> It's stupid for Linux to even think of competing there.
Is it? Why? I use Linux on both my desktops, daily and its works perfectly well, even considering both are Debian Unstable.
> When I need to set up a new desktop client, it typically takes 3-4 days, using Windows 2000.
I'd sack you now. It takes me no more than 3 or 4 hours to get a Debian KDE or GNOME machine up and configured from scratch and including the time to download all the packages. That's two money savings! Have you tried Linux on the desktop? Do. Any gripes you have can and will be fixed if you really want them to be.
> If I were to try and use Linux, I would have even longer, downloading the source, copying it, fiddling with unresponsive hardware and looking for drivers that usually do not work.
OK, you've really not tried Linux have you? www.debian.org. What 'drivers' are you talking about? WinModems? On a corporate desktop?
> Then I have to compile, and compile again. And what am I rewarded with?
You can put on your resume that it no longer takes you 3-4 days to install an OS.
In 3-4 days you could probaly learn most of the desktoppy stuff from scratch.
Sounds a little like they wanted a "super cheap system" rather than a "Free System". If the builders claimed the fault in the machines was Y2K related then it sounds like you got stung by a bunch of cowboys. Y2K doesn't effect Linux and unless their application ran under DOSEMU, they are not telling you the truth. You should have it all independently examined and take the company who built it to court for your money back. Oh and make sure you ask in court if anyone is funding them.;)
You should have gone to Red Hat, VA or LinuxCare for advice and taken it from there, not let the first bunch who tell you they can do it.
Technically yes, it can run other WMs (that one is called 8 1/2 I think (or 8 1/2 is a clone of that default one which some nicer things) - actually I think that default one is called 8.
Its been ages since I used it at Uni (York, where Vita Nuova sprung from). It was on the undergrad dev machines during my first year before it was savagely replaced by Linux and NT dual booters to wide applause (and tears).
Much of what I remember about it was 'fun' - it does lots differently and the whole the gui apps (its not X) had very different behaviour to what we expect but its is surprisingly smooth to learn and become accustomed to.
But, outside of white coat scientist walks we all run drooling toward eye candy and Linux and its plethory of color won the day among the students.
I'm in pretty much the same position as yourself (only 6 figures?;) but unlike you, I have rather fond feelings of a fair, intelligently run Union of our Tradesmen.
One that has the intelligence to limit itself to matters of universal importance (health care, worker rights and suchlike) would succeed perfectly in realising them and would be a Good Thing for everyone. It is perhaps our last chance as Workers to keep the Corporate Beast in check before we belong to it completely.
We've been lucky my friend but don't let luck make you blind to the misfortune of others.
The difference between symetric and asymetric key encryption schemes.
A 56 bit cypher would be the same on both sides and good schemes mean they are usually only breakable by brute force (checking each patter of the 56 bits as the cypher until success).
The public/private key schemes use longer keys because not every pattern of bit in its bit range can occur for the scheme to work. It normally takes 1024 bit in these schemes for the same level of security to be acheived.
Of course, the asymetric schemes have the bonus that you can hand out the public key in untrusted environments such as the net.
In such cases of an unbroken encryption scheme, the leaked details could easily be vendor keys and suchlike.
The measure for protecting against that is indicated in the article linked off the peice. It mentions using a satellite network to revoke comprimised keys but the details of that network would then be candidates for leakage.
Sure, although VNC is rather heavy over a network compaired the how small compressed X can be. VNC is just a networked framebuffer.
It would be kinda cool to have massive bill board sized Digital Canveses in train stations so people can grafiti them (using the trackball on their mobile phones as input devices from the ground in front - each with their own brush on the display), just as an example from the top of my head.
What would be better is an extension to the Xnest X Server to allow it to act as a proxy for the X Commands being sent to itself from the X Client applications. This would allow remote Xnest instances to connect to the central one which would provide their input streams.
The remote X Client's inputs (mouse, keyboard etc) would be sent to the main instance in order to provide remote control.
To remove the reliance on Xnest, the project should be built as simply an X Proxy with no display its own.
It may even handle the connections from remote X Severs over XDMCP allowing any current X Server to use the proxy, rather than just a hacked XFree Xnest.
