Choose one of the articles below and then click the "comment" link to post a comment that includes the following:
>Title of article you read
>Brief summary of the article
>Your reaction - put some thought into it!
>Your name
ARTICLES:
Legislator Moves to Limit Google Maps Because of Terrorist Threat
http://cwflyris.computerworld.com/t/4490819/432338165/173401/0/
Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/03/02/09FE-desktop-linux-mainstream_1.html
Is Cloud Computing Inherently Evil?
http://weblog.infoworld.com/whurley/archives/2009/03/cloud_computing_5.html
You will be given a grade based on your depth of thought and professionalism. This is not a text message, so please use proper spelling and grammar. Please read your article and make a comment by Monday, March 9, to receive your full 25pts.
29 comments:
Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
Cheyenne Koch
The author of this article seems to think that Linux operating systems, like Ubuntu, have finally reached the stage of development that they can now be fully utilized as a common desktop system in most scenarios. But a few concerns still exist: first, most speciality software is not compatible with Linux, and second, do IT professionals know enough about it to confidently implement and secure Linux desktops within an existing network?
As an increasingly avid Linux user, I think some Linux operating systems (like Ubuntu, Fedora, & Mandriva) HAVE almost reached that mark of functionality and usability that allows them to be notable candidates in education and enterprise networks. Speaking from experience, I can honestly say that these Linux derivatives do provide an easy transition from XP and come with most of the basic software pre-installed that users require. Don't set up a Linux system to play your Windows XP games on (there's plenty of free Linux games available to download), but Linux systems are secure, user friendly, and best of all, FREE!
Desktop Linux: Ready for the mainstream
Adam Phelps
Some people are as stubborn as they can be, until they give what there fighting against a chance. This was exactly the case! Some may be happy with their copy of Windows or Mac but there also a free alternative out there, which is Linux. This article goes over with us one’s man thought on how Linux is actually ready.
Linux has many similarities with Windows and this article describes it in depth. What its trying to get at though people from businesses can basically switch from Windows to Linux in no time. This and the fact that Linux cost nothing compared to Windows makes businesses consider using Ubuntu.
Ubuntu has many apps that can replace those similar on Windows. For example, Open Office can replace Microsoft Office; they are basically the same thing. Only Open Office uses fewer resources and cost nothing! Saving money is ideal for any business. Also Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird are also compatible with Linux, both are great alternatives to the Microsoft apps. Firefox is well on its way to overtaking Internet Explorer as the dominant web browser.
Another subject mention in this article is how apps such as iTunes, or games couldn’t be installed on Linux. This, for businesses, is actually a good thing! Because this keeps employees from installing unwanted applications and actually staying on task and working.
Also discussed is how Linux worked with printers and hand held devices such as the iPod. Although business don’t need this, regular Joes do and will be happy with this functionality.
So, really, depending on what you need an OS for. Linux could be or could not be for you.
Nolan Park Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
I have never really used a Linux app or product so I don’t really know what to expect from them, but in the article it sounds to me like Linux operating systems have been vastly over shadowed by Windows operating systems like Vista, XP, and 7. But apparently Linux has created a desktop that is cheaper and simpler to use and navigate in the office of IT workers who really only use word documents and standard internet apps.
The article says that Windows operating systems are to complex and adored in to many cover ups to make it look better and make it hard to navigate. I have to disagree with that because, although Linux might be cheaper and be great for business use so is Windows operation systems as well. Plus I have been using Window XP and Vista for a will now and I have never had any problem figuring out how to find and work any of there apps. I actually would prefer to use Windows XP in the work place because I find it a great operating system and easy to use. Plus with all the other apps and compatibility with other components Windows XP has I cant even imagine ditching it for anything else. But hey if a company would rather use a Linux operating system then that is fine by me, but Windows operating systems are no were near as complex or as overly flashy as this article made them out to be. But hey it’s a maker of preference and taste as well, and the only real way to tell if anything is better is to test them all out yourself.
Jonathan Duncan
Linux ready for Mainstream
This article titled “Desktop Linux: Ready for the main stream”. Written by Galen Gruman was an article that explained how ubuntu 8.10 is the most user friendly OS that Linux has ever released. The new version of Ubuntu is supposed to be very reliable. 8.10 is supposed to take over the place of windows XP. 8.10 use all professional apps such as, Firefox, G-Mail, and other important apps. This article explains how the switch form Windows XP to Ubuntu 8.10 is very easy. The article also explains how the switch to Ubuntu is more user friendly than the switch to Vista or Windows 7.
