What you see as subjective and arbitrary law I see as being capable of providing for flexible and thoughful remedies. Some penalty written in stone may work for a train company 100 years ago but would be useless in dealing with a software company, automobile maker or publisher
I'm not talking about penalties. Penalties can be subjective without subverting justice.
If I am not a monopoly, then I know what the law is. I know what I can do and what I cannot do. If I break a law then I have no excuse. But if I am a monopoly then I do not know what the law is with regards to my actions. I do not know if exclusive contracts are legal or illegal. I do not know if bundling a browser is legal or illegal. And I do not know if collecting customer information is legal or illegal. The ONLY way I can find out is to have the issue brought before a court.
It is not justice for a monopoly to never know when any of its actions will subsequently be declared illegal.
proprietary developers can not use the Qt/Free edition to develope their products and then switch to Qt/Professional
A) This is an evaluation. What the hell are you doing developing your primary application on an evaluation product?
B) It doesn't matter what their FAQ says, it matters what the license says. You may develop any software with the Qt/Free edition so long as you don't distribute it. Remember, your application isn't proprietary UNTIL you distribute it.
Be observant and ask questions. Use your knowledge of the customer to tailor a pitch to them. Gosh, I've *never* seen *any* vendor do that. How awful.
I've been flamed royal here before for suggesting that Microsoft might actually have committed acts that are not immoral, unethical or illegal. As everyone keeps telling me, "they're a monopoly so they operate under a different set of laws than everyone else".
Maybe those slashdorks are right. Maybe it is illegal for Microsoft to be observant and ask questions. Maybe it is illegal to tailor a sales pitch to the customer. Heck, as far as I know it might even be illegal for Microsoft to even process a customer initiated order.
Of course, the law doesn't actually say what these new rules are that monopolies must adhere to. Thus we get subjective and arbitrary law, the very antithesis of civilization. Oh joy...
Commercial software companies DO NOT need to purchase the Trolltech license. Only *proprietary* developers do. Huge difference.
The Qt license may be one of the most "fair" licenses in history. It's Free if you write Free Software (GPL), Open if you write Open Source Software (QPL) and need to make that distinction, and proprietary if you write proprietary software.
If a company is going to profit $20,000 next year off of a KDE application, then they can afford a $2000 license. If you're only going to make $2000 in profit, however, I would strongly suggest going into another line of work.
What about the hundreds of other people who pour hard work into Linux for free?
KDE is not Linux. It is a desktop that runs on Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, IRIX, etc. Nothing Linux specific about it.
XFree86 is a windowing system. GNOME is not. And XFree86 is not a GNU project. So I don't think RMS has any claim to say "I've been working for GNOME since years before there was a GNOME." However, he meets all the requirements to run for the Al Gore Chair for Retroactive Invention.
I've been on broadband for one year now, with both Slackware and FreeBSD, and not once have I been hacked. I have logs that show people tried but not got through. Of course I'm only running a client box so I shut off virtually everything, but if I know enough to secure my box at home, you would think that the guys getting paid to admid servers would be evern more paranoid.
The bastards are going to know the exploits before you do, so make that part of your equation. Don't plan on the known avenues of attack, plan for the unknown. Expect that someone *will* break in and have a plan in place for that eventuality.
As usual, switch off active scripting, even though that will make essentially every webpage that's designed for IE not work.
Well duh! If you're creating webpages just for IE you get what you deserve. There are standards out there and if you use them you will be fine. If you don't use them you only have yourself to blame.
I've stopped blaming Microsoft and starting blaming these webmaster who ought to know better.
All throughout this forum you challenge other people to come up with quotes and references. The one time some asks the same of you, you weasel out.
Here's major snippets from the thread so far:
Sabolon: Okay...so in 1983 when he started thinking about his OS, and that it should have a GUI interface, therefore he is the grand-father of GNOME?
Sabolon is implying through normal Slashdot sarcasm that RMS is not the grand-father of GNOME. Note the title of the post "ego?"
Then you reply: No, that's not it. How about reading up about RMS and the beginnings of GNOME before you attack RMS?
It's clear from context that you don't consider RMS to be the grand-father of GNOME for the reason Sabolon postulated, but for *another* reason. "No, that's not it" implies that there is an "it". So I asked you what the "it" was:
Now just where are your sources that show that RMS started, created, founded, or invented GNOME?
