The problem is, it may be bad practice for libraries to allocate their own memory for returned data, but it's also bad practice for libraries to have fixed size returned data, particularly when dealing with IO. There's a reason why C programs have so many buffer overflow problems and Y2K-like error conditions.
(From which many sensible people conclude that it's bad practice to write in C.)
One would also have to convince the SCOTUS that a blanket income tax is effectively a head tax. One cannot survive without income; thus, one's very existence is taxable (head tax).
There's a hole in that theory. The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations should be legally considered as people, and there are plenty of corporations that pay no tax.
If you think that's cool, look for a copy of the CD "Symphony for Dot Matrix Printers" by [The User], as previously discussed on Slashdot. It's excellent.
Not quite as good, but still worth buying, is "Xerophonics"
What's that, mom, you want to install an application?
You downloaded the software as a.rpm file for Mandrake Linux from the web, right? OK. Double-click it and follow the instructions. Then click the button in the bottom left of the screen and look through the menus until you find the program.
I downloaded playfair a couple of days ago. Built it fine, but it doesn't work. It claims to be decrypting my m4p files, but the resulting files are corrupt and crash QuickTime and iTunes. (Yes, I had my iPod docked.)
I'd be a bit more upset about the program getting yanked if it actually did something.
In Cocoa, to support localization all you need to do is wrap each natural language string from your program in a single function call.
A supplied tool will then extract the necessary information into strings files, which are stored in the application bundle. Any user can edit the strings file and send the result to the developer to incorporate.
Similarly, the nib file containing the UI elements can be localized by any user who has a copy of interface builder, and sent back to the developer, who can just drop it into the project.
I know this because someone was kind enough to localize one of my programs into Japanese.
Yes. The OS X image is two CDs, plus a developer tools CD. If your machine has a DVD drive, you might get one DVD instead, but it should have a full OS install, applications restore, and the developer tools. Plus, when you get the machine, the developer tools should be on the hard drive in a disk image you can double-click to install.
Their technology currently only works on GSM phones, so here in the US, it'll only block T-Mobile customers.
...or AT&T customers (except those with old analog phones), or Cingular customers (except those with old analog phones), or Pac Bell customers, or Powertel customers, or BellSouth customers.
In case you hadn't noticed, everyone's switching to GSM except Verizon and Sprint.
Look, at that point, TrollTech becomes a big impediment to the use of Linux. *Microsoft* doesn't try to charge every person that wants to release a closed-source Windows application a tax on doing so. TrollTech is trying to do *exactly* that.
On the other hand, Microsoft tries to prevent people from releasing completely free (as in freedom) applications, because the only way to develop Windows applications is to use Microsoft's proprietary libraries, and you're not allowed to distribute them at all, let alone distribute the source code.
All closed-source software is not "leech"ing from the open source community.
Didn't say it was. The leeches are the ones who want something for nothing--they want to take from Linux, but they don't want to give back in source code or money. Qt's licensing doesn't let them use Qt if they're gonna do so. Well, boo hoo.
But if he wanted to include GUI config support using the *standard widget set* that everything else on the platform is using, he is forced to pay the "TrollTech tax"
And as a Porsche-driving commercial game developer, he could afford to pay TrollTech a couple of thousand dollars for their work. He didn't mind paying NeXT for their OS to develop on; hell, he probably spent more than that on soft drinks during development.
GNOME didn't like some of the technical decisions made in the production of Qt, and went with a newer approach...
Pity it turned out to be a dead end. I see more excitement around AmigaOS than around CORBA these days...
There was a group that did a Qt implementation called Harmony, but it isn't feasible for them to keep up with Qt, which is a large API
If you think that, I assume you'll agree with me that Mono is a complete waste of time, and that the GNOME team must be smoking crack if they think it's sensible to build future GNOME apps on.NET...
I fall very firmly into the ESR camp here. If open source really
is better, if it's not a lot of lies about "more efficiency" and "better
security" being pushed -- then *let open source win on its own merits", not by
trying to force non-open source adherents from being able to write
non-open-source software.
I used to think that; dig up the archives of gnu.misc.discuss circa
1991/92 for my rants on the subject. ESR probably believes it because he's a
right-wing libertarian, and most right-wing libertarians mistakenly believe
that a free market is the same thing as an unregulated market.
The problem with licenses like the BSD license is that they set up an
extremely slanted playing field, where commercial software can take what it
likes from the free software world, but the reverse is not true. That's not
fair competition at all, that's leeching. Frankly, there's already enough
illegal leeching going on, without legalizing it.
