Does anyone know where I can download winelib? It's mentioned on the WINE website, but I can't find a link to it, and there are no mention of it on freshmeat.
Basically, want I want to do is make sure that RedHat and ESR keeps making money off of software I make, for free.
Another goal is to get more flames about why a certain feature has not been implemented in the software, why I don't choose a more free toolkit, why I bothered writing a clearly inferior product when there are other free ones out there, and how much I suck by people who never used my app.
Without copyright, someone could take the GPL software and change some stuff, and not release the source code. Isn't GPL fanatics up in arms on the BSD license because that license makes this possible.
>>if pay-per-copy were eliminated, there'd be no motive for authors not to share their source code
In your dreams, maybe. They would probably still withhold source code, for no other reason than to get the money made off on support. Who would you trust to support you? The guy with the code or the guy without?
Also, something that never seem to come up in discussions about the GPL: Who are you paying the support for? The author(s) of the software or the distributor of the software? Who is making the money?
Wasn't the point of the original poster that the port would *not* be trivial? Lets say the port is done and you only get one customer? Was that a waste? Probably.
And the majority of Linux users might be competent, but are these the same people who would be day-traders? And if Linux users don't need support, why is Redhat basing their business on support?
You don't steal free software. It was freely given to you to do as you want.
RedHat and the other distributions aren't charging $50 for the package. You can by the same exact CDs from other places for $2 or less. What you do get for $50 (although I've seen official RedHat for $29 at Fry's), is 30 days support. You are free to resell your RedHat CD by making multiple copies to recuperate your initial buy.
I disagree with most (some?)/.'ers position on the music case, so I won't argue for it.
Eh, didn't we agree that, in order to be inoffensive, all occurences of the word hacker would be substituted with cracker when the media meant cracker, on Slashdot?
Besides, how dare CBS question our use of the word? Don't they realize we are the powerelite? What does it matter what everybody else is using, what the major dictionaries are defining? The Jargon File is the final say in this matter. If it's not mentioned there, it must be incorrect.
I think we should hold a rally in Washington, the One Million Geek March, to protest the unfair treatment (you know, getting paid lots of money, doing what we love, being associated with people who crack into systems) of the geeks. We could all dress up like Jedi, and Jon Katz could talk about how....
sorry, I usually zone out when Jon starts writing...
Artwork, music, gameplay. Free Software might be able to solve the gameplay issue, although I'm not sure the feedback is as good in the community as it is when people are paid to give feedback.
You could always try to *pay* the artists, you know. Open Source/Free Software doesn't mean free (gratis) software. You can always try to sell your game. GPL doesn't stop you from charging for your product.
Or you can try to sell support for the game (if someone is willing to buy from you instead of Redhat or LinuxCare), or sell manual for it (if O'Reilley doesn't beat you to it).
Whatever you decide to do, keep the source GPL and FREE, otherwise./'ers and RMS and everybody inbetween will call you a parasite and clueless.
There is a reason why games like Tomb Raider, Quake, Tetris and Gran Turismo (never heard of the last one, but then again, racing games aren't my thing) is so popular. They're Good!
Sega and Sony moved the bar on the platform games, and played upmanship. Basically, they tried to make *better* games.
If you have a better game than first-person shooter than Quake, fine, show it to the world. Don't just take a third-bit first-person shooter, write it for Linux, and then say "See DOS/Windows has Quake, we have Storm, therefore the Gameing situation on Linux is just as good as Win". If it's crap, people won't come.
If I had the choice between Civilization and FreeCiv, I would choose Civilization over a bad copy any day.
Games is not important enough in my life for me to try to debug, and rewrite to make better. Either it works or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I move on.
Sure, GNU might have lots of games, just like OS/2 had lots of applications.
But is it games people wants, or is it games for the sake of saying there are games on Linux? What difference is there if there are games for GNU/Linux if is not the games people want?
Most people here is saying that only the author can relicense a L/GPL software if he wants to (presuming he is the only contributor), is that really so?
