Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Economist's Technology Predictions For 2008

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the prediction-is-hard-especially-about-the-future dept.

The Internet 117

mrcgran notes an article in The Economist with three technology predictions for 2008. Normally they're pretty good on technology, and the predictions seem sound enough, but the article contains a couple of bloopers. "1. Surfing will slow: The internet is not about to grind to a halt, but as more and more users clamber aboard to download music, video clips and games... surfing the web is going to be more like traveling the highways at holiday time. You'll get there, eventually, but the going won't be great. 2. Surfing will detach: Internet will doubtless be as popular among mobile-internet surfers as among their sedentary cousins. 3. Surfing — and everything else computer-related — will open: Rejoice: the embrace of 'openness' by firms that have grown fat on closed, proprietary technology is something we'll see more of in 2008... Since the verdict against SCO, Linux has swiftly become popular in small businesses and the home, largely the doing of Ubuntu 7.10. And because it is free, Linux become the operating system of choice for low-end PCs. Neither Microsoft nor Apple can compete at the new price points being plumbed by companies looking to cut costs."

cancel ×

117 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So in other words... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814048)

2008 will be the year of Linux on the desktop?

Re:So in other words... (2, Insightful)

coldcell (714061) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814302)

The only reason every year is finally the year for Linux on the Desktop is because it's already on everything else. The desktop is the last place to go.

Re:So in other words... (2, Insightful)

The Dobber (576407) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814902)

No

Every year is going to be the year of Linux because the previous years claim of year of Linux fell a bit short. Again.

Linux is a great operating system. It's flexibility, versatility, open standards and lets face it, cost of ownership make it very attractive to technical applications. It will always fall short in the typical desktop market because it is perceived as being something geeky.

Re:So in other words... (1)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 6 years ago | (#21818384)

Ah... but here's the kicker. Every year it has fallen short, the developers have scrambled to catch up. Sooner or later, they'll not only have caught up, but they will surpass the competition.

Linux is not your last option (0)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815960)

my co-worker and I recently downloaded Solaris/86 and brought it up on VM/ware

this is a pretty darn good looking system

i have an extra 2GHZ machine I want to load with that shortly but it looks to be this will be a very viable alternative

all that needs to happen is simple: the first guy to offer a system that can be guaranteed immune to virus is gonna take over the market in a very short time

all that needs to be done is to refuse to execute unknown programs and to dis-allow unknown software updates

the later of course means you take the box offline and log on as root to update software. otherwise software updates are not allowed when you are online and logged on as user.

Re:So in other words... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814632)

The year of Linux on the desktop will be the year you install it on your desktop. That's pretty much it, it's come along far enough now that people like me (who aren't too terribly computer literate) can enjoy.

Re:So in other words... (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814894)

2008 will be the year of Linux on the desktop?
Must be - I hear they're already working on the port of Duke Nukem Forever.

Re:So in other words... (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814970)

2008 will be the year of Linux on the desktop

Linux on the desktop and the release of "Duke Nukem Forever". Wow, what a great year it will be!

Re:So in other words... (1)

edis (266347) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815246)

If you call desktop your inexpensive SSD-based 10" screen ultramobile.

There will never be a Year of the Linux Desktop (1)

Vingborg (141225) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815426)

The "universal" desktop is a dead end, as people are moving towards a combination of online services, very smart gadgets and virtualized personal appliances. The Linux kernel, though, will probably play a significant, if not preeminent, part in this future.

See http://idling.atadon.dk/2007/12/vista-blessing.html [atadon.dk] for some elaborations on this subject (my own blog).

Re:So in other words... (1)

tm2b (42473) | more than 6 years ago | (#21819176)

2008 will be the year that people claim that Linux is finally ready for the desktop, unlike 2007.

2007 was the year that people claimed that Linux was finally ready for the desktop, unlike 2006.

You remember 2000? That was the year that people claimed that Linux was finally ready for the desktop, unlike 1999.

Re:So in other words... (1)

sams67 (880846) | more than 6 years ago | (#21819472)

2007 *was* the year of the Linux desktop. Didn't you notice?

MERRY CHRISTMAS, FUCKERS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814052)

A few years ago, while browsing around the library downtown, I
had to take a piss. As I entered the john a big beautiful all-American
football hero type, about twenty-five, came out of one of the booths.
I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he
washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was "straight" and
married - and in any case I was sure I wouldn't have a chance with
him.

As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated,
hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still
warm from his sturdy young ass. I found not only the smell but the
shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left
behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It
apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat,
stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd
- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as a man's wrist.

I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and
wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd
always been a heavy rimmer and had lapped up more than one little
clump of shit, but that had been just an inevitable part of eating ass
and not an end in itself. Of course I'd had jerk-off fantasies of
devouring great loads of it (what rimmer hasn't), but I had never done
it. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound
turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy
and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of the world's
handsomest young stud.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both
hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled
like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the
consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit
without the benefit of a digestive tract?

I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it
smelled. I've found since then that shit nearly almost does.

I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into
my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big brown cock,
beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and
bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet
flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had
chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed
I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I
soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd
passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily,
sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My
only regret was the donor of this feast wasn't there to wash it down
with his piss.

I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the
cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more
delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with
the rich bitterness of shit.

Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But
then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There
was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished
them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my
briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the
shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever
unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an
unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using
them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my
mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit
trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six
orgasms in the process.

I often think of that lovely young guy dropping solid gold out
of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could,
and at least once did, bring to a grateful shiteater.

Re:MERRY CHRISTMAS, FUCKERS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21817890)

Well merry christmas to you too, gosh we ACs are thoughtful.

dnf (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814054)

Duke Nukem Forever will be released! [dwarfurl.com]

Re:dnf (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814156)

myminicity link, again. how do these people have so much time on their hands?!
--your friendly neighborhood anti-troll

Re:dnf (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815942)

This is why we need a -1 Spam mod. Troll and flamebait just doesn't cut it. This would apply to GNAA and 'slashdot suxorz' AC posts, as that is what they truly are.