The remaining issue of how multiple input is handed - whether to merge each set of input streams into one, or to provide for instances of each one (multiple mouse pointers on screen for example) is best thought about more closely I think. There is no current way that much of the X Window System would handle multiple keyboards on the same Screen, or rather for Window Managers to hold 'focus' for each specific input source, although not strictly necessary for this task, I think this could have some interesting effects on how people use and work with computers in groups of two or more.
Firstly, they only really make sense if your applications are OO. Mine are now, I use Zope and its OODBM is amazing (supports transactions, versions, undo etc).
It keeps things elegant, tidy and dev time is slashed considerably (perhaps 40% of similar things in PHP/RDBMS from my experience)
> companies have no incentive to give up their IP
> and in fact will probably lose out on the deal
This not only depends on the company, it depends on the *market*!
Who do you think HP and IBM's have identified as their market with their Linux/OSS drive? Who do you think will be running the corporate IT backbone by the time they expect it to be the most prevelent software? Who do you think CAN demand pretty much anything from them? That is the 'WE' and it is us. We can demand anything we like becuase we have the money in OUR pockets. If they won't play, they will look very bad and loose this market. Someone else will come to serve it and they will win it.
I think you'll be very surprised at just how powerful such a simple thing as customers in a connected market can be. We can talk to each other now, not just the "Your call is important to us" voice of 'customer services'.
Actually its rather the other way round. By lobbying them to act in ways that we free softies and open sourcers find more acceptable, after they have found ways to make money from our efforts, they are sacrificing their own freedom to expliot and perhaps will adopt agreements to behave as we expect of them. (Our ilk are likely to be their biggest customers in future). Its really quite simple and doesn't constitute any loss of freedom on our behalf at all. In fact it is a state of "mutual benefit".
If they play fair, I would imagine some sort of 'seal of approval' is in order since they'd deserve it and hopefully such recognition will encourage others to follow that example. It will make it much harder for Microsoft to hoodwink the less informed if HP, IBM et al suddenly announce their own plans to co-opt Free Software and Open Source and actually have a set of independent (from themselves) standards to adhere to which are.
There is no "legal obligation" from us to these companies, there is a "moral obligation" the other way around and if you for one minute believe that any of the initialed few (ESR, RMS, BP) will, between them, settle for anything less than what we expect of them, then you need to lay off the computer for a few hours and get some sleep.
Nothing agreed will undermine the freedom you have to do what you like with Free Software (within its current terms), except that the summit may result in a promise from these software patent holders to leave your well alone.
A good thing and well timed. How better can IBM and HP make Microsoft look even more out of date (the death toll in the Technology sector) And since their prime concern is money (via the winding path of good publicity and marketing), this is something I expect they will drool on their collective advisory reports about.
It is all about providing some level of 'approval' to those who play by our rules which they are then free to use as they see fit. Its good and hopefully will mean The People have more of a say in how corporates are run, especially since its our money they are aiming for.
Compare and contrast to Apple or Microsoft's positions on the same subject.
Legally it probably classes as truely public domain - it just goes further in assuring the CONTINUAL availablility of it in the public domain via some copyright license agreements.
I don't think you'll have much luck arguing that it isn't Public Domain to a court of law, especially given the nature of PD software being called "FreeWare"
Pretty evidently the GPL. In an ideal world, either would work but in this one where people are inherently greedy and self seeking, the GPL ensures that the point in improving the Free Code Base is maintained, and thus it is maintained.
The BSD code base could easily be taken and hoarded, rapidly improved and restricted from public use.
While much BSD codebase is improved to match its hoarded counterparts, this can happen and probably would have happened more had the BSD license been the only one around.
Ironically having the GPL around has given the BSD folks more of a reason to keep up and also has provided another competing system (with more developers).
Both are good for 'us' but only one is 'bad' for those who'd fsck us over.
There is (as with all things) lots of ways to look at this.
We can be skeptical about it and guess at hidden motives that prompted this (such as that given most big SAP customers replace SAPDB with Oracle etc, SAP open sourcing their product may prompt one of the big DB vendors to open their own, leading to the combined price of SAP + Big DB being less without SAP having to do an aweful lot.