A new version of a software seems to me to be fit the 'perfect' definition of a derivative work. Most people increase the version number when they do a bugfix or increase the functionality. They don't rewrite the whole thing from groundup. SO it is a derived work. And since the original software was under GPL, wouldn't the new version of the software also have to be under the GPL because of the derivate clause?
L/GPL wasn't designed to give the author any control of their software, but give it entirely to the user. So, why pretend the author can change the license, when the L/GPL specifically deals with changing of license AND derivate work?
There is a difference between an application like Netscape or game like Quake and an API. OpenGL had problems getting out of the door. CORBA isn't as big as everybody wants it to be. Both of them are superior technology than the M$ version, but both of them are struggling compared to DirectX and COM.
Aren't cars a more important part of modern life? Shouldn't we, by that measure, by teaching how to repair and build a car? If you doubt cars are important, I'm guessing families who can afford are more likely to get a car before they get a computer.
Clifford Stoll has a very interesting book on the subject: "High Tech Heretic - Why Computers *Don't* Belong in the Classroom and Other Reflections by a COmputer Contrarian".
Excepts from the back of his book: ############ On Computer Literacy: * I don't think our suffers from a fear of technology. If anything, our problems are rooted in a love affair with gizmos.
* Sure, kids love computers. I met an eigth grader who told me he'd spent his summer vacations logged onto the Internet for seven hours a day. Every day of the summer. A thirteen-year-old girl looked at me with a fresh face and asked, How can I meet boys if I'm not on-line?
On Computers in the Classroom * Whenever I point out the dubious value of computers in the schools. I hear, 'Look, computers are everywhere, so we have to bring them into the classroom.' Well, automobiles are everywhere, too. They play a damned important part in our society, and it's hard to get a job if you can't drive. In fact, cars count for more of our economy than do computers. But we don't teach automotive literacy.
*********** I think he's right in one important aspect. Most people who are really into computers will learn it sooner or later. Why force it on everybody else? I didn't have computers in grammar school. It was more important to learn to read, write, do math, and learn to interact, to communicate with other people. Why learn to read, when you can have the computer read back the book for you? Why learn to write, when the computer can correct your spelling, and your grammar? Why learn to think when you can just have the computer spit back the homework answers for you?
And no, not everybody has an interest in learning everything there is to know about the computer. Heck, most people shouldn't have to. Technology should work, and otherwise keep the hell out of the way. I don't know how the radio captures radiowaves and send out the sound. Not my point of interest. All i know is,it is works.
And is it really useful for classrooms to receive old computers? Sure, it might run Windows 2000 today with Office 2000, but how will that help if it won't run the next version? Doesn't it cost more to keep upgrading all the time? And if you don't want them to upgrade, wasn't the point of the exercise to give the students proficiency in today's technology? Of will that help if they are 3-5 years behind? Again, not everybody wants or needs to know how the compiler works. How useful is it to teach them the UNIX command prompt, if in college they need to learn the Mac interface and at work they need to learn the newest GUI "innovation" by M$?
Wouldn't the money spent on computers be better off hiring more teachers, increasing the salary so that more quality people will be interested in becoming teachers?
Finally, isn't it more useful to learn a new language rather than learning of the latest software package (which will be useless by the time they graduate anyways) works?
My understanding is that OS/2 1.3, which was the last version worked on by both M$ and IBM, used the old 'Windows 3.1' desktop. OS/2 v2.0 and up was a huge rewrite with the new object oriented desktop.
Opensource might be faster and better, but at least M$ is giving the user the experience what they want (make it easier to get the job done).
How many times have you heard RTFM (as if it actually exists in most projects) or 'we don\'t need no stinking GUI', 'CLI RULES!!', 'fire up vi and edit those [none documented] config. files', 'I don\'t feel 3L33T enough because so many LUSERS are using my OS'
Would HOWTOs be necessary if people documented their projects?
