This sounds suspiciously like the exact same trailer they showed at the end of the LOTR movie, complete with Gandalf spoiler. Am I the only one who saw that trailer? I remember the first time I saw LOTR there was no trailer at the end.
Do Americans not know that sorcerers and philosophers are not the same thing? What the hell is going on here? Why are there two different titles for the same movie? This seems ridiculous and arbitrary.
Sorry, but CD quality is pretty much the perfect optimised quality at this point, and any claims that a new format has "better" stereo quality is dubious.
The determining factor is the quality of audio recorded in the studio. There are many factors involved, and to make a long story short, the recording studio is the bottleneck -- they contribute a minimal level of noise to the recording -- not the CD.
This guy can't even spell Qt right, let alone criticise it. I'd advise using Qt first before making off the cuff remarks like that.
The whole reason for Inti's existence is to compete with the ease and power of Qt. Sorry but the latest m&m release doesn't even come close to matching Qt in the terms of ease of use and power.
From: Waldo Bastian To: kde-core-devel@mail.kde.org Subject: Thoughts about releases. Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 15:47:53 -0800
Releases are a funny thing, you know, we love them and we hate them. Before a release everyone tends to get all excited and some people see a bunch of bugs and problems and then go into panic-mode. I have seen it happening with about every KDE release. Psychology must be playing tricks on the human mind. Looking back though, KDE releases have all been pretty ok. 2.0 could have been a bit more stable, but it is questionable whether delaying it would have helped much.
Instead of going in panic-mode it is usually more constructive to check for remaining problems and either fix them yourself, or report them to one of the lists. Based on such reports a release coordinator will be able to get an impression of the overall quality and make an informed decission whether to release or to postpone.
Unlike popular believe there is no shame in delaying a release till it has reached a quality that is desirable. It is up to the release coordinator to decide when that point has been reached. The sole purpose of release schedules is to coordinate develoment _WITHIN_ KDE itself. Distro's like Conectiva, Mandrake or SuSE may find it inconvenient that a KDE release happens later than originally planned but quite frankly that's their problem, not KDE's. (And in my case that's partly my problem because I happen to work for SuSE, but I disgress).
I would also like to make use of the opportunity to thank Dirk for his hard work on this release. Thank you Dirk!
And now let's have some fun finding those last remaining bugs....
Cheers, Waldo -- Advanced technology only happens when people take a basic idea and add to it.
-- Bob Bemer
Is this why Bonobo is being replaced by.NET? Step back and look at Bonobo again. Where is it now? Who is using it? Who *likes* it besides the GNOME promotion department? Where is it going?
It should tell you something that to launch Evolution you have to run at least 5 other processes! This is a horrible idea with horrible consequences. Not only is it stupid on a local machine, but it doesn't even *work* on a distributed network. So what's the point?
Most GNOME elements can't even talk to each other on the desktop. In KDE, *all* of them can. That's DCOP. In KDE, component embedding is a *piece of cake*. Can't say that for Bonobo.
Bonobo is the whole reason people are looking elsewhere to improve the GNOME development platform. I'm sorry, but the Network Object Model of GNOME never was. Come back when you have.NET-based GNOME, then I will be truly impressed.
It's funny, we don't hear of *any* contributions from Sun to KDE. It's as if they are trying to create a divergence in the community.
The fact that KDE has been progressing leaps and bounds without Sun's help, is on schedule, and works *better* on Solaris than GNOME itself, must be a truly worrying prospect for Sun. Add in Mono, and they've got a problem.
However, despite being a KDE'r I wish the GNOMEs luck with their 50 Indian developers. It'd be instructive to see what they can do against the handful of volunteer KDE developers.
After all the hype and noise about.NET, tomorrow's technology tomorrow, I'm glad there is now a little focus on some of the great technologies we have *today*.
KParts is modest. It doesn't not try to solve all the problems of the programming community. But it's *damn* good at what it's good at.
Like they say, the right tool for the right job. Only rarely will you find a one-size-fits-all solution.
for existing GNOME applications?
on
GNOME 2.0 Beta
·
· Score: 0, Troll
That's not true, as far as I know. Existing GNOME applications don't work on GNOME2. Just like KDE2 doesn't work on KDE3.
What makes GNOME so accessible compared to KDE? I can do everything in KDE with the keyboard and DCOP, can you do that with GNOME?
Also, is there anyone out there actually *using* GNOME2? It seems to me that in the GNOME world most GNOME1 users are ignoring GNOME2. I haven't heard or seen much about GNOME2 anywhere.
"Another misleading point in the article was the reference to GNOME as an "open source project."
The Open Source Initiative has the right to
define a criterion for open source and note the fact that GNOME fits it, but GNOME has no connection with them. GNOME, like the GNU Project as a whole, is part of the free software movement. GNOME is a free software project par excellence, because it was started in 1997 as a defense against the threat to our freedom posed by the (at the time, since changed) non-free license of Qt."
