not really the spirit... I downloaded the source, and even rebooted into windows to give it a whirl. It's painful. When you first open the open the workspace in visual studio, you have many open files, and they have neglected to include all of the resources necessary for a build. (All of the source seems to be there, but icons and bitmaps are missing... VS won't even start a build without them.) To be fair to the Morpheus folks, though, it looks like they might have simply forgotten a directory in their zip file. I checked Gnucleus out of CVS and copied the "res" directory from their checkout to the Morpheus directory. It still didn't build, but I got the same (mis-)behavior with both projects. Morpheus clearly was in a hurry to get this source file up; the archive is a mess. Absolute paths (like d:\gnucleus\morpheuspe.exe) are hard-coded into the workspace, and the changelog isn't even updated. I'm too tired to play with it more tonight, but it looks like the essentials (for license compliance) are there, just in a shitty package.
Wouldn't displaying the GPL license constitute a written offer to provide source? IANAL, but I would certainly consider it to be such an offer were I to encounter it... It would inspire me to request the source before screaming about a license violation. Now if the license weren't included, it'd be another story altogether.
I can't complain too much about the subscription, and will probably subscribe. I do have two requests before I do:
Please, please don't go to the annoying ads before you have some other means of paying than paypal. I will stop reading your site on a regular basis if you have these ads and no means of getting rid of them. Or I will put your ad servers on my junkbuster list. (They're not there already because your ads are not obnoxious and I like you guys.) I am not comfortable using paypal at this time, though, and I don't believe I am alone in this, so please don't move to the annoying ads just yet. Perhaps you could use ThinkGeek's CC billing system?
Please consider a second model whereby I can block only the big ads. I actually don't mind your current ads and click on them somewhat regularly. Perhaps $5 to chop the big ads out of 2000 pages??
Anyway, best of luck with the subscription model. I hope you guys can provide enough value that people want to subscribe. Thanks for a great site!
Essentially, the arguments against complain that much research couldn't happen if it had to yield open source software because it builds on non-open source software. This ignores the fact that software developed as a result of this research cannot be distributed at all, open or closed source, as it stands today. The writer's objection only applies to code which researchers do not have the license to redistribute.
The sensible thing to do, then, to address the concerns of both parties, is to mandate that any software which is developed by public funds and then distributed be distributed under an opensource license. The real concern with software developed using public funds (IMO) is that it not be used to the exclusive profit of one individual/group/corporation while being denied to others who contributed the funds. My problem isn't when the software stays in the lab. It's when citizens' tax dollars contribute to the profits of some megacorp and citizens are then unable to access the results of their contributions.
I've had nothing but good luck with EasyDNS... After our last incident with NSI, we transferred our domains to them. The prices are fair, and they do a good job.
What are you complaining about? The only projects that end, typically, are failed projects. In order for stuff to continue to improve, it can't end. Are you also sick of hearing about the never-ending project that is windows (which just had its 5.1 release, to great fanfare) this week? What about the never-ending RealPlayer project? Or the Mac OS project? Or the WinAmp project? Or...? If you don't like hearing about them, here's a suggestion: Stop reading sites that print news about software!
Jackass.
Insightful: +1. Funny: +1. Flamebait: -1. Troll: -1. A good flame: priceless
In the end, the people most affected by encryption limiting laws would be common middle-class citizens in the developed nations, people who do on-line shopping and banking, or who use credit cards for any purchases. Remember, you don't need to do any on-line shopping to be vulnerable if your local shopkeepers keep your credit card numbers in vulnerable computers.
My local shopkeeper had fucking well better not be keeping my credit card number anywhere at all, least of all on a "vulnerable computer"!
I may be feeding a troll, but, just in case it was an honest question, we already have a very simple tool that helps people fork. I have used this mysterious and little-known tool to maintain my own forks of several projects when I was making changes that couldn't or shouldn't be folded back into the main tree. (To truly be effective, you should use it in concert with another hard-to-find tool.)
The problem with Linux is that you can't buy a decent Office package for Linux for any price
Really, StarOffice meets my needs. The only "need" any of the cited M$ products fills is file format compatibility =P. Gnumeric is my spreadsheet of choice. Admittedly, my office software needs are not too complex... I fill out my time sheet and complete test reports, and the most basic office packages can do that.
Did you get a rock solid, visual development environment on Linux for free? Sheesh...
yes. gnu autoconf + gnu automake + gcc + perl + python + jikes + kdevelop + glade + WxWindows + Tcl/Tk + Forte WTF is a "visual" development environment anyway? I got a rock-solid, free development environment. kdevelop and glade are pretty damn visual, FWIW. I don't use VC++ in visual mode anyway... I mostly use it from the command line with nmake. Too many options are simplified away in visual mode. My Linux development environment is infinitely superior. I spend a ton of time in my development environment, and the Windows environment is just not up to snuff. I guess if I did lots of platform-specific GUI development, Visual Studio would be worth what we pay. Generally, it's just not.
