Maybe Apple could build off of KOffice, since the code there is likely a lot cleaner, and it also supports the OASIS standard.
Feature wise there would be some work to do, and they'd have to emulate the QT/KDE framework (which they've already done some of for KHTML), but it would be feasible.
Of course it is probably easier and more profitable for them to use their own Keynote and Pages applications, and add a spreadsheet to it.
It would also be interesting to see how it compares to Apple's new 'launchd' in OS X. For those who don't know what launchd is, here is an excert from apple's website:
Launchd provides faster startup through a unified framework for starting, stopping and managing daemons, and incorporates inetd, init, mach_init, System Starter and related services. Administrators have a single mechanism for auditing, configuring and setting resources limits on services.
Yeah, but a failure of a device put there for convenience could cause other more deadly failures (due to sudden and massive interference from cell phones).
Bingo! Frickin cell phone talkers are always shouting into the damned things. Given the poor reception they might receive in an airplane, it'd only be worse.
One has to wonder whether the Linux for PPC effort might lose a bit of steam now that Apple won't be making PPC workstations (or won't after 2007 anyhow - they'll still be releasing some nice PPC PowerMacs until then).
I'm sure IBM didn't consider the loss of Apple to be a big deal as far as hardware sales, since Apple is pretty low volume and the consoles will more than make up for it. However, it may hurt IBM's big push to OSS developers to port all of their stuff to PPC. In the end, IBM's inability to deliver PPC chips for desktop and notebook use (as well as future portable devices that Jobs eluded to) may hurt PPC and Cell a lot more than they thought.
Maybe they can convince Sony to encourage Linux on the Playstation 3 like they did for PS2, because MS and Nintendo sure as heck aren't going to be thrilled about Linux on their consoles (MS has virtually guaranteed Linux will not run on XBox 360). Linux on the consoles may be the only way we'll see the average hacker having a PPC or Cell machine that they want to play with.
The problem being that KHTML is not platform independant either. It is quite dependant on KDE. What should really happen is that Apple and the KHTML team together write a portable rendering engine that could be used by both projects (ala Gecko). Unfortunately Apple doesn't seem interested in doing that, and the KDE team isn't necessarily that interested in it either. Too bad, because it woud benefit both groups to have a standard rendering engine, just like it has benefited all of the Gecko-based browsers.
You know that if something renders in Mozilla, it'll probably work in Firefox, Galeon, Netscape, etc. This is great for both web developers and the browser teams, as it reduces the amount of testing needed (it especially helps the little-known Gecko-based projects that would never get tested against themselves). The KDE project could benefit hugely from having a truly shared HTML rendering core with Safari, as large developers such as Google already make their pages avaiable in Safari but not Konqueror. Fragmenting KHTML/WebCore only makes both less useful to test against, though this hurts KDE much more than Apple.
It is indeed redundant, though there is a reason for it. A long time ago, there used to be two teams in Hamilton: the Tigers and the Wildcats. When they merged, they took the name Tiger-Cats and kept the tiger logo.
This April Fools they had posted on their website that because of the huge increase in attendance they had in Bob Young's first year of ownership, they were de-merging the team and would operate 2 franchises out of their stadium for this CFL season.
By the way Bob, thanks for buying the team. I don't suppose you want to buy Ottawa's team now do you?
Real also uses the file extension.rpm for something (though I don't remember what it was for). You just need to change your browser settings so that the realplayer plugin doesn't try to open rpms.
Such as report the problem to an editor before it makes the main page?
Oh wait, they don't give a fuck, as long as they get their page hits. Well, maybe that is a bit harsh, since they did add an update later on. But you think they'd at least read the article before posting it. It is sad that the/. editors neither read the articles they are posting, nor read/. itself.
Though it has been this way for years, I think they may have crossed the line when they practically slandered Linus. If Slashdot starts posting lies about the creator of Linux, I have to wonder how long the community will continue to support it.
"this is really an open source community problem and I have to say that the open source community couldn't have failed more than they have." He pointed out that as a long-time open source fanatic and the CEO of BitMover, "we represent as open-source friendly a commercial organization as you are *ever* going to see"
"Unlike the Marine corp, the open source community is more than willing to ignore their bad apples as 'not my problem' (the Marine corp punishes the group for the behavior of the bad apples, pretty soon there are no bad apples)."
