I must admit I get tired of all this GNOME vs KDE crap. Even the GNOME FAQ says [when talking of KDEs licencing problems]: The GNOME people like the KDE people, and we consider this an unfortunate situation that is in the process of being fixed. Hopefully, this will cease to be an issue soon, and GNOME and KDE can compete friendlily on technical merit and design. Get some focus, guys - KDE/GNOME isn't a either-or situation. Both can exist side by side each offering its strengths to the user community. You can even use both at once, as some have commented. At the moment I use KDE because it is (in my opinion) a little more mature, and I must confess it is the 'default' installed by the distribution I use. But I have tried GNOME from time to time, and each time I am more impressed with it. Who knows, next year I might even change to using GNOME all the time... Just revel in the joy that this choice is available to you, unlike the millions of Windows victims, and stop squabbling. Miguel might be a little outspoken, but then all 'movers' are, otherwise they wouldn't get off there butt and do stuff. If he wasn't in love with and biased in favour of his 'child' then he wouldn't be driven to push it on. So he has an excuse - do you?
Well, I I was to steal a £30,000 car then I would be charged with stealing a £30,000 car, not with stealing a car that cost £18,000,000,000 to develop. Mitnick did not deprive his 'victims' of there goods, so there losses should be limited to the notional value of the disclosure - given that solaris is not exactly bleeding edge tech and that they will sell you the source for $100 I would see the value of the damage to be $100. Or are they now claiming that all the development they put into the products is now worthless ? I don't think so.
Yea, Linux stripped down and booted into single-user mode is pretty lightweight, perhaps U can use VFAT file system instead of ext2fs ? I've never tried it but i'm sure its possible. If you strip it down far enough U could boot from floppy disk/Flash, and use CD for storage, and completly eradicate the Hard Disk. Other options ? Has anyone tried ELKS (and is it up to the job ?)
What utter bollox. Being able to shut down the GUI when not in use is an ASSET. My web server (small tho' it is) doesn't have a monitor connected-> Because it just serves web pages & acts as a firewall. If NT can't shut down its GUI and recover the memory used, then that's its problem. a GUI is only required when there is a USER to INTERFACE to!!! Yes, a GUI setup tool is nice. Great, so just fire up the GUI when needed, and shut it down when not. That is part of the unix philosopy; only activate things when required. Linux would never be able to compete against NT if it was required to emulate all the shortcomings of NT!!! Sure, Linux has problems. But given a list of any 10 Linux problems and an equivalent list for NT, I know who I would bet on to address and fix them first.
Pop Quiz: Name 3 users who have had a non-trivial problem with any Microsoft product and have received useful help from Microsoft.
I worked for Ford of Europe as a desktop support specialist and we never received any meaningful help from Microsoft - Their helpline hardly ever answered and when it did you got through to someone who only knew how to log your problem or advise you to re-install the OS. We eventually gave up completely and used to post queries on Compuserve- we never got a 'fix' from Microsoft. I don't beleive ANYONE has ever got a custom fix from Microsoft.
In the real world people would rather have software that works. Of course people "*want* to know who they can call if something breaks" but few commercial organisations can offer this because they only have 1 or 2 people that know about the technicalities of any specific area.
I dislike the writers unqualified assumption that OSS will inevitably result in 'many different versions' of a product. As far as I can see, there is only one mainstream 'thread' of the linux sources; most people modifying OSS actually WANT to submit there changes back to the original author/project manager so that their fixes become part of the main version and they can continue to use the main version in future and not have to re-implement their changes every time a new version comes out. The authors of this document have clearly not studied HOW OSS actually works in real life, they have just listened to a few people to learn the jargon and made up their own story based on their own (wrong) assumptions. Whoever paid them for this report should ask for their money back.
So what is the relationship between GNU and Linux? I hoped that this artical would sort it out. I read on/. that RMS claimed 'Since GNU initiated the Linux project, it should be called GNU/Linux'. Without wishing to open the wound of the Linux - GNU/Linux - Gnulix debate, does RMS have any basis (even if misguided) for this claim ? I thought Linus started Linux independantly and just used the GNU tools because they where there. RMS was (and still is, I think) developing his own kernel called Hurd (as in GNU/Hurd I suppose!).