Re:dnf (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816742)

More than that, I don't understand why completely useless posts can't be deleted. I know the philosophy is that "why post if it can't be permanent?" but that's more about forcing people to THINK before they post. That implies relevancy to said posts, and that's simply not the case anymore. If a post is simply spam or something completely unrelated to the topic, how is it relevant, and moreso, how does it add to the conversation? I think a lot of people would stop wasting their time if there were a little more moderation than simply a label, but hey, that's just one man's opinions.
BTW, I know this will be modded off-topic but at the same time: is it really...?

Re:dnf (1)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817832)

The essential flaw to your plan is that if useless posts can be deleted so can useful posts. So can politically awkward posts. Moderation largely works ok there are times when there is extremely partisan moderation but i think we can live with that.

The mini-city spam links are extremely annoying however if nothing gets said in a post of interest surely the link provided isn't going to be worth clicking on either. no ?

My gut instinct is a spam moderation could be a good thing, however what constitutes spam. Is it spam if a related competing product or service is posted as a link?

One mans spam is anothers working lunch. Slashdot posters have put me on to interesting things as well as quite a few which i wish i'd never clicked.

I think 'trash' and 'noise' are better moderation names with 0 movement by default. Individual users will be able to set their own rating for 'trash' and 'noise' I'd make these two mods cost less maybe half a mod point. for sure it's well past time for slashdots moderation system to be upgraded.

Cite your sources (3, Funny)

Rumagent (86695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814070)

From TFA: "The biggest road-hog remains spam (unsolicited e-mail), which accounts for 90% of traffic on the internet."

Can anyone verify that number? It seems grotesquely inflated...

Re:Cite your sources (1)

slash.dt (701002) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814072)

From TFA: "The biggest road-hog remains spam (unsolicited e-mail), which accounts for 90% of traffic on the internet."

I think that is supposed to be 90% of all emails are spam, not 90% of all traffic.

Re:Cite your sources (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814896)

That figure of 90% is completely bullshit. This fraudulent number has been circulating for years, and the fact that another paper has been duped into reporting it doesn't make it any less bullshit.

Re:Cite your sources (1)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815050)

what is "bullshit" = A/C

even a cursory search will turn up documents that confirm: 90% of email on the net is spam

you make a lot of postings out here buddy and I ain't exactly sure how many you are or what your agenda is

but after a note like the one I'm responding to I have confirmed for myself pretty much what you are.

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/51055.html [technewsworld.com]

http://handsoff.org/blog/category/spam/ [handsoff.org]

http://www.postini.com/news_events/pr/pr110606.php [postini.com]

Re:Cite your sources (0)

HiggsBison (678319) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815236)

you make a lot of postings out here buddy and I ain't exactly sure how many you are or what your agenda is

Damn right! I say we mod "Anonymous Coward" back to the stone age! Who's with me?

A/C = anyone (1)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815980)

I think A/C is actually "anyone"

a practice the board administrator ought not to allow

Re:Cite your sources (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814086)

it is actually more like 91.2% according to some [ripway.com]

Re:Cite your sources (3, Informative)

muftak (636261) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814098)

90% of all email is SPAM, but email accounts for a very small proportion of internet traffic.

Re:Cite your sources (1)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814124)

- Consider how many poorly managed Windows boxes (this is not Windows bashing - it's fun but it gets old very quickly) are connected via high-speed (DSL, cable) links to the internet
- Consider how many of those are left running unattended downloading music or movies
- Consider how many of them got infected by some spam malware during the lifetime of their installs
- Consider they can be used to send spam and to infect other poorly managed Windows boxes for the full time they are connected to the internet

I would be surprised if those owners really knew how their computers use he net 90% of the time.

If 90% of all e-mail is spam, I am sure it's only a matter of time until 90% of all traffic is automated spam/malware propagation. From what I see, this can only go up.

Re:Cite your sources (2, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814358)

If i use the % on my personal domain, their number slightly low. I get more like 95%, from both direct to nonsence addresses on my domain, and indirect via 'replies' from stupid mailers that dont use spam rules before they send back replies on nonexistent addresses. I see about 2000 spam messages a day.

At the office on a different more well known domain, we sometimes hit 10000 messages per HOUR.. ( and it promptly hoses our outside unix mail server and anti-spam engine, then freaks out exchange when it cant send to the unix server.. )

SPAM is bad. Really bad.

Re:Cite your sources (1)

religious freak (1005821) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815816)

Why do you believe Booth was a patriot?

Re:Cite your sources (1)

LeafOnTheWind (1066228) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816992)

At 64 KB per spam, 2000 spam messages totals to about 128 MB/day. I cover ten times that on a normal day through Bittorrent. 95% of traffic is grossly inflated, 95% of email seems more reasonable.

Re:Cite your sources (2)

RKenshin1 (899412) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814410)

"In 2001, spam accounted for about five per cent of the traffic on the Internet; by 2004, that figure had risen to more than seventy per cent. This year, in some regions, it has edged above ninety per cent--more than a hundred billion unsolicited messages clogging the arterial passages of the world's computer networks every day. [2007] The flow of spam is often seasonal. It slows in the spring, and then, in the month that technology specialists call "black September"--when hundreds of thousands of students return to college, many armed with new computers and access to fast Internet connections--the levels rise sharply."

Source: The New Yorker, August 2007 [newyorker.com]

Re:Cite your sources (1)

Talchas (954795) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814518)

The New Yorker really needs to cite its sources too if you want people to be satisfied.

Re:Cite your sources (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814630)

That's not a valid source. They don't say where their numbers come from either. Most spam messages are very small ( 10 KiB), so I don't see how 10e9 messages/day could be a relevant portion of "the traffic on the Internet" in terms of bandwidth. I don't have a study at hand, but in the statistics I've seen email accounts for just about 1% of Internet bandwidth. Of which 90% could be spam, of course - probably more.