Phew, well, maybe, but I doubt it. Chances are some student intern asked it and no one could give a serious answer to why not.
At the end of it all, there is now more code available freely than before and on my scale, that's a Good Thing for us humans and probably the world around us.
If actions speak lowder than words, its often becuase action actually does say something - unlike much of today's corporations output. And if that action is good, then more power to that, we should support it regardless and encourage it more. This way we may end up with everything under Free license in 3 or 4 years.
ASP is a framework for page based scripting in multiple langauages (VB and JS out the box but Perl and Python from ActiveState).
Page based scripting is bad, ugly and quickly becomes unmaintable and messy.
Check out Zope, its is an object based, cross platform framework which makes PHP, ASP and JSP look decidedly old hat. At the moment it allows you to use Python and Perl (with an add on). If you haven't tried it, give it a go. I know I've said this a few times here but try it, give it some effort and next time the subject comes up, you'll be saying this;)
Give Zope another go, since version 2.3.0 its had internal python capabilities (no more external file nastiness). I've not tried Webware but it look conceptually similar to what Zope now offers with the internal python script stuff (except Zope also offers version control and rollback, along with undoability on your objects (practically everything in zope is stored in an object database as a proper object - you can even write your own - think EJB without having to try;).
1. Is the development time so long that buying faster hardware would be cheaper than building it in something just 'faster' at runtime (PHP isn't fast anyway - its just faster than its peers)
2. Does it work (this means does it support transactional operations, simple distribution and integration with third party application that customers may already be tied to.
The above items alone are the prime reasons why Java solutions are very popular. Enhydra is better than PHP by a long way. Don't get me wrong, I like PHP and have built some very complex sites in it but these days I use Zope (www.zope.org) for all that I'd ever use PHP for and its perfect (can I say that?). If you haven't tried it, give it a go, the curve is steep but that's because you end up a lot higher than PHP would get you. Its offers a lot of stuff starting at a built in transactioal object database (no SQL, no tables, just object that persist automatically - the coolest thing your likely to find in the open source world!)
For example in Zope I could put together a simple website with News postings and suchlike in about 1 hour - and the site would cope with undoing changes to practically everything and version control so changes can be made without them being visible to general visitors (again to everything - even the HTML and images).
I'm pretty much against the idea of Java for web sites (simply becuase I'd not use C++ for presentation layers so why is JSP a good idea? Its ugly and one look at Enhydra's XMLC or Zope's new Page Templates makes it look completely crappy). Also now that there are a hundred and one ways to connect anything to Java backend stuff if necessary (XML-RPC, Soap, Corba, DCOM bridges, etc etc) there just isn't the need for Java on the presentation layer.
Anyway, try Zope - give it a month (yes, its a lot longer than it took you to learn PHP but hey, its worth it). Get there and you won't go back.
The over cautious "junk character lameness filter" wouldn't let me quote it, but do look at it, its funny.
How to Fix Mozilla's Slowness
on
QT Mozilla Port
·
· Score: 4
Firstly, mozilla isn't really "slow". Its a complex little beast. Its less a "web browser" and more an application framework with built in Javascript engine and cross platform GUI descriptor langauge (XUL).
Practically the entire 'application' is built from XML and Javascript. That's why its so themable and is also why it is being used to develop cross platform applications (www.activestate.com - check out Komodo).
To bypass the slowness, get Galeon. (galeon.sourceforge.net). The latest version is stable and is Just A Web Browser. You need mozilla installed as Galeon uses it as the HTML engine but none of the extra stuff (mail, news, composer) are enabled and it flies along really nicely.
It very rarely crashes, copes with plugins and java perfectly (well, wherever I've tested that anyway) and has a really nice recovery mode which reverts to the open pages you had if ever it does loose its sanity (a very useful feature).
It you want to know how good the vanilla HTML handling in Mozilla is, try it. You really won't be disappointed.
Every CD reader already available will read the data clear text off the disk. It is how the CD spec was agreed and no one can force it to change overnight without replacing all the players and readers out there. At the very least, you will always be able to read the data from the SPDIF digitally.
I fear this is a ploy to prove the point beyond all doubt that nothing can be done to "protect" the current CD format and to usher in the move to closed formats such as DVD-Audio and its like, region coded and all.
