Slashdot Mirror


Introducing Nvu, A Web-Authoring Application

An anonymous reader writes "MozillaZine is reporting that the first public beta of Nvu has been released. "What's that?", I hear you cry. Well, Nvu (pronounced 'N-View', short for 'New View') is a new open source WYSIWYG Web page creator/editor with FTP facilities that produces standards-compliant code. It is based on Mozilla Composer and is being developed by ex-Netscape employee Daniel Glazman's new company, Disruptive Innovations, under licence for Lindows.com. All the code for Nvu will be released back into the wild under the MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-licence. More information is available in the Nvu FAQ. Users of LindowsOS, other Linux distributions and Windows 98 and later can download Nvu 0.1 now." TheWanderingHermit writes points out that the feature list includes "(finally!) the ability to include and edit forms."

88 comments

  1. Impressive. by Beatbyte · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you see his screenshots, they seem impressive. I'm at 85% right now and plan on doing some testing tonight with it.

    1 less reason to get stuck with DreamWeaver MX at work ;)

    1. Re:Impressive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dream Weaver? That was so back in the days...GoLive is way better IMO.

    2. Re:Impressive. by dedazo · · Score: 1

      That sounds like switching from Photoshop to the Gimp. I don't think this thing is quite ready for primetime.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    3. Re:Impressive. by Beatbyte · · Score: 1

      I've had problems with Dreamweaver saving (error in a JavaScript file that actually does the file i/o). My company's web services department has decided to use HomeSite (comes with DWMX) instead of DreamWeaverMX because of some other bugs they found (destroying code bugs).

      Either way, step in right direction, no? ;)

    4. Re:Impressive. by wembley · · Score: 1

      > 1 less reason to get stuck with DreamWeaver MX at work ;)

      Dream Weaver... I believe you can get me through the night
      Dream Weaver... I believe we can reach the morning light.

      http://www.lyrictracker.com/show.php?id=NTk3ODU=

      --

      Share and Enjoy!

  2. That's just fucking great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    new open source WYSIWYG Web page creator/editor with FTP facilities

    Just when the world finally stopped caring about FrontPage and FrontPage look alikes and started implementing MovableType, pMachine and fully-GPLed WordPress and other content-management system for full blown sites, open source community comes up with something no one gives a fuck anymore, since we've moved on from FrontPage.

    Way to go, guys, innovation at its best. So in 5 years can I except a full framework for XML-driven clients (hint: Microsoft OneNote) being a new innovation??

    1. Re:That's just fucking great! by dedazo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I fail to see how OneNote is relevant here. Perhaps you meant InfoPath? And even then it's irrelevant. It's an intranet forms engine.

      And BTW, not everyone wants to do blogs or portals. So more often than not, things like MT or Plone are overkill.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  3. yhbt hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for starters, it will run on more platforms than dreamweaver...

    1. Re:yhbt hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's definitely awesome. When I develop my HTML, I need to switch between 4 or 5 different platforms, as Micro$oft sucks!!!! and Windoze does not fully offer the capabilities for building good HTML.

    2. Re:yhbt hand by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      dreamweaver runs on at least 90% of desktop machines. This thing will run on 1% or less.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    3. Re:yhbt hand by Goose+In+Orbit · · Score: 1

      Very curious...

      If Windows accounts for 90%, how does (Windows + Linux) account for less than 1% ?

    4. Re:yhbt hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows accounts for about 94%, actually. Macs are about 5%.

      Leaving 1% for "other."

  4. Not really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not really. Dreamweaver has windows and mac, this has windows and linux.

  5. Missing DLLs on Windows by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 4, Informative

    For Windows users... like Firebird (pre 0.8) you can just unzip this and go. However, you may get it bitching about missing DLLs (I did, on a reasonably clean install of XP). The two that were missing were C runtime libraries, which I managed to download at dll-files.com (never heard of it before, but it works). msvcp70.dll and msvcr70.dll. As ever, exercise caution, although it has worked for me :-)

  6. Who would have thunk it? by 7-Vodka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Lindows, the new model free-software citizen. They're also supporting kde-look.org and kde-apps.org... What else are they contributing?