I think that the switch from Windows XP to Ubuntu 8.10 is a very good switch. I have personally used 8.10 and I think that it is almost exactly like Windows XP. The GUI is shaped out like a MAC but the backbone is like XP. So your getting MAC looks but an XP backbone. Witch is an amazing thing.
Another issue in the article was that Linux is free and Windows Vista and 7 are hundreds of dollars. And some people are claiming that the new version of Ubuntu (8.10) is better than Visa or 7. Recently I have purchased Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit. And it is the best OS I have ever interacted with. But unlike me most of Americans think that Vista is not the way to go. And for the people that feel that way then 8.10 is definitely the way to go. I would highly recommend it to any company of to any consumer who doesn’t want to have to spend a lot of money on an OS but want a quality OS.
So in conclusion Ubuntu 8.10 is very much ready for the mainstream. Its great for company’s that need to switch from XP. And its also great for just the regular old Joe who wants an updated OS. It’s awesome and the best part of it is that it’s free!
The world of Linux, a good or bad transition? According to the article "Desktop Linux..." the writer explains how a transition from Windows XP to Ubuntu 8.10 (known as Hardy Heron) on desktop computers will be a mixed result. While you get a free OS that offers the exact basis of XP; you also get the downfall of no compatibility. Yes, Hardy Heron offers Wine as a "parallel" to adding the applications from XP, that originally won't install, to Heron ; but, not all programs will still work.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, I believe install Linux, specifically Ubuntu 8.04, will be great for the users that don't want to play PC games/use many compilers/ or don't like writing sudo command for every install. I had Hardy for about a year and a half and loved it, besides when someone wanted me to try a application that wasn't compatible with Linux. I did use Wine, but I constantly had to recheck wines website, seeing if the program I wanted installed would even work. (90% of the time it would be in the bronze level meaning it had major bugs, but, would work)
Ryan English
used "Desktop Linux:Ready for the mainstream"
Randy Luecke
Is Cloud Computing Inherently EVIL!?!?!?!
Brad Templeton the chairman of the EFF recently raised a valid point criticizing the potential privacy concerns of the recent online phenomenon of cloud computing. Cloud computing is the simply moving your desktop applications and data to the internet. The advantages of this are huge, but at the same time people need to understand what’s going on and how to protect themselves.
Mr. Templeton uses the fourth amendment of the United States constitution to back up his point. The fourth amendment states protects against warrant-less search and seizures. Templeton states that the fourth amendment doesn’t protect people who store their data on third party servers. Templeton presents this as a fundamental problem with cloud computing.
This problem represents a fundamental problem with the way the fourth amendment is interpreted, NOT cloud computing. As we see cloud computing become mainstream, as it soon will, this problem of privacy will present itself and could stall the development of cloud computing, which will hinder advancement. To fix this problem we need to pass legislation protecting the privacy of people regardless of who hosts the data. The fourth amendment is strongly written, and in the 21st century we cannot rely on 200 year old interpretations to protect us. In the end it will up to the user to protect themselves, and the owner of the services to be responsible with users data. Blaming cloud computing is a cop out answer to the problem.
Kyle Nieber
Is Cloud Computing Inherently evil?
Cloud Computing, also known as your app information and data being stored on the internet, is not evil, but rather we just need to know how to use it. Brad Templeton tells us in this blog that we need to know that it is a wonderful thing, but we must know the dangers of it.
We store so many things in unknown places: servers in michigan, montana, and england. I believe we should know that our information isn't necessarily safe according to the fourth amendment. I think Cloud computing is completely fine and that we shouldn't have to worry about our apps data being stored in third party areas, as long as we are careful with the information we hold, especially since the government won't back us up.
Cloud computing is a wonderful thing and the way of the future, it is not inherently evil. If you can't risk it, then you shouldn't even be on the internet at all.
Desktop Linux: Ready for Mainstream
"Desktop Linux is a great choice for many regular joes with basic computer needs." This is apparently so as stated by Galen Gruman the writer of this article. This concept is explained very thoroughly by the writer and I for one agree.