Thank you for the reference at the least. Attempting to gr0k... I'll reserve judgement until then.
I would like to point out however, in reference to your analogy, that you can't even model a three-body system without approximation on classical computers (yes, you know what I mean). If three bodies in motion can't be modelled with reliable equations, then I have reservations about making the leap to modelling more complex situations realistically.
> It's well known already that quantum computers cannot do anything that normal computers can't (they both are Turing machines); they just do some things quite a bit faster.
Sorry, no. It's not well-known. This is like asserting that classical physics is equivalent to quantum physics, which is essentially what you are doing. Perhaps you are restricting your definition of Quantum computers too severely.
I would like to assert myself that Quantum computers should be able to simulate a Quantum reality, whereas Classical computers pretty much can't do this.
Please quote your sources or quit talking out of your ass!
Has Sun said anything about it's.NET/Mono strategy on Linux yet? This would be interesting to see, given Sun's strong support of Ximian.
Important point from Joerg Mayer On Wine List
on
WINE May Change To LGPL
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 07:51:04PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> Yeah, that could work. But I still don't understand your objections about
> the proprietary drivers: LGPL would work just fine with that. What's your
> concern?
Look at the copy protection stuff that transgaming have added to their
tree: they licensed it and thus quite likely can't publish the source
for this - but I still want to see this in the binary only releases
they make:-) Other scenarios I can imagine: drivers for hardware -
think of a company that wants to port their software to Linux via wine
but continue using a dongle or something like that: the dongle code
is quite likely to go into the kernel itself (and may need some support
for that by the wineserver).
Ciao
Jörg
-----------
PS Since I have been modded down on previous posts, I have been slowing learning how to be a good Karma citizen from other examples on Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
dep called the whole KDE project a bunch of nazis. This is why he uses GNOME now, because it's American. What an asshole.
This sounds suspiciously like the exact same trailer they showed at the end of the LOTR movie, complete with Gandalf spoiler. Am I the only one who saw that trailer? I remember the first time I saw LOTR there was no trailer at the end.
Sorry, too big a download to confirm.
Do Americans not know that sorcerers and philosophers are not the same thing? What the hell is going on here? Why are there two different titles for the same movie? This seems ridiculous and arbitrary.
I've got to click *14 times* to get the full article? What's wrong with those people?
Does anyone actually have the energy and motivation to click 14 times to read an article, no matter how interesting?
The determining factor is the quality of audio recorded in the studio. There are many factors involved, and to make a long story short, the recording studio is the bottleneck -- they contribute a minimal level of noise to the recording -- not the CD.
This guy can't even spell Qt right, let alone criticise it. I'd advise using Qt first before making off the cuff remarks like that.
The whole reason for Inti's existence is to compete with the ease and power of Qt. Sorry but the latest m&m release doesn't even come close to matching Qt in the terms of ease of use and power.
Sun/wipro was the driving force behind GNOME 2 development.
So how will this affect GNOME 2? We can expect more delays presumably.
GTK 2.0.0 is already out, making Mozilla dated software. Seems they are suffering from Debian syndrome.
From: Waldo Bastian
To: kde-core-devel@mail.kde.org
Subject: Thoughts about releases.
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 15:47:53 -0800
Releases are a funny thing, you know, we love them and we hate them. Before a
release everyone tends to get all excited and some people see a bunch of bugs
and problems and then go into panic-mode. I have seen it happening with about
every KDE release. Psychology must be playing tricks on the human mind.
Looking back though, KDE releases have all been pretty ok. 2.0 could have
been a bit more stable, but it is questionable whether delaying it would have
helped much.
Instead of going in panic-mode it is usually more constructive to check for
remaining problems and either fix them yourself, or report them to one of the
lists. Based on such reports a release coordinator will be able to get an
impression of the overall quality and make an informed decission whether to
release or to postpone.
Unlike popular believe there is no shame in delaying a release till it has
reached a quality that is desirable. It is up to the release coordinator to
decide when that point has been reached. The sole purpose of release
schedules is to coordinate develoment _WITHIN_ KDE itself. Distro's like
Conectiva, Mandrake or SuSE may find it inconvenient that a KDE release
happens later than originally planned but quite frankly that's their problem,
not KDE's.
(And in my case that's partly my problem because I happen to work for SuSE,
but I disgress).
I would also like to make use of the opportunity to thank Dirk for his hard
work on this release. Thank you Dirk!
And now let's have some fun finding those last remaining bugs....
Cheers,
Waldo
--
Advanced technology only happens when people take a basic idea and add to it.
-- Bob Bemer
This is Neil blowing things out of proportion again. It's honestly nothing new. He has long history of lambasting anything to do with KDE3.
Others are having *excellent* experiences with KDE3. Just check the "fucking amazing" (sic) post, for example.
So yes, there are two sides to the story
How does that work? That's brilliant!
Who watched the Grammy's anyway, once they announced they had cancelled emjay's performance?