Hasn't this been said every year before? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814914)

and everything else computer-related -- will open: Rejoice: the embrace of 'openness' by firms that have grown fat on closed, proprietary technology is something we'll see more of in 2008... Since the verdict against SCO, Linux has swiftly become popular in small businesses and the home, largely the doing of Ubuntu 7.10. And because it is free, Linux become the operating system of choice for low-end PCs. Neither Microsoft nor Apple can compete at the new price points being plumbed by companies looking to cut costs


Haven't they been predicting a Lunix victory on the desktop since... well, since the very beginning of Lunix?

Also, if any business things using Teh Lunix is going to cost less, they obviously have never tested it. Your support costs skyrocket with Teh Lunix. Just ask the City of Munich how good their Lunix total conversion has gone. Seeing as how 80% of their desktops are running Windows in a VM, the only thing Lunix has added is a needless layer of complexity. Oh, and redundancy of costs, but the highly paid consultants they have providing support aren't complaining.

What I find sad every year is that people's "predictions" always end up as more of a wish list than predictions. My prediction is that the number of Lunix users remains essentially flat, just like it has for the past decade. Even Apple's "Switch" campaign didn't really result in any new users... and their disasterous "Leoptard: It Just Works" campaign sure didn't help people think Apple was any better.

The problem Lunix and Apple are running in to is that, at the end of the day, 99% of people don't care, and don't view their operating system as an expression of their lifestyle. They just want to sit down at their computer and do stuff- they've spent a decade becoming marginally proficient with Windows. None of them look forward to spending the next decade becoming marginally proficient with a different operating system.

Re:Cite your sources (-1, Flamebait)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814962)

Currently I have 79 emails in my spam box of gmail and 40 emails received during the same time period in my Inbox.

Rules of statistics tell me is grossly inflated. According to that rule it should been 110 instead of 40. sd of 110 is 10, so 40 is 7 sd's off the expected number.

Re:Cite your sources (1)

Znork (31774) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815034)

"Rules of statistics tell me is grossly inflated"

The level of spam to any particular email address is strongly dependent on where that email address has been published.

Personally I have about 50 email addresses (merged to a single mailbox), yet most recieve no spam at all. That's because each address is distributed to only one or a few senders, so if one address is compromized I both know who compromized it and I can selectively disable it.

If your particular mailbox recieves little spam, then it simply hasnt been widely enough distributed yet. Put it on a website or two if you feel lonely. :)

Re:Cite your sources (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 6 years ago | (#21818640)

That brings an interesting conclusion. I guess people who advertise publicly their email addresses are also responsible for whatever clogging our shared tubes are taking from them spammers.

Re:Cite your sources (1)

Znork (31774) | more than 6 years ago | (#21820190)

Public advertising of an email address is just one (fast) way to get it harvested tho. Most are probably compromized by viral harvesters or intrusions and/or software misconfigurations (mailinglists, exchange, etc).

But as long as you just have a single active address, it will, sooner or later, get compromized and then it will just spread. And then you're faced with the painful choice of changing address or trying to filter. Having one address per person sending mail to you makes it trivial to change the address, and trivial to trace leaks and inform them of the problem.

Anyways, it's an easy way to avoid spam (for some, it requires you have control over your own mailserver and a client that supports choosing the right reply From: based on who I got the mail from, such as Horde).

Re:Cite your sources (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21816150)

yeah I thought it was p2p traffic?

I get a lot of spam but find it hard to believe spam makes up 90% of internet traffic.

It will remain high until (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21816418)

Windows is not the dominant OS on the internet. Until then, expect loads more spam from the viruses on Windows.

What no flying cars? (2, Interesting)

COMICAGOGO (1055066) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814074)

Well another year gone and no flying cars (at least none I can afford.) I was promised flying cars by this time, can't they at least get me a rocket pack:)

Ok, kidding aside. The statement about Linux gaining some ground is not totally out of line (although i don't think MS or Apple are quaking in their boots.) I have noticed a higher than normal percentage of people that hang out at our local library and browse the internet on a laptop all day using some variety of Linux. I have asked a few of them why they are using it and the main answer does seem to be that it is free and "surfs" the interwebs.

Re:What no flying cars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814954)

The problem of flying cars these days probably has less to do with technical solutions, and more to do with psychology and human behavior. Building a aircraft that can take off and land in a reasonable space and so forth is probably doable, and the price could also be reasonable with a sufficiently large market.
Letting x millions of distracted soccer moms and stressed out sales reps take to the skies on a daily basis..well, there's your problem. No one would ever feel safe again.

Re:What no flying cars? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816578)

The problem of flying cars these days probably has less to do with technical solutions, and more to do with psychology and human behavior.

One possible solution is to not let users directly control them[1]: you punch in your destination, and a computer takes over and does the rest. However, the day a terrorist hacks into one and careens into the Super Bowl is the day they'll be yanked.

[1] There may be "free drive" zones in the desert.
   

2008 - The year of the Linux desktop! (5, Funny)

brunocosta (831988) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814084)

nuff said!

Re:2008 - The year of the Linux desktop! (1)

Klaus_1250 (987230) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814114)

Most likely, yes. But I think it is awkward to talk about the Linux desktop as the article does, only mentioning:

With open-source software maturing fast, Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox, MySQL, Evolution, Pidgin and some 23,000 other Linux applications available for free seem more than ready to fill that gap.

They should have at least mentioned KDE and Gnome. And Wine of course.

Re:2008 - The year of the Linux desktop! (1)

brunocosta (831988) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814158)

i'm so sorry, my linux-desktop script was accidentally triggered by the article, it happens every single year =(

Re:2008 - The year of the Linux desktop! (1)

Klaus_1250 (987230) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814268)

I've been trying various Linux and *BSD desktop environments for the last 8 years and every year they seem to get closer to the point why I would consider them sufficient. Hardware support is steadily improving (though not perfect, especially when it comes to videocard performance and functionality), installing has improved a whole lot (quite to the point where it is easy enough), usability and functionality of applications that people will daily use (surfing, emailing, IM, media-playback, office-applications) is close to where it should be and KDE4 should provide people with enough eye-candy and widgets. Wine is also making steady progress (my favorite games run under WINE) and with NTFS-3G I can now use NTFS-volumes in both FreeBSD and my Windows XP install without a hitch. Sure, there is plenty of work to do to make Linux (or *BSD) a more competitive alternative to Windows or OS X, but AFAIAC, the groundwork is nearly finished.

