that doesn't make any sense, and obviously he doesn't have a very good grasp on economics, i would suggest he take ecn 221 and 222. Anyways yeah in a sense Linux could just out of the blue stop being advanced and completely loose all support but i seriously doubt that will happen. Even then he talked about monopolies, and what is Microsoft, really a financial monopoly, really though what other choice do people have. So yeah that person doesn't make any sense.
That person is me. And I don't think you understood my article. My point is that Linux is something closer to the opposite of communism since it centers around personal freedom and a free, competitive market.
Lol AT, your article makes perfect sense. And it's short and sweet, which is nice. Only suggestion is I think you could've perhaps explained yourself at the end just slightly more. After all, the ending is your main point. Perhaps you could toss in an extra sentence spelling out how open source software challenges the established market domination of microsoft or something. I dunno, your point is clear enough but just feels like it could be elucidated a little bit more without sounding redundant or anything. Also I personally didn't like your very last sentence too much. I agree with what you're saying but a "stunning" model? Capitalism "at its very best"? I dunno about that... i wasn't convinced enough to think of it that highly. But still, bottom line is it's a nice little commentary.
What's stunning about open source is that it's such an altruistic approach to something which doesn't ordinarily lend itself to altruism: capitalism. In other words, you can potentially make money hand-over-fist and still benefit the good of everyone in the process. How could that be much better? You're right though that I did get a little soft in the end. I suppose the reasoning here is that I didn't want to spoon feed too much. Next time I'll try and make the writing a little more balanced. Edit: There, I've beefed up the ending of the article substantially, even making the observation that Microsoft is the one drawing from the Communist playbook, not the open-source community. Check it out now: Anti-Trend's Home
Nice, AT. Now, do you think Microsoft would be as aggressive if Gates were still in charge, or do you think that it's shooting off more with Ballmer at the helm?
lol, but aint communist bad?, because linux aint bad, its preety good, so that would make comunist things great :s
I think its partly because of Ballmer, but he doesn't have the knowledge to go into the details of any patent infringement cases. I think he just orders the management and lower employees to "Find a patent, any patent will do, no matter how weak or trivial".
I wonder how many seconds it would take to completely flood the server. It is only a K5 500Mhz on a home internet connection.
Whether communism is good or bad is hard to determine. On a national scale examples are not a lot short of tyranny. communism - Definitions from Dictionary.com Sorry AT, I havent had chance to have a good look at your site. I will I promise!
The article is about why Linux is *NOT* communist, though Microsoft claims it is. Sheesh, you're the second person that didn't understand it. Am I that bad at writing, or are you guys just skipping every other word? I think that Ballmer is a bad example of a human being, let alone as a person in a position of any authority. But ultimately, all of Microsoft's evil decisions have been in the best interests of their shareholders, not their customers, and not anyone else in the world either. I don't see that changing no matter who sits in the throne. If Microsoft was to get a new CEO who has a different approach than that, I think the share holders with the controlling share or stock would simply remove them and bring in new one; one with less ethics and more of an eye for the financial bottom line.
Ooh I just read the new version. Nice. I got just one quick idea for a small insert though! In your second paragraph where you talk about reselling it for a profit I think you can drive the connection to capitalism home a bit more with just one extra small phrase or sentence. I had to stop reading and think about it for a sec before I got the implication, even though you bolded the "sell it at a profit" part. You could insert something like this: ...and even free to sell it at a profit. How much profit exactly? We can sell as high as we believe the market will bear. (Sounds like capitalism, doesn't it?) In fact, this is one of ... Just a suggestion though. Maybe I'm just slow for not getting it right away. * I think it's the latter lol.
Oh hey, sorry for the confusion on my part, hmm by the way i feel like an ass, hey sorry, but yeah i guess i was really confused, i thought you were saying that linux was communist, and also i realized that was your site, but for some reason i thought someone else had written the article, anyways i apologize
