But wasn't the survey kind of wierd? I mean, I would never have expected Delphi to have *that* big of a demand...perhaps Borland rigged the survey?
Actually I think that the popularity of Delphi might even be true.
I used to work for a company that also made addons for Borland's development tools, and I remember one of their techies telling me about the huge amounts of interest there was for a Linux port of Delphi. And that was over a year ago!
If I remember correctly Delphi has been holding a very high ranking in the 'port this to Linux' wish lists...
... must have grabbed this from me and forwarded it to you.:)
...or they might also have grabbed the question from my mind. It is one of the problems I am still struggling with on my Linux desktop.
While I haven't ever used a proper NeXT workstation, from what I've seen and heard of it, it sounds extremely nice. Of course, Linux with WindowMaker and GTKstepped GNOME apps is also nice, but still doesn't quite come close enough.
And judging from the amount of NeXT-related projects going on in the Free Software community, this is a thing very many are interested in.
I don't know if there are any other pages like this but I thought I'd write a "How to NeXTify your X" page.
I haven't seen one, either. But I would surely love to have one around.
So if you are going to put one up, please let me know, and we'll see if I can help.
Actually, by looking at Apple's pages on AirPort, they will not be that expensive.
But anyhow, it seems that AirPort will play nicely with many other wireless networking products, the 802.11 being a standard and all.
And what is even better, a short search on AltaVista for Linux and IEEE 802.11 showed that some projects are already in place building Linux drivers for the 802.11 WLANs. Check out AbsoluteValue's page on it.
"The fact of the matter is that there will always be more than one toolkit for Unix. Right now the big players include Motif, GTK+ and QT. Each of these toolkits unfortunately has its own look and feel for many things including menus and scrollbars.. None of these toolkits is going away anytime soon and it is inevitable that there will be ports of mozilla to each of these toolkits.
...
One of the goals of the Xlib toolkit project is to create a common base, written in Xlib, that will include all of the functionality that is common across the Unix toolkits. The majority of the code will include simple drawing and image handling in the gfx module. It will also include some of the widget side of the toolkit. Some candidates include the nsWindow class which is the simple drawing surface used by the html layout and the XP widgets.
One of the project goals should be to make it very easy to plug in your toolkit of choice. This means that you will be able to use Mozilla in your Motif, GTK+ or QT application. Until the world chooses the One True Toolkit or dies in the process, Mozilla should be able to run on all the toolkits without hardship to people writing applications.
...
It should also be possible to have a stand alone Mozilla browser that is based entirely in Xlib. While this compromises one of the primary goals of the many Desktop Projects for Unix and Unix-like systems, it allows for a lightweight browser implementation that could be used on a Kiosk system, or on very old hardware. The fact is that Mozilla contains most of the functionality of the modern Unix widget toolkits and it is a very small stretch to turn it into a complete toolkit system."
So the answer to your question is yes, altough I'm not sure if the Xlib port is that far along yet.
There are a lot of programmers out there like me that don't care about GPL or "Free" software, but use it because its a cool environment and it provides a level playing field that isn't inundated and overwhelmingly dominated by Microsoft.
Umm... yes, it is a level playing field. But have you ever stopped to think why it is so? Could it possibly be because of GPL and other free software licenses? If people don't care about freedom, how long will it stay that way?
And anyway, writing Open Source software doesn't exclude the possibility of making money. I know many people who are doing it as their job.
(and check out SourceXchange for another way to make money with Open Source).
Of course, eventually someone will not like the direction that the Apache group is going and will create a new distribution (ala Linux) with a different aim.
I don't think that this will actually affect Apache development in any way, the code will remain under the BSD license.
Rather, the ASF was obviously formed to create a supporting organization for Apache and its sister projects (mod_perl, PHP,...)
What bothers me is the several other articles which claim it's blindingly fast - on this machine it's quite the opposite.
Actually I think that most of the comments about speed are about the speed of HTML & CSS rendering (which is fast), not the speed of browser behaviour, which still is quite slow because of the lack of optimization.
And is there truly no way of setting up a proxy host? I've looked, and I can't find one.
I hear that this has been asked frequently on Mozilla newsgroups. So you'll propably find some answers by searching for it in Deja.com.
Doesn't seem appropriate to drool about something that is still slow...
As I stated before, the reasons why it still slow are quite obvious, and once they are removed, it will be very, very fast.
And besides that, it will be the first really good and standards compliant browser out there (yes, I know about Opera and iCab, but neither are available yet for my Linux box).
...because it feels about an order of magnitude slower than Communicator 4.6 on this Linux box.
Ah, but you must remember that this is still an alpha (or pre-alpha, even?) release. There is still a lot of debugging stuff in the code.
I guess that when those are removed and there is some optimization done, it will be much faster.
Also, at this point (I think) it doesn't do caching correctly, which of course lowers performance.
Wait a few Milestones, I'd say, and then see whether the speed has improved!
And as for the outlook of the browser, that is very much configurable by the new XUL standard. Check out MozillaZine's ChromeZone for more information.
The previous Mozillas just didn't 'feel' solid. Has that changed any?
Not much. I still managed to crash it several times during my less-than-hour test drive. Admittedly, the stuff I did with it wasn't quite normal browsing, but still...
Anyway, it can be seen that Mozilla is making good progress, and I am sure we'll have quite an usable browser before autumn (or that's what I hope).
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Mozilla.org, but I try to watch the development as closely as I can as when working with Midgard a good browser is quite everything.
Given the size, I'm betting the keyboard is not useable for touch typing
Actually, the Series 5 keyboard is the best I've seen on a PDA.
Of course the small size takes some getting time used to, but after using it for a while, you can type with it (almost) as fast as with a regular keyboard.
My only complaint is that in the Nordic edition letters like ä and ö require two keypresses (the letters are used in Finnish all the time). But if you are typing in English, this isn't a problem, of course.
where Miguel essentially said he thought E was a piece of sh*t
Actually, your description of the article seems fairly familiar, altough I am quite sure it was not Miguel behind the sentence.
Now that I think about it, it was an article titled "The Mad Hatters" by some US newspaper. I guess you'll find the link from GNOME.org's news archives.
(Checking for it, it might be that Frederico could've been interpreted to have said that in the interview, which actually wasn't about GNOME but rather the RHAD labs).
I am a contract-oriented programmer who, unfortunately, must do design work (and in a rush, too) in order to get certain programming jobs. In those events, I don't have the time or desire to sit in front of a text editor and work the code by myself from scratch. It doesn't even make sense. [snip]
I have to say I found your comment peculiar, to say the least. I have been working as a full time web developer/designer for the last three years. In the time I've had opportunity to try out many kinds of editors, from 'HTML editors' to 'WYSIWYG' editors.
And I have found them all lacking in usability. Actually, using a WYSIWYG program like FrontPage slows down the process of creating web sites. They might be good for sketching out something, but for serious creation or maintenance of sites, there is no chance that they would stand up to a good application server and a text editor.
And of course have to be mentioned that all of the software I use for web development is free. Midgard as the application server, Emacs with PSGML as the text editor used in sketching out layouts, and GIMP for creating graphics. only proprietary piece of software I need in my work is Netscape, and that will change when Mozilla approaches a usable status.
It also has to be remembered that WYSIWYG concept, good for normal print layouting, doesn't quite work with Web as we sites should be usable by a variety of different browsers and internet appliances.
I know that you have been told about many other application servers by now. But there is another one that you might find interesting - Midgard.
Midgard is built over the foundation of PHP3, MySQL and Apache, and works on the ideology that there will be no normal files on the server but rather that all the queries are validated with a database table containing instructions on what to do with incoming URLs.
It is actually easy to create good-looking and effective web-based interfaces with this. I've done it with a few sites, and even normal sales personnel and school people have been able to create content to their pages.
So if you are interested, check Midgard out at http://midgard.greywolves.org. The system is under LGPL, and came publicly available just last night.
I like the system, but then again, it can be said that I have bias...
I don't ever remember trying to peak around a corner in a room by staring into a moniter at an angle in Quake, Quake 2, Unreal, Half-Life, etc.. like I did in DOOM.
...or falling off my chair while trying to dodge incoming fireballs.
The big three are all down - userfriendly, bedope, segfault... I sure as hell hope it's an April Fools joke.
Yes, they all are down. But however, it has not been reported on other community sites, like SlashDot, which would lead us to believe that at least Rob et al. think it is a hoax.
Also, they being all shut down at this particular date would also hint at something of that note.
But if it isn't a hoax, and the sites are really gone... well, simply, someone is going to be very pissed off.
Slashdot Mirror
But wasn't the survey kind of wierd? I mean, I would never have expected Delphi to have *that* big of a demand...perhaps Borland rigged the survey?
Actually I think that the popularity of Delphi might even be true.
I used to work for a company that also made addons for Borland's development tools, and I remember one of their techies telling me about the huge amounts of interest there was for a Linux port of Delphi. And that was over a year ago!
If I remember correctly Delphi has been holding a very high ranking in the 'port this to Linux' wish lists...
--
--
While I haven't ever used a proper NeXT workstation, from what I've seen and heard of it, it sounds extremely nice. Of course, Linux with WindowMaker and GTKstepped GNOME apps is also nice, but still doesn't quite come close enough.