You forgot one thing there... (2, Insightful)

SamP2 (1097897) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814096)

As more and more high-bandwidth content traverses the net, in the absense of development of new infrastructure, ISPs and backbone routing providers will arbitrarily throttle "intensive content" to allow other content through. Guess what type traffic to throttle is on the top of the list?

Re:You forgot one thing there... (2, Funny)

mrjb (547783) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814634)

pr0n?

Dunno abou tthe Exchnage bit in the article... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814104)

Article writer says there is an Exchange replacement with Linux now? Not as far as I can tell. While Linux is a fair match for any desktop now and in some cases better with indeed the huge array of free software that does make it quite possible to run a fully open source system (like mine, I'm a recent Unbuntu convert after Vista just bit me too many times for my liking) the one real area that Linux has a problem is Exchange and Windows server are pretty good combination when you configure them correctly - dont fucking tell me Exchange is lousy, you probably just don't know what your doing. Serious overkill of course but it is a good combination.

So where is this mythical replacement I just read about? Would someone like to point it out for me? And yes I would love a true Exchange replacement and also in truth Outlook has become quite a good application, which open source alternatives do have some problems matching, altho I'll be honest and say that I haven't looked too closely because Outlook has done exactly what I want (And And I can access Outloook via Terminal Services, another reasonable but seriously pricey thing that is very useful. Pity it's so fuckign expensive!). Exchange replacement on the other hand, been looking and not liking what I see.

One thing I am confident about is that Ubuntu has moved so fast in the last two years with such a great load of development work, it proves Open Source very viable and if there is no genuine Exchange replacement now.... well who knows in a year's time? Maybe I just blinked and missed it?

Re:Dunno abou tthe Exchnage bit in the article... (1)

OffTheLip (636691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814218)

Depends on what you mean by replacement. If you are talking about binary compatibility (ie, MAPI) then your choices are limited although non-free alternatives are out there. If you are talking about a product capable of servicing the needs of a business and not concerned with 100% MS Office compatibility then Linux does offer that. Not sure about Sharepoint portal alternatives.

Re:Dunno abou tthe Exchnage bit in the article... (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814476)

[i]dont fucking tell me Exchange is lousy,[/i]

Interoperability with other platforms. Costing an arm and a leg. Incredible amounts of CPU time and memory necessary to do its job (compared to something like Zimbra).

Zimbra kicks Exchange's arse up and down the road.

Re:Dunno abou tthe Exchnage bit in the article... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21820036)

So where is this mythical replacement I just read about? Would someone like to point it out for me?


There are several candidates for you to choose from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-Xchange [wikipedia.org]
http://www.open-xchange.com/EN/header/home.html [open-xchange.com]
http://www.open-xchange.com/header/products/openxchange_express_edition.html [open-xchange.com]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbra [wikipedia.org]
http://www.zimbra.com/about/ [zimbra.com]
http://www.zimbra.com/products/ [zimbra.com]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolab [wikipedia.org]
http://www.kolab.org/ [kolab.org]
http://www.kolab.org/screenshots.html [kolab.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfresco_(software) [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalix [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group-Office [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGroupWare [wikipedia.org]

You take take your pick at all kinds of levels of complexity and capability.

Most of them will happily support Windows, OSX and Linux clients. Most of them are $0 per client.

Linux is not free (-1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814106)

I just paid £289 for a nokia n810 with Maemo Linux installed.
When I told them that linux is free and tried to walk out of the store without paying they got the guards to ruff me up a bit.

The penguin is evil.

2007 Predictions (2, Interesting)

sciop101 (583286) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814112)

What were the predictions for 2007?

How true were the predictions for 2007?

Give the prognosticators the chance to spin to seem brilliant and correct!

Re:2007 Predictions (1)

ThePromenader (878501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815520)

I think that 90% of all 'prediction' articles are actually the author's hopes/ideas summed up into an essay backed with only facts/sources supporting those ideas. I'd like to see more ~objective~ predictions, please.

Linux is running the web, as far as I'm concerned. As for the web "slowing down", I think there may be a fundament for the idea that this might happen, but there are still many millions of computer users not yet using broadband services, and few of those who are using them only occasionally reach their capacity for any extent of time, yet the net is nowhere near saturated. What "slows things down" most today are virtually-hosted heavy websites that is sharing one IP (and one hard disk) with thirty other websites.

I think that the number of Flash sites has actually gone ~down~ in recent years - clients are finally beginning to realise that these don't have the "find and feedback" potential html has - but this I get from personal experience, not from any statistical source. I really would like to concretely know where things are going in that field, so if anyone has a reliable source, please do tell.

Only a huge up-shift in video streaming and p2p exchanges could saturate bandwidth, but for the former, I don't think we're anywhere near there yet. As for the second, if the RIAA gets its way, this will be going down as well.

Re:2007 Predictions (1)

Not The Real Me (538784) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817000)

...As for the web "slowing down", I think there may be a fundament for the idea that this might happen...yet the net is nowhere near saturated...

The notion of the web "slowing down" is because of the ad servers that many web sites are using. The advertisers frequently do not have the resources to handle traffic, particularily when a site gets Slashdotted or Dugg.

Re:2007 Predictions (1)

ThePromenader (878501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817678)

Ah, yes - yet another reason why things already are slow - even with questions of bandwidth nonwithstanding. Machine fatuigue - one ad server can only do so much. Pages don't finish loading until the content does too... grrr.

"slow to a crawl" ???! (2, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814116)

For something like this to happen, there should be at least an indicator of things to come, as some people having trouble with http access in any parts of the world. noone is experiencing this. additionally the only problem users are experiencing is due to some isps taking on the duty of being the internet police upon themselves and HAMPERING users.

economist have put piece of crap articles before. but lately, the number and frequency of such crap have started to increase.