Now we get to your current reply:
I just said that he wasn't claiming to have invented GNOME on the basis of having wanted a window system for GNU.
So on what basis did he claim to have invented GNOME?
What about the guy who designed the CPU that the compiler runs on? Is he eligible? What about the companies that host GNOME mirrors? Are they eligible? Or what about IDG who provides the GNOME team with new wardrobes twice a year? What about the makers of Jolt Cola?
As GUI installers go, SuSE has the best one overall. I judge installers by both their simplicity and their effectiveness. SuSE isn't as "simple" as some, but it works. That's more than I can say for those that leave my system in an unusable state, or decide that my G450 is really a generic framebuffer.
I would still have to go with the FreeBSD sysinstall, but that's just me.
One *possible* explanation though, and you say isn't likely: they ARE new users. The marketplace has been growing exponentially for years, and it seems likely that the internet newbies outnumber us. Newbies are more likely to have modems simply because they don't want to futz with their computer.
If you define userfriendly as "gooey pointy clicky thingies", then Mandrake wins hands down. But if you define it as a streamlined, cruft-less, put the user in charge of the process, then FreeBSD is it. GUIs may look pretty, but they don't make anything easier. Other than the inital kernel configuration screen (which is easily bypassed), everything is very straight forward, well documented, and *easy*. The hardest part would be partioning the harddrive, but that's true for any of the GUI installs as well. Then once you're done, you can use the SAME program (sysinstall) for all of your configuration and administration needs.
So Covad passed me on to Earthlink. Whatever problems Earthlink is having seem to be self-created.
Same thing happened to me when Verio decided they didn't like DSL customers. So now I'm with Earthd**k/Mindf**k. During off-peak hours I am now getting faster speeds. But come the weekend I might as well have an ISDN. Geez, 128Kbit connection for $49 a month.
Good thing though is that they didn't change the existing account. It's still the same connection, circuit, gateway, static IP, bridge that I had with Verio/Covad. So I don't have to use their silly PPPoE. Their tech support is clueful, but everyone else at the company seems to be recent graduates of Moron U.
Yeah, like that guy yesterday that sent me a 3Meg PDF. He wanted to be nice to me so he zipped it up first. Geez. 1Meg worth of actual content took 5.5Megs of mailbox space. I've tried educating him but it doesn't work.
It still amazes me the # of users of my websites that still use modems.
Then it's time you get a clue. You don't get broadband unless it's provided in your area or you want to pay the big bucks for a dedicated line. DSL is only available where they offer DSL. The mere presence of a telco doesn't guarantee it. And cable access is only available where there is cable AND the cable monopoly decides to offer it. Long range wireless seems to be rapidly imploding, which is a shame since it was the only option most rural customers had.
Even in the heart of Silicon Valley where I live I know people who can't get broadband. I didn't have access to broadband until a year and a half ago, and I can see Mae West from here.
And of course you have those people who have chosen to keep their modem connection. You may not understand it, but it's not your choice to make.
Yeah! This is ridiculous. When I go to a conference I ONLY want to see one side presented. I don't want those I disagree with to have a fair hearing. I have my mind made up already, and I don't need Tim to come along and pretend that the other side is composed of human beings.
Hell, I don't know why he even has these conferences anyway. All he needs to do is hang out a sign that says "If You Ain't Us Then Bugger Off".
Instead, we spend almost $10k on licenses for Microsoft software and third party filtering applications.
Try the back door route. Spend $99 bucks on proprietary BSD/OS with commercial support available from Windriver. That's your proof of concept. While everyone is admiring that, go sneak FreeBSD on all the other systems. "Of course it's BSD" you tell them in all honesty. Once you got FreeBSD in the door, sneaking in Linux is a piece of cake (not to mention redundant).
It's mainly the internal architecture of the chips. Is the memory address you need in cache or will you have to spend 50 clock cycles to fetch it? What if you want to read an address before a previous instruction finished writing it?
The Intel chips are really fast at "hurry up and wait", but not nearly as fast at "hurry up and do something".
Slashdot Mirror
What you see as subjective and arbitrary law I see as being capable of providing for flexible and thoughful remedies. Some penalty written in stone may work for a train company 100 years ago but would be useless in dealing with a software company, automobile maker or publisher
I'm not talking about penalties. Penalties can be subjective without subverting justice.
If I am not a monopoly, then I know what the law is. I know what I can do and what I cannot do. If I break a law then I have no excuse. But if I am a monopoly then I do not know what the law is with regards to my actions. I do not know if exclusive contracts are legal or illegal. I do not know if bundling a browser is legal or illegal. And I do not know if collecting customer information is legal or illegal. The ONLY way I can find out is to have the issue brought before a court.
It is not justice for a monopoly to never know when any of its actions will subsequently be declared illegal.
proprietary developers can not use the Qt/Free edition to develope their products and then switch to Qt/Professional
A) This is an evaluation. What the hell are you doing developing your primary application on an evaluation product?
B) It doesn't matter what their FAQ says, it matters what the license says. You may develop any software with the Qt/Free edition so long as you don't distribute it. Remember, your application isn't proprietary UNTIL you distribute it.
Most users of Mozilla run it on Windows. So what?
Be observant and ask questions. Use your knowledge of the customer to tailor a pitch to them. Gosh, I've *never* seen *any* vendor do that. How awful.
I've been flamed royal here before for suggesting that Microsoft might actually have committed acts that are not immoral, unethical or illegal. As everyone keeps telling me, "they're a monopoly so they operate under a different set of laws than everyone else".
Maybe those slashdorks are right. Maybe it is illegal for Microsoft to be observant and ask questions. Maybe it is illegal to tailor a sales pitch to the customer. Heck, as far as I know it might even be illegal for Microsoft to even process a customer initiated order.
Of course, the law doesn't actually say what these new rules are that monopolies must adhere to. Thus we get subjective and arbitrary law, the very antithesis of civilization. Oh joy...
Commercial software companies DO NOT need to purchase the Trolltech license. Only *proprietary* developers do. Huge difference.
The Qt license may be one of the most "fair" licenses in history. It's Free if you write Free Software (GPL), Open if you write Open Source Software (QPL) and need to make that distinction, and proprietary if you write proprietary software.
If a company is going to profit $20,000 next year off of a KDE application, then they can afford a $2000 license. If you're only going to make $2000 in profit, however, I would strongly suggest going into another line of work.
What about the hundreds of other people who pour hard work into Linux for free?
KDE is not Linux. It is a desktop that runs on Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, IRIX, etc. Nothing Linux specific about it.
XFree86 is a windowing system. GNOME is not. And XFree86 is not a GNU project. So I don't think RMS has any claim to say "I've been working for GNOME since years before there was a GNOME." However, he meets all the requirements to run for the Al Gore Chair for Retroactive Invention.
RMS needs to realize that not EVERYTHING needs to be called "GNU/"
Oh damn! And here I was calling my operating system "GNU/FreeBSD" just to make him happy...
It's pronounced "newspeak", but it's spelled "GNUspeak".
I've been on broadband for one year now, with both Slackware and FreeBSD, and not once have I been hacked. I have logs that show people tried but not got through. Of course I'm only running a client box so I shut off virtually everything, but if I know enough to secure my box at home, you would think that the guys getting paid to admid servers would be evern more paranoid.
The bastards are going to know the exploits before you do, so make that part of your equation. Don't plan on the known avenues of attack, plan for the unknown. Expect that someone *will* break in and have a plan in place for that eventuality.
As usual, switch off active scripting, even though that will make essentially every webpage that's designed for IE not work.
Well duh! If you're creating webpages just for IE you get what you deserve. There are standards out there and if you use them you will be fine. If you don't use them you only have yourself to blame.
I've stopped blaming Microsoft and starting blaming these webmaster who ought to know better.
All throughout this forum you challenge other people to come up with quotes and references. The one time some asks the same of you, you weasel out.
Here's major snippets from the thread so far:
Sabolon: Okay...so in 1983 when he started thinking about his OS, and that it should have a GUI interface, therefore he is the grand-father of GNOME?
Sabolon is implying through normal Slashdot sarcasm that RMS is not the grand-father of GNOME. Note the title of the post "ego?"
Then you reply: No, that's not it. How about reading up about RMS and the beginnings of GNOME before you attack RMS?
It's clear from context that you don't consider RMS to be the grand-father of GNOME for the reason Sabolon postulated, but for *another* reason. "No, that's not it" implies that there is an "it". So I asked you what the "it" was:
Now just where are your sources that show that RMS started, created, founded, or invented GNOME?
Now we get to your current reply:
I just said that he wasn't claiming to have invented GNOME on the basis of having wanted a window system for GNU.
So on what basis did he claim to have invented GNOME?
Al Gore invents internet
Bill Gates invents Open Source
Richard Stallman invents GNOME
Now just where are your sources that show that RMS started, created, founded, or invented GNOME?
What about the guy who designed the CPU that the compiler runs on? Is he eligible? What about the companies that host GNOME mirrors? Are they eligible? Or what about IDG who provides the GNOME team with new wardrobes twice a year? What about the makers of Jolt Cola?
All I'm saying is he was trying to do the legally right thing.
And he did it out of ignorance (no FSF code is in KDE) in the most arrogant way possible (I forgive you).
Qt is dual licensed. The QPL part allows kdelibs to be LGPL.
As GUI installers go, SuSE has the best one overall. I judge installers by both their simplicity and their effectiveness. SuSE isn't as "simple" as some, but it works. That's more than I can say for those that leave my system in an unusable state, or decide that my G450 is really a generic framebuffer.
I would still have to go with the FreeBSD sysinstall, but that's just me.
Okay, sorry for the slam. I misunderstood.
One *possible* explanation though, and you say isn't likely: they ARE new users. The marketplace has been growing exponentially for years, and it seems likely that the internet newbies outnumber us. Newbies are more likely to have modems simply because they don't want to futz with their computer.
If you define userfriendly as "gooey pointy clicky thingies", then Mandrake wins hands down. But if you define it as a streamlined, cruft-less, put the user in charge of the process, then FreeBSD is it. GUIs may look pretty, but they don't make anything easier. Other than the inital kernel configuration screen (which is easily bypassed), everything is very straight forward, well documented, and *easy*. The hardest part would be partioning the harddrive, but that's true for any of the GUI installs as well. Then once you're done, you can use the SAME program (sysinstall) for all of your configuration and administration needs.
So Covad passed me on to Earthlink. Whatever problems Earthlink is having seem to be self-created.
Same thing happened to me when Verio decided they didn't like DSL customers. So now I'm with Earthd**k/Mindf**k. During off-peak hours I am now getting faster speeds. But come the weekend I might as well have an ISDN. Geez, 128Kbit connection for $49 a month.
Good thing though is that they didn't change the existing account. It's still the same connection, circuit, gateway, static IP, bridge that I had with Verio/Covad. So I don't have to use their silly PPPoE. Their tech support is clueful, but everyone else at the company seems to be recent graduates of Moron U.
Yeah, like that guy yesterday that sent me a 3Meg PDF. He wanted to be nice to me so he zipped it up first. Geez. 1Meg worth of actual content took 5.5Megs of mailbox space. I've tried educating him but it doesn't work.
It still amazes me the # of users of my websites that still use modems.
Then it's time you get a clue. You don't get broadband unless it's provided in your area or you want to pay the big bucks for a dedicated line. DSL is only available where they offer DSL. The mere presence of a telco doesn't guarantee it. And cable access is only available where there is cable AND the cable monopoly decides to offer it. Long range wireless seems to be rapidly imploding, which is a shame since it was the only option most rural customers had.
Even in the heart of Silicon Valley where I live I know people who can't get broadband. I didn't have access to broadband until a year and a half ago, and I can see Mae West from here.
And of course you have those people who have chosen to keep their modem connection. You may not understand it, but it's not your choice to make.
You're right. Stick with Windows always. Nobody ever got fired for choosing Windows.
I think I see a pattern here and it sucks.
Yeah! This is ridiculous. When I go to a conference I ONLY want to see one side presented. I don't want those I disagree with to have a fair hearing. I have my mind made up already, and I don't need Tim to come along and pretend that the other side is composed of human beings.
Hell, I don't know why he even has these conferences anyway. All he needs to do is hang out a sign that says "If You Ain't Us Then Bugger Off".
Instead, we spend almost $10k on licenses for Microsoft software and third party filtering applications.
Try the back door route. Spend $99 bucks on proprietary BSD/OS with commercial support available from Windriver. That's your proof of concept. While everyone is admiring that, go sneak FreeBSD on all the other systems. "Of course it's BSD" you tell them in all honesty. Once you got FreeBSD in the door, sneaking in Linux is a piece of cake (not to mention redundant).
It's mainly the internal architecture of the chips. Is the memory address you need in cache or will you have to spend 50 clock cycles to fetch it? What if you want to read an address before a previous instruction finished writing it?
The Intel chips are really fast at "hurry up and wait", but not nearly as fast at "hurry up and do something".