What about Gnome closed apps? [Re:Good riddance]
on
Eazel Come, Eazel Go?
·
· Score: 1
1. Point one existed only as a prelude to point 2. However look no further than the thousands of closed apps on every OS to see why QT isn't special there.
2. No. I mean you can use Motif or GTK. KDE is mostly compatible with both. I.e. drag and drop etc... Icons and menus are simply about puting a script and a.xpm graphic in the correct place. Install Star Office 5.2 on a system running KDE 1.x. See what happens.
3. What's your point? You don't need professional tools to build the stuff nobody wants. Talk to the authors of every piece of shareware you have EVER paid for. Tell me which of them was built using free tools only. Tell me which wasn't spending $1200 per week per programer and would be happy to shave a month off the development time if it could be done at that cost.
4. Did you talk to Corel about this?
4b. I love when people bring up BSD when talking about how to make Linux more popular. Advise people on stuff you do better than them. I.e. The Open BSD teem can teach the Linux teem about security. Free/open/net BSD can't teach Linux about marketing.
5. WinZip isn't crummy. It's a professional tool that was developed by professionals who spent a lot of money buying development tools.
Linux doesn't count as freeware. Don't confuse freeware with Free Software. I was talking about the stuff built using Visual *** and other expensive tools and given away in binary form for free.
Finally. There are actual closed source KDE applications on the market or in beta right now. kISDN-Pro and a couple of the products from theKompany.com for instance.
What about Gnome closed apps?
Re:Good riddance to yet another bad business model
on
Eazel Come, Eazel Go?
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
1. You don't have to use QT to make a closed source application.
2. You don't have to use QT to make a closed source KDE application.
3. Any app that isn't going to easily make $1200 ( 100 copies at $20 each minus media costs ) should be given away in source form so it can be brought up to the standard of viable shareware.
4. If you want to sell a closed source product for profit then pay for the privilege.
4b. It's pure hypocrisy to demand free stuff when you won't give anything away.
5. I think the Linux desktop will be better off if we can stall for another year or 2 the arrival of lots of crummy little binary only shareware.
Have you been to tocows lately? The freeware generally has better quality in most categories.
6. In any case the point is mute because no matter what is decided on Slashdot, Gnome will continue to exist and grow for years to come. If it falters that will be because the developers loose interest, not because a few companies fail or even KDE widening the gap (the latter would deepen there resolve actually)
SO-5.2 was almost a KDE app [Re:Is Gnome next?]
on
Eazel Come, Eazel Go?
·
· Score: 1
when you install Star Office on KDE it gets placed into the menue structure. At least SO 5.x did on KDE 1.x
This is what a desktop is about. It's just that back then Gnome didn't have a clear enogh set of standards for them to try and comply. I sospect the next version will integrate with both or perhaps tow the company line and be Gnome only.
Re:Good riddance to yet another bad business model
on
Eazel Come, Eazel Go?
·
· Score: 2
For the record you don't have to pay for QT until you actually start selling your product. This means that you can design and build it for free and then if it looks viable you pay Troll and put it on the market.
If you aren't going to make $1,200 (the full list price of QT) in very short order you probably have a dud product that's not commercially viable. You know something of the caliber of Linux-0.0.2 and which should be treated in a similar manner.
As for those pore students and struggling commercial developers on Windows, guess what? If the development environment didn't cost them over $1,200 then they are using just the GNU tools etc... If they are using simplified GUI toolkits or an IDE for less it means pirated software.
Finally. KDE has clearly defined standards, UI requirements and communications protocols. You can build a full KDE application without actually using the KDE or QT libs. Star Office came very close in the last couple versions.
In short if Gnome was to disappear it wouldn't make QT a monopoly. An advantage perhaps but not a monopoly.
The potential for chips frying is the cost of an open market and it is a low cost indeed. You see you can get the case, motherboard, CPU and fans from different vendors. You have to make sure they all work together well.
With PPC the burnouts aren't as common because the whole thing is designed by a single vendor. The upshot is that when you buy X86 from one of the better vendors (And there are still literally thousands of "better vendors") the fan is big enough for the chip and the Motherboard is compatible.
As for the design features. Shorter pipelines and cleaner design doesn't mean squat when your database can't handle 1/2 the users mine dose despite us spending the same amount on our systems.
For the record $5,000 buys you dual P3s at 1GH, a GB of RAM and RAID. You will still have change left over for 1/2 dozen Ethernet adapters including a couple of gigabit ones. Sure it's more stuff and perhaps lower quality stuff but it still gets a larger portion of the job done.
Finally there is the situation where I can get a new ATX motherboard or ATX case from any of 80+ vendors within a 25 minute drive (in heavy traffic) of where I live. I speak definitively about Kingston Jamaica on this but I am willing to lay money on that this is typical in other cities worldwide.
For closed stuff you have little if any choice in vendors and the WILL gauge your eyes out. I have seen grown men discard a whole system because the power supply failed. On a PC this is a $15 part. On that Mac it was a $250 part which had to be flown in from a distant dealer at additional cost.
When you get a grasp of the real cost advantages come back to me.
PS: Even if I buy a 3rd CPU for each of my dual systems it would still leave me ahead of the game.
You can get X86 CPUs from at least 4 vendors who compete aggressively. PPC chips are manufactured by a 3 member cartel ( Apple, IBM and Motorola ). 3rd party PPC vendors exist at the mercy of this cartel since they totally own the architecture.
Those 3rd party vendors who do supply PPC systems are few and far between. The prices are also considerably higher. Yes I mean that in terms of performance. I.e. If you buy a $5000 PPC-Linux server to run your business on the $5000 x86 Linux server will run rings around it. Until you have the legions of vendors who openly hate each others guts, PPC will not be price/performance competitive.
the news sucks but it's still true.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
The ONLY problem with PPC is that it's very closed hardware. I.e. If you buy a PPC based system you will likely have a single source for upgrades and replacement parts. As is typical in such situations this single source charges an arm and a leg for everything.
What this translates to is that you should not be considering low end or midrange PPC systems for anything that doesn't absolutely depend on that architecture. High end is different in that sometimes you just have to have the fastest no matter what. As for stuff that's bound to PPC. If you have it you have no choice. Linux isn't one of those things.
Everything I have said here applies to Spark, PA-Risk, S390 and some very proprietary, name brand PCs. For most jobs generic x86 is the best choice because after you choose it you can still decide where to buy each and every component, thus forcing the vendors to jump through hoops to get at your money.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
If you really want to keep ever get business from that client again then let the security problems sit. I know it will grate on your conscience but this is like seeing your friend cheat on his wife. If you report it you will be called a lier.
How you proceed is to keep contact with all your clients ( including those you lost ) in a generic way. Offer them new services. Send them brochures for security audits etc... Let them know this is something you are selling to everyone.
I.e. Have a special. A demo of some security tool or other along with a discount if they are impressed and a full audit all for one low price. Do it that way and you might make more than you expect and maintain the respect of all involved.
Remember also to include the VAR you lost to in this mailing because they are a potential customer. If you really care about your lost clients not getting hurt then teaching the goy _they_ chose is not a bad idea.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
The other thing is that this elevator cannot be a direct lift into orbit. In order to work you need to break the climb into stages. The 1st would be a conventional aircraft up to a floating platform ( think 30 blimps in a cluster ).
The second and 3rd stages would also be blimp clusters but at increasing altitudes. That gets you well above the stratorfare and hence above weather etc... You then have the final hop to a low orbit satellite or space station...
Not as convenient as the original plan but this could possibly work without damage to the strand causing the whole thing to come crashing down in an unplanned manner ( Planing is key since the station would likely be bigger than Mir. If it comes down you better make sure it lands in the ocean. I can't imagine the kind of liability suite you would face for wiping out a small town.
PS: The individual stages could also tumble but spliting reduces both the risk and the extent of damage if it hapens.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I have seen something like this device. It's called NetBUI. I know one corp that has over 200 PCs on NetBUI in a LAN and the broadcast traphic is so heavy that Telnet falls over on ocasion.
I used to watch that show on SiFi. All the movies they did stank but the coments just made the whole experience fun.
I wish they would do "Big Sister 2000".
This is the worst low budget movie ever in my book. Watching it gives the distinkt impresion that someone rented equiptment and emploied cast and crew to do 4 porn flics in a week. He got them all done by Friday morning and then set out to creat this monstrosity betwean Friday afternoon and Saturday night with the same cast, crew and equiptment from the porno flics.
The tipoff to this scenario was females playing male characters ( Militery gear with partial masks and paded jakets make it almost beliveble. )
Sure Cloning is newer than Gen Mods but it is less dangerus on a small scale.
I.e. The downside of cloning is when you have lots of identical people with many of the same weakneses. A single incorectly modifide subject however can wreck onknown havoc.