This supposed open source fanatic obviously doesn't have a frickin clue. Comparing OSS developers to the Marine corp makes no sense, as there is no single organization that all OSS programmers belong to. Even if you had the desire to do so, you can't sit and police a group when you have no authority. OSDL quite simply wasn't going to stop doing business with a guy because of what he does in his free time, nor should they have to. It is none of their business, nor is it McVoy's.
He's got to be delusional if he thinks he's got the most open source friendly commercial organization out there. There are a lot of companies that work in the OSS world without bullying other developers. McVoy has turned his company into a joke amongst the OSS crowd, and will probably promptly run it bankrupt too. And I have to say, it looks good on him.
"...there may be some products that are, perhaps, not appropriate for that browser."
Someone needs to tell Yahoo that if an application is not appropriate for one standards compliant browser, then it is not appropriate to be a web application. In fact, it really can't be called a web application anymore if it only runs in IE - it is a Windows application at that point.
This whole retraction is just an excuse to cover the fact that they're too lazy to fix all of their buggy code.
What are the Mozilla Foundation's plans regarding the future of XUL as a development platform, especially as it regards competing with IE/XAML/Avalon? Will you push Firefox as a platform in itself like Netscape tried to do with their browser, or will the browser project and the XUL platform be handled seperately?
I ask because it seems like many of the Mozilla 2.0 goals would apply to all XUL applications and the platform itself, not just Firefox. I could see two approaches to the development of Mozilla 2.0 - one being that Firefox becomes the testbed that the Suite used to be, the other being that the FireFox team only worries about producing a browser and another group develops the "platform" as a whole. But how would this platform be developed and tested going forward, and will it be capable of competing with Avalon/XAML?
I'm wondering whether there are any plans to integrate the existing stand-alone applications, and whether this will even be possible now that the Mozilla Foundation is not doing development on all of them.
For example, it might be useful to see integration between two or more of Firefox, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Nvu, the address book, and a chat component. But since the Mozilla Foundation does not develop Nvu or Chatzilla any longer (is anyone working on Chatzilla or any XUL chat app any longer?), this won't necessarily be easy.
Is there any plans to work with Linspire and other application developers to integrate their work with Firefox and Thunderbird? Will the Mozilla Foundation be doing official extensions that bring some of the suite functionality to the stand-alone products?
BTW, does anyone know the reason why this is? From what I understand it is due to them having a far different legal system than the rest of North America, but I don't really know the specifics.
Kind of funny, but it certainly can't help their subscriber rate. Between duplicate stories and completely misleading summaries, it all comes off as very unprofessional.
When the "editors" don't read their own site, or even RTFAs, it doesn't exactly inspire one to pay them money.
True enough. I realize it isn't the NAT bit that is protecting you. I just don't know of too many people who put up a hardware firewall and router just to service one machine behind it (even though it'd be a good idea from a security standpoint) so I've come to associate this setup with NAT.
And as you said, if you have multiple computers, you'll need NAT in order to run Windows Update or whatever online update tool you're using.
A lot of people I work with have taken to calling those little hardware router/firewall units as "NAT boxes", and characterize being on an internal network as being "behind NAT". Both are partially correct, but only describe one piece of the puzzle.
It will prevent some worms from spreading, which does allow for safe online updates. On our campus network, an unpatched machine lasts an average of 20 minutes before being infected, so you can't ever take the risk of installing service packs online unless you're behind NAT.
But you are correct that it does not help prevent spyware and other viruses that come in through IE, email, and infected executables. Since most spyware either comes with commercial software, or installs itself through IE and ActiveX, NAT does nothing at all there.
Well it was saved from being outlawed, which is what allowed the VCR to flourish. Though the court ruling that allowed Betamax to be legal didn't exactly save Betamax in the marketplace.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe Apple could build off of KOffice, since the code there is likely a lot cleaner, and it also supports the OASIS standard.
Feature wise there would be some work to do, and they'd have to emulate the QT/KDE framework (which they've already done some of for KHTML), but it would be feasible.
Of course it is probably easier and more profitable for them to use their own Keynote and Pages applications, and add a spreadsheet to it.
It would also be interesting to see how it compares to Apple's new 'launchd' in OS X. For those who don't know what launchd is, here is an excert from apple's website:
Launchd provides faster startup through a unified framework for starting, stopping and managing daemons, and incorporates inetd, init, mach_init, System Starter and related services. Administrators have a single mechanism for auditing, configuring and setting resources limits on services.
Reference: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
Yeah, but a failure of a device put there for convenience could cause other more deadly failures (due to sudden and massive interference from cell phones).
Bingo! Frickin cell phone talkers are always shouting into the damned things. Given the poor reception they might receive in an airplane, it'd only be worse.
One has to wonder whether the Linux for PPC effort might lose a bit of steam now that Apple won't be making PPC workstations (or won't after 2007 anyhow - they'll still be releasing some nice PPC PowerMacs until then).
I'm sure IBM didn't consider the loss of Apple to be a big deal as far as hardware sales, since Apple is pretty low volume and the consoles will more than make up for it. However, it may hurt IBM's big push to OSS developers to port all of their stuff to PPC. In the end, IBM's inability to deliver PPC chips for desktop and notebook use (as well as future portable devices that Jobs eluded to) may hurt PPC and Cell a lot more than they thought.
Maybe they can convince Sony to encourage Linux on the Playstation 3 like they did for PS2, because MS and Nintendo sure as heck aren't going to be thrilled about Linux on their consoles (MS has virtually guaranteed Linux will not run on XBox 360). Linux on the consoles may be the only way we'll see the average hacker having a PPC or Cell machine that they want to play with.
The problem being that KHTML is not platform independant either. It is quite dependant on KDE. What should really happen is that Apple and the KHTML team together write a portable rendering engine that could be used by both projects (ala Gecko). Unfortunately Apple doesn't seem interested in doing that, and the KDE team isn't necessarily that interested in it either. Too bad, because it woud benefit both groups to have a standard rendering engine, just like it has benefited all of the Gecko-based browsers.
You know that if something renders in Mozilla, it'll probably work in Firefox, Galeon, Netscape, etc. This is great for both web developers and the browser teams, as it reduces the amount of testing needed (it especially helps the little-known Gecko-based projects that would never get tested against themselves). The KDE project could benefit hugely from having a truly shared HTML rendering core with Safari, as large developers such as Google already make their pages avaiable in Safari but not Konqueror. Fragmenting KHTML/WebCore only makes both less useful to test against, though this hurts KDE much more than Apple.
Drivers would be about the only useful thing. Rumour is that Sun took out the license with SCO to get better drivers for Solaris x86.
Even then, there are probably very few drivers in SCO's Unix products that don't have Linux equivalents.
It is indeed redundant, though there is a reason for it. A long time ago, there used to be two teams in Hamilton: the Tigers and the Wildcats. When they merged, they took the name Tiger-Cats and kept the tiger logo.
This April Fools they had posted on their website that because of the huge increase in attendance they had in Bob Young's first year of ownership, they were de-merging the team and would operate 2 franchises out of their stadium for this CFL season.
By the way Bob, thanks for buying the team. I don't suppose you want to buy Ottawa's team now do you?
I find it hard to believe that much Solaris kernel code belongs to anyone other than Sun.
Um, ever heard of SCO?
Real also uses the file extension .rpm for something (though I don't remember what it was for). You just need to change your browser settings so that the realplayer plugin doesn't try to open rpms.
Good point, just read their splash screen to see how many patents they claim are relevant to Acrobat Reader.
Such as report the problem to an editor before it makes the main page?
/. editors neither read the articles they are posting, nor read /. itself.
Oh wait, they don't give a fuck, as long as they get their page hits. Well, maybe that is a bit harsh, since they did add an update later on. But you think they'd at least read the article before posting it. It is sad that the
Though it has been this way for years, I think they may have crossed the line when they practically slandered Linus. If Slashdot starts posting lies about the creator of Linux, I have to wonder how long the community will continue to support it.
"this is really an open source community problem and I have to say that the open source community couldn't have failed more than they have." He pointed out that as a long-time open source fanatic and the CEO of BitMover, "we represent as open-source friendly a commercial organization as you are *ever* going to see"
"Unlike the Marine corp, the open source community is more than willing to ignore their bad apples as 'not my problem' (the Marine corp punishes the group for the behavior of the bad apples, pretty soon there are no bad apples)."