I think that the basic problem is that the Open Source community does not recognise that there are several different classes of software. The Open Source paradigm works very well on types of application that, when I where a lad, were called 'Horizontal Market' applications, i.e. application s that are applicable to a wide range of users but are general purpose and not targetted at a particular group of users. Examples of this kind of software are Operating Systems, Spreadsheets, WP, networking tools, web servers etc.
The other kind of software that the Open Source paradigm does not serve well are 'Vertical Market' applications, such as Fishery Management applications, Online Trading systems and aircraft flight control systems.
The hoardes of unemployed programmers pushed out of their jobs by Open Source software will simply be absorbed into IT departments and software houses developing custom Vertical Applications for clients, who want to keep their competative edge by having applications that only THEY use, and will be able to pay for it because they no longer have the cost of paying for and propping up and expensive and unreliable IT infrastructure based on proprietary operating systems.
You see, there are whole classes of software for which there will be no point in open sourcing.
Well, actually a domain name has more uses than to host web pages. Like FTP, Email, nntp &c &c Just because theres no web page DOES NOT mean the domain is unused.
I just want to know why people think that a domain name can be a trademark infringement ? I mean, a domain name is an address, not a title. If the content of a site seeks to defame/dilute/exploit a trademark then that's a different matter. I used to live on Springfield Road, but I don't expect Matt Groening would get very far trying to force me to move house because I was infringing his trademark/copyright... Yes, some companies are sited on roads named after them:- that is a priviledge, not a right.
"Our proposal is that if you transfer your domain name to my client, it would reimburse you for the cost of registering any new domain name that does not contain "theos", as well as for any costs associated with that transfer." As far as I can remember, 'Theos' is a greek word meaning 'God'. So Theos-Software want to lay claim to the name of God ? I'd sure like to see the letter from God's lawyer (I'm sure he could claim prior use)!
It seems to me that quite a lot of my distribution owes its ancestry to BSD or others (Messages about "Regents of the University of California..>" or "Copyright Caldera...." during bootup from a whole slew of drivers/modules). These may be on the GPL, but the're NOT developed by the FSF.
First off, if source code is physical why would algorithms not be physical? In essence, source code is just a bunch of algorithms put together to form a bigger algorithm. So you are saying the set of algorithms is a product and should be allowed to be patented, but the individual algorithms are not? What if I had the source code to do just the individual algorithm itself? Would that be physical and hence morally patentable?
No No No No... An algorithm (technique) is an abstract idea and only becomes concrete when assembled into a physical program. You should not be able to patent the IDEA of, say, a spreadsheet, because this is an abstract concept. However, if you create a particular spreadsheet , them someone should not be able to copy your EXE and manuals and sell them as there own. The shame of it is that in most countries this is TRUE in patent law, its just that patent offices are so hopeless at enforcing the rules. I find particularly offensive those companies that make hundreds of patent applications, for all kinds of obvious things, then sit on them until someone else goes to the trouble of developing them into products, and then says "Oh, we've got the patent on that. Give us your money!!". I think that all patents should be voided if it can be shown that the owner has made no effort (successful or not) to exploit the idea.
I think we should just stop people posting as AC, and offer people the option of a 'kill-list'. Privacy ? Well, just get a hotmail account - if you've got web access to see slashdot you can get a hotmail account. The key point really is that people will not be able to know that other people are 'killing' them, so there will be little motivation to keep switching accounts. Besides, if people know that they're being identified, even if its just a psuedonym, then they tend to take more care in there opinions. I subscribe to a number of Email lists, and despite them having many users registered, the conversation is intelligent and mostly on-topic. Quite simply, there is always the danger of being bounced from the list, and people usually will rather tame there tongue than keep creating hotmail accounts. Give us Accountability!!
Is it just me, or is Tux kind of stupid?
on
Quickie Fu
·
· Score: 1
Penguins fly - just they do it underwater where the food is, rather than in the air where the competition is. Sort of represents the paradigm switch that linux is. I'd rather be a fat penguin with a stomach full of fish than a skinny gull chasing fishing boats for offal.....
*-*
You want ZD NET filters? You are an idiot
on
Amiga Comeback?
·
· Score: 1
I used to wonder at this too. Then I realised its the whole geek/hacker/nerd thing, characterised by "If its possible, it must be right" So, if a link is clickable, it SHOULD be clicked. If a ZDNET filter is possible, it should be made. There Is No Other Way(tm). These guys just can't help themselves, there's no point in trying to retrain them. Guess that means I'm Not A Geek (Damn!). Then again, wihout this mentality we wouldn't have Linux, so I'm not going to complain any more about this failing....
Well, actually most libraries are issued on the LGPL which allows you to sell/give away binaries linked with the library. You only need to give the source (of the library) if you modify the library. The QPL (Qt Licence) requires you to pay for a licence if you want to sell software generated with it, but if you're making a profit that should not be too difficult (I don't think the licence is that expensive). So what libraries do you have problems with ?
Its always been a tradition in computing to name the operating system after the kernel. Its only appropriate, as it is the kernel that determines the operating characteristics of the OS as a whole.
CP/M=Control Program/Microprocessor KIM=Keyboard Interface Monitor VMS=Virtual Memory System VM=Virtual Memory (This is a guess) ICL Multijob etc etc
The kernel, dispite being less visible, is the major part of any Linux distribution and successfully implementing a OS Kernel is significantly more complex that implementing a clone of grep,awk, or even a compiler. Linus et al used the GNU tools because they where there, and if they where not, then perhaps it would have taken longer to bring Linux to where it is now. But then again, would GNU have anything like the influence it has now if it wasn't for Linux ? I think not. RMS should stop beefing and do something else. Perhaps finish Hurd ? Then he'd really have something to shout about. IFAIK Hurd has been around longer than Linux, but where is it ? Perhaps implementing a kernel is harder than RMS is prepared to admit...
I don't really understand this. Here in the UK, companies are taxed (VAT) based on sales. Why does it matted WHO your selling to ? You take the money, you should be taxed on that sale. Or does the purchaser pay the sales tax ? That seems a little bizarre. Anyway, I think that there should be no distinction between orders taken by 'phone and those taken on the Internet. Definitely no extra taxes...
Slashdot Mirror
Presumably included in the $6300 cost are a few clamps to hold the monitor....
I must admit I get tired of all this GNOME vs KDE crap. Even the GNOME FAQ says [when talking of KDEs licencing problems]:
The GNOME people like the KDE people, and we consider this an unfortunate situation that is in the process of being fixed. Hopefully, this will cease to be an issue soon, and GNOME and KDE can compete friendlily on technical merit and design.
Get some focus, guys - KDE/GNOME isn't a either-or situation. Both can exist side by side each offering its strengths to the user community. You can even use both at once, as some have commented. At the moment I use KDE because it is (in my opinion) a little more mature, and I must confess it is the 'default' installed by the distribution I use. But I have tried GNOME from time to time, and each time I am more impressed with it. Who knows, next year I might even change to using GNOME all the time... Just revel in the joy that this choice is available to you, unlike the millions of Windows victims, and stop squabbling. Miguel might be a little outspoken, but then all 'movers' are, otherwise they wouldn't get off there butt and do stuff. If he wasn't in love with and biased in favour of his 'child' then he wouldn't be driven to push it on. So he has an excuse - do you?
Well, I I was to steal a £30,000 car then I would be charged with stealing a £30,000 car, not with stealing a car that cost £18,000,000,000 to develop. Mitnick did not deprive his 'victims' of there goods, so there losses should be limited to the notional value of the disclosure - given that solaris is not exactly bleeding edge tech and that they will sell you the source for $100 I would see the value of the damage to be $100.
Or are they now claiming that all the development they put into the products is now worthless ? I don't think so.
S'funny, but in England LOMBARD is an acronym like YUPPIE that means "Lots Of Money But A Right D***head" - Are Apple trying to tell us something :-)
Put in a LS-120 and it could be used for upgrades and uploading new tuned to the HD...
Yea, Linux stripped down and booted into single-user mode is pretty lightweight, perhaps U can use VFAT file system instead of ext2fs ? I've never tried it but i'm sure its possible.
If you strip it down far enough U could boot from floppy disk/Flash, and use CD for storage, and completly eradicate the Hard Disk.
Other options ? Has anyone tried ELKS (and is it up to the job ?)
What utter bollox.
Being able to shut down the GUI when not in use is an ASSET. My web server (small tho' it is) doesn't have a monitor connected-> Because it just serves web pages & acts as a firewall. If NT can't shut down its GUI and recover the memory used, then that's its problem. a GUI is only required when there is a USER to INTERFACE to!!!