    --

    Liberty.

    1. Re:Who would have thunk it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not surprised. Their CEO, Michael Robertson, goes way back in supporting Open Source software. He was one of the first main contributors to ReiserFS way back when, because MP3.com used it.

      Here are some of the projects supported by Lindows.com: http://lindows.com/opensource

  7. Where is the open source? by axxackall · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the web-site: Nvu is 100% open source

    Downloading, untar.gzippining, looking for the source code among all those x86 dlls, still looking, ... not found!

    Hey! Either stop lying that it is 100% open source or publish a compilable source. Now!

    --

    Less is more !
    1. Re:Where is the open source? by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 1
      This is the same thinking - it's 100% open source, but links to a few system dlls.

      Parallel with a proprietary application, that links to a few open source (kernel) system libraries, and maybe a few LGPL libraries as well.

    2. Re:Where is the open source? by poulbailey · · Score: 2, Informative

      > From the web-site: Nvu is 100% open source

      Also from the website:
      "Nvu 0.1 binary test builds are now available for Linux and Windows. The source code of Nvu will be released when we reach a more complete product in terms of features. The code will be tri-licensed MPL/GPL/LGPL and we'll contribute it back to Mozilla.org at that time."

      I don't know enough about these licenses to know if this is kosher though.

    3. Re:Where is the open source? by axxackall · · Score: 0
      This is the same thinking - it's 100% open source, but links to a few system dlls.

      It doesn't link to system dlls - it is distributed with system specific dlls.

      Still think that it is open source?

      Let me put it even more straight for you:

      1. download it;
      2. untar.gzip it;
      3. remove all binary-libraries;
      4. try to build it or run it;
      5. try to understand that it is not open source if it is not buildable or runable without those binaries;
      --

      Less is more !
    4. Re:Where is the open source? by axxackall · · Score: 1
      So, the source code is not distributed yet, while the binary is distributed. Under GPL. Hmm... I see the direct violation of GPL here. Time to call Richard Stallman...

      Seriously, if the source code is not available yet, then

      1. they should not license it under GPL
      2. and they should not claim it as 100% open source
      ... liers ...
      --

      Less is more !
    5. Re:Where is the open source? by be-fan · · Score: 2, Informative

      But its not licensed under the GPL yet. The site says that the source will be tri-licensed under the GPL.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    6. Re:Where is the open source? by poulbailey · · Score: 1

      > But its not licensed under the GPL yet.

      It's based on Mozilla Composer and that program's GPL'ed.

    7. Re:Where is the open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    8. Re:Where is the open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying they should take it down and not share ANYTHING?

      That's lame. Chill out. They said they'd post the code soon.

      Stop looking a gift horse in the mouth.

    9. Re:Where is the open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... liers ...

      So you're saying they are people who lie down a lot? Or did you mean liars, as in they don't tell the truth? If you're going to flame, learn to fucking spell first.

    10. Re:Where is the open source? by glazou · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hi there; I am Daniel Glazman, the lead engineer on Nvu project. The only reason why the source is not here _today_ is because we are totally overloaded. We got, in the last weeks, a so increasing number of requests for a preview version that we wanted/needed FIRST OF ALL to address that request. Hey, if we release nothing, /.ers say it's a fake project and when we release something, I read complaints ;-)

      More seriously, we're only humans and we gave higher priority to the test package, just because much more people care about that... We hope to be able to release the source by the end of this week.

      More info about the missing Windows dlls or linux libs is available from my blog. Thanks.

    11. Re:Where is the open source? by a.koepke · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's based on Mozilla Composer and that program's GPL'ed.

      Since when is Mozilla releasing stuff under GPL?

