Looking at the picture in the article about their camping experience just makes me cringe. I mean they have tons of fold out chairs their, not to mention the obvious laptops and wireless connection. I mean the whole point of camping is to get away from everything and get back to the basics. I wonder if they ordered out for pizza too? Guess a more accurate headline would be "car-camping".
I'm glad they can get together and hack on stuff, but they didn't have to go "camping" to do it. A better article would be if the went to Vegas and had their "pow-wow" while getting lap dances...
I was replying to a previous post. I do not think Apple has a monopoly. I thought the previous posters use of comparing the RIAA to Apple was inappropriate and used my previous post as an example, though it wasn't a good one
Though I do still believe they price fix. In fact previous posters who claimed to be resellers stated that they could decrease the price by 70-100 dollars and still make a profit. And you previously stated that Apple does not price gouge? They will drop resellers who don't adhere to their prices. How is that good for the consumer?
What you said makes no sense to me. Apple makes the iPod and sells it to it's resellers and directly to customers. Apple is forcing resellers to sell their product at a certain price. How is that different from the RIAA telling music stores to sell CDs at a certain price?
Yes there are other products from other companies, but that isn't the issue. Who else makes the iPod? No one. Who do you have to go through to buy one? Apple or a reseller. Who's keeping prices at a fixed level? Apple. Whether they can do this or not is irrelevant to me. I don't plan on buying their product. But for those who do have fun throwing a portion of your money down the drain just because Apple dictates a profit level.
You're right that these license agreements are nothing new, but I think the real problem is that the company itself is putting a new agreement in place without the ability to read it (for the very few who want to). The lack on training of their employees to handle the situation and the inability to provide a hard copy of the agreements. I mean that's just silly.
The majority of work and time will be spent by those who are walking this new ground for the first time. I think the idea is that a precendence will be set. If certain steps are taken a refund will be issued. The fact that it was brought to court (was mentioned in a previous comment, I haven't read the story yet) and the plaintiff won will help those who follow.
My altruism! Have you listened to anything you've said? You talk like the open source is the best thing in the world. Hey I love it as much as the next guy, but I don't care who uses my code for free or not. I'd rather have things work rather than sit at home and cry about people not sharing their proprietary code with the rest of the world.
I'm sorry you don't like Sun's license. They apparently don't like the open source licenses. But if you like a product and have the chance to improve it and in the process help the millions of others who use it to benefit wouldn't you do that regardless of the license?
I never said look at the code. What I am trying to get at is that once a native layer to support the needs of AWT and 2D is in place GCJ should be able to compile the already available AWT and Swing source. There would be no need to port these. Yes, if Sun gave out the source for the native peers this would make the job easier for GCJ but they don't. You may have to reinvent some of the wheel, but at least it's not the whole thing.
Well apparently it's not "preventing" open source if people are cloning it like you said. And I have yet to see a Swing open source clone. Plus all the AWT and Swing java source code is available in the distribution so go and GCJ yourself into a frenzy.
Java not being open source isn't "holding" this back. Look at the GCJ web site FAQ. They are currently writing peers in GTK and XLIB for AWT. Once that's finished Swing will follow.
Sun has been working on Gnome 2.0 with the Gnome community. It's not exactly a stock Gnome 2.0 installation. You might want to check it out before giving it the thumbs down...
Yeah, a feature list that touts "With the Palm you have to press the HotSync button, but with ours it's automatic" really impresses me.
I'm sorry, but people buy a PDA because it's a small handheld device to do specific things. Microsoft keeps repackaging their products and OS to platforms that don't make much sense. If I wanted Outlook or an Internet browser I would have bought a laptop to put it on, not a PDA.
Slashdot Mirror
Looking at the picture in the article about their camping experience just makes me cringe. I mean they have tons of fold out chairs their, not to mention the obvious laptops and wireless connection. I mean the whole point of camping is to get away from everything and get back to the basics. I wonder if they ordered out for pizza too? Guess a more accurate headline would be "car-camping".
I'm glad they can get together and hack on stuff, but they didn't have to go "camping" to do it. A better article would be if the went to Vegas and had their "pow-wow" while getting lap dances...
Dan,
I didn't find it condescending at all. This is a forum for everyone to voice their opinion and I'm glad you did.
I was replying to a previous post. I do not think Apple has a monopoly. I thought the previous posters use of comparing the RIAA to Apple was inappropriate and used my previous post as an example, though it wasn't a good one
Though I do still believe they price fix. In fact previous posters who claimed to be resellers stated that they could decrease the price by 70-100 dollars and still make a profit. And you previously stated that Apple does not price gouge? They will drop resellers who don't adhere to their prices. How is that good for the consumer?
What you said makes no sense to me. Apple makes the iPod and sells it to it's resellers and directly to customers. Apple is forcing resellers to sell their product at a certain price. How is that different from the RIAA telling music stores to sell CDs at a certain price?
Yes there are other products from other companies, but that isn't the issue. Who else makes the iPod? No one. Who do you have to go through to buy one? Apple or a reseller. Who's keeping prices at a fixed level? Apple. Whether they can do this or not is irrelevant to me. I don't plan on buying their product. But for those who do have fun throwing a portion of your money down the drain just because Apple dictates a profit level.
You're right that these license agreements are nothing new, but I think the real problem is that the company itself is putting a new agreement in place without the ability to read it (for the very few who want to). The lack on training of their employees to handle the situation and the inability to provide a hard copy of the agreements. I mean that's just silly.
The majority of work and time will be spent by those who are walking this new ground for the first time.
I think the idea is that a precendence will be set. If certain steps are taken a refund will be issued. The fact that it was brought to court (was mentioned in a previous comment, I haven't read the story yet) and the plaintiff won will help those who follow.
My altruism! Have you listened to anything you've said? You talk like the open source is the best thing in the world. Hey I love it as much as the next guy, but I don't care who uses my code for free or not. I'd rather have things work rather than sit at home and cry about people not sharing their proprietary code with the rest of the world.
I'm sorry you don't like Sun's license. They apparently don't like the open source licenses. But if you like a product and have the chance to improve it and in the process help the millions of others who use it to benefit wouldn't you do that regardless of the license?
I never said look at the code. What I am trying to get at is that once a native layer to support the needs of AWT and 2D is in place GCJ should be able to compile the already available AWT and Swing source. There would be no need to port these. Yes, if Sun gave out the source for the native peers this would make the job easier for GCJ but they don't. You may have to reinvent some of the wheel, but at least it's not the whole thing.
Well apparently it's not "preventing" open source if people are cloning it like you said. And I have yet to see a Swing open source clone. Plus all the AWT and Swing java source code is available in the distribution so go and GCJ yourself into a frenzy.
Java not being open source isn't "holding" this back. Look at the GCJ web site FAQ. They are currently writing peers in GTK and XLIB for AWT. Once that's finished Swing will follow.
Sun has been working on Gnome 2.0 with the Gnome community. It's not exactly a stock Gnome 2.0 installation. You might want to check it out before giving it the thumbs down...
I totally see your point of view, but heck I felt that way about OpenGL for a long time. Now look at it.
Yeah, a feature list that touts "With the Palm you have to press the HotSync button, but with ours it's automatic" really impresses me.
I'm sorry, but people buy a PDA because it's a small handheld device to do specific things. Microsoft keeps repackaging their products and OS to platforms that don't make much sense. If I wanted Outlook or an Internet browser I would have bought a laptop to put it on, not a PDA.