There is no other reason that such a technical thing would be employed by a relatively small artist (except to show the before and after napster figures of people offering his works).
I imagine he's currently quite low down the napster chart. I also imagine he'll sky rocket after his album launch.
My advice is ignore this bait, don't buy the album and prove the point in opposite, that we don't want your work in any medium, at any price, if you won't respect our right to fair use (I don't mean the right to give it away on napster, I mean the right to make personal MP3 files from it etc).
This is simply a move to prove with more figures that "fair use == piracy". Don't make it so people.
News is News becuase its SURPRISING. Given the current stock market climate, I think many have become conditioned to think no one can make any money these days with technology products unless they have been here since the 70's.
This is really impressive, RedHat have done something many many other relatively recent internet boom start ups will never achieve. They have proof that their existance doesn't leak money and that is a cue for their customer base to increase exponentially (when you know your supplier is financially comfortable, you don't mind using them). The same game rules for all corporates apply to Open Source / Free Software companies too. Business is after all, business, but RedHat have one very large difference.
This is good for everyone in the Linux and Free Software worlds. It means RedHat can be pretty confident in gaining more funding, employees and clients and can further fund Free Software development for us all. Those of you not into this will benefit (albeit later) from the poker this provides those 1970's companys to improve their offerings, and I hope you enjoy seeing their profits knowing that money could have staying in your pockets.
While I personally don't see corporate success (at least in the distribution vendor sector) as synonimous with Linux's and Free Software success, it is nice to see that the world isn't locked into its technological straight jackets just yet.
Firstly, the Government cannot hold a copyright over a work. This is good since you tax payers pay for it. They can keep things secret but that's a different matter.
The GPL doesn't mean you are permitted to distribute code, only that if you do, you must abide by its terms. If the works done is subject to classification then you simply can't distribute it, GPL or not. The Army already has the code your obligations under the GPL is complete. If they distribute it then they must follow the terms, but that is between them and who they distribute to really.
If on the other hand you are allowed to distribute it then there shouldn't be any problem with the GPL being used. Frankly I can't see why the military would care what license you distribute something under, as long as you can distribute it.
As for the stallmanite free world, that applies to generic mass market code also, that's why we have Star Office, GNOME and KDE.
In the end there may only be contractual custom code work (done above a free code base). Say, for example, the US Government contracted someone to make GNOME suitable for their entire workforce. That why Microsoft's Allchin (Surely "All-mouth" is better;) made the comments he did, nothing to do with improvement or innovation, it'd simply lose them their biggest customer.
So BigExistingCoInc takes an idea that is unpatented and implements it themselves, in the process having to sell it at a lesser price or even give it away free. Fair play, that is called Freedom and it shouldn't stop just because a large number of people are acting in unison. (Microsoft or not).
The problem is that the BigExistings often find ways to remove that freedom from others - including the real SmallNewGuys who are just using their computers / instuments / whatever to entertain and help others.
Personally, I think the removal of the assumed income from 'pattern control' is a low price to pay in exchange for the open ability to improve on what is available without worring about stepping on other peoples patents and copyrights etc.
The only supplied counter argument to support those mechanisms ('that they encourage generation of new works of art and science' - rather than the real reason - 'that they can ensure enourmous profit') is quite weak when you remember that lots of works of art and science were created without such control systems in place and any scientist or musician would be happy working without such an offer of massive wealth (many do already and plenty of good scientific research is government funded). Further the ability for them to work according to their own abilities unrestricted by patent and copyright control will, I think, be a very good thing for the majority of people on this planet.
Sounds a lot like S/MIME digital x509 certs to me. If this is the case then Netscape Communicator will do the job without problems, just make sure you request the key from Netscape in the first place so that it is supplied in the correct format to import (although this may be fixable after the event).
The SSL plugin for Mozilla may add S/MIME support for this task too. Otherwise there's aways openssl on the command like and mutt;)
Slashdot Mirror
> It's stupid for Linux to even think of competing there.
Is it? Why? I use Linux on both my desktops, daily and its works perfectly well, even considering both are Debian Unstable.
