it existed on 75% of the installed systems in th US - why, because there is no retail distribution channel to give you statistics. (I doubt that the Debian Team could tell you how many system there may be, +/- 20%!). As an article, it was interesting, but the headline was definately missleading.. -- --==**==-- Ian Stuart - EdINA, DataLibrary, University computing services. --------------------------------- Truth is what you believe it to be. I cannot force my facts on you, only make you believe my beliefs. --------------------------------- http://lucas.ucs.ed.ac.uk/
From: (anonymous) To: "'firstname.lastname@example.org'" <email@example.com> Subject: SuSE and market share Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:19:03 -0800 I think its important for everything to be in perspective- The PC Data numbers that SuSE use to claim its "48%" market share are only for ONE WEEK- PC Data releases weekly numbers to its subscribers and has YET to release the numbers for February in total....obviously that one week was when SuSE 7.1 was released and the other distros were silent. Retail sales over all for Linux distros are flat or declining - with Caldera pulling out all together, Corel soon to be done and Turbo can't be far behind. Basically- from a retail perspective, the distros are just trading customers and not seeing true market growth...I encourage you folks to get the PC Data numbers and look for yourselves- do not just rely on respective press releases...as they say...Torture the data until it confesses. Its best I be anonymous....
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 14:44:59 +0100 From: Duncan Cragg <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Embedded Linux and Freedom So RMS says: > I'm less concerned with what happens with embedded systems than I am with > real computers. The real reason for this is the moral issues about > software freedom are much more significant for computers that users see > as a computer. And so I'm not really concerned with what's running > inside my microwave oven. And I say the opposite: http://cilux.net The reason we differ is simple: I predict an imminent new 'generation' of 'programmable machines' (not 'computers') which are fundamentally embedded. I believe that we have lost a battle to Microsoft in the current generation (Unix tried, but failed). But we have a second chance this time around! And in the new generation, issues of privacy and freedom come into very sharp focus. RMS has, in a way, hit the nail on the head: you see present-day computers. In the future you may not. In the future, you will see your 'virtual stuff' before you see anything that looks like a computer. And that virtual stuff can be instantly manifest anywhere in the world many times over. Spot the privacy issues! But more importantly, spot the freedom issues: 'Intellectual Property' simply becomes moot when seen in the light of this highly volatile and mobile virtual stuff. There can be no such thing, since it only exists by government decree and the technology has outgrown such boundaries! Now, in the new generation of programmable machines, you see virtual stuff before you see any program. The stuff 'implies' and draws in to you the programs that are needed to animate it. So (a) you can't have to license your programs just to be able to do things with your own or your colleagues stuff; (b) you all have to agree to use the same programs to ensure compatibility with other virtual stuff, and (c) you have to be able to trust (i.e., see and improve) those programs when they control virtual stuff that could even be running your home - or running nanobots around your home! So the Intellectual Property absurdity over virtual stuff applies fully to the programs used to animate it. Thankfully! Duncan Cragg
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 14:46:05 +0100 (CET) From: ?Erik_Inge_Bolsų <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: ALSA & Suse Greetings. One thing that could be noted about your recent editorial about ALSA, is that it is not exactly surprising that ALSA is included in the Suse distribution - since all three of Jaroslav Kysela, Abramo Bagnaro and Takashi Iwai, the three core developers of ALSA, are employed full-time by Suse. :) -- Erik I. Bolsų, Triangel Maritech Software AS Tlf: 712 41 699 Mobil: 915 79 512
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 15:13:54 -0500 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Ol' Uncle Harlan From: Zygo Blaxell <email@example.com> >The *ability* copy does not confer the *right* to copy Sorry, but I _do_ believe that the ownership and possession of an object _does_ confer the right to do nearly anything to that object, including but not limited to destroying it, modifying it, analyzing it, and making (or attempting to make) copies of all or part it, provided that my doing so does not necessarily constitute an infringement of the rights of someone else. I further believe that these rights deserve the highest levels of legal protection. I believe that activities such as using copyright works to cause direct harm to people, whether by evading an established legal framework for other people to derive compensation from their creative work, or by breaking up CD media containing copyright works into sharp plastic shards and building some kind of weapon out of them with demonstrable intent to use the weapon on somebody, do not deserve legal protection. Distributing copies of copyright works without permission should be illegal. Merely making the copies in the first place should be a protected activity as long as privacy is maintained. -- "You acknowledge that Zygo Blaxell is not responsible for the Internet or whether it should continue to exist in its present form or whether or not a government or governmental agency, either foreign or domestic, will control, regulate, or disband the Internet." GPGkeyID=0x69722DEE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6u66CHUphDmlyLe4RArv7AKCNMfU4qzj92LEgdUZX6lGWmWQC/QCgp4ji 31aLjHEb8AeIlTfH3pHvFrY=FOmf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----