Why would OpenSource/FreeSoftware proponents want *more* security? Doesn't information want to be free? Aren't you hoarding information by scrambling it so that only you and the recipient of your keys can read it? Aren't we being hypocritical if we want everybody else's information to be free?
At least RMS is consistent when he wants everybody to have root access.
Season 5 wasn't written and filmed until season 4 was over because they weren't sure they would get picked up. That's why last episode of season 5 (and of the series) was filmed during season 4.
I think the reason season 5 was as poor as it was (and it was poor, no matter what JMS and his disciples say, compared to the previous seasons), was because a) he didn't have time to rewrite and rethink the premises as much as he did before, and b) he had to fill up more episodes than he had planned (look at my other message for how the serie was supposed to progress).
Season 4 was supposed to end with Sheridan in prison (Intersection in Real Time).
Most of season 5 was supposed to be about the Earth civil war, probably ending midseason. Check out The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5 for more information.
I know I was unable to write any programs before the word *hacker* was corrected to cracker.
Of course, in the future, in order to not offend anyone, I expect that M$/Microshaft/Microsleuth/Micro$soft etc. be changed to Microsoft Inc.
Slovaris be changed to Solaris (SunOS 6-> is also acceptable).
Linux will be changed to GNU/Linux or Linux/GNU in all text.
RMS will be changed ESR. Linus Thorvald will be changed to Richard M. Stallman.
EvilHat, the Next M$, whatever people wants to call RedHat, to RedHat.
Also, while we are at it, I find any mention of GNOME being better than KDE also highly offensive. Please substitute all GNOME articles with KDE articles.
I'm glad these features have been implemented, BECAUSE OTHERWISE I WOULD BE SO OFFENDED.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone know where I can download winelib? It's mentioned on the WINE website, but I can't find a link to it, and there are no mention of it on freshmeat.
Basically, want I want to do is make sure that RedHat and ESR keeps making money off of software I make, for free.
Another goal is to get more flames about why a certain feature has not been implemented in the software, why I don't choose a more free toolkit, why I bothered writing a clearly inferior product when there are other free ones out there, and how much I suck by people who never used my app.
Ah, I love being a programmer.
When was the last time you read the GPL?
Without copyright, someone could take the GPL software and change some stuff, and not release the source code. Isn't GPL fanatics up in arms on the BSD license because that license makes this possible.
>>if pay-per-copy were eliminated, there'd be no motive for authors not to share their source code
In your dreams, maybe. They would probably still withhold source code, for no other reason than to get the money made off on support. Who would you trust to support you? The guy with the code or the guy without?
Also, something that never seem to come up in discussions about the GPL: Who are you paying the support for? The author(s) of the software or the distributor of the software? Who is making the money?
Wasn't the point of the original poster that the port would *not* be trivial? Lets say the port is done and you only get one customer? Was that a waste? Probably.
And the majority of Linux users might be competent, but are these the same people who would be day-traders? And if Linux users don't need support, why is Redhat basing their business on support?
You don't steal free software. It was freely given to you to do as you want.
/.'ers position on the music case, so I won't argue for it.
RedHat and the other distributions aren't charging $50 for the package. You can by the same exact CDs from other places for $2 or less. What you do get for $50 (although I've seen official RedHat for $29 at Fry's), is 30 days support. You are free to resell your RedHat CD by making multiple copies to recuperate your initial buy.
I disagree with most (some?)
Eh, didn't we agree that, in order to be inoffensive, all occurences of the word hacker would be substituted with cracker when the media meant cracker, on Slashdot?
Besides, how dare CBS question our use of the word? Don't they realize we are the powerelite? What does it matter what everybody else is using, what the major dictionaries are defining? The Jargon File is the final say in this matter. If it's not mentioned there, it must be incorrect.
I think we should hold a rally in Washington, the One Million Geek March, to protest the unfair treatment (you know, getting paid lots of money, doing what we love, being associated with people who crack into systems) of the geeks. We could all dress up like Jedi, and Jon Katz could talk about how....
sorry, I usually zone out when Jon starts writing...