> When I need to set up a new desktop client, it typically takes 3-4 days, using Windows 2000.
I'd sack you now. It takes me no more than 3 or 4 hours to get a Debian KDE or GNOME machine up and configured from scratch and including the time to download all the packages. That's two money savings! Have you tried Linux on the desktop? Do. Any gripes you have can and will be fixed if you really want them to be.
> If I were to try and use Linux, I would have even longer, downloading the source, copying it, fiddling with unresponsive hardware and looking for drivers that usually do not work.
OK, you've really not tried Linux have you? www.debian.org. What 'drivers' are you talking about? WinModems? On a corporate desktop?
> Then I have to compile, and compile again. And what am I rewarded with?
You can put on your resume that it no longer takes you 3-4 days to install an OS.
In 3-4 days you could probaly learn most of the desktoppy stuff from scratch.
Sounds a little like they wanted a "super cheap system" rather than a "Free System". If the builders claimed the fault in the machines was Y2K related then it sounds like you got stung by a bunch of cowboys. Y2K doesn't effect Linux and unless their application ran under DOSEMU, they are not telling you the truth. You should have it all independently examined and take the company who built it to court for your money back. Oh and make sure you ask in court if anyone is funding them. ;)
You should have gone to Red Hat, VA or LinuxCare for advice and taken it from there, not let the first bunch who tell you they can do it.
Technically yes, it can run other WMs (that one is called 8 1/2 I think (or 8 1/2 is a clone of that default one which some nicer things) - actually I think that default one is called 8.
Its been ages since I used it at Uni (York, where Vita Nuova sprung from). It was on the undergrad dev machines during my first year before it was savagely replaced by Linux and NT dual booters to wide applause (and tears).
Much of what I remember about it was 'fun' - it does lots differently and the whole the gui apps (its not X) had very different behaviour to what we expect but its is surprisingly smooth to learn and become accustomed to.
But, outside of white coat scientist walks we all run drooling toward eye candy and Linux and its plethory of color won the day among the students.
Forget defining 'karma', how about selfish?
;) but unlike you, I have rather fond feelings of a fair, intelligently run Union of our Tradesmen.
I'm in pretty much the same position as yourself (only 6 figures?
One that has the intelligence to limit itself to matters of universal importance (health care, worker rights and suchlike) would succeed perfectly in realising them and would be a Good Thing for everyone. It is perhaps our last chance as Workers to keep the Corporate Beast in check before we belong to it completely.
We've been lucky my friend but don't let luck make you blind to the misfortune of others.
> What am I missing?
The difference between symetric and asymetric key encryption schemes.
A 56 bit cypher would be the same on both sides and good schemes mean they are usually only breakable by brute force (checking each patter of the 56 bits as the cypher until success).
The public/private key schemes use longer keys because not every pattern of bit in its bit range can occur for the scheme to work. It normally takes 1024 bit in these schemes for the same level of security to be acheived.
Of course, the asymetric schemes have the bonus that you can hand out the public key in untrusted environments such as the net.
In such cases of an unbroken encryption scheme, the leaked details could easily be vendor keys and suchlike.
The measure for protecting against that is indicated in the article linked off the peice. It mentions using a satellite network to revoke comprimised keys but the details of that network would then be candidates for leakage.
Sure, although VNC is rather heavy over a network compaired the how small compressed X can be. VNC is just a networked framebuffer.
It would be kinda cool to have massive bill board sized Digital Canveses in train stations so people can grafiti them (using the trackball on their mobile phones as input devices from the ground in front - each with their own brush on the display), just as an example from the top of my head.
What would be better is an extension to the Xnest X Server to allow it to act as a proxy for the X Commands being sent to itself from the X Client applications. This would allow remote Xnest instances to connect to the central one which would provide their input streams.
The remote X Client's inputs (mouse, keyboard etc) would be sent to the main instance in order to provide remote control.
To remove the reliance on Xnest, the project should be built as simply an X Proxy with no display its own.
It may even handle the connections from remote X Severs over XDMCP allowing any current X Server to use the proxy, rather than just a hacked XFree Xnest.
