Re:Instant Messenger is a gross mis-representation
on
Programming Jabber
·
· Score: 2
Jabber is a PROTOCOL, not an instant messenger
I've often wondered if Jabber should be renamed to something else to avoid the confusion. Currently when most people hear the term, they probably think of JIM (a client) or Jabber Inc. (a company that makes a server).
In a recent JSF conference meeting, someone brought up the idea of changing the protocol name to XMPP (eXtensible Messaging and Presence Protocol). I doubt it would ever happen, but something to think about.
By signing up with MSN and Yahoo, I've opened up channels to me from people who only use MSN or Yahoo. Believe it or not, there are people out there like that.
I believe it. I guess it comes down to a matter of tradeoff. Is it worth sacrificing possible communication with Yahoo users, in effort to stay away from Yahoo? When I decided to make the move to "just Jabber" a few months ago, I had to sacrifice over half of my contact list, most of which were AIM or ICQ users. I don't advise that people do this unless they are Jabber fanatics (of which I fit the bill:) ). Since then, my list has steadily grown in size, which is good to know.
I'd gladly campaign for moving my department over to Jabber, so we could have an internal server for it
I think this is Jabber's key to victory. Businesses who take IM seriously will want to keep all communication behind the firewall.
lacking AIM/ICQ support, I'd have a harder time selling it to my other coworkers who aren't fired up about it. (Who want to talk to their wife/aunt/father/whatever who are single IM client users). Jabber either needs to maintain that compatbility to take off, not just to "ease migration."
I don't agree. In fact, I think the transports have caused Jabber more trouble than anything else. First, they completely cloud the issue. People generally don't come to Jabber because it is the most advanced IM network. No, they come because of transports. Then, they proceed to enjoy the AOL IP ban placed on the popular servers, and they come to the conclusion that Jabber sucks. Ask anyone why they don't like Jabber, and they will say something about ICQ. I'm serious.
If Jabber was instead promoted as a "next gen" IM system _period_, then everyone would know what they are getting themselves into. This whole interoperation with AIM would not even be in the discussion. I think this would have also caused a lot more OSS people to try Jabber. Instead, most of them write it off as a Gaim-clone.
Check out this very interesting mail from JDEV on the subject of Jabber Advocacy. Be sure to read the quoted portions too, from Julian and Ashvil. Those are the best parts.
So the question remains: would the average single-IM client user want to start using Jabber also? Probably not. I think in order to win we're going to have to work from the inside out. I say we get all the business and OSS people using it first, then go from there.
I think you are looking at this all wrong. Jabber was never meant to be a multi-IM solution. While the transport modules that allow you to connect to other services like AIM can be cool, they are for easing Jabber migration only. Do not come to Jabber with the expectation of perfect AIM compatibility for life. And definitely stay away from proprietary IM systems that you were not previously using (in your case, MSN and Yahoo). No need to make yourself more dependent them.
The reason to use Jabber is to promote it as a standard. The sooner we all switch to Jabber, the sooner the IM war will be over. Then things like transports and Trillian won't even matter.
My recommendation for you is to use Trillian for all of your proprietary IM needs (but please, please, don't use extra services you weren't already using), and keep a Jabber client around for Jabber-only communication.
-Justin
Re:Differences between Gnome and KDE?
on
KDE 3.0 is Out
·
· Score: 2
My question is, what does KDE offer that Gnome doesn't? Why should I make the effort to switch?
From a user perspective, it boils down mostly to applications, looks (available themes) and handling (gtk vs. Qt). Both are highly configurable systems that are trying to achieve the same goal, just taking different roads.
As a developer (not a KDE developer though), I am very impressed with KDE's underlying architecture. I have only heard good things (never bad) about KDE application programming, and the joys of working with DCOP and KParts. In contrast, I haven't really ever heard much of anything positive about GNOME development. If anything, I hear negative (maybe I converse with the wrong crowd).
Anyhow, because of the good KDE architecture, the core developers are able to get stuff done, and get stuff done quickly. Konqueror, Kmail, Koffice, etc. Only a handful of people work on these projects, but they keep getting better and better at a very fast rate.
So that's why I choose KDE.
Of course, you can always run GNOME apps under KDE, or KDE apps under GNOME, or KDE and GNOME apps under BlackBox, so it doesn't really matter too much what environment you spend your time in. The only real decision comes from developers, when they must decide whether their app should be for KDE or GNOME.
