Win ME and 95 are nothing compared to the pile of crap know as Windows 3.1, have you alll forgotten? I therefore Sentence him to life imprisonment in Space Jail with a 20Mhx 386 SX (remember?) running Windows 3.1. How that!?
Checking out the head lines on CNet, and after reading some of the article, one might start to think SCO "might" have a case. But again, still no one has seen this code. But the more intersting thing I realized was this: SCO is now poo-pooing the GPL and questioning the "legality" of teh GPL. Then I got to the end of this CNet article and how the talked about the next release of OpenServer. It states that OpenServer would "provide better compatibility with Microsoft Windows through version 3 of Samba". I had to double check, but Samba is most definately GPL'd. Npw lets have a look at whats in Open Server 5, you'll see a good portion of it includes GLP software. So is this a "do as we say, not as we do" sort of thing?
There is no need, SVG is XML. Keep in mind that XML is not a "language" but a specifiation. SVG is an XML application as is XHTML. Hope that clears some things up more that using "cat input.svg > output.xml".
Aparently you haven't been a victim of the "please help president Zamundu of Congo" spam. This is hilarious, especially having recieved several of those messages already.
Apparently you are not familar with Photoshop, color profiles and the lot. The question is more than valid. Seeing how Photoshop on Windows is designed to take advantage of the display system on Windows, it is perfectly valid to ask if Photoshop under Crossover will properly calibrate with X11. I tend to doubt it since both Windows and Mac OS X have color systems that extend to input and output devices as well. So, I find it a tad rude as well as gramatically incorrect to state:
"Your question is wrong asked. Photoshop on wine is the same binary like on windows. Enough said.
I find this question "right asked" because it is something that I don't see mentioned at all. Futhermore I don't see any mention of X11 supporting ICC color profiles.
I think the real question here is that you as company need to ask yourselves: "Do we currently have the skills in house to do this?" Too often, I've had bosses throw me into the fire on a project I had no business being on. For example, I ended up getting a crash course in Java, J2EE, Oracle, MQSeries, and Web Logic Commrce on an ecommerce system for a popular donuts and coffee chain. At the time, I was just a DHTML monkey. I was pretty psyched because I was going to be the JSP guy. 3 guys on the project, none with Java skills, let alone J2EE, and 1 month to do it in. The project got done by 2 of the 3 or us and was a 2 months late. Suprisingly, the company that I worked for, Type T, is now out of buisness.
My point is that the quick and dirty approach seems to always apply when you commit to somehting is not your core compentency. In the case of Type T here, they should have NEVER said that they could do the job in a month. They didn't have the people to do it in the 1st pace. So no matter what, we were stuck with the quick and dirty approach. You need to put in about a month of learning Java, the how J2EE works, plus Oracle and Weblogic Commerce. Then once yo know that, youhave 3 weeks left to figure out you're going to get the shit done.
The place I'm at now, we make an e-newsletter system that we resell. While I know it is morally challeneged, we do have some pretty good features and WE KNOW HOW IT WORKS. So when someone needs something extra, it's not difficult to do. Not only that, we can do it properly. However, we do have a similar problem to Type T: account managers sell the platform with features that it does not do. Then they wonder why it will take longer, thus force back into the QnD.
So C# is a standard now. I say BIG DEAL! For starters, the.NET Framework is not a "standard" and is controlled completely by MS. This is further complicated by the fact that.NET allows developers to write in any.NET compatible language ( which is you use laguages like VB and Perl is.NET it's structure eerily become like that of C# or Java). Now I know that the CLI has also been standarized as well. But without the underlying Framework, who really cares? I can write my code in standard ISO, ECMA C# all I want on Windows and.NET, but this does NOT mean that my code will compile on say Mono, or Portable.NET.
Sure, the JCP is controlled by Sun. Howevers, the JCP also sets the rules for what API's compose the Java framework, not just the Java language. Sun also provides compatiblity testing for 3rd party implementations so that can be deemed Java compatible, if they choose. With that said, Mono can be 100% ISO and ECMA standards compliant, but they will never be 100%.NET compatible.
And since recompiling is really the only step you need to make, I'll be that Microsoft is going release Office for Linux next week. Hey, it runs on Mac OS X wich is BSD, so it shouldn't be THAT hard to bring to Linux.