The remaining issue of how multiple input is handed - whether to merge each set of input streams into one, or to provide for instances of each one (multiple mouse pointers on screen for example) is best thought about more closely I think. There is no current way that much of the X Window System would handle multiple keyboards on the same Screen, or rather for Window Managers to hold 'focus' for each specific input source, although not strictly necessary for this task, I think this could have some interesting effects on how people use and work with computers in groups of two or more.
Firstly, they only really make sense if your applications are OO. Mine are now, I use Zope and its OODBM is amazing (supports transactions, versions, undo etc).
It keeps things elegant, tidy and dev time is slashed considerably (perhaps 40% of similar things in PHP/RDBMS from my experience)
If you don't try them, you'll never know.
http://www.zope.org
> companies have no incentive to give up their IP
> and in fact will probably lose out on the deal
This not only depends on the company, it depends on the *market*!
Who do you think HP and IBM's have identified as their market with their Linux/OSS drive? Who do you think will be running the corporate IT backbone by the time they expect it to be the most prevelent software? Who do you think CAN demand pretty much anything from them? That is the 'WE' and it is us. We can demand anything we like becuase we have the money in OUR pockets. If they won't play, they will look very bad and loose this market. Someone else will come to serve it and they will win it.
I think you'll be very surprised at just how powerful such a simple thing as customers in a connected market can be. We can talk to each other now, not just the "Your call is important to us" voice of 'customer services'.
Divide and conquer has long gone in this sector.
Try http://www.cluetrain.com
Actually its rather the other way round. By lobbying them to act in ways that we free softies and open sourcers find more acceptable, after they have found ways to make money from our efforts, they are sacrificing their own freedom to expliot and perhaps will adopt agreements to behave as we expect of them. (Our ilk are likely to be their biggest customers in future). Its really quite simple and doesn't constitute any loss of freedom on our behalf at all. In fact it is a state of "mutual benefit".
If they play fair, I would imagine some sort of 'seal of approval' is in order since they'd deserve it and hopefully such recognition will encourage others to follow that example. It will make it much harder for Microsoft to hoodwink the less informed if HP, IBM et al suddenly announce their own plans to co-opt Free Software and Open Source and actually have a set of independent (from themselves) standards to adhere to which are.
There is no "legal obligation" from us to these companies, there is a "moral obligation" the other way around and if you for one minute believe that any of the initialed few (ESR, RMS, BP) will, between them, settle for anything less than what we expect of them, then you need to lay off the computer for a few hours and get some sleep.
Nothing agreed will undermine the freedom you have to do what you like with Free Software (within its current terms), except that the summit may result in a promise from these software patent holders to leave your well alone.
A good thing and well timed. How better can IBM and HP make Microsoft look even more out of date (the death toll in the Technology sector) And since their prime concern is money (via the winding path of good publicity and marketing), this is something I expect they will drool on their collective advisory reports about.
It is all about providing some level of 'approval' to those who play by our rules which they are then free to use as they see fit. Its good and hopefully will mean The People have more of a say in how corporates are run, especially since its our money they are aiming for.
Compare and contrast to Apple or Microsoft's positions on the same subject.
Legally it probably classes as truely public domain - it just goes further in assuring the CONTINUAL availablility of it in the public domain via some copyright license agreements.
I don't think you'll have much luck arguing that it isn't Public Domain to a court of law, especially given the nature of PD software being called "FreeWare"
> Which gives everyone more freedom?
Pretty evidently the GPL. In an ideal world, either would work but in this one where people are inherently greedy and self seeking, the GPL ensures that the point in improving the Free Code Base is maintained, and thus it is maintained.
The BSD code base could easily be taken and hoarded, rapidly improved and restricted from public use.
While much BSD codebase is improved to match its hoarded counterparts, this can happen and probably would have happened more had the BSD license been the only one around.
Ironically having the GPL around has given the BSD folks more of a reason to keep up and also has provided another competing system (with more developers).
Both are good for 'us' but only one is 'bad' for those who'd fsck us over.
There is (as with all things) lots of ways to look at this.
We can be skeptical about it and guess at hidden motives that prompted this (such as that given most big SAP customers replace SAPDB with Oracle etc, SAP open sourcing their product may prompt one of the big DB vendors to open their own, leading to the combined price of SAP + Big DB being less without SAP having to do an aweful lot.
Phew, well, maybe, but I doubt it. Chances are some student intern asked it and no one could give a serious answer to why not.
At the end of it all, there is now more code available freely than before and on my scale, that's a Good Thing for us humans and probably the world around us.
If actions speak lowder than words, its often becuase action actually does say something - unlike much of today's corporations output. And if that action is good, then more power to that, we should support it regardless and encourage it more. This way we may end up with everything under Free license in 3 or 4 years.
We can make that happen.
ASP is a framework for page based scripting in multiple langauages (VB and JS out the box but Perl and Python from ActiveState).
;)
Page based scripting is bad, ugly and quickly becomes unmaintable and messy.
Check out Zope, its is an object based, cross platform framework which makes PHP, ASP and JSP look decidedly old hat. At the moment it allows you to use Python and Perl (with an add on). If you haven't tried it, give it a go. I know I've said this a few times here but try it, give it some effort and next time the subject comes up, you'll be saying this
Give Zope another go, since version 2.3.0 its had internal python capabilities (no more external file nastiness). I've not tried Webware but it look conceptually similar to what Zope now offers with the internal python script stuff (except Zope also offers version control and rollback, along with undoability on your objects (practically everything in zope is stored in an object database as a proper object - you can even write your own - think EJB without having to try ;).
No, not really. What matters is...
1. Is the development time so long that buying faster hardware would be cheaper than building it in something just 'faster' at runtime (PHP isn't fast anyway - its just faster than its peers)
2. Does it work (this means does it support transactional operations, simple distribution and integration with third party application that customers may already be tied to.
The above items alone are the prime reasons why Java solutions are very popular. Enhydra is better than PHP by a long way. Don't get me wrong, I like PHP and have built some very complex sites in it but these days I use Zope (www.zope.org) for all that I'd ever use PHP for and its perfect (can I say that?). If you haven't tried it, give it a go, the curve is steep but that's because you end up a lot higher than PHP would get you. Its offers a lot of stuff starting at a built in transactioal object database (no SQL, no tables, just object that persist automatically - the coolest thing your likely to find in the open source world!)
For example in Zope I could put together a simple website with News postings and suchlike in about 1 hour - and the site would cope with undoing changes to practically everything and version control so changes can be made without them being visible to general visitors (again to everything - even the HTML and images).
I'm pretty much against the idea of Java for web sites (simply becuase I'd not use C++ for presentation layers so why is JSP a good idea? Its ugly and one look at Enhydra's XMLC or Zope's new Page Templates makes it look completely crappy). Also now that there are a hundred and one ways to connect anything to Java backend stuff if necessary (XML-RPC, Soap, Corba, DCOM bridges, etc etc) there just isn't the need for Java on the presentation layer.
Anyway, try Zope - give it a month (yes, its a lot longer than it took you to learn PHP but hey, its worth it). Get there and you won't go back.
Zope is to PHP, JSP and Perl as The GIMP is to using a HEX editor to make XPMs
www.zope.org
http://www.python.org/doc/Humor.html#parsing
The over cautious "junk character lameness filter" wouldn't let me quote it, but do look at it, its funny.
Firstly, mozilla isn't really "slow". Its a complex little beast. Its less a "web browser" and more an application framework with built in Javascript engine and cross platform GUI descriptor langauge (XUL).
Practically the entire 'application' is built from XML and Javascript. That's why its so themable and is also why it is being used to develop cross platform applications (www.activestate.com - check out Komodo).
To bypass the slowness, get Galeon. (galeon.sourceforge.net). The latest version is stable and is Just A Web Browser. You need mozilla installed as Galeon uses it as the HTML engine but none of the extra stuff (mail, news, composer) are enabled and it flies along really nicely.
It very rarely crashes, copes with plugins and java perfectly (well, wherever I've tested that anyway) and has a really nice recovery mode which reverts to the open pages you had if ever it does loose its sanity (a very useful feature).
It you want to know how good the vanilla HTML handling in Mozilla is, try it. You really won't be disappointed.
Every CD reader already available will read the data clear text off the disk. It is how the CD spec was agreed and no one can force it to change overnight without replacing all the players and readers out there. At the very least, you will always be able to read the data from the SPDIF digitally.
I fear this is a ploy to prove the point beyond all doubt that nothing can be done to "protect" the current CD format and to usher in the move to closed formats such as DVD-Audio and its like, region coded and all.
There is no other reason that such a technical thing would be employed by a relatively small artist (except to show the before and after napster figures of people offering his works).
I imagine he's currently quite low down the napster chart. I also imagine he'll sky rocket after his album launch.
My advice is ignore this bait, don't buy the album and prove the point in opposite, that we don't want your work in any medium, at any price, if you won't respect our right to fair use (I don't mean the right to give it away on napster, I mean the right to make personal MP3 files from it etc).
This is simply a move to prove with more figures that "fair use == piracy". Don't make it so people.
News is News becuase its SURPRISING. Given the current stock market climate, I think many have become conditioned to think no one can make any money these days with technology products unless they have been here since the 70's.
This is really impressive, RedHat have done something many many other relatively recent internet boom start ups will never achieve. They have proof that their existance doesn't leak money and that is a cue for their customer base to increase exponentially (when you know your supplier is financially comfortable, you don't mind using them). The same game rules for all corporates apply to Open Source / Free Software companies too. Business is after all, business, but RedHat have one very large difference.
This is good for everyone in the Linux and Free Software worlds. It means RedHat can be pretty confident in gaining more funding, employees and clients and can further fund Free Software development for us all. Those of you not into this will benefit (albeit later) from the poker this provides those 1970's companys to improve their offerings, and I hope you enjoy seeing their profits knowing that money could have staying in your pockets.
While I personally don't see corporate success (at least in the distribution vendor sector) as synonimous with Linux's and Free Software success, it is nice to see that the world isn't locked into its technological straight jackets just yet.
Well done to them.
Firstly, the Government cannot hold a copyright over a work. This is good since you tax payers pay for it. They can keep things secret but that's a different matter.
;) made the comments he did, nothing to do with improvement or innovation, it'd simply lose them their biggest customer.
The GPL doesn't mean you are permitted to distribute code, only that if you do, you must abide by its terms. If the works done is subject to classification then you simply can't distribute it, GPL or not. The Army already has the code your obligations under the GPL is complete. If they distribute it then they must follow the terms, but that is between them and who they distribute to really.
If on the other hand you are allowed to distribute it then there shouldn't be any problem with the GPL being used. Frankly I can't see why the military would care what license you distribute something under, as long as you can distribute it.
As for the stallmanite free world, that applies to generic mass market code also, that's why we have Star Office, GNOME and KDE.
In the end there may only be contractual custom code work (done above a free code base). Say, for example, the US Government contracted someone to make GNOME suitable for their entire workforce. That why Microsoft's Allchin (Surely "All-mouth" is better
Phill
So BigExistingCoInc takes an idea that is unpatented and implements it themselves, in the process having to sell it at a lesser price or even give it away free. Fair play, that is called Freedom and it shouldn't stop just because a large number of people are acting in unison. (Microsoft or not).
The problem is that the BigExistings often find ways to remove that freedom from others - including the real SmallNewGuys who are just using their computers / instuments / whatever to entertain and help others.
Personally, I think the removal of the assumed income from 'pattern control' is a low price to pay in exchange for the open ability to improve on what is available without worring about stepping on other peoples patents and copyrights etc.
The only supplied counter argument to support those mechanisms ('that they encourage generation of new works of art and science' - rather than the real reason - 'that they can ensure enourmous profit') is quite weak when you remember that lots of works of art and science were created without such control systems in place and any scientist or musician would be happy working without such an offer of massive wealth (many do already and plenty of good scientific research is government funded). Further the ability for them to work according to their own abilities unrestricted by patent and copyright control will, I think, be a very good thing for the majority of people on this planet.
Sounds a lot like S/MIME digital x509 certs to me. If this is the case then Netscape Communicator will do the job without problems, just make sure you request the key from Netscape in the first place so that it is supplied in the correct format to import (although this may be fixable after the event).
;)
The SSL plugin for Mozilla may add S/MIME support for this task too. Otherwise there's aways openssl on the command like and mutt
Phill