Now that would have been something worth watching, all jokes aside.
Is this why Bonobo is being replaced by .NET? Step back and look at Bonobo again. Where is it now? Who is using it? Who *likes* it besides the GNOME promotion department? Where is it going?
.NET-based GNOME, then I will be truly impressed.
It should tell you something that to launch Evolution you have to run at least 5 other processes! This is a horrible idea with horrible consequences. Not only is it stupid on a local machine, but it doesn't even *work* on a distributed network. So what's the point?
Most GNOME elements can't even talk to each other on the desktop. In KDE, *all* of them can. That's DCOP. In KDE, component embedding is a *piece of cake*. Can't say that for Bonobo.
Bonobo is the whole reason people are looking elsewhere to improve the GNOME development platform. I'm sorry, but the Network Object Model of GNOME never was. Come back when you have
It's funny, we don't hear of *any* contributions from Sun to KDE. It's as if they are trying to create a divergence in the community.
The fact that KDE has been progressing leaps and bounds without Sun's help, is on schedule, and works *better* on Solaris than GNOME itself, must be a truly worrying prospect for Sun. Add in Mono, and they've got a problem.
However, despite being a KDE'r I wish the GNOMEs luck with their 50 Indian developers. It'd be instructive to see what they can do against the handful of volunteer KDE developers.
After all the hype and noise about .NET, tomorrow's technology tomorrow, I'm glad there is now a little focus on some of the great technologies we have *today*.
KParts is modest. It doesn't not try to solve all the problems of the programming community. But it's *damn* good at what it's good at.
Like they say, the right tool for the right job. Only rarely will you find a one-size-fits-all solution.
That's not true, as far as I know. Existing GNOME applications don't work on GNOME2. Just like KDE2 doesn't work on KDE3.
What makes GNOME so accessible compared to KDE? I can do everything in KDE with the keyboard and DCOP, can you do that with GNOME?
Also, is there anyone out there actually *using* GNOME2? It seems to me that in the GNOME world most GNOME1 users are ignoring GNOME2. I haven't heard or seen much about GNOME2 anywhere.
Hey this Afrotech stuff is grattttttttttttteee!
Got a real kicker out of this one. Check http://www.afrotechmods.com/ for one hell of a site design.
Hey Phillip.
The proposal is a full 22 page document and goes way beyond a KDE introduction. Look a little closer, maybe.
Yeah, I saw this one. Definitely a keeper. Since the site is down, check out the apps.kde.com info page. It has screenshots and all.
I have it on good authority that Fox is replacing Futurama with the XFL.
Hooray!
Stallman says:
"Another misleading point in the article was the reference to GNOME as an "open source project." The Open Source Initiative has the right to define a criterion for open source and note the fact that GNOME fits it, but GNOME has no connection with them. GNOME, like the GNU Project as a whole, is part of the free software movement. GNOME is a free software project par excellence, because it was started in 1997 as a defense against the threat to our freedom posed by the (at the time, since changed) non-free license of Qt."
But right there on gnome.org, I see otherwise!
"GNOME is part of the GNU project, and is free software (some times referred to as open source software.)"
So, is GNOME open source software or isn't? On one hand Stallman denies it, and on the other it's confirmed on the project web page. Theories:
(1) Stallman is lying
(2) Stallman is out-of-touch with what-is-gnome
Thank you for the reference at the least. Attempting to gr0k... I'll reserve judgement until then.
I would like to point out however, in reference to your analogy, that you can't even model a three-body system without approximation on classical computers (yes, you know what I mean). If three bodies in motion can't be modelled with reliable equations, then I have reservations about making the leap to modelling more complex situations realistically.
> It's well known already that quantum computers cannot do anything that normal computers can't (they both are Turing machines); they just do some things quite a bit faster.
Sorry, no. It's not well-known. This is like asserting that classical physics is equivalent to quantum physics, which is essentially what you are doing. Perhaps you are restricting your definition of Quantum computers too severely.
I would like to assert myself that Quantum computers should be able to simulate a Quantum reality, whereas Classical computers pretty much can't do this.
Please quote your sources or quit talking out of your ass!
Has Sun said anything about it's .NET/Mono strategy on Linux yet? This would be interesting to see, given Sun's strong support of Ximian.
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 07:51:04PM -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
:-) Other scenarios I can imagine: drivers for hardware -
> Yeah, that could work. But I still don't understand your objections about
> the proprietary drivers: LGPL would work just fine with that. What's your
> concern?
Look at the copy protection stuff that transgaming have added to their
tree: they licensed it and thus quite likely can't publish the source
for this - but I still want to see this in the binary only releases
they make
think of a company that wants to port their software to Linux via wine
but continue using a dongle or something like that: the dongle code
is quite likely to go into the kernel itself (and may need some support
for that by the wineserver).
Ciao
Jörg
-----------
PS Since I have been modded down on previous posts, I have been slowing learning how to be a good Karma citizen from other examples on Slashdot.