What do you mean "bad" ?? For God's sake it is corporation which solely goal is to make money for it's memebers. Simple as that. The only way this company can be "bad" is when it does not bring profits or breaks the law. Anything else is simply business game.
You are right. Of course it is strictly personal decision but I for example, find it hard to use Emacs and forget about vi ( tried couple times and still get mad as hell... definately not for me.) Visual Slick edit is quite good ( however little bit on the slow side on my K2 300 + G200, well it is static Motif so can't really expect more )
I if you think that QT code is ugly then it is obvious that you have no idea about C++. C maybe but not C++. (btw I was there 2 years ago... and trust me , GUI and C don't mix well )
So tell us what is your verdict ? Which GUI lib on Unix would be worth your time ? If you don't like QT then surely you must hate Motif or GTK.. what else is there ?
HAM being based on encoding was almost like lottery. You draw and wonder when color will change or stuff like that. Neverthless it was usefull for images and like. Good old days... ( I still ocasionally use Deluxe Paint under DOS..)
Yup. One thing that keeps GIMP from being truly usefull is its rather unusuable interface. I wonder why don't they change it - I mean, in this kind of programs it interface is half the success. Even GTK programs are getting better and better every day ( IglooFTP looks very nice.)
I use Accel X and I would never go back to XFree. In my case (Matrox G200) it is faster but the most importand thing is smooth mouse handling. There is something about XFree mouse code that simply makes it much more clumsy than under Windows.
He he , you see it is simple. Windows developers don't give a damn about anything else. They are out ther to make products and sell them. The competition on Win32 market is so great that you need all the possible advantages you can get and portability is not one of them ( just compare Netscape to IE or X windows with Win32 windowing system.) It wouldn't be that hard to optimize X windows servers and Xlib to specific platform ( say Intel Linux ) but it will not happen... And results will be that X will aways be lagging behind Windows ( most of the time one of the first comments about Linux people make is something like " why is it so slow ", talking about X windows )
"The problem is new Perl users getting introduced to MS-Perl, and MS-Perl becoming defacto standard so that the majority of Perl out there becomes Windoze based, thus basically eviscerating a perfectly good language. "
Are you on crack ? How is it going to happen ? You are not using Windows right, so your Perl will always be the same. And how can you assume that mere fact of extending Perl to better support Win32 platform will be "eviscerating a perfectly good language." If you think that your computing platform is so much better than anything else then stick with it and be happy. For many people ( majority) Win32 is the platform and they are perfectly happy using MS tools and "dreaded" IDEs. And I bet ( just as it was with Java) MS extensions will kick ass. They know their platform and therefore their tools are almost always the best in the industry ( on Win32 , that is.) Ever tried running aplets on IE versus Netscape ? Then you know what I am talking about.
You loose interoperability precisely because of GPL resctictions, nothing else. BSD type is much more about freedom. Do whatever you want as long as you give due credit. With GPL, you are _forced_ to be free - what kind of freedom is that ?
I have excatly the same feeling about PERL. It just looks like hack, unreadable and encouraging to write cryptic code. For now I will stay with C++ and use Python for scritping stuff...
I work with C/C++ ( used to be ASM on various platforms) and anytime I look at something written in PERL it just makes me sick. It is quite possible that this language is perfect but its syntax seem to be designed to scare off people. It sort of resembles to me output generated by encrypting software...
Re:Cool, yet another thing for scr|pt kiddies to d
on
Linux 2.2 DoS Attack
·
· Score: 1
And could you be more specific, exectly how NT is much more insecure than Linux ? If there is such a big difference then surely you should not have problems coming up with some examples ?
Apache is not better than IIS on NT. Balmer simply mentioned that there are some things that Apache does much better than their server. IIS is perfectly fine server and when NT itself is not sick, performs very well. I do not see them selling Apache with their platform, it is simply not possible right know. They invested too much technology into integrating IIS with all this new stuff their coming up constanlty. As to the Linux ? Heheh. Will not hapen either. They don't need that - it is as simple as that. At most what they will do is to provide some sort of bridge tools between Unix and NT ( and mostly provide assistance with moving from UNIX to NT )
I don't understand this "Ohs", jaws on the floor etc... I mean what's the big deal. AOL bought not WinAmp per se but its user base !!! It was the same with ICQ. I mean, come on , it would not be that hard for AOL to write their own MP3 player. It is users who are familiar with the product that count. And that's fine with me. WinAMP authors made lot of money - they deserved that. Everything works ok.
Windows GUI is mostly very nice and usable and therefore I do not see any problem trying to imitate this part of MS OS. The only sad part is that Win32 GUI code is much, much more optimized than X and as such will always seem smoother than anything on X. It is sad but true.
For this to happen there needs to be at least one example of Linux game that actually made some money... otherwise , forget it. It is as simple as that.
Slashdot Mirror
Could anyone familiar with this term explain what is is and how it relates to RedHat situation ?
Thanks
We are very fortunate that there is competition for Intel. All my systems are either Cyrix or lately AMD. It is simply cheaper ...
What do you mean "bad" ?? For God's sake it is corporation which solely goal is to make money for it's memebers. Simple as that. The only way this company can be "bad" is when it does not bring profits or breaks the law. Anything else is simply business game.
You are right. Of course it is strictly personal decision but I for example, find it hard to use Emacs and forget about vi ( tried couple times and still get mad as hell ... definately not for me.) Visual Slick edit is quite good ( however little bit on the slow side on my K2 300 + G200, well it is static Motif so can't really expect more )
I if you think that QT code is ugly then it is obvious that you have no idea about C++. C maybe but not C++. ... and trust me , GUI and C don't mix well )
(btw I was there 2 years ago
So tell us what is your verdict ? Which GUI lib on Unix would be worth your time ? If you don't like QT then surely you must hate Motif or GTK ..
what else is there ?
QT is just about the best GUI toolkit available for Unix at this time.Your comment simply shows that you are not familiar with QT.
HAM being based on encoding was almost like lottery. You draw and wonder when color will change or stuff like that. Neverthless it was usefull for images and like. Good old days ... ..)
( I still ocasionally use Deluxe Paint under DOS
Yup. One thing that keeps GIMP from being truly usefull is its rather unusuable interface. I wonder why don't they change it - I mean, in this kind of programs it interface is half the success. .)
Even GTK programs are getting better and better every day ( IglooFTP looks very nice
Why is it so expensive over there in Europe ?
I mean, the infrastructure can't be that far behind US.
So this is now called GNU WindowMaker ?
Why ?
I use Accel X and I would never go back to XFree. In my case (Matrox G200) it is faster but the most importand thing is smooth mouse handling. There is something about XFree mouse code that simply makes it much more clumsy than under Windows.
He he , you see it is simple. Windows developers don't give a damn about anything else. They are out ther to make products and sell them. The competition on Win32 market is so great that you need all the possible advantages you can get and portability is not one of them ( just compare Netscape to IE or X windows with Win32 windowing system.) It wouldn't be that hard to optimize X windows servers and Xlib to specific platform ( say Intel Linux ) but it will not happen ... And results will be that X will aways be lagging behind Windows ( most of the time one of the first comments about Linux people make is something like " why is it so slow ", talking about X windows )
"The problem is new Perl users getting
introduced to MS-Perl, and MS-Perl becoming defacto standard so that the majority of Perl out
there becomes Windoze based, thus basically
eviscerating a perfectly good language. "
Are you on crack ? How is it going to happen ? You are not using Windows right, so your Perl will always be the same. And how can you assume that mere fact of extending Perl to better support Win32 platform will be "eviscerating a perfectly good language." If you think that your computing platform is so much better than anything else then stick with it and be happy. For many people ( majority) Win32 is the platform and they are perfectly happy using MS tools and "dreaded" IDEs. And I bet ( just as it was with Java) MS extensions will kick ass. They know their platform and therefore their tools are almost always the best in the industry ( on Win32 , that is.) Ever tried running aplets on IE versus Netscape ? Then you know what I am talking about.
You loose interoperability precisely because of GPL resctictions, nothing else. BSD type is much more about freedom. Do whatever you want as long as you give due credit. With GPL, you are _forced_ to be free - what kind of freedom is that ?
I have excatly the same feeling about PERL. It just looks like hack, unreadable and encouraging to write cryptic code. For now I will stay with C++ and use Python for scritping stuff ...
I work with C /C++ ( used to be ASM on various platforms) and anytime I look at something written in PERL it just makes me sick. It is quite possible that this language is perfect but its syntax seem to be designed to scare off people. It sort of resembles to me output generated by encrypting software ...
And could you be more specific, exectly how NT is much more insecure than Linux ? If there is such a big difference then surely you should not have problems coming up with some examples ?
Apache is not better than IIS on NT. Balmer simply mentioned that there are some things that Apache does much better than their server. IIS is perfectly fine server and when NT itself is not sick, performs very well. I do not see them selling Apache with their platform, it is simply not possible right know. They invested too much technology into integrating IIS with all this new stuff their coming up constanlty. As to the Linux ? Heheh. Will not hapen either. They don't need that - it is as simple as that. At most what they will do is to provide some sort of bridge tools between Unix and NT ( and mostly provide assistance with moving from UNIX to NT )
What's wrong with Mindcratf analysis. I thought it was colaborated by another round of tests by others . Was it not ?
I don't understand this "Ohs", jaws on the floor etc
Everything works ok.
This seem like him .... He is known , for example, to constantly bitch about KDE.
Windows GUI is mostly very nice and usable and therefore I do not see any problem trying to imitate this part of MS OS.
The only sad part is that Win32 GUI code is much, much more optimized than X and as such will always seem smoother than anything on X. It is sad but true.
At this point you are exactly right. As a workstation NT beats Linux any time... .. will see
Hopefully, it will change
For this to happen there needs to be at least one example of Linux game that actually made some money ... otherwise , forget it. It is as simple as that.