Having read the TrollTech pages, but not the actual Proprietary Qt license agreement as I didn't find it there, I agree with DAldredge's reading: TrollTech's own materials say that, if you're a for-profit company and aren't going to distribute your application as Open Source, then they want you to buy the license. If I were TrollTech and wanted to enforce that, then I would chase down a few companies who downloaded the GPL version from them (that's the catch that I'll get to in a minute), and ask their employees if they received (or could receive) the source code and redistribution rights to whatever in-house app was built with the GPL Qt. Given that in-house code (for companies that aren't in the software business) frequently contains things like embedded passwords and business rules that generally aren't shared with the rank-and-file, I would doubt that to be the case, and so the affected business may be in violation of the GPL. Businesses, especially those with enough money to be worth suing, don't like to play with things like that.
The catch seems to be this: TrollTech, as (if I understand correctly) sole copyright holder on Qt, has the right to distribute its own code as it wishes. It has every right to license its code as it wishes at any time, and, I would presume, to refuse to license it as well (see also BitKeeper). Others in possession of the GPL code, however, don't have the right to refuse anyone the Qt source code if they are distributing it at all... it has to be free to all comers. So, a business such as the one described above, which was willing to forsake the possibility of redistributing their in-house app under a proprietary license, could get the libs from a third party and go on their merry way.
That poem was actually the only match on/. for "wheelbarrow" when I searched prior to posting... it was quoted in a response to an April Fools' Day story.
The rain water implies liquid cooling. The chickens imply... dinner?
Thanks for the link. I had originally thought that the issue was brought up by Slashdot denizens with too much time on their hands. Now, I see that there is a larger group of people with too much time on their hands.
Points on that site's argument:
- In the construction "www.domain.com", "www" is not a subdomain; it's a hostname. In "www.xyz.domain.com", "xyz" would be a subdomain while www would still be the hostname.
- Claiming something is deprecated because you don't like it doesn't make it so. Ozzie Guillen could as easily say that the use of Lance Berkman in the Astro's line up is deprecated, and it would be equally as relevant.
Nothing in the above observations should be construed as an endorsement by myself of either team currently contesting the World Series.
There was a huge debate (which I was only aware of second-hand... I never saw any of it but saw it referenced) regarding whether Slashdot should use a "www" hostname or not. Note that "www.slashdot.org" redirects to "slashdot.org", so apparently the nays carried the question. I have no idea of the substance of the debate, however.
IIRC, it didn't take very long for UID's to hit 10000, or even 100000, after you implemented user registration. Of course, my recollection could be faulty, as I was supposed to be working at the time.
I wish I could remember the name of a story I read that thought about this. The hook was that babies that were born on a Moonbase could never visit Earth for exactly that reason (bones & muscle wouldn't support them)...
As a Mainer, I have a nagging feeling that Olympia! would be appalled to find herself compared to Fox News in any way. She and the few other Northeast Republicans are the last remaining stragglers of the former Rockefeller wing of the party.
I'm not trying to be elitist by stating that only 'qualified' users should try to be admins.
So, what of users who go to the store, buy a hypothetical preloaded Linux PC, set it up at home and find that they can't set the clock, or even the timezone?
"This lawyer has never been a judge - she does not have the judge experience and that is integral."
The point of my response was that prior experience as a judge is not integral to service or performance on the Supreme Court. None of the individuals I listed had prior experience as a judge prior to being appointed to the Court. You are correct that she may or may not be the best appointee for the job, but we have as of yet no evidence to use to assess that.
"PLUS, since she is not a judge, I have no idea how she would have ruled over different issues - something that is very important to the people."
IMHO, points of view regarding certain specific issues are not the proper criteria to use when scrutinizing a proposed judge. Judges should be scrutinized regarding their judgment, their overall judicial philosophy, and their ability to apply the law as written; "issues" are appropriate criteria to use when assessing legislators and executives. My thought regarding Ms. Biers and what I believe her likely views on said issues is that one would no more expect President Bush to appoint George Mitchell to the Supreme Court than one would expect Bill Clinton to appoint John Roberts. Such are the consequences of elections.
The lack of bench experience has been well-discussed in the traditional media since yesterday. In coming to the Court without such experience, she would follow a path well-traveled by such men as:
Shortly before StarDivision sold itself to Sun, they announced a server-based StarOffice product (was it StarPortal?) that may have been similar to this. Does anyone else remember it, and wonder if bandwidth and technology (AJAX?) have finally made it usable over the Internet (as opposed to just over one company's network)?
I have also heard that we no longer have the plans for the SR-71; apparently, they were burned so the Soviets (or maybe the Republicans) wouldn't get them. Several pages listed on this Google search mention that the plans, dies, etc. were ordered destroyed in 1968.
... and furthermore, since the Constitution and judiciary are supposed to uphold Freedom above all else, I will not answer any questions unless the name of the appropriate Federal agency is changed to the Department of GNU/Justice."
At my former employer, we had several Biscom fax servers which were essentially PCs on a rack-mountable board, with a slew of modems attached. IIRC, those ran Santa Cruz OpenServer. They were also the only machines I've seen that actually called themselves UNIX on the boot screen.
Slashdot Mirror
Having read the TrollTech pages, but not the actual Proprietary Qt license agreement as I didn't find it there, I agree with DAldredge's reading: TrollTech's own materials say that, if you're a for-profit company and aren't going to distribute your application as Open Source, then they want you to buy the license. If I were TrollTech and wanted to enforce that, then I would chase down a few companies who downloaded the GPL version from them (that's the catch that I'll get to in a minute), and ask their employees if they received (or could receive) the source code and redistribution rights to whatever in-house app was built with the GPL Qt. Given that in-house code (for companies that aren't in the software business) frequently contains things like embedded passwords and business rules that generally aren't shared with the rank-and-file, I would doubt that to be the case, and so the affected business may be in violation of the GPL. Businesses, especially those with enough money to be worth suing, don't like to play with things like that.
The catch seems to be this: TrollTech, as (if I understand correctly) sole copyright holder on Qt, has the right to distribute its own code as it wishes. It has every right to license its code as it wishes at any time, and, I would presume, to refuse to license it as well (see also BitKeeper). Others in possession of the GPL code, however, don't have the right to refuse anyone the Qt source code if they are distributing it at all... it has to be free to all comers. So, a business such as the one described above, which was willing to forsake the possibility of redistributing their in-house app under a proprietary license, could get the libs from a third party and go on their merry way.
That's why I have all that equipment in the living room with the big speakers attached to it.
That poem was actually the only match on /. for "wheelbarrow" when I searched prior to posting... it was quoted in a response to an April Fools' Day story.
The rain water implies liquid cooling. The chickens imply... dinner?
Okay, I'm going to bite: what on earth does a red wheelbarrow have to do with databases?
I've been looking at my 27" Trinitron screen since 1998 and never noticed any lines. Hmmm.
Thanks for the link. I had originally thought that the issue was brought up by Slashdot denizens with too much time on their hands. Now, I see that there is a larger group of people with too much time on their hands.
Points on that site's argument:
- In the construction "www.domain.com", "www" is not a subdomain; it's a hostname. In "www.xyz.domain.com", "xyz" would be a subdomain while www would still be the hostname.
- Claiming something is deprecated because you don't like it doesn't make it so. Ozzie Guillen could as easily say that the use of Lance Berkman in the Astro's line up is deprecated, and it would be equally as relevant.
Nothing in the above observations should be construed as an endorsement by myself of either team currently contesting the World Series.
There was a huge debate (which I was only aware of second-hand... I never saw any of it but saw it referenced) regarding whether Slashdot should use a "www" hostname or not. Note that "www.slashdot.org" redirects to "slashdot.org", so apparently the nays carried the question. I have no idea of the substance of the debate, however.
IIRC, it didn't take very long for UID's to hit 10000, or even 100000, after you implemented user registration. Of course, my recollection could be faulty, as I was supposed to be working at the time.
I wish I could remember the name of a story I read that thought about this. The hook was that babies that were born on a Moonbase could never visit Earth for exactly that reason (bones & muscle wouldn't support them)...
He leavened it with appearances on Junkyard Wars.
As a Mainer, I have a nagging feeling that Olympia! would be appalled to find herself compared to Fox News in any way. She and the few other Northeast Republicans are the last remaining stragglers of the former Rockefeller wing of the party.
So, what of users who go to the store, buy a hypothetical preloaded Linux PC, set it up at home and find that they can't set the clock, or even the timezone?
"This lawyer has never been a judge - she does not have the judge experience and that is integral."
The point of my response was that prior experience as a judge is not integral to service or performance on the Supreme Court. None of the individuals I listed had prior experience as a judge prior to being appointed to the Court. You are correct that she may or may not be the best appointee for the job, but we have as of yet no evidence to use to assess that.
"PLUS, since she is not a judge, I have no idea how she would have ruled over different issues - something that is very important to the people."
IMHO, points of view regarding certain specific issues are not the proper criteria to use when scrutinizing a proposed judge. Judges should be scrutinized regarding their judgment, their overall judicial philosophy, and their ability to apply the law as written; "issues" are appropriate criteria to use when assessing legislators and executives. My thought regarding Ms. Biers and what I believe her likely views on said issues is that one would no more expect President Bush to appoint George Mitchell to the Supreme Court than one would expect Bill Clinton to appoint John Roberts. Such are the consequences of elections.
Shortly before StarDivision sold itself to Sun, they announced a server-based StarOffice product (was it StarPortal?) that may have been similar to this. Does anyone else remember it, and wonder if bandwidth and technology (AJAX?) have finally made it usable over the Internet (as opposed to just over one company's network)?
I got yer virtual desktops right here.
I have also heard that we no longer have the plans for the SR-71; apparently, they were burned so the Soviets (or maybe the Republicans) wouldn't get them. Several pages listed on this Google search mention that the plans, dies, etc. were ordered destroyed in 1968.
She went to Fordham University, which is in the Bronx.
To quote one Michael McGreevey, "'Nuff Said"
Read the history... that article has been edited over 2 dozen times today, much of which is undoubtedly vandalism & counter-vandalism.
... and furthermore, since the Constitution and judiciary are supposed to uphold Freedom above all else, I will not answer any questions unless the name of the appropriate Federal agency is changed to the Department of GNU/Justice."
It mentions roaming support as well (harped about elsewhere on this page).
They already did.
At my former employer, we had several Biscom fax servers which were essentially PCs on a rack-mountable board, with a slew of modems attached. IIRC, those ran Santa Cruz OpenServer. They were also the only machines I've seen that actually called themselves UNIX on the boot screen.
Given the way that the entire state of Massachusetts (even the out-of-the-way parts like Mount Washington or Greenfield) is hi-res on Google Earth, my guess is that the state government paid to have the photographs taken. See it at http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Worcester,+Massachus etts&ll=42.293564,-72.015381&spn=2.732946,5.014984 &t=k&hl=en.
Nit: Compaq itself bought Tandem, I believe before it bought DEC.