I've used linux for years, but still get confused when people bring up this subject. I can't make heads or tails of all the different X's being bandied about. Half the time I can't tell if it's a group of people or a program.
X11, x.org, xfree86, X Consortium, X Window(s?), not to mention freedesktop.org which is commonly mentioned in the same breath - i'm sure i'm missing some.
I'm sure there's others that would appreciate an unscrambling of the relationships between the x's
They may be morons, but they are morons who can quickly write simple database apps and deliver them to the client in one all-inclusive.mdb file that includes the database, all table relationships and data constraints and the program itself.
"Here's your program, sir. Just put it in your My Documents folder and double-click it" What open source program allows you to do that?
Since taking the "No MS Office" pledge, Access is the one program that I truly miss.
I agree that their player sucks, but their air supply was essentially cut off by MS so they don't have resources to improve it.
If MS wasn't targeting them for execution, they may have been able to raise the cash needed to improve their program - of course, then we'd probably be paying for it, but that would be ok if there was some value in it.
Maybe so. Maybe eventually the market will take care of itself.
But that could easily be 10 years down the road. Meanwhile, MS will have stamped Real Networks and many other perceived threats out of existence, trampling on the livelihoods of thousands of people who are trying to find markets for innovative new products. All this time they will be bullying OEMs into bundling their high-priced bloatware with all their systems, forestalling the day that we can claim to have anything resembling a free market (a monopoly, by definition, is not a free market).
They've used their monopoly to harm consumers and continue to do so. Just because the market will eventually deal with them doesn't mean that consumers shouldn't hope for some releif now.
Kind of a strained analogy, but it's not unlike saying "Why bother arresting criminals? They'll eventually die anyway"
SCO is suing IBM over breach of contract. IBM allegedly released SCO's trade secrets that they were contractually obligated to protect.
Redhat has no such contract with SCO and had no access to the SCO code - so they could only sue Redhat over copyright infringement. Big difference since RH didn't willfully release their code (neither did IBM, I'm sure, but that's the basis of the suit)
Market cap maybe isn't the best metric. It can fluctuate by millions of dollars on a day and there's no practical way to turn it into cash. More important in this case is cash on hand.
Last time they reported, Redhat had around $80 million, while SCO had only 10 million.
I guess the difference is that now they can stop putting actual dollars into it, but still write off the less tangible (more easily fudge-ible) items like hosting.
Also, as a non-profit, it may be easier for other companies like IBM, Sun, Red Hat, etc to write off their contributions to the project. If Mozilla is just a part of AOL, then IBM couldn't easily donate to the project and take it as a legitimate expense.
IANAAccountant, but since Mozilla was a legitimate business expense, the money that AOL put into it was already a write-off, in the sense that it was money that didn't show up on the bottom line.
"all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court"
So, in short, if the I.C.C. holds an American citizen captive, the US authorizes the pres to go in and get them out. Note - that doesn't mean we invade if you convict (as your post claims).
So feel free to try U.S. citizens in the I.C.C., but if you try to take them captive, make sure you're packing heat. Lots of heat.
The fascinating thing about this subject is that it's the first new thing to make it's way into an army medic's bag in decades.
I remember hearing recently that an injured soldier's survivability, prior to reaching a hospital, is roughly the same as it was during the civil war. The real improvement in field medicine isn't the medicine itself, it's the speed of the medical evacuations (helicopters). Field medics skills are stuck in the 1860s
As a former army medic in the early 90's I carried medical bag. In that bag were a lot of big, fat gauze bandages, green bandanas to make tournaquets, finger and arm splints...and that was about it for treating trauma. All the treatments available to me were centered around mechanically stopping the bleeding - which is the same thing they had a century ago.
The only item I can think of that they didn't have 100 years ago is atropine injectors for nerve gas exposure, but then they didn't have nerve gas 100 years ago either.
I agree that this will be a problem for their corporate customers who depend the MS VM, but what about the reverse? I've personally written apps that work on Sun's vm but not Microsoft's. But I needed Swing, so I've had to break it to the clients that MOST PEOPLE will have to download and install Sun's Java.
