Enlightenment is more like a baroque cathedral than anything modern... it looks good in photos, but people don't get real work done around E (instead they have to turn their display contrast/brightness knobs to maximum and buy a 20-inch screen to read the default font).
In my experience, an IDE CD burner enjoys making coasters if anything (even a screensaver) decides to share the computer with it. (My experience is with a Celeron366/Win95/Mitsumi IDE CD burner.)
I have never used a SCSI system, so I don't know what difference it would have.
The man's name is "Fred Brooks", and it is his law... therefore, the apostrophe should come after the "s". (i.e., it is "Brooks' Law" or "Brooks's Law".)
In fact, TNHD defines it as... Brooks's Law. (Follow the link on the page.)
Sorry about a flame over a technicality, but bad spelling and grammar gets on my nerves.
Regarding the last paragraph about users being unwilling to learn...
The learning curve from being illiterate to being able to write quickly with pencil and paper takes several years, and is taught at schools. Using a computer (except perhaps for Unix boxen) is significantly easier to learn. Once you know how to use a computer, computers seem easy to use.
Linux runs significantly faster than Windows on any machine I have tried it on (except for an old 486/33 with a Trident 8900 card). I haven't had any problems with graphics card config under Linux. I have set up over 5 computers to run Linux Xfree86 (from Slackware 2.5 to Mandrake 5.2), and the graphics card has never been a problem. Sound cards, on the other hand, have required rebuilding the kernel several times before they work. Ugh.
I can't see why people hate Netscape so much. I have only used IE a few times, but it was horribly bloated and slow on a 486, and reasonably slow even on a P3!
As far as I can tell, Netscape 4.0x (on Win95 and Linux) works perfectly with almost all pages; Netscape 3.x doesn't like PNGs or style sheets, but it works most of the time.
If they put watermarking devices in the Windows driver... then counterfeiters would use ghostscript and write directly to the printer.
No-one would be foolish enough to place watermarking systems into Ghostscript, in plain view for everyone to reverse engineer, erm, see. Or would they?
In Australia, we have plastic notes with microscopic text (i.e., cannot be duplicated accurately by a standard scanner). On top of this, a small part of each note is clear, so it can't be photocopied or printed with ordinary (``consumer'') equipment.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to stop the ``serious'' counterfeiters.
If you are spending more than $100, then you are probably better off getting `real' speakers (like for a stereo system). For example, speakers advertised as `surround' or `rear' speakers are smaller than full hi-fi but generally sound quite good. The downside of this is that you will probably need a separate power amplifier (although older sound cards such as the SB16 have built-in power amps that eliminate this need, a separate amplifrier sounds better & louder).
On the other hand, I know someone with Yamaha "multimedia" speakers that sound quite good and cost below $250. Beware of the power ratings of multimedia speakers, which are normally given in Watts PMPO ("Peak Music Power Output", which is nearly meaningless). Other speakers are normally rated in Watts RMS. But none of these terms really defines how loud they can go, or how good they sound.
Of course, it all depends on the situation and what you will use them for.
Mozilla doesn't have the market influence that IE and Microsoft have unfortunately gained. There are very few webmasters out there who would make Mozilla-specific pages, even if it were possible. Of course, if IE wasn't shipped with Windows this would not be the case.
I have used Netscape 3 Gold for Linux and it hasn't crashed on me once. I have also used Netscape 4.5 for Windows, and it crashes occasionally. I have never used IE3 or IE4, but I have used IE5 and it is... not very good. As far as I have noticed, Netscape3 and IE5 can both render almost all pages on the web, with the exception of Java pages and Plugin pages. (I avoid pages using Plugins even under Windows, and I almost always have Java turned off.)
Lynx manages to render most pages on the 'net, and if you run it under X11 it can render graphics, too.
No matter what you do to Mozilla for Linux, it won't be able to use Microsoft's latest OLE/VB/whatever plugins. Microsoft seems to have polluted the Java standard, unfortunately, which means that Mozilla probably has a fair bit of catching up to do.
Microsoft does not (yet) control the server standards, except indirectly through the FrontPage extensions. I am not sure exactly what the purpose of these are. It is perhaps more likely that MS will pollute the internet mail standards, with more and more people using `free' services like Hotmail.
I agree with RMS's article completely, except for his statements about the GPL not being a virus.
The article also repeats a widespread misunderstanding of the GNU GPL:
"But the GPL's expectation is that even the tiniest bit of GPLed source code, combined with your own, can "infect" your program with the GPL's redistribution terms.
Actually, the GPL states in Section 0:
This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language.
This seems to imply that if I copy any of the Emacs code, then the programme I write must be GPLed. Actually, I don't see any of this as a problem, except perhaps to commercial software developers. I like the idea that people can't take some GPLed code and reuse it in proprietary systems.
A final note: how can someone tell if GPLed code is being used in proprietary (i.e., closed-source) software, considering that commercial software doesn't come with any source to look at?
There is one drawback with any anti-piracy scheme: if it is possible to view a DVD (or head a CD), it is equally possible to record it (to a VHS tape, or a computer hard drive, or whatever). No copy-protection scheme for movies or music will be able to change that.
Of course, the "digital quality" duplicates will be better, but despite the encryption people use, eventually someone will break it.
Slashdot Mirror
Enlightenment is more like a baroque cathedral than anything modern... it looks good in photos, but people don't get real work done around E (instead they have to turn their display contrast/brightness knobs to maximum and buy a 20-inch screen to read the default font).
:)
In my experience, an IDE CD burner enjoys making coasters if anything (even a screensaver) decides
to share the computer with it. (My experience is with a Celeron366/Win95/Mitsumi IDE CD burner.)
I have never used a SCSI system, so I don't know
what difference it would have.
The apostrophes are in the wrong place.
The man's name is "Fred Brooks", and it is his law... therefore, the apostrophe should come after the "s". (i.e., it is "Brooks' Law" or "Brooks's Law".)
In fact, TNHD defines it as... Brooks's Law. (Follow the link on the page.)
Sorry about a flame over a technicality, but bad spelling and grammar gets on my nerves.
Regarding the last paragraph about users being unwilling to learn...
The learning curve from being illiterate to being able to write quickly with pencil and paper takes several years, and is taught at schools. Using a computer (except perhaps for Unix boxen) is significantly easier to learn. Once you know how to use a computer, computers seem easy to use.
Of course, I may be missing your point here.
Linux runs significantly faster than Windows on any machine I have tried it on (except for an old 486/33 with a Trident 8900 card). I haven't had any problems with graphics card config under Linux. I have set up over 5 computers to run Linux Xfree86 (from Slackware 2.5 to Mandrake 5.2), and the graphics card has never been a problem. Sound cards, on the other hand, have required rebuilding the kernel several times before they work. Ugh.
What is to stop someone from buying the full list of ZIP codes and then re-packaging them for free?
I can't see why people hate Netscape so much. I have only used IE a few times, but it was horribly bloated and slow on a 486, and reasonably slow even on a P3!
As far as I can tell, Netscape 4.0x (on Win95 and Linux) works perfectly with almost all pages; Netscape 3.x doesn't like PNGs or style sheets, but it works most of the time.
Presumably if it can be built into photocopiers, the techniques used couldn't be too complex.
Is there any Open-Source software around that create watermarks? How could I find out about how it works?
If they put watermarking devices in the Windows driver... then counterfeiters would use ghostscript and write directly to the printer.
No-one would be foolish enough to place watermarking systems into Ghostscript, in plain view for everyone to reverse engineer, erm, see. Or would they?
In Australia, we have plastic notes with microscopic text (i.e., cannot be duplicated accurately by a standard scanner). On top of this, a small part of each note is clear, so it can't be photocopied or printed with ordinary (``consumer'') equipment.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to stop the ``serious'' counterfeiters.
If you are spending more than $100, then you are probably better off getting `real' speakers (like for a stereo system). For example, speakers advertised as `surround' or `rear' speakers are smaller than full hi-fi but generally sound quite good. The downside of this is that you will probably need a separate power amplifier (although older sound cards such as the SB16 have built-in power amps that eliminate this need, a separate amplifrier sounds better & louder).
On the other hand, I know someone with Yamaha "multimedia" speakers that sound quite good and cost below $250. Beware of the power ratings of multimedia speakers, which are normally given in Watts PMPO ("Peak Music Power Output", which is nearly meaningless). Other speakers are normally rated in Watts RMS. But none of these terms really defines how loud they can go, or how good they sound.
Of course, it all depends on the situation and what you will use them for.
Mozilla doesn't have the market influence that IE and Microsoft have unfortunately gained. There are very few webmasters out there who would make Mozilla-specific pages, even if it were possible. Of course, if IE wasn't shipped with Windows this would not be the case.
I have used Netscape 3 Gold for Linux and it hasn't crashed on me once. I have also used Netscape 4.5 for Windows, and it crashes occasionally. I have never used IE3 or IE4, but I have used IE5 and it is ... not very good. As far as I have noticed, Netscape3 and IE5 can both render almost all pages on the web, with the exception of Java pages and Plugin pages. (I avoid pages using Plugins even under Windows, and I almost always have Java turned off.)
Lynx manages to render most pages on the 'net, and if you run it under X11 it can render graphics, too.
No matter what you do to Mozilla for Linux, it won't be able to use Microsoft's latest OLE/VB/whatever plugins. Microsoft seems to have polluted the Java standard, unfortunately, which means that Mozilla probably has a fair bit of catching up to do.
Microsoft does not (yet) control the server standards, except indirectly through the FrontPage extensions. I am not sure exactly what the purpose of these are. It is perhaps more likely that MS will pollute the internet mail standards, with more and more people using `free' services like Hotmail.
Actually, the GPL states in Section 0:
This seems to imply that if I copy any of the Emacs code, then the programme I write must be GPLed. Actually, I don't see any of this as a problem, except perhaps to commercial software developers. I like the idea that people can't take some GPLed code and reuse it in proprietary systems.
A final note: how can someone tell if GPLed code is being used in proprietary (i.e., closed-source) software, considering that commercial software doesn't come with any source to look at?
There is one drawback with any anti-piracy scheme: if it is possible to view a DVD (or head a CD), it is equally possible to record it (to a VHS tape, or a computer hard drive, or whatever). No copy-protection scheme for movies or music will be able to change that.
Of course, the "digital quality" duplicates will be better, but despite the encryption people use, eventually someone will break it.