I would really like to try ubuntu I’ve only seen it running but never actually played with it. From what I’ve heard it’s a really great OS except for the compatibility problem. I would really like to see how it stands up to windows with mine own eyes, I believe it could possibly be better. But I don’t think I could deal with the compatibility it lacks to have. The pros of using ubuntu do seem like it will be worth running, if i could only get my hands on a copy (legally).
Desktop Linux: Ready for Mainstream
Austin Lambert
The writer is talking about how Linux is now ready to be used as a desktop. At first he laughed at the Idea, but now he is supporting it 100%. He explains how much better Linux is than windows XP.
I believe Linux would be a good decision because it doesn’t take as much space as windows or vista. As the author of the summary up top states “Linux is ideal for regular Joes with simple needs”. In the article were screen shots and it looked like Linux was easier and less complex as windows XP is. I am currently a windows user and I am now seriously considering switching to Linux because it is less expensive and smaller than Windows. The down side that I am debating is if you use ActiveX controls for your company's Web apps you would lack Internet Explorer which I use. Also not all programs are available for Linux. Also I have grown accustom to using Windows so if I switch I will have to learn how to use a new OS all over again. Another thing that isn’t that big is I don’t like how the tool bar is on the top of the screen instead of on the bottom.
Austin Hresko
Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
In my opinion, I myself do not think that Linux is ready for the mainstream. There are many factors that put Linux in a bad position. Many applications that businesses and government agencies use are not supported on the Linux OS. This may be a big problem for Linux if it went mainstream because certain applications such as internet explorer, Adobe Photoshop, and many Mac and Window applications that are widely used cannot be used on the Linux OS. Although Linux has some applications of its own, many users may not be used to the apps and may dislike them. Many businesses and other companies may not want to change Operating systems after being used to XP and 2000 for so long. It may be an easy change for some users but just the thought of change may be one reason why they won’t. If you are already used to XP and like it, why change operating systems in the first place. Businesses and government agencies have spent millions of dollars in training for Windows and Mac Operating Systems. This would just be money wasted if Linux replaced these OS’s. Another downside to Linux is that you can’t sync any iPod or iPhone, Windows Mobile Device, or other handhelds.
Although Linux may be a great operating system, I do not think users are ready for the change. Many applications are not meant to be ran on the Linux OS which makes Linux harder to get used to. Society is doing fine running Windows and Mac, so why make the change?
Legislator Moves to Limit Google Maps Because of Terrorist Threat
In this article it talks about limiting the detail of areas to possibly decrease terrorist attacks.
This is a double edged sword for all because as it would be good that the detail is limited since it is pointless to be perfect, it would also be somewhat pointless.
Terrorism has been going on for decades so if we ban the detail on online maps, what's next? They can still sit in the area and watch the places they decide they want to strike. All in all banning detail on Google maps won’t decrease terrorism because if they want to kill then they will, whether it the place they will get more deaths or not.
Legislator Moves to Limit Google Maps Because of Terrorist Threat
Jake York
A Californian legislator wants to limit the amount of detail submitted on Google map and Google earth because of a terrorist attack.
I agree with the legislator very little, he does make an interesting point that it could be used for terrorist attacks but the only thing a terrorist can gather from the digital images Google offers is routes and the main layout of the terrain. Google map doesn’t offer detail about what’s inside the building a terrorist is willing to attack, it only offers the physical outside structure of the place. Yeah it will show tops of roofs but he is missing details such as, the blueprint of the place is a lot more valuable and needed than just what the building looks like.
Do Google Maps = Terrorist Threat?
Nicholas Adams
The article states that terrorist, in the past, have used Google maps in order to plan their attacks. It says that there is too much detail in Google’s pictures for our own good. I, for one, agree with this. If we limit the detail in these maps, it would reduce this way of getting information. Some might ask, “Well what about other sites that offer the same view as Google?” If there was a limitation for ALL maps on the internet, that would fix the problem. Yes, you can still type in an address and find out where the building is located, but you will not have access to the buildings details, and the surrounding areas. Details such as parking structures, fire escapes, window arrangement, and many other details in online maps are irrelevant for those who are looking for directions. If the people who actually use the maps are not using these details, then why put them out there for everyone else to see? I agree that this won’t completely eliminate the threat of terrorist attacks; however, I feel when we have the chance to reduce the threat, we defiantly should.