Your comparison is totally daft.
Your comments are totally daft. My comparison was spot-on. I was comparing my windows configuration which allows me to be almost as productive in Windows as in Linux to my (preferred) Linux configuration. Fortunately, my employer and the licensing agreements for Linux allow me to duplicate that at work as needed, so I don't have to spend too much time in the horribly crippled WIndows environment. Seems stupid at best and trollish at worst to call that "daft". cheers- pétard
You can't be daft enough to assume that the OEM didn't make sure to pass on the full cost of a Win98 install licence in their profit marign, regardless of the actual price from MS to them. Or are you?
You can't be daft enough to have missed the fact that I calculated my cost in the same (flawed!) way the article did. Or are you? My (not too subtle, I thought) point was that even if you didn't count the cost of the OEM software, since the article didn't, in my experience, it cost (my employer) more than 5x as much to get similar but lesser functionality from a Windoze box as I got from a Linux box. And the cost on the Linux box was optional-- I paid for convenience.
The only "free" Windows is a warezed one you put on clean hardware you build from components.
There's no such thing as a "free" copy of Windows. Even if neither I nor my employer had to lay out a penny of cash for Windows-related purchases, the cost in lost productivity and risk of lawsuits for being in contravention of M$'s license would be >$500, IMO.
If I didn't recognize your handle, I'd think: "IHBT. IHL."
Here's a breakdown of my expenses over 3 years for two machines with similar functionality (from my perspective, the Linux box actually gives me more... the Linux one doesn't handle Office-format docs as well as the Windows one, but that's ok by me... I save as portable formats when I take work home) One's my home box, the other my employer provides. Linux cost me 1/5 as much... certainly not more than Windoze! And let's be real. I have broadband. I only buy linux distributions because it is, relative to Windows, cheap & convenient. It *could* have all been free:-). Windows could not have, at least not legally.
too cool... I wish I had heard too. I'd have jumped on 20 been there in a heartbeat, Apple ][ in tow. What boggles my mind about the whole thing is that I've got more processing power and memory on a smart card now than on some of the computing hardware that was on display and cost 100000x more in its heysay:-)
ROTFLMAO! And the warning that this was in the wild appeared on bugtraq 2 days ago. You'd think they could at least apply their own patches. I knew there was a reason I don't allow M$ software on my network unless it's absolutely required. (I tend to use Linux sparingly too:-))
Build XFree86 from CVS. It's not in the release but if you pull from cvs and make World && make install, then startx -- -rootless it works for the most part. I have had some problems with the cursor disappearing, but no worse than with Classic.
These things are neither cheap nor simple... anyone who has access to one (*not* thousands of retards!) and has a support contract can tell when it's a software/os/line/etc. problem. Those folks who can't are kept far away from the router.
We're a very small installation and get similar response. If you've paid for a support contract and it even smells like a router problem, the fastest way to fix it is to call them right away. They are a model tech support organization.
You can find the law here. The relevant clause specifically forbids commercial mail which:
Uses a third party's internet domain name without permission of the third party, or otherwise misrepresents or obscures any information in identifying the point of origin or the transmission path of a commercial electronic mail message;
(IANAL TINLA etc) My reading of this is that you can't lie about the point of origin of a commercial message. This does not prevent you from sending them via an anonymous mail account somewhere, only from forging the headers on the spam. IMO, lying about your identity while trying to sell me something indicates an attempt to defraud me. I can be a free expression zealot, but fraud is no more a protected form of expression than, say, attempting to steal my wallet.
In addition, Microsoft says, it will provide a free bit of programming code, called a "meta tag," that site owners could use to bar any Smart Tags from appearing on their sites.
In other words, if the "nice disclaimer" is in the form of a properly formed meta tag instructing Internet Exploder not to provide these "smart links", it will be disabled. Still, it sounds like a bad feature to me. Also, who would be surprised if there were a "bug" that prevented the meta tag from being read and conveniently went unfixed? I don't think I'll be using this new OS anyway, between this kind of garbage and the over the top, intrusive license controls. I also don't think I will derive enough value from their other software to justify the costs associated with the subscription model they will surely be moving to. If I can't use their application software, Windows will certainly have no place on my drive.
These guys have what you want. I'm not sure how well-funded they are, and they seem rather europe-focused. I think LinuxFormat shipped with a CD at one point
Before pursuing them in court, the author should offer to license the code for use in a closed-source product for the price of $5 Billion (or a similarly outrageous figure). The company will, quite sensibly IMO, be unwilling to pay the price. At this point, he has actual monetary damages (at least according to the BSA and, apparently, US courts) to sue for. IANAL, but it seems pretty open and shut:-).
