Possible, but according to rumours you will be able to get several EeePCs for the price of one Nokia netbook, so it may have some fairly advanced battery tech in it -- after all, batteries are pretty 'core competence' for Nokia.
What the hell is wrong with moderators today? This is not insightful or informative... loufoque make a perfectly valid point. ACP may resemble open source, but it is not open source.
Claiming that the definition of open source does not include redistribution rights is revisionist, if not totally absurd.
Like another poster, I've been a very active internet user for more than ten years and I've never seen that rant. And yes, a substantial amount of that internet use was usenet so I've seen a lot of rants...
I guess that means I'm "living in a dreamworld" or "one of those people" then. Shrug.
If you know this area at all you also know that the authors are extremely well connected in the kernel development circles... They probably have first hand knowledge of hundreds of the most active developers and can tell which companies are working on which drivers without consulting git.
As an example, I'm pretty sure Jonathan Corbet knows the Volkswagen deal pretty well, since he has written articles about the networking stuff they wrote (btw, as far as I can remember the VW guys didn't even use volkswagen addresses;))
So feel free to call their methodology garbage. I'm going to trust their assessment much more than something "more scientific" done by just about anyone else.
You're the clueless one here, so look it up. The guy is a joke. He makes wild ass predictions that mostly have no basis in reality (like Sun and Apple merging) and complains about technical details he obviously doesn't understand. Examples of the latter include complaining about "the idle process" taking 95% of his CPU and slowing down his computer, as well as stating that website SEO is useless (because when he changed _all_ his sites page names to SEO friendlier ones, his traffic dropped. No, he didn't know about 301, all the old addresses just 404'd).
Basically, reading Dvorak is like listening to your dad complain about something he thinks he understands, but doesn't really. Except fathers usually don't troll like mr Dvorak does.
Calling me names won't make your case any stronger.
My point from the beginning was: Digsby didn't do The Right Thing, and your only reponse so far has been "but the users didn't do the right thing either". Your response does not invalidate my point in any way, however many times you repeat it.
You just keep digging a deeper hole... This is not about the TOS or EULA, this is about what's The Right Thing to do (and secondarily about the backlash that invariably happens when the invisible line between right and wrong is crossed in such a purposeful manner).
So everything Digsby did was a-ok because the only stupid people were conned? Great.
Things have different levels of importance, this should be pretty easy to understand: some things deserve to be buried deep into "documentation" and some things require more attention -- in this case there should have been a page in the installation wizard that explains the issue and Äets the user choose.
The fact that Digsby developers did not do that tells me they are either incompetent or malicious. I am not interested in their software in either case.
I don't know of any machines today that offer the modern equivalent of performance and portability (even on the PC side of the fence, which I'd happily consider).
As someone pointed out: Thinkpad X series has delivered that consistently for quite a long time. Be prepared to pay through the nose though.
The original claim was this: IE still accounts for more than 60% no matter what source of statistics you look at. The main point of my answer: "Not true, it depends heavily on site focus".
Still account for at least more than 60% of users, no matter what source of statistics you use.
Wrong. This depends heavily on the site focus. User location makes a difference as well. Go check W3Schools stats and see for yourself: their numbers for IE are below 40% (a single number might not be impressive or usable for just about anything, but the change certainly is: IE fell from 90% to 40% in six years).
The price was $20-30 last I heard (totally off-the-record remark, so I'm not vouching for that), in any case the price cut is a major one. Linux on netbooks was and is a scary thing for Microsoft.
Yes, as Rob Weir points out, anyone can weasel word a standard, but MS isn't weasel wording. There are literally giant mac-truck sized holes in the standard.
If you had ever worked on a standard even half as big as these standards are, you'd know that it's impossible to write a standard that you couldn't break like this. Standards cannot force anyone to interoperate.
Slashdot Mirror
Possible, but according to rumours you will be able to get several EeePCs for the price of one Nokia netbook, so it may have some fairly advanced battery tech in it -- after all, batteries are pretty 'core competence' for Nokia.
What the hell is wrong with moderators today? This is not insightful or informative... loufoque make a perfectly valid point. ACP may resemble open source, but it is not open source.
Claiming that the definition of open source does not include redistribution rights is revisionist, if not totally absurd.
Like another poster, I've been a very active internet user for more than ten years and I've never seen that rant. And yes, a substantial amount of that internet use was usenet so I've seen a lot of rants...
I guess that means I'm "living in a dreamworld" or "one of those people" then. Shrug.
That's the staging tree (drivers not ready for mainline yet).
Just read LWN, Corbet has been writing these for a couple of years already.
See http://lwn.net/Kernel/Index/ and search for "Contributor statistics"
If you know this area at all you also know that the authors are extremely well connected in the kernel development circles... They probably have first hand knowledge of hundreds of the most active developers and can tell which companies are working on which drivers without consulting git.
As an example, I'm pretty sure Jonathan Corbet knows the Volkswagen deal pretty well, since he has written articles about the networking stuff they wrote (btw, as far as I can remember the VW guys didn't even use volkswagen addresses ;))
So feel free to call their methodology garbage. I'm going to trust their assessment much more than something "more scientific" done by just about anyone else.
You're the clueless one here, so look it up. The guy is a joke. He makes wild ass predictions that mostly have no basis in reality (like Sun and Apple merging) and complains about technical details he obviously doesn't understand. Examples of the latter include complaining about "the idle process" taking 95% of his CPU and slowing down his computer, as well as stating that website SEO is useless (because when he changed _all_ his sites page names to SEO friendlier ones, his traffic dropped. No, he didn't know about 301, all the old addresses just 404'd).
Basically, reading Dvorak is like listening to your dad complain about something he thinks he understands, but doesn't really. Except fathers usually don't troll like mr Dvorak does.
Calling me names won't make your case any stronger.
My point from the beginning was: Digsby didn't do The Right Thing, and your only reponse so far has been "but the users didn't do the right thing either". Your response does not invalidate my point in any way, however many times you repeat it.
You just keep digging a deeper hole... This is not about the TOS or EULA, this is about what's The Right Thing to do (and secondarily about the backlash that invariably happens when the invisible line between right and wrong is crossed in such a purposeful manner).
So everything Digsby did was a-ok because the only stupid people were conned? Great.
Things have different levels of importance, this should be pretty easy to understand: some things deserve to be buried deep into "documentation" and some things require more attention -- in this case there should have been a page in the installation wizard that explains the issue and Äets the user choose.
The fact that Digsby developers did not do that tells me they are either incompetent or malicious. I am not interested in their software in either case.
Again in a discussion like this, I'm left wondering why you won't link to the article and the edits, so we could see for ourselves...
Another thing: if the information was important, why wasn't it in the README or help files -- which you could then have referenced?
Oh, and one more thing:
I guess that depends on the context. UK, Poland and Italy are all smaller...
Yes, something like 99% of the country is covered by GSM.
Other questions?
Still a walled garden. Not a single mention of the protocols they use or how to get data out of their service...
Well, maybe that's why the term is never actually used in the license text...
As someone pointed out: Thinkpad X series has delivered that consistently for quite a long time. Be prepared to pay through the nose though.
Did you even read my comment?
The original claim was this: IE still accounts for more than 60% no matter what source of statistics you look at. The main point of my answer: "Not true, it depends heavily on site focus".
So what exactly are you trying to tell me?
Wrong. This depends heavily on the site focus. User location makes a difference as well. Go check W3Schools stats and see for yourself: their numbers for IE are below 40% (a single number might not be impressive or usable for just about anything, but the change certainly is: IE fell from 90% to 40% in six years).
The rest of your comment still stands of course.
I did nothing to imply there was something wrong. I only pointed out that it is data mining. I stand behind that comment.
"make install" vs "checkinstall", doesn't sound like extra work to me...
...and how is that not data mining again?
The price was $20-30 last I heard (totally off-the-record remark, so I'm not vouching for that), in any case the price cut is a major one. Linux on netbooks was and is a scary thing for Microsoft.
If you had ever worked on a standard even half as big as these standards are, you'd know that it's impossible to write a standard that you couldn't break like this. Standards cannot force anyone to interoperate.
This is a really important point. If I remember correctly the license prices are going to be re-evaluated next year and then every few years...