Remember that most non-powerusers suffer from the default Windows settings, which hide the extension of registered file types. For them, there is no such thing as an EXE, DOC, BMP,... file. Only pretty colored icons to be clicked on:-(
You can't. SCO now claims ownership of every line of GPL code. Barely stretching it, the Internet Archive (and thus Internet itself) can be seen as SCO's IP as "derivative work". You'll send a $699 check to the order of D. McBride, Salt Lake City UT 84101 every time you connect to your ISP. Ka-ching!
Suppose my digital camera's memory card was NTFS In order to use NTFS, your camera/memory card maker would need proper documentation about this filesystem. I don't think such information is available outside of the Microsoft campus (and maybe not even there)... which is exactly why the Linux developers have so much trouble adding NTFS support to the kernel.
If I take your Fortran application, use g77 to convert it to C++
It would not work. g77 compiles FORTRAN code to assembly language (or more accurately, to GCC's own internal representation, which is subsequently converted to the proper assembly language for the target architecture). I guess you're thinking of f2c, which translates F77 to a pretty much unreadable form of C...
On the DHS alert color code, blue means "guarded", just one notch lower than the alert level the USA have been living in for the last few months (with occasional orange flares). Should this color be reconsidered in sight of the well known Blue Screen of Death?
In nVidia's case they licensed code from SGI or some company like that.
SGI was indeed mentioned on several occasions about this. And they repeatedly denied that they had signed such a restrictive deal with Nvidia... The only reason why the card makers won't release their specs or open-source drivers is because they're afraid that a concurrent will steal their IP. That's very sad IMHO.
They released an X server, working in rootless mode. Although the X clients open their windows directly on the OSX desktop, they do not share the Aqua look. Each X toolkit (Qt, GTK, Athena, Motif...) has to provide its own look (or theme when it's possible) and Apple forbids anything that might look like Aqua.
And the funny part is that now, people who use X11 and KDE on their Macs running OSX would love such a theme, which would give their desktop a unified look...
Thanks again, Apple:-(
Re:In related news...
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Slashdotters are very confused. What to hate? Who to love?
Might have been a nice haiku, except the syllable count is wrong;-) Allow me to rephrase:
What is it we hate? Who do we Slashdotters love? Confusion and doubt
So asking NVIDIA to OSS it's drivers would allow competitors to use large amounts of hardware-independent code in the OpenGL library. Asking NVIDIA to OSS it's drivers would be like asking Oracle to OSS Oracle DB.
That's not what I'm asking. I don't care if card manufactors provide the Linux/FreeBSD/BeOS with their own Open Source drivers, as long as enough hardware documentation is available to develop one. This is how it worked for most drivers in the past, and I wish it would work for NVidia, too.
Sorry, but I have to disagree: the support of Creative hardware in Linux is simply great. OK, maybe there's a short delay between the availability of their latest sound card and the patching of the OSS and/or ALSA drivers to support said card, but after that it's just about perfect. In sharp contrast to Nvidia, Creative hardware is managed by open-source drivers. And it just works. Period.
After inventing the Internet, he will now invent the Macintosh, and thus the GUI, user-friendly computing, and so on...
Re:For ATI developers: Linux support of R200 Model
on
ATi Radeon 9800 Pro
·
· Score: 1
I'm not talking about ATI's driver, this was about
Damn, I'm having a bad morning today. The end of the sentence was supposed to be:... about the opensource DRI+XFree86 driver.
Re:For ATI developers: Linux support of R200 Model
on
ATi Radeon 9800 Pro
·
· Score: 1
ATI's driver is binary-only as well.
I'm not talking about ATI's driver, this was about I'd be very surprised if a binary-only driver would had accepted in the official XFree86 distribution! Maybe the open-source driver doesn't come with all the bells and whistles, but it exists and there is hardware 3D acceleration for all platforms, not just Linux/i386.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't it be 7.2/1.7=4.24 times better? See, we're already closing the gap! Go Mozilla!
... will it play ogg/vorbis files?
With the combined stellar security records of MS and sendmail, guess how secure the new software would be.
... on time for the next SCO press conference?