Yes I have. Acording to Microsofts published financial statements of the last few quarters.
revenue from Server OS sales are down. Desktop OS revenue is stedy. Office Suite Revenue is diving.
More than 100% of Microsofts profits comes from the sale of outside investments. In other words they are lusing money elsware. And no, don't blame Internet venuters like hotmail and MSN. Those have NEVER been profitable.
In other words Microsoft is a very profitable bank and investment fund manager
Windows **, Office, Visual **. Those were the only profitable areas for the company and the profits there are down.
Microsoft is luseing marketshare. It's OS and Office Suite sales are down and it is actualy lusing money on the software side of it's business.
To top it off you have this Linux thing which regardless of how you slice it will dictate that companies like Microsoft will make less money off each copy sold. If they adopt open sorce it means they will actualy sell fewer copies even if more people use the code.
What do you want tthem to do? Just role over and take it up the tail pipe? Of course not. They are going to go down fighting. They will not let us eat there lunch onchalenged.
This "brutal asoult on logic" is a perfect reasonable response from any company in the situation MS is. They need to do this in order to stall enogh people long enogh to let MS migrate into businesses that will be lucretive in the future. the sale of desktop OSs and comodity apps is not one of those businesses and they know it better than we do.
"That's a screwed up statement, why, if nobody stole the idea from rambus, should they be entitled to anything?"
Because that's how patents work. Copyright implies that your work must be derived or copied from mine to be infringing. Patents however just say it must be the same thing produced at a latter date.
Simply put an illiterate blind man on a desert island can violate the patent of somebody he has never herd of. Doesn't matter if he never read the patent or saw a device from the author of said patent.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I think this article was unfair to the Psychic Friends. For one thing the author posted all the problems to the same technician back to back. They also ignored his suggestion to call another Psychic Friend the following day.
I suspect they might have hit a solution on some of the issues if they had treated the friends as they had treated Microsoft. However the refund thing is a different matter.
Simply upgrade the hardware and bandwidth to cope with increased loads but don't improve the site. I.e. Don't add more editors to a news site. Don't build a biger test lab to support a technical site just keap it efectivly the same little site but on a biger box with a fatter pipe.
What this dose is make the site running costs into known quantities. A T3 or a P4 costs $x and will only get cheaper. Your labor costs will not increse but your add revenue might.
Another side benifit of this is that it slows the rate at which new visitors are added.
Slashdot has since it's inception limited fruntpage stories to a single paragraph. Usualy with only a few sentences. In other words, not longer than the 1st paragraph of this story.
Why the suden shift and when will Rob corect it by moving that extra gunk to a side page.
ViaVoice outload is the clearest text to speech I have ever herd. This includes the expensive ( >$800 ) JAWS for Windows
The problem is that what this project really needs to work is for VV bindings in QT and KDE to be a simple compile time option. However VV is proprietary and unlike the situation with QT a few years ago we can't see the source code.
Sure, it's documented well enough that they got it to work. The problem is what happens when IBM comes up with a pricing method and distribution restrictions for this thing.
I and others have been nagging IBM to release the source code for this thing under a free license but they won't budge. The KDE team will not take the flack they suffered over QT again. Especially not for IBM because frankly YOU CAN'T TRUST IBM. We can work with them on our terms however but this kind of thing is a nono.
In the mean time blind people are being forced to use second rate operating systems.
Yes. It is plain to see. good voice synthesis is extremely hard as programing jobs go. It would be nice if IBM helped us out here. This doesn't mean the wheel won't be reinvented to get around this however.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
What were you talking about here ?
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=01/04/01/003 32 23&cid=500
at the risk of sounding inflamatory for bringing up the Nazi's, Gun Control, Germany, instituted in '38 or '39. and i'll bet every family minded person wanted there kid in that nice 'youth group.' (offtopic)
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I live in a contry where you can get 15 years in prison for having an onused and onlicensed gun in your poosesion.
We still manage 800 to 1100 morders per year for the last 1/2 decade. The total population is 2.7 million which makes this a huge anual slaughter.
Would we be worse off with less stringent gun laws ? 30 years ago we had 40 murders in the year before this law was enacted. We are curently in the top 3 cuntrys to get killed worldwide so it seams preposturus to claim no gun ban would have made us worse off.
All this proves is that there is more to the social order than simple things like "ban guns" or "remove violent movies and games".
Slashdot Mirror
1. Point one existed only as a prelude to point 2. However look no further than the thousands of closed apps on every OS to see why QT isn't special there.