And judging from the amount of NeXT-related projects going on in the Free Software community, this is a thing very many are interested in.
I don't know if there are any other pages like this but I thought I'd write a "How to NeXTify your X" page.
I haven't seen one, either. But I would surely love to have one around.
So if you are going to put one up, please let me know, and we'll see if I can help.
--
Actually, by looking at Apple's pages on AirPort, they will not be that expensive.
But anyhow, it seems that AirPort will play nicely with many other wireless networking products, the 802.11 being a standard and all.
And what is even better, a short search on AltaVista for Linux and IEEE 802.11 showed that some projects are already in place building Linux drivers for the 802.11 WLANs. Check out AbsoluteValue's page on it.
--
Does this mean Mozilla will not require GTK+?
From the Mozilla Xlib Project page:
"The fact of the matter is that there will always be more than one toolkit for Unix. Right now the big players include Motif, GTK+ and QT. Each of these toolkits unfortunately has its own look and feel for many things including menus and scrollbars.. None of these toolkits is going away anytime soon and it is inevitable that there will be ports of mozilla to each of these toolkits.
One of the goals of the Xlib toolkit project is to create a common base, written in Xlib, that will include all of the functionality that is common across the Unix toolkits. The majority of the code will include simple drawing and image handling in the gfx module. It will also include some of the widget side of the toolkit. Some candidates include the nsWindow class which is the simple drawing surface used by the html layout and the XP widgets.
One of the project goals should be to make it very easy to plug in your toolkit of choice. This means that you will be able to use Mozilla in your Motif, GTK+ or QT application. Until the world chooses the One True Toolkit or dies in the process, Mozilla should be able to run on all the toolkits without hardship to people writing applications.
It should also be possible to have a stand alone Mozilla browser that is based entirely in Xlib. While this compromises one of the primary goals of the many Desktop Projects for Unix and Unix-like systems, it allows for a lightweight browser implementation that could be used on a Kiosk system, or on very old hardware. The fact is that Mozilla contains most of the functionality of the modern Unix widget toolkits and it is a very small stretch to turn it into a complete toolkit system."
So the answer to your question is yes, altough I'm not sure if the Xlib port is that far along yet.
--
How do one "install"/run this beast? Which script to run?
Just open extract the tarball, go to the 'package' directory and run ./mozilla-apprunner.sh
--
There are a lot of programmers out there like me that don't care about GPL or "Free" software, but use it because its a cool environment and it provides a level playing field that isn't inundated and overwhelmingly dominated by Microsoft.
Umm... yes, it is a level playing field. But have you ever stopped to think why it is so? Could it possibly be because of GPL and other free software licenses? If people don't care about freedom, how long will it stay that way?
And anyway, writing Open Source software doesn't exclude the possibility of making money. I know many people who are doing it as their job.
(and check out SourceXchange for another way to make money with Open Source).
--
But while we're on the subject of digital cameras, does anyone know of one that works under linux?
You'll want to check out gPhoto for a list of cameras.
--
Of course, eventually someone will not like the direction that the Apache group is going and will create a new distribution (ala Linux) with a different aim.
I don't think that this will actually affect Apache development in any way, the code will remain under the BSD license.
Rather, the ASF was obviously formed to create a supporting organization for Apache and its sister projects (mod_perl, PHP, ...)
So in effect it is much like the Free Software Foundation and Software in the Public Interest. It just hasn't got its nonprofit status yet.
--
What bothers me is the several other articles which claim it's blindingly fast - on this machine it's quite the opposite.
Actually I think that most of the comments about speed are about the speed of HTML & CSS rendering (which is fast), not the speed of browser behaviour, which still is quite slow because of the lack of optimization.
And is there truly no way of setting up a proxy host? I've looked, and I can't find one.
I hear that this has been asked frequently on Mozilla newsgroups. So you'll propably find some answers by searching for it in Deja.com.
--
Doesn't seem appropriate to drool about something that is still slow...
As I stated before, the reasons why it still slow are quite obvious, and once they are removed, it will be very, very fast.
And besides that, it will be the first really good and standards compliant browser out there (yes, I know about Opera and iCab, but neither are available yet for my Linux box).
Would those be reasons enough for drooling? :-)
--
Ah, but you must remember that this is still an alpha (or pre-alpha, even?) release. There is still a lot of debugging stuff in the code.
I guess that when those are removed and there is some optimization done, it will be much faster.
Also, at this point (I think) it doesn't do caching correctly, which of course lowers performance.
Wait a few Milestones, I'd say, and then see whether the speed has improved!
And as for the outlook of the browser, that is very much configurable by the new XUL standard. Check out MozillaZine's ChromeZone for more information.
