Why does everyone make it sound like you can't do this with an X terminal? Get a terminal with a sound card, you now have XMMS. They can change their background themes all they want to. To an end user, there wouldn't be that much difference. They don't know if their desktop comes from the machine on their desk or is beamed to them from Saturn.
What do you consider "first class equipment" when talking about an X terminal? I mean, do you really need a P3 500+ to display the output of an X server?
We're not talking about machines for development, CAD or other intensive tasks. We're talking about Sally the secretaries computer.
Linux does have file change notifications, it's just not integrated with the mainline kernel yet. IIRC, it's SGI's Irix implementation which they opened for Linux.
Except that linux distros don't install telnet by default. It would therefore require a user to explicitly ask for it to be installed. From what I understand, most of the IIS sites infected were cases where MS installed IIS by default.
And I think that redhat update lets me be a lot more lazy than any NT admin. 2 clicks, downloads and installs all the patches. Doesn't get much easier than that.
Do you know how PGP works? It's called the web of trust. Similar to that 7 degrees of separation theory. Sure, Bobby might not know Sally, but to verify who Sally is would not be difficult. Furthermore, if we were in such a situation as described, no one would trust anyone else explicitly anyways. And, yes, it will always be possible to break into a web of trust, but it need not be easy. I can always say that you need 4 ultimatly trusted signatures for me to believe who you are. Or 10, or 100. A speakeasy worked in a similar manner. Some of them got busted, many didn't. But, if things head in that direction, you can be sure that ideas like the speakeasy will resurrect and become prominant.
I don't know what you're talking about in respect to quake 3. I play quake 3 extensively (think 3 hours a day or more) and have 0 problems with it. I get a few less frames then Windows 9x players with the same hardware as me, but equal to Win 2000 players (p3 500, 256ram, geforce2 mx 64). And you can hardly blame quake3 being slow on loki since it was the video drivers sucking.
Simcity 3000 has been significantly less buggy for me then under windows. Course, I couldn't play it for more than an hour or so on windows before it crashed either. So YMMV.
Tribes 2 has been faster on Linux since day one (look back in just about any tribes forum... the windows version has been patched to get speeds closer to linux in recent patches).
Descent 3 I played, but never got into so I couldn't speak for it. SOF was fantastic on Linux. HG2 sucked on every platform it was released. Myth2, HOMM3, and RR2 have all been a excellent.
The libraries they wrote to port the games have been open source since day one. You know, little things like SDL and OpenAL. Yea, loki wrote them. And it'd be tough for them to release the source code to games when *they don't own the source.*
Does anyone on slashdot actually know what the hell is going on anymore?
That's a load of crap. I've purchased every game that Loki has released and they are consistently more stable, faster and better maintained then their Windows counterparts. Loki has even complained on their newsgroups on several occasions that they found bugs that they *couldn't fix* because that bug wasn't going to get fixed on the windows side (they would have broken compatibility with the windows version if they had fixed it).
I won't disagree that Loki might have bit off more than they could chew, but they sure as hell did a damn fine job in porting those games.
The super mario 2 you bought was not the super mario 2 released in Japan. The super mario 2 released in Japan is much closer to Super Mario 3 in the US/Canada.
Trading of a companies stock is always halted directly after a large news story is released about them (this is why most companies release earning reports after the market closes). The reason they halt trading is so that investors are given some time to think about what they're going to do before they go off and buy or sell.
Just a note about the PHPBuilder.com article. Mysql has a problem with 30 concurrent users. This is a bit different than 30 users. 30 people can be connected at one time and mysql doesn't even sweat... but when you get 30 concurrent queries, it starts to fall apart.
For a pretty normal website, 30 concurrent connections can get you 500,000 - 1.5 million hits a day (depending on your traffic patterns... if you get all your hits all within 6 hours think low end of the scale... if it's pretty well spread out across the day, think high end of the scale). As most mysql users point out, mysql isn't meant to be used in super high load situations and this assessment backs that fact up.
Now, I use mostly postgresql where I work (I need the transaction support and mysql didn't have it at the time). But I thought the current user point should be brought up.
You're reading that completely wrong. If what you said is true then all of the Windows libraries (as well as Solaris's, HPUX's, AIX's, etc, etc) would have to have been GPL'd long ago because GCC, GDB, ls, mv, cp, etc, etc all link to them. Writing a program that links against a library in no way, shape or form modifies the library. The GPL includes verbiage that talks about linking to system libraries (and the author of a program can always say that this is licensed under the GPL and you have explicit permission to link to library X).
Furthermore, there is no way for a license to superced the original license. You cant take something that I wrote and apply a new license to it.
