What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy casts another employee in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Jarice Brodie has done some cool things in his life. Next: Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
189 Comments
- tcpip4lyfe, on 04/26/2008, -2/+74"I think if you invent drugs, you should be able to charge for them," he said, adding with a shrug: "That may seem radical." He's right. You should be able to charge for them. You could give them away for free too. There is no moral battle with Microsoft vs. open source. It's just different business models.
- manningbowl135, on 04/26/2008, -14/+58Let me get this straight. Bill Gates gave $24 billion to help people in need. At age 50 something, he's retiring from his empire so he can focus fully to help others and this guy is basically making him out to be a bad person b/c he doesn't like open source. And what kind of ***** idiot is this guy:
"Now children in the poorest nations in the world who might have been given a chance to learn about free and open source software will be given Windows. Hooking them early, like handing out crack cocaine in kindergarten and waiting until graduation to start selling to the addicts."
Is he honestly ***** stupid? He really thinks the poorest kids in the poorest nations have the opportunity to just walk around with laptops on their hands clicking around digg learning about linux until Gates comes by and hooks them to windows? No. They live in huts in the side of the street where they start working or begging with their father at age 10. I know b/c I lived in Bangladesh for 11 years and I saw them every day. People like Gates gives them the opportunity to learn. It's not about ***** open source or windows. It's about teaching them math and giving them an education. What a loser. - billgrant, on 04/26/2008, -1/+33Setting aside my personal feelings on commercial vs. open source for the moment, I think the comment about whether Bill will be effective or merely a check-writer withe the Gates Foundation is a cheap-shot. I don't think anyone can reasonably say Bill doesn't take that stuff seriously.
- TehJoe, on 04/26/2008, -5/+33Everything he says there is ridiculous. "Not able to improve the software"? The hell! That's why they invented the license in the first place, so it CAN BE IMPROVED by the COMMUNITY, not the money grubbing company.
- M4v3R, on 04/26/2008, -12/+40Nobody cares that he disagrees with it.
- Cytranic, on 04/26/2008, -3/+29There is a reason you two are not being dugg up. Its WAY too early for computing to start moving to the cloud. Sure google docs is cool, but its not practical in a business environment. Speaking as an IT Manager, there are tons of obstacles to overcome before computing will be moved to the cloud.
- steveoco, on 04/26/2008, -4/+21Regardless of what any elitist software guru thinks about Gate's opinion and business stance on open source... Gates has done unbelievable good with his foundation and for that he deserves nothing but praise.
- inactive, on 04/26/2008, -6/+21Seriously. Bill Gates is a computer genius and anyone who disagrees doesn't know the story of his life.
The guy worked from a cramped apartment with like 4 other guys to invent qbasic.
He is a kind and intelligent person. Just because he doesn't like something you like, doesn't mean he's stupid or bad. - inactive, on 04/26/2008, -1/+14http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_100_wealt ...
Nope. Slim is second, Gates is third. But Gates has given more to charity than most of the people on that list are worth. - inactive, on 04/26/2008, -0/+12Um no, You're talking about STEVE JOBS not BILL GATES.
(drop out meaning chose to drop out)
See Jobs was a 1st semester drop out in Oregon in Literature and Poetry.
Bill was a 3rd year drop out at Hardvard in Computer Science.
He created Basic and was very intimate with knowledge and the creation of windows pretty much up to win 98.
It helps when the CEO actually knows what the programmers are talking about and not just want to make something look "pretty" with very few buttons. - nacnud75, on 04/26/2008, -4/+15>"I think if you invent drugs, you should be able to charge for them,"
Yes you also have to patent them, a process that tells everyone exactly how they work, and that expires after 20 years allowing the drug to be produced by anyone. You also have to go through many many regulatory hurdles to make sure they are safe and don't interact with any other drugs in a bad way. I wish windows was as transparent and well regulated. - jstone, on 04/26/2008, -2/+12It's Bill Gates we're talking about here. I'm sure he has a different definition of 'improve'.
- Mossmaal, on 04/26/2008, -1/+11i thought carlos slim was?
- nahsrocketeer75, on 04/26/2008, -32/+42Bill who?
