Please remember that SDL development was done mostly by the lead programmer for Loki.
If you all want more work to be done on it, go buy Loki games (from Loki themselves or one of their resellers like everythinglinux or Tux Games. Without Loki, there will be much slower development of SDL
Tux Games is selling Heavy Gear 2 for, as far as we have found, the lowest price. We charge $37 INCLUDING shipping anywhere in the world. This compares to $38 to buy from Loki if you are in the USA, or $46 elsewhere in the world.
I have known fred for many years, he is NOT a nice guy. He got fired from infomagic for having a hard drive full of porn, and the last time I talked to him (about a year ago) he said he 'regretted doing any work on Linux, cos it sucks' (that isnt word for word, but that was the gist of the conversation).
Now, please, flames aside, I think they did a fairly good job on this. Ive been working on Y2K on and off for some time now, and I can guarentee there will be problems. I would say that the nuclear plant meltdown is unlikely, but thats in the US/UK. What about the ones in china, russia, other places that just dont have the resources or money to impliment Y2K fixes. If one melts down, we all suffer, just look at chernobil. Just look at it this way. When an OS is released (yes, and I include Linux kernel releases here) there are bugs. When just about ANY software product is released there are bugs. There are usually at least 3 or 4 patch releases even for something as simple as a game. What do you think the chances are that someone will have gotten EVERY SINGLE BUG out of the system FIRST TIME? I think those that are thinking that it will be without a hitch have their head in the sand. I dont expect the end of the world, but I do expect fatalities. The question is just how many.
OK, I admit, I am biased. I just started up a new banner ad company. Yes, I was of the opinion that banner ads were evil. I still am if they infringe on your privacy. However, what doubleclick are doing isnt necessarily evil. They arent passing on your information (if they are, THAT is evil) they are using the information they have access to to provide a better service to their clients.
And they have a right to make a proffit. Many companies, INCLUDING SLASHDOT (andover) use banner ads to make ends meet. To pay for their lines and employees. If they didnt, how do YOU think you would read slashdot? Answer, you would have to pay for it.
Banner ad companies, as has been so rightly stated, are in a tough business. Clickthrough rates are falling (I am seeing 2.3% on my sites I serve, as I use cookies and other information to target the best banners I can) and they need to be able to appeal to the people paying the bills. If they dont, people wont be paying the bills for too much longer, and you will have to pay for your slashdot, or your CNN.com or your altavista. Yes there are alternatives, like google which I believe is academicly funded, but we NEED corporations to provide these huge bandwidth pipes we now have and the slew of services we now have. Academia and the government will NO LONGER PROVIDE THIS.
Personally, my company guarentees your private information will not be passed on. However we gather AS MUCH information as possible to target banner ads that are more appropriate. And I ask you, WHY IS THIS BAD? You will see a banner ad whether our database has information on you or not, its just more likely that if we have some information about your preferences, you will see one you might be interested in. Is it such a crime to try and make a fair profit and to stay in business? If banner ads dont survive, 95% of the net will become pay per view. Do you REALLY want that?
Dont get me wrong, I DO NOT APPROVE of selling on information about clients. My company specifically guarentees we will not do this. But making a profit is the right of anyone. By fighting the banner ad companies, you win a short-term battle, the right to have your screens free of advertising. But you lose the war the first time you have to pay a subscription to get access to slashdot.
We have been using postgresql for all our database needs for the last 18 months where I work. It has gone through a number of changes and is now a LOT more stable than it was only a year ago.
If your data is critical and 100% availability is essential, I would probably still go for oracle, as it has a far more mature background and, whilst closed source, is very stable. Otherwise, postgresql is a very good choice. It handles tables of effectively infinite size (it just breaks them into 1GB chunks to avoid the filesystem limit). And it has the bonus that is is open source. If you need a feature, you can add it. I am sure that if you are part of an organisatin generating 40GB of data a year, you probably have a few programmers floating around to add enhancements.
As an addition, I have found the postgres development team to be VERY responsive and helpful. Personally I would say they are probably the most active and helpful open source dev team I have seen.
If you want something out of the box, with 100% availability, go oracle. If you want something that you can control, that will grow with you, and will eventually get 100% reliability (it is very close right now), go postgres.
If redhat wants to keep others from using its name, that is their right. Afterall, nobody would be surprised if any other company did this.
They are in a tough market, selling a product that is available for free. They need something that is THEIRS. The software sure isnt, so they only really have the name and the reputation.
