I don't want to add to the Java vs (Windows || C++) holy wars, but if you do decide to try Java, then you should also give Forte a try. Sun has recently released the basic IDE as open source under the Mozilla license. I haven't yet used it on a large project but after just playing around with it for awhile it seems to be as good as any other IDE I've used. It's written in Java, and will therefore run on any platform that supports a JRE.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The big problem with this, of course, is that bandwidth is being allocated based on the resources of the content provider, not the desires of the content consumer. If the consumers have no preference between CNN or MSNBC, but MSNBC seems quicker, then they'll usually use MSNBC. But if content consumers find that sites they want to access are slow to load, while sites they don't care about (or dislike) load quickly, then they will start looking for another way to get to their prefered sites. And DSL is coming soon to a local loop near you.
Excite knows that they have to deliver users to content providers in order to keep those dollars rolling in. I suspect they will be smart enough to manage their bandwidth well enough to keep their subscribers at home (or should that be at @home?).
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
When you have legions of lawyers to throw at anyone who says something you don't like, you can afford to say what pleases you without anonymity. When you have something to say, but fear those legions of lawyers, you can blurt it out and sign it and risk financial ruin, or say it anonymously, or just shut up.
When the system of justice, as it is in the present-day USA, makes it almost impossible for those without lots and lots of money to win a judgement, and even winning a case as a defendant can be financially ruinous; then anonymity is absolutely essential to maintain privacy as well as freedom of speech.
Bronfman and his ilk want nothing more than to see the situation emerge where they have the ability to gather and use all information about everybody, but to keep that information out of the hands of anyone who does not pay dearly for it. He says privacy is needed to stop spam and credit card theives. Privacy is also needed to shield our personal lives from those who would make of them nothing but commodities.
And the only thing that will provide us that shield us is the ability to behave anonymously.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
By judging this book, have you not reduced the value of other books?
Books, unlike people, are not all created equal. The right of everyone to express an opinion does not imply an obligation on the part of anyone to listen to that opinion. If my opinion is that your opinion is absurd, I certainly have the right to express that.
While no book has an absolute value, there are still books that are more valuable to me than others, and since I have a limited amount of reading time, I value any help I can get in selecting books I will find valuable.
Would you prefer that everyone read F451 over the Turner Diaries
Actually, I think people should read both. While I have not read the Turner Diaries yet, it is on my "must read" list. It's just that I expect the experience to be somewhat unpleasant, and so I'm sort of building up the nerve. Different kinds of value is to be found in different kinds of books.
There can be no equal rights for all and everything as long as people have preferences
There should be no equal rights for all and everything. Those rights that are appropriate for all people to have equally, then all people should have equally. Rights that are not appropriate for all to have should adhere to those who should appropriately have them. Inanimate things do not have any rights at all. That sounds like a trivial truth, and in a different age it would be. But in our age of unreasonable political correctness it would seem to need stating, and restating
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Everything by Bradury is great
on
Fahrenheit 451
·
· Score: 1
It's been more years than I care to admit to since I read this book. There's nothing written by Bradbury that is not reading, and re-reading again and again.
Thanks for reminding me that it's time to check this one out again. And for pointing out that it may be especially relevent today.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
While this act by Red Hat may ultimately be self serving, it is at least enlightened self interest. Considering how rare enlightenment of any kind is getting to be, I think that they should be commended. By and large, and certainly for the short term, the interests of Red Hat coincide with the interests of the Linux community. The stronger we are, the stronger they are. The stronger they are, the stronger we are. While that may change some time in the future, it seems to be the case right now.
Anyone who thinks Red Hat could become another Microsoft does not understand much about Microsoft. The mindset that got them where they are today did not evolve from benevolence. It was there from day one. Red Hat at least started as a group of people trying to do good things. Even if they are eventually seduced by the dark side, the fact that they started their jouney in the light will help keep them from ultimate darkness (to mix a few literary metaphors).
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I was hoping to read a rational, well thought criticism of the ethics of free software and got instead just another foam-at-the-mouth rant at anything and anyone the author disagreed with. His portrayal of both RMS and ESR as ranting lunatics is almost as offensive as his dismissal of the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution as preposterous (well, ok, he only called the second one preposterous - but just start to mess with any one of the ten, as see how long the rest of them survive). He condemns dubious rhetorical devices but fills his article with them. And he fails, as have all who have written such diatribes I have read, to come to grips with the ethical problems that arise when people are forced by economic need to sell cheaply the products of their labor while others who perform no work at all gain far more economic benefit from them.