Seems to confuse some with 2020... (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814118)

As usual with these predictions, they seem to think of 2008 as some far future. For example, Linux getting much more common on the desktop won't just take "Your correspondent has been happily using Gutsy Gibbon on a ten-year-old desktop with only 128 megabytes of RAM and a tiny 10 gigabyte hard-drive" because people don't care much for running computers with 10 GB drives and 128 MB RAM. What rather makes a difference is what operating systems new PC's use to come with and how well marketed this OS is. I don't really see a paradigm shift here among OEM's and what's still often a grass roots movement of Linux (noticeable especially when Ubuntu of all distros is the most popular on desktops, and not Novell's distro, etc). It's interesting to see Linux getting increasingly more interesting for desktop use, but far more still needs to happen than what I think can take place in 2008 before "Surfing--and everything else computer-related--will open" will happen.

Re:Seems to confuse some with 2020... (4, Insightful)

NorbrookC (674063) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814208)

What rather makes a difference is what operating systems new PC's use to come with and how well marketed this OS is. I don't really see a paradigm shift here among OEM's

The paradigm shift has already occurred. 5 years ago, if you wanted to buy a desktop with Linux pre-installed, you either built it yourself, bought a custom-built from your local computer shop, or dug through the back areas of a limited number of computer suppliers. Today, I can go into a Wal-Mart and get one off the shelves, or pick up the phone and order one from any of several major OEMs. It's no longer a case of being forced to pay the "Windows tax" even if you weren't going to use Windows. What's even more impressive is the sales figures - and this is likely to grow.

This doesn't mean that I think that in 2008 Windows will collapse and Linux will supplant it. I do think that this is one of the best opportunities for Linux in quite some time. You have a series of blunders by the dominant desktop OS provider, combined with an OSS alternative that is finally easy enough, with enough applications, for the average user to use. What this means is that you're going to see Linux start to increase its user base, as well as its mindshare.

Re:Seems to confuse some with 2020... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21815522)

That's not entirely true. I want to be able to buy _any_ computer, laptop or desktop, without Windows on it. And that isn't possible. The whole point of having so many OEMs is so that you can pick the hardware configuration you want. When only some offer a Windows-free deal, that takes away many options. I ordered an HP dv9700t laptop yesterday, because I got an amazing deal and I love the aesthetics. I was forced to buy Windows Shitsta Home Premium with it, even though I boot into Windows on my current computer about once every 2 months. This was such a good deal though that even Windows's presence didn't stop me from buying it. But I would hope that in the future, I won't even have to think about whether I'll be forced to pay the Windows tax.

Re:Seems to confuse some with 2020... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817246)

The Linux based ASUS Eee sold out in Australia over two days a couple of weeks before Christmas. Schools were buying 30 or 40 at a time. Families were buying one for each member.

I checked back about a week ago. The retailer now limits sales to four per person. They promised to have more available on the 22nd of December and I expect most of that batch will have gone by now.

The people who are buying this product like the low price and the fact it has MS word like functionality out of the box. Cheap Linux based computers are taking off. Microsoft is the new IBM.

Re:Seems to confuse some with 2020... (1)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 6 years ago | (#21818280)

I don't really see a paradigm shift here among OEM's and what's still often a grass roots movement of Linux (noticeable especially when Ubuntu of all distros is the most popular on desktops, and not Novell's distro, etc).
Would Linux be less grassroots if the most popular distro were openSUSE, a grassroots encouraged branch of the SUSE distro that Novell purchased? For that matter, is Ubuntu all that grassroots when ultimately run by a millionaire's new startup?

An article to think about (4, Interesting)

dancingmad (128588) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814140)

I am a huge fan of The Economist - for the daily gripes on slashdot, digg, and other websites about the pap that is journalism today, the paper has been a bastion of good writing and in depth coverage, even when I don't agree with the editorial/political stances. That said, I read this article earlier today (students are on winter break but I'm stuck coming into the office with nothing to do!) and it seemed like a mix of the obvious (more user created content? You don't say!) and the unlikely - when net speed starts becoming a customer service issue, you can bet the ISPs will get on board. American ISPs and those running the infrastructure have been dragging their feet in the U.S., while in Asia you can get really high speed internet (anywhere from DSL to fiber) even in the boondocks (believe me, I live in the middle of nowhere and could have gotten fiber).

The second prediction seems likely, though again, the U.S. is drawing up the rear. I know people here (Japan) that interact with the Internet solely or primarily through their mobile phone (not to mention things like GPS, and broadcast TV I got on a phone that cost less than $100 US). I hope Google does lead the way on this front next year, though I feel like we're going to have another year of baby steps unless Apple or Google or someone else with some clout decides to turn the American cell phone market on it's musty, stagnant head.

The third prediction seems very pie in the sky. I've used Windows, Linux, and OS X extensively, and I think (for my needs) OS X best matches my needs. I think there's a level of polish that is very difficult to for Linux to achieve in relation to the power home user. Ubuntu has probably got almost easy enough for the average user, if you disregard games and things. Linux certainly has a place as a great developer tool, server OS, and power-power user OS, but the article seems to imply that Linux is set to take over the entire PC world in 2008. I've heard that it's "the year of desktop Linux" since Redhat 5 and experience has taught me to wait for actual proof on that claim.

Re:An article to think about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814416)

Goahead and read Marc Anderson's(Netscape, Ning) rebuttal to Economist's article. You will know how worst is Economist analysis.
http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/12/when-non-techno.html [pmarca.com]

Re:An article to think about (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815824)

A site like Slashdot is unusable on a cell phone - as is basically every other thing I use the Internet for, except VoIP and maybe youtube. There's just no way around the tiny-ass screen and the inferior input methods. Japan uses phones for the Internet because it's a good way to kill time on the subway, not because there's anything superior about mobile phones as an internet device.