As long as they keep the software free, that is all that really matters, lets stay focused on what the open source movement is all about.
Remember, redhat shouldnt be penalised for being successful. They have contributed a lot of software back to the community. If we lose them it would be a loss to us all, so lets support them surviving in the industry they are in!
Does anyone have any idea if this patent applies outside the US? I am in the UK and I am JUST starting up a small business. Now, yes, I will admit the business is a banner ad company, but dont flame me, as the company is focusing on open source advocacy and products, and also donates a *large* proportion of its income to open-source groups, so please, flames off. I have a bit of software that I wrote myself to add a little XXX to the corner of a gif on-the-fly if it leads to a website that may be unsuitable for minors. I want to keep this functionality, as it is irrisponsable to NOT warn of possible offensive content, but my business would be completely overwhealmed by a $5,000 bill just for doing this! As it IS a for-profit business, even though we give away a large percentage to good causes, we would probably have to pay this huge bill for such a small change {:-(
As a final note, heres an idea. Yes, we dont like gifs for a lot of reasons, but they DO have their place. I wonder on the possibility of a group like eff raising the money to buy and open the gif and lzw standards.
Why do we care? The only issue is that he was forced to wait so long without trial and sentencing. THAT is bad. Other than that, who cares, he is nothing more than a simple thief. I know, he stole MY card details. We dont spend this much time examining the actions of someone that breaks into somebodies house, so why raise a common criminal into media stardom so they can go and earn a million selling the film rights. I ask you, do YOU want to reward a thief for stealing? Ignore the situation and it will go away.
The only thing that doesnt work inder IP-masq is *incoming* connections. That is because the remote system connects to say, port 1234 on the server that sends the original packet. As this is apparently the masquerading host, the masq host does not know where to send the packet on to, there is no way to connect an arbitrary portnumber without configuring that portnumber to ALWAYS be accociated with a unique app.
Your only solution is to have your ISP give you a group of IPs, and assign one for each box
Its good that linux.com is finally in the hands of someone that likes Linux. Ive been listening to fred diss Linux for the last 4 years. I just wish that the deal hadnt made a complete arsehole a rich complete arsehole. Still, knowing him, he will blow it all on porn CDs, like he usually does.
Slashdot Mirror
Please remember that SDL development was done mostly by the lead programmer for Loki.
If you all want more work to be done on it, go buy Loki games (from Loki themselves or one of their resellers like everythinglinux or Tux Games. Without Loki, there will be much slower development of SDL
If you find a lower price, let us know!
I have known fred for many years, he is NOT a nice guy. He got fired from infomagic for having a hard drive full of porn, and the last time I talked to him (about a year ago) he said he 'regretted doing any work on Linux, cos it sucks' (that isnt word for word, but that was the gist of the conversation).
Now, please, flames aside, I think they did a fairly good job on this. Ive been working on Y2K on and off for some time now, and I can guarentee there will be problems.
I would say that the nuclear plant meltdown is unlikely, but thats in the US/UK. What about the ones in china, russia, other places that just dont have the resources or money to impliment Y2K fixes. If one melts down, we all suffer, just look at chernobil.
Just look at it this way. When an OS is released (yes, and I include Linux kernel releases here) there are bugs. When just about ANY software product is released there are bugs. There are usually at least 3 or 4 patch releases even for something as simple as a game. What do you think the chances are that someone will have gotten EVERY SINGLE BUG out of the system FIRST TIME?
I think those that are thinking that it will be without a hitch have their head in the sand. I dont expect the end of the world, but I do expect fatalities. The question is just how many.
In the UK, it is already illegal. If a company wishes to sell on your information, they have to ask your premission. I never do. And it works.
I have never had a junk phonecall, and I only get junkmail from companies I have had dealings
with.
I see what you are saying though, and the US needs a law like the UKs data protection act
And they have a right to make a proffit. Many companies, INCLUDING SLASHDOT (andover) use banner ads to make ends meet. To pay for their lines and employees. If they didnt, how do YOU think you would read slashdot? Answer, you would have to pay for it.
Banner ad companies, as has been so rightly stated, are in a tough business. Clickthrough rates are falling (I am seeing 2.3% on my sites I serve, as I use cookies and other information to target the best banners I can) and they need to be able to appeal to the people paying the bills. If they dont, people wont be paying the bills for too much longer, and you will have to pay for your slashdot, or your CNN.com or your altavista. Yes there are alternatives, like google which I believe is academicly funded, but we NEED corporations to provide these huge bandwidth pipes we now have and the slew of services we now have. Academia and the government will NO LONGER PROVIDE THIS.