- olenick, on 04/26/2008, -27/+37As applications migrate to the cloud, Windows will move from relevance to obscurity. On connected computers it won't matter so rational businesses will just choose the cheapest, most stable and secure client that can host a browser: an Ubuntu machine. Non-connected computers in poor countries will probably need to act as both clients and servers to run software: since applications that matter are written for a Linux back-end they'll naturally migrate to a Linux front-end too (and why not: Firefox, Flash, Java, and the rest run the same on both). Net result: everybody except gamers will move to Ubuntu or some cousin of it eventually; it's not a question of if, just when.
- plusmedic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+9Obviously you have thought through your statement on accountability. The Windows family of operating systems is a shining example of this.
- marx2k, on 04/26/2008, -1/+10You do of course realize that not all open source projects are done by nerds sitting in their basement trying to reverse engineer a webcam, right?
Furthermore, read Microsoft's EULA at some point and find out just how much accountability Microsoft guarantees to the end user. - TheMachine1, on 04/26/2008, -0/+8Hes some what correct a BSD style license is more attractive to many companies so they can close source and protect their technology investment.
- aaabatteries, on 04/26/2008, -3/+11Agreed. There's quite a few obstacles I can think of. Here's three of them, feel free to add:
1. Sensitivity of information (very important for businesses)
2. Access to the intarwebz anywhere. (700mhz spectrum, hopefully)
3. Aforementioned things in my last comment will have to be on the desktop for quite awhile... - Shadowgamers, on 04/26/2008, -1/+8'Hooking them early, like handing out crack cocaine in kindergarten and waiting until graduation to start selling to the addicts.'
Linux, promising great things for the tired and the sick and the hungry, then ships them to Chinese sweat-shops :V
See, I can demonize things too! - inactive, on 04/26/2008, -8/+15What a moron. Making software open source means nobody can improve it? What the hell?
- Culyt, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6The problem becomes who's cloud you are on. Microsoft are going to be making their own, I think the modular Windows is a step in that direction and there was a whole load of talk about Windows getting web apps.
Personally I think its wise to avoid cloud computing unless you can have a copy of the stuff your self, otherwise you run the risk of businesses going under, getting sued on patents, being banned, more so now since login are starting to cross sites, ie I don't want to loose all my email because I made some comments on a Google hosted blog that happened to be picked up as spam) and all your files being locked away.
Or just downright scumminess. "Where sorry your document download quota reached its limit, please insert your credit card to keep using Microcloud Word Online 2022."
Or the cloud corporations trying to keep the smaller companies on a leach, ie you sell your company to us or all those docs you hosted that contain your entire client list die, or get leaked. - Murdats, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6and windows will not change in any way what so ever as this change occurs, and we will all just shift to the current version of ubuntu instead, because apparently it and every other operating system will remain unchanged.
- rasmasyean, on 04/26/2008, -4/+10Gates opinion carries a LOT of weight in the real world. The only reason why everyone bashes him on sites like these is because these sites consist of a lot of young people who aren’t as attuned to how the business world works. The older people in the business world don’t have the attitudes that you see in these sites. Microsoft is a well respected company in the real world…where it’s about money.
- inactive, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7There isn't a separation of Windows and Open source based on charge. It's free as in free speech, the code is available to be modified, but the software can and IS still sold for money.It isn't that people who are involved with open source just want to give everything away for free, they want to include FREEDOM with what they give. That's why the name was changed from free software to open source in the first place, to try and prevent this misconception. (Also some proprietary software is given away i.e. skype, vlc etc.)
- morphie, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5Off course he disaggrees. It's proprietary software which made him rich.
- cquinnd, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5If nobody cared, this item would not be getting dugg.
Gates is entitled to his opinion, we are entitled to agree or disagree with it as we please. - inactive, on 04/26/2008, -12/+17Gates, that richest man in the world.
- greevar, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6I think you're being overly optimistic if you think that portable devices will become as powerful as desktop systems. The size of a portable devices will always be a bottleneck for performance whereas the desktop systems have a much wider margin for expandability. Not to mention that portable devices are hardware locked, which is to say that the device cannot keep up with more complex software without upgrading to more powerful hardware. It's really just logic in that realm. If you can make a device this powerful in a hand held version, then a full desktop unit will do even better. Portable devices will always supplement the desktop, but they will never replace it.