Re:how much stuff with this break?
on
GCC 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
kgcc was included because the kernel was broken, not GCC. You can even look it up in the kernel mailing lists. Linus considered gcc 2.96 a good way to start getting Linux ready for gcc 3.0. Neither the gcc developers nor the Linux developers could have made it a "policy" that redhat had to include kgcc. Redhat did it because they knew that the kernel wouldn't compile on gcc 2.96 and they had to include a compiler that would compile the kernel.
Futhermore, even the gcc guys have admitted that using gcc 2.96 (which was really the name of the development branch) spead up development because of the bugfixes that were generated.
Why don't we all complain about them including glibc 2.2 as well? I mean, that breaks binary compatibility with all the other distributions too.
No, his comments on that are quite straightforward. GCC has never been binary compatible with itself across versions before. Redhat 7.x isn't binary compatible with *anything* because it uses glibc 2.2. 2.95.2 doesn't support IA64, one of the supported architectures of Redhat. Only needing to support one compiler across all architectures is much simpler.
I believe that those reasons pretty much account for both his reasons why it doesn't matter and why Redhat went with the decisions.
How are they twisting the word free? And as others pointed out, who is forcing anyone to work on a GPL'd project? Forced at gun point would mean that I put a gun to your head and made you contribute code. If you do so on your own will, then it's hardly forced anything.
Furthermore, why is it that people need to go out of their way and troll a conversation because they don't like the GPL? I think the QPL is an awful license. Should I now make all sorts of rude comments about your emulator?
Not to completely disagree with you (I'm a huge Phish head... if they'd only go on tour again)... but Dave Matthews used to (and still might AFAIK) allow taping of his shows. He did, however, sell out as you said.
Another band people might want to look at that has no real backing is Of A Revolution (www.ofarevolution.com... they have basically all of their songs on their site so you can stream them).
I can write a program that will *only* run on Windows NT 4.0. Most people don't, but you could. The fact that they made it easy to install on Redhat (and that is debatable unless someone wants to say that they did it) doesn't mean that the company made it even remotely easy to install on any other distribution.
The difference between distributions is mostly in where they put stuff. All the software and libraries installed is the same. This is not fragmentation (at least no more then the fragmentation between versions of Windows).
> All in all, I'll say I've put about a hundred hours into making the car work the way I like it.
That's a bit different then what we're talking about. You spent that time to take something that worked and then make it work exactly the way you want it too. We're talking about purchasing something, then spending that hundred hours just getting the car to start.
First off, you need to do your homework. Dreamweaver and UltraDev are available on Macs (all the web designers where I work use them). I've never heard of Databeacon, so I can't comment. What I can say tho, is that I feel *really* sorry for your customers if you hand them the output of Dreamweaver. It takes me hours to clean up the output of Dreamweaver before I can put it into the PHP to actually generate the page. Dreamweaver has the worst output of any HTML generator I've ever seen.
That's a load of crap. Copyright has to do with redistribution, not use. I have no right to redistribute something that is copyrighted. But, if I bought it legally, then I can do damn well whatever I want to with it *except* redistribute it without a license. Fair use in the cases you state are for redistributing something. If you can come up with a lawsuit that shows that you need a license to use something that you buy, I'd like to see it.
As far as an EULA is concerned, they have nothing to do with copyrights either. The EULA is software companies attempting to tell you how to use or not use software that you legally purchased.
> "Warning: For sale, rental or private home use in the USA or Canada only." Its not line the shrink wrap licences on software. In this case the stipulation is clear as day on the packaging.
The stipulation may be clear as day on the packaging, but as far as contract law is concerned, it's the exact same thing as an EULA. Don't expect them to stand up in court as long as you stay within the realm of what's legal under normal copyright law (and for now at least, the DMCA). Course, YMMV outside the US.
At least one of your points is happening. Sun recently gave the gnome team (it's somewhere at developer.gnome.org as a slideshow) a ton of information from a usability test they did. It seems that the GNOME did pretty good once a few basic things were told to the people being watched (like the little G foot thing is the GNOME logo... then they know it was the "start menu").
That isn't entirely accurate either. A consumer grade DVD writer will not write to the CSS portion of the DVD. However, a professional grade can and must be able to. A professional grade DVD writer is what is used to create the master to build the press for mass production. This master DVD must be exactly identicle to what is to be produced.
This is actually how the big DVD piracy rings do things. They create an identicle bit by bit copy of a DVD using a professional grade DVD writer and then use that DVD to create a press.
BTW, the difference in price between the consumer and professional grade DVD writers is about $10,000+ so everyone isn't about to go out and buy one. This difference in price is attributed to the MPAA to keep the professional DVD writers out of consumers hands so that they can't create playable DVD's. The only hardware difference between the two is the lock on writing to the CSS segment of the DVD.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does everyone make it sound like you can't do this with an X terminal? Get a terminal with a sound card, you now have XMMS. They can change their background themes all they want to. To an end user, there wouldn't be that much difference. They don't know if their desktop comes from the machine on their desk or is beamed to them from Saturn.