They look the same, feel the same, and their goal is the same. GNOME and KDE are both trying to be good desktop environments.
A desktop environment (or "DE") is more than just a window manager, it is the integration of applications. Before DE's, most X applications had their own individual look and feel, did not interact very much with other applications, and there was very little code sharing. KDE sought to solve this, by building a group of libraries (now known as kdelibs) for all desktop apps to utilize. Before KDE, there was CDE, but it was not nearly as ambitious. KDE was to be the ultimate unix desktop. GNOME came around about a year later, as a result of the GNU folks unhappy with the Qt license (KDE uses the C++ Qt library as a foundation). Now Qt is GPL, but back then it was not. This leaves us today with two desktop environment efforts.
From a user (or UI) standpoint, there is very little difference between the two. You'll find that most of the differences are internal. GNOME uses CORBA and Bonobo to integrate applications, while KDE uses DCOP and KParts.
In my opinion (note: I am a KDE user), KDE is more stable and complete because it is based around a featureful and commercialized foundation toolkit: Qt. This means that the KDE team can focus soley on the DE, while a dedicated company, Trolltech, works on their foundation. GNOME, on the other hand, uses (and maintains) gtk as a foundation toolkit, an offshoot of the GIMP. This is a tremendous effort on the part of the GNOME folks, because they have to develop both the foundation toolkit _and_ DE. gtk1 is not on par with Qt, and I don't think gtk2 will be either (Qt just simply has way too many years over gtk), but perhaps someday...
Anyhow, I say just choose the one you feel most comfortable with. They both have a large selection of applications, and excited userbases. I don't think one will ever win over the other, but maybe they will slowly merge together in some respects. I use KDE because I like the look/feel/behavior, as well as the programming style and organization. Also, DCOP from the commandline is just too cool.
world has yet to witness sustainable business model for commercial companies developing GPLed products
Take a look at Trolltech. Their Qt/X11 product is GPL, but they'll sell you a non-GPL version for around $2K. This is the best business model around GPL I've seen yet.
Re:Can'tt beat the original
on
Bang The Machine
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
And who remembers the huge debate over which was better, SF2 or Mortal Kombat.
SF2 was definitely a better game in my opinion. The characters felt stiff in MK, and they all played the same (and I won't even go into the number of palette-swapped Sub-Zeros). Here's a strange fact: I can remember that there was a developer called "Ed Boon" that worked on MK, but I can't name a single developer of SF. Why can I remember Ed Boon? Midway always had a thing about putting their developers in their games somehow (remember "toasty" ?). Note to future game developers: if you want to make yourself famous, put a character in the game whose name is yours spelled backwards. Then ensure that gaming mags make a point of it. You will be remembered for all time, no matter how bad your game is.
Capcom has been getting diminishing returns off of newer 2d fighters like capcom vs. marvel. I think we've finally reached the end of an era.
Marvel vs. Capcom was pretty good. Each "Vs" game, as they are called, has been progressively better than the last (Not counting Capcom Vs. SNK series though, which has a completely different play style). Marvel vs. Capcom 2 is insane. No other game can top 56 characters, with each player choosing 3, and I think even Capcom would have a hard time topping itself here and remaining playable. Let's see how long the CvS series lasts.
Check out Shoryuken.com, for the latest information (tournaments/ranking) on the SF scene, as well as combo videos and recorded tournament matches.
Currently, the most popular games are Capcom vs SNK 2 and Marvel vs Capcom 2. I am a big fan of the latter, and I often play at Southern Hills Golfland. The players there are incredible, and on the weekends the place is completely packed (15 minute wait for a game sometimes). I played in the MvC2 tourney last month, but lost first round.:)
What else do cell vendors need to do to "get their shit together"?
Erm, standardization?
This Japan stuff might be nifty-cool, but to me it seems more like YAP (Yet Another Protocol), something we are not lacking at all here in the USA. Honestly, I'd rather see the USA go all-GSM, and upgrade to the latest enhancements like HSCSD and GPRS. Fortunately AT&T has moved in this direction, as I have heard rumors of shared GSM towers here in California (finally some GSM competition for you Cingular!), and apparently they did a small GPRS deployment in Washington. Ironically, Cingular (a current GSM provider), has not shown any sign of advancing. But then what do you expect from a company that barely even promotes their data services?
Too bad "3G" isn't actually a protocol, but rather a nice buzzword to represent the next step that all of the currently incompatible networks (GSM, Sprint, Verizon, Japan, Analogue, AT&T) take.