Re:An article to think about (1)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 6 years ago | (#21818576)

I agree with you there, mobile browsing has a whole slew of uses, killing time like you suggested, comparing competitor prices inside a retail store, 100X better than 411, etc, and about none of that overlaps with how we already browse the internet.

Re:An article to think about (1)

reidconti (219106) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816216)

The Economist is good on virtually everything but technology. Their technology articles are usually well-researched and written, but ultimately the product of people who simply don't get it.

But then again, these tech predictions don't seem well-researched OR well-written. I guess those people are on vacation.

Re:An article to think about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21816864)

They are as incompetent about other subjects as they are about technology.

Of course, since they are cheerleaders for the capitalist ideology you learned in school, you think they know what they are talking about. Just like "Christian Magazine" is considered insightful by Christians.

Re:An article to think about (1)

bbdb (921914) | more than 6 years ago | (#21820354)

"I've heard that it's "the year of desktop Linux" since Redhat 5 and experience has taught me to wait for actual proof on that claim."

What you say is true but not the whole picture - I've heard it since the days of Abiword and Gnumeric that it's alternative for MS Office. Sure it's been wishful thinking. But, and it's a big but, things are definitely and demonstrably going up -- just because things are at level of OO 2 and Kubuntu doesn't mean they'll stay there. Since things are going up, some day in future they will reach the point of "good enough". OO2 at the moment has the problem of slow recalculating graphs. Some people I know gave it up for Excel just for this single reason. Had things stayed static, what you write would have been true. But things are not static.

In many cases good enough & cheap kills better. Sure I like Mac OS X better, but I'm not willing to pay enough, so I run Kubuntu at my home (not at the moment though).

This "el cheapo" prediction just might become true, because trends certainly indicate that. Linux on desktop used to be wishful thinking, but it just might become true.

To summarize, the typical market formation of oligopoly will probably be formed, with, say 80% of "good enough, cheap" market belonging to smth like Ubuntu/x86, and 20% of market belonging to "fancy, polished and pricey" belonging to Mac OS X.

In many cases I suspect this duopoly will even be present in many homes, say, Mac OS X on father's workstation used for professional purposes and cheap Linux box for a kid, or some other combo of this kind.

greed/fear/ego based life forms to decline in 2008 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814144)

giving will become more important than getting for some. others will change due to having no other choice. see you there?

Oh, but they can (1)

Plantain (1207762) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814258)

"Neither Microsoft nor Apple can compete at the new price points being plumbed by companies looking to cut costs." I'm pretty sure the first of those two could compete at a low price point for a VERY long time... Microsoft could (and possibly will) give away Windows XP for the OLPC to all the developing countries, just to make sure the first OS kids associate with computers is "Windows". As for the second, Apple needn't compete at the low price point, their money is made on premium computers, not dirt cheap PC's you can pickup at your local supermarket. Even so, Apple's not so unlike Microsoft at the core, Jobs offered OS X for the OLPC too. Anyway, time will tell who exploits the children of the third world countries for their own agendas.

Re:Oh, but they can (1)

mccabem (44513) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817450)

I'm pretty sure the first of those two could compete at a low price point for a VERY long time...


Agreed. In fact, through the 80's and particularly through the 90's (and most likely to a significant degree today) MSFT literally thrived on piracy of its OS. (Better to prevent the sale than to let it go to 'the other side' after all.)

BTW, concerning Apple... Supposedly they are up to >$15 Billion in cash. According to my calculations, even at full retail that would be a LOT of 'free' copies of OS X. ;) 'Course that doesn't make it a good idea...

hmm (2, Insightful)

GregNorc (801858) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814450)

Can't seem to find their 2007 predictions online... how convenient.

Re:hmm ya didn't save a copy (1)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814502)

ya didn't save a copy?

web pages, particularly interesting ones, have a bad habit of ,-- disappearing!!

Re:hmm (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816608)

Can't seem to find their 2007 predictions online... how convenient.

Prediction #7: "2007 will be the year that people finally realize how disturbing it is when old web pages go offline".
     

not so fast, buddy (1)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814466)

at the Economist / Technology 2008 we find

Any gizmo worth its silicon these days has its own internet connection--so it can update itself automatically
-like the iPhone, an easy target for the hacker what we need in 2008 is a re-thinking of the idea that remote updates are de rigeur we need t get the guys who throw this stuff together without first addressing security requirements and get them out in the parking lot for a short red-neck lesson in manners.

Different future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814574)

1. Internet is NOT going to slow down. New algorithms will make it even faster.

2. Linux is not the future.

Sagara

My preditions for 2008 (1)

MorpheousMarty (1094907) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814880)

I predict in 2008 I will not be getting my tech predictions form the Economist. Although they have few valid points, their conclusions seem detached from reality. The whole article feels like a bunch of half truths and crappy conclusions. Maybe they want to move the technology forward, to be honest doesn't the article feel like a wish-list? Maybe the internet infrastructure needs updating. Maybe they want the type of portable internet that Japan has. Maybe they see that with the EEE PC, this year there is a true market for Linux PCs on the consumer level. Still, I think I can make 3 predictions that are much more likely and important.

1. WiMax will work pretty much as advertised, and some city in the world will get municipal WiMax, and we will make a note: Huge Success. Also, where can I read a real world test of WiMax? I have great hopes for that technology, but it has been vapor ware for so long I am worried it has a horrible flaw.
2. Google's bids for the 700mhz spectrum will pressure the ISP and cellphone companies to open their networks and start charing per kilobyte. Seriously, it's 2008, why are we paying flat rates for a service that is cost bound by bandwidth? Why do we pay 10 cents for a text message? You should pay for what you use. The internet would be a lot more expensive for me if they did this (thanx bittorrent) but I realize that it is the only logical choice in the medium to long run. The funny part is that Google will initiate this change weather or not they get in the market, just the threat will be enough.
3. iPhone-like devices will flood the market, and sell better than all perditions. They will be the Wii of 2008. I know I'm going to attract so much flame for this but here it goes anyways: Steve Jobs knows what the people want and has always been ahead of trends. He saw the value of the PC, the mouse (everyone did but he was one of the first), wireless internet and hard drive MP3 players, way before anyone of it became mainstream. The iPhone is a special case because it instantly became mainstream, the market was ready for this device, but the providers were not. As perditions 1 and 2 flesh out, the demand for an all in one device like this will explode.