      All their projects are released under the Mozilla Public License.

      --


      (\(\
      (^.^)
      (")")
      *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
    12. Re:Where is the open source? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      try to understand that it is not open source if it is not buildable or runable without those binaries

      It might not be GPL "compliant" if those binaries aren't standard system binaries, but that doesn't mean it isn't open source.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    13. Re:Where is the open source? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      The only reason why the source is not here _today_ is because we are totally overloaded.

      And I bet the slashdotting you are receiving is really helping, huh? At least the article was posted in the developers.slashdot.org ghetto:)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    14. Re:Where is the open source? by glazou · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And I bet the slashdotting you are receiving is really helping, huh?

      I hope you find some pleasure attacking people without knowing them. Just ask other Mozillians, or my former Netscape colleagues : when I say the _only_ reason is time, the _only_ reason is time. The decision to make the source available with 0.1 was taken long before this /. post and your so friendly answer.

    15. Re:Where is the open source? by Compuser · · Score: 1

      I am actually surprised you guys released compiled
      version. Why take the time. Just dump code out there
      (I assume compile process is well documented with
      Mozilla). In any case, your efforts are appreciated,
      especialy when the tri-licensed release happens, but
      even before that too.

    16. Re:Where is the open source? by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 1
      it is distributed with system specific dlls.

      The DLLs in question are the Microsoft C Runtime Libraries mentioned in another thread, which were not distributed with the archive. Call it an artifact of developing the windows version in MSVC++ (Visual Studio)

      And no, it's not open source at the moment because we can't download the source. It is planned to be open source once it gets more feature complete though.

    17. Re:Where is the open source? by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 1
      I read his post as kinda sympathetic. Everyone knows how a /.ing tends to take down sites, and the fact that developers.slashdot.org doesn't get a huge amount of posts and/or readers _does_ help mitigate that a bit.

      Don't take things so seriously - this is the /. comments section after all :P

    18. Re:Where is the open source? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Chill. Go reread it. I was clearly sympathizing with the guy. He is on a schedule, being hammered, and then Slashdot shows up with fuel on the fire.

      Lithium: it does a body good.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    19. Re:Where is the open source? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I was totally sympathetic. I only pointed out 'developers' because things could be MUCH worse for his website, and, well, for a place that is 'for Nerds', developers.slashdot.org seems to get far less traffic than ask, YRO, or games, which is kinda sad.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    20. Re:Where is the open source? by Finuvir · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mozilla is in the middle of moving all of their code (with the permission of contributers) to a GPL/LGPL/MPL tri-licence. The Mozillazine article Relicensing of Majority of Mozilla Codebase to Begin Soon has the details.

      --
      Why is anything anything?
    21. Re:Where is the open source? by poulbailey · · Score: 1

      > Since when is Mozilla releasing stuff under GPL?

      Saying Mozilla is GPL'ed was a slipup on my part, since it's only half the truth. It's tri-licensed and the GPL is one of these licenses. Let me quote http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html for you:

      "We are now implementing Mozilla relicensing using an MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license."

    22. Re:Where is the open source? by poulbailey · · Score: 1

      > So you're saying they should take it down and not share ANYTHING?

      No.

    23. Re:Where is the open source? by be-fan · · Score: 1

      But it hasn't started yet, and thus the MPL is still in effect, no?

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    24. Re:Where is the open source? by Finuvir · · Score: 1

      All of the code contributed by Mozilla Foundation employees or Netscape employees has already been relicenced. My understanding is that there's very little left that is only MPL or NPL.

      --
      Why is anything anything?
    25. Re:Where is the open source? by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      > So you're saying they should take it down and not share ANYTHING?

      No.
      Then what are you saying?
      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    26. Re:Where is the open source? by poulbailey · · Score: 1

      > Then what are you saying?

      I'm not saying anything. There hasn't been any opinions in any of my posts in this story. Why's that so hard to grasp?