It actually isn't quite so hypocritical as you might think. Violating the GPL is almost like the reverse of violating traditional copyright. Trade copyrighted music, and you are doing something illegal. Refuse to trade GPL code, and you are doing something illegal. It is the lack of "sharing" source code that is a GPL violation. It is easy to see then, how someone could share copyrighted music yet still obey the GPL (sharing code). Sharing is the name of the game, and these people are strong believers.
Of course, that is no excuse to violate copyright law. And when someone does violate the GPL, it gives these people less room to speak (law-wise).
It all depends on how much money you need, if you need more than $4 a month you better keep your day job.
Very true. However, I wrote under the assumption that you could just get another job, not that you would run for the hills and code like a hermit. Even a lesser paying job would suffice.. I guess it would depend on what quality of living you are shooting for. Even my friend who works at a gas station makes enough to pay rent. Just because my night job is free software does not mean my day job has to be programming. Hmm, I wonder how many people actually hold non-software jobs, but do free software in their spare time? Sounds like fun.
I've thought about just quitting my day job and working at the nearby Chili's restaurant. It would be a lot more social than the boring office, and I need to get out anyway. Not to mention there are lots of cute girls there too.:) I could handle it, I think.
Wow, that's gotta suck. I would challenge that or work someplace else. What you do at home has nothing to do with your day job. But yeah, you'll need to keep your "useful routines" separate.
Where I work, it is very clear about what is mine and what is the company's. In the case of "useful code" that I have already written in my spare time, I will actually re-sell (license) the code to the company I work for. This gets me some extra money and keeps me from having to code certain things more than once.
This only really applies to free software developers, but say you have a day job doing one thing, and by night (or weekend or what have you) you put time into a free programming project. Since you actually work two jobs, you could say either one is your "true" job.
It doesn't matter what your day job is. You could be a waiter or a pr0nstar or a programmer in a cubicle. If you enjoy your night job more, then consider that your true job. After all, your "job" is nothing more than simply doing your part in society. If you consider free software to be more of a calling than your day job, then so be it. It is even possible that your free software project is better for society. The downside is that it may not be the job that is bringing in the money, but it is your job nonetheless. Think about it this way: if you had to choose between losing your job or losing your free software project (the latter is sort of impossible, so lets just say that it disappears in a puff of smoke), which would you choose? Which is more important?
So before you tell your friend that your job sucks, or tell your uncle at the family party that you work at a dead-end computer job, why don't you say you work on free software instead? It's a much more enjoyable job, isn't it? It also reflects what you truly want to do, and because of the impact it makes, is a much better candidate to represent your place in society.
Anyway, I got into this discussion with one of my friends the other day. I am a free software developer, but I have not finished college, and my day job sucks. He said something along the lines of: "What do your parents think about this? Are they angry you have not aspired to more? What greater plans do you have?" And to that I answer: "Greater plans? I'm doing exactly what I want to do _right now_. How can it get any better? Maybe I can improve my day job, but my night job is where the fun is."
Can someone please explain to me why the "Slashdot Consensus" seems to be in disagreement of things like this?
Why is having enforcable ratings on video games a bad thing? After all, we have movie ratings and no one is complaining.
So a salesman will now stop some 10 year old kid from buying Mortal Kombat 7, with ultra-bloody effects. Isn't this better than being stuck with a one-version-fits-all where the blood is replaced by sweat?
Without ratings, all movies would suck. They would have to stay within certain limits. This bill is about enforcing who is able to purchase a game based on content (ie, rating). Such enforcement only encourages developers to be as artistic as possible, and not worry about angry parents. The ratings are here to protect not only children, but developers.
Isn't.Net different though, in that there are system libraries to worry about? I don't claim to be an expert here, I'm just going from what I have read and heard, but let's look at some crossplatform examples:
Java - you have a VM and a standard API that are with you wherever you go. Your API is limited, but you run anywhere. Life in a box!
Qt - you have an API that operates on all supported platforms. Each platform requires a separate build. The upside is you can link with native system libraries just like any normal program, and do specifics with win32, X, Carbon, etc.
.Net - a hybrid of the above. Your foundation is a VM, but you rely on libraries that exist outside of the box. Because the necessary libs may not be present on all platforms, your program may not be available everywhere (just like Qt).
.Net sounds like a nice solution to binary-compatibility though.