- jblack15, on 04/26/2008, -4/+9I wish I could digg you 5 times.
- OneLess, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5Ads?
- init100, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6What he is talking about is the wish among proprietary software companies that the GPL would die and all open projects would switch to the BSD license or equivalent. This would enable those companies to capitalize on the large volume of free quality code, while still being able to take the derivative work proprietary.
Is it so hard to understand that this isn't very popular among open source developers? - h2d2, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5Really? And you nick is xptweaker...
- inactive, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5"Get real, would ya? You and I are both like guys who had this rich neighbor - Xerox - who left the door open all the time. And you go sneakin' in to steal a TV set. Only when you get there, you realize that I got there first. I got the loot, Steve! And you're yellin'? "That's not fair. I wanted to try to steal it first." You're too late." --Bill Gates
- Sawta, on 04/26/2008, -2/+7I might not agree with Bill Gates on his stance towards GPL and Open Source, but comparing the man to a crack dealer is a bit much, don't you think?
- GQCarrick, on 04/26/2008, -13/+18More anti Microsoft news from a Linux website, wow, incredibly original!
- known, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5Dear Mr Gates,
Open source promotes Competition.
Closed source promotes Collusion. - inactive, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6Well, Bill can disagree with FLOSS, that's fine, we all have different opinions. The problem is when MS use its shady tactics to play against FLOSS.
- Myztry, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5It there is competition, then financial reward will drive people to do better. There isn't much on the OS front which is why Microsoft can still get massive rewards for not doing anything significant other than finally confronting a few self caused design flaws.
On the application front, people can still create proprietary applications and sell them. They just can't take work from the open-source pool, modify it and keep it as their own. Open source also complicates it for the proprietary model because those applications get along with each other's protocols, and it makes it really hard to tie customers into propriety compounds. You just can't get away with lacing everything with cocaine to create an false dependence. Stiff *****! - TheSwashbuckler, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4Cloud computing is appropriate for some applications in some situations. A lot of infrastructure is going to have to be developed before it becomes a threat to desktops, particularly in the consumer space - at least in the U.S.
I have "high speed" access at home at a measly 6Mb/sec. Meanwhile, in some places in the world high speed is more like 100 Mb/sec. - Culyt, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5If Linux was BSD, we would all be using Microsoft Linux about now. Apple already grabbed FreeBSD's userland and the Mach kernel. Actually I'm quite surprised the MS havn't just forked their own commecrial BSD with complete Windows intergration (although they do have parts)
GPL might be viral and has its integration problems, but its also needed to stop large corperations basically owning the opensource stuff. - Ademan, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4Well the GPL helps 'flossboys' protect THEIR hard work and effort from someone just coming along and leeching it.
- init100, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4"but in a free for all with no communication, its no advance at all."
You obviously have no idea about how open source development works. I've had contact with the developers of several open source projects, but I've never had contact with Microsoft or their partners. Now who isn't communicating? - GMorgan, on 04/26/2008, -4/+8No it won't. What we will eventually have is network enabled, desktop applications.
You won't edit your documents in the web browser. You will edit them on the desktop. However you might store your documents over the internet.
This is the sole benefit the internet offers, remote storage (not compatibility, that's easily achievable on the desktop). Sooner or later someone will recognise this and will build a software stack around that basis. At that point the cloud concept dies overnight. - burnblue, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4Few people talk about cloud computing more than Gates does. I first heard the term from Microsoft. I think that's why anyone could see Murdats was being sarcastic
- Culyt, on 04/26/2008, -3/+6Bill Murry, that guys awesome
- cquinnd, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4There are whole fields of information management that cannot be truly managed in the Cloud, for various security or reliability reasons. Not to say they won't use the internet, but they will work on the idea of dedicated (and tracked) lines of communication thru the cloud, and no information will be modified within the clound, just passed between dedicated systems (desktop or local server) that will do the actual modifying (and auditing of the data).
- AndrewWiggin, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Drug companies only have a 7 year layover. If you invent a drug, you can have a monopoly for 7 years but after that anyone can make them.
- inactive, on 04/26/2008, -6/+9The cloud can go ***** itself.
- blankhorizons, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3When life gives you lemons, create a cocaine cartel. That, friends, is the moral of the story.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 189 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is