.xpm graphic in the correct place. Install Star Office 5.2 on a system running KDE 1.x. See what happens.
2. No. I mean you can use Motif or GTK. KDE is mostly compatible with both. I.e. drag and drop etc... Icons and menus are simply about puting a script and a
3. What's your point? You don't need professional tools to build the stuff nobody wants. Talk to the authors of every piece of shareware you have EVER paid for. Tell me which of them was built using free tools only. Tell me which wasn't spending $1200 per week per programer and would be happy to shave a month off the development time if it could be done at that cost.
4. Did you talk to Corel about this?
4b. I love when people bring up BSD when talking about how to make Linux more popular. Advise people on stuff you do better than them. I.e. The Open BSD teem can teach the Linux teem about security. Free/open/net BSD can't teach Linux about marketing.
5. WinZip isn't crummy. It's a professional tool that was developed by professionals who spent a lot of money buying development tools.
Linux doesn't count as freeware. Don't confuse freeware with Free Software. I was talking about the stuff built using Visual *** and other expensive tools and given away in binary form for free.
Finally. There are actual closed source KDE applications on the market or in beta right now. kISDN-Pro and a couple of the products from theKompany.com for instance.
What about Gnome closed apps?
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
1. You don't have to use QT to make a closed source application.
2. You don't have to use QT to make a closed source KDE application.
3. Any app that isn't going to easily make $1200 ( 100 copies at $20 each minus media costs ) should be given away in source form so it can be brought up to the standard of viable shareware.
4. If you want to sell a closed source product for profit then pay for the privilege.
4b. It's pure hypocrisy to demand free stuff when you won't give anything away.
5. I think the Linux desktop will be better off if we can stall for another year or 2 the arrival of lots of crummy little binary only shareware.
Have you been to tocows lately? The freeware generally has better quality in most categories.
6. In any case the point is mute because no matter what is decided on Slashdot, Gnome will continue to exist and grow for years to come. If it falters that will be because the developers loose interest, not because a few companies fail or even KDE widening the gap (the latter would deepen there resolve actually)
when you install Star Office on KDE it gets placed into the menue structure. At least SO 5.x did on KDE 1.x
This is what a desktop is about. It's just that back then Gnome didn't have a clear enogh set of standards for them to try and comply. I sospect the next version will integrate with both or perhaps tow the company line and be Gnome only.
For the record you don't have to pay for QT until you actually start selling your product. This means that you can design and build it for free and then if it looks viable you pay Troll and put it on the market.
If you aren't going to make $1,200 (the full list price of QT) in very short order you probably have a dud product that's not commercially viable. You know something of the caliber of Linux-0.0.2 and which should be treated in a similar manner.
As for those pore students and struggling commercial developers on Windows, guess what? If the development environment didn't cost them over $1,200 then they are using just the GNU tools etc... If they are using simplified GUI toolkits or an IDE for less it means pirated software.
Finally. KDE has clearly defined standards, UI requirements and communications protocols. You can build a full KDE application without actually using the KDE or QT libs. Star Office came very close in the last couple versions.
In short if Gnome was to disappear it wouldn't make QT a monopoly. An advantage perhaps but not a monopoly.
The potential for chips frying is the cost of an open market and it is a low cost indeed. You see you can get the case, motherboard, CPU and fans from different vendors. You have to make sure they all work together well.
With PPC the burnouts aren't as common because the whole thing is designed by a single vendor. The upshot is that when you buy X86 from one of the better vendors (And there are still literally thousands of "better vendors") the fan is big enough for the chip and the Motherboard is compatible.
As for the design features. Shorter pipelines and cleaner design doesn't mean squat when your database can't handle 1/2 the users mine dose despite us spending the same amount on our systems.
For the record $5,000 buys you dual P3s at 1GH, a GB of RAM and RAID. You will still have change left over for 1/2 dozen Ethernet adapters including a couple of gigabit ones. Sure it's more stuff and perhaps lower quality stuff but it still gets a larger portion of the job done.
Finally there is the situation where I can get a new ATX motherboard or ATX case from any of 80+ vendors within a 25 minute drive (in heavy traffic) of where I live. I speak definitively about Kingston Jamaica on this but I am willing to lay money on that this is typical in other cities worldwide.
For closed stuff you have little if any choice in vendors and the WILL gauge your eyes out. I have seen grown men discard a whole system because the power supply failed. On a PC this is a $15 part. On that Mac it was a $250 part which had to be flown in from a distant dealer at additional cost.
