Some users may complain about not having CD audio/mp3 audio/OGG audio/DVD audio playback on their PC's but a lot more users are complaing about not having the same support in appliances. Let's face it. Consumers won't pay for music but they'll give up their next 5 years salaries to have a convient way to play it.
Is anyone complaining about playing CD's in stereo components? Not having audio CD support in PC's sucks for some users but not having audio CD support in stereo components would have sucked for a lot more users.
You're already better off writing for MFC using Codeweavers than using GTK or something right now. Support for win32 drivers in Linux is less than a year away and then you'll be better off writing win32 drivers than kernel modules. In the end the UNIX model will be used in embedded systems while the windows model will be used in desktop systems, with the only differentiating factor being the kernel.
General purpose computing is a good hobby but I wouldn't work for a company trying to survive on it. General purpose computing is toast for all operating systems. Linux never was going to break into it in the first place.
The original idea of distributed.net dates back to when the government was conspiring to restrict the number of bits in encryption and students protested that 64 bits wasn't enough. Well it may be technically breakable but economics made it unbreakable in the end.
It may be about freedom to Dick but it's all about money to the rest of the world. Independance from corporate authority is neat but not having to pay for software is neater. First, banks don't recognize source code as repayment for loans, they still want money. Second,.coms didn't go bankrupt because the source code was uneditable but because they couldn't pay for it. Third, the most popular open source projects are free front ends to commercial libraries. If you argued with that you were moderated to -1 in those stories.
My experience is if you don't get sued by your employer or by users you'll get shafted by one or the other. Although a defect in the software causes it, the retaliation usually is not a software lawsuit but something you did long ago getting used against you, like illegal parking or shoplifting, and it comes in the form of a web page or a broadcast email to recruiters.
You can't give away software in your own name anymore. Software is now the domain of businesses and governments with individuals being mere employees. Losing the ability to write software as a private individual isn't the end of the world. No-one complains about not being able to build ASIC's in their dorm room.
That's why build to order software became so popular in 2000. But either way, with all the Microsoft.dlls required to run Linux nowadays how can dropping the non Microsoft software still be considered a separate act?
Being as unpopular as they are, first because they're not in the wireless handheld mainstream and second because they're general purpose, there's very little accurate information on exactly how to make an Athlon XP run in dual mode. Some web pages say the bios must be reconfigured. Some say the bridge must be joined. Regardless of what it was, you can be sure it won't work next year and you'll have to pay a lot more for dual cpus, even if there still is such a thing next year.
You want to give up the convenience of wireless, pay per view, video on demand, media organization, plug and play, one touch recording, ease of use, so you can shift time? You need to give before you can get. If you want rights, use a PC and do it yourself. Don't expect major electronics companies to give you maximum convenience with full rights.
Now if you want to give away software you'll really have to pay for it. Sooner or later a responsibility document was going to happen but the areas where it's going to hit hardest are not in mainstream press but in free software, where programmers won't have enough money to release anything in the first place.
Sort of sad to see how slashdot story after slashdot story last year was about products being produced by nothing but vapor.
Don't see many complaints
on
More on MPEG4
·
· Score: 2
No-one's complaining about paying $500 for dedicated PVR's instead of mpeg-4 on their PC's. Compared to the money people want to pay for convenience the royalty on the codec is nothing. Then of course, no-one ever complained about the fees for video on demand either. Is the.02/hour use fee really going to force people to give up their $60/hour wireless connection to watch it on a PC?
Sometimes I wish instead of cleartype that Microsoft advertized 3 years ago it was 3D graphics or something because even though there seems to be more to life than font rendering, most people don't know what's important without Microsoft to lead the way. Now that we have to spend our existances getting the absolute best approximation to cleartype it's like Microsoft advertizes exactly what doesn't matter so their competition doesn't beat them at what does matter.
Looks like video on Linux is only going to be the domain of professionals, motion picture houses with renderfarms and electronics manufacturers with the wherewithall to embed it into appliances. The age of the bedroom hacker hacking his PC to use Linux for video editing is almost over.
Because in order for a software project to have any effect it has to be judged by other people interested in open source software. These people are also the same ones you compete with to get jobs and are usually more intimidated than impressed.
Instead of writing free software to gain experience you should use open source software to interact with other programmers who can then get you leads. Most open source projects are created for social value not for software production.
Obviously the government put spyware in the clocks to make them synchronize and thereby suppress individual freedom, not to mention lack of support for.NET.
> From what I have read,
> interference is not an issue, so I wonder what
> their real agenda is?
3 choices:
1) government oppression of individual freedom.
2) government campaigning for something besides.NET and therefore oppressing individual freedom.
3) government acting more powerful than Microsoft, oppressing individual freedom in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
Some users may complain about not having CD audio/mp3 audio/OGG audio/DVD audio playback on their PC's but a lot more users are complaing about not having the same support in appliances. Let's face it. Consumers won't pay for music but they'll give up their next 5 years salaries to have a convient way to play it.
Is anyone complaining about playing CD's in stereo components? Not having audio CD support in PC's sucks for some users but not having audio CD support in stereo components would have sucked for a lot more users.
What kind of mp3 jukebox expires?
Then I won't need to spend $60 on codeweavers to run anything on it anymore. Does anything still run without Windows emulation?
You're already better off writing for MFC using Codeweavers than using GTK or something right now. Support for win32 drivers in Linux is less than a year away and then you'll be better off writing win32 drivers than kernel modules. In the end the UNIX model will be used in embedded systems while the windows model will be used in desktop systems, with the only differentiating factor being the kernel.
General purpose computing is a good hobby but I wouldn't work for a company trying to survive on it. General purpose computing is toast for all operating systems. Linux never was going to break into it in the first place.
The original idea of distributed.net dates back to when the government was conspiring to restrict the number of bits in encryption and students protested that 64 bits wasn't enough. Well it may be technically breakable but economics made it unbreakable in the end.
It may be about freedom to Dick but it's all about money to the rest of the world. Independance from corporate authority is neat but not having to pay for software is neater. First, banks don't recognize source code as repayment for loans, they still want money. Second, .coms didn't go bankrupt because the source code was uneditable but because they couldn't pay for it. Third, the most popular open source projects are free front ends to commercial libraries. If you argued with that you were moderated to -1 in those stories.
My experience is if you don't get sued by your employer or by users you'll get shafted by one or the other. Although a defect in the software causes it, the retaliation usually is not a software lawsuit but something you did long ago getting used against you, like illegal parking or shoplifting, and it comes in the form of a web page or a broadcast email to recruiters.
You can't give away software in your own name anymore. Software is now the domain of businesses and governments with individuals being mere employees. Losing the ability to write software as a private individual isn't the end of the world. No-one complains about not being able to build ASIC's in their dorm room.
That's why build to order software became so popular in 2000. But either way, with all the Microsoft .dlls required to run Linux nowadays how can dropping the non Microsoft software still be considered a separate act?
Being as unpopular as they are, first because they're not in the wireless handheld mainstream and second because they're general purpose, there's very little accurate information on exactly how to make an Athlon XP run in dual mode. Some web pages say the bios must be reconfigured. Some say the bridge must be joined. Regardless of what it was, you can be sure it won't work next year and you'll have to pay a lot more for dual cpus, even if there still is such a thing next year.
Or maybe nonstop handheld orgnizer pitches aren't.
You knew I was going to say that.
Corel Computer, VA I.O.U., Suse, Mandrake, Loki: they didn't make handheld organizers.
You want to give up the convenience of wireless, pay per view, video on demand, media organization, plug and play, one touch recording, ease of use, so you can shift time? You need to give before you can get. If you want rights, use a PC and do it yourself. Don't expect major electronics companies to give you maximum convenience with full rights.
Now if you want to give away software you'll really have to pay for it. Sooner or later a responsibility document was going to happen but the areas where it's going to hit hardest are not in mainstream press but in free software, where programmers won't have enough money to release anything in the first place.
Does Hurd run .net? Does it compile C#? Does it emulate Cleartype? Does it use official Microsoft .dlls or does it rely on immitations?
Sort of sad to see how slashdot story after slashdot story last year was about products being produced by nothing but vapor.
No-one's complaining about paying $500 for dedicated PVR's instead of mpeg-4 on their PC's. Compared to the money people want to pay for convenience the royalty on the codec is nothing. Then of course, no-one ever complained about the fees for video on demand either. Is the .02/hour use fee really going to force people to give up their $60/hour wireless connection to watch it on a PC?
Sometimes I wish instead of cleartype that Microsoft advertized 3 years ago it was 3D graphics or something because even though there seems to be more to life than font rendering, most people don't know what's important without Microsoft to lead the way. Now that we have to spend our existances getting the absolute best approximation to cleartype it's like Microsoft advertizes exactly what doesn't matter so their competition doesn't beat them at what does matter.
Looks like video on Linux is only going to be the domain of professionals, motion picture houses with renderfarms and electronics manufacturers with the wherewithall to embed it into appliances. The age of the bedroom hacker hacking his PC to use Linux for video editing is almost over.
Because in order for a software project to have any effect it has to be judged by other people interested in open source software. These people are also the same ones you compete with to get jobs and are usually more intimidated than impressed.
Instead of writing free software to gain experience you should use open source software to interact with other programmers who can then get you leads. Most open source projects are created for social value not for software production.
Is there such a thing as a corporate user? Do corporations still buy anything when the economy is being driven by consumers?
Obviously the government put spyware in the clocks to make them synchronize and thereby suppress individual freedom, not to mention lack of support for .NET.
> From what I have read,
.NET and therefore oppressing individual freedom.
> interference is not an issue, so I wonder what
> their real agenda is?
3 choices:
1) government oppression of individual freedom.
2) government campaigning for something besides
3) government acting more powerful than Microsoft, oppressing individual freedom in the process.