Artwork, music, gameplay. Free Software might be able to solve the gameplay issue, although I'm not sure the feedback is as good in the community as it is when people are paid to give feedback.
./'ers and RMS and everybody inbetween will call you a parasite and clueless.
You could always try to *pay* the artists, you know. Open Source/Free Software doesn't mean free (gratis) software. You can always try to sell your game. GPL doesn't stop you from charging for your product.
Or you can try to sell support for the game (if someone is willing to buy from you instead of Redhat or LinuxCare), or sell manual for it (if O'Reilley doesn't beat you to it).
Whatever you decide to do, keep the source GPL and FREE, otherwise
There is a reason why games like Tomb Raider, Quake, Tetris and Gran Turismo (never heard of the last one, but then again, racing games aren't my thing) is so popular. They're Good!
Sega and Sony moved the bar on the platform games, and played upmanship. Basically, they tried to make *better* games.
If you have a better game than first-person shooter than Quake, fine, show it to the world. Don't just take a third-bit first-person shooter, write it for Linux, and then say "See DOS/Windows has Quake, we have Storm, therefore the Gameing situation on Linux is just as good as Win". If it's crap, people won't come.
If I had the choice between Civilization and FreeCiv, I would choose Civilization over a bad copy any day.
Games is not important enough in my life for me to try to debug, and rewrite to make better. Either it works or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I move on.
Sure, GNU might have lots of games, just like OS/2 had lots of applications.
But is it games people wants, or is it games for the sake of saying there are games on Linux? What difference is there if there are games for GNU/Linux if is not the games people want?
How do you know he meant RedHat and not Mandrake or any other 6.1 distributions?
Most people here is saying that only the author can relicense a L/GPL software if he wants to (presuming he is the only contributor), is that really so?
A new version of a software seems to me to be fit the 'perfect' definition of a derivative work. Most people increase the version number when they do a bugfix or increase the functionality. They don't rewrite the whole thing from groundup. SO it is a derived work. And since the original software was under GPL, wouldn't the new version of the software also have to be under the GPL because of the derivate clause?
L/GPL wasn't designed to give the author any control of their software, but give it entirely to the user. So, why pretend the author can change the license, when the L/GPL specifically deals with changing of license AND derivate work?
There is a difference between an application like Netscape or game like Quake and an API. OpenGL had problems getting out of the door. CORBA isn't as big as everybody wants it to be. Both of them are superior technology than the M$ version, but both of them are struggling compared to DirectX and COM.
Aren't cars a more important part of modern life? Shouldn't we, by that measure, by teaching how to repair and build a car? If you doubt cars are important, I'm guessing families who can afford are more likely to get a car before they get a computer.
Clifford Stoll has a very interesting book on the subject: "High Tech Heretic - Why Computers *Don't* Belong in the Classroom and Other Reflections by a COmputer Contrarian".
Excepts from the back of his book:
############
On Computer Literacy:
* I don't think our suffers from a fear of technology. If anything, our problems are rooted in a love affair with gizmos.
* Sure, kids love computers. I met an eigth grader who told me he'd spent his summer vacations logged onto the Internet for seven hours a day. Every day of the summer. A thirteen-year-old girl looked at me with a fresh face and asked, How can I meet boys if I'm not on-line?
On Computers in the Classroom
* Whenever I point out the dubious value of computers in the schools. I hear, 'Look, computers are everywhere, so we have to bring them into the classroom.' Well, automobiles are everywhere, too. They play a damned important part in our society, and it's hard to get a job if you can't drive. In fact, cars count for more of our economy than do computers. But we don't teach automotive literacy.
***********
I think he's right in one important aspect. Most people who are really into computers will learn it sooner or later. Why force it on everybody else? I didn't have computers in grammar school. It was more important to learn to read, write, do math, and learn to interact, to communicate with other people. Why learn to read, when you can have the computer read back the book for you? Why learn to write, when the computer can correct your spelling, and your grammar? Why learn to think when you can just have the computer spit back the homework answers for you?