Native L&F, no. Qt implements its own widgets across all supported platforms.
While Qt does implement its own widgets, it does still have the native look and feel. I think the Mac is the only platform where there is such a thing as true native widgets.
On Windows, the concept of "native widgets" really only applies to the look and feel. After all, there are many products/compilers to make Windows programs, and they are not all based on MFC (for instance, Borland does their own widgets AFAIK). I believe this is because use of MFC requires licensing. This means Qt is nothing strange on Windows.
And X11 has no concept of native widgets or native look either, but we won't get into that:)
Despite how much you may wish AOL should play nice here, they aren't. Some posts mentioned how programmers are wasting their time reverse-engineering when they could be adding features to an AIM client. How about just not making an AIM client?
Jabber is an open instant messaging system. You may have heard of "Jabber Transports" which allow you to talk to other services. Please remember that these are only extension to the system, with the same possible flaws as Trillian. More importantly, Jabber is an IM system of its own, and works just fine. Our standard IM system is here, guys, and no one can stop us from using it. Not only is development of clients and other software encouraged, but you are given full protocol documentation. This is what co-operation is about. Making an IM client should not be a war. So quit wasting your time with these closed systems, and come join us!
Just stop using AIM, and tell your friends too also. I expected more Jabber related posts on this board, considering all the open source advocation that goes on here. If you were confused and thought that Jabber was "just another multi-IM" and nothing more, well... you have now been learned.
Hmm? Jabber works perfectly. Oh wait, maybe you meant the "Jabber Transports", which allow connectivity to other instant messaging services. Those are a gamble, but then so is Trillian as you have just now learned.
Jabber itself (you know, the open IM system) will never suffer from these problems. There is no company to pull the rug out from under us. If the Trillian team really cared about its users, they would include Jabber support. Then these people would at least have an "out." And no, "ICQ", "MSN", and "Yahoo!" are not "outs." These companies could pull the same tricks as AOL.
I agree that Slashdot sometimes reports on certain software that lots of people consider important, even point releases of things like KOffice.
However, I don't remember ever seeing news posts about Linux 2.3, the previous unstable branch (I checked the archive and apparently there were just two). So why are things different now with 2.5?
If all you want to do is make open code and just give it away to society, then sure, use a BSD-style license. If you don't mind who uses it, you're sort of just throwing it out in the road, use a BSD-style license. Some people like licenses like these, and I can see myself using this license depending on the project.
On the other hand, the GPL is about keeping things open. The classic problem with societies is that there is always someone who breaks the rules, or who won't play fair with the rest of us. The GPL exists to solve this problem and protect developers. This way, I can create code that is open, and if anyone wants to use it then their code must remain open also. Is that really too much to ask? I made something that you may use for free, and now I want you to do the same for me. That's the point of the GPL. It's to force people to play fair. Otherwise, you'll have good honest people making all this free code, and then other people/companies will just take it without giving back.
It sounds to me like you just want to take.
Please, don't whine about licenses. It is up to the developer to choose. Don't complain when something is GPL, geez. Be glad you have the code.
How is this post going to induce a flame-fest? What is there even to discuss? Are we going to get a posting war between legitimate users and software-pirates? Give me a break.
And now for my equally "flamable" (but will cause no flame) comment:
In the Linux world we have the GPL, and we expect users and developers to respect it. We should also respect other software licenses as well. So please, if you are a Linux user, don't pirate software! It makes us look bad. If you don't like a software's license, then don't use it. You would complain if Microsoft were to steal GPL code, after all.
With "Ask", you can use the popup windows you want, and avoid the ones you don't. Some websites might have a non-ad use for popups, and if you just have popups disabled then you might think the site doesn't work properly.
Dealing with a prompt rather than a new browser window is much easier. The prompt comes up faster and uses considerably less resources than loading a new browser window. And if you stumble upon a porn site that likes to load zillions of popups, it is much easier to just say "No" to a prompt then to go chasing around all these browser windows.
True, so he should look at his OS distribution's hardware compatibility list. I can't speak for FreeBSD, but SuSE, for instance, has a link to their hardware compatibility database on their front page.
Oddly, this is backwards from the Windows way. Instead of seeing what is supported on the hardware package, you check for support from the OS vendor. This also makes me wonder what the purpose of even listing "Windows" on a hardware package is. After all, since no one knows what a Linux or a BSD is, it obviously works on Windows. Maybe it is sort of like labelling water as fat-free.