Deep in my heart I know that it's possible to mount a rational attack on the principles espoused by Stallman and Raymond, if only because it should be possible to do so against any stated position. Anyone who took a debate class should understand that.
But I've gotta say I didn't find that here.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
sharing is evil and so are the people that do it. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I have always suspected that a lot of posters here here were simply folks who had just never learned to share their toys. Now I know that's true for at least one.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Back in the days of the Bell System, you could not put a modem on your phone without an expensive and restrictive Bell interface. Now, you can connect your home LAN to the Internet using a wideband digital modem. If the Bell system had not been broken up, it is very unlikely that we would now be in this state. Most likely the Internet would still be research only, and wideband would still refer to cable-based networks. The breakup of the Bell system benefitted both the Bell companies and all of us - the general public.
If Microsoft achieved and maintained their market share by exploiting innovation and the quality of their software, then they will continue to enjoy that market share with or without a breakup. If, on the other hand, they got where they are mainly by manipulating the monopoly position they inherited from IBM, they are likely to suffer from the loss in control that will come from a breakup.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Surely setting an aliased account for everyday use, and logging in as root *only when really necessary* is the solution
No, no! You want to set up all your users with uid 0, but with their own login id and home directory. That way they all get full access to the system, and you get the full windows flavor while running *nix.
(Note for the humor impaired -- this was meant to be a joke)
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
So if I use Photoshop to create some masterpiece (and maybe even Eyecandy and Kai's Power Tools for nifty effects), then it isn't a creative work? Or are you saying that HTML created using any program (even Notepad) is neither created nor unique?
That's not really analogous. The original workers created neither the artistic content (the ad agency did that) nor the actual HTML (Dreamweaver did that). Also, neither Photoshop nor Notepad create anything themselves, but merely render what is input. Dreamweaver actually creates an HTML page, where there was none before. From what I gather reading the posting, it is the HTML that is considered copyrighted. And it was Dreamweaver created that.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Yesterday I went to the local copy shop with a friend of mine's textbook because I only needed 5 pages of it for a class. I copied it, and I feel no shame
Copying a small amount of a copyrighted work is considered "fair use", and is perfectly legal, at least for the moment. Unfortunately, fair use is one of the many consumer rights that are under attack by those who are currently purchasing the new copyright laws.
Most people won't bother trying to affect the legislation. They'll just consider the new laws another example of why the law is a ass, and add it to the long and growing list of laws that are ignored.
When we reach the point when all laws are held in complete contempt and disregarded, the people cying the loudest will be those that helped the process along, one purchased law at a time.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I once worked at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is just up the hill from NOAA in Boulder, and knew several people who worked at NOAA. They swore that the first question everybody asked when given a tour was "Where's the ark?" Since that was my first question, I couldn't argue. Anyhow, the "look out for rain" joke first surfaced about five milliseconds after the agency was named, and has ever since popped into the mind of everyone who first hears of the agency.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I'd like to state a contrarian view here, and if it gets flamed (or moderated down) well, so be it. I think it's a Good Thing that this Librarian of Congress is doing what he is doing, though I agree with most all of the community that his reasoning is, shall we say, flawed. The works in the LOC will become digitized, sooner or later, and the entire corpus will not be digitized tomorrow. The digitization must be prioritized, and I cannot fault the choice of doing images and audio works first. The post of Librarian will pass soon enough to one who is online-literate, and the work of digitizing the works of text can proceed from there.
In the mean time, it's good to see someone in a position of such influence give voice to a defence of paper books. A future in which all books are online and none are on paper seems to me to be a bleak future, indeed. I am as eager as anyone to see all information online. But I would hate for that to mean than none is availble offline.
There is a sensual pleasure in turning pages of a book, and a practical pleasure in having words in a form that can be bent, folded and mutilated. And torn and ripped up in anger and thrown away in disgust. No improvement is going to bring that to electronic display.
The online world is a wonderful enhancement to the lives of all who would use it well, but anyone who uses the online world as a substitute for a real life does run the danger of having no real life at all. And a librarian who loses the love of books as they have existed throughout history is a poor librarian indeed.
As long as he isn't seriously getting in the way of progress, I'd rather have a Luddite in charge now than one of those new wired librarians we see who think only of information online, and let the precious works they have under their care rot away.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Those trees have already been converted to paper. No trees will be saved by doing this
Most all wood pulp used to make paper comes from trees grown on tree farms, rather than from trees grown in forests. If the market for paper shrinks significantly some of those farms will be converted to other forms of agriculture, thereby resulting in fewer, not more, trees on the planet. But since the valuable asset we should be concerned about saving is the forest, and not the tree, it really doesn't matter.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The ethos of Unix is to have each program doing one thing, and for it to do that thing well. As the GIMP already does image manipulation perfectly well, there really is no demand for another graphics package
There is a big difference between each program doing one thing and only having one program available to do any one thing. The former is certainly the Unix philosophy, even if it is observed mostly in the breach. The latter is the Microsoft philosophy - one ring to rule them all - and I, for one, would hate to see it become the dominant philosophy in the Linux community (whatever that happens to be).
Choice is good for all concerned, even when the choice is between free, open source software and commercial, closed software. Let the community decide for itself what it wants.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I think I speak for the Linux community when I say that commercial closed-source software has no place on our operating system.
No, I don't think you speak for the Linux community. The Linux community has no single voice, and includes a great many people who would like to see commercial as well as Open Source software running on Linux.
And the Linux community certainly does not need an AC to speak for it.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
This is Linux related because Corel has been so focused on Linux of late. I think it is entirely reasonable to expect that they would come out with a port of these applciations to Linux. They have a heavy interest in making Linux as strong a platform as possible, since that will expand the user base of their products. And if they expand their Linux products at the same time, they have a very good shot at being one of the dominant players on this platform they are helping to grow.
Yes, it it very Linux related.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The DV camera I bought came with a coupon for Digital Origins's IntroDV. Since I was not at sure I wanted to get serious about video editing, I wanted something inexpensive, but upgradeable. I bought the IntroDV, which included a firewire card, software that transfers video from camera to disk and VERY minimal editing capability. Less than $300 got me a 40GB UltraDMA hard drive, which is fast enough to transfer video with no frame loss (Had to spend another $60 for an UltraDMA card because my system was all of a year old). Spent another $100 to upgrade to EditDV Unplugged and that's what I've been using for the last few months.
I'm starting to like it a whole lot, so I'll probably upgrade to the full version of EditDV. For an inexpensive intro with upgrade to full capability, I don't think you can beat these guys.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
To protect the guilty. Come on, now. These guys aren't interested in helping the kids of today, or in giving anyone a voice in the workings of their program. The only reason they are changing anything at all is because the name they chose was linked to a fictional neo-nazi group. It would have been far better if that link had remained hidden until after they had started marketing this program full-blast. Then the embarassment would have killed it dead. As it is, they'll just make enough minor changes to warrant a name change and start calling it something else. Then they'll be able to pretend that this is not a nazi style supression of freedom and individuality, and that they themselves are not closet nazis.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Could one port all the standard command line utilities to NT, clone one or two of the popular shells, set up the directory structure in the standard UNIX layout and call it Microsoft UNIX?
I run just such an environment, using Cygnus' Cygwin on NT, and believe me, it isn't Unix. Not by a long shot. Even if it were nothing more than the process scheduling, Unix would have it all over NT. On a Unix system you can run processes in the background and just forget about them unless they are real resource hogs. With NT you have to be always thinking "is this going to kill performance?". But there's more. Pop up a telnet window and you have the same old DOS prompt window. Even though it's running Bash, it still feels like Windows. And, of course, all the applications are the clunky Windows apps. And of course, there are the constant crashes and running out of memory. Run Cygwin next to an X server running an xterm on Unix, and you'll see the difference very clearly. I've done that in the past, and I'm working very hard to get that set up now. I'll still have memory and stability problems, but at least the apps will run right.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
While Canvas does come with an awesome number of tools, most all of them are there as plug-ins, and there is a tool loader that lets you pick just that set of tools you need for the job you're doing at the moment.
It's not really bloatware - at least not because of the number of tools it supplies. It's pretty much what a feature rich program should be. It's modular, and gives the user quite a bit of control over how big its disk or memory footprint is.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Slashdot Mirror
I don't want to add to the Java vs (Windows || C++) holy wars, but if you do decide to try Java, then you should also give Forte a try. Sun has recently released the basic IDE as open source under the Mozilla license. I haven't yet used it on a large project but after just playing around with it for awhile it seems to be as good as any other IDE I've used. It's written in Java, and will therefore run on any platform that supports a JRE.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The big problem with this, of course, is that bandwidth is being allocated based on the resources of the content provider, not the desires of the content consumer. If the consumers have no preference between CNN or MSNBC, but MSNBC seems quicker, then they'll usually use MSNBC. But if content consumers find that sites they want to access are slow to load, while sites they don't care about (or dislike) load quickly, then they will start looking for another way to get to their prefered sites. And DSL is coming soon to a local loop near you.
Excite knows that they have to deliver users to content providers in order to keep those dollars rolling in. I suspect they will be smart enough to manage their bandwidth well enough to keep their subscribers at home (or should that be at @home?).
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I recently read that to qualify for the loan on a simple one bedroom bungalow in San Francisco, you had to make a minimum of $160,000 per annum.
:-)
Must be the rent control.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
When you have legions of lawyers to throw at anyone who says something you don't like, you can afford to say what pleases you without anonymity. When you have something to say, but fear those legions of lawyers, you can blurt it out and sign it and risk financial ruin, or say it anonymously, or just shut up.
When the system of justice, as it is in the present-day USA, makes it almost impossible for those without lots and lots of money to win a judgement, and even winning a case as a defendant can be financially ruinous; then anonymity is absolutely essential to maintain privacy as well as freedom of speech.
Bronfman and his ilk want nothing more than to see the situation emerge where they have the ability to gather and use all information about everybody, but to keep that information out of the hands of anyone who does not pay dearly for it. He says privacy is needed to stop spam and credit card theives. Privacy is also needed to shield our personal lives from those who would make of them nothing but commodities.
And the only thing that will provide us that shield us is the ability to behave anonymously.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
By judging this book, have you not reduced the value of other books?
Books, unlike people, are not all created equal. The right of everyone to express an opinion does not imply an obligation on the part of anyone to listen to that opinion. If my opinion is that your opinion is absurd, I certainly have the right to express that.
While no book has an absolute value, there are still books that are more valuable to me than others, and since I have a limited amount of reading time, I value any help I can get in selecting books I will find valuable.
Would you prefer that everyone read F451 over the Turner Diaries
Actually, I think people should read both. While I have not read the Turner Diaries yet, it is on my "must read" list. It's just that I expect the experience to be somewhat unpleasant, and so I'm sort of building up the nerve. Different kinds of value is to be found in different kinds of books.
There can be no equal rights for all and everything as long as people have preferences
There should be no equal rights for all and everything. Those rights that are appropriate for all people to have equally, then all people should have equally. Rights that are not appropriate for all to have should adhere to those who should appropriately have them. Inanimate things do not have any rights at all. That sounds like a trivial truth, and in a different age it would be. But in our age of unreasonable political correctness it would seem to need stating, and restating
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
It's been more years than I care to admit to since I read this book. There's nothing written by Bradbury that is not reading, and re-reading again and again.
Thanks for reminding me that it's time to check this one out again. And for pointing out that it may be especially relevent today.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
While this act by Red Hat may ultimately be self serving, it is at least enlightened self interest. Considering how rare enlightenment of any kind is getting to be, I think that they should be commended. By and large, and certainly for the short term, the interests of Red Hat coincide with the interests of the Linux community. The stronger we are, the stronger they are. The stronger they are, the stronger we are. While that may change some time in the future, it seems to be the case right now.
Anyone who thinks Red Hat could become another Microsoft does not understand much about Microsoft. The mindset that got them where they are today did not evolve from benevolence. It was there from day one. Red Hat at least started as a group of people trying to do good things. Even if they are eventually seduced by the dark side, the fact that they started their jouney in the light will help keep them from ultimate darkness (to mix a few literary metaphors).
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I was hoping to read a rational, well thought criticism of the ethics of free software and got instead just another foam-at-the-mouth rant at anything and anyone the author disagreed with. His portrayal of both RMS and ESR as ranting lunatics is almost as offensive as his dismissal of the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution as preposterous (well, ok, he only called the second one preposterous - but just start to mess with any one of the ten, as see how long the rest of them survive). He condemns dubious rhetorical devices but fills his article with them. And he fails, as have all who have written such diatribes I have read, to come to grips with the ethical problems that arise when people are forced by economic need to sell cheaply the products of their labor while others who perform no work at all gain far more economic benefit from them.
Deep in my heart I know that it's possible to mount a rational attack on the principles espoused by Stallman and Raymond, if only because it should be possible to do so against any stated position. Anyone who took a debate class should understand that.
But I've gotta say I didn't find that here.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Whatever you think of copyright infringement and the unauthorized copying of IP, in general, sharing is good.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
sharing is evil and so are the people that do it. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I have always suspected that a lot of posters here here were simply folks who had just never learned to share their toys. Now I know that's true for at least one.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Even Finnegans Wake has grammatically well-formed sentences underlying its puns.
That's right. It was Faulkner who turned violations of grammar rules into a writing style.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Back in the days of the Bell System, you could not put a modem on your phone without an expensive and restrictive Bell interface. Now, you can connect your home LAN to the Internet using a wideband digital modem. If the Bell system had not been broken up, it is very unlikely that we would now be in this state. Most likely the Internet would still be research only, and wideband would still refer to cable-based networks. The breakup of the Bell system benefitted both the Bell companies and all of us - the general public.
If Microsoft achieved and maintained their market share by exploiting innovation and the quality of their software, then they will continue to enjoy that market share with or without a breakup. If, on the other hand, they got where they are mainly by manipulating the monopoly position they inherited from IBM, they are likely to suffer from the loss in control that will come from a breakup.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Surely setting an aliased account for everyday use, and logging in as root *only when really necessary* is the solution
No, no! You want to set up all your users with uid 0, but with their own login id and home directory. That way they all get full access to the system, and you get the full windows flavor while running *nix.
(Note for the humor impaired -- this was meant to be a joke)
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
So if I use Photoshop to create some masterpiece (and maybe even Eyecandy and Kai's Power Tools for nifty effects), then it isn't a creative work? Or are you saying that HTML created using any program (even Notepad) is neither created nor unique?
That's not really analogous. The original workers created neither the artistic content (the ad agency did that) nor the actual HTML (Dreamweaver did that). Also, neither Photoshop nor Notepad create anything themselves, but merely render what is input. Dreamweaver actually creates an HTML page, where there was none before. From what I gather reading the posting, it is the HTML that is considered copyrighted. And it was Dreamweaver created that.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Yesterday I went to the local copy shop with a friend of mine's textbook because I only needed 5 pages of it for a class. I copied it, and I feel no shame
Copying a small amount of a copyrighted work is considered "fair use", and is perfectly legal, at least for the moment. Unfortunately, fair use is one of the many consumer rights that are under attack by those who are currently purchasing the new copyright laws.
Most people won't bother trying to affect the legislation. They'll just consider the new laws another example of why the law is a ass, and add it to the long and growing list of laws that are ignored.
When we reach the point when all laws are held in complete contempt and disregarded, the people cying the loudest will be those that helped the process along, one purchased law at a time.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I once worked at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is just up the hill from NOAA in Boulder, and knew several people who worked at NOAA. They swore that the first question everybody asked when given a tour was "Where's the ark?" Since that was my first question, I couldn't argue. Anyhow, the "look out for rain" joke first surfaced about five milliseconds after the agency was named, and has ever since popped into the mind of everyone who first hears of the agency.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I'd like to state a contrarian view here, and if it gets flamed (or moderated down) well, so be it. I think it's a Good Thing that this Librarian of Congress is doing what he is doing, though I agree with most all of the community that his reasoning is, shall we say, flawed. The works in the LOC will become digitized, sooner or later, and the entire corpus will not be digitized tomorrow. The digitization must be prioritized, and I cannot fault the choice of doing images and audio works first. The post of Librarian will pass soon enough to one who is online-literate, and the work of digitizing the works of text can proceed from there.
In the mean time, it's good to see someone in a position of such influence give voice to a defence of paper books. A future in which all books are online and none are on paper seems to me to be a bleak future, indeed. I am as eager as anyone to see all information online. But I would hate for that to mean than none is availble offline.
There is a sensual pleasure in turning pages of a book, and a practical pleasure in having words in a form that can be bent, folded and mutilated. And torn and ripped up in anger and thrown away in disgust. No improvement is going to bring that to electronic display.
The online world is a wonderful enhancement to the lives of all who would use it well, but anyone who uses the online world as a substitute for a real life does run the danger of having no real life at all. And a librarian who loses the love of books as they have existed throughout history is a poor librarian indeed.
As long as he isn't seriously getting in the way of progress, I'd rather have a Luddite in charge now than one of those new wired librarians we see who think only of information online, and let the precious works they have under their care rot away.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Those trees have already been converted to paper. No trees will be saved by doing this
Most all wood pulp used to make paper comes from trees grown on tree farms, rather than from trees grown in forests. If the market for paper shrinks significantly some of those farms will be converted to other forms of agriculture, thereby resulting in fewer, not more, trees on the planet. But since the valuable asset we should be concerned about saving is the forest, and not the tree, it really doesn't matter.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The ethos of Unix is to have each program doing one thing, and for it to do that thing well. As the GIMP already does image manipulation perfectly well, there really is no demand for another graphics package
There is a big difference between each program doing one thing and only having one program available to do any one thing. The former is certainly the Unix philosophy, even if it is observed mostly in the breach. The latter is the Microsoft philosophy - one ring to rule them all - and I, for one, would hate to see it become the dominant philosophy in the Linux community (whatever that happens to be).
Choice is good for all concerned, even when the choice is between free, open source software and commercial, closed software. Let the community decide for itself what it wants.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
I think I speak for the Linux community when I say that commercial closed-source software has no place on our operating system.
No, I don't think you speak for the Linux community. The Linux community has no single voice, and includes a great many people who would like to see commercial as well as Open Source software running on Linux.
And the Linux community certainly does not need an AC to speak for it.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
This is Linux related because Corel has been so focused on Linux of late. I think it is entirely reasonable to expect that they would come out with a port of these applciations to Linux. They have a heavy interest in making Linux as strong a platform as possible, since that will expand the user base of their products. And if they expand their Linux products at the same time, they have a very good shot at being one of the dominant players on this platform they are helping to grow.
Yes, it it very Linux related.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
The DV camera I bought came with a coupon for Digital Origins's IntroDV. Since I was not at sure I wanted to get serious about video editing, I wanted something inexpensive, but upgradeable. I bought the IntroDV, which included a firewire card, software that transfers video from camera to disk and VERY minimal editing capability. Less than $300 got me a 40GB UltraDMA hard drive, which is fast enough to transfer video with no frame loss (Had to spend another $60 for an UltraDMA card because my system was all of a year old). Spent another $100 to upgrade to EditDV Unplugged and that's what I've been using for the last few months.
I'm starting to like it a whole lot, so I'll probably upgrade to the full version of EditDV. For an inexpensive intro with upgrade to full capability, I don't think you can beat these guys.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
To protect the guilty. Come on, now. These guys aren't interested in helping the kids of today, or in giving anyone a voice in the workings of their program. The only reason they are changing anything at all is because the name they chose was linked to a fictional neo-nazi group. It would have been far better if that link had remained hidden until after they had started marketing this program full-blast. Then the embarassment would have killed it dead. As it is, they'll just make enough minor changes to warrant a name change and start calling it something else. Then they'll be able to pretend that this is not a nazi style supression of freedom and individuality, and that they themselves are not closet nazis.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Could one port all the standard command line utilities to NT, clone one or two of the popular shells, set up the directory structure in the standard UNIX layout and call it Microsoft UNIX?
I run just such an environment, using Cygnus' Cygwin on NT, and believe me, it isn't Unix. Not by a long shot. Even if it were nothing more than the process scheduling, Unix would have it all over NT. On a Unix system you can run processes in the background and just forget about them unless they are real resource hogs. With NT you have to be always thinking "is this going to kill performance?". But there's more. Pop up a telnet window and you have the same old DOS prompt window. Even though it's running Bash, it still feels like Windows. And, of course, all the applications are the clunky Windows apps. And of course, there are the constant crashes and running out of memory. Run Cygwin next to an X server running an xterm on Unix, and you'll see the difference very clearly. I've done that in the past, and I'm working very hard to get that set up now. I'll still have memory and stability problems, but at least the apps will run right.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
While Canvas does come with an awesome number of tools, most all of them are there as plug-ins, and there is a tool loader that lets you pick just that set of tools you need for the job you're doing at the moment.
It's not really bloatware - at least not because of the number of tools it supplies. It's pretty much what a feature rich program should be. It's modular, and gives the user quite a bit of control over how big its disk or memory footprint is.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation