registration needed? No!
on
In Google We Trust
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Registration is not needed! Thanks to google:-)
Just google for the following URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/14/fashion/14 GOOG.h tml
(without the space in "h tml")
Google will tell you that it found no results, but that you can visit the link by clicking onto it. Do that and that's all.
Motivate KDE developers!
on
KDE 3.2.1 Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Except helping in KDE Quality Team or supporting it in various other ways there is a simple thing you can do within a couple of minuts which really help: write an email!
Start one of the many good KDE applications, go to the "help menu" and click on the "about box"->"authors". Pick one or two of them and write them a short email telling them how much you like their application and that you really appreciate what they are doing for us, the open source community.
It's easy and makes them very happy to hear from satisfied users--normally they just hear about it when something is wrong and sending some nice words really keeps them motivated. Thanks.
Please double check when reporting a bug that it really isn't a duplicate. Also be sure to send in backtraces only if you have compiled with debug information. Every bad bug report just costs the developers valueable time which is badly needed for all the features coming with 3.3:
1. copy link location (here: "http://www.nytimes.com/2004/ and so on...") 2. google search for the URL: search for "http:// and so on" 3. ignore that you got no search results and click on the link below "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: " (and yes, it is the same link!) 4. enjoy reading:-)
Reading without registration (using google)
on
Google v. Microsoft
·
· Score: 2, Informative
1. copy link location (here: "http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/ and so on...") 2. google search for the URL: search for "http:// and so on" 3. ignore that you got no search results and click on the link below "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: " (and yes, it is the same link!) 4. enjoy reading:-)
Copy the link, go to google and search for the link. Yes, right, search for it you won't get a result, BUT google will tell you "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link" and if you click that link you have access to that article.
---- thanks to a slashdotter who found out that having the right referrer solves the registration problem:-) my addition was just to not use the browser itself to modify the referrer, but use good old google for that.
While your point is valid, I think that the right to make a copy for your own usage is an important part of our system and society. E.g. some companies would profit if all libraries were closed, but the society would certainly not.
The intention of copyright was to protect the rights of the author, not of the publisher. Unfortunately this has changed and today the author gets only a very small percentage of the total monoey and the copyright is the instrument of the mega-corps to protect their money. Copyright is nothing were the society profits from it just helps a minority to get richer and richer.
I think we made terrible mistakes in the past and it is time to change copyright back to something were the society and not few profit from. Copyright should guarantee the author a fair part of the income, but finaly his work should become a part of public domain. Copyright should be something the society profits from (by giving the author an incentive) and should not be perverted to be used against us (the society).
I totaly agree here with John Gilmore in many many points he a lot others he made in his article:
This means that it is impossible to create commercial closed source KDE applications without purchasing a special license from TrollTech. That gives Gnome a major advantage over KDE for a company that sells software.
If you ever coded something with Qt/KDE resp. Gtk/Gnome then you would know that developing with Qt is a lot faster then with Gtk. This little bit extra development speed counts much more than license fees.
There are also language bindings available for KDE such as Python and Java. Nevertheless the C++ language is the most important interface at the moment. The C++ bindings for gnome are bad (and btw the reason I switched to KDE/Qt) so if Gnome wants to close up they should spend much more work on these bindings. Just have a look at job offerings and compare the number of C++ and C offers and you will easily find out that C is dying. Please don't get me wrong: I like C very much but for writing GUI C++ is certainly a better choice than C (and yes you can write OO with C but there are some disadvantages in doing so, just to mention two: inheritance and type verification)
I also bet you have never had a deeper look at the KDE community. Your mail includes so many prejudices and I am not sure if you are writing such things to make KDE look bad or because you never made the effort to have a closer look at the KDE folks. I think the latter is true since you are not one of the standard Gnome trolls (for the log: KDE trolls exist as well) who says Gnome is better in every aspect--you even admit that KDE is ahead in some areas, wow;-)
Please do me a pleasure: read the KDE lists for a while and you will find out for yourself that the KDE guys are not that bad--in fact they are really nice guys:-)
Yes, I read about the Inti bindings but they are not much different from gtk-- (read: unusable or far behind Qt quality).
Concerning the question of C support for Qt: there is none. But _I_ think that C is slowly dying so this has not a high priority. On the other hand the share of C++ programmers grows and almost nobody of them would like to code the UI in C when there is a good C++ toolkit. To make a long story short: Qt/KDE does IMHO _not_ need C bindings but Gnome/Gtk will fall back if they can't offer good bindings in the future--and they can't at the moment.
About the python support:
1. This is irrelevant for now since there are much more c++ than python programmers
2. Qt/KDE has Python bindings (see theKompany page for more information: VeePee IIRC)
> I don't think, that everybody will be using
> only C++ in the next years.
Of course not everyone, but have a look at the job offerings and you will easily find out that there are two dominating languages: C++ and Java. So believe what you want, but C++/Java are still the languages of choice while there is almost no demand for C programmers.
> > Yet another possibly unfounded impression -
> > I get the feeling that KDE development is
> > moving faster than Gnome development at the
> > moment,
> That's just an impression.:)
Really?:-)
Here are the cvs commits of gnome and kde for the last months:
Month Gnome (evol,ximian) KDE (without real qt commits, without additional theKompany software)
The gnome commits are counted including ximian, eazel. The gnome commits almost stay constant over the time while KDE increases the commits by almost 40%.
I am sure that Gnome will more and more have one problem: the lack of support for C++ (yes, I had a look at gtk-- and it is undocumented and not comparable with qt/kde). More and more developers these days want to use C++ instead of C and for those developers (being one of them) the decision Qt/KDE vs. Gtk/Gnome is easy:)
Nevertheless there is a small but important difference. The KDE article was posted as an X11 event while Gnome gets this extra article. This might look as a small difference but we all know that slashdot articles tend to be more Gnome friendly.
And as somebody mentioned before:
"Every post CmdrTaco does about KDE is riddled with excuses ("Most of what is there is already being done within efm...", "Of course this stuff is really only with icons and images, and not fonts...")."
So the first poster was not completly wrong...
And no: I will not cry:-))
KDE and Qt can *never* be forced back to non-free. They're both GPLed. There's no way to undo that. If they tried integrating non-GPL code with Qt/KDE, they'd be violating the GPL. Therefore they have no choice but to release their code under the GPL.
I think you are wrong here. TrollTech is still the copyright holder of Qt. So nothing can stop them from relasing a Qt3 which is closed source again, BUT on the other hand everybody can work on qt 2.2.x and add what he likes.
I am sure they (tt) will not do it (relase it under a closed liscence) but who know's perhaps they come up with two qt3--one closed with voice recognition, one open without.
1) Doesn't have the backing of multimilion dollar companies behined it, for marketing and development.
Yes, and that is IMHO a good thing. I really do not like the way
Gnome is currently heading. The influence of companies on Gnome
will increase if you like it or not (I do not like it). You may
argue that the steering commitee is independent, but you should know
that economical power ALWAYS means political power.
I have to admit that I am a bit disappointed of the Gnome community
which tries to back such efforts. I liked Gnome more when Miguel was
a hacker and not a manager. Look at Linus T. who had a lot of offers
but strictly seperated his work from his LINUX activities.
(with slight exaggeration)
The day when marketing rules in the free software world will
end the period of the hacking community.
2) see ketbra reply
3) I prefer Gtk+:)
Nice argumentation;-)
I first was a Gnome user until I decided to hack my own application.
I had a look at Gtk+ and Gtk-- and at Qt and from that day on I am
a KDE user because: Gtk+ is not a good solution for someone, who wants
to use C++. Qt/KDE is easier to use (read higher productivity), has
nicer documentation and has really powerfull tools (e.g. a web browser
with 4-8 LOC).
Slashdot Mirror
Registration is not needed! Thanks to google :-)
4 GOOG.h tml
Just google for the following URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/14/fashion/1
(without the space in "h tml")
Google will tell you that it found no results, but that you can visit the link by clicking onto it. Do that and that's all.
Except helping in KDE Quality Team or supporting it in various other ways there is a simple thing you can do within a couple of minuts which really help: write an email!
Start one of the many good KDE applications, go to the "help menu" and click on the "about box"->"authors". Pick one or two of them and write them a short email telling them how much you like their application and that you really appreciate what they are doing for us, the open source community.