NOW it's reversed - the inconvenience is just transferred to people who target MS's VM rather than the current one from Sun. It's hilarious that MS feels it's unfair because that's exactly what they did to Sun. Now if MS wants people to use their crap VM, they have to convince people to download it or install it from their Windows CD.
This has hamstrung Java because the current version from Sun is SO superior to what MS has been shipping - either their home-grown broken one OR the old one the court previously forced them to ship.
Java developers should be rejoicing that they can now write quality apps that make use of the far superior, newer versions of Java and have an even chance of it working on a vanilla Windows install.
Nobody really wants it that badly. Laying the fiber was was only half the battle, or less. Lighting it is the costly part. Fiber-optic switches ain't cheap.
There's so much excess bandwidth down there that owning a strand of fiber is more of a liability than an asset.
Also very nice is the fact that Phoenix needs not to be installed. It just works anywhere you unzip it.
Mozilla will work the same way. If you get the big zip file instead of the installer, Mozilla also Just Works. Or it did last I checked.
The problem with it is that it doesn't include talkback, but on a milestone, it doesn't seem to matter much. I can't remember the last time a milestone crashed on me.
Nearest deep pocket is the rule of thumb in any civil suit.
In this case, they wouldn't be after money - they'd be after an injunction.
MS would gladly forgo any monetary consideration if they could just set Linux devel back by a year or so - while Linus, et al are forced to rewrite a huge swath of code and RedHat, Suse, et al are prevented from shipping product.
While I'm sure they'd be happy to win some of RedHat's pile of cash, it's small potatoes to MS.
I spent a little time in a tank unit (as a medic, so I didn't really pay attention) and I seem to recall the commanders discussing the importance of retaining at least a 1:12 ratio of Nato forces vs Soviet - at least as far a tanks were concerned.
That's not a typo - they figured we needed one tank for every 12 of theirs - at least to hold the red army until a complete REFORGER (REturn of FORces to GERmany), which is supposed to be a 48 hour operation.
They most definitely were counting on air superiority, and the fact that a good rule of thumb is that you can defend a position with a force about a third the size of the attacking force.
But how they got from one third to one twelfth was that they assessed that Nato equipment is that much better. An example would be that our M1 Abrams can pretty much fire dead-nut accurate at a full run, over fairly rough terrain, whereas the soviet tanks had to basically stop before it could hope to hit anything. Their newer tanks were better, but they had very few of those, their main battle tanks were mostly built in the sixties. They were truly counting on overwhelming numbers to break the back of the NATO defense (that is, assuming they ever were thinking of attacking NATO, their strategy may have always been focused on the assumption that they were the defenders).
We also had LOTS of fancy tank-busting toys: wire-guided dragon missiles, apache hellicopters, those ugly A-10 fighters, jeep mounted rockets that can take out tanks from safe distances.
I always had my doubts about the 1:12 ratio, but it was comforting to know that NATO was that confident
Slashdot Mirror
It was called the Pentagon Wars
I've used linux for years, but still get confused when people bring up this subject. I can't make heads or tails of all the different X's being bandied about. Half the time I can't tell if it's a group of people or a program.
X11, x.org, xfree86, X Consortium, X Window(s?), not to mention freedesktop.org which is commonly mentioned in the same breath - i'm sure i'm missing some.
I'm sure there's others that would appreciate an unscrambling of the relationships between the x's
They may be morons, but they are morons who can quickly write simple database apps and deliver them to the client in one all-inclusive .mdb file that includes the database, all table relationships and data constraints and the program itself.
"Here's your program, sir. Just put it in your My Documents folder and double-click it" What open source program allows you to do that?
Since taking the "No MS Office" pledge, Access is the one program that I truly miss.
I agree that their player sucks, but their air supply was essentially cut off by MS so they don't have resources to improve it.