Slashdot Mirror
Jabber is a PROTOCOL, not an instant messenger
I've often wondered if Jabber should be renamed to something else to avoid the confusion. Currently when most people hear the term, they probably think of JIM (a client) or Jabber Inc. (a company that makes a server).
In a recent JSF conference meeting, someone brought up the idea of changing the protocol name to XMPP (eXtensible Messaging and Presence Protocol). I doubt it would ever happen, but something to think about.
By signing up with MSN and Yahoo, I've opened up channels to me from people who only use MSN or Yahoo. Believe it or not, there are people out there like that.
:) ). Since then, my list has steadily grown in size, which is good to know.
I believe it. I guess it comes down to a matter of tradeoff. Is it worth sacrificing possible communication with Yahoo users, in effort to stay away from Yahoo? When I decided to make the move to "just Jabber" a few months ago, I had to sacrifice over half of my contact list, most of which were AIM or ICQ users. I don't advise that people do this unless they are Jabber fanatics (of which I fit the bill
I'd gladly campaign for moving my department over to Jabber, so we could have an internal server for it
I think this is Jabber's key to victory. Businesses who take IM seriously will want to keep all communication behind the firewall.
lacking AIM/ICQ support, I'd have a harder time selling it to my other coworkers who aren't fired up about it. (Who want to talk to their wife/aunt/father/whatever who are single IM client users). Jabber either needs to maintain that compatbility to take off, not just to "ease migration."
I don't agree. In fact, I think the transports have caused Jabber more trouble than anything else. First, they completely cloud the issue. People generally don't come to Jabber because it is the most advanced IM network. No, they come because of transports. Then, they proceed to enjoy the AOL IP ban placed on the popular servers, and they come to the conclusion that Jabber sucks. Ask anyone why they don't like Jabber, and they will say something about ICQ. I'm serious.
If Jabber was instead promoted as a "next gen" IM system _period_, then everyone would know what they are getting themselves into. This whole interoperation with AIM would not even be in the discussion. I think this would have also caused a lot more OSS people to try Jabber. Instead, most of them write it off as a Gaim-clone.
Check out this very interesting mail from JDEV on the subject of Jabber Advocacy. Be sure to read the quoted portions too, from Julian and Ashvil. Those are the best parts.
So the question remains: would the average single-IM client user want to start using Jabber also? Probably not. I think in order to win we're going to have to work from the inside out. I say we get all the business and OSS people using it first, then go from there.
-Justin
Sabby,
I think you are looking at this all wrong. Jabber was never meant to be a multi-IM solution. While the transport modules that allow you to connect to other services like AIM can be cool, they are for easing Jabber migration only. Do not come to Jabber with the expectation of perfect AIM compatibility for life. And definitely stay away from proprietary IM systems that you were not previously using (in your case, MSN and Yahoo). No need to make yourself more dependent them.
The reason to use Jabber is to promote it as a standard. The sooner we all switch to Jabber, the sooner the IM war will be over. Then things like transports and Trillian won't even matter.
My recommendation for you is to use Trillian for all of your proprietary IM needs (but please, please, don't use extra services you weren't already using), and keep a Jabber client around for Jabber-only communication.
-Justin
My question is, what does KDE offer that Gnome doesn't? Why should I make the effort to switch?
From a user perspective, it boils down mostly to applications, looks (available themes) and handling (gtk vs. Qt). Both are highly configurable systems that are trying to achieve the same goal, just taking different roads.
As a developer (not a KDE developer though), I am very impressed with KDE's underlying architecture. I have only heard good things (never bad) about KDE application programming, and the joys of working with DCOP and KParts. In contrast, I haven't really ever heard much of anything positive about GNOME development. If anything, I hear negative (maybe I converse with the wrong crowd).
Anyhow, because of the good KDE architecture, the core developers are able to get stuff done, and get stuff done quickly. Konqueror, Kmail, Koffice, etc. Only a handful of people work on these projects, but they keep getting better and better at a very fast rate.
So that's why I choose KDE.
Of course, you can always run GNOME apps under KDE, or KDE apps under GNOME, or KDE and GNOME apps under BlackBox, so it doesn't really matter too much what environment you spend your time in. The only real decision comes from developers, when they must decide whether their app should be for KDE or GNOME.
Yeah, but they didn't make any of it.
They look the same, feel the same, and their goal is the same. GNOME and KDE are both trying to be good desktop environments.