Yes, a GUI setup tool is nice. Great, so just fire up the GUI when needed, and shut it down when not. That is part of the unix philosopy; only activate things when required. Linux would never be able to compete against NT if it was required to emulate all the shortcomings of NT!!!
Sure, Linux has problems. But given a list of any 10 Linux problems and an equivalent list for NT, I know who I would bet on to address and fix them first.
Brave words from an AC.
Pop Quiz: Name 3 users who have had a non-trivial problem with any Microsoft product and have received useful help from Microsoft.
I worked for Ford of Europe as a desktop support specialist and we never received any meaningful help from Microsoft - Their helpline hardly ever answered and when it did you got through to someone who only knew how to log your problem or advise you to re-install the OS. We eventually gave up completely and used to post queries on Compuserve- we never got a 'fix' from Microsoft. I don't beleive ANYONE has ever got a custom fix from Microsoft.
In the real world people would rather have software that works. Of course people "*want* to know who they can call if something breaks" but few commercial organisations can offer this because they only have 1 or 2 people that know about the technicalities of any specific area.
I dislike the writers unqualified assumption that OSS will inevitably result in 'many different versions' of a product. As far as I can see, there is only one mainstream 'thread' of the linux sources; most people modifying OSS actually WANT to submit there changes back to the original author/project manager so that their fixes become part of the main version and they can continue to use the main version in future and not have to re-implement their changes every time a new version comes out.
The authors of this document have clearly not studied HOW OSS actually works in real life, they have just listened to a few people to learn the jargon and made up their own story based on their own (wrong) assumptions. Whoever paid them for this report should ask for their money back.
You mean like a temporary phenomenon that has existed for 30 years and PRE-DATED commercial software ?
Sheesh! Hit these guys with a clue stick...
So what is the relationship between GNU and Linux? I hoped that this artical would sort it out. I read on /. that RMS claimed 'Since GNU initiated the Linux project, it should be called GNU/Linux'. Without wishing to open the wound of the Linux - GNU/Linux - Gnulix debate, does RMS have any basis (even if misguided) for this claim ?
I thought Linus started Linux independantly and just used the GNU tools because they where there. RMS was (and still is, I think) developing his own kernel called Hurd (as in GNU/Hurd I suppose!).
I think that the basic problem is that the Open Source community does not recognise that there are several different classes of software. The Open Source paradigm works very well on types of application that, when I where a lad, were called 'Horizontal Market' applications, i.e. application s that are applicable to a wide range of users but are general purpose and not targetted at a particular group of users. Examples of this kind of software are Operating Systems, Spreadsheets, WP, networking tools, web servers etc.
The other kind of software that the Open Source paradigm does not serve well are 'Vertical Market' applications, such as Fishery Management applications, Online Trading systems and aircraft flight control systems.
The hoardes of unemployed programmers pushed out of their jobs by Open Source software will simply be absorbed into IT departments and software houses developing custom Vertical Applications for clients, who want to keep their competative edge by having applications that only THEY use, and will be able to pay for it because they no longer have the cost of paying for and propping up and expensive and unreliable IT infrastructure based on proprietary operating systems.
You see, there are whole classes of software for which there will be no point in open sourcing.
Well, actually a domain name has more uses than to host web pages. Like FTP, Email, nntp &c &c
Just because theres no web page DOES NOT mean the domain is unused.
I just want to know why people think that a domain name can be a trademark infringement ? I mean, a domain name is an address, not a title. If the content of a site seeks to defame/dilute/exploit a trademark then that's a different matter. I used to live on Springfield Road, but I don't expect Matt Groening would get very far trying to force me to move house because I was infringing his trademark/copyright... :- that is a priviledge, not a right.
Yes, some companies are sited on roads named after them
"Our proposal is that if you transfer your domain name to my client, it would reimburse you for the cost of registering any new domain name that does not contain "theos", as well as for any costs associated with that transfer."
As far as I can remember, 'Theos' is a greek word meaning 'God'. So Theos-Software want to lay claim to the name of God ? I'd sure like to see the letter from God's lawyer (I'm sure he could claim prior use)!
It seems to me that quite a lot of my distribution owes its ancestry to BSD or others (Messages about "Regents of the University of California ..>" or "Copyright Caldera...." during bootup from a whole slew of drivers/modules).
...
These may be on the GPL, but the're NOT developed by the FSF.
Just my £0.0125
Be fair! the artical was about SERVERS running NT not your mims windoze box.
First off, if source code is physical why would algorithms not be physical? In essence, source code is just a bunch of algorithms
put together to form a bigger algorithm. So you are saying the set of algorithms is a product and should be allowed to be patented,
but the individual algorithms are not? What if I had the source code to do just the individual algorithm itself? Would that be
physical and hence morally patentable?
No No No No... An algorithm (technique) is an abstract idea and only becomes concrete when assembled into a physical program. You should not be able to patent the IDEA of, say, a spreadsheet, because this is an abstract concept. However, if you create a particular spreadsheet , them someone should not be able to copy your EXE and manuals and sell them as there own. The shame of it is that in most countries this is TRUE in patent law, its just that patent offices are so hopeless at enforcing the rules.
I find particularly offensive those companies that make hundreds of patent applications, for all kinds of obvious things, then sit on them until someone else goes to the trouble of developing them into products, and then says "Oh, we've got the patent on that. Give us your money!!". I think that all patents should be voided if it can be shown that the owner has made no effort (successful or not) to exploit the idea.
I think we should just stop people posting as AC, and offer people the option of a 'kill-list'. Privacy ? Well, just get a hotmail account - if you've got web access to see slashdot you can get a hotmail account. The key point really is that people will not be able to know that other people are 'killing' them, so there will be little motivation to keep switching accounts.
Besides, if people know that they're being identified, even if its just a psuedonym, then they tend to take more care in there opinions. I subscribe to a number of Email lists, and despite them having many users registered, the conversation is intelligent and mostly on-topic. Quite simply, there is always the danger of being bounced from the list, and people usually will rather tame there tongue than keep creating hotmail accounts. Give us Accountability!!
Wasn't that http://www.elanvital.com.tw/ ?
Penguins fly - just they do it underwater where the food is, rather than in the air where the competition is. Sort of represents the paradigm switch that linux is. I'd rather be a fat penguin with a stomach full of fish than a skinny gull chasing fishing boats for offal.....
*-*
I used to wonder at this too. Then I realised its the whole geek/hacker/nerd thing, characterised by "If its possible, it must be right"
So, if a link is clickable, it SHOULD be clicked.
If a ZDNET filter is possible, it should be made.
There Is No Other Way (tm).
These guys just can't help themselves, there's no point in trying to retrain them. Guess that means I'm Not A Geek (Damn!). Then again, wihout this mentality we wouldn't have Linux, so I'm not going to complain any more about this failing....
Well, actually most libraries are issued on the LGPL which allows you to sell/give away binaries linked with the library. You only need to give the source (of the library) if you modify the library. The QPL (Qt Licence) requires you to pay for a licence if you want to sell software generated with it, but if you're making a profit that should not be too difficult (I don't think the licence is that expensive).
So what libraries do you have problems with ?
Its always been a tradition in computing to name the operating system after the kernel. Its only appropriate, as it is the kernel that determines the operating characteristics of the OS as a whole.
CP/M=Control Program/Microprocessor
KIM=Keyboard Interface Monitor
VMS=Virtual Memory System
VM=Virtual Memory (This is a guess)
ICL Multijob
etc etc
The kernel, dispite being less visible, is the major part of any Linux distribution and successfully implementing a OS Kernel is significantly more complex that implementing a clone of grep,awk, or even a compiler.
Linus et al used the GNU tools because they where there, and if they where not, then perhaps it would have taken longer to bring Linux to where it is now. But then again, would GNU have anything like the influence it has now if it wasn't for Linux ? I think not.
RMS should stop beefing and do something else. Perhaps finish Hurd ? Then he'd really have something to shout about. IFAIK Hurd has been around longer than Linux, but where is it ? Perhaps implementing a kernel is harder than RMS is prepared to admit...
I don't really understand this. Here in the UK, companies are taxed (VAT) based on sales. Why does it matted WHO your selling to ? You take the money, you should be taxed on that sale. Or does the purchaser pay the sales tax ? That seems a little bizarre.
Anyway, I think that there should be no distinction between orders taken by 'phone and those taken on the Internet. Definitely no extra taxes...