I have to admit I am totally clueless about this kind of thing. I don't listen to music and usually stay away from Mpegs. So, I have to ask: is Mpeg and open format?
And I think maybe Mpegs could bring down the prices of CDs. Just like software only the company spends almost no money on R&D. This is what there are afraid of.
I keep clicking links and I end up back on the first page! I like slashdot better, but maybe it is a problem with netscape. I know, anyone know how to stir the cache?
Can someone help me?
And if you can get that site to work, can you reflect it, err, mirror? I want to find out about JonDogz's nose.
This kind of thing doesn't surpise me. It is all about marketing. It doesn't matter if it is a good movie or not, as long as it generates the hype. I do not need Star Wars on my chip bags, my Pepsi, my delivered Pizza. I cringe when the local News starts out with "The hottest thing this summer...".
Celebrities? We are suppose to worship people because they make a lot of money??!! I truly think my Dad is a more dedicated and hard working man than Arnold Swartzenager, Will Smith, or any other "Stars" (I quote "Stars" because it is a really dumb word in this context.) But my dad, unfortunately, is a little person compared to these people because they generate all the hype.
And why are these actors inspirational to so many people, anyway. I like movies for their story, the plot, and how good was the directing. Actors are like puppets, I a good movie depends mostly on who pulls the strings. I guess acting is a talent I should dismiss so easily, but talk about makeing a mountain out of an ant hill!
Story and script writers make very little money for what they do. Yet they are what can define the difference between a movie worth watching, and one I have better use of my time.
Heck, one of the best movies I have seen is Contact. Nobody seems to have a very good opinion of it though. I hear a lot of "I didn't understand it." Bah! No big name actors. No explosions. I wouldn't be suprised if a movie with just explosions, big name actors and *no* content would make lots of money in the box office.
It is about marketing and is the reason so many people go to see bad movies. It is also the reason so many people use bad software.
then will it be labeled Amiga/Linux using Stallman's naming system? I guess Stallman makes a little more sense I guess. It kind of says, "You can call it Amiga, but, Hey! there is a Linux kernal in there!" Kind of sweet.
(No flames please. I have read alot of anti-Stallman flames and I don't think you can come up with anything new.)
I downloaded it out of curiousity, to see what it says in the README files. Took a LONG time to download. Not going to install it though, I don't trust Microsoft enough to let them loose on my system. Besides, I don't think I would trust any binaries that big unless it was RPM or something.
There are so many OpenSource IDEs on their way and gcc is pretty much the standard compiler. I guess it would help those who need to port between Windows and Linux.
Desktop functionality would be a read plus and I figure that porting between desktops is probably much easier than porting between Operating Systems anyway. I am not sure I would use something propietary though (no flames please, use whatever software you please).
Besides, unless Borland change thier product non-trivially, I don't think Delphi or C Builder would blend well with linux anyway.
Oh, before I posted this, there were no comments so I am going to make a prediction. NO, I don't think this is to get back at Microsoft. It is simply a business exploring a new market. Microsoft will too (in fact, they already have frontpage for Linux).
Oops. Im sorry for offending you. I just really dislike people thinking that using drugs is something people should do. It is not and I think people are starting to figure this out. If you think that most people do drugs because they want to and not to avoid being called "drug-free" boy, then I think you are mistaken in my view.
I've heard of starbucks but microbrews? I think your perceptions are warped. Cut the stereotypes, boy.
But I do admit I had alterior motives in mind. Sorry.
For example, there are hints that Borland may port Delphi to Linux. While there are many people commenting "Yay! This is good for Linux" there are many who won't buy it because it is not open source.
Some people have this strange notion that every company must port to Linux because either Linux is *such* an important or to get back to Microsoft. While I would like to think so, it is certainly not true. Heck these companies are probably better off porting to the BeOS or the Mac, where the OS is on more desktops and workstations, and the users are used to propietary offerings, indeed, they have no choice.
One of the virtues of using a Open OS is that I don't need to be spoonfed by companies. Anyone know how many people who use the Mac or OS/2 are waiting and hoping that so-and-so company will port to their OS.
Anyone who thinks *Linux* needs these companies to port are hoping for the Linux Industry. The Community, in my mind, will eventually fill in the remaining needs.
As an example to this, there is an Open Source project to make a Delphi like project called Lazarus. This, my friends, is what Linux is about.
I was looking on freshmeat last night and came upon some molecule editor and view. And on the home page there was mention of this open science thing. The really nice thing is that this program is in Java and I could, with the teacher's permission, install it on the computers in class and let the class know the values of open source (Okay, they probably won't care, still, I think the school has a football program to run;). I could give the teacher the web site so he can keep up to date provide some feedback.
I know my beginning Chemistry teacher noted the lack of such a program and am not sure how much such a program would cost otherwise (especially for the dozen machines in the room).
Given Gnome's language bindings and things like GLADE, I am wondering, hypothetically, if it is possible to have a Gnome BASIC, sorta like Visual Basic (not that anyone would want to).
I was wondering this for a while now, anyone know?
You think in the opposite direction than most people. You have your conclusion (GNOME sucks) and then scurry to justify it. With that logic, everything sucks. Let me give you a few examples:
1. Linux sucks. 2. Linux uses outdated Unix technology.
1. KDE sucks. 2. KDE looks a lot like Windows.
1. GNOME sucks. 2. GNOME uses technology similar to Windows.
1. Diplomacy sucks. 2. The minority has no voice.
1. The Space program sucks. 2. It uses money from the national bugdet.
1. World Peace sucks. 2. The arms contracters don't make as much money.
Gee, this is easy. I guess everything really sucks then.
And I hate to see people bash GPLed software. We don't make fun of Windows because it crashes, we make fun of it because it doesn't get fixed. Gnome is getting fixed very rapidly because of it's open source nature. Same thing goes for KDE.
I think we can do without your kind of advocacy (Hint: You aren't changing anyone's minds).
Oh, and about Miguel's misquote that was tooken out of context. It was a very good compromise, otherwise KDE or Gnome would have had to change to interoperate with the other. Quit expecting developers to speak like diplomats!
Now don't hide everyone. I can just see 30 or 40 people thinking "Ah". Come on, admit it. I know I am not the only one who doesn't use drugs (in fact, we are a huge majority).
Jee, the things you learn from the bickering between two ACs.
Let me give you an example. Both desktops come with their own text editors. The really neat thing is that they go about text editing different ways. The KDE Advanced Editor is lightweight and has nice features such as syntax editing. On the other hand, GEdit has a multiple document interface and plug ins.
The same thing goes with everything else. The office suits are broadly different. KOffice are many applications made to integrate together from the start in one suit. And Gnome Workshop are separate applications that integrate at the file level (I may be wrong about this, please correct me) so that other programs may be added as needed.
I can go on with differences between IDEs, Calenders, and the rest of the programs. This is what competition offers that wouldn't have existed otherwise. Just thing where Linux would be now if the Hurd matured a little quicker.
I think this is a different Open Source model than we are used to. ESR should write another essay.
I am not sure of the details, but I think the thread was about the things that should go into the.desktop file. Both parties disagreed and the solution, if I remember correctly, was a wrapper that would do the correct thing for either desktop which I think is a far better than having one desktop change the other in the sake of interoperability.
I think it is better to treat developers as developers and not as ambassadors.
I guess by *definition* Gnome is window manager agnostic and KDE uses KWM. But I guess there are people creating lightweight Gnome-specific windopw managers and their are other KDE-compliant window managers. So, you can say anything and both be right and flamed by slashdot brats(not everyone, mind you).
Let's quite the politics game. Use whatever you like. Just don't say anything unless you accept you are both right and wrong at the same time.
I don't know of any statistics either way but it is entirely possible that most Linux users read slashdot regularly. Perhaps not the comments, some of us have more important stuff to do. But given how many sites mirror, link to, or post headlines, it is likely.
But then again, there are other communities who read slashdot as well.
On one side: This sorta shows that Open Source projects like Apache and I might as well include Slashdot in this, are being taken more seriously with this kind of business backbone. Maybe opensource projects needs business to grow beyond hacker projects. Gee, there are many examples already: Debian and the SPI; Gnome and International Gnome Support; Linux and all them corporate big shots. Now apache and slashdot can be included in this.
Then on the other: Kind of scary all these businesses looking to make money off of opensource projects. It has become known that makeing consumers happy is not as important as consumer lock in and incompatability in the software industry. While opensource software relies heavily on standards, I don't see it impossible that business makes Apache propietary (with no source) at some point in the future.
I have no idea if this is necessary or not. Just seems to me a lot of people want to make money where it wasn't much of a factor before.
(Yeah, I know this reply is unfocused. I am not really with it right now for some reason.)
I think so. They are in a quasi-0.3 release judgeing from the mailing list archive. When they release, I have no idea. I assume development may pick up once they do release.
I am wondering, if anyone knows. Are there any advantages to using the Hurd other than it's microkernal design?
Well, in my opinion, the current GUI is trash. Mice are too innacurate. Drag and drop means doing mouse tricks so that the window you need is on top. And hierarchical menus are more hassle than it's worth.
I think GUIs need to be more keyboard oriented. I am not talking about cryptic UNIX commands (thought it should be possible) or 50 keyboard shortcuts, I am talking about logical commands that give you the same feedback as the mouse, without memorizing more than a few keys for common tasks. This way, anything you want to do can be done instantly without doing hunt&click with the mouse.
Also, the current keyboards are quite old. We need "virtual" keypads, something like small flat monitor with touch screen and is angled the way most keyboards are. This way, you only see the keys you need. At one moment, you have a querty keyboard, the next you have controls for a flight simulator.
Of course we don't have these kinds of thing because that would mean Microsofts software would become obsolete. I am just hoping that something like this happens sometime.
Slashdot Mirror
And I think maybe Mpegs could bring down the prices of CDs. Just like software only the company spends almost no money on R&D. This is what there are afraid of.
--
Can someone help me?
And if you can get that site to work, can you reflect it, err, mirror? I want to find out about JonDogz's nose.
--
--
Celebrities? We are suppose to worship people because they make a lot of money??!! I truly think my Dad is a more dedicated and hard working man than Arnold Swartzenager, Will Smith, or any other "Stars" (I quote "Stars" because it is a really dumb word in this context.) But my dad, unfortunately, is a little person compared to these people because they generate all the hype.
And why are these actors inspirational to so many people, anyway. I like movies for their story, the plot, and how good was the directing. Actors are like puppets, I a good movie depends mostly on who pulls the strings. I guess acting is a talent I should dismiss so easily, but talk about makeing a mountain out of an ant hill!
Story and script writers make very little money for what they do. Yet they are what can define the difference between a movie worth watching, and one I have better use of my time.
Heck, one of the best movies I have seen is Contact. Nobody seems to have a very good opinion of it though. I hear a lot of "I didn't understand it." Bah! No big name actors. No explosions. I wouldn't be suprised if a movie with just explosions, big name actors and *no* content would make lots of money in the box office.
It is about marketing and is the reason so many people go to see bad movies. It is also the reason so many people use bad software.
--
My name is extrasolar and I read instructions.
Yes, it is sad. Like when I buy a Nintendo game, I read thoroughly through the instruction manual, even the "How to turn your SNES on" section.
I know the copyright information for my surge protector.
I even mailed back a spelling error in my monitor manual.
I need help!
(Okay, so maybe this is a bit of an exageration. But I do read the manual before playing the game, to make sure I am not missing anything.)
--
(No flames please. I have read alot of anti-Stallman flames and I don't think you can come up with anything new.)
--
--
I downloaded it out of curiousity, to see what it says in the README files. Took a LONG time to download. Not going to install it though, I don't trust Microsoft enough to let them loose on my system. Besides, I don't think I would trust any binaries that big unless it was RPM or something.
--
Desktop functionality would be a read plus and I figure that porting between desktops is probably much easier than porting between Operating Systems anyway. I am not sure I would use something propietary though (no flames please, use whatever software you please).
Besides, unless Borland change thier product non-trivially, I don't think Delphi or C Builder would blend well with linux anyway.
Oh, before I posted this, there were no comments so I am going to make a prediction. NO, I don't think this is to get back at Microsoft. It is simply a business exploring a new market. Microsoft will too (in fact, they already have frontpage for Linux).
--
I've heard of starbucks but microbrews? I think your perceptions are warped. Cut the stereotypes, boy.
But I do admit I had alterior motives in mind. Sorry.
--
Some people have this strange notion that every company must port to Linux because either Linux is *such* an important or to get back to Microsoft. While I would like to think so, it is certainly not true. Heck these companies are probably better off porting to the BeOS or the Mac, where the OS is on more desktops and workstations, and the users are used to propietary offerings, indeed, they have no choice.
One of the virtues of using a Open OS is that I don't need to be spoonfed by companies. Anyone know how many people who use the Mac or OS/2 are waiting and hoping that so-and-so company will port to their OS.
Anyone who thinks *Linux* needs these companies to port are hoping for the Linux Industry. The Community, in my mind, will eventually fill in the remaining needs.
As an example to this, there is an Open Source project to make a Delphi like project called Lazarus. This, my friends, is what Linux is about.
--
I know my beginning Chemistry teacher noted the lack of such a program and am not sure how much such a program would cost otherwise (especially for the dozen machines in the room).
Maybe I am being optimistic.
--
I was wondering this for a while now, anyone know?
--
1. Linux sucks.
2. Linux uses outdated Unix technology.
1. KDE sucks.
2. KDE looks a lot like Windows.
1. GNOME sucks.
2. GNOME uses technology similar to Windows.
1. Diplomacy sucks.
2. The minority has no voice.
1. The Space program sucks.
2. It uses money from the national bugdet.
1. World Peace sucks.
2. The arms contracters don't make as much money.
Gee, this is easy. I guess everything really sucks then.
And I hate to see people bash GPLed software. We don't make fun of Windows because it crashes, we make fun of it because it doesn't get fixed. Gnome is getting fixed very rapidly because of it's open source nature. Same thing goes for KDE.
I think we can do without your kind of advocacy (Hint: You aren't changing anyone's minds).
Oh, and about Miguel's misquote that was tooken out of context. It was a very good compromise, otherwise KDE or Gnome would have had to change to interoperate with the other. Quit expecting developers to speak like diplomats!
--
Jee, the things you learn from the bickering between two ACs.
--
Let me give you an example. Both desktops come with their own text editors. The really neat thing is that they go about text editing different ways. The KDE Advanced Editor is lightweight and has nice features such as syntax editing. On the other hand, GEdit has a multiple document interface and plug ins.
The same thing goes with everything else. The office suits are broadly different. KOffice are many applications made to integrate together from the start in one suit. And Gnome Workshop are separate applications that integrate at the file level (I may be wrong about this, please correct me) so that other programs may be added as needed.
I can go on with differences between IDEs, Calenders, and the rest of the programs. This is what competition offers that wouldn't have existed otherwise. Just thing where Linux would be now if the Hurd matured a little quicker.
I think this is a different Open Source model than we are used to. ESR should write another essay.
--
--
I think it is better to treat developers as developers and not as ambassadors.
--
Let's quite the politics game. Use whatever you like. Just don't say anything unless you accept you are both right and wrong at the same time.
--
(As an afterthought, that is actually really lame compared to what the french are doing. Unless the ball falls down because of Y2K, that would rule!)
--
But then again, there are other communities who read slashdot as well.
--
I guess we are all in one basket according to the popular press.
--
Then on the other: Kind of scary all these businesses looking to make money off of opensource projects. It has become known that makeing consumers happy is not as important as consumer lock in and incompatability in the software industry. While opensource software relies heavily on standards, I don't see it impossible that business makes Apache propietary (with no source) at some point in the future.
I have no idea if this is necessary or not. Just seems to me a lot of people want to make money where it wasn't much of a factor before.
(Yeah, I know this reply is unfocused. I am not really with it right now for some reason.)
--
I think so. They are in a quasi-0.3 release judgeing from the mailing list archive. When they release, I have no idea. I assume development may pick up once they do release.
I am wondering, if anyone knows. Are there any advantages to using the Hurd other than it's microkernal design?
--
Well, in my opinion, the current GUI is trash. Mice are too innacurate. Drag and drop means doing mouse tricks so that the window you need is on top. And hierarchical menus are more hassle than it's worth.
I think GUIs need to be more keyboard oriented. I am not talking about cryptic UNIX commands (thought it should be possible) or 50 keyboard shortcuts, I am talking about logical commands that give you the same feedback as the mouse, without memorizing more than a few keys for common tasks. This way, anything you want to do can be done instantly without doing hunt&click with the mouse.
Also, the current keyboards are quite old. We need "virtual" keypads, something like small flat monitor with touch screen and is angled the way most keyboards are. This way, you only see the keys you need. At one moment, you have a querty keyboard, the next you have controls for a flight simulator.
Of course we don't have these kinds of thing because that would mean Microsofts software would become obsolete. I am just hoping that something like this happens sometime.
--