And no, not everybody has an interest in learning everything there is to know about the computer. Heck, most people shouldn't have to. Technology should work, and otherwise keep the hell out of the way. I don't know how the radio captures radiowaves and send out the sound. Not my point of interest. All i know is,it is works.
And is it really useful for classrooms to receive old computers? Sure, it might run Windows 2000 today with Office 2000, but how will that help if it won't run the next version? Doesn't it cost more to keep upgrading all the time? And if you don't want them to upgrade, wasn't the point of the exercise to give the students proficiency in today's technology? Of will that help if they are 3-5 years behind? Again, not everybody wants or needs to know how the compiler works. How useful is it to teach them the UNIX command prompt, if in college they need to learn the Mac interface and at work they need to learn the newest GUI "innovation" by M$?
Wouldn't the money spent on computers be better off hiring more teachers, increasing the salary so that more quality people will be interested in becoming teachers?
Finally, isn't it more useful to learn a new language rather than learning of the latest software package (which will be useless by the time they graduate anyways) works?
Just a little warning.
My understanding is that OS/2 1.3, which was the last version worked on by both M$ and IBM, used the old 'Windows 3.1' desktop. OS/2 v2.0 and up was a huge rewrite with the new object oriented desktop.
>>The order was 2.0, 2.1, 3.0 (Warp), 4.0 (Merlin)
You're right:-) Then again, being a OS/2 user, you couldn't really be wrong;-) Wonder if there is a support group for former OS/2 users...
OS/2 is the OS where they got the desktop right.
There never was a OS/2 2.2, it was 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 4.0 (warp).
Opensource might be faster and better, but at least
M$ is giving the user the experience what they want (make it easier to get the job done).
How many times have you heard RTFM (as if it actually exists in most projects) or 'we don\'t need no stinking GUI', 'CLI RULES!!', 'fire up vi and edit those [none documented] config. files', 'I don\'t feel 3L33T enough because so many LUSERS are using my OS'
Would HOWTOs be necessary if people documented their projects?
Why would OpenSource/FreeSoftware proponents want
*more* security? Doesn't information want to be
free? Aren't you hoarding information by scrambling
it so that only you and the recipient of your keys
can read it? Aren't we being hypocritical if we
want everybody else's information to be free?
At least RMS is consistent when he wants everybody to have root access.
Actually, TNT hadn't agreed to pick up season 5 before after season 4 had ended or at the very end of the season 4.
Season 5 wasn't written and filmed until season 4 was over because they weren't sure they would get picked up. That's why last episode of season 5 (and of the series) was filmed during season 4.
I think the reason season 5 was as poor as it was (and it was poor, no matter what JMS and his disciples say, compared to the previous seasons), was because a) he didn't have time to rewrite and rethink the premises as much as he did before, and b) he had to fill up more episodes than he had planned (look at my other message for how the serie was supposed to progress).
Season 4 was supposed to end with Sheridan in prison (Intersection in Real Time).
Most of season 5 was supposed to be about the Earth civil war, probably ending midseason. Check out The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5 for more information.
Yahoo is making money. I think they have since June last year.
I know I was unable to write any programs before the word *hacker* was corrected to cracker.
Of course, in the future, in order to not offend anyone, I expect that M$/Microshaft/Microsleuth/Micro$soft etc. be changed to Microsoft Inc.
Slovaris be changed to Solaris (SunOS 6-> is also acceptable).
Linux will be changed to GNU/Linux or Linux/GNU in all text.
RMS will be changed ESR. Linus Thorvald will be changed to Richard M. Stallman.
EvilHat, the Next M$, whatever people wants to call RedHat, to RedHat.
Also, while we are at it, I find any mention of GNOME being better than KDE also highly offensive. Please substitute all GNOME articles with KDE articles.
I'm glad these features have been implemented, BECAUSE OTHERWISE I WOULD BE SO OFFENDED.
Judge Dredd started out as a British comic book, didn't he?
Agree with you though. Anyone remember the godawful Wing Commander?