ANyways... You seemed to place value on your software, but when you release your software under the GPL, it's no longer yours. It's OURS... So that doesn't do you any good, either.
If you release your software under BSD, it's still your software... You're just saying "Hi. I did this. If you want to do something with this that might make yourself some money, go for it..."
I've never whined before, but i possibly see how i was "redundant" with that remark... I wouldn't have said it if someone else had pointed this out...
Anyways...
1 - who cares how much power you have? For most people, today's computers are just overkill for their needs... (Gamers, programmers, and other power-user types not included here)
2 - To show how dedicated you are? By installing a piece of software and then not shutting down your computer? WOW... that's such dedication...:)
3 - You're not figuring anything... your computer is dumbly trying one key after another... If you win, it shows nothing about your skill or your computing power, just that the keyserver happened to dole out the winning key to you.
4 - Yeah... I'll agree with that one... it's cool to actually know your CPU is doing something... rather than how it is right now, probably around 0% usage as i type on slashdot....
No MacOS - I know it's not great, but I bet a machine running appleshare server would do pretty well...
Only machines which have either binaries available (SunOS, Linux, Windows, FreeBSD) or PERL are eligible to partake.
Would someone running OpenBSD be running PERL for instance? (is it even included???) Or run an unknown binary?
How about Irix boxes that just sit and calculate all day long... Why would they want perl on their system, let alone an unneeded program?
This project is a JOKE. There is no way in the world that this can be subjective... Notice the heavy skewing in the number of linux boxes on the list vs others... Now look at the real world... All those NT boxes are probably admin'd by people who have no business setting foot near the console of one of those boxes.
Those losers who don't want to do anything interesting with their computers?
Like what?
SETI@home? Useless. If there is life out there, SETI@home might even find it, but what will that do for us? Nothing... We'll get a few blips and then need to spend the next 50 years speculating as to what was said...
Distributed.net? Just so you can prove over and over and over again that crypto is indeed breakable? The points been made.
Mersenne Prime number search? Yep... there's something useful... even if you get a huge number it still needs to be verified on a cray for a few months... and what do larger prime numbers do for us?
Renderfarms.... How many home users do you reckon have racks and racks of machines to do their rendering. Or even just one workstation at home doing professional graphics? MAYBE 5000, i'd bet... Those ones probably do leave their machines on...
So really, there isn't much point in leaving your home box if you're just the "average home computer user"... and if you're reading this posting, obviously you don't fit that criteria...
Exactly... If you need Oracle, you NEED Oracle... If your application doesn't require it, you're just throwing away your cash. They compete in COMPLETELY different areas of the market.
Just like somewhere once i saw a checklist comparison of MySQL vs. Oracle. The most pointless waste of time i'd ever stumbled across. Yeah you can say MySQL supports this and that that Oracle may not support, or maybe it's faster when dealing with 25MB files, but you'd better not be buying Oracle to deal with said file.
I liked your analogy there... But let's make that desk into a 13" TV...:)
Why not just one database that's kick-ass.... ANd then just enable or disble features as you need them... It'd suck to build a DB and then realize you need features from another db, and then have to redo all your core-logic...
Can Interbase possibly compete against Oracle8? Um... doubtfully.
And on another point... Inprise is presumably looking to make money. Your vote doesn't earn them dollars... a pledge to purchase their commercial development tools would help, maybe.
I don't think that/. could stand a chance at losing it's registration or anything, but i would like to point out that/. is hardly a "neutral" forum... Every posting on the home page is rather obviouly twisted a little bit in order to insight a discussion in a distinct way...
/. isn't innocent as people say... but it also is not in a position where it's exposed to anything... unless after the lawsuit, and if the plaintiffs win, anonymous cowards start posting links to the software.... if those posts get moderated up to 5, there's sure to be some complaints...
You enjoy reading decompiled binaries??? Who are you, RMS? I thought he was the only one that did that for fun:)
I think it's perfectly acceptable to assume that if you didn't write the software, you have no more rights to it than the original author of it... The GPL exists for the reason that it allows people to develop under that license with express intent of being that other people can look at, alter and redistriubte that code.
You, Me, or any other person or company should have enough control of our work to be able to determine what license it should be distributed under...
I just don't understand what the issue is.... They wrote it, they want control of it, and they're fighting back because, while people could license they they instead attempted to circumvent it....
Oops... go ahead... moderate me to trolldome... i deserve it.
Their earning should skyrocket as all the little hackers/crackers rush to buy iMacs and/or OS 9 upgrades before Apple releases a fix... Years from now those babies will still be useful!
Imagine tomorrow on News.com:
Mac OS 9 deemed OS of choice for crackers... The rush is on to buy before 9.0.1 arrives!
If any of these script kiddies has a web server somewhere that they can see the logs of, then it'd seem much easier to just see where the macs are coming from, and send the attack through them... if nothing else, it would add an extra step to finding who perpetrated the attack.
Forever now, i've operated under the assumption that frame size is variable... Which is why all those utilities are available (for win and mac) that allow you to change your MTU (is that the right term... and is it the right term for this discussion?) depending on the speed of your connection - small for modems high for ethernet...
So, couldn't you send the packetr to the Macs using a very small frame size and have them in return clog the pipe for you? It sounds that way to me.... maybe i'm wrong
at least the microsoft poster was funny, being that it's slightly relevant to the topic... Microsoft did invest in apple... the joke is about the programmers...
Redhat's done squat... so far as this discussion goes.
I spend most of my day laying out pages using Quark.... A lot of these pages also need to be available online, and we've found that the best way to do so, when formatting is an issue, is to use PDF's.
CSS is relatively new - yes, the spec's been out for a while, but only now do most browsers have somewhat decent support for it. And Mozilla I wouldn't even consider, being that it's pretty much Alpha software... I haven't ventured to try it with Linux (because at this point i feel Linux is best suited as a server OS), but on the Mac, Win 9x, and Win NT, I've found it to be horribly unstable. I also haven't fully investigated Opera, which leaves us with just Netscape and IE...
Of those two, IE seems to more fully implement CSS... version 5 is much better than 4.5, but 5 is Windows only where as 4.5 was also available for the Mac.
Acrobat reader is available for probably as many or more platforms as Netscape Communicator/Navigator. It also (Thanks to QuarkXPress) has MUCH better typographical control than CSS. That's probably because the programs being used to generate PDF's are much more mature than those used to genertate HTML, XML, etc...
You can't generate ligatures with CSS... nor can you have nearly as wide a choice of fonts... With PDF, I don't care what font's you have available, because i can embed them within my document. And also, using PDF's, you're extremely unlikely to need to tinker with the file/code at all, where as anything where detail is that much an issue in HTML, you always need to wade through the code.
So, to summarize... The tools to generate PDF's are much more advanced than the ones to make CSS/HTML. The tools to view PDF's are also much more advanced than those currently available for HTML, in that the designer/author has so much more control over the final appearance of their document than can ever be achieved with CSS/HTML... Yes, I could specify that i'd like this font to appear as Adobe Bembo, but if that's not available on your machine, you may end up with Times, or whatever generic Serif font is available.
I'm not saying that they're using it because it might support this or that, but wouldn't it be nice if there was that option???
If x86 Linux is headed towards the mainstream, then it's RISC cousins need to be able to have a mechanism in order to use all the software available to x86, otherwise they'll always be treated as second rate to x86.
And yeah, running Oracle in emulation would be just dumb... but for something not as performance hungry, like WordPerfect or Opera, it'd be nice to have the option, i'd think...
I actually enjoy his and the Register's commentary on things more than anyone else, specifically because they aren't out to make friends... just to report news and include their own insights. Dvoraks been reporting on this industry for maybe 20 years now... If he really knew/knows nothing, he'd have lost his job and audience years ago...
Just because he's not pro-linux is not a good enough reason to say he knows nothing...
If they don't think it's worth it and complain, then they're just dumb... IF you don't want to deal with that sort of work atmosphere, get a different job and forget about the stock options... IF you do want to do that, then you are entitled to the big payoff - should it arrive....
It's all about what you value most - enjoying your time as it happens, or throwing away a period of your life in hopes that a later era will be much different.
While I'm not a programmer and therefore can't really contribute much to the cause, I still wonder why there has been no effort to make an opensource emulator... x86 to Alpha... maybe x86 to SPARC... x86 to PowerPC.... and two way, as well... though i suspect the main use would be to run x86 software on other platforms... Wouldn't that be great? And why is there no effort that I can find?
PDF's the format for people who actually want to have a say in how people view their documents. HTML's cool, but it's very limited, typographically and such... There are so many effects you can accomplish via PDF (using Word, Quark, Pagemaker, Illustrator, etc...) that are just impossible to do with HTML...
Besides which, readers are free for just about every platform (Linux included, I believe... and if the official version isn't available - there's surely an opensource reader....)
Programs that wait on CPU's definetly benefit from added CPU's... For instance, yes, photoshop loved them... Then there's pretty much every 3-D application on the planet... RIPs - the programs/hardware that converts Quark files to bitmaps so they can be printed in the Boston Globe, also enjoy added CPU's...
I spend a huge amount of my time waiting and wating for my computer sometimes... just watching the bar crawl across the screen... Added CPU's would certainly help - so long as the programs were reworked to recognize them.
Yes be thankful... Be thankful that Apple exists today to bring you multi-G4 Mac's... Be thankful that OS 9 is here, OS-X Server has been here for a while and OS-X consumer is due to arrive soon.... Be thankful for the little iMacs that could.... Be thankful they finally got USB to become popular enough that people decided to make USB devices... and be thankful that they've taken part in the development of firewrie... i'm sure there's others too...
Not much harder... But hopefully all the good compilers strip out things like comments prior to actually compiling the code. Yes, you can decompile or disassemble binaries, but those are only 50% useful compared to fully commented code... So, it does make things a slight bit more difficult than otherwise...
You mean like all the dotcoms that were the craze the last two years?
Of course that's what's going to happen... Everyone's hopping from Amazon to Redhat to ride it's ups and downs...And then when the next buzzword comes along (probably B2B...) they'll scurry away from Linux and on the B2B bandwagon.
(B2B = Business to Business e-commerce, in case you were wondering...)
Slashdot Mirror
Ooops... I didn't mean to post that yet! :)
ANyways... You seemed to place value on your software, but when you release your software under the GPL, it's no longer yours. It's OURS... So that doesn't do you any good, either.
If you release your software under BSD, it's still your software... You're just saying "Hi. I did this. If you want to do something with this that might make yourself some money, go for it..."
I've never whined before, but i possibly see how i was "redundant" with that remark... I wouldn't have said it if someone else had pointed this out...
:)
Anyways...
1 - who cares how much power you have? For most people, today's computers are just overkill for their needs... (Gamers, programmers, and other power-user types not included here)
2 - To show how dedicated you are? By installing a piece of software and then not shutting down your computer? WOW... that's such dedication...
3 - You're not figuring anything... your computer is dumbly trying one key after another... If you win, it shows nothing about your skill or your computing power, just that the keyserver happened to dole out the winning key to you.
4 - Yeah... I'll agree with that one... it's cool to actually know your CPU is doing something... rather than how it is right now, probably around 0% usage as i type on slashdot....
Check out their selection of clients...
No MacOS - I know it's not great, but I bet a machine running appleshare server would do pretty well...
Only machines which have either binaries available (SunOS, Linux, Windows, FreeBSD) or PERL are eligible to partake.
Would someone running OpenBSD be running PERL for instance? (is it even included???) Or run an unknown binary?
How about Irix boxes that just sit and calculate all day long... Why would they want perl on their system, let alone an unneeded program?
This project is a JOKE. There is no way in the world that this can be subjective... Notice the heavy skewing in the number of linux boxes on the list vs others... Now look at the real world... All those NT boxes are probably admin'd by people who have no business setting foot near the console of one of those boxes.
Next pointless survey, please?
Those losers who don't want to do anything interesting with their computers?
Like what?
SETI@home? Useless. If there is life out there, SETI@home might even find it, but what will that do for us? Nothing... We'll get a few blips and then need to spend the next 50 years speculating as to what was said...
Distributed.net? Just so you can prove over and over and over again that crypto is indeed breakable? The points been made.
Mersenne Prime number search? Yep... there's something useful... even if you get a huge number it still needs to be verified on a cray for a few months... and what do larger prime numbers do for us?
Renderfarms.... How many home users do you reckon have racks and racks of machines to do their rendering. Or even just one workstation at home doing professional graphics? MAYBE 5000, i'd bet... Those ones probably do leave their machines on...
So really, there isn't much point in leaving your home box if you're just the "average home computer user"... and if you're reading this posting, obviously you don't fit that criteria...
Exactly... If you need Oracle, you NEED Oracle... If your application doesn't require it, you're just throwing away your cash. They compete in COMPLETELY different areas of the market.
:)
Just like somewhere once i saw a checklist comparison of MySQL vs. Oracle. The most pointless waste of time i'd ever stumbled across. Yeah you can say MySQL supports this and that that Oracle may not support, or maybe it's faster when dealing with 25MB files, but you'd better not be buying Oracle to deal with said file.
I liked your analogy there... But let's make that desk into a 13" TV...
Why not just one database that's kick-ass.... ANd then just enable or disble features as you need them... It'd suck to build a DB and then realize you need features from another db, and then have to redo all your core-logic...
And Oracle is far far far from Opensource.
Can Interbase possibly compete against Oracle8? Um... doubtfully.
And on another point... Inprise is presumably looking to make money. Your vote doesn't earn them dollars... a pledge to purchase their commercial development tools would help, maybe.
I don't think that /. could stand a chance at losing it's registration or anything, but i would like to point out that /. is hardly a "neutral" forum... Every posting on the home page is rather obviouly twisted a little bit in order to insight a discussion in a distinct way...
/. isn't innocent as people say... but it also is not in a position where it's exposed to anything... unless after the lawsuit, and if the plaintiffs win, anonymous cowards start posting links to the software.... if those posts get moderated up to 5, there's sure to be some complaints...
You enjoy reading decompiled binaries??? Who are you, RMS? I thought he was the only one that did that for fun :)
I think it's perfectly acceptable to assume that if you didn't write the software, you have no more rights to it than the original author of it... The GPL exists for the reason that it allows people to develop under that license with express intent of being that other people can look at, alter and redistriubte that code.
You, Me, or any other person or company should have enough control of our work to be able to determine what license it should be distributed under...
I just don't understand what the issue is.... They wrote it, they want control of it, and they're fighting back because, while people could license they they instead attempted to circumvent it....
Oops... go ahead... moderate me to trolldome... i deserve it.
Their earning should skyrocket as all the little hackers/crackers rush to buy iMacs and/or OS 9 upgrades before Apple releases a fix... Years from now those babies will still be useful!
Imagine tomorrow on News.com:
Mac OS 9 deemed OS of choice for crackers... The rush is on to buy before 9.0.1 arrives!
If any of these script kiddies has a web server somewhere that they can see the logs of, then it'd seem much easier to just see where the macs are coming from, and send the attack through them... if nothing else, it would add an extra step to finding who perpetrated the attack.
Forever now, i've operated under the assumption that frame size is variable... Which is why all those utilities are available (for win and mac) that allow you to change your MTU (is that the right term... and is it the right term for this discussion?) depending on the speed of your connection - small for modems high for ethernet...
So, couldn't you send the packetr to the Macs using a very small frame size and have them in return clog the pipe for you? It sounds that way to me.... maybe i'm wrong
at least the microsoft poster was funny, being that it's slightly relevant to the topic... Microsoft did invest in apple... the joke is about the programmers...
Redhat's done squat... so far as this discussion goes.
I spend most of my day laying out pages using Quark.... A lot of these pages also need to be available online, and we've found that the best way to do so, when formatting is an issue, is to use PDF's.
CSS is relatively new - yes, the spec's been out for a while, but only now do most browsers have somewhat decent support for it. And Mozilla I wouldn't even consider, being that it's pretty much Alpha software... I haven't ventured to try it with Linux (because at this point i feel Linux is best suited as a server OS), but on the Mac, Win 9x, and Win NT, I've found it to be horribly unstable. I also haven't fully investigated Opera, which leaves us with just Netscape and IE...
Of those two, IE seems to more fully implement CSS... version 5 is much better than 4.5, but 5 is Windows only where as 4.5 was also available for the Mac.
Acrobat reader is available for probably as many or more platforms as Netscape Communicator/Navigator. It also (Thanks to QuarkXPress) has MUCH better typographical control than CSS. That's probably because the programs being used to generate PDF's are much more mature than those used to genertate HTML, XML, etc...
You can't generate ligatures with CSS... nor can you have nearly as wide a choice of fonts... With PDF, I don't care what font's you have available, because i can embed them within my document. And also, using PDF's, you're extremely unlikely to need to tinker with the file/code at all, where as anything where detail is that much an issue in HTML, you always need to wade through the code.
So, to summarize... The tools to generate PDF's are much more advanced than the ones to make CSS/HTML. The tools to view PDF's are also much more advanced than those currently available for HTML, in that the designer/author has so much more control over the final appearance of their document than can ever be achieved with CSS/HTML... Yes, I could specify that i'd like this font to appear as Adobe Bembo, but if that's not available on your machine, you may end up with Times, or whatever generic Serif font is available.
That's all in my opinion, of course..
I'm not saying that they're using it because it might support this or that, but wouldn't it be nice if there was that option???
If x86 Linux is headed towards the mainstream, then it's RISC cousins need to be able to have a mechanism in order to use all the software available to x86, otherwise they'll always be treated as second rate to x86.
And yeah, running Oracle in emulation would be just dumb... but for something not as performance hungry, like WordPerfect or Opera, it'd be nice to have the option, i'd think...
Think proprietary...
Is WOrdperfect for Linux available for AlphaLinux, LinuxPPC, and UltraLinux (is that the sparc version)?
Oracle8
Informix
Sybase
and mostly every other non-opensource program for linux will probably target x86...
Thanks for the info, though!
I actually enjoy his and the Register's commentary on things more than anyone else, specifically because they aren't out to make friends... just to report news and include their own insights. Dvoraks been reporting on this industry for maybe 20 years now... If he really knew/knows nothing, he'd have lost his job and audience years ago...
Just because he's not pro-linux is not a good enough reason to say he knows nothing...
If they don't think it's worth it and complain, then they're just dumb... IF you don't want to deal with that sort of work atmosphere, get a different job and forget about the stock options... IF you do want to do that, then you are entitled to the big payoff - should it arrive....
It's all about what you value most - enjoying your time as it happens, or throwing away a period of your life in hopes that a later era will be much different.
While I'm not a programmer and therefore can't really contribute much to the cause, I still wonder why there has been no effort to make an opensource emulator... x86 to Alpha... maybe x86 to SPARC... x86 to PowerPC.... and two way, as well... though i suspect the main use would be to run x86 software on other platforms... Wouldn't that be great? And why is there no effort that I can find?
PDF's the format for people who actually want to have a say in how people view their documents. HTML's cool, but it's very limited, typographically and such... There are so many effects you can accomplish via PDF (using Word, Quark, Pagemaker, Illustrator, etc...) that are just impossible to do with HTML...
Besides which, readers are free for just about every platform (Linux included, I believe... and if the official version isn't available - there's surely an opensource reader....)
So, get over it!
:)
Programs that wait on CPU's definetly benefit from added CPU's... For instance, yes, photoshop loved them... Then there's pretty much every 3-D application on the planet... RIPs - the programs/hardware that converts Quark files to bitmaps so they can be printed in the Boston Globe, also enjoy added CPU's...
I spend a huge amount of my time waiting and wating for my computer sometimes... just watching the bar crawl across the screen... Added CPU's would certainly help - so long as the programs were reworked to recognize them.
Yes be thankful... Be thankful that Apple exists today to bring you multi-G4 Mac's... Be thankful that OS 9 is here, OS-X Server has been here for a while and OS-X consumer is due to arrive soon.... Be thankful for the little iMacs that could.... Be thankful they finally got USB to become popular enough that people decided to make USB devices... and be thankful that they've taken part in the development of firewrie... i'm sure there's others too...
Not much harder... But hopefully all the good compilers strip out things like comments prior to actually compiling the code. Yes, you can decompile or disassemble binaries, but those are only 50% useful compared to fully commented code... So, it does make things a slight bit more difficult than otherwise...
My opinion, at least.
You mean like all the dotcoms that were the craze the last two years?
Of course that's what's going to happen... Everyone's hopping from Amazon to Redhat to ride it's ups and downs...And then when the next buzzword comes along (probably B2B...) they'll scurry away from Linux and on the B2B bandwagon.
(B2B = Business to Business e-commerce, in case you were wondering...)