If MS wasn't targeting them for execution, they may have been able to raise the cash needed to improve their program - of course, then we'd probably be paying for it, but that would be ok if there was some value in it.
Maybe so. Maybe eventually the market will take care of itself.
But that could easily be 10 years down the road. Meanwhile, MS will have stamped Real Networks and many other perceived threats out of existence, trampling on the livelihoods of thousands of people who are trying to find markets for innovative new products. All this time they will be bullying OEMs into bundling their high-priced bloatware with all their systems, forestalling the day that we can claim to have anything resembling a free market (a monopoly, by definition, is not a free market).
They've used their monopoly to harm consumers and continue to do so. Just because the market will eventually deal with them doesn't mean that consumers shouldn't hope for some releif now.
Kind of a strained analogy, but it's not unlike saying "Why bother arresting criminals? They'll eventually die anyway"
But Redhat has no contract with SCO.
SCO is suing IBM over breach of contract. IBM allegedly released SCO's trade secrets that they were contractually obligated to protect.
Redhat has no such contract with SCO and had no access to the SCO code - so they could only sue Redhat over copyright infringement. Big difference since RH didn't willfully release their code (neither did IBM, I'm sure, but that's the basis of the suit)
Market cap maybe isn't the best metric. It can fluctuate by millions of dollars on a day and there's no practical way to turn it into cash. More important in this case is cash on hand.
Last time they reported, Redhat had around $80 million, while SCO had only 10 million.
Very true. It's the coolest thing. Get yourself a $50 keychain drive and make it your persistent storage.
Then, no matter where you go, any machine you can get your hands on your machine.
I guess the difference is that now they can stop putting actual dollars into it, but still write off the less tangible (more easily fudge-ible) items like hosting.
Also, as a non-profit, it may be easier for other companies like IBM, Sun, Red Hat, etc to write off their contributions to the project. If Mozilla is just a part of AOL, then IBM couldn't easily donate to the project and take it as a legitimate expense.
IANAAccountant
IANAAccountant, but since Mozilla was a legitimate business expense, the money that AOL put into it was already a write-off, in the sense that it was money that didn't show up on the bottom line.
That may be true, but just looking at the tree, It's clear that there's substantial work being done by developers that are not on AOL's payroll.
There are 15 unique email addresses checking in in the last 12 hours. Of them, 7 are from outside netscape:
I won't bother with the rest of your troll.
Not accurate.
The so called Hague Invasion Clause authorizes:
"all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court"
So, in short, if the I.C.C. holds an American citizen captive, the US authorizes the pres to go in and get them out. Note - that doesn't mean we invade if you convict (as your post claims).
So feel free to try U.S. citizens in the I.C.C., but if you try to take them captive, make sure you're packing heat. Lots of heat.
This is the second time I've seen that post modded up to 5. It deserves a response. Finding superficial similarities is completely irrelavent.
Blood transfusions, IV's, and sterile equipment, those are not improvements?
We didn't carry those things in the field. Except IV's - and apparently they aren't enough to appreciably change the statistics.
As I said:
I remember hearing recently that an injured soldier's survivability, prior to reaching a hospital, is roughly the same as it was during the civil war.
It's only after a soldier has been medivac'd to a hospital that his chances improve.
The fascinating thing about this subject is that it's the first new thing to make it's way into an army medic's bag in decades.
I remember hearing recently that an injured soldier's survivability, prior to reaching a hospital, is roughly the same as it was during the civil war. The real improvement in field medicine isn't the medicine itself, it's the speed of the medical evacuations (helicopters). Field medics skills are stuck in the 1860s
As a former army medic in the early 90's I carried medical bag. In that bag were a lot of big, fat gauze bandages, green bandanas to make tournaquets, finger and arm splints...and that was about it for treating trauma. All the treatments available to me were centered around mechanically stopping the bleeding - which is the same thing they had a century ago.
The only item I can think of that they didn't have 100 years ago is atropine injectors for nerve gas exposure, but then they didn't have nerve gas 100 years ago either.
I agree that this will be a problem for their corporate customers who depend the MS VM, but what about the reverse? I've personally written apps that work on Sun's vm but not Microsoft's. But I needed Swing, so I've had to break it to the clients that MOST PEOPLE will have to download and install Sun's Java.
NOW it's reversed - the inconvenience is just transferred to people who target MS's VM rather than the current one from Sun. It's hilarious that MS feels it's unfair because that's exactly what they did to Sun. Now if MS wants people to use their crap VM, they have to convince people to download it or install it from their Windows CD.
This has hamstrung Java because the current version from Sun is SO superior to what MS has been shipping - either their home-grown broken one OR the old one the court previously forced them to ship.
Java developers should be rejoicing that they can now write quality apps that make use of the far superior, newer versions of Java and have an even chance of it working on a vanilla Windows install.
Nobody really wants it that badly. Laying the fiber was was only half the battle, or less. Lighting it is the costly part. Fiber-optic switches ain't cheap.
There's so much excess bandwidth down there that owning a strand of fiber is more of a liability than an asset.
Maybe a slashdot poll would be in order.
Also very nice is the fact that Phoenix needs not to be installed. It just works anywhere you unzip it.
Mozilla will work the same way. If you get the big zip file instead of the installer, Mozilla also Just Works. Or it did last I checked.
The problem with it is that it doesn't include talkback, but on a milestone, it doesn't seem to matter much. I can't remember the last time a milestone crashed on me.
Nearest deep pocket is the rule of thumb in any civil suit.
In this case, they wouldn't be after money - they'd be after an injunction.
MS would gladly forgo any monetary consideration if they could just set Linux devel back by a year or so - while Linus, et al are forced to rewrite a huge swath of code and RedHat, Suse, et al are prevented from shipping product.
While I'm sure they'd be happy to win some of RedHat's pile of cash, it's small potatoes to MS.
I spent a little time in a tank unit (as a medic, so I didn't really pay attention) and I seem to recall the commanders discussing the importance of retaining at least a 1:12 ratio of Nato forces vs Soviet - at least as far a tanks were concerned.
That's not a typo - they figured we needed one tank for every 12 of theirs - at least to hold the red army until a complete REFORGER (REturn of FORces to GERmany), which is supposed to be a 48 hour operation.
They most definitely were counting on air superiority, and the fact that a good rule of thumb is that you can defend a position with a force about a third the size of the attacking force.
But how they got from one third to one twelfth was that they assessed that Nato equipment is that much better. An example would be that our M1 Abrams can pretty much fire dead-nut accurate at a full run, over fairly rough terrain, whereas the soviet tanks had to basically stop before it could hope to hit anything. Their newer tanks were better, but they had very few of those, their main battle tanks were mostly built in the sixties. They were truly counting on overwhelming numbers to break the back of the NATO defense (that is, assuming they ever were thinking of attacking NATO, their strategy may have always been focused on the assumption that they were the defenders).
We also had LOTS of fancy tank-busting toys: wire-guided dragon missiles, apache hellicopters, those ugly A-10 fighters, jeep mounted rockets that can take out tanks from safe distances.
I always had my doubts about the 1:12 ratio, but it was comforting to know that NATO was that confident
"Does anyone who knows more about this than I do"
The guy wasn't exactly trying to pass himself off as an expert.
America may largely deserve your criticism for its IP policies, but you may want to think twice about spouting off about it.
These are the same countries US (and EU to a lesser extent) corporations dump out-of-date food and medical supplies on to claim tax breaks
Another way of putting that is that the US gives food and medicine to starving nations.
Are you actually objecting to that policy?
Oh, and you're correct. The EU commits less of this atrocity than does the US.
slashdot.info just brings up the newsforge page. That's owned by OSDN - like slashdot.
Is there some relationship between OSDN and zdnet?
From the web site you linked to:
"PHPEdit is completely free and is released under the PHPEdit licence."
It's a short, sweet license giving the right to redistribute the code or binaries, but it's not GPL'd.
Nice editor, though.