--
The previous Mozillas just didn't 'feel' solid. Has that changed any?
Not much. I still managed to crash it several times during my less-than-hour test drive. Admittedly, the stuff I did with it wasn't quite normal browsing, but still...
Anyway, it can be seen that Mozilla is making good progress, and I am sure we'll have quite an usable browser before autumn (or that's what I hope).
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Mozilla.org, but I try to watch the development as closely as I can as when working with Midgard a good browser is quite everything.
--
--
So, when do we start working on 'Y'?
Check the Hungry Programmers' site on Y.
--
--
Given the size, I'm betting the keyboard is not useable for touch typing
Actually, the Series 5 keyboard is the best I've seen on a PDA.
Of course the small size takes some getting time used to, but after using it for a while, you can type with it (almost) as fast as with a regular keyboard.
My only complaint is that in the Nordic edition letters like ä and ö require two keypresses (the letters are used in Finnish all the time). But if you are typing in English, this isn't a problem, of course.
--
--
Didn't you read the article? The message suite (email and web) is on the ROM (much faster).
Umm... Actually, web is only included in the CD that comes with the 5mx package, just like the JVM.
Email, then, is on the ROM, and also contains other nifty features like fax and (finally!) SMS support.
In all ways, 5mx sounds like a very promising machine. Now, if I only could synchronize it with my Gnome calendar... *sigh*
--
--
(I don't have the project website on me - anybody?)
The Linux 7K project is at:
http://www.calcaria.net
--
--
where Miguel essentially said he thought E was a piece of sh*t
Actually, your description of the article seems fairly familiar, altough I am quite sure it was not Miguel behind the sentence.
Now that I think about it, it was an article titled "The Mad Hatters" by some US newspaper. I guess you'll find the link from GNOME.org's news archives.
(Checking for it, it might be that Frederico could've been interpreted to have said that in the interview, which actually wasn't about GNOME but rather the RHAD labs).
--
--
I am a contract-oriented programmer who, unfortunately, must do design work (and in a rush, too) in order to get certain programming jobs. In those events, I don't have the time or desire to sit in front of a text editor and work the code by myself from scratch. It doesn't even make sense.
[snip]
I have to say I found your comment peculiar, to say the least. I have been working as a full time web developer/designer for the last three years. In the time I've had opportunity to try out many kinds of editors, from 'HTML editors' to 'WYSIWYG' editors.
And I have found them all lacking in usability. Actually, using a WYSIWYG program like FrontPage slows down the process of creating web sites. They might be good for sketching out something, but for serious creation or maintenance of sites, there is no chance that they would stand up to a good application server and a text editor.
And of course have to be mentioned that all of the software I use for web development is free. Midgard as the application server, Emacs with PSGML as the text editor used in sketching out layouts, and GIMP for creating graphics. only proprietary piece of software I need in my work is Netscape, and that will change when Mozilla approaches a usable status.
It also has to be remembered that WYSIWYG concept, good for normal print layouting, doesn't quite work with Web as we sites should be usable by a variety of different browsers and internet appliances.
All of this is IMO, of course.
--
I know that you have been told about many other application servers by now. But there is another one that you might find interesting - Midgard.
Midgard is built over the foundation of PHP3, MySQL and Apache, and works on the ideology that there will be no normal files on the server but rather that all the queries are validated with a database table containing instructions on what to do with incoming URLs.
It is actually easy to create good-looking and effective web-based interfaces with this. I've done it with a few sites, and even normal sales personnel and school people have been able to create content to their pages.
So if you are interested, check Midgard out at http://midgard.greywolves.org. The system is under LGPL, and came publicly available just last night.
I like the system, but then again, it can be said that I have bias...
--
Fucking hell, IE is even more STANDARDS compliant than NS!
More standards compliant? Huh?
I'd say there is no such thing as being "more standards compliant". Either you are standards compliant or you are not. Make no compromises here.
And currently none of the browsers available are standards compliant.
The web of today is in really sorry state. I had hoped that Mozilla would bring us some hope, but now that hope seems quite vain...
--
I don't ever remember trying to peak around a corner in a room by staring into a moniter at an angle in Quake, Quake 2, Unreal, Half-Life, etc.. like I did in DOOM.
Ahh... those were days.
--
The big three are all down - userfriendly, bedope, segfault... I sure as hell hope it's an April Fools joke.
Yes, they all are down. But however, it has not been reported on other community sites, like SlashDot, which would lead us to believe that at least Rob et al. think it is a hoax.
Also, they being all shut down at this particular date would also hint at something of that note.
But if it isn't a hoax, and the sites are really gone... well, simply, someone is going to be very pissed off.
--