How is HTTP going to work as a printer language? When I send a document to a printer I want to know 100% exactly what it's going to look like. We can't get documents to look the same on two different computers using the same browser half of the time; IE vs. Netscape is even worse. Do we really need to start hacking our www pages so our printers can understand them aswell as ie and netscape?
Let's see "Baby's first pop up book" or "Bussiness at the speed of thought"? I'm thinking Baby's first pop up would teach you more. And have cute little animals or something in it.
Right next to dan quayle's book that I saw at Atlantic book store (a bargin bookstore/warehouse near me) at 2 for $1.50. 1 to bludgen yourself with and the other to use in your fireplace.
It makes a good light weight browser. It doesn't render most sites correctly, but if I just need something to startup and view a page quickly it's great.
Why would redhat break rpms? Then all rpms that aren't made by them would stop working. Seems like they'd actually shoot themselves in the foot by doing that. Also, rpm is GPLed. RedHat can change the format. Other distributions can see the changes and then fix them in their dists if they wish, or not.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with offloading developement, provided it also helps the community. FSF and Linux and other similar projects are all examples of this. The users fix the bugs, and get rock solid software that they can use and break and play with in anyway they wish. I just don't see this being the case with apple. I think they are just trying to get in good with the free software community by claiming to open the source to their OS, and they are trying to leech off of us by making us do their work.
I'm so ashamed; but I'm not
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 1
The problem is that the license is NOT open source. They are releasing the source code but they still have a tight leash around its neck. Open source in the true sense means that ANYONE can modify it in ANY WAY they see fit. The code essentially belongs to the community. With Apple they don't want to give up controll. Steve Jobs never was good at letting his pets roam free in the wilderness and he hasn't gotten any better. Essentially Apple wants the community to take its code, hack it, fix bugs, make it better, and then Apple wants to take all of that work and use it w/o paying the people for their work. Essentially Apple is offloading its developement work, which it would have to pay for if done in-house, to the world where it doesn't have to pay. That's not what open source is about. Also, this is dangerous in the fact that it sets a precident for other companies to follow. We need to make a stand and show the world that we won't accept this psuedo-open source license.
i've found it's generally more than 2-3%. Also, it can speed up more than just the kernel. I know my copy of snes9x that I compiled w/ -O9 -mcpu=pentiumpro -march=pentiumpro had sigificant speed improvements, about 20fps. (I went from about 35fps to 55fps, that's a nice speed increase).
What exactly would be the point? You already can view QuickTime on windows and the mac. Isn't java's entire point to be cross-platform. It just seems like a waste of cpu cycles for something that could be better done using standard c/c++.
The serial# really only acomplishes one thing. It allows software to be locked to a specific CPU. Something that has been done in high end unix markets for years. It is 100% useless and quite dangerous for online sales. This means A) anyone w/ physical access to your computer becomes you. B) if you upgrade your CPU you no longer exist. C) Your identity can be easily spoofed. Now while spoofing the id on the system would be difficult, it could easily be intercepted by a firewall and then rewritten to something else. This is a very dangerous situation.
Also, I really would like to believe that Intel is not against home users over-clocking. I won't believe this until they remove the multiplier lock. Since intel has software that can detect overclocking they have proved that it is possible to check in software. Why not just add something to the bios that checks the speed the system is running at, and then displays the real mhz. It could even display a large warning if the cpu is not running at the rated mhz. It's really not a difficult situation to remedy.
It also makes economic sense for Intel to block overclocking. If I can buy a 400mhz cpu and run it at 450mhz why would I buy the 450mhz cpu?
I wish I could believe that Intel had nothing but honorable intentions but do to the facts as I see them I can't believe this.
I don't know about the false advertising. They could easily say "PentiumII 400 running at 450mhz". That's 100% true. If someone is ordering a large quantity they might want the systems to come pre-overclocked. I personally think that the stores should be able to do anything they want as long as they are 100% honest and upfront about it.
Part of Intel's motivation is to keep the end user from over clocking as well. The 400 and 450 are the same exact cpu. So why buy a 450 when you can get a 400 and run it at 450? Intel doesn't want to lose any of its profits.
I doubt that will work. A) It uses DGA to improve video access, which I'm fairly certain doesn't run remotely. B) The performance isn't that great. It's useable (w/ a pII-300) but not that useable.
Actually what I'm wondering, half the size of an mp3 w/ better quality. How much CPU are you going to have to throw at it to make it play w/o skipping? I'm guessing a quad Xeon 450 should do the trick. Now where did I leave my quad-Xeon-450 box?
I'm looking at my copy of forest gump right now. I see a "VHS" logo, but I can't find anything resembeling JVC. Unless maybe they have it hidden, but taht would be stupid.
How much do you think the authors of x11amp or winamp or mpg123 or amp paid in mp3 licensing fees? Or how bout the author of bladeenc? Here's a hit, it starts with Z and ends in ero. And some people buy the cds because the like owning them. And some people actually believe that the money they spend on the cd actually goes to the artist.
Get a clue, no one considers slashdot to be a responsible news site. It's a site for nerds to learn about some of the latest rumors/happenings in the online world. If you have a problem go away. We don't like you.
Why is it that so many people associate all GNOME problems w/ "other parts" of the system. Is it too hard to admit that GNOME is buggy? I'm running redhat5.2 w/ all of the updates installed and it crashes for me in no time at all, I just click on the panel and boom it's dead.
I agree with that. KDE underwent a LONG period of testing and pre-1.0 releases before 1.0 came out. The result was a very stable release. There's a reason that people have this "wait till.1" mentality, it's because developers release software that is NOT ready for public use as.0 and figure everyone will test it and then they'll release.1 when the debugging is done. I still don't understand why GNOME released, then very quickly deleted pre1.0. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted to get 1.0 faster than they should have.
1.0 can be very stable. I used KDE 1.0 for a long time, and I don't remember a single crash. GNOME crashed on me after about 3 seconds of use. I clicked on the little terminal button on the panel and every GNOME app locked tight. I promptly killed X and changed my.xinitrc to start kde instead of gnome.
And for those of you who think KWM is ugly, check out kde.themes.org. The themes are a pain to install, but KWM can look VERY nice and it doesn't have anywhere near the overhead of enlightenment.
Kinda like when the GNOME anouncement was mailed to the KDE-devel list saying that GNOME would take parts of KDE that they found usefull and rewrite them for GNOME. That pissed off quite a few people. There was even talk of changing licenses to one that would not allow GNOME to use any KDE source code. Not like that would have actually worked, but it still shows how angry people were.
I agree that they would be usefull, but IMHO they should be implimented in libraries on the compiler side. So the developers can use the functions which would talk to the hardware directly. I'm sure whatever sony does will be the best cource of action, I know they know a lot more about console design than i'll ever know.
Slashdot Mirror
How is HTTP going to work as a printer language? When I send a document to a printer I want to know 100% exactly what it's going to look like. We can't get documents to look the same on two different computers using the same browser half of the time; IE vs. Netscape is even worse. Do we really need to start hacking our www pages so our printers can understand them aswell as ie and netscape?
Let's see "Baby's first pop up book" or "Bussiness at the speed of thought"? I'm thinking Baby's first pop up would teach you more. And have cute little animals or something in it.
Right next to dan quayle's book that I saw at Atlantic book store (a bargin bookstore/warehouse near me) at 2 for $1.50. 1 to bludgen yourself with and the other to use in your fireplace.
It makes a good light weight browser. It doesn't render most sites correctly, but if I just need something to startup and view a page quickly it's great.
Why would redhat break rpms? Then all rpms that aren't made by them would stop working. Seems like they'd actually shoot themselves in the foot by doing that. Also, rpm is GPLed. RedHat can change the format. Other distributions can see the changes and then fix them in their dists if they wish, or not.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with offloading developement, provided it also helps the community. FSF and Linux and other similar projects are all examples of this. The users fix the bugs, and get rock solid software that they can use and break and play with in anyway they wish. I just don't see this being the case with apple. I think they are just trying to get in good with the free software community by claiming to open the source to their OS, and they are trying to leech off of us by making us do their work.
The problem is that the license is NOT open source. They are releasing the source code but they still have a tight leash around its neck. Open source in the true sense means that ANYONE can modify it in ANY WAY they see fit. The code essentially belongs to the community. With Apple they don't want to give up controll. Steve Jobs never was good at letting his pets roam free in the wilderness and he hasn't gotten any better. Essentially Apple wants the community to take its code, hack it, fix bugs, make it better, and then Apple wants to take all of that work and use it w/o paying the people for their work. Essentially Apple is offloading its developement work, which it would have to pay for if done in-house, to the world where it doesn't have to pay. That's not what open source is about. Also, this is dangerous in the fact that it sets a precident for other companies to follow. We need to make a stand and show the world that we won't accept this psuedo-open source license.
My redhat 5.2 box has xv, I use it all the time.
i've found it's generally more than 2-3%. Also, it can speed up more than just the kernel. I know my copy of snes9x that I compiled w/ -O9 -mcpu=pentiumpro -march=pentiumpro had sigificant speed improvements, about 20fps. (I went from about 35fps to 55fps, that's a nice speed increase).
What exactly would be the point? You already can view QuickTime on windows and the mac. Isn't java's entire point to be cross-platform. It just seems like a waste of cpu cycles for something that could be better done using standard c/c++.
Well considering I don't know of any players for sorensen, it seems pretty obvious that mpegs play better.
The serial# really only acomplishes one thing. It allows software to be locked to a specific CPU. Something that has been done in high end unix markets for years. It is 100% useless and quite dangerous for online sales. This means A) anyone w/ physical access to your computer becomes you. B) if you upgrade your CPU you no longer exist. C) Your identity can be easily spoofed. Now while spoofing the id on the system would be difficult, it could easily be intercepted by a firewall and then rewritten to something else. This is a very dangerous situation.
Also, I really would like to believe that Intel is not against home users over-clocking. I won't believe this until they remove the multiplier lock. Since intel has software that can detect overclocking they have proved that it is possible to check in software. Why not just add something to the bios that checks the speed the system is running at, and then displays the real mhz. It could even display a large warning if the cpu is not running at the rated mhz. It's really not a difficult situation to remedy.
It also makes economic sense for Intel to block overclocking. If I can buy a 400mhz cpu and run it at 450mhz why would I buy the 450mhz cpu?
I wish I could believe that Intel had nothing but honorable intentions but do to the facts as I see them I can't believe this.
I don't know about the false advertising. They could easily say "PentiumII 400 running at 450mhz". That's 100% true. If someone is ordering a large quantity they might want the systems to come pre-overclocked. I personally think that the stores should be able to do anything they want as long as they are 100% honest and upfront about it.
Part of Intel's motivation is to keep the end user from over clocking as well. The 400 and 450 are the same exact cpu. So why buy a 450 when you can get a 400 and run it at 450? Intel doesn't want to lose any of its profits.
I doubt that will work. A) It uses DGA to improve video access, which I'm fairly certain doesn't run remotely. B) The performance isn't that great. It's useable (w/ a pII-300) but not that useable.
Mp3s produce bad sound? That's funny, here I am listening to mp3s and I can't notice any thing wrong w/ the sound at all.
Actually what I'm wondering, half the size of an mp3 w/ better quality. How much CPU are you going to have to throw at it to make it play w/o skipping? I'm guessing a quad Xeon 450 should do the trick. Now where did I leave my quad-Xeon-450 box?
I'm looking at my copy of forest gump right now. I see a "VHS" logo, but I can't find anything resembeling JVC. Unless maybe they have it hidden, but taht would be stupid.
How much do you think the authors of x11amp or winamp or mpg123 or amp paid in mp3 licensing fees? Or how bout the author of bladeenc? Here's a hit, it starts with Z and ends in ero. And some people buy the cds because the like owning them. And some people actually believe that the money they spend on the cd actually goes to the artist.
Get a clue, no one considers slashdot to be a responsible news site. It's a site for nerds to learn about some of the latest rumors/happenings in the online world. If you have a problem go away. We don't like you.
Why is it that so many people associate all GNOME problems w/ "other parts" of the system. Is it too hard to admit that GNOME is buggy? I'm running redhat5.2 w/ all of the updates installed and it crashes for me in no time at all, I just click on the panel and boom it's dead.
I agree with that. KDE underwent a LONG period of testing and pre-1.0 releases before 1.0 came out. The result was a very stable release. There's a reason that people have this "wait till .1" mentality, it's because developers release software that is NOT ready for public use as .0 and figure everyone will test it and then they'll release .1 when the debugging is done. I still don't understand why GNOME released, then very quickly deleted pre1.0. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted to get 1.0 faster than they should have.
.xinitrc to start kde instead of gnome.
1.0 can be very stable. I used KDE 1.0 for a long time, and I don't remember a single crash. GNOME crashed on me after about 3 seconds of use. I clicked on the little terminal button on the panel and every GNOME app locked tight. I promptly killed X and changed my
And for those of you who think KWM is ugly, check out kde.themes.org. The themes are a pain to install, but KWM can look VERY nice and it doesn't have anywhere near the overhead of enlightenment.
Kinda like when the GNOME anouncement was mailed to the KDE-devel list saying that GNOME would take parts of KDE that they found usefull and rewrite them for GNOME. That pissed off quite a few people. There was even talk of changing licenses to one that would not allow GNOME to use any KDE source code. Not like that would have actually worked, but it still shows how angry people were.
We are seeing real press about Gore lying. I wasn't expecting that to happen. Not that I like his oponents any, maybe we should form a slashdot party.
I agree that they would be usefull, but IMHO they should be implimented in libraries on the compiler side. So the developers can use the functions which would talk to the hardware directly. I'm sure whatever sony does will be the best cource of action, I know they know a lot more about console design than i'll ever know.