The issue here was processor speed, not paging. He was complaining that on slower processors that don't support AltiVec, it's too slow. FWIW, it worked fine when the box only had 128 as well... the extra RAM did (of course) have performance implications, but not on the eye candy the poster was complaining about. pétard
Slashdot Mirror
not really the spirit... I downloaded the source, and even rebooted into windows to give it a whirl. It's painful. When you first open the open the workspace in visual studio, you have many open files, and they have neglected to include all of the resources necessary for a build. (All of the source seems to be there, but icons and bitmaps are missing... VS won't even start a build without them.) To be fair to the Morpheus folks, though, it looks like they might have simply forgotten a directory in their zip file. I checked Gnucleus out of CVS and copied the "res" directory from their checkout to the Morpheus directory. It still didn't build, but I got the same (mis-)behavior with both projects. Morpheus clearly was in a hurry to get this source file up; the archive is a mess. Absolute paths (like d:\gnucleus\morpheuspe.exe) are hard-coded into the workspace, and the changelog isn't even updated. I'm too tired to play with it more tonight, but it looks like the essentials (for license compliance) are there, just in a shitty package.
Wouldn't displaying the GPL license constitute a written offer to provide source? IANAL, but I would certainly consider it to be such an offer were I to encounter it... It would inspire me to request the source before screaming about a license violation. Now if the license weren't included, it'd be another story altogether.
I can't complain too much about the subscription, and will probably subscribe. I do have two requests before I do:
Anyway, best of luck with the subscription model. I hope you guys can provide enough value that people want to subscribe. Thanks for a great site!
Essentially, the arguments against complain that much research couldn't happen if it had to yield open source software because it builds on non-open source software. This ignores the fact that software developed as a result of this research cannot be distributed at all, open or closed source, as it stands today. The writer's objection only applies to code which researchers do not have the license to redistribute.
The sensible thing to do, then, to address the concerns of both parties, is to mandate that any software which is developed by public funds and then distributed be distributed under an opensource license. The real concern with software developed using public funds (IMO) is that it not be used to the exclusive profit of one individual/group/corporation while being denied to others who contributed the funds. My problem isn't when the software stays in the lab. It's when citizens' tax dollars contribute to the profits of some megacorp and citizens are then unable to access the results of their contributions.
I've had nothing but good luck with EasyDNS... After our last incident with NSI, we transferred our domains to them. The prices are fair, and they do a good job.
boot from the install cd, choose the repair from console option, and chkdsk /R.
What are you complaining about? The only projects that end, typically, are failed projects. In order for stuff to continue to improve, it can't end. Are you also sick of hearing about the never-ending project that is windows (which just had its 5.1 release, to great fanfare) this week? What about the never-ending RealPlayer project? Or the Mac OS project? Or the WinAmp project? Or ...? If you don't like hearing about them, here's a suggestion:
Stop reading sites that print news about software!
Jackass.
Insightful: +1. Funny: +1. Flamebait: -1. Troll: -1. A good flame: priceless
you've changed your behavior now, after telling the world about it, right?! your key is now vulnerable to a trivial dictionary attack :-)
<flamebait>
</flamebait>
My local shopkeeper had fucking well better not be keeping my credit card number anywhere at all, least of all on a "vulnerable computer"!
I may be feeding a troll, but, just in case it was an honest question, we already have a very simple tool that helps people fork. I have used this mysterious and little-known tool to maintain my own forks of several projects when I was making changes that couldn't or shouldn't be folded back into the main tree. (To truly be effective, you should use it in concert with another hard-to-find tool.)
--
pétard
The problem with Linux is that you can't buy a decent Office package for Linux for any price
...
Really, StarOffice meets my needs. The only "need" any of the cited M$ products fills is file format compatibility =P. Gnumeric is my spreadsheet of choice. Admittedly, my office software needs are not too complex... I fill out my time sheet and complete test reports, and the most basic office packages can do that.
Did you get a rock solid, visual development environment on Linux for free? Sheesh
yes. gnu autoconf + gnu automake + gcc + perl + python + jikes + kdevelop + glade + WxWindows + Tcl/Tk + Forte
WTF is a "visual" development environment anyway? I got a rock-solid, free development environment. kdevelop and glade are pretty damn visual, FWIW. I don't use VC++ in visual mode anyway... I mostly use it from the command line with nmake. Too many options are simplified away in visual mode. My Linux development environment is infinitely superior. I spend a ton of time in my development environment, and the Windows environment is just not up to snuff. I guess if I did lots of platform-specific GUI development, Visual Studio would be worth what we pay. Generally, it's just not.
Your comparison is totally daft.
