X11 runs in the userspace, so misconfiguration (or just switching your video card or screen) doesn't lock up the system
But X runs as root, while framebuffer apps don't have to. Likewise, X bangs the hardware directly, while framebuffer apps don't. So I think framebuffer apps should be safer than X (unless you are running the fbcon driver for X, of course).
Since fbcon doesn't provide acceleration AFAIK, it might be interesting if they used the same loadable modules as XFree86. But I admit that I don't know anything about the X driver APIs, so maybe that is a terrible idea and someone in Norway is spewing COke through his nostrils right now...
Or maybe they use more BeOS-style loadable accelerant modules.
Apple's current machines are just CHRP systems. CHRP is well-documented, and companies like IBM, Prophet Systems, and SiliconFruit are coming out with CHRP systems.
OTOH, I usually wouldn't assign the copyrights on my code to anyone else, precisely because I don't want them to change the license on code that I wrote whenever they feel like it.
PostScript and PDF are fully documented at Adobe's site.
The "Open" EBook spec is also publicly-available, but it uses some tricky PKI stuff so that knowing the file format won't help you, because any reader software has to have a certificate issued by a central authority. (Or at least that's how I remember it...)
The purpose of most Pointcast-style "push" technology (as I understand it) is/was to bombard the user with as much information as possible as often as possible. Don't feel like doing work right now? Just click over to Pointcast, which has 37 news stories for you to read, already conveniently downloaded onto your computer.
That would probably be even worse for my productivity than Slashdot!
Patents are a big issue on the Web today; while many people are protesting software patents like Amazon's, Nielsen is racking them up. I'd like to hear what he thinks about that.
I've seen some posts from Gtk+ hackers saying that it would be inefficient for GtK+ to do its own font rendering (I don't remember the reason offhand). It also leads to bloat if we have two implementations of everything: one in the X server and one in each toolkit.
And I'm not even sure that it's possible to do true inter-window translucency (which lots of people seem to want these days) without X server changes.
Slashdot Mirror
But X runs as root, while framebuffer apps don't have to. Likewise, X bangs the hardware directly, while framebuffer apps don't. So I think framebuffer apps should be safer than X (unless you are running the fbcon driver for X, of course).
Since fbcon doesn't provide acceleration AFAIK, it might be interesting if they used the same loadable modules as XFree86. But I admit that I don't know anything about the X driver APIs, so maybe that is a terrible idea and someone in Norway is spewing COke through his nostrils right now...
Or maybe they use more BeOS-style loadable accelerant modules.
They say it has HD component output; that means 1280x720 non-interlaced or 1920x1080 interlaced.
Apple hasn't released any QuickTime player for Linux.
Apple's current machines are just CHRP systems. CHRP is well-documented, and companies like IBM, Prophet Systems, and SiliconFruit are coming out with CHRP systems.
See openppc.org.
Motherboards and chipsets from Intel, VIA, Sun, DEC, etc. are all proprietary. What's your point?
Do Alpha motherboards include the full source code to the firmware? Are you going to complain when your 21164 motherboard won't take a 21364 CPU?
OK, so some big RHAT investor doesn't want the expo to happen. But WHY? You seem to have ommited that from your post.
Yawn. Wake me when they have some real drives.
The info I read (which is admittedly vague) says that Power3 implements the PowerPC ISA (both 32 and 64 bit versions).
OTOH, I usually wouldn't assign the copyrights on my code to anyone else, precisely because I don't want them to change the license on code that I wrote whenever they feel like it.
PostScript and PDF are fully documented at Adobe's site.
The "Open" EBook spec is also publicly-available, but it uses some tricky PKI stuff so that knowing the file format won't help you, because any reader software has to have a certificate issued by a central authority. (Or at least that's how I remember it...)
The solution seems obvious enough to me.
IIRC, RSADSI owned a stake in PKP while it was in operation.
The purpose of most Pointcast-style "push" technology (as I understand it) is/was to bombard the user with as much information as possible as often as possible. Don't feel like doing work right now? Just click over to Pointcast, which has 37 news stories for you to read, already conveniently downloaded onto your computer.
That would probably be even worse for my productivity than Slashdot!
Patents are a big issue on the Web today; while many people are protesting software patents like Amazon's, Nielsen is racking them up. I'd like to hear what he thinks about that.
...you can't have a good GC in a programming language which allows pointers.
Call me pedantic, but Java and Lisp have pointers, they just don't have pointer arithmetic.
Yes; MacOS is ahead in some areas and woefully far behind in others. Hopefully MacOS X will solve this problem.
I've seen some posts from Gtk+ hackers saying that it would be inefficient for GtK+ to do its own font rendering (I don't remember the reason offhand). It also leads to bloat if we have two implementations of everything: one in the X server and one in each toolkit.
And I'm not even sure that it's possible to do true inter-window translucency (which lots of people seem to want these days) without X server changes.
Wow, they're almost caught up with MacOS, which allows multiple screens with different sizes and depths.
The icons that you see in those Aqua screen shots are just plain (although large) bitmaps.
Embedded stuff is nice, but I was really hoping that Java would allow me to write cross-platform desktop apps. So far that's not happening. :-(
What does this have to do with the article?
Java can be used for a lot more than applets.
OK, so they have a new graphical installer. I remember the last graphical installer was a usability disaster. Where are the screen shots?
So it comes with new GNOME packages "from Helix Code". How is that different from the regular releases?
So many buzzwords...
If you use the gratis-but-closed-source PSM daemon, Mozilla will have SSL.