7 posts • joined Wednesday 4th November 2009 13:01 GMT
"I agree the article could have been written more clearly, but I think it took as much as 20 seconds to check the PCWorld site"
Yes, but el Reg is /supposed/ to be a news aggregator (with a teensy bit of editorial control chucked in).
I have to side with those above who are critical of the poorly written churnalism that TFA is an example of.
Over engineering yet again
I've got one of these chargers, and it's good -- small and quick to charge. You never needed software for the charger to work, and it has a light on the actual hardware device that indicates charging/charged status. As one of the forgotten few -- I'm a Linux user -- I never even attempted to install any software. What idiocy made Energizer think that you needed any damn software in the first place? Pillocks.
Q. When is a promise not a promise?
A. When it's made by Canonical/Ubuntu.
Front page of the Ubu website (http://www.ubuntu.com/) we have: "The Ubuntu promise... Ubuntu core applications are all free and open source". Google Docs is open source? Really? Great job, $huttleworth.
"A purely GPL license would not confer things like intellectual-property rights to a single company"
Not necessarily true. Some open source organisations ask that contributors transfer their rights to the organisation. A prime example being the FSF/GNU project...
> Canonical is a private company of 200 employees...
That was something that I've often wondered. Can you breakdown by job function? I'm curious how many are actually doing technology/support, and how many artwork, marketing and other fluffy stuff?
[And yes, I /am/ an *buntu user, but am amazed at how little progress Canonical seem to have made in the last year or two towards that seamless user experience...]
- Analysis BlackBerry Messenger unleashed: Look out Twitter and Facebook
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Nine-year-old Opportunity Mars rover sets NASA distance record
- Prankster 'Superhero' takes on robot traffic warden AND WINS
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE