20 times... that would be a billion dollars. Linux has probably already "cost" Microsoft well over a billion dollars in revenue, and that is bound to only exponentiate.
I bet anything that MS would pay $20 billion if it would get rid of Open Source for good.
> With Java you have easy access to a lot of OOP features that are very difficult to implement in Php, and the function base is simple to expand. Yea it's big and beefy, but that's what you need sometimes.
Right. Take a heavily OOP PHP program, which has everything in a class, neatly designed into a great architecture. Now, for EVERY SINGLE FREEKING HTTP REQUEST, it has to parse a boatload of OOP code, then run it, creating all the objects. PHP objects cannot persist between page requests. (I don't know if Java objects can or not, but at least they wouldn't have to be recompiled each time.)
I saw one project die a horrible death for exactly that reason. Each HTTP request took quite a few seconds.
And I'm afraid Xaraya, which looks like a very slick new CMS, is going to follow suit. I've tried it, played with it, looked at the code. And it's parsing quite a bit with each request, and on my server each request took at LEAST two seconds, sometimes quite a bit longer.
> Its like going to the races and putting on 50 million on a 40-1 outsider. Except that in this instance, by giving the horse 50 million, you increase its chance of winning substantially.
Huh? It will certainly help them be a pest longer.
But the facts are still solidly against them, and they will be annihilated in court no matter how much money they have.
Heck, this will give them money that the judge can award as damages to all the Linux companies they've harmed.
Or even just offer it for a lower price, but maybe higher than the student price.
I once talked to a lady at Wolfram about offering a version of Mathematica for interested end-users who were no longer students. Told her I'd gladly pay $400 or so for it. (The student version was like $130 and the full version like $1200.) She actually seemed to take the suggestion seriously, but I never heard anything back regarding a decision.
I once had a Mozilla 1.3 Alpha with SVG build, and it rendered these files perfectly. I was using Red Hat at the time.
Now I'm using Gentoo, and I emerge Mozilla with mozsvg in my USE flags, which of course builds an SVG enabled Mozilla. Cool.
Except that the croczilla files look like crap. They are rendered B&W, all color is gone. AND the image gets corrupted every time 1) you open a menu over it, or 2) part of it is manipulated with DOM. None of this was a problem with that old build I had.
I also just downloaded the latest SVG build from Mozilla's site, in case there was something wrong with the ebuild process. It had the same problems.
My questions:
1. Is everyone else getting the same screwed up results when viewing SVG in Mozilla? If not, I'm wondering if there's a problem with a library I have installed.
2. Has anyone tried the Croczilla files with a recent Konqueror CVS? Do they work? Including the DOM transformations?
I'm not sure if KDE uses libart or not. Probably not; I think KSVG is an independent implementation.
But, KDE *could* use libart because libart is LGPL. KDE is GPL, and GPL'd code can import LGPL libraries, no problem. But Mozilla is licenced under GPL, LGPL, *and* the Mozilla Public License, which is not GPL/LGPL compatible. (Correct me if I'm wrong; that's a possibility.)
If KDE uses its own, it would probably also be either GPL or LGPL, so it wouldn't have any advantages over libart.
Really it's not that big a deal. I don't think Mozilla *needs* to include libart, but SVG should just be an optional configure step if libart is on the system. I *do* think that Linux distro vendors should start shipping Mozilla with SVG enabled, though. There's absolutely no legal problem with that.
I've thought about some, and how about this for an idea?
Write up an e-mail to educate new (and old) e-mail users about e-mail etiquette. Include the following:
1. If you get an email advertising something from a company you have not done business with it, simply delete it. Explain why this is bad. Tell them not to fight it unless they know what they're doing.
2. Overview of e-mail forward hoaxes. Tell them not to forward outrageous stories unless they know them to be true.
3. Tell them not to include everyone they talk to on their forward-list without asking.
4. Tell them to not include.DOC files or large images in an email without being sure the recipient can handle the file.
5. Tell them to disable HTML image loading in mail, as it can be used by spammers to verify your address.
6. Forward this to every new Internet user you know, and everyone who violates any of the other rules. (And let this be the LAST message you mass forward!)
7. More???
Then, put that up on a web site with a textbox for entering e-mail addresses. The system would send the message to all those addresses.
Yeah, I hear what you're saying about war. US policy has seemingly been extremely inconsistant. We also sponsored some pretty nasty deeds in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua (I've been too all three and seen the effects).
I guess what determines whether we "get involved" or not in any given situation is the perceived threat to us, regardless of whether or not it is rational.
In Afghanistan, I think the threat to us was fairly clear. Al-Queada, with the full approval of the Taliban, carried out 9/11. And they were probably using Afghan shelters to plan further attacks.
In Iraq, there was a perceived threat, but Bush was probably jumping the gun.
In Central America, the "threat" was Communism. Not even that, but just some socialist policies which would have helped the poor class have a chance. How we interpreted that as a threat to us is beyond me. But it happened.
Nobody thinks Liberia is a threat to us. So our involvement there will probably be limited to a token just to look like we care.
Anyway, the military is one area where I'm not particularly conservative.:) I actually have a pacifist Mennonite background. I'm giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on some of this stuff because I can also see where he's coming from, and I think his motives are sincere.
Still, ideally, we'd get the heck out of the Middle East completely, including support for Israel. We'd save a lot of money, and have a lot fewer enemies!
> As for Dean. You probably argee with him on lots of issues. He is pro gun, fiscally conservative, for a smaller govt etc.
Yeah. I'll need to check him out more on all those issues.
> I find that most republicans would never vote for a democrat no matter who was running.
Not necessarily. That is true of me so far -- I've never voted for a Democrat. A couple years ago I was pretty proud of that. Now, in the RIGHT situation, I might consider it. Whether or not Dean will meet my qualifications has yet to be seen.
I sincerely hope he wins the Democratic nomination. Then we'll have a REAL choice to make in November.:-) Unfortunately I won't be able to support him in that since I'm a registered Republican. Hmm, guess I could always "cross over" for the primary season...
> I'm not trying to troll you or anything, but how, as a Christian, can you support Bush after the atrocities he's spent the last 3 years creating, and after all the outright lies he's told?
What "outright lies" has Bush told?
I assume you mean the WMD in Iraq thing. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he honestly believed Saddam had them. His evidence indicated that, and he was not purposely lying about it. There is evidence that Clinton believed that Saddam had WMDs.
What "atrocities" has he created?
Afghanistan: Not pretty, but the Taliban had to go, plain and simple. They were harboring people whose only goal in life is to violently kill as many people as possible in the free world.
Iraq: much more debatable. I'm not personally convinced that they were a direct threat to us, and never really supported this war (although it was great to see Baghdad fall and the Saddam statues come down). Yes, we made a mess, but our troops are trying to fix it as best they can. I saw on the news recently about how business is coming back to Baghdad. Looks like it's becoming a fairly bustling place.
Or do you mean the US economy? Well, his tax cuts were a worthwhile start. Really, he needs to start taxing companies that send work offshore. I don't think we'll have a truly great economy again until that happens.
So I'm really not a huge Bush fan. He's done some things right and made some mistakes. But IMHO he is vastly better than most Democrats. I'd vote for Bush over someone like Gephardt any day.
I do sort of wish someone would give Bush a run for his money in the Republican primaries, but that seems unlikely. There are many better Republicans than him, but I'm having a hard time immagining someone who could make a serious run right now. John McCain? Hmmm.
Seriously, good for Dean. I'll need to take a closer look at this stuff.
I *do* sort of feel betrayed by the Republicans. During the Newt revolution in 1994, they continually flapped their jaws about cutting government programs like the National Endowment for the Arts. Why in tarnation haven't they done it yet? Funding art displays, many of which are controversial, with taxpayer dollars while we have a huge deficit and a huge debt is the height of irresponsibility. It would be *so* ironic if Dean could cut this crap when it's the Republicans that promised to do it.
I do ask that someone close to the guy PLEASE find out where he stands on issues like the DMCA, CBDTPA, software patents, etc. If he has the "right" positions, I might just have to jump on board.
Of course, I'm also a social conservative, so I might have to hold my nose at the same time.:( But, Bush hasn't done a whole lot of good on social issues either, so it probably doesn't much matter.
I'm (mostly) conservative and will probably vote for Bush again, but I have to admit, there's something about Dean that makes me really want to like him. I disagree with him on many issues, but if he has a clue about technology issues, I'd seriously consider supporting him. He seems to have a relatively straight head on.
Slashdot Mirror
20 times ... that would be a billion dollars. Linux has probably already "cost" Microsoft well over a billion dollars in revenue, and that is bound to only exponentiate.
I bet anything that MS would pay $20 billion if it would get rid of Open Source for good.
where does Yahoo run PHP? I believe they use Python quite a bit.
And Python, with mod_python or maybe Twisted, can probably scale much better than PHP.
> With Java you have easy access to a lot of OOP features that are very difficult to implement in Php, and the function base is simple to expand. Yea it's big and beefy, but that's what you need sometimes.
Right. Take a heavily OOP PHP program, which has everything in a class, neatly designed into a great architecture. Now, for EVERY SINGLE FREEKING HTTP REQUEST, it has to parse a boatload of OOP code, then run it, creating all the objects. PHP objects cannot persist between page requests. (I don't know if Java objects can or not, but at least they wouldn't have to be recompiled each time.)
I saw one project die a horrible death for exactly that reason. Each HTTP request took quite a few seconds.
And I'm afraid Xaraya, which looks like a very slick new CMS, is going to follow suit. I've tried it, played with it, looked at the code. And it's parsing quite a bit with each request, and on my server each request took at LEAST two seconds, sometimes quite a bit longer.
No, it shouldn't. Investment money should never be accounted towards income or profit.
> Its like going to the races and putting on 50 million on a 40-1 outsider. Except that in this instance, by giving the horse 50 million, you increase its chance of winning substantially.
Huh? It will certainly help them be a pest longer.
But the facts are still solidly against them, and they will be annihilated in court no matter how much money they have.
Heck, this will give them money that the judge can award as damages to all the Linux companies they've harmed.
Or even just offer it for a lower price, but maybe higher than the student price.
I once talked to a lady at Wolfram about offering a version of Mathematica for interested end-users who were no longer students. Told her I'd gladly pay $400 or so for it. (The student version was like $130 and the full version like $1200.) She actually seemed to take the suggestion seriously, but I never heard anything back regarding a decision.
If it really supports data-driven widgets, that would be *extremely* useful! I'm tired of coding PHP forms that keep inserting/updating a database...
Indeed. This gives pretty good ammunition to Red Hat's suit, which SCO is trying to get thrown out.
It would also give SuSE, Mandrake, et. al a good reason to join Red Hat.
Text ads annoying?
I think text ads are GREAT personally. Especially the way Google does them. No annoying animations, Flash crap, or the wait to download graphics.
I wish all websites would use them!
Especially if you're roaming outside of your home area. Then you'd be hit with a 60 cent bill even if you stay within your plan's minutes!
What the...?
There were several compilers available for OS/2, and they all included the SDK.
Watcom and Visual Age C++ were probably the most popular. Borland also had one for a time but dropped it.
Speaking of which, I have a complete VAC++ 3 for OS/2 pack. Anyone want it?
Ok, I've been following SVG for a little while and I'm excited about its prospects.
Most of you have probably seen the SVG demos at Croczilla.
I once had a Mozilla 1.3 Alpha with SVG build, and it rendered these files perfectly. I was using Red Hat at the time.
Now I'm using Gentoo, and I emerge Mozilla with mozsvg in my USE flags, which of course builds an SVG enabled Mozilla. Cool.
Except that the croczilla files look like crap. They are rendered B&W, all color is gone. AND the image gets corrupted every time 1) you open a menu over it, or 2) part of it is manipulated with DOM. None of this was a problem with that old build I had.
I also just downloaded the latest SVG build from Mozilla's site, in case there was something wrong with the ebuild process. It had the same problems.
My questions:
1. Is everyone else getting the same screwed up results when viewing SVG in Mozilla? If not, I'm wondering if there's a problem with a library I have installed.
2. Has anyone tried the Croczilla files with a recent Konqueror CVS? Do they work? Including the DOM transformations?
Thanks!
> IBM trains you
...
Lots of people have said that already, but it seems like it should be
In SOVIET RUSSIA, *YOU* train IBM!
Sodipodi is pretty good at SVG creation/editing. It's a Gnome/GTK app though.
I wonder how long it will be before we have KSodipodi...
I'm not sure if KDE uses libart or not. Probably not; I think KSVG is an independent implementation.
But, KDE *could* use libart because libart is LGPL. KDE is GPL, and GPL'd code can import LGPL libraries, no problem. But Mozilla is licenced under GPL, LGPL, *and* the Mozilla Public License, which is not GPL/LGPL compatible. (Correct me if I'm wrong; that's a possibility.)
If KDE uses its own, it would probably also be either GPL or LGPL, so it wouldn't have any advantages over libart.
Really it's not that big a deal. I don't think Mozilla *needs* to include libart, but SVG should just be an optional configure step if libart is on the system. I *do* think that Linux distro vendors should start shipping Mozilla with SVG enabled, though. There's absolutely no legal problem with that.
devfs is being replaced with udev, which is supposedly a much better implementation of the same concept.
And I agree it's a good concept. But udev is where it's going, so eventually devfs should be taken out to avoid duplication.
> Educating users is futile...
.DOC files or large images in an email without being sure the recipient can handle the file.
I've thought about some, and how about this for an idea?
Write up an e-mail to educate new (and old) e-mail users about e-mail etiquette. Include the following:
1. If you get an email advertising something from a company you have not done business with it, simply delete it. Explain why this is bad. Tell them not to fight it unless they know what they're doing.
2. Overview of e-mail forward hoaxes. Tell them not to forward outrageous stories unless they know them to be true.
3. Tell them not to include everyone they talk to on their forward-list without asking.
4. Tell them to not include
5. Tell them to disable HTML image loading in mail, as it can be used by spammers to verify your address.
6. Forward this to every new Internet user you know, and everyone who violates any of the other rules. (And let this be the LAST message you mass forward!)
7. More???
Then, put that up on a web site with a textbox for entering e-mail addresses. The system would send the message to all those addresses.
It might educate at least some people...
> not buried under four layers of variable-position right-click menus. This makes GIMP incredibly tedious to use.
Tried Gimp 1.3 yet? It has a menubar at the top of each image window. Nice.
I don't have the strip in front of me, but I believe it was Wally that said that, not Dilbert.
Yeah, I hear what you're saying about war. US policy has seemingly been extremely inconsistant. We also sponsored some pretty nasty deeds in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua (I've been too all three and seen the effects).
:) I actually have a pacifist Mennonite background. I'm giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on some of this stuff because I can also see where he's coming from, and I think his motives are sincere.
:-) Unfortunately I won't be able to support him in that since I'm a registered Republican. Hmm, guess I could always "cross over" for the primary season...
I guess what determines whether we "get involved" or not in any given situation is the perceived threat to us, regardless of whether or not it is rational.
In Afghanistan, I think the threat to us was fairly clear. Al-Queada, with the full approval of the Taliban, carried out 9/11. And they were probably using Afghan shelters to plan further attacks.
In Iraq, there was a perceived threat, but Bush was probably jumping the gun.
In Central America, the "threat" was Communism. Not even that, but just some socialist policies which would have helped the poor class have a chance. How we interpreted that as a threat to us is beyond me. But it happened.
Nobody thinks Liberia is a threat to us. So our involvement there will probably be limited to a token just to look like we care.
Anyway, the military is one area where I'm not particularly conservative.
Still, ideally, we'd get the heck out of the Middle East completely, including support for Israel. We'd save a lot of money, and have a lot fewer enemies!
> As for Dean. You probably argee with him on lots of issues. He is pro gun, fiscally conservative, for a smaller govt etc.
Yeah. I'll need to check him out more on all those issues.
> I find that most republicans would never vote for a democrat no matter who was running.
Not necessarily. That is true of me so far -- I've never voted for a Democrat. A couple years ago I was pretty proud of that. Now, in the RIGHT situation, I might consider it. Whether or not Dean will meet my qualifications has yet to be seen.
I sincerely hope he wins the Democratic nomination. Then we'll have a REAL choice to make in November.
> It will die when people stop using it.
And they'll stop using it when all the new sites no longer work in it.
> You can bet if I choose 2, they won't blame their crappy browser.
Some will, some won't.
Still, let it die!
> I'm not trying to troll you or anything, but how, as a Christian, can you support Bush after the atrocities he's spent the last 3 years creating, and after all the outright lies he's told?
What "outright lies" has Bush told?
I assume you mean the WMD in Iraq thing. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he honestly believed Saddam had them. His evidence indicated that, and he was not purposely lying about it. There is evidence that Clinton believed that Saddam had WMDs.
What "atrocities" has he created?
Afghanistan: Not pretty, but the Taliban had to go, plain and simple. They were harboring people whose only goal in life is to violently kill as many people as possible in the free world.
Iraq: much more debatable. I'm not personally convinced that they were a direct threat to us, and never really supported this war (although it was great to see Baghdad fall and the Saddam statues come down). Yes, we made a mess, but our troops are trying to fix it as best they can. I saw on the news recently about how business is coming back to Baghdad. Looks like it's becoming a fairly bustling place.
Or do you mean the US economy? Well, his tax cuts were a worthwhile start. Really, he needs to start taxing companies that send work offshore. I don't think we'll have a truly great economy again until that happens.
So I'm really not a huge Bush fan. He's done some things right and made some mistakes. But IMHO he is vastly better than most Democrats. I'd vote for Bush over someone like Gephardt any day.
I do sort of wish someone would give Bush a run for his money in the Republican primaries, but that seems unlikely. There are many better Republicans than him, but I'm having a hard time immagining someone who could make a serious run right now. John McCain? Hmmm.
> Are you fiscally conservative?
:( But, Bush hasn't done a whole lot of good on social issues either, so it probably doesn't much matter.
Yep.
Seriously, good for Dean. I'll need to take a closer look at this stuff.
I *do* sort of feel betrayed by the Republicans. During the Newt revolution in 1994, they continually flapped their jaws about cutting government programs like the National Endowment for the Arts. Why in tarnation haven't they done it yet? Funding art displays, many of which are controversial, with taxpayer dollars while we have a huge deficit and a huge debt is the height of irresponsibility. It would be *so* ironic if Dean could cut this crap when it's the Republicans that promised to do it.
I do ask that someone close to the guy PLEASE find out where he stands on issues like the DMCA, CBDTPA, software patents, etc. If he has the "right" positions, I might just have to jump on board.
Of course, I'm also a social conservative, so I might have to hold my nose at the same time.
I'd like to know that too.
I'm (mostly) conservative and will probably vote for Bush again, but I have to admit, there's something about Dean that makes me really want to like him. I disagree with him on many issues, but if he has a clue about technology issues, I'd seriously consider supporting him. He seems to have a relatively straight head on.
That's pretty much what I do for my sites.
:-) )
(The first needs to be updated badly. I don't do Slash anymore.