When you get a grasp of the real cost advantages come back to me.
PS: Even if I buy a 3rd CPU for each of my dual systems it would still leave me ahead of the game.
We have different definitions of "plenty".
You can get X86 CPUs from at least 4 vendors who compete aggressively. PPC chips are manufactured by a 3 member cartel ( Apple, IBM and Motorola ). 3rd party PPC vendors exist at the mercy of this cartel since they totally own the architecture.
Those 3rd party vendors who do supply PPC systems are few and far between. The prices are also considerably higher. Yes I mean that in terms of performance. I.e. If you buy a $5000 PPC-Linux server to run your business on the $5000 x86 Linux server will run rings around it. Until you have the legions of vendors who openly hate each others guts, PPC will not be price/performance competitive.
the news sucks but it's still true.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
The ONLY problem with PPC is that it's very closed hardware. I.e. If you buy a PPC based system you will likely have a single source for upgrades and replacement parts. As is typical in such situations this single source charges an arm and a leg for everything.
What this translates to is that you should not be considering low end or midrange PPC systems for anything that doesn't absolutely depend on that architecture. High end is different in that sometimes you just have to have the fastest no matter what. As for stuff that's bound to PPC. If you have it you have no choice. Linux isn't one of those things.
Everything I have said here applies to Spark, PA-Risk, S390 and some very proprietary, name brand PCs. For most jobs generic x86 is the best choice because after you choose it you can still decide where to buy each and every component, thus forcing the vendors to jump through hoops to get at your money.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
If you really want to keep ever get business from that client again then let the security problems sit. I know it will grate on your conscience but this is like seeing your friend cheat on his wife. If you report it you will be called a lier.
How you proceed is to keep contact with all your clients ( including those you lost ) in a generic way. Offer them new services. Send them brochures for security audits etc... Let them know this is something you are selling to everyone.
I.e. Have a special. A demo of some security tool or other along with a discount if they are impressed and a full audit all for one low price. Do it that way and you might make more than you expect and maintain the respect of all involved.
Remember also to include the VAR you lost to in this mailing because they are a potential customer. If you really care about your lost clients not getting hurt then teaching the goy _they_ chose is not a bad idea.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I'll be taking a little of my time to dig through this to see how many of the well hyped performance hacks actually work as advertised.
Too bad the do little detailed things like lines of code and Stat rather than how much RAM/CPU dose your dynamic web server need to saturate a T1.
Still educational for the none kernel hacker in any case.
I'm getting confused.
Wouldn't spliting it into stages reduce the likelyhood of it whiping the equator into a frenzy ?
The other thing is that this elevator cannot be a direct lift into orbit. In order to work you need to break the climb into stages. The 1st would be a conventional aircraft up to a floating platform ( think 30 blimps in a cluster ).
The second and 3rd stages would also be blimp clusters but at increasing altitudes. That gets you well above the stratorfare and hence above weather etc... You then have the final hop to a low orbit satellite or space station...
Not as convenient as the original plan but this could possibly work without damage to the strand causing the whole thing to come crashing down in an unplanned manner ( Planing is key since the station would likely be bigger than Mir. If it comes down you better make sure it lands in the ocean. I can't imagine the kind of liability suite you would face for wiping out a small town.
PS: The individual stages could also tumble but spliting reduces both the risk and the extent of damage if it hapens.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I have seen something like this device. It's called NetBUI. I know one corp that has over 200 PCs on NetBUI in a LAN and the broadcast traphic is so heavy that Telnet falls over on ocasion.
Now the coments make sence.
I used to watch that show on SiFi. All the movies they did stank but the coments just made the whole experience fun.
I wish they would do "Big Sister 2000".
This is the worst low budget movie ever in my book. Watching it gives the distinkt impresion that someone rented equiptment and emploied cast and crew to do 4 porn flics in a week. He got them all done by Friday morning and then set out to creat this monstrosity betwean Friday afternoon and Saturday night with the same cast, crew and equiptment from the porno flics.
The tipoff to this scenario was females playing male characters ( Militery gear with partial masks and paded jakets make it almost beliveble. )
what dose "MST3k" mean.
That's a new one for me.
Sure Cloning is newer than Gen Mods but it is less dangerus on a small scale.
I.e. The downside of cloning is when you have lots of identical people with many of the same weakneses. A single incorectly modifide subject however can wreck onknown havoc.
I.e. What if there realy is an "evil gean"
If by "OS" you mean "Open Source", I likely won't be caling you. I don't see Free Software as a very good way to make lots of money.
However, that dosn't stop it from limiting the ability of some other companies to make lots of money.
This is actualy a good thing. It means that even when the money stops flowing the software will keap going.
Yes I have. Acording to Microsofts published financial statements of the last few quarters.
revenue from Server OS sales are down. Desktop OS revenue is stedy. Office Suite Revenue is diving.
More than 100% of Microsofts profits comes from the sale of outside investments. In other words they are lusing money elsware. And no, don't blame Internet venuters like hotmail and MSN. Those have NEVER been profitable.
In other words Microsoft is a very profitable bank and investment fund manager
Windows **, Office, Visual **. Those were the only profitable areas for the company and the profits there are down.
Be reasonable people.
Microsoft is luseing marketshare. It's OS and Office Suite sales are down and it is actualy lusing money on the software side of it's business.
To top it off you have this Linux thing which regardless of how you slice it will dictate that companies like Microsoft will make less money off each copy sold. If they adopt open sorce it means they will actualy sell fewer copies even if more people use the code.
What do you want tthem to do? Just role over and take it up the tail pipe? Of course not. They are going to go down fighting. They will not let us eat there lunch onchalenged.
This "brutal asoult on logic" is a perfect reasonable response from any company in the situation MS is. They need to do this in order to stall enogh people long enogh to let MS migrate into businesses that will be lucretive in the future. the sale of desktop OSs and comodity apps is not one of those businesses and they know it better than we do.
"That's a screwed up statement, why, if nobody stole the idea from rambus, should they be entitled to anything?"
Because that's how patents work. Copyright implies that your work must be derived or copied from mine to be infringing. Patents however just say it must be the same thing produced at a latter date.
Simply put an illiterate blind man on a desert island can violate the patent of somebody he has never herd of. Doesn't matter if he never read the patent or saw a device from the author of said patent.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I think this article was unfair to the Psychic Friends. For one thing the author posted all the problems to the same technician back to back. They also ignored his suggestion to call another Psychic Friend the following day.
I suspect they might have hit a solution on some of the issues if they had treated the friends as they had treated Microsoft. However the refund thing is a different matter.
Simply upgrade the hardware and bandwidth to cope with increased loads but don't improve the site. I.e. Don't add more editors to a news site. Don't build a biger test lab to support a technical site just keap it efectivly the same little site but on a biger box with a fatter pipe.
What this dose is make the site running costs into known quantities. A T3 or a P4 costs $x and will only get cheaper. Your labor costs will not increse but your add revenue might.
Another side benifit of this is that it slows the rate at which new visitors are added.
Slashdot has since it's inception limited fruntpage stories to a single paragraph. Usualy with only a few sentences. In other words, not longer than the 1st paragraph of this story.
Why the suden shift and when will Rob corect it by moving that extra gunk to a side page.
The problem is that what this project really needs to work is for VV bindings in QT and KDE to be a simple compile time option. However VV is proprietary and unlike the situation with QT a few years ago we can't see the source code.
Sure, it's documented well enough that they got it to work. The problem is what happens when IBM comes up with a pricing method and distribution restrictions for this thing.
I and others have been nagging IBM to release the source code for this thing under a free license but they won't budge. The KDE team will not take the flack they suffered over QT again. Especially not for IBM because frankly YOU CAN'T TRUST IBM. We can work with them on our terms however but this kind of thing is a nono.
In the mean time blind people are being forced to use second rate operating systems.
Yes. It is plain to see. good voice synthesis is extremely hard as programing jobs go. It would be nice if IBM helped us out here. This doesn't mean the wheel won't be reinvented to get around this however.
-- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
What were you talking about here ?3 32 23&cid=500
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=01/04/01/00
at the risk of sounding inflamatory for bringing up the Nazi's, Gun Control, Germany, instituted in '38 or '39. and i'll bet every family minded person wanted there kid in that nice 'youth group.' (offtopic)
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
I live in a contry where you can get 15 years in prison for having an onused and onlicensed gun in your poosesion.
We still manage 800 to 1100 morders per year for the last 1/2 decade. The total population is 2.7 million which makes this a huge anual slaughter.
Would we be worse off with less stringent gun laws ? 30 years ago we had 40 murders in the year before this law was enacted. We are curently in the top 3 cuntrys to get killed worldwide so it seams preposturus to claim no gun ban would have made us worse off.
All this proves is that there is more to the social order than simple things like "ban guns" or "remove violent movies and games".