Personally, my company guarentees your private information will not be passed on. However we gather AS MUCH information as possible to target banner ads that are more appropriate. And I ask you, WHY IS THIS BAD? You will see a banner ad whether our database has information on you or not, its just more likely that if we have some information about your preferences, you will see one you might be interested in. Is it such a crime to try and make a fair profit and to stay in business? If banner ads dont survive, 95% of the net will become pay per view. Do you REALLY want that?
Dont get me wrong, I DO NOT APPROVE of selling on information about clients. My company specifically guarentees we will not do this. But making a profit is the right of anyone. By fighting the banner ad companies, you win a short-term battle, the right to have your screens free of advertising. But you lose the war the first time you have to pay a subscription to get access to slashdot.
If your data is critical and 100% availability is essential, I would probably still go for oracle, as it has a far more mature background and, whilst closed source, is very stable. Otherwise, postgresql is a very good choice. It handles tables of effectively infinite size (it just breaks them into 1GB chunks to avoid the filesystem limit). And it has the bonus that is is open source. If you need a feature, you can add it. I am sure that if you are part of an organisatin generating 40GB of data a year, you probably have a few programmers floating around to add enhancements.
As an addition, I have found the postgres development team to be VERY responsive and helpful. Personally I would say they are probably the most active and helpful open source dev team I have seen.
If you want something out of the box, with 100% availability, go oracle. If you want something that you can control, that will grow with you, and will eventually get 100% reliability (it is very close right now), go postgres.
If redhat wants to keep others from using its name, that is their right. Afterall, nobody would be surprised if any other company did this.
They are in a tough market, selling a product that is available for free. They need something that is THEIRS. The software sure isnt, so they only really have the name and the reputation.
As long as they keep the software free, that is all that really matters, lets stay focused on what the open source movement is all about.
Remember, redhat shouldnt be penalised for being successful. They have contributed a lot of software back to the community. If we lose them it would be a loss to us all, so lets support them surviving in the industry they are in!
I just mailed these peopleand asked them:
What happens with a gif that was created with a licenced product and then modified with a program I wrote myself. Answer:
> If you are modifying images and then re-encoding
> in GIF, you likely require a license.
That is bad.
Does anyone have any idea if this patent applies outside the US? I am in the UK and I am JUST starting up a small business.
Now, yes, I will admit the business is a banner ad company, but dont flame me, as the company is focusing on open source advocacy and products, and also donates a *large* proportion of its income to open-source groups, so please, flames off.
I have a bit of software that I wrote myself to add a little XXX to the corner of a gif on-the-fly if it leads to a website that may be unsuitable for minors. I want to keep this functionality, as it is irrisponsable to NOT warn of possible offensive content, but my business would be completely overwhealmed by a $5,000 bill just for doing this!
As it IS a for-profit business, even though we give away a large percentage to good causes, we would probably have to pay this huge bill for such a small change {:-(
As a final note, heres an idea. Yes, we dont like gifs for a lot of reasons, but they DO have their place. I wonder on the possibility of a group like eff raising the money to buy and open the gif and lzw standards.
Why do we care? The only issue is that he was forced to wait so long without trial and sentencing. THAT is bad. Other than that, who cares, he is nothing more than a simple thief. I know, he stole MY card details.
We dont spend this much time examining the actions of someone that breaks into somebodies house, so why raise a common criminal into media stardom so they can go and earn a million selling the film rights.
I ask you, do YOU want to reward a thief for stealing?
Ignore the situation and it will go away.
The only thing that doesnt work inder IP-masq is
*incoming* connections. That is because the
remote system connects to say, port 1234 on the
server that sends the original packet. As this
is apparently the masquerading host, the masq host
does not know where to send the packet on to,
there is no way to connect an arbitrary portnumber
without configuring that portnumber to ALWAYS be accociated with a unique app.
Your only solution is to have your ISP give you a
group of IPs, and assign one for each box
Its good that linux.com is finally in the hands of someone that likes Linux. Ive been listening to fred diss Linux for the last 4 years.
I just wish that the deal hadnt made a complete arsehole a rich complete arsehole.
Still, knowing him, he will blow it all on porn CDs, like he usually does.