This supposed open source fanatic obviously doesn't have a frickin clue. Comparing OSS developers to the Marine corp makes no sense, as there is no single organization that all OSS programmers belong to. Even if you had the desire to do so, you can't sit and police a group when you have no authority. OSDL quite simply wasn't going to stop doing business with a guy because of what he does in his free time, nor should they have to. It is none of their business, nor is it McVoy's.
He's got to be delusional if he thinks he's got the most open source friendly commercial organization out there. There are a lot of companies that work in the OSS world without bullying other developers. McVoy has turned his company into a joke amongst the OSS crowd, and will probably promptly run it bankrupt too. And I have to say, it looks good on him.
I'm glad I saw it yesterday before it hit Slashdot, while this April Fool's stuff was remotely amusing.
"...there may be some products that are, perhaps, not appropriate for that browser."
Someone needs to tell Yahoo that if an application is not appropriate for one standards compliant browser, then it is not appropriate to be a web application. In fact, it really can't be called a web application anymore if it only runs in IE - it is a Windows application at that point.
This whole retraction is just an excuse to cover the fact that they're too lazy to fix all of their buggy code.
What are the Mozilla Foundation's plans regarding the future of XUL as a development platform, especially as it regards competing with IE/XAML/Avalon? Will you push Firefox as a platform in itself like Netscape tried to do with their browser, or will the browser project and the XUL platform be handled seperately?
I ask because it seems like many of the Mozilla 2.0 goals would apply to all XUL applications and the platform itself, not just Firefox. I could see two approaches to the development of Mozilla 2.0 - one being that Firefox becomes the testbed that the Suite used to be, the other being that the FireFox team only worries about producing a browser and another group develops the "platform" as a whole. But how would this platform be developed and tested going forward, and will it be capable of competing with Avalon/XAML?
I'm wondering whether there are any plans to integrate the existing stand-alone applications, and whether this will even be possible now that the Mozilla Foundation is not doing development on all of them.
For example, it might be useful to see integration between two or more of Firefox, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Nvu, the address book, and a chat component. But since the Mozilla Foundation does not develop Nvu or Chatzilla any longer (is anyone working on Chatzilla or any XUL chat app any longer?), this won't necessarily be easy.
Is there any plans to work with Linspire and other application developers to integrate their work with Firefox and Thunderbird? Will the Mozilla Foundation be doing official extensions that bring some of the suite functionality to the stand-alone products?
Poor Quebec, always excluded from these contests.
BTW, does anyone know the reason why this is? From what I understand it is due to them having a far different legal system than the rest of North America, but I don't really know the specifics.
Heh, that would be asking a lot of the mods and editors around here, since most don't even RTFA.
If IP multicast were ever implemented across the internet, stuff like this would be trivial.
They had dust on their cars in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan too, though probably a fair bit less than Redmond and Seattle had.
Kind of funny, but it certainly can't help their subscriber rate. Between duplicate stories and completely misleading summaries, it all comes off as very unprofessional.
When the "editors" don't read their own site, or even RTFAs, it doesn't exactly inspire one to pay them money.
True enough. I realize it isn't the NAT bit that is protecting you. I just don't know of too many people who put up a hardware firewall and router just to service one machine behind it (even though it'd be a good idea from a security standpoint) so I've come to associate this setup with NAT.
And as you said, if you have multiple computers, you'll need NAT in order to run Windows Update or whatever online update tool you're using.
A lot of people I work with have taken to calling those little hardware router/firewall units as "NAT boxes", and characterize being on an internal network as being "behind NAT". Both are partially correct, but only describe one piece of the puzzle.
It will prevent some worms from spreading, which does allow for safe online updates. On our campus network, an unpatched machine lasts an average of 20 minutes before being infected, so you can't ever take the risk of installing service packs online unless you're behind NAT.
But you are correct that it does not help prevent spyware and other viruses that come in through IE, email, and infected executables. Since most spyware either comes with commercial software, or installs itself through IE and ActiveX, NAT does nothing at all there.
Well it was saved from being outlawed, which is what allowed the VCR to flourish. Though the court ruling that allowed Betamax to be legal didn't exactly save Betamax in the marketplace.