A desktop environment (or "DE") is more than just a window manager, it is the integration of applications. Before DE's, most X applications had their own individual look and feel, did not interact very much with other applications, and there was very little code sharing. KDE sought to solve this, by building a group of libraries (now known as kdelibs) for all desktop apps to utilize. Before KDE, there was CDE, but it was not nearly as ambitious. KDE was to be the ultimate unix desktop. GNOME came around about a year later, as a result of the GNU folks unhappy with the Qt license (KDE uses the C++ Qt library as a foundation). Now Qt is GPL, but back then it was not. This leaves us today with two desktop environment efforts.
From a user (or UI) standpoint, there is very little difference between the two. You'll find that most of the differences are internal. GNOME uses CORBA and Bonobo to integrate applications, while KDE uses DCOP and KParts.
In my opinion (note: I am a KDE user), KDE is more stable and complete because it is based around a featureful and commercialized foundation toolkit: Qt. This means that the KDE team can focus soley on the DE, while a dedicated company, Trolltech, works on their foundation. GNOME, on the other hand, uses (and maintains) gtk as a foundation toolkit, an offshoot of the GIMP. This is a tremendous effort on the part of the GNOME folks, because they have to develop both the foundation toolkit _and_ DE. gtk1 is not on par with Qt, and I don't think gtk2 will be either (Qt just simply has way too many years over gtk), but perhaps someday...
Anyhow, I say just choose the one you feel most comfortable with. They both have a large selection of applications, and excited userbases. I don't think one will ever win over the other, but maybe they will slowly merge together in some respects. I use KDE because I like the look/feel/behavior, as well as the programming style and organization. Also, DCOP from the commandline is just too cool.
world has yet to witness sustainable business model for commercial companies developing GPLed products
Take a look at Trolltech. Their Qt/X11 product is GPL, but they'll sell you a non-GPL version for around $2K. This is the best business model around GPL I've seen yet.
And who remembers the huge debate over which was better, SF2 or Mortal Kombat.
SF2 was definitely a better game in my opinion. The characters felt stiff in MK, and they all played the same (and I won't even go into the number of palette-swapped Sub-Zeros). Here's a strange fact: I can remember that there was a developer called "Ed Boon" that worked on MK, but I can't name a single developer of SF. Why can I remember Ed Boon? Midway always had a thing about putting their developers in their games somehow (remember "toasty" ?). Note to future game developers: if you want to make yourself famous, put a character in the game whose name is yours spelled backwards. Then ensure that gaming mags make a point of it. You will be remembered for all time, no matter how bad your game is.
Capcom has been getting diminishing returns off of newer 2d fighters like capcom vs. marvel. I think we've finally reached the end of an era.
Marvel vs. Capcom was pretty good. Each "Vs" game, as they are called, has been progressively better than the last (Not counting Capcom Vs. SNK series though, which has a completely different play style). Marvel vs. Capcom 2 is insane. No other game can top 56 characters, with each player choosing 3, and I think even Capcom would have a hard time topping itself here and remaining playable. Let's see how long the CvS series lasts.
Check out Shoryuken.com, for the latest information (tournaments/ranking) on the SF scene, as well as combo videos and recorded tournament matches.
:)
Currently, the most popular games are Capcom vs SNK 2 and Marvel vs Capcom 2. I am a big fan of the latter, and I often play at Southern Hills Golfland. The players there are incredible, and on the weekends the place is completely packed (15 minute wait for a game sometimes). I played in the MvC2 tourney last month, but lost first round.
Intentional. "Erm" is a cross between "Err" and "Hrm".
What else do cell vendors need to do to "get their shit together"?
Erm, standardization?
This Japan stuff might be nifty-cool, but to me it seems more like YAP (Yet Another Protocol), something we are not lacking at all here in the USA. Honestly, I'd rather see the USA go all-GSM, and upgrade to the latest enhancements like HSCSD and GPRS. Fortunately AT&T has moved in this direction, as I have heard rumors of shared GSM towers here in California (finally some GSM competition for you Cingular!), and apparently they did a small GPRS deployment in Washington. Ironically, Cingular (a current GSM provider), has not shown any sign of advancing. But then what do you expect from a company that barely even promotes their data services?
Too bad "3G" isn't actually a protocol, but rather a nice buzzword to represent the next step that all of the currently incompatible networks (GSM, Sprint, Verizon, Japan, Analogue, AT&T) take.
It actually isn't quite so hypocritical as you might think. Violating the GPL is almost like the reverse of violating traditional copyright. Trade copyrighted music, and you are doing something illegal. Refuse to trade GPL code, and you are doing something illegal. It is the lack of "sharing" source code that is a GPL violation. It is easy to see then, how someone could share copyrighted music yet still obey the GPL (sharing code). Sharing is the name of the game, and these people are strong believers.
Of course, that is no excuse to violate copyright law. And when someone does violate the GPL, it gives these people less room to speak (law-wise).
It all depends on how much money you need, if you need more than $4 a month you better keep your day job.
:) I could handle it, I think.
Very true. However, I wrote under the assumption that you could just get another job, not that you would run for the hills and code like a hermit. Even a lesser paying job would suffice.. I guess it would depend on what quality of living you are shooting for. Even my friend who works at a gas station makes enough to pay rent. Just because my night job is free software does not mean my day job has to be programming. Hmm, I wonder how many people actually hold non-software jobs, but do free software in their spare time? Sounds like fun.
I've thought about just quitting my day job and working at the nearby Chili's restaurant. It would be a lot more social than the boring office, and I need to get out anyway. Not to mention there are lots of cute girls there too.
-Justin
Wow, that's gotta suck. I would challenge that or work someplace else. What you do at home has nothing to do with your day job. But yeah, you'll need to keep your "useful routines" separate.
Where I work, it is very clear about what is mine and what is the company's. In the case of "useful code" that I have already written in my spare time, I will actually re-sell (license) the code to the company I work for. This gets me some extra money and keeps me from having to code certain things more than once.
This only really applies to free software developers, but say you have a day job doing one thing, and by night (or weekend or what have you) you put time into a free programming project. Since you actually work two jobs, you could say either one is your "true" job.
It doesn't matter what your day job is. You could be a waiter or a pr0nstar or a programmer in a cubicle. If you enjoy your night job more, then consider that your true job. After all, your "job" is nothing more than simply doing your part in society. If you consider free software to be more of a calling than your day job, then so be it. It is even possible that your free software project is better for society. The downside is that it may not be the job that is bringing in the money, but it is your job nonetheless. Think about it this way: if you had to choose between losing your job or losing your free software project (the latter is sort of impossible, so lets just say that it disappears in a puff of smoke), which would you choose? Which is more important?
So before you tell your friend that your job sucks, or tell your uncle at the family party that you work at a dead-end computer job, why don't you say you work on free software instead? It's a much more enjoyable job, isn't it? It also reflects what you truly want to do, and because of the impact it makes, is a much better candidate to represent your place in society.
Anyway, I got into this discussion with one of my friends the other day. I am a free software developer, but I have not finished college, and my day job sucks. He said something along the lines of: "What do your parents think about this? Are they angry you have not aspired to more? What greater plans do you have?" And to that I answer: "Greater plans? I'm doing exactly what I want to do _right now_. How can it get any better? Maybe I can improve my day job, but my night job is where the fun is."
-Justin
Can someone please explain to me why the "Slashdot Consensus" seems to be in disagreement of things like this?
Why is having enforcable ratings on video games a bad thing? After all, we have movie ratings and no one is complaining.
So a salesman will now stop some 10 year old kid from buying Mortal Kombat 7, with ultra-bloody effects. Isn't this better than being stuck with a one-version-fits-all where the blood is replaced by sweat?
Without ratings, all movies would suck. They would have to stay within certain limits. This bill is about enforcing who is able to purchase a game based on content (ie, rating). Such enforcement only encourages developers to be as artistic as possible, and not worry about angry parents. The ratings are here to protect not only children, but developers.
Isn't .Net different though, in that there are system libraries to worry about? I don't claim to be an expert here, I'm just going from what I have read and heard, but let's look at some crossplatform examples:
Java - you have a VM and a standard API that are with you wherever you go. Your API is limited, but you run anywhere. Life in a box!
Qt - you have an API that operates on all supported platforms. Each platform requires a separate build. The upside is you can link with native system libraries just like any normal program, and do specifics with win32, X, Carbon, etc.
.Net - a hybrid of the above. Your foundation is a VM, but you rely on libraries that exist outside of the box. Because the necessary libs may not be present on all platforms, your program may not be available everywhere (just like Qt).
.Net sounds like a nice solution to binary-compatibility though.
Native L&F, no. Qt implements its own widgets across all supported platforms.
:)
While Qt does implement its own widgets, it does still have the native look and feel. I think the Mac is the only platform where there is such a thing as true native widgets.
On Windows, the concept of "native widgets" really only applies to the look and feel. After all, there are many products/compilers to make Windows programs, and they are not all based on MFC (for instance, Borland does their own widgets AFAIK). I believe this is because use of MFC requires licensing. This means Qt is nothing strange on Windows.
And X11 has no concept of native widgets or native look either, but we won't get into that
Despite how much you may wish AOL should play nice here, they aren't. Some posts mentioned how programmers are wasting their time reverse-engineering when they could be adding features to an AIM client. How about just not making an AIM client?
Jabber is an open instant messaging system. You may have heard of "Jabber Transports" which allow you to talk to other services. Please remember that these are only extension to the system, with the same possible flaws as Trillian. More importantly, Jabber is an IM system of its own, and works just fine. Our standard IM system is here, guys, and no one can stop us from using it. Not only is development of clients and other software encouraged, but you are given full protocol documentation. This is what co-operation is about. Making an IM client should not be a war. So quit wasting your time with these closed systems, and come join us!
Just stop using AIM, and tell your friends too also. I expected more Jabber related posts on this board, considering all the open source advocation that goes on here. If you were confused and thought that Jabber was "just another multi-IM" and nothing more, well... you have now been learned.
Hmm? Jabber works perfectly. Oh wait, maybe you meant the "Jabber Transports", which allow connectivity to other instant messaging services. Those are a gamble, but then so is Trillian as you have just now learned.
Jabber itself (you know, the open IM system) will never suffer from these problems. There is no company to pull the rug out from under us. If the Trillian team really cared about its users, they would include Jabber support. Then these people would at least have an "out." And no, "ICQ", "MSN", and "Yahoo!" are not "outs." These companies could pull the same tricks as AOL.
I agree that Slashdot sometimes reports on certain software that lots of people consider important, even point releases of things like KOffice.
However, I don't remember ever seeing news posts about Linux 2.3, the previous unstable branch (I checked the archive and apparently there were just two). So why are things different now with 2.5?
If all you want to do is make open code and just give it away to society, then sure, use a BSD-style license. If you don't mind who uses it, you're sort of just throwing it out in the road, use a BSD-style license. Some people like licenses like these, and I can see myself using this license depending on the project.
On the other hand, the GPL is about keeping things open. The classic problem with societies is that there is always someone who breaks the rules, or who won't play fair with the rest of us. The GPL exists to solve this problem and protect developers. This way, I can create code that is open, and if anyone wants to use it then their code must remain open also. Is that really too much to ask? I made something that you may use for free, and now I want you to do the same for me. That's the point of the GPL. It's to force people to play fair. Otherwise, you'll have good honest people making all this free code, and then other people/companies will just take it without giving back.
It sounds to me like you just want to take.
Please, don't whine about licenses. It is up to the developer to choose. Don't complain when something is GPL, geez. Be glad you have the code.
Flamebait? Come on moderators!
How is this post going to induce a flame-fest? What is there even to discuss? Are we going to get a posting war between legitimate users and software-pirates? Give me a break.
And now for my equally "flamable" (but will cause no flame) comment:
In the Linux world we have the GPL, and we expect users and developers to respect it. We should also respect other software licenses as well. So please, if you are a Linux user, don't pirate software! It makes us look bad. If you don't like a software's license, then don't use it. You would complain if Microsoft were to steal GPL code, after all.
With "Ask", you can use the popup windows you want, and avoid the ones you don't. Some websites might have a non-ad use for popups, and if you just have popups disabled then you might think the site doesn't work properly.
Dealing with a prompt rather than a new browser window is much easier. The prompt comes up faster and uses considerably less resources than loading a new browser window. And if you stumble upon a porn site that likes to load zillions of popups, it is much easier to just say "No" to a prompt then to go chasing around all these browser windows.
Can't just look for the daemon
True, so he should look at his OS distribution's hardware compatibility list. I can't speak for FreeBSD, but SuSE, for instance, has a link to their hardware compatibility database on their front page.
Oddly, this is backwards from the Windows way. Instead of seeing what is supported on the hardware package, you check for support from the OS vendor. This also makes me wonder what the purpose of even listing "Windows" on a hardware package is. After all, since no one knows what a Linux or a BSD is, it obviously works on Windows. Maybe it is sort of like labelling water as fat-free.