Your comments are totally daft. My comparison was spot-on. I was comparing my windows configuration which allows me to be almost as productive in Windows as in Linux to my (preferred) Linux configuration. Fortunately, my employer and the licensing agreements for Linux allow me to duplicate that at work as needed, so I don't have to spend too much time in the horribly crippled WIndows environment. Seems stupid at best and trollish at worst to call that "daft".
cheers-
pétard
You can't be daft enough to assume that the OEM didn't make sure to pass on the full cost of a Win98 install licence in their profit marign, regardless of the actual price from MS to them. Or are you?
You can't be daft enough to have missed the fact that I calculated my cost in the same (flawed!) way the article did. Or are you? My (not too subtle, I thought) point was that even if you didn't count the cost of the OEM software, since the article didn't, in my experience, it cost (my employer) more than 5x as much to get similar but lesser functionality from a Windoze box as I got from a Linux box. And the cost on the Linux box was optional-- I paid for convenience.
The only "free" Windows is a warezed one you put on clean hardware you build from components.
There's no such thing as a "free" copy of Windows. Even if neither I nor my employer had to lay out a penny of cash for Windows-related purchases, the cost in lost productivity and risk of lawsuits for being in contravention of M$'s license would be >$500, IMO.
If I didn't recognize your handle, I'd think: "IHBT. IHL."
Here's a breakdown of my expenses over 3 years for two machines with similar functionality (from my perspective, the Linux box actually gives me more... the Linux one doesn't handle Office-format docs as well as the Windows one, but that's ok by me... I save as portable formats when I take work home) One's my home box, the other my employer provides. Linux cost me 1/5 as much... certainly not more than Windoze! And let's be real. I have broadband. I only buy linux distributions because it is, relative to Windows, cheap & convenient. It *could* have all been free :-). Windows could not have, at least not legally.
Linux:
6 distros @~$50 = $300
4 books @~$50 = $200
Windows:
1 Win98 (included with machine): $0
1 Visual studio 6 (incl. NT4): ~$1600
1 Win2k upgrade: ~$150
1 Office 97: ~$500
1 Office 2k upgrade: ~$250
1 Office XP upgrade: ~$250
1 Winzip: ~$25
1 Nero CD Recording SW: ~$70
1 Norton AntiVirus: ~$70
too cool... I wish I had heard too. I'd have jumped on 20 been there in a heartbeat, Apple ][ in tow. What boggles my mind about the whole thing is that I've got more processing power and memory on a smart card now than on some of the computing hardware that was on display and cost 100000x more in its heysay :-)
] call -171
* 1F 2A 16 37 FF 4C BA
ROTFLMAO! And the warning that this was in the wild appeared on bugtraq 2 days ago. You'd think they could at least apply their own patches. I knew there was a reason I don't allow M$ software on my network unless it's absolutely required. (I tend to use Linux sparingly too :-))
pétard
Build XFree86 from CVS. It's not in the release but if you pull from cvs and make World && make install, then
startx -- -rootless
it works for the most part. I have had some problems with the cursor disappearing, but no worse than with Classic.
These things are neither cheap nor simple... anyone who has access to one (*not* thousands of retards!) and has a support contract can tell when it's a software/os/line/etc. problem. Those folks who can't are kept far away from the router.
We're a very small installation and get similar response. If you've paid for a support contract and it even smells like a router problem, the fastest way to fix it is to call them right away. They are a model tech support organization.
This is probably what you want. At a mere $22k, it's probably cheaper than the plasma display too. :-)
Just my $0.02 US.
In other words, if the "nice disclaimer" is in the form of a properly formed meta tag instructing Internet Exploder not to provide these "smart links", it will be disabled. Still, it sounds like a bad feature to me. Also, who would be surprised if there were a "bug" that prevented the meta tag from being read and conveniently went unfixed? I don't think I'll be using this new OS anyway, between this kind of garbage and the over the top, intrusive license controls. I also don't think I will derive enough value from their other software to justify the costs associated with the subscription model they will surely be moving to. If I can't use their application software, Windows will certainly have no place on my drive.
These guys have what you want. I'm not sure how well-funded they are, and they seem rather europe-focused. I think LinuxFormat shipped with a CD at one point
Before pursuing them in court, the author should offer to license the code for use in a closed-source product for the price of $5 Billion (or a similarly outrageous figure). The company will, quite sensibly IMO, be unwilling to pay the price. At this point, he has actual monetary damages (at least according to the BSA and, apparently, US courts) to sue for. IANAL, but it seems pretty open and shut :-).
The issue here was processor speed, not paging. He was complaining that on slower processors that don't support AltiVec, it's too slow. FWIW, it worked fine when the box only had 128 as well... the extra RAM did (of course) have performance implications, but not on the eye candy the poster was complaining about.
pétard