What do you consider "first class equipment" when talking about an X terminal? I mean, do you really need a P3 500+ to display the output of an X server?
We're not talking about machines for development, CAD or other intensive tasks. We're talking about Sally the secretaries computer.
Linux does have file change notifications, it's just not integrated with the mainline kernel yet. IIRC, it's SGI's Irix implementation which they opened for Linux.
Except that linux distros don't install telnet by default. It would therefore require a user to explicitly ask for it to be installed. From what I understand, most of the IIS sites infected were cases where MS installed IIS by default.
And I think that redhat update lets me be a lot more lazy than any NT admin. 2 clicks, downloads and installs all the patches. Doesn't get much easier than that.
Do you know how PGP works? It's called the web of trust. Similar to that 7 degrees of separation theory. Sure, Bobby might not know Sally, but to verify who Sally is would not be difficult. Furthermore, if we were in such a situation as described, no one would trust anyone else explicitly anyways. And, yes, it will always be possible to break into a web of trust, but it need not be easy. I can always say that you need 4 ultimatly trusted signatures for me to believe who you are. Or 10, or 100. A speakeasy worked in a similar manner. Some of them got busted, many didn't. But, if things head in that direction, you can be sure that ideas like the speakeasy will resurrect and become prominant.
I don't know what you're talking about in respect to quake 3. I play quake 3 extensively (think 3 hours a day or more) and have 0 problems with it. I get a few less frames then Windows 9x players with the same hardware as me, but equal to Win 2000 players (p3 500, 256ram, geforce2 mx 64). And you can hardly blame quake3 being slow on loki since it was the video drivers sucking.
... the windows version has been patched to get speeds closer to linux in recent patches).
Simcity 3000 has been significantly less buggy for me then under windows. Course, I couldn't play it for more than an hour or so on windows before it crashed either. So YMMV.
Tribes 2 has been faster on Linux since day one (look back in just about any tribes forum
Descent 3 I played, but never got into so I couldn't speak for it. SOF was fantastic on Linux. HG2 sucked on every platform it was released. Myth2, HOMM3, and RR2 have all been a excellent.
The libraries they wrote to port the games have been open source since day one. You know, little things like SDL and OpenAL. Yea, loki wrote them. And it'd be tough for them to release the source code to games when *they don't own the source.*
Does anyone on slashdot actually know what the hell is going on anymore?
That's a load of crap. I've purchased every game that Loki has released and they are consistently more stable, faster and better maintained then their Windows counterparts. Loki has even complained on their newsgroups on several occasions that they found bugs that they *couldn't fix* because that bug wasn't going to get fixed on the windows side (they would have broken compatibility with the windows version if they had fixed it).
I won't disagree that Loki might have bit off more than they could chew, but they sure as hell did a damn fine job in porting those games.
I guess it's a good thing that Audrey runs QNX then, isn't it.
The super mario 2 you bought was not the super mario 2 released in Japan. The super mario 2 released in Japan is much closer to Super Mario 3 in the US/Canada.
That's what he was talking about.
Then why is MS dumping the Win95 interface in XP?
Trading of a companies stock is always halted directly after a large news story is released about them (this is why most companies release earning reports after the market closes). The reason they halt trading is so that investors are given some time to think about what they're going to do before they go off and buy or sell.
Just a note about the PHPBuilder.com article. Mysql has a problem with 30 concurrent users. This is a bit different than 30 users. 30 people can be connected at one time and mysql doesn't even sweat ... but when you get 30 concurrent queries, it starts to fall apart.
... if you get all your hits all within 6 hours think low end of the scale ... if it's pretty well spread out across the day, think high end of the scale). As most mysql users point out, mysql isn't meant to be used in super high load situations and this assessment backs that fact up.
For a pretty normal website, 30 concurrent connections can get you 500,000 - 1.5 million hits a day (depending on your traffic patterns
Now, I use mostly postgresql where I work (I need the transaction support and mysql didn't have it at the time). But I thought the current user point should be brought up.
You're reading that completely wrong. If what you said is true then all of the Windows libraries (as well as Solaris's, HPUX's, AIX's, etc, etc) would have to have been GPL'd long ago because GCC, GDB, ls, mv, cp, etc, etc all link to them. Writing a program that links against a library in no way, shape or form modifies the library. The GPL includes verbiage that talks about linking to system libraries (and the author of a program can always say that this is licensed under the GPL and you have explicit permission to link to library X).
