I use the Open Source R200 driver, and it works very well. Which is why it pisses me off that XGL is deliberately ignoring it. While the R200 3D isn't as good as the proprietary 3D, it's still very usable. It's not up to hardcore gaming, but it's more than adequate for XGL.
Besides, as a FreeBSD user, Open Source is the only way I'm going to get native drivers. Even if the proprietary ATI drivers get ported (just like the Nvidia one was), they'll be big pieces of kernel panicking crap (just like the Nvidia one is).
You mean like the giant man eating penises with teeth? The endless cascade of falling brontosaurs I could handle. Jack Black's horrible acting I could handle. But Andy Serkis getting eaten by big dicks with teeth was too much.
Except that the regulations themselves are barriers to entry. The drug industry is a case in point. There are relatively few regulations on food supplements, and so we see dozens and dozens of supplement companies. But heavily regulated harmaceutical companies are few and far between. Yet there is little difference between the two industries except for the regulations (and the patents). Eliminate the regulations (and the patents), while keeping in force a robust tort system, and you'll see drug prices plummet.
p.s. Yes, a unregulated pharmaceutical industry means more dangerous and risky medicines. But the current regulations are such that they would not approve aspirin, penicillin or acetominephin, if they were being developed today.
Natural monopoly, what natural monopoly? Surely you don't mean the cable companies, where only one is allowed to exist per municipality, per city council edict. The modern telcos aren't quite as bad, but they're still direct descendents of government created monopoly. These guys are not natural.
But even though they are not natural monopolies, the market still seems to work. I myself have a choice between three monopolies and two non-monopolies for my internet service. My friend who lives in the rural boondocks has a choice between two monopolies for his service.
You are correct. Johnson, Carter and Clinton also have dirty hands.
The phrase "drink the Kool-Aid" should have been a clue, but since the moonbats have taken over, it's hard to tell the difference beween mainstream Democratic thought and naked sarcasm.
I was in the middle of learning Ruby when my management said I had to learn C# instead. I got publicly chewed out by my VP in front of the entire company because I didn't know C#. Yet the product I work on is an realtime embedded Unix system.
I understand your point, but it's all still a crapshoot. There's no way you can have in-depth knowledge of a language without focusing on the language, but you can't focus on a language if you're trying to juggle a dozen different languages hoping that one of them might be the next big thing. Do I really need to learn ALL languages? Can I take the time to master Ruby, or should I just skim over it to save time to skim over all the other languages?
I am slowly coming to grips with this reality. I need to make the decision on whether I want to continue striving for mastery, or give up and join the younglings in their culture of mediocrity.
That post was a rant, a sarcasm, a fiction, a collection of invented quotes. It was made up. It's obvious that it was made up. *YOU* know it was made up. Yet you present it as factual quotes.
People wonder why Bush and Co. can get away with the stuff they do. But it's easy to get away with stuff when your opponents are habitual and compulsive liars. If you don't want Bush to get away with this crap, THEN STOP LYING ABOUT IT!
I would test aircraft designed for professional pilots by testing them against professional pilots.
I firmly and vociferously oppose the idea of the "trainee" desktop. If you don't know how to ride a bicycle, get training wheels, and stop demanding that everyone else ride a tricycle!
new company with one director has a 25% chance of success. A company started by 2 people, suddenly had a 65-70% chance of success. 3 people raise this to about 80-90%, again I forget the exact numbers of last year in the UK, but I'm sure you'll get the picture.
So you're saying if I walk into a bank with two other partners, the bank will think, "Wow, 80-90% chance of success! Give them the loan now!"
Sorry, but I have to dispute your claim that nearly all UK startups with 3 directors are successful. That's an absurd statistic, which leads me to believe that you misread/misinterpreted them. Also, you're confusing correlation with cause, as the statistic does not indicate that the number of directors actually causes the succees. For an example of this, consider the statistic that people who throw up are 80-90% more likely to have the stomach flu than people who don't throw up. Does this mean that throwing up causes the flu?
