Except open source isn't a trademarked term. I even posted a quote from Eric S. Raymond above to show this:
We have discovered that there is virtually no chance that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would register the mark "open source"; the mark is too descriptive. Ironically, we were partly a victim of our own success in bringing the "open source" concept into the mainstream.
IBM might be a big US company but it is hardly focused "almost entirely" on open source. Pretty much all of their hardware is proprietary, their own Unix is proprietary, they sell all sorts of proprietary tools like Lotus Notes, ClearCase and the rest of the Rational tools, etc. Sure you can point out a number of projects and things they work on and support that are open source, but those hardly make up even a significant portion of their portfolio.
And if that's not enough here is this page from Eric S. Raymond himself:
We have discovered that there is virtually no chance that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would register the mark "open source"; the mark is too descriptive. Ironically, we were partly a victim of our own success in bringing the "open source" concept into the mainstream.
"Open source" is a trademark of OSI, who fortunately are not evil AFAICT.
No, it's not. According to their own page their trademarks are for OSI, Open Source Initiative and the OSI logo. If you don't believe me here's the quote:
OSI, Open Source Initiative, and OSI logo ("OSI Logo"), either separately or in combination, are hereinafter referred to as "OSI Trademarks" and are trademarks of the Open Source Initiative.
Perhaps they could, but aren't examples like the kernel, mysql etc proof that open source endeavors are just as capable in providing "proprietary quality" products as closed houses are.
Only if you ignore the fact that MySQL was funding it's development by selling licenses for it's proprietary version.
Especially when they don't have to worry about any backlash from their customers as the government will just give them immunity from any suits after the fact.
That's because the demo discs are far more compressed than the actual releases. You see the exact some pixelation problems on demo DVDs. I agree with the sentiment though that their demo discs should look a lot better when they are trying to sell the product, though.
Artifacts which I would not have noticed on DVD are readily apparent on BluRay disk.
Unless you are talking about film grain, I have no clue what "artifacts" you are talking about as Blu-Ray, outside of the early Mpeg-2 releases, and HD DVD both use more efficient compression codecs than DVD does. If you are talking about film grain, yes it is more apparent now due to the higher resolution which is able to resolve such detail now, but it is supposed to be there.
Ultimately, both the FPS and RTS genre are undoubtedly better on the PC. Why? The mouse is a superior controller in any of those genres. Plain simple. Someone seems a bit butthurt that they get owned constantly on console FPS by people half their age. Seriously, I've never seen any real reason why people constantly whine about FPS games on console other than the fact that they suck at them.
So you're point is that the BMI chart pegged you correctly? You do know that 24% body fat puts you in the obese region, right? The recommended adult male body fat percentage is between 8-14%.
Boohoo. It's about time someone started telling the little fatties the truth instead of feeding them the nonsense like "you're not fat, you're just big boned". I did find this quote in the linked story to be hilarious:
"She is solidly built but not fat. She was devastated to be called fat and we had to work hard to convince her she isn't. "Solidly built". LOL. Good euphemism there.
Didn't even bother to read the summary?
and is able to show the difference between nitrate esters (trinitroglycerin) and nitroaromatic explosives (TNT).
Slashdot Mirror
A RISC based architecture would be much better suited for todays computers.
Is this ignoring the fact that modern x86 chips from Intel are basically RISC chips with a CISC to RISC interpreter bolted on?
That's a little dishonest.
You mean except for the fact that Monty himself has made the exact statement?
Nokia aquired QT about a year ago, and Nokia has added more free licenses (LGPL).
Nokia acquired QuickTime and it released the code under the LGPL?
Except open source isn't a trademarked term. I even posted a quote from Eric S. Raymond above to show this:
We have discovered that there is virtually no chance that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would register the mark "open source"; the mark is too descriptive. Ironically, we were partly a victim of our own success in bringing the "open source" concept into the mainstream.
IBM might be a big US company but it is hardly focused "almost entirely" on open source. Pretty much all of their hardware is proprietary, their own Unix is proprietary, they sell all sorts of proprietary tools like Lotus Notes, ClearCase and the rest of the Rational tools, etc. Sure you can point out a number of projects and things they work on and support that are open source, but those hardly make up even a significant portion of their portfolio.
And if that's not enough here is this page from Eric S. Raymond himself:
We have discovered that there is virtually no chance that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would register the mark "open source"; the mark is too descriptive. Ironically, we were partly a victim of our own success in bringing the "open source" concept into the mainstream.
"Open source" is a trademark of OSI, who fortunately are not evil AFAICT.
No, it's not. According to their own page their trademarks are for OSI, Open Source Initiative and the OSI logo. If you don't believe me here's the quote:
OSI, Open Source Initiative, and OSI logo ("OSI Logo"), either separately or in combination, are hereinafter referred to as "OSI Trademarks" and are trademarks of the Open Source Initiative.
Perhaps they could, but aren't examples like the kernel, mysql etc proof that open source endeavors are just as capable in providing "proprietary quality" products as closed houses are.
Only if you ignore the fact that MySQL was funding it's development by selling licenses for it's proprietary version.
Especially when they don't have to worry about any backlash from their customers as the government will just give them immunity from any suits after the fact.
I'm forced to run Linux .01 you insensitive clod!
Just stick to pointing out that he's hung like a toddler. You can't be sued for libel if the claim is true!
That's because the demo discs are far more compressed than the actual releases. You see the exact some pixelation problems on demo DVDs. I agree with the sentiment though that their demo discs should look a lot better when they are trying to sell the product, though.
Artifacts which I would not have noticed on DVD are readily apparent on BluRay disk.
Unless you are talking about film grain, I have no clue what "artifacts" you are talking about as Blu-Ray, outside of the early Mpeg-2 releases, and HD DVD both use more efficient compression codecs than DVD does. If you are talking about film grain, yes it is more apparent now due to the higher resolution which is able to resolve such detail now, but it is supposed to be there.
Go back to WoW you fucking carebear.
In Soviet Russia, distro benchmarks you!
Get your stinkin paws off me, you damned dirty ape!
You can't imagine all the problems I had with the alpha of Beta 1...
No, the correct phrase is 200+-layer recording medium. What exactly would "200 laser recording medium" mean?
So you're point is that the BMI chart pegged you correctly? You do know that 24% body fat puts you in the obese region, right? The recommended adult male body fat percentage is between 8-14%.
No, that's just a hole in the ground.
Who modded this up? The ether isn't what the article is talking about. The ods are doing an even more horrible job than normal.