The Qt licensing doesn't stop anyone from being able to write
non-open-source software. It just means that if they want to use TrollTech's
work to do so, they have to pay money in return. Seems reasonable to me--why
the hell should TrollTech subsidize the development costs for a purely
commercial piece of software that they won't be able to use, learn from, or
distribute?
Now, there is a legitimate gripe against Qt: that it doesn't allow for
closed-source freeware. You either need to go open source, or pay for a Qt
license. However, I don't see that as a big deal myself.
There are a lot of Open Source companies that I think are quite ethical and do a wonderful job out there without threatening elements of the Open Source community.
Smells like troll. When have TrollTech ever threatened the open
source community? They release Qt under the GPL, they let anyone in the open
source community use it, modify it, redistribute it. It's the commercial leech community they threaten.
The GNOME project could have done what so many other GNU projects have
done--made an open-source clone of a "proprietary" library.
In fact, the
hypothetical commercial software companies who want to use Qt but find the price too onerous could easily club together and fund the development of a commercial closed-source clone of Qt. They probably would, if the argument had any validity whatsoever.
At first I was puzzled by this "dilemma," because in the Socialist Upper Midwest about the only way you can mess up getting unemployment checks is to be working a job on the sly.
Speaking of Spaf pontificating loudly, don't forget to read the "Farewell To Usenet" message he posted back in 1993, defining that it was the end of an era for Usenet because he was bored with it.
The only purpose of the LGPL is to allow code to be exploited for non-free software. Why should Linux developers want that? If they did, we wouldn't have the kernel taint system, and the kernel and its drivers would be LGPL.
I can answer that one. In an interview, Groening explained that it was a joke that didn't quite work.
The idea was that Bart had no respect at all for his father, yet he idolized someone who was exactly the same except dressed as a clown. Nothing will make kids respect their parents, yet they'll worship any schmuck on TV.
Obviously over time Krusty developed his own personality, history and so on, and turned into more than an obscure joke.
Given that the preferred way to eject or unmount disks was to choose "Put away" or "Eject" from the File menu, ever since Mac OS 7.0, and the "drag to trash" thing was undocumented and only kept to avoid annoying long-time Mac users, just how out-of-date does that make your Mac knowledge?
I don't see anything unethical about what they are doing.
I make DVD movies for my family. Because not all of them have DVD players, I tape the final product to VHS for some of them. I've also done this for a friend who needed an audition tape for a movie audition.
If I want to copy my DVD which I made myself using footage I filmed myself using my own camcorder, nVidia are going to treat me like a pirate and tell me I can't do it. That's what's unethical.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, it may be bad practice for libraries to allocate their own memory for returned data, but it's also bad practice for libraries to have fixed size returned data, particularly when dealing with IO. There's a reason why C programs have so many buffer overflow problems and Y2K-like error conditions.
(From which many sensible people conclude that it's bad practice to write in C.)
My thought exactly. Make it part of the deal that Real formats have to be playable in QuickTime; i.e. Real has to be more than a write-only format.
There's a hole in that theory. The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations should be legally considered as people, and there are plenty of corporations that pay no tax.
About as many as actually come with an original Windows disc in the first place.
If you think that's cool, look for a copy of the CD "Symphony for Dot Matrix Printers" by [The User], as previously discussed on Slashdot. It's excellent.
Not quite as good, but still worth buying, is "Xerophonics"
Of course, circuit bending is how popular electronic music started. Kraftwerk were building their own instruments from scavenged parts in 1970.
The issue with the X40, for me, is that I don't want Windows.
What's that, mom, you want to install an application?
.rpm file for Mandrake Linux from the web, right? OK. Double-click it and follow the instructions. Then click the button in the bottom left of the screen and look through the menus until you find the program.
You downloaded the software as a
*click*
I downloaded playfair a couple of days ago. Built it fine, but it doesn't work. It claims to be decrypting my m4p files, but the resulting files are corrupt and crash QuickTime and iTunes. (Yes, I had my iPod docked.)
I'd be a bit more upset about the program getting yanked if it actually did something.
They also don't have anything to compare to the ultra-small laptops like the Sony VAIOs with the 10" screens.
In Cocoa, to support localization all you need to do is wrap each natural language string from your program in a single function call.
A supplied tool will then extract the necessary information into strings files, which are stored in the application bundle. Any user can edit the strings file and send the result to the developer to incorporate.
Similarly, the nib file containing the UI elements can be localized by any user who has a copy of interface builder, and sent back to the developer, who can just drop it into the project.
I know this because someone was kind enough to localize one of my programs into Japanese.
Yes. The OS X image is two CDs, plus a developer tools CD. If your machine has a DVD drive, you might get one DVD instead, but it should have a full OS install, applications restore, and the developer tools. Plus, when you get the machine, the developer tools should be on the hard drive in a disk image you can double-click to install.