I look forward to all of you on /. tearing apart my perditions, and I will respond to valid criticisms.

Re:My preditions for 2008 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21814982)

My prediction: in 2008 your mouth will be even more full of Steve Jobs' man-milk than it was in 2007.

Re:My preditions for 2008 (1)

MorpheousMarty (1094907) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816434)

By the sound of it he's too busy molesting you, care to contradict any of my statements coward?

markt ready / providers not (1)

Grampaw Willie (631616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815904)

==>"the market was ready for this device, but the providers were not"

a most excellent observation!

large organizations tend to stagnate and respond poorly to sea changes in the market

this opens the door for the up-start:

the large organization can ignore the upstart and gradually go obsolete and fade into history

or

begin production of a competitive offering

or

send goons out to quash the competition

all of these methods are tried and true

~*~

we have a couple products right now that are setting ducks

~ Blink clocks that have to be reset manually all the time

~ virus-vulnerable computer software

"Surfing will slow" my butt. (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 6 years ago | (#21814940)

You meant "surfing will CONTINUE to slow".

Re:"Surfing will slow" my butt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21815106)

Surfing already slowed mine :(

Propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21815002)

1. The Intertubes is gonna fill up. Time for a tiered Interweb.
3. The Loonix is a competitor to Microsoft now, so you can stop hitting them with a hammer, EU.

Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (1, Interesting)

jaykali (1207794) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815200)

We have the perfect Unix based desktop already and it's called Mac OS. It's not free but it's better than any of the crap Linux ppl put out. Linux found it's place as great server software and that's where it will remain. The problem with Linux was also it's strength, the fact that ppl can make their own 'version' of linux distro. The problem is that the community is so fragmented that the uniting factor is going to be Microsoft going forward, not necessarily bc it's hands down the best but bc it's united. Linux ppl give up on ppl throwing away their Windows OS for Linux. The only thing that can really help Linux is the growing independence from OS apps and the web is becoming more the one app that we all use. That makes it possible to use the same apps no matter what OS, but again we have our OS ppl it's Mac! Get one! -J

Re:Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (1)

canuck57 (662392) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815360)

You say the strength of Linux is also it's weakness. But I don't see the weakness in morphing new distros and versions. In fact, unlike Mac OS and Windows it is free to evolve! Even it's very weakness is a strength.

Lets just wait a few years, all those One Laptop per Child PCs is going to harvest a computer literate crop of talented kids in a few years. Oh, many will wind up broken in dumps, but many will educate and open up a whole new world. And it will not have Apple nor Microsoft as the monopoly.

Early Apple's, Macs, PCs and even Microsoft products brought computing to the middle classes and out of the suit controlled glass houses of IBM/Amdahl, now Linux is going to take it to all classes. It will be a slow but sure revolution of computing in time, and like the death of the monster mainframe, it took many years.

While I do agree it sort of myopic to state Linux 2008 desktop, it is not without merit in that Linux is growing. The proof is in Microsoft anti-Linux FUD. Companies don't spend that kind of money (billions) on impeding the competition if they are not feeling the heat.

Re:Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (1)

jaykali (1207794) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815798)

You make some valid points. It does evolve, but in a thousand different directions. I've played with a bunch of distros and they're not bad tho setting up wireless has been a challenge. Anyways it doesn't matter now bc my love is Mac. And it has office and the programs I really need. I hope that there are more cross platform apps in the future and certainly the web helps make that possible. I think linux and google and IBM help push the momentum towards more open platforms. I just think it's folly to think that Linux is one day going to "take over." It's just not going to happen.

Re:Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (1)

burnin1965 (535071) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815430)

we have our OS ppl it's Mac! Get one! -J
Your a bit late, many linux desktop users jumped on the Mac OSX bandwagon a few years back, myself included.

I had dumped Windows for better than 90% of the apps I was running back in the late 90's in favor of linux on the desktop. Not long after Mac OSX came out I purchased a Wind Tunnel G4 [wikipedia.org] and was able to completely dump Windows. I did not dump my linux desktop and instead ran both linux and OSX, but in the end I always went back to my linux desktop because IMO its better. Perhaps its familiarity, or maybe its all the missing desktop features in OSX or some of the goofy quirks in OSX. Eventually the linux desktop progressed far enough that I was able to do 100% of my work on linux. The Windtunnel now sits silent.

So, in other words, YOU have your OS, keep it. -burnin

Re:Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (1)

jaykali (1207794) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815868)

I am definately late on the Mac OS X bandwagon but I couldn't be happier. I think both the hardware and OS have won me over. And Mac has MS Office support which in the biz world is a must have. That's the only app I really have to have (please don't tell me ab Open Office or I will throw up in my mouth). I think google docs might help on that end and reduce the dependency on office into the future. I'm a programmer and I just want my OS to work. I don't need to tinker with it or hack anything, I just want it to help me be productive. I want my wireless to work without reading a bunch of message boards and configuring a lot of things. I like more modern distros like Ubuntu and Suse but the pail in comparison to Mac OS X. I realize I'm opening myself up to hate mail here from avid Linux fans but I love me some Mac OS X and love me some macbook.

Re:Can we get over the Linux desktop please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21815878)

You're not helping the image that OSX users are bunch of illiterate twats, you know.

Holiday time? No trouble for me (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#21815848)

1. Surfing will slow: The internet is not about to grind to a halt, but as more and more users clamber aboard to download music, video clips and games... surfing the web is going to be more like traveling the highways at holiday time.

I don't know about anyone else but I never have trouble accessing the Internet at holiday time such as on Labor Day, Easter, Independence Day, Veteran's Day, President's Day or Memorial Day. What's so special about those holidays?

Inaccuracies about scox - plz write editor (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816512)

The following is my letter to the editors of The Economist:

----

To: letters@economist.com

There are many mistakes in the section about "SCO."

>>The trend toward openness has been given added impetus by the recent collapse of the legal battles brought by SCO, a software developer. Formerly known as Santa Cruz Operations, the firm bought the Unix operating system and core technology in 1995 from Novell (which, in turn, had bought it from its original developer, AT&T). >Short of cash, SCO initiated a series of lawsuits against companies developing Linux software, claiming it contained chunks of copyrighted Unix code. Pressured by worried customers fearing prosecution, a handful of Linux distributors settled with SCO just to stay in business.>But IBM, which uses Linux, was having none of it, and fought the firm through the courts until it won.

IBM did not just decide to fight TSG. TSG sued IBM. Although TSG has filed chapter 11, the case is not over.

Please check your facts on this.

Re:Inaccuracies about scox - plz write editor (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816542)

Sorry, post was messed up, trying again:

To: letters@economist.com

There are many mistakes in the section about "SCO."

The trend toward openness has been given added impetus by the recent collapse of the legal battles brought by SCO, a software developer. Formerly known as Santa Cruz Operations, the firm bought the Unix operating system and core technology in 1995 from Novell (which, in turn, had bought it from its original developer, AT&T).

The company is not named "SCO" the name is "The SCO Group" and The SCO Group (TSG) was not formerly known as "Santa Cruz Operations." The SCO Group was formerly known as Caldera. Santa Cruz Operations is now known as Tarentella Inc.

Caldera may have bought some assets from Santa Cruz Operations, but Caldera never bought he Unix operating system - this was determined about six months ago by a USA federal judge named Dale Kimball.

Short of cash, SCO initiated a series of lawsuits against companies developing Linux software, claiming it contained chunks of copyrighted Unix code. Pressured by worried customers fearing prosecution, a handful of Linux distributors settled with SCO just to stay in business.

I have followed this case fairly closely since day one. I do not think any Linux distributors settled with The SCO Group. A hosting company called EV1 gave TSG an unspecified sum, but that exchange is highly suspect. Microsoft was been funnelling money to TSG since the beginning, and the EV1 deal appears to be just another Microsoft vehicle.

But IBM, which uses Linux, was having none of it, and fought the firm through the courts until it won.

IBM did not just decide to fight TSG. TSG sued IBM. Although TSG has filed chapter 11, the case is not over.

Please check your facts on this.

What about sexbots in 2008? (1)

fyoder (857358) | more than 6 years ago | (#21816660)

I want my sexbot [backofthebook.ca] ! I don't want a cute dog robot, I don't want a dinosaur robot, what, is there no market for sexbots?

Don't Worry (1)

alphasubzero949 (945598) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817136)

A few lottery balls ought to unclog the tubes.

Economist is F***ing ignorant (2, Insightful)

knorthern knight (513660) | more than 6 years ago | (#21817346)

1)The biggest road-hog remains spam (unsolicited e-mail), which accounts for 90% of traffic on the internet.

Spam does *NOT* constitute 90% of all internet traffic. It constitutes 90% of all emails. At 10-to-15 kbytes each, they're not exactly overwhelming the internet. I should also point out that an email with multiple recipients at the same ISP goes as one email, and is exploded into multiple copies at the receiving ISP. This reduces the internet traffic even more. The biggest single traffic use is bittorrent and friends. Streaming video and legit online/download sales of movies might challenge it in future.

2) Soon, portable media-players, personal navigators, digital cameras, DVD players, flat-panel TV sets, and even mobile phones won't be able to function properly without access to the internet.

OMFG, NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! The only way you'll see that is if linux is outlawed, and DRM-crippled computers/mediaplayers won't function without a live connection to the mothership.

3) Apple's initial response was to attempt a heavy-handed crackdown. But then a court decision in Germany forced its local carrier to unlock all iPhones sold there. Good news for iPhone owners everywhere: a flood of third-party applications is now underway.

The decision was overturned on appeal [sfgate.com] three weeks ago.

4)The trend toward openness has been given added impetus by the recent collapse of the legal battles brought by SCO, a software developer. Formerly known as Santa Cruz Operations, the firm bought the Unix operating system and core technology in 1995 from Novell (which, in turn, had bought it from its original developer, AT&T).

Dear Economist, please hire Dan Lyons. He's a helluva lot more knowledgable about the SCOX case than you are. Sad, isn't it? Santa Cruz Operations sold their Unix distribution business to Caldera, who later renamed themselves The SCO Group and started trying to shake down linux users.

5)Pressured by worried customers fearing prosecution, a handful of Linux distributors settled with SCO just to stay in business.

NO. A handful of firms that use linux in their business signed SCOSource licences. None of these firms were linux distributors. The reporter might be confusing the SCOSource licence, with Microsoft's FUD licence, which a few distributors actually have signed.

And fer-cryin-out-loud, please knock off this bit about "The Year Of The Linux Desktop". Linux is growing slowly, relative to the overall market. It will overtake Apple, and eventually Windows. But it will be a long slow grind. What might happen is that one year people will stop counting sales (obviously $0 even for millions of free copies) and start counting desktops. Much to the establishment's surprise, they'll discover that there's a helluva lot more linux desktops than they expected.

What is left? (1)

slashhack230 (1204732) | more than 6 years ago | (#21819084)

What will happen in 2008? I mean there is nothing new really on the horizon as far as I can tell:
We've seen many things happen in the past 10 to 15 years
1. Revolution in digital music.
2. Unification of devices(finished with Apple iPhone)
3. New web technologies things like Ruby, J2EE, ASP.NET and PHP
4. A Web 2 woe
5. XML
6. RSS
7. Podcasts
8. Blogs
9. Forums
10. Office applications
11. Accounting software
12. Database software( MySql, MS SQL, Oracle)
13. wikipedia and other online research tools like answers.com
14. Open source software
What will be the next big thing? Can you think of anything!!!
What is left on my computer that hasn't already been done or demonstrated?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?