Remember that most non-powerusers suffer from the default Windows settings, which hide the extension of registered file types. For them, there is no such thing as an EXE, DOC, BMP,... file. Only pretty colored icons to be clicked on :-(
You can't. SCO now claims ownership of every line of GPL code. Barely stretching it, the Internet Archive (and thus Internet itself) can be seen as SCO's IP as "derivative work". You'll send a $699 check to the order of D. McBride, Salt Lake City UT 84101 every time you connect to your ISP. Ka-ching!
Suppose my digital camera's memory card was NTFS
In order to use NTFS, your camera/memory card maker would need proper documentation about this filesystem. I don't think such information is available outside of the Microsoft campus (and maybe not even there)... which is exactly why the Linux developers have so much trouble adding NTFS support to the kernel.
An article at Groklaw shows IBM's legal team dissecting the whole SCO thing professionally and thoroughly.
;-)
And people say that animal testing should be banned...
If I take your Fortran application, use g77 to convert it to C++
It would not work. g77 compiles FORTRAN code to assembly language (or more accurately, to GCC's own internal representation, which is subsequently converted to the proper assembly language for the target architecture).
I guess you're thinking of f2c, which translates F77 to a pretty much unreadable form of C...
So shareware and freeware programs have been illegal all these years... thank you so much SCO, for clarifying this point. NOT!
Bzzt... wrong, but thanks for playing. The present threat advisory is yellow. Business as usual.
On the DHS alert color code, blue means "guarded", just one notch lower than the alert level the USA have been living in for the last few months (with occasional orange flares). Should this color be reconsidered in sight of the well known Blue Screen of Death?
In nVidia's case they licensed code from SGI or some company like that.
SGI was indeed mentioned on several occasions about this. And they repeatedly denied that they had signed such a restrictive deal with Nvidia...
The only reason why the card makers won't release their specs or open-source drivers is because they're afraid that a concurrent will steal their IP. That's very sad IMHO.
It's OK as SF goes, but I've read better. And it's not out of print ;-)
This could be a new kind of defensive patent: think of a new way that ad makers might use to annoy you and patent it so that they can't...
Business plan
1) think like a porn site administrator
2) ???
3) profit!
They released an X server, working in rootless mode. Although the X clients open their windows directly on the OSX desktop, they do not share the Aqua look. Each X toolkit (Qt, GTK, Athena, Motif...) has to provide its own look (or theme when it's possible) and Apple forbids anything that might look like Aqua.
And the funny part is that now, people who use X11 and KDE on their Macs running OSX would love such a theme, which would give their desktop a unified look...
:-(
Thanks again, Apple
Slashdotters are very confused. What to hate? Who to love?
;-) Allow me to rephrase:
Might have been a nice haiku, except the syllable count is wrong
What is it we hate?
Who do we Slashdotters love?
Confusion and doubt
Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!
So asking NVIDIA to OSS it's drivers would allow competitors to use large amounts of hardware-independent code in the OpenGL library. Asking NVIDIA to OSS it's drivers would be like asking Oracle to OSS Oracle DB.
That's not what I'm asking. I don't care if card manufactors provide the Linux/FreeBSD/BeOS with their own Open Source drivers, as long as enough hardware documentation is available to develop one. This is how it worked for most drivers in the past, and I wish it would work for NVidia, too.
Sorry, but I have to disagree: the support of Creative hardware in Linux is simply great. OK, maybe there's a short delay between the availability of their latest sound card and the patching of the OSS and/or ALSA drivers to support said card, but after that it's just about perfect.
In sharp contrast to Nvidia, Creative hardware is managed by open-source drivers. And it just works. Period.
Not Windows, but "X Windows"...
;-)
That's "X Window" (no final S) according to the man pages
After inventing the Internet, he will now invent the Macintosh, and thus the GUI, user-friendly computing, and so on...
I'm not talking about ATI's driver, this was about
... about the opensource DRI+XFree86 driver.
Damn, I'm having a bad morning today. The end of the sentence was supposed to be:
ATI's driver is binary-only as well.
I'm not talking about ATI's driver, this was about
I'd be very surprised if a binary-only driver would had accepted in the official XFree86 distribution!
Maybe the open-source driver doesn't come with all the bells and whistles, but it exists and there is hardware 3D acceleration for all platforms, not just Linux/i386.