Legislator Moves to Limit Google Maps Because of Terrorist Threat
The proposed Californian Legislation just shows where America is headed. The whole concept of "Limiting" Google Maps is blurring a certain area on the map. Hrmm... Let's blur a spot on a map on the internet that everybody can see... This is just asking to be bombed by terrorists, because it shows everyone "Potential Areas of Danger" When America is run by these kind of politicians... It scares me to see where we'll go next.
Desktop Linux: Ready for the mainstream
Gunnar Johnson
The author says how Linux is an excellent choice for those with very basic computer needs, but not for those with more complex needs.
I think Linux is a excellent OS choice for anybody. I don't have basic computer need (I do a lot of games) and I use Ubuntu for my main OS, and the only reason I even have a copy of Windows installed is for games I can't get running on Ubuntu. There is an application for almost everything one could ever need to do (Windows/Linux file sharing; media players; media encoders; photo editors). And terminal is quite easy to learn.
Legislator moves to limit Google Maps because of terrorist threat.
Dylan Mittendorf
A legislator from CA believes that terrorists are using Google Maps and Google Earth, which in the common eye are the very same thing, to plan future attacks.
In my own opinion, I think this bill is good and bad. Just think about it. Some previous terrorists have acknowledged that they have used these sources for their attacks. Though but without it, they still do the same exact thing. In these words, the terrorists using google to find places are still finding places with or without it. Limiting the use for all users is limiting the people. The masses do not like being limited, the spoiled brats that they are. Limiting these sources will not change anything except make many people mad. So in all i completely disagree with this bill and it should not be passed.
Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
Codi Slawson
Personally, I have never used any Linux OS before. Recently I've been using an older version of Windows Vista (which I deeply regret). From what I have read in this article, any Linux sounds like it really is ready to compete in the real world reality as Windows is. I also like the face that the GUI is somewhat the same and not as confusing as Windows would have it. This makes it sound simpler to use. The concerns are the same that I would worry about: incompatibility with advanced computer "gear" and misleading instructions to install internet browsers. Also, my main browser is the Internet Explorer which sort of puts a little negative effect on Linux. However, Mozilla isn't all that bad. I will use it if it's the only thing available.
I agree with the author thinking this OS is ready. It was said in the article that this system is recommended more for office users than specialty users, only because offices do not have the "specialty equipment" that a single user would use. I am not a specialty user, just another person who enjoys being on a computer. If Linux, itself, feels it is ready to run in the mainstream with Windows, I believe it will do well...it already has a good number of supporters who prefer Linux above anything else.
Desktop Linux: Ready for the Mainstream
Winston Ruley
Even though I have never used a Linux product and I don’t know what to expect, in the article it sounds as though Linux operating systems have been vastly over powered by operating systems like Vista, XP, and Mac. But apparently Linux has now created an OS that is simpler to use and navigate in the office of IT workers who basically use word documents and standard applications.
The article states that Windows operating systems are too favored and complex, and has to many cover ups to make it look better. I have to disagree with that because, although Linux is free and could be great for business use, but so is Windows operation systems. Also Windows is a default OS for most computers. Plus I have been using Windows and Vista ever since I have used computers and I have had very little problems figuring out how to find and use any of the Windows applications. I actually would prefer to use a Windows operating system in the work place simply because I find it a great easy to use and a powerful operating system. Plus with all the other applications and compatibility Windows operating systems has I cant really imagine using some other cheap OS with no compatibility and few applications. But some companies would rather use a Linux operating system for its free and most companies are cheap. Personally if I owned a company I would use Windows despite the cost.
Google Maps Terrorist Threat?
Kevin Lang
In my opinion about the whole issue i do not agree with the legislator at all. He says that terrorists are using google maps to gain information about certain places so he wants to "blur" certain spots. Bluring a spot on google maps is only going to make it worse. What do you think the terrorists will think when he sees a blurred out spot on the map? dont you think that might throw a red flag to him that that might be an important spot? Trying to hide spots on a world map only paints that spot bright red and is begging for a terrorists attack there soon. If teerorists are really using google maps to bomb areas then the reasonable thing to do would to take it offline for the safty of others. People wont die if they dont have google maps so it shouldnt be a big deal. But in even doing that terrorists will only find other ways to gain information. Google maps is not the problem and again blurring it will only escalate the problem.