It's easy and makes them very happy to hear from satisfied users--normally they just hear about it when something is wrong and sending some nice words really keeps them motivated. Thanks.
And with this new release a new flood of bugs coming in
KDE weekly bug report summaryPlease double check when reporting a bug that it really isn't a duplicate. Also be sure to send in backtraces only if you have compiled with debug information. Every bad bug report just costs the developers valueable time which is badly needed for all the features coming with 3.3:
KDE 3.3 featuresKDEPIM 3.3 features
If you want to help with an even better 3.3 your help in the KDE Quality team is welcome!
KDE, rock on
Doesn't work for me unfortunately :-(
1. copy link location (here: "http://www.nytimes.com/2004/ and so on...") :-)
2. google search for the URL: search for "http:// and so on"
3. ignore that you got no search results and click on the link below "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: " (and yes, it is the same link!)
4. enjoy reading
1. copy link location (here: "http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/ and so on...") :-)
2. google search for the URL: search for "http:// and so on"
3. ignore that you got no search results and click on the link below "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link: " (and yes, it is the same link!)
4. enjoy reading
Copy the link, go to google and search for the link. Yes, right, search for it you won't get a result, BUT google will tell you "If the URL is valid, try visiting that web page by clicking on the following link" and if you click that link you have access to that article.
:-) my addition was just to not use the browser itself to modify the referrer, but use good old google for that.
----
thanks to a slashdotter who found out that having the right referrer solves the registration problem
While your point is valid, I think that the right to make a copy for your own usage is an important part of our system and society. E.g. some companies would profit if all libraries were closed, but the society would certainly not.
The intention of copyright was to protect the rights of the author, not of the publisher. Unfortunately this has changed and today the author gets only a very small percentage of the total monoey and the copyright is the instrument of the mega-corps to protect their money. Copyright is nothing were the society profits from it just helps a minority to get richer and richer.
I think we made terrible mistakes in the past and it is time to change copyright back to something were the society and not few profit from. Copyright should guarantee the author a fair part of the income, but finaly his work should become a part of public domain. Copyright should be something the society profits from (by giving the author an incentive) and should not be perverted to be used against us (the society).
I totaly agree here with John Gilmore in many many points he a lot others he made in his article:
http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.htmlI recommend very much the following article from John Gilmore (EFF, inventer of the alt hierarchy): "What's Wrong With Copy Protection".
http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.htmlThe article is well written and he makes some good and interesting points. Worth a read IMHO.
This means that it is impossible to create commercial closed source KDE applications without purchasing a special license from TrollTech. That gives Gnome a major advantage over KDE for a company that sells software.
If you ever coded something with Qt/KDE resp. Gtk/Gnome then you would know that developing with Qt is a lot faster then with Gtk. This little bit extra development speed counts much more than license fees.
From kde-common/accounts
To be fair the number is slightly to large (you have to reduce the number by about 3).
06.07.00 329
10.08.00 344
29.09.00 360
06.10.00 366
21.11.00 391
10.12.00 402
16.01.01 415
23.02.01 431
22.03.01 454
20.04.01 471
19.05.01 486
18.06.01 506
25.07.01 529
21.08.01 546
There are also language bindings available for KDE such as Python and Java. Nevertheless the C++ language is the most important interface at the moment. The C++ bindings for gnome are bad (and btw the reason I switched to KDE/Qt) so if Gnome wants to close up they should spend much more work on these bindings. Just have a look at job offerings and compare the number of C++ and C offers and you will easily find out that C is dying. Please don't get me wrong: I like C very much but for writing GUI C++ is certainly a better choice than C (and yes you can write OO with C but there are some disadvantages in doing so, just to mention two: inheritance and type verification)
;-)
:-)
I also bet you have never had a deeper look at the KDE community. Your mail includes so many prejudices and I am not sure if you are writing such things to make KDE look bad or because you never made the effort to have a closer look at the KDE folks. I think the latter is true since you are not one of the standard Gnome trolls (for the log: KDE trolls exist as well) who says Gnome is better in every aspect--you even admit that KDE is ahead in some areas, wow
Please do me a pleasure: read the KDE lists for a while and you will find out for yourself that the KDE guys are not that bad--in fact they are really nice guys
Marco
Yes, I read about the Inti bindings but they are not much different from gtk-- (read: unusable or far behind Qt quality).