  8. Warning - HTML files containing PHP code by a.koepke · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't use this program to edit any HTML files containing PHP code. It does not like PHP code and will actually modify the file and partially remove your PHP code.

    So... unless you feel like loosing your programming code and completely stuffing up your file, stay away from this program.

    --


    (\(\
    (^.^)
    (")")
    *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
    1. Re:Warning - HTML files containing PHP code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that different than normal PHP behavior?

  9. Nvu site...white space by toddlg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What's with all the white space at the bottom of most pages on their site?






    http://nvu.com/features.html

    1. Re:Nvu site...white space by togofspookware · · Score: 1

       



      (about 20 times).

      Probably used Nvu to make the page :P

      (I know, I know, they probably didn't, but what's that say about their web desigh sk!11z?)
      --
      Duct tape, XML, democracy: Not doing the job? Use more.
    2. Re:Nvu site...white space by toddlg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was hoping Nvu didn't add that automatically... Front Page Express would always do crazy stuff like that...

    3. Re:Nvu site...white space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blame the browser. There's no reason to render a "paragraph" that contains nothing but whitespace (or other stupidity like leading whitespace and redundant BR elements).

  10. Not running on Fedora Core 1 by mshiltonj · · Score: 3, Informative

    I just downloaded it to my Fedora Core 1 machine, and couldn't getting it to run.

    NOTE: The tarball unpacks into the current directory! It doesn't create a subdirectory for itself!

    There is no 'install' script at all. Untarring is the installation, so put it where you want.

    When I run it, it fails and reports that I'm missing two libraries, one I do have and one I don't.

    I looked at the start script and it's got a Mozilla 1.7a path hardcoded in there. I'm running Mozilla 1.6, so that's probably part of the problem.

    The script also seems to expect an installation of the MRE (Mozilla Runtime Environment) Is this it?

    There's no README file, no LICENSE file, no docs of any kind. It'd be nice to have the dependencies identified.

    Anyone else getting it running on Fedora Core 1? With or without Mozilla 1.7a? With or without the MRE/GRE?

    Still hoping for the best...

    1. Re:Not running on Fedora Core 1 by mchappee · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did the same. If you're getting a complaint about libstdc++.so.3 then do this:
      ln -s /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5.0.5 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.3

      After that it ran. No symbol mismatches.

      Matthew

      --
      /. finds me to be 20% Troll, 80% Funny
    2. Re:Not running on Fedora Core 1 by mshiltonj · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did the same. If you're getting a complaint about libstdc++.so.3 then do this:

      ln -s /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5.0.5 /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.3


      That was the problem, and after making that link, I am able to start nvu. Thanks!

      Mod parent up!

  11. Re:Do not download yet -- wait till I'm done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've forgotten what it's like to be on 56K, haven't you?

  12. Re:That's just f*cking great! by LarryRiedel · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... we've moved on from FrontPage.

    I think the primary potential value offered by Nvu is as a clean free WYSIWYG HTML/CSS page editor. I do not know of anything even yet on the horizon to make such a thing obsolete. Heck, I'm still waiting for correct CSS2 and PNG alpha channel support in IE... :-)

    Larry

  13. dumb abbreviations by Teach · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nvu (pronounced 'N-View', short for 'New View')

    While I agree that Nvu is a pretty cool name, why do people feel the need to "shorten" something that's already just two syllables? And NewView even seems to roll off the tongue more easily than N-View.

    At least it's not as bad as "WWW", which is a nine-syllable "abbreviation" for the three-syllable phrase "World-Wide Web". Radio announcers all over are still cursing Tim Berners-Lee for that one.

    --
    Graham "Teach" Mitchell, computer science teacher, Leander HS
    1. Re:dumb abbreviations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just go to "dub-dub-dub.people'll-find-a-way.com"

      (c:

    2. Re:dumb abbreviations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But "dub-ya dub-ya dub-ya" is only 6 syllables.

    3. Re:dumb abbreviations by vitalitychernobyl · · Score: 2, Informative

      Radio announcers all over are still cursing Tim Berners-Lee for that one.
      That's because they are even dumber than the abreviation and haven't figured out the one syllable slang replacement (dub dub dub)

      --
      Automatics are for old men
    4. Re:dumb abbreviations by addaon · · Score: 1

      wuh-wuh-wuh!

      A wuh, for wanda!

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    5. Re:dumb abbreviations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think it's a stupid name.

    6. Re:dumb abbreviations by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      Would you rather say "du-ble-you du-ble-you du-ble-you" or type "WorldWideWeb"?

      Could you imagine? "worldwideweb.netscape.org" "worldwideweb.eff.org" "worldwideweb.cnn.com"

      Yuck!

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    7. Re:dumb abbreviations by Teach · · Score: 1

      Would you rather say "du-ble-you du-ble-you du-ble-you" or type "WorldWideWeb"?

      Granted, www was intended to be a typed abbreviation rather than a spoken one. He could have gone with "web", though. It's just as easy to type (easier, in fact, since the letters are on different fingers) and clocks in with a mere one syllable! It's a win-win-win! (heh)

      In fact, I think "web.netscape.com" even looks nicer!

      --
      Graham "Teach" Mitchell, computer science teacher, Leander HS
    8. Re:dumb abbreviations by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1

      Of course, you realize that you can call it anything you want. "fred.netscape.com"; "getlost.netscape.com"; "html.netscape.com"; or even "netscape.com". "www" is just the common convention, but lots of sites don't follow it.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    9. Re:dumb abbreviations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's because the English language didn't figure out yet that a "W" is actually a "double V", not a "double U". Besides, in German it's much simpler. It's called "Veh". So "Veh-Veh-Veh" is much simpler than "Weltweites Netzwerk" :-P

  14. My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Landaras · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just sent this to 'feedback at nvu dot com', and will post whatever response I get to this thread.

    *************

    I recently learned of your project through a link from Slashdot.org.

    Link to Slashdot story: http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/0 2/04/0050215&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=154&tid=156&t id=95

    It appears that you are definitely filling a need within the F/OSS community, and I applaud your group and Lindows, your sponsor, for that.

    There appears to be some concern from the Slashdot community about the availability of source for Nvu. Although I am not a programmer of any real skill (and cannot fully judge if the tar.gz I downloaded contains human-readable source), others have complained that the full source is NOT included.

    Link to relevant Slashdot comment:
    http://developers.slashdot.org/comments. pl?sid=954 28&cid=8176411

    Although your site states that this is a Beta release, you also claim to build off of Mozilla Composer, which is available under the GPL (and two other licenses). If Mozilla Composer was distributed only under the GPL, it would require you to make full source available to those you re-distribute to.

    However, I have noticed that Composer is available under the GPL / MPL / LGPL. I would greatly appreciate clarification of how your obligations differ under these licenses, as I am significantly less familiar with them. You may also wish to update your FAQ with this information, as I am sure I am not the only one with these questions.

    I look forward to your reply, and the clearing up of any confusion that may exist in regards to this. Additionaly, I anticipate using Nvu and providing feedback to make this a great product for Lindows and all other users of F/OSS.

    Thank you for your time.

    - Neil Wehneman

    ***************

    1. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were them, my response would be...

      "OK, fine, we'll take it down and keep it for ourselves and not let you take a peek."

      I get so sick and tired of the religious fanaticism from the OS community. You'd bite of your nose to spite your face.

    2. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Landaras · · Score: 1

      I don't normally respond to AC's, but you raise a point worth responding to.

      You'll notice that I open and close this letter with sincere positives. I'm glad Lindows is bankrolling this, and although I'm not a Lindows customer, I look forward to working with them as an intelligent bug-submitting end-user to help them polish the product.

      With my questions about the license, I admit some ignorance and ask them for clarification. I toned down the initial language that I had in order to try to make this more professional.

      Nowhere did I threaten them or try to sound confrontational. I was simply confused about how they are ensuring license compliance, and asked for some additional information.

      If they were building on solely GPL'd software (which they are not), then Lindows / Nvu would have no legal right whatsoever to offer us "a peek" (as you put it). This is not the case, as Mozilla Composer is tri-licensed under the GPL / MPL / LGPL. My letter asked for clarification on what their rights are, as that question has been raised by others.

      I hardly see how asking politely and professionally to ensure that the legal rights of a community I am a part of are respected is "biting off my nose to spite my face."

      - Neil Wehneman

    3. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Keep an eye on the thread. I was gonna berate you for not reading it, but I notice that he posted his message one hour after you. Slagging you for not noticing might be unfair even on slashdot.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The answer is explained on Nvu's web site :

      Nvu 0.1 binary test builds are now available for Linux and Windows. The source code of Nvu will be released when we reach a more complete product in terms of features. The code will be tri-licensed MPL/GPL/LGPL and we'll contribute it back to Mozilla.org at that time.
    5. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Twylite · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Let me translate your own letter for you:

      Hi. Nice project, but I think you could be violating the GPL. I'm too rabidly Stallmanist to bother reading other licenses, and my statement is based entirely on hearsay anyway, but I'm making it your responsibility to address my problems.

      By not even bothering to find out about the other licenses, or if the source code is really unavailable, you are showing complete disrespect for the time, effort and finance that has gone into this project.

      --
      i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
    6. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by Landaras · · Score: 1

      I got the following from Tom Welch (CTO of Lindows) shortly after emailing him:

      ***

      Neil,

      The full source will be made available shortly. We are running fast
      and wanted to get it out as quickly as possible.

      Tom

      ***

      I emailed him back with the following:

      ***

      Tom,

      I appreciate the quick reply, and understand the hecticness of your
      situation. If you or a staffer can't get back to me for a couple of
      days, that's fine. However, I stil have my initial confusion about the
      license interaction involved with Nvu. As I'm sure you are aware, there
      are many people in F/OSS who view license compliance with a religious
      zealotry.

      I am not accusing Lindows / Nvu in any way of not abiding by the
      licenses upon which they are building. I am simply stating that many in
      the community (myself included) are very confused because we are not as
      familiar with tri-licensing and/or the MPL / LGPL.

      Breaking those licenses down, your rights and responsibilities under
      them, and how you are complying with them in your FAQ would be greatly
      appreciated.

      Perhaps you could say "We are fully complying with both the spirit and
      letter of the Open Source licenses that we are building upon. For a
      technical breakdown of this, please click here." This would answer the
      question for non-technical users / people who don't care but still
      provide a resource for those of us who try to stay on top of the legal
      framework that F/OSS is built upon.

      Thank you for your time and all your company is contributing to F/OSS,
      and I look forward to your reply.

      - Neil Wehneman

      ***

      I'll post anything else I get in reply.

      - Neil Wehneman

    7. Re:My Letter to Nvu Regarding Source by osssmkatz · · Score: 1

      I agree. Furthermore, I don't think Lindows knows. I'm the one that asked them (due to Slashdot complaints) to clarify Daniel Glazman's intent to tri-license the project and move it back into the trunk. Have you visited www.nvudev.org? Have you read the GNU GPL FAQs? Until Mozilla clarifies their own tri-licensing scheme.. I am certain Lindows will comply in good faith. They have cooperated fully with the FSF, and implemented all suggestions provided to them. Lindows itself is FSF-compliant and as you probably know they have a highly capable legal department. But I believe Daniel Glazman has the full copyright to the project.. Lindows is merely sponsoring it. Directing your inquiries to Glazman might shed more light and reassurance on the issue. The marketing rhetoric at www.nvu.org/features.html is hardly written by someone unfamiliar with Open Source. --Sam

  15. Re:That's just f*cking great! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    " Heck, I'm still waiting for correct ... PNG alpha channel support in IE.."

    Us artists are too.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  16. Say what you want about Lindows.com... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lindows.com takes lots of bullets from the Slashdot crowd, but it sure seem to me that Robertson and company actually deliver. Here's a list of things just in the last few months that Lindows.com has done:

    nVu released - Seems likea great product to rival Frontpage and is available for all Linux flavors and MSWin. Seems like Lindows.com paid for this whole thing. They seem to support lots of open source if you look at: http://lindows.com/opensource

    Desktop Linux Summit - Just announced that it will be held in April with sponsors such as Sun and Redhat. They are expecting 1000 people http://www.desktoplinux.org

    300,000 Laptops - Shipping 300,000 laptops at $699. This has to be the largest real deployment of desktop Linux. And unlike Sun's vapor announcement, they named the company, the model and the channel. Anyone know where you can buy one of these yet?

    Using P2P - They are first commercial company using P2P to distribute their software. I read this story on news.com. You can get LindowsLive from Bittorrent and other networks. See: lindows.com/p2p

    Standing up to the beast - They have a trial coming up to return the generic word "windows" to the public domain. I think they will win. See: http://lindows.com/mslawsuit

    Say what you want about Lindows.com marketing, but they're getting it done. desktop linux is happening because of these guys. they're also getting their machines sold in real stores, but I forget which ones (not just online).

  17. Nvu Source now available by glazou · · Score: 3, Informative

    The title says it all. MPL/GPL/LGPL as promised. Get it there.

    1. Re:Nvu Source now available by SeaEye420 · · Score: 1

      Wow! I'd just like to say thank you for all your hard work. I can't believe a few /. license trolls, who will probably never even look at the source(let alone submit patches), was enough for you to work extra hard and get the source out that fast. Like you haven't done enough for us already! They didn't deserve it, but thanks again and keep up the great work.

      --
      Wort Wort Wort!
  18. Re: dreamweaver by theblackdeer · · Score: 1

    CrossOver Office recently announced full support for DWMX. You could probably be even more bold than saying at least 90%.

  19. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the whole "Troll" thing failed, you guys tried "Flamebait."

    I swear, you zealot moderators just won't quit, will you?

    Of course, I notice that nobody has yet taken the time to answer my questions. I'm sure that's mostly because it got mod-bombed down to -1 and most people didn't see it, but could it also be because I touched on an uncomfortable truth?

  20. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got modded down because you have asked many of the same questions that have been beaten into oblivion about ten thousand times over the last few years concerning other projects . Also, your tone was somewhat snide and made it appear your mind is made up and that it would be a waste of time and effort to try and change it. Just because you feel it to be a well considered post doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

  21. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got modded down because you have asked many of the same questions that have been beaten into oblivion about ten thousand times over the last few years concerning other projects .

    I think you're overlooking something. The questions I asked might have been discussed before, but they've never been adequately answered in any context. Some people are evidently uncomfortable with that, and would rather ignore those things which they can't answer.

    Also, your tone was somewhat snide and made it appear your mind is made up and that it would be a waste of time and effort to try and change it.

    It's a waste of time to just repeat the same old non-answers.

    Just because you feel it to be a well considered post doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

    No, you can live in denial if you want to. It's just a shame that those who are made uncomfortable by such reasonable and thoughtful questions feel compelled to try to prevent others from seeing them through shameless abuse of the moderation system.

  22. Re:Why? by Omega996 · · Score: 1

    i burned my mod points earlier, otherwise i would've modded up your questions - they seem like good ones to me, FWIW.
    attacking the whole 'free software just because' is a crapshoot - i've been modded troll for it, but my last post about tools and work and being productive was modded up to +4... who woulda thunk?