Desktop Linux: Ready for Mainstream
Hayes Buchanan
I do think that Linux is ready for mainstream. The only reason I think this is because it doesn't run all the same programs that XP or Mac can run. Also the fact that it doesn't run a lot of games would not be good for most people. You could download Linux games but it's probably like playing an Atari. There would be a lot of people who wouldn't use it for that reason alone. The only reason I could see Linux in use at the moment would be for people who just use their computer for simple needs like email and accessing the internet. Another reason would be for starting businesses because if your starting a business then you want to save as much money as you can and Linux is free. Those two reasons are the only reasons they should be used in my opinion.
Desktop Linux: Ready for the mainstream
In my opinion I think that he was entirely true about it being perfect for small businesses because it free first of all is easier to use and they wouldn't really use the OS for gaming so they wouldn't rally have to have it compatible, but if they needed to put programs like compilers they wold be out of luck.
But, on the other hand like he said this OS isn't really for gamers because like he said this isn't really compatible with windows game because I tried two windows games and they couldn't install either of them, so that shows that even though it's free doesn't mean its the best thing in the world.
In the end I like the new Linux OS is a hit .
Kyle McDonald
Legislator moves to limit Google Maps because of terrorist threat.
Rodney Curry
Joel Anderson, a Californian legislature submitted a bill stating that he would like to limit the detail of Google Maps due to terrorist attacks. I agree with him for the most part, because even in the article a terrorist stated that they have used Google Maps in the past, and who's not to think they'll use it again? Yea they can get all the outside information such as the surrounding environment and whatnot, but what about the inside detail? That information is pretty much unreachable because Google Maps doesn't go that far in depth on the buildings. The inside information is way more important than the outside, and without that you can't pull a successful attack. I do however somewhat disagree on this because if you single out specific areas on the Google Maps, that just shows the terrorists the important areas we don't want destroyed. Whose to know if they see those specific areas they'll know immediately that it's something we don't want them to attack, and they'll take what little information they know, and they'll take advantage of that, and attack.
Legislator Moves to Limit Google
Maps Because of Terrorist Threat
-Kenzie "Danger" Nance
The article states that terrorist have used Google maps in order to plan their attacks. It states there is too much detail in Google’s pictures.
I agree with this article stating Google maps have too much detail. Google maps have an immense amount of detail that could simply be toned down for the general safety of our country. I don’t think there are any large issues with Google maps. I simply believe that our government has just proposed to increase our security.
At the same time though Google maps only offers an outside physical view of a structure. So this could easily be argued that limiting Google maps will have no affects on terrorism.
Desktop Linux: Ready for the mainstream Brandon Holder
The article talks about how governments and major businesses are changing to Linux more and more. The reason for this is because of high costs of Vista or Windows 7. Most of the Linux users are major businesses and government official. Most home computers still are using Windows. The reason being is Windows is most well known. Even though Linux came FIRST!!! Linux is trying their best all the time to get better and better so they’ll get more users. Linux already has a lot of home users in Asia and Europe. They're trying to totally get rid of Windows. Personally I love Windows. That's probably because that's all I've ever used. So, I don't have much of an opinion about Linux.
Legislator Moves to Limit Google Maps because of Terrorist Threat...
Brittany Harrington
California wants to pass i bill that limits Google Maps. Because of terrorist attacks. I agree with the legislator. Google Maps has to much information available for many freaks out there... So to be on the safe side things should be blurred out or something like that...
People Search Engines: They Know Your Dark Secrets
As it is something to worry about with all the information people can find out about you, if they do it is only your part. The only things that can be searched up on the internet about you is WHAT YOU POST! so if someone, like in the article, finds out you want an electric nose trimmer, they only know it since you have it typed somewhere on the internet at a site such as myspace or facebook. so its your fault.
Kevin Lang- People search engines
I believe that the search engines are good and need to stay. If people don't want people to know there dark secrets then they shouldn't post them on a nationwide internet. They should keep that stuff to themselves. Search engines are great because they might help you find a friend from your high school years. They should not be taken off because they are helpful in many ways. DON'T POST IF YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW!!!
Post a Comment