Concerning the question of C support for Qt: there is none. But _I_ think that C is slowly dying so this has not a high priority. On the other hand the share of C++ programmers grows and almost nobody of them would like to code the UI in C when there is a good C++ toolkit. To make a long story short: Qt/KDE does IMHO _not_ need C bindings but Gnome/Gtk will fall back if they can't offer good bindings in the future--and they can't at the moment.
About the python support:
1. This is irrelevant for now since there are much more c++ than python programmers
2. Qt/KDE has Python bindings (see theKompany page for more information: VeePee IIRC)
> I don't think, that everybody will be using
> only C++ in the next years.
Of course not everyone, but have a look at the job offerings and you will easily find out that there are two dominating languages: C++ and Java. So believe what you want, but C++/Java are still the languages of choice while there is almost no demand for C programmers.
Marco
> > Yet another possibly unfounded impression -
:)
:-)
:)
> > I get the feeling that KDE development is
> > moving faster than Gnome development at the
> > moment,
> That's just an impression.
Really?
Here are the cvs commits of gnome and kde for the last months:
Month Gnome (evol,ximian) KDE (without real qt commits, without additional theKompany software)
03/2001 5389 (517, 218) 8372
02/2001 6088 (380, 296) 7315
01/2001 5052 (684, 200) 7694
12/2000 3835 (360, 145) 5179
11/2000 4388 (400, 185) 5056
10/2000 5519 (627, 120) 5876
09/2000 4444 (500, 51) 6240
08/2000 4644 (619, 38) 5261
07/2000 3993 (600, 1) 7294
06/2000 4097 (512, 3) 6813
05/2000 5872 (573, 7) 6202
The gnome commits are counted including ximian, eazel. The gnome commits almost stay constant over the time while KDE increases the commits by almost 40%.
I am sure that Gnome will more and more have one problem: the lack of support for C++ (yes, I had a look at gtk-- and it is undocumented and not comparable with qt/kde). More and more developers these days want to use C++ instead of C and for those developers (being one of them) the decision Qt/KDE vs. Gtk/Gnome is easy
Marco
Nevertheless there is a small but important difference. The KDE article was posted as an X11 event while Gnome gets this extra article. This might look as a small difference but we all know that slashdot articles tend to be more Gnome friendly.
:-))
And as somebody mentioned before:
"Every post CmdrTaco does about KDE is riddled with excuses ("Most of what is there is already being done within efm...", "Of course this stuff is really only with icons and images, and not fonts...")."
So the first poster was not completly wrong...
And no: I will not cry
--
KDE and Qt can *never* be forced back to non-free. They're both GPLed. There's no way to undo that. If they tried integrating non-GPL code with Qt/KDE, they'd be violating the GPL. Therefore they have no choice but to release their code under the GPL.
I think you are wrong here. TrollTech is still the copyright holder of Qt. So nothing can stop them from relasing a Qt3 which is closed source again, BUT on the other hand everybody can work on qt 2.2.x and add what he likes. I am sure they (tt) will not do it (relase it under a closed liscence) but who know's perhaps they come up with two qt3--one closed with voice recognition, one open without.
1) Doesn't have the backing of multimilion dollar companies behined it, for marketing and development.
Yes, and that is IMHO a good thing. I really do not like the way Gnome is currently heading. The influence of companies on Gnome will increase if you like it or not (I do not like it). You may argue that the steering commitee is independent, but you should know that economical power ALWAYS means political power.
I have to admit that I am a bit disappointed of the Gnome community which tries to back such efforts. I liked Gnome more when Miguel was a hacker and not a manager. Look at Linus T. who had a lot of offers but strictly seperated his work from his LINUX activities.
(with slight exaggeration)
The day when marketing rules in the free software world will end the period of the hacking community.
2) see ketbra reply
3) I prefer Gtk+ :)
Nice argumentation
I first was a Gnome user until I decided to hack my own application. I had a look at Gtk+ and Gtk-- and at Qt and from that day on I am a KDE user because: Gtk+ is not a good solution for someone, who wants to use C++. Qt/KDE is easier to use (read higher productivity), has nicer documentation and has really powerfull tools (e.g. a web browser with 4-8 LOC).