...or AT&T customers (except those with old analog phones), or Cingular customers (except those with old analog phones), or Pac Bell customers, or Powertel customers, or BellSouth customers.
In case you hadn't noticed, everyone's switching to GSM except Verizon and Sprint.
On the other hand, Microsoft tries to prevent people from releasing completely free (as in freedom) applications, because the only way to develop Windows applications is to use Microsoft's proprietary libraries, and you're not allowed to distribute them at all, let alone distribute the source code.
Didn't say it was. The leeches are the ones who want something for nothing--they want to take from Linux, but they don't want to give back in source code or money. Qt's licensing doesn't let them use Qt if they're gonna do so. Well, boo hoo.
And as a Porsche-driving commercial game developer, he could afford to pay TrollTech a couple of thousand dollars for their work. He didn't mind paying NeXT for their OS to develop on; hell, he probably spent more than that on soft drinks during development.
Pity it turned out to be a dead end. I see more excitement around AmigaOS than around CORBA these days...
If you think that, I assume you'll agree with me that Mono is a complete waste of time, and that the GNOME team must be smoking crack if they think it's sensible to build future GNOME apps on .NET...
No, I'm a resident alien.
Resident aliens are required to pay taxes, but aren't allowed to vote and aren't allowed to collect unemployment or medicare.
I used to think that; dig up the archives of gnu.misc.discuss circa 1991/92 for my rants on the subject. ESR probably believes it because he's a right-wing libertarian, and most right-wing libertarians mistakenly believe that a free market is the same thing as an unregulated market.
The problem with licenses like the BSD license is that they set up an extremely slanted playing field, where commercial software can take what it likes from the free software world, but the reverse is not true. That's not fair competition at all, that's leeching. Frankly, there's already enough illegal leeching going on, without legalizing it.
The Qt licensing doesn't stop anyone from being able to write non-open-source software. It just means that if they want to use TrollTech's work to do so, they have to pay money in return. Seems reasonable to me--why the hell should TrollTech subsidize the development costs for a purely commercial piece of software that they won't be able to use, learn from, or distribute?
Now, there is a legitimate gripe against Qt: that it doesn't allow for closed-source freeware. You either need to go open source, or pay for a Qt license. However, I don't see that as a big deal myself.
Smells like troll. When have TrollTech ever threatened the open source community? They release Qt under the GPL, they let anyone in the open source community use it, modify it, redistribute it. It's the commercial leech community they threaten.
The GNOME project could have done what so many other GNU projects have done--made an open-source clone of a "proprietary" library.
In fact, the hypothetical commercial software companies who want to use Qt but find the price too onerous could easily club together and fund the development of a commercial closed-source clone of Qt. They probably would, if the argument had any validity whatsoever.
It was a rhetorical answer.
Hey, who's dumber, the person who answers the question, or the person who continues to ask it?
Yes, and a guinea pig is not a pig, and a civet cat is not a cat. In English, we don't always call things by biologically accurate terms.
Cut it out, McNealy. Melinda's getting jealous.
Or by not being a US citizen.
No taxation without representation!
Speaking of Spaf pontificating loudly, don't forget to read the "Farewell To Usenet" message he posted back in 1993, defining that it was the end of an era for Usenet because he was bored with it.
The FSF advocates releasing libraries under the GPL, not the LGPL, so the idea that a widget set "should" be released under the LGPL is debateable at best.
The only purpose of the LGPL is to allow code to be exploited for non-free software. Why should Linux developers want that? If they did, we wouldn't have the kernel taint system, and the kernel and its drivers would be LGPL.
X is a bloated pig that shouldn't be necessary to compile the Linux kernel.
And guess what? It isn't.
I can answer that one. In an interview, Groening explained that it was a joke that didn't quite work.
The idea was that Bart had no respect at all for his father, yet he idolized someone who was exactly the same except dressed as a clown. Nothing will make kids respect their parents, yet they'll worship any schmuck on TV.
Obviously over time Krusty developed his own personality, history and so on, and turned into more than an obscure joke.
Given that the preferred way to eject or unmount disks was to choose "Put away" or "Eject" from the File menu, ever since Mac OS 7.0, and the "drag to trash" thing was undocumented and only kept to avoid annoying long-time Mac users, just how out-of-date does that make your Mac knowledge?
I make DVD movies for my family. Because not all of them have DVD players, I tape the final product to VHS for some of them. I've also done this for a friend who needed an audition tape for a movie audition.
If I want to copy my DVD which I made myself using footage I filmed myself using my own camcorder, nVidia are going to treat me like a pirate and tell me I can't do it. That's what's unethical.