Bad analogy. You would be truly stupid to test aircraft control usability by testing against non-pilots. While you may use a trainer for your testing, you don't want to test with people who can't fly.
That is precisely the WRONG approach! It's why we need REAL usability experts to study this problem, instead of a bunch of pundits who read some website and think themselves experts.
The right approach is to know who you users are, and get a sample of THEM to test. "People who are not experts" is not the target market! They are not your users!
Studying bicycle usability by only testing against people who do not know how to ride bicycles is stupid. Studying the usability of a manual transmission by only testing against people who do not know how to drive a stick is stupid. Studying GNOME and KDE usability by only testing with Windows and Mac users is stupid.
Most business fail. I can't remember the statistics, but it was miniscule amount that manage to survive past five years. I'm not talking Linux support businesses, I'm talking ALL businesses (in the US). The holy grail of "Viable Business Model of Open Source" is a myth, because we still haven't found one for any other industry.
It's like dieting. No matter what the diet fads are, the only way to lose weight is to eat less and exercise. Similarly, no matter what the Open Source pundits tell you, the only way to keep a business running is to sell a product or service other people are will to pay for.
The Open Source fairy going to come along and give you a magical business plan. So start eating less, exercising more, and selling a product people want.
And while they're at it, they should get rid of their culture of corrupt authoritarian governments. It's hard to own private property when you have to be the correct tribal ethnicity to do so. It's hard to accumulate capital when genocide is being waged against you.
Africa has a lot of problems, but being treated as children by white Europeans is not the solution.
The food didn't work because it was stolen. The aid didn't work because it was stolen. The laptops may or may not work, it depends on whether they will be stolen. Most of Africa's problems can be traced to corrupt authoritarian governments.
But if it's "SO simple to implement in software", why can't even Microsoft get it right in Internet Explorer? Maybe it's not quite "SO simple" as you think. If it's "SO simple", why don't you fix it?
I may not recognize kerning, and for that intolerable lapse of geekinesss I apologize. But I still dispute your implication that KDE/GNOME/FreeSofware is an unaesthetic pile of crap. My Konqueror/FreeBSD rendering is significantly better than that Internet Explorer crap I have to use at work.
I shouldn't have to specify !important to get the web developer to stop messing around with my fonts.
It's like saying it's my fault he didn't read my email because I didn't set the priority high enough. It's like saying it's my fault he didn't read my proposal because I didn't make it bold, red and blinking. I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SET THE PRIORITY! I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO USE THE "IMPORTANT" RULE! I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BEAT PEOPLE OVER THE HEAD TO GET THEM TO HONOR MY STYLESHEET!
Can you imagine a small note on the ibm.com frontpage telling you to switch default fonts on your browser
I wouldn't but something like this past them. After all, every other webpage in the world is telling me what my monitor resolution needs to be or what browser I have to use or what new spyware-laden plugin I have to download. Why should fonts be any different.
Do web designers buy their arrogance in fifty gallon drums? It sure seems like they do! The web would be much richer if web designers stopped treating HTML/CSS like WYSIWYG media.
It's my browser and I can specify whatever freaking font I want to. If I want Bitstream Vera Sans instead of UngawaOblique Black, it's none of their business! Those guys need to get off of their silly obsession with controlling how their pages look on my system. Those "three fonts" are there for a reason. It's not my fault that professional web designers never bothered to learn how to properly specify a font.
Slashdot Mirror
I use the Open Source R200 driver, and it works very well. Which is why it pisses me off that XGL is deliberately ignoring it. While the R200 3D isn't as good as the proprietary 3D, it's still very usable. It's not up to hardcore gaming, but it's more than adequate for XGL.
Besides, as a FreeBSD user, Open Source is the only way I'm going to get native drivers. Even if the proprietary ATI drivers get ported (just like the Nvidia one was), they'll be big pieces of kernel panicking crap (just like the Nvidia one is).
I'm already pledged to do that.
though King Kong may be a little extreme...
You mean like the giant man eating penises with teeth? The endless cascade of falling brontosaurs I could handle. Jack Black's horrible acting I could handle. But Andy Serkis getting eaten by big dicks with teeth was too much.
Except that the regulations themselves are barriers to entry. The drug industry is a case in point. There are relatively few regulations on food supplements, and so we see dozens and dozens of supplement companies. But heavily regulated harmaceutical companies are few and far between. Yet there is little difference between the two industries except for the regulations (and the patents). Eliminate the regulations (and the patents), while keeping in force a robust tort system, and you'll see drug prices plummet.
p.s. Yes, a unregulated pharmaceutical industry means more dangerous and risky medicines. But the current regulations are such that they would not approve aspirin, penicillin or acetominephin, if they were being developed today.
Natural monopoly, what natural monopoly? Surely you don't mean the cable companies, where only one is allowed to exist per municipality, per city council edict. The modern telcos aren't quite as bad, but they're still direct descendents of government created monopoly. These guys are not natural.
But even though they are not natural monopolies, the market still seems to work. I myself have a choice between three monopolies and two non-monopolies for my internet service. My friend who lives in the rural boondocks has a choice between two monopolies for his service.
You are correct. Johnson, Carter and Clinton also have dirty hands.
The phrase "drink the Kool-Aid" should have been a clue, but since the moonbats have taken over, it's hard to tell the difference beween mainstream Democratic thought and naked sarcasm.
I was in the middle of learning Ruby when my management said I had to learn C# instead. I got publicly chewed out by my VP in front of the entire company because I didn't know C#. Yet the product I work on is an realtime embedded Unix system.
I understand your point, but it's all still a crapshoot. There's no way you can have in-depth knowledge of a language without focusing on the language, but you can't focus on a language if you're trying to juggle a dozen different languages hoping that one of them might be the next big thing. Do I really need to learn ALL languages? Can I take the time to master Ruby, or should I just skim over it to save time to skim over all the other languages?
I am slowly coming to grips with this reality. I need to make the decision on whether I want to continue striving for mastery, or give up and join the younglings in their culture of mediocrity.
But no Democrat has EVER done this. That's the whole point. If only we didn't have Bush in office, this NEVER would have happened!
Wake up and smell the Kool-Aid...
That post was a rant, a sarcasm, a fiction, a collection of invented quotes. It was made up. It's obvious that it was made up. *YOU* know it was made up. Yet you present it as factual quotes.
People wonder why Bush and Co. can get away with the stuff they do. But it's easy to get away with stuff when your opponents are habitual and compulsive liars. If you don't want Bush to get away with this crap, THEN STOP LYING ABOUT IT!
No. Stop being silly.
I would test aircraft designed for professional pilots by testing them against professional pilots.
I firmly and vociferously oppose the idea of the "trainee" desktop. If you don't know how to ride a bicycle, get training wheels, and stop demanding that everyone else ride a tricycle!
Maybe it's a Linux thing, because my FreeBSD/KDE system looks fine with Arial, Trebuchet, Verdana, etc.
new company with one director has a 25% chance of success. A company started by 2 people, suddenly had a 65-70% chance of success. 3 people raise this to about 80-90%, again I forget the exact numbers of last year in the UK, but I'm sure you'll get the picture.
So you're saying if I walk into a bank with two other partners, the bank will think, "Wow, 80-90% chance of success! Give them the loan now!"
Sorry, but I have to dispute your claim that nearly all UK startups with 3 directors are successful. That's an absurd statistic, which leads me to believe that you misread/misinterpreted them. Also, you're confusing correlation with cause, as the statistic does not indicate that the number of directors actually causes the succees. For an example of this, consider the statistic that people who throw up are 80-90% more likely to have the stomach flu than people who don't throw up. Does this mean that throwing up causes the flu?
Bad analogy. You would be truly stupid to test aircraft control usability by testing against non-pilots. While you may use a trainer for your testing, you don't want to test with people who can't fly.
That is precisely the WRONG approach! It's why we need REAL usability experts to study this problem, instead of a bunch of pundits who read some website and think themselves experts.
The right approach is to know who you users are, and get a sample of THEM to test. "People who are not experts" is not the target market! They are not your users!
Studying bicycle usability by only testing against people who do not know how to ride bicycles is stupid. Studying the usability of a manual transmission by only testing against people who do not know how to drive a stick is stupid. Studying GNOME and KDE usability by only testing with Windows and Mac users is stupid.
Most business fail. I can't remember the statistics, but it was miniscule amount that manage to survive past five years. I'm not talking Linux support businesses, I'm talking ALL businesses (in the US). The holy grail of "Viable Business Model of Open Source" is a myth, because we still haven't found one for any other industry.
It's like dieting. No matter what the diet fads are, the only way to lose weight is to eat less and exercise. Similarly, no matter what the Open Source pundits tell you, the only way to keep a business running is to sell a product or service other people are will to pay for.
The Open Source fairy going to come along and give you a magical business plan. So start eating less, exercising more, and selling a product people want.
And while they're at it, they should get rid of their culture of corrupt authoritarian governments. It's hard to own private property when you have to be the correct tribal ethnicity to do so. It's hard to accumulate capital when genocide is being waged against you.
Africa has a lot of problems, but being treated as children by white Europeans is not the solution.
The food didn't work because it was stolen. The aid didn't work because it was stolen. The laptops may or may not work, it depends on whether they will be stolen. Most of Africa's problems can be traced to corrupt authoritarian governments.
Next you've got a bunch of diesels...
Comparing petrol to diesel is not valid.
But I guess it's just easier to sit in your armchair and criticize real engineering...
Who's criticizing the engineering? Go read the post again. It's criticizing the hyperbolic story summary that claimed there were no downsides.
But if it's "SO simple to implement in software", why can't even Microsoft get it right in Internet Explorer? Maybe it's not quite "SO simple" as you think. If it's "SO simple", why don't you fix it?
I may not recognize kerning, and for that intolerable lapse of geekinesss I apologize. But I still dispute your implication that KDE/GNOME/FreeSofware is an unaesthetic pile of crap. My Konqueror/FreeBSD rendering is significantly better than that Internet Explorer crap I have to use at work.
I shouldn't have to specify !important to get the web developer to stop messing around with my fonts.
It's like saying it's my fault he didn't read my email because I didn't set the priority high enough. It's like saying it's my fault he didn't read my proposal because I didn't make it bold, red and blinking. I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SET THE PRIORITY! I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO USE THE "IMPORTANT" RULE! I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BEAT PEOPLE OVER THE HEAD TO GET THEM TO HONOR MY STYLESHEET!
Still, a typical KDE/GNOME/whatever editor/browser is pretty likely to have no kerning at all.
But yet they do! Methinks I smell a large pile of bullshit around here...
HTML/CSS is not a WYSIWYG medium. Therein lies your problem. Start using it like it was meant to be used, and you'll have fewer headaches.
Can you imagine a small note on the ibm.com frontpage telling you to switch default fonts on your browser
I wouldn't but something like this past them. After all, every other webpage in the world is telling me what my monitor resolution needs to be or what browser I have to use or what new spyware-laden plugin I have to download. Why should fonts be any different.
Do web designers buy their arrogance in fifty gallon drums? It sure seems like they do! The web would be much richer if web designers stopped treating HTML/CSS like WYSIWYG media.
It's my browser and I can specify whatever freaking font I want to. If I want Bitstream Vera Sans instead of UngawaOblique Black, it's none of their business! Those guys need to get off of their silly obsession with controlling how their pages look on my system. Those "three fonts" are there for a reason. It's not my fault that professional web designers never bothered to learn how to properly specify a font.