Just messin' dood, but seriously, there's a lot mor eto it than just recompiling. You have the issue of drivers for differnt video cards. If Apple were to do such a thing, you'd only be using nVidia and ATI cards and a limited range at that.
and if i'm not mistaken, it's already compiled under gcc.
You are. Apple uses cc to build some of it's software. Just because it comes with the OS, doesn't mean Apple uses it to build the entire OS.
it requires no porting of darwin, it doesn't really cut into mac sales, and it would be easy to get apps like photoshop, dreamweaver, etc., ported.
ooh, boy. Actually it would require porting of Darwin since teh Carbon and Cocoa APIs rely on Darwin and Quartz. And how would it be easy to port all of those apps since they use Carbon pretty much exclusivley? Keep in mind that Carbon is a hold over form OS 9 and doesn't have too much to do with 'NIX. Now go get some coffee so you can successfully wake up fromthat crazy dream you've been having.
This is really a much better solution than the stoopid copy protected CD's that only work on Windows PC's. Whats funny about this solution is that not only do the buyers get perks, the marketing data on this could be potentially huge for the record comapnies. They could probably find a way to determine how many times you listen to the songs in your PC, trade MP3's, go to shows, etc.,etc.. But the nice part is that YOU don't have to register.
Just curious to know what this topic has to do with Apache? For some odd reason, one might be inclined to believe that this post belongs in the "Apple" section. Just FYI;)
Well being a current, and happy, RCN cable Modem customer, their uplaod speed with the standard package is 768Kbps. And I can say back up their claim that you do indeed get these upload speeds. Their network is far less stressed than ATT and I have only had 2 short outages in the 3 years I've had them. I aonly hope this 3Mbps Modem comes to Boston soon!
If Sun's antics are making you ill, why not help out the folks at Ximian on Mono? It is backed by a REAL ECMA standard and not controlled by one company. Sure it's based on an MS product, but at least MS had the balls to submit it to a standards body and NOT retract it.
It's not so bad if you kow where to look
on
The Laid-off Techie
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
First off, I agree with most posters that this article doesn't really describe techies, but those who probably are unemployable in thier fields. How many of us worked someplace where more than half the people there were not qualified to do thier job let alone get the saleries they were getting? From what I have been able to see so far, this "recession" is a massive house cleaning. Unfortunately, some very talented, hard-working folks also got the shaft.
The article also states that some of us are "settling for contract work without benefits." Uh, I've actually been doing FAR better contracting this year than I had been last year making over $80k. And suprisingly, getting work is far less complicated than you might think.
Here are some tips that have helped me out:
Get your resume together (duh!) and don't take it to your nearest Starbucks
If you have a web site, don't spend your time trying to be "artistic". If you code, your design skills probably aren't that great
Talk to your friends, even those who AREN'T in a tech field. You'd be suprised at what kind of work pops up
Don't be greedy. Everyone is trying to save money, so if you're charging $75/hr to HTML and JavaScript you're on dope. The guy who's doing that stuff for $45/hr is gonna have your lunch
Look for the smaller gigs. The Sub $10k jobs are a plenty in the New England area, as I'm sure everywhere else. Don't go looking for the $100k+ jobs, you will remain poor.
Buddy up. Working with a designer or copy writer has it's advantages. They usually call you when there is work to be done
Be flexible with the creative folks. They usually don't know much about tech, but if you can explain things to them, in english, while not being condescending, you will get more work from them. For soem reason, these creative folks know how to find work.
If you use a head hunter, use someone small. I think the big places have lost thier credibility over the past 2 years. How many sucky hires from big placement agencies did your company hire last year? The smaller ones tend to have a closer relationship with both the client and talent and can generally speak to your abilities better.
Thats just my two cents. After my former employer stole my 401k money and failed to pay us our last 2 pay check, things have improved greatly for me. This advice has gotten me off unemployment and I'm now on the road to recovery:)
Well, that's just because the advertising company didn't bother to spend like 5 minutes getting the implementation to work in Moz
Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Plugins in Mozilla are based on the Netscape 4 plugin architecture. This means that they don't support transparency or layering as they do in the Flash ActiveX control. So, the marekting company would have to also contract with Macromedia to develop a "window-less" plugin API for Mozilla for all platforms. Basically, all that they could do now in Mozilla is have a box show up on the screen. You currently cannot get the same effect as you do in IE. And because of that, you more than likely will get agencies to start pushing IE becaus eyou can do crap like this. BTW, window-less plugins are not supported on Mac OS either so it doesn't work there either.
Reason being that that on IE 4 and higher on Windows support "window-less" plugins or controls. Meaning that the plugin is not bound to a new window class, but can be instantiated like a another element, such as an image on the page. A window-less control can also support transparency and layering which is why it can float on top of the page.
This was never implemented on the Mac, and I don't think Netscape ever bothered to get it working on Linux either (hard to tell seeing how very few developers released plugins for Linux or any other UNIX OS). So, IMHO, this is kind like a huge plug for alternative OS's like OS X and Linux simply because these ads can't work. If I recall correctly, there are plans to eventually include window-less controls in Mozilla. This is a good idea for designers and such but we all know that some marketing schmoe is going to abuse it. Much like they are now.
Why should I be drooling? Because I can can have all my windows look trasparent on Windows? I've been seeing windows through Mac OS X's terminal for the past year now and I have to say that it's the only app that it's actually really cool to do it with (yes, you can make other windows transparent). This demo has the entire contents of the window transparent, buttons, menus and all. That doesn't really help anyone use this OS any. At least Mac OS X, and ETerm I think, keep the title bar opaque so you can see where the freakin' windows is.
And for obvious reasons apparently, Mac OS 9 could hardly multi-task! Looks like our productivity is going to go out the window now that we have Mac OS X.
At first I thought Mono was a good idea. But upon further thinking, one can quickly realize that this announcement make.NET valid. Sure, C# is very cool and has potential to do things better than Java. But now, Ximian is playing into Microsofts hands by investing a ton of work into making.NET available for other platforms. Unfortunatly, I think Sun blew it withJava in reguards to.NET. Let's take a look at how:
Sun
Create a cool language and keep it in house so no big scarry companies can prevert it and in turn, let no one improve it
Release the initial version for Windows and Solaris and let everone else (Mac OS, Linux, etc) fend for themselves.
Get some opensource developers to create a Linux version of the JDK and take the credit
Create a UI set that is heavy and slow to use and offer no convienient way to package a double clickable application accross platforms
Get opensource developers looking elsewhere because the language is not open.
And now the MS way:
Make the opensource world hate you
Announce a cool software initiative and language and say it's only for Windows
Release the specs to a standards body
Offer a semi-open source version of the language and spec
Get all the angry open source developers to develop the implementation for you on every platform you're not willing to develop for.
Make.NET a more viable platform than Java
If Ximian suceeds.NET will be available for as many mainstream platforms as Java. With MS putting the C# reference on FreeBSD, it's a pretty good indication that.NET will live on Mac OS X too. So, by the time it's ready.NET will have Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and who know what other platforms will be involved here too. And the best part is, MS just had to publish it as a standard. Sun, are you listening?
Unlike MS, Apple paid to have Sound Jam code used in iTunes rather than develop their own MP3 player in house. Similarly, the Disc Burner software was also developed, and licenesed, outside of Apple. Add to that all of the good UNIX tools that have been developed by Open Source groups and you have a very different story than MS does.
I can't think of anything off hand that a third party was paid to develop for Windows. IIS, IE Outlook, WMP, etc. are all MS developed tools that were built to shut down competitors. I don't think you can lump Apple into that category anymore.
This is really nothing new to anyone who has done Java on Mac OS X and it's also very simeilar to the Java-GNOME project too. Mac OS X has Java bindings in Cocoa in addition to allowing you to do Mac specific things. For example, if you use the MRJ classes, you can do things like set the type and creator codes for files (Mac's son't rely on file extensions for file types). That's something that Java doesn't do by default and it's something you don't need to do on other platforms. Apple has had to add those classes to do Mac specific things so that Java apps feel comfy on the Mac. Similarly, with these KDE bindings, it allows developers to add some KDE features that make it feel more like a KDE application.
In my experience with Java, I have found that things like the JFileChooser aren't quite the same as the native file chooser dialogs. With the MRJ classes on Mac, I can use a Real Mac OS X file chooser as well as use sheets. With the KDE bindings and Java-GNOME, I can do the same things on any OpenSource Platform. It looks like MS is left out on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
...oh say missing fuel rods from a
nuclear power plant in Vermont. Thank god the FBI is keeping our schools safe!
Win ME and 95 are nothing compared to the pile of crap know as Windows 3.1, have you alll forgotten? I therefore Sentence him to life imprisonment in Space Jail with a 20Mhx 386 SX (remember?) running Windows 3.1. How that!?
Checking out the head lines on CNet, and after reading some of the article, one might start to think SCO "might" have a case. But again, still no one has seen this code. But the more intersting thing I realized was this: SCO is now poo-pooing the GPL and questioning the "legality" of teh GPL. Then I got to the end of this CNet article and how the talked about the next release of OpenServer. It states that OpenServer would "provide better compatibility with Microsoft Windows through version 3 of Samba". I had to double check, but Samba is most definately GPL'd. Npw lets have a look at whats in Open Server 5, you'll see a good portion of it includes GLP software. So is this a "do as we say, not as we do" sort of thing?
There is no need, SVG is XML. Keep in mind that XML is not a "language" but a specifiation. SVG is an XML application as is XHTML. Hope that clears some things up more that using "cat input.svg > output.xml".
Aparently you haven't been a victim of the "please help president Zamundu of Congo" spam. This is hilarious, especially having recieved several of those messages already.
Apparently you are not familar with Photoshop, color profiles and the lot. The question is more than valid. Seeing how Photoshop on Windows is designed to take advantage of the display system on Windows, it is perfectly valid to ask if Photoshop under Crossover will properly calibrate with X11. I tend to doubt it since both Windows and Mac OS X have color systems that extend to input and output devices as well. So, I find it a tad rude as well as gramatically incorrect to state:
"Your question is wrong asked. Photoshop on wine is the same binary like on windows. Enough said.
I find this question "right asked" because it is something that I don't see mentioned at all. Futhermore I don't see any mention of X11 supporting ICC color profiles.
I think the real question here is that you as company need to ask yourselves: "Do we currently have the skills in house to do this?" Too often, I've had bosses throw me into the fire on a project I had no business being on. For example, I ended up getting a crash course in Java, J2EE, Oracle, MQSeries, and Web Logic Commrce on an ecommerce system for a popular donuts and coffee chain. At the time, I was just a DHTML monkey. I was pretty psyched because I was going to be the JSP guy. 3 guys on the project, none with Java skills, let alone J2EE, and 1 month to do it in. The project got done by 2 of the 3 or us and was a 2 months late. Suprisingly, the company that I worked for, Type T, is now out of buisness.
My point is that the quick and dirty approach seems to always apply when you commit to somehting is not your core compentency. In the case of Type T here, they should have NEVER said that they could do the job in a month. They didn't have the people to do it in the 1st pace. So no matter what, we were stuck with the quick and dirty approach. You need to put in about a month of learning Java, the how J2EE works, plus Oracle and Weblogic Commerce. Then once yo know that, youhave 3 weeks left to figure out you're going to get the shit done.
The place I'm at now, we make an e-newsletter system that we resell. While I know it is morally challeneged, we do have some pretty good features and WE KNOW HOW IT WORKS. So when someone needs something extra, it's not difficult to do. Not only that, we can do it properly. However, we do have a similar problem to Type T: account managers sell the platform with features that it does not do. Then they wonder why it will take longer, thus force back into the QnD.
So C# is a standard now. I say BIG DEAL! For starters, the .NET Framework is not a "standard" and is controlled completely by MS. This is further complicated by the fact that .NET allows developers to write in any .NET compatible language ( which is you use laguages like VB and Perl is .NET it's structure eerily become like that of C# or Java). Now I know that the CLI has also been standarized as well. But without the underlying Framework, who really cares? I can write my code in standard ISO, ECMA C# all I want on Windows and .NET, but this does NOT mean that my code will compile on say Mono, or Portable.NET.
.NET compatible.
Sure, the JCP is controlled by Sun. Howevers, the JCP also sets the rules for what API's compose the Java framework, not just the Java language. Sun also provides compatiblity testing for 3rd party implementations so that can be deemed Java compatible, if they choose. With that said, Mono can be 100% ISO and ECMA standards compliant, but they will never be 100%
Dood, that blockbuster Ad sucked. That kind of humor usually appeals to the "Grandma" crowd.
It's no way near as amusing as "Terry Tate Office Linebacker" or the Diet Dr. Pepper "3" Ad.
wget http://progressive.stream.aol.com/wb/gl/wbonline/p rogressive/thematrix/us/med/animatrixlgfinal_dl.mo v
p rogressive/thematrix/us/med/animatrixlgfinal_dl.mo v
or
curl -o http://progressive.stream.aol.com/wb/gl/wbonline/
And since recompiling is really the only step you need to make, I'll be that Microsoft is going release Office for Linux next week. Hey, it runs on Mac OS X wich is BSD, so it shouldn't be THAT hard to bring to Linux.
Just messin' dood, but seriously, there's a lot mor eto it than just recompiling. You have the issue of drivers for differnt video cards. If Apple were to do such a thing, you'd only be using nVidia and ATI cards and a limited range at that.
and if i'm not mistaken, it's already compiled under gcc.
You are. Apple uses cc to build some of it's software. Just because it comes with the OS, doesn't mean Apple uses it to build the entire OS.
it requires no porting of darwin, it doesn't really cut into mac sales, and it would be easy to get apps like photoshop, dreamweaver, etc., ported.
ooh, boy. Actually it would require porting of Darwin since teh Carbon and Cocoa APIs rely on Darwin and Quartz. And how would it be easy to port all of those apps since they use Carbon pretty much exclusivley? Keep in mind that Carbon is a hold over form OS 9 and doesn't have too much to do with 'NIX. Now go get some coffee so you can successfully wake up fromthat crazy dream you've been having.
This is really a much better solution than the stoopid copy protected CD's that only work on Windows PC's. Whats funny about this solution is that not only do the buyers get perks, the marketing data on this could be potentially huge for the record comapnies. They could probably find a way to determine how many times you listen to the songs in your PC, trade MP3's, go to shows, etc.,etc.. But the nice part is that YOU don't have to register.
Just curious to know what this topic has to do with Apache? For some odd reason, one might be inclined to believe that this post belongs in the "Apple" section. Just FYI ;)
Well being a current, and happy, RCN cable Modem customer, their uplaod speed with the standard package is 768Kbps. And I can say back up their claim that you do indeed get these upload speeds. Their network is far less stressed than ATT and I have only had 2 short outages in the 3 years I've had them. I aonly hope this 3Mbps Modem comes to Boston soon!
Well said. A friend of mine was trying to get me to get "Java Certified" by Sun because you only needed a 70 on the test to pass. Go figure.
Whatever.
If Sun's antics are making you ill, why not help out the folks at Ximian on Mono? It is backed by a REAL ECMA standard and not controlled by one company. Sure it's based on an MS product, but at least MS had the balls to submit it to a standards body and NOT retract it.
First off, I agree with most posters that this article doesn't really describe techies, but those who probably are unemployable in thier fields. How many of us worked someplace where more than half the people there were not qualified to do thier job let alone get the saleries they were getting? From what I have been able to see so far, this "recession" is a massive house cleaning. Unfortunately, some very talented, hard-working folks also got the shaft.
The article also states that some of us are "settling for contract work without benefits." Uh, I've actually been doing FAR better contracting this year than I had been last year making over $80k. And suprisingly, getting work is far less complicated than you might think.
Here are some tips that have helped me out:
Thats just my two cents. After my former employer stole my 401k money and failed to pay us our last 2 pay check, things have improved greatly for me. This advice has gotten me off unemployment and I'm now on the road to recovery :)
Well, that's just because the advertising company didn't bother to spend like 5 minutes getting the implementation to work in Moz
Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Plugins in Mozilla are based on the Netscape 4 plugin architecture. This means that they don't support transparency or layering as they do in the Flash ActiveX control. So, the marekting company would have to also contract with Macromedia to develop a "window-less" plugin API for Mozilla for all platforms. Basically, all that they could do now in Mozilla is have a box show up on the screen. You currently cannot get the same effect as you do in IE. And because of that, you more than likely will get agencies to start pushing IE becaus eyou can do crap like this. BTW, window-less plugins are not supported on Mac OS either so it doesn't work there either.
Reason being that that on IE 4 and higher on Windows support "window-less" plugins or controls. Meaning that the plugin is not bound to a new window class, but can be instantiated like a another element, such as an image on the page. A window-less control can also support transparency and layering which is why it can float on top of the page.
This was never implemented on the Mac, and I don't think Netscape ever bothered to get it working on Linux either (hard to tell seeing how very few developers released plugins for Linux or any other UNIX OS). So, IMHO, this is kind like a huge plug for alternative OS's like OS X and Linux simply because these ads can't work. If I recall correctly, there are plans to eventually include window-less controls in Mozilla. This is a good idea for designers and such but we all know that some marketing schmoe is going to abuse it. Much like they are now.
you should be drooling.
Why should I be drooling? Because I can can have all my windows look trasparent on Windows? I've been seeing windows through Mac OS X's terminal for the past year now and I have to say that it's the only app that it's actually really cool to do it with (yes, you can make other windows transparent). This demo has the entire contents of the window transparent, buttons, menus and all. That doesn't really help anyone use this OS any. At least Mac OS X, and ETerm I think, keep the title bar opaque so you can see where the freakin' windows is.
And for obvious reasons apparently, Mac OS 9 could hardly multi-task! Looks like our productivity is going to go out the window now that we have Mac OS X.
At first I thought Mono was a good idea. But upon further thinking, one can quickly realize that this announcement make .NET valid. Sure, C# is very cool and has potential to do things better than Java. But now, Ximian is playing into Microsofts hands by investing a ton of work into making .NET available for other platforms. Unfortunatly, I think Sun blew it withJava in reguards to .NET. Let's take a look at how:
Sun- Create a cool language and keep it in house so no big scarry companies can prevert it and in turn, let no one improve it
- Release the initial version for Windows and Solaris and let everone else (Mac OS, Linux, etc) fend for themselves.
- Get some opensource developers to create a Linux version of the JDK and take the credit
- Create a UI set that is heavy and slow to use and offer no convienient way to package a double clickable application accross platforms
- Get opensource developers looking elsewhere because the language is not open.
And now the MS way:If Ximian suceeds .NET will be available for as many mainstream platforms as Java. With MS putting the C# reference on FreeBSD, it's a pretty good indication that .NET will live on Mac OS X too. So, by the time it's ready .NET will have Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and who know what other platforms will be involved here too. And the best part is, MS just had to publish it as a standard. Sun, are you listening?
Unlike MS, Apple paid to have Sound Jam code used in iTunes rather than develop their own MP3 player in house. Similarly, the Disc Burner software was also developed, and licenesed, outside of Apple. Add to that all of the good UNIX tools that have been developed by Open Source groups and you have a very different story than MS does.
I can't think of anything off hand that a third party was paid to develop for Windows. IIS, IE Outlook, WMP, etc. are all MS developed tools that were built to shut down competitors. I don't think you can lump Apple into that category anymore.
This is really nothing new to anyone who has done Java on Mac OS X and it's also very simeilar to the Java-GNOME project too. Mac OS X has Java bindings in Cocoa in addition to allowing you to do Mac specific things. For example, if you use the MRJ classes, you can do things like set the type and creator codes for files (Mac's son't rely on file extensions for file types). That's something that Java doesn't do by default and it's something you don't need to do on other platforms. Apple has had to add those classes to do Mac specific things so that Java apps feel comfy on the Mac. Similarly, with these KDE bindings, it allows developers to add some KDE features that make it feel more like a KDE application.
In my experience with Java, I have found that things like the JFileChooser aren't quite the same as the native file chooser dialogs. With the MRJ classes on Mac, I can use a Real Mac OS X file chooser as well as use sheets. With the KDE bindings and Java-GNOME, I can do the same things on any OpenSource Platform. It looks like MS is left out on this one.