Furthermore, there is no way for a license to superced the original license. You cant take something that I wrote and apply a new license to it.
kgcc was included because the kernel was broken, not GCC. You can even look it up in the kernel mailing lists. Linus considered gcc 2.96 a good way to start getting Linux ready for gcc 3.0. Neither the gcc developers nor the Linux developers could have made it a "policy" that redhat had to include kgcc. Redhat did it because they knew that the kernel wouldn't compile on gcc 2.96 and they had to include a compiler that would compile the kernel.
Futhermore, even the gcc guys have admitted that using gcc 2.96 (which was really the name of the development branch) spead up development because of the bugfixes that were generated.
Why don't we all complain about them including glibc 2.2 as well? I mean, that breaks binary compatibility with all the other distributions too.
No, his comments on that are quite straightforward. GCC has never been binary compatible with itself across versions before. Redhat 7.x isn't binary compatible with *anything* because it uses glibc 2.2. 2.95.2 doesn't support IA64, one of the supported architectures of Redhat. Only needing to support one compiler across all architectures is much simpler.
I believe that those reasons pretty much account for both his reasons why it doesn't matter and why Redhat went with the decisions.
How are they twisting the word free? And as others pointed out, who is forcing anyone to work on a GPL'd project? Forced at gun point would mean that I put a gun to your head and made you contribute code. If you do so on your own will, then it's hardly forced anything.
Furthermore, why is it that people need to go out of their way and troll a conversation because they don't like the GPL? I think the QPL is an awful license. Should I now make all sorts of rude comments about your emulator?
Not to completely disagree with you (I'm a huge Phish head ... if they'd only go on tour again) ... but Dave Matthews used to (and still might AFAIK) allow taping of his shows. He did, however, sell out as you said.
... they have basically all of their songs on their site so you can stream them).
Another band people might want to look at that has no real backing is Of A Revolution (www.ofarevolution.com
I can write a program that will *only* run on Windows NT 4.0. Most people don't, but you could. The fact that they made it easy to install on Redhat (and that is debatable unless someone wants to say that they did it) doesn't mean that the company made it even remotely easy to install on any other distribution.
The difference between distributions is mostly in where they put stuff. All the software and libraries installed is the same. This is not fragmentation (at least no more then the fragmentation between versions of Windows).
> All in all, I'll say I've put about a hundred hours into making the car work the way I like it.
That's a bit different then what we're talking about. You spent that time to take something that worked and then make it work exactly the way you want it too. We're talking about purchasing something, then spending that hundred hours just getting the car to start.
First off, you need to do your homework. Dreamweaver and UltraDev are available on Macs (all the web designers where I work use them). I've never heard of Databeacon, so I can't comment. What I can say tho, is that I feel *really* sorry for your customers if you hand them the output of Dreamweaver. It takes me hours to clean up the output of Dreamweaver before I can put it into the PHP to actually generate the page. Dreamweaver has the worst output of any HTML generator I've ever seen.
That's a load of crap. Copyright has to do with redistribution, not use. I have no right to redistribute something that is copyrighted. But, if I bought it legally, then I can do damn well whatever I want to with it *except* redistribute it without a license. Fair use in the cases you state are for redistributing something. If you can come up with a lawsuit that shows that you need a license to use something that you buy, I'd like to see it.
As far as an EULA is concerned, they have nothing to do with copyrights either. The EULA is software companies attempting to tell you how to use or not use software that you legally purchased.
> "Warning: For sale, rental or private home use in the USA or Canada only." Its not line the shrink wrap licences on software. In this case the stipulation is clear as day on the packaging. The stipulation may be clear as day on the packaging, but as far as contract law is concerned, it's the exact same thing as an EULA. Don't expect them to stand up in court as long as you stay within the realm of what's legal under normal copyright law (and for now at least, the DMCA). Course, YMMV outside the US.
At least one of your points is happening. Sun recently gave the gnome team (it's somewhere at developer.gnome.org as a slideshow) a ton of information from a usability test they did. It seems that the GNOME did pretty good once a few basic things were told to the people being watched (like the little G foot thing is the GNOME logo ... then they know it was the "start menu").
That isn't entirely accurate either. A consumer grade DVD writer will not write to the CSS portion of the DVD. However, a professional grade can and must be able to. A professional grade DVD writer is what is used to create the master to build the press for mass production. This master DVD must be exactly identicle to what is to be produced.
This is actually how the big DVD piracy rings do things. They create an identicle bit by bit copy of a DVD using a professional grade DVD writer and then use that DVD to create a press.
BTW, the difference in price between the consumer and professional grade DVD writers is about $10,000+ so everyone isn't about to go out and buy one. This difference in price is attributed to the MPAA to keep the professional DVD writers out of consumers hands so that they can't create playable DVD's. The only hardware difference between the two is the lock on writing to the CSS segment of the DVD.