Re:Having several 'modes' slows you down
on
Interface Zen
·
· Score: 2
First, vim did things right by always letting you use arrow keys regardless of context.
> In vi you must press ESC once before moving, and once after
No you don't. If you're in insert mode, you have to hit ESC to go to normal mode, but you don't hit ESC again after that. If you want to start inserting again, you hit "i" or "a". Hitting ESC in normal mode will just give you a beep.
vim does things even better. Regardless of your mode, you can always use the arrow keys (and PgUp/PgDn/Home/End).
So if he tried to scare people about Y2K, you're on his side, but if he's trying to scare people about their rights, you'd like to see him tarred and feathered?
Actually, I think Judge Jackson doesn't want to rule because a ruling could be appealed. Regardless of the final outcome of endless appeals, the only think he is certain of is that MS will not behave itself in the meantime.
However, if MS can agree to "voluntary" mediation, the remedy will be immediate and won't be appealed.
All the antitrust experts seem to agree that opening the MS source code can't be done by the court as it would constitute "taking" of property. The only way I can see MS opening their source (assuming that's even an effective solution) would be for them to agree to it voluntarily.
A horizontal breakup WOULD remedy the main abuse MS made, namely leveraging to OS to maintain the applications barrier to entry.
MS made decisions about how to market and integrate IE for the sole purpose of defeating Netscape, and it did that for the sole purpose of keeping developers from coding to Netscape's APIs instead of MS's OS APIs. A horizontal split would make it impossible for this to happen without one company losing huge amounts of money to keep the other profitable. That's easy to do in-house, but much harder when each company has to answer to a different set of share holders and file an independent balance sheet.
> Housing the Win98, WinNT and Win2k development teams in separate, competing companies[...]
Win2k is just WinNT 5.0 renamed. No one's gonna want WinNT 4.0. There is no "development" team for WinNT 4.0, just maintenance. That would make as much sense as giving Win95 to one company and Win98 to another.
Splitting Win98 and WinNT addresses the monoply problem less than a vertical split would. According to the FoF, MS has a monopoly on the Desktop. Virtually nothing was said about the Server. In fact, MS does have serious competition today on the Server side. Even though a few poor souls like me have NT on their desktops, it's not really considered a Desktop OS.
There are actually two ways to split MS up: vertical (an apps, OS and online company) or horizontal (multiple OS+apps+online companies).
Richard Hawkins seems to be the one pushing for a horizontal breakup that would lead to the problems you describe and I think he's wrong and you're right.
A vertical breakup, however, would NOT lead to a fracturing of standards. The OSes (NT, 98, CE) would all come from one company which would want standards.
The apps (Office, IE, etc) would come from a separate company. Lots of what MS did, according to the FoF, was to make financial decisions that did not profit the company *except* to keep the applications barrier to entry. For example, the FoF found that giving away IE on Macintosh made no sense except to discourage developers from programming to Netscape APIs. If the apps were a separate company, they wouldn't be able to justify a lot of those decisions and, even if they did, it would show up on the books and be seen by the regulators.
I think an apps company would also be more likely to port their apps to other platforms. The only reason they don't do that now is to keep the OS monopoly.
Frankly, I'm of the opinion that there shouldn't be a distinction between murder and attempted murder. If Byrd had somehow survived his attack, I would still hope to see his "attempted" killers put to death.
Al Gore says "And to me, in a year when Matthew Shepard was crucified on a split rail fence because of his sexual orientation; when James Byrd was dragged to his death because of his skin color; and both a Filipino-American and a Korean graduate student were murdered because of the shape of their eyes--I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes. That is why we need tougher laws to prevent and punish them."
Two of the killers of Byrd have already been given the death sentence, the third is still on trial.
The killer of Matthew Shepard avoided the death penalty because the family did not seek it, but he will still face life behind bars.
How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes?
See http://linux.corel.com/products/linux_os/licensing .htm for more detailed licensing.
It looks like the Corel additions are all under the "Corel Public License" or "CPL", which is exactly the same the the Mozilla license with Corel replacing references to Mozilla and Netscape.
You can just add a getty to your serial port. If you can't get to your machine over the net, just plug in an old dumb terminal or, my favorite, use PalmTelnet.
> indebted [...] > 2: owing gratitude or recognition to another for help or favors etc
In other words, you should be *thankful* that Cygnus and others have developed Open Source software that you use. There is no obligation on your part. An obligation would preclude gratitude.
This is how Open Source works. While there is no requirement that you give anything back, it is hoped that you will feel gratitude for the Free software and that you might want to say "thank you" by offering something Free back.
"`But from what we hear it appears to be a groundless lawsuit, especially when the Windows operating system is priced less than our competitors,' said the spokesman, Jim Cullinan."
Which competitor is that? Linux? BSD? It can't be Macintosh since their OS doesn't run on Intel PCs and, therefore, does not compete. If this is their whole defense, they're gonna loose hard. The Findings of Fact has already found that they are a monopoly (i.e. they *don't have* competitors).
> DVD playback probably will take longer to make it to Linux than it would have before. Why? Because of this.
"Because of this" there *will* be a linux player. You went on and on about why the industry would never want to port to linux, and yet you still think the industry has to give us the player.
I'm still waiting for 3Com to offer a linux Desktop. Not that I need theres... I've got one!
Here's an analogy: a kid asks his father for some money, and his father says no. So the kid goes and gets a job that the father doesn't like. So now his father REALLY won't give him any money. So what?
The whole point is that (whether you like it or not) some people felt a desire to have a linux-based DVD player . Industry ignored them for all the reasons you mentioned, and now we will not only have a linux-based player, but one that can also be used for piracy...
Slashdot Mirror
First, vim did things right by always letting you use arrow keys regardless of context.
> In vi you must press ESC once before moving, and once after
No you don't. If you're in insert mode, you have to hit ESC to go to normal mode, but you don't hit ESC again after that. If you want to start inserting again, you hit "i" or "a". Hitting ESC in normal mode will just give you a beep.
vim does things even better. Regardless of your mode, you can always use the arrow keys (and PgUp/PgDn/Home/End).
When my NT goes blue, the MP3 player starts skipping (playing the last 1/2 second repeatedly).
So if he tried to scare people about Y2K, you're on his side, but if he's trying to scare people about their rights, you'd like to see him tarred and feathered?
Einstein never actually road on a beam of light, but his "thought experiments" lead to valuable insights into the nature of light.
Whether or not Wesley's theories are "true" or not, they seem worthy of discussion.
My gripes are: (1) makes bookmarking a pain in the butt, and (2) makes printing the entire page impossible.
Actually, I think Judge Jackson doesn't want to rule because a ruling could be appealed. Regardless of the final outcome of endless appeals, the only think he is certain of is that MS will not behave itself in the meantime.
However, if MS can agree to "voluntary" mediation, the remedy will be immediate and won't be appealed.
All the antitrust experts seem to agree that opening the MS source code can't be done by the court as it would constitute "taking" of property. The only way I can see MS opening their source (assuming that's even an effective solution) would be for them to agree to it voluntarily.
A horizontal breakup WOULD remedy the main abuse MS made, namely leveraging to OS to maintain the applications barrier to entry.
MS made decisions about how to market and integrate IE for the sole purpose of defeating Netscape, and it did that for the sole purpose of keeping developers from coding to Netscape's APIs instead of MS's OS APIs. A horizontal split would make it impossible for this to happen without one company losing huge amounts of money to keep the other profitable. That's easy to do in-house, but much harder when each company has to answer to a different set of share holders and file an independent balance sheet.
> Housing the Win98, WinNT and Win2k development teams in separate, competing companies[...]
Win2k is just WinNT 5.0 renamed. No one's gonna want WinNT 4.0. There is no "development" team for WinNT 4.0, just maintenance. That would make as much sense as giving Win95 to one company and Win98 to another.
Splitting Win98 and WinNT addresses the monoply problem less than a vertical split would. According to the FoF, MS has a monopoly on the Desktop. Virtually nothing was said about the Server. In fact, MS does have serious competition today on the Server side. Even though a few poor souls like me have NT on their desktops, it's not really considered a Desktop OS.
> The integers are neither Real [...]
Yes they are. All Real numbers are not Integers, but all Integers are Real.
10-28-1888
^ ^
1 is not an even number. All the *digits* have to be even. The last even day was not in 1888, but rather 888.
There are actually two ways to split MS up: vertical (an apps, OS and online company) or horizontal (multiple OS+apps+online companies).
Richard Hawkins seems to be the one pushing for a horizontal breakup that would lead to the problems you describe and I think he's wrong and you're right.
A vertical breakup, however, would NOT lead to a fracturing of standards. The OSes (NT, 98, CE) would all come from one company which would want standards.
The apps (Office, IE, etc) would come from a separate company. Lots of what MS did, according to the FoF, was to make financial decisions that did not profit the company *except* to keep the applications barrier to entry. For example, the FoF found that giving away IE on Macintosh made no sense except to discourage developers from programming to Netscape APIs. If the apps were a separate company, they wouldn't be able to justify a lot of those decisions and, even if they did, it would show up on the books and be seen by the regulators.
I think an apps company would also be more likely to port their apps to other platforms. The only reason they don't do that now is to keep the OS monopoly.
> you don't have to be 18 anymore, do you?
Yes. 21, actually. They can make exceptions on a case-by-case basis, but it is still their policy.
Frankly, I'm of the opinion that there shouldn't be a distinction between murder and attempted murder. If Byrd had somehow survived his attack, I would still hope to see his "attempted" killers put to death.
Al Gore says "And to me, in a year when Matthew Shepard was crucified on a split rail fence because of his sexual orientation; when James Byrd was dragged to his death because of his skin color; and both a Filipino-American and a Korean graduate student were murdered because of the shape of their eyes--I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes. That is why we need tougher laws to prevent and punish them."
Two of the killers of Byrd have already been given the death sentence, the third is still on trial.
The killer of Matthew Shepard avoided the death penalty because the family did not seek it, but he will still face life behind bars.
How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes?
See http://linux.corel.com/products/linux_os/licensing .htm for more detailed licensing.
It looks like the Corel additions are all under the "Corel Public License" or "CPL", which is exactly the same the the Mozilla license with Corel replacing references to Mozilla and Netscape.
The movie industry was arguably /very/ big on security as well...
Security conscious is not the same as security capable, though...
There page is NOT "Burn All GIFs Day" compliant, though...
You can just add a getty to your serial port. If you can't get to your machine over the net, just plug in an old dumb terminal or, my favorite, use PalmTelnet.
Check your WordNet dictionary, definition 2:
> indebted
[...]
> 2: owing gratitude or recognition to another for help or favors etc
In other words, you should be *thankful* that Cygnus and others have developed Open Source software that you use. There is no obligation on your part. An obligation would preclude gratitude.
This is how Open Source works. While there is no requirement that you give anything back, it is hoped that you will feel gratitude for the Free software and that you might want to say "thank you" by offering something Free back.
> it's more the other way round
Regardless of what is merging into what, my real point was that Cygnus is the maintainer now, not GNU...
> EGCS' development will move fully to GNU, as per the original GCC
I thought Cygnus had formally adopted GCC from GNU and that they were working on merging EGCS back into GCC (just as they had always hoped).
Robert Young will no longer be in charge of day-to-day operations and Matthew Szulik will be the new CEO.
I suppose this is the source of the rumor. Not exactly true, but based in fact.
Well, according to your link, it runs on "Macintosh® Quadra or better". I'd say Linux is better.
What's the deal with the topicmozzila.GIF icon? /. still seems to have quite a few gifs, actually.
/. have been a premiere site for Burn All GIFs Day?
I wouldn't say anything on any other web site (well, maybe GNU or Debian...), but shouldn't
From the Yahoo! article:
"`But from what we hear it appears to be a groundless lawsuit, especially when the Windows operating system is priced less than our competitors,' said the spokesman, Jim Cullinan."
Which competitor is that? Linux? BSD? It can't be Macintosh since their OS doesn't run on Intel PCs and, therefore, does not compete. If this is their whole defense, they're gonna loose hard. The Findings of Fact has already found that they are a monopoly (i.e. they *don't have* competitors).
> DVD playback probably will take longer to make it to Linux than it would have before. Why? Because of this.
"Because of this" there *will* be a linux player. You went on and on about why the industry would never want to port to linux, and yet you still think the industry has to give us the player.
I'm still waiting for 3Com to offer a linux Desktop. Not that I need theres... I've got one!
Here's an analogy: a kid asks his father for some money, and his father says no. So the kid goes and gets a job that the father doesn't like. So now his father REALLY won't give him any money. So what?
The whole point is that (whether you like it or not) some people felt a desire to have a linux-based DVD player . Industry ignored them for all the reasons you mentioned, and now we will not only have a linux-based player, but one that can also be used for piracy...