About 5 years ago, I had just graduated Nursing School with my BSN. So, as one would expect I received a lot of solicitations for professional periodicals such as Nursing Weeky, etc. With one of these mags was offering to 2 free monthly issues - not an unheard of propositon. So I bit. Well the mag was relatively uninteresting and I opted not to persue a subscription.
Well guess what? You got it - I got a letter from the mag stating that my subscription was going to lapse and that I needed to renew asap. Funny thing is that I never subscribed, I just tried out the mags, so I ignored it. About a month later I got a letter from "North Shores" collections. I had to go to some lengths to get them off my back. I had to threaten the nursing rag by telling them that I would be forced to contact the States Attorney generals office (I lived in Madison, WI at the time). I also informed that I had recorded the phone conversation (which is legal in Wisconsin). After that conversation I received no further communiques from North Shores or the Nursing rag.
This tactic is pretty sleezy to say the least (and especially so from a professional medical periodical, or so I thought). Seems a not too uncommon tactic that many magazines attempt when their business are going to the into the red.
Wonderful business strategy. And by the way the magazine tanked. How pathetic.
Ya right. I'm 45 and have been playing guitar since i was 13. I'd like to see said robot follow me for 8 bars! I bet I can blow it up in less than 4. My days are numbered - Ya sure, right, ok, whatever!
I'd be upset - but I can't stop laughing. I can play better than any machine - I'd really like to see this thing to improve jazz fusion. It doesn't stand a chance, poor sot!
Is it me? Or, does anyone else think the icons from the screenshot of IE7 looks alot like KDE Icons?
Look at the home icon - stock KDE imho.
Seems M$ is doing to Linux what they did with Apple. Apple came out with something cool - M$ ripped it of, branded it - and will swear up and down that it's their own "original" idea - hmmm! I smell another patent - something obscure, like a icon rendering protocol or two. lol.
This is yet another "strange" M$ promotion to come out of the M$ U.K. offices. Does anyone remember the M$ lew??? Wasn't it in the U.K. that M$ wanted to install some sort of terminal to an M$ service in public bathrooms, or something along those lines.
To quote the frontpage (pun intended) of MSN UK competetion:
Thought Thieves is about people stealing and profiting from your creation or innovation. Think about it: how would you feel if you saw your hard work being passed off as the property of someone else? What would you do?
We want to know!
Send us your short film on intellectual property theft by 1st July 2005 for your chance to win £2,000 worth of film and video equipment vouchers. And finalists will be invited to attend a special screening of their films and presentation ceremony in London.
And when clicking on the "About TT partners one is presented with short blurbs about the "Film Education" org and a U.K. Film Councils "First Light" initiative for youth. And then at the bottom of the page is:
The Promoter of this competition is Microsoft Limited. Microsoft works hard to ensure its customers get the full value of its products through purchasing genuine Microsoft software. Find out how Microsoft is fighting software piracy at www.microsoft.com/uk/piracy
So M$ has funded a film contest about stealing thoughts and ideas... Anyone see anything hypocritical in this stance or is it just me? I also find it a bit sneaky (for lack of a better word) to see M$ U.K. using the films created in a "anti-piracy" campaign made by the very target aucience they want to "persuade". English youths make an anit-piracy/IP-theft film for English youth - but in a "not" so transparent manner.
To quote the catch phrase for me is the line:
So how would you feel if you saw your hard work being passed off as the property of someone else? What would you do?
Well, if your an M$ competitor (or former "partner") you'ld sue - many many have already and the list is growing. If anyone knows about stealing ideas and IP isn't it M$? Oh, I'm sorry, the preferred method is to cripple the company and then roll in with a low ball hostile bid. The only time they "steal" anything is if they think they won't get caught or it's too expensive.
And this comes in the midst of a big (and often dubious) patent filing blitz. I can't help but wonder if M$ thought that they could patent the alphabet they would - then we would all be paying and M$ tax, unless you wrote in cyrillic or a character based language.
I don't know - I just find the whole thing somewhat insulting. Not to mention how it somehow makes me think that those at the M$ U.K. office must think their citizens to be just short of out and out idiots. And what does that say of the U.K. educational groups behind this?
So when does the list of "approved" thoughts come out - I don't what to be labelled a theif!
Ok, I'm 44 and have been playing guiter (and other assorted instruments) since I was 13. I have grew up with other musiciams that have had a lot of success (Jake E Lee - Ozzy, RATT) and played in many bands. I used to be all about "getting signed". Now the reality is that musicains are generally flakes and unreliable. Pair this with R&A reps and you've a hard time getting anywhere if you're serious.
Now, the computer age! Right now I have Ableton Live 4 and Steinberg's CubaseSX 2.1 (both music sequencing/mastering programs). The state of the art is now at the point where "quality" produced music can be done with a modest investment and a bit of talent. What really is at the crux of this "file sharing" BS that the RIAA is spewing is really about gaining control of media distribution.
Let me be direct. I don't need to hope to "get signed" in order to produce my music in an RIAA approved studio. I can record, mix and master my music. Now pair this with the plethera of indy music publishers popping up and their main means of exposure and distribution - the net. The way I would (and others) work it is to place a song or two (hopefully one that will hold interest) on to a p2p network - this gains exposure. Now if you like what I've produced you can go to "X" site and see my full album/CD and if so desired buy it! Gee what a novel idea.
Now, using the net, p2p, and the help of an indy publisher or three I actually start to sell my work. So, just for arguement, let's say That my song (released for free on a p2p) is getting attention in the U.S. and Europe. There are over 240 million in the U.S. and a few more million in Europe (to say the least). Now lets say i get $1 for each CD sold (actually more but let's keep it in round numbers). To get a Gold album you sell 500K, and platinium 1Mil. Between the U.S. and Europe I have catchy song and sell a million - I'm rich and who needs the RIAA and it's affiliates?
The only thing the RIAA members may afford me is distribution and advertising (and maybe concert arrangements). I don't need to sign my life away to "get signed" in order to ply my craft, and with the advent of p2p and indy publishers I really don't even need the distribution (though big record companies can provide some nice advertising).
If they get legislation to shutdown or hinder p2p networks then they set legal precedence and can use their legal teams to further gain back their deathgrip on who makes what music and whether or not it sees the light of day.
P2P is just a step in keeping the RIAA's domination over musicians and music creation and distribution. The idea of musicians creating, controlling, and making a sizable amount of money off their product seems to really bother the record moguls - Gee, imagine that. Musicains make money from their music without having to "sign" away the overwhelming majority of the money generation to a "contract" holder, and providing their fans with music "they've" decided they like at an affordable price.
I bet it keeps the RIAA big wigs up at night - any takers on that bet?
Does this surprise anyone? M$ stock has been flat for over 3 years. M$ is betting the farm on Longhorn and unless the code base isn't as porous as it's previous products M$ is going to have a lot of negative and very critical reviews and recommendation by various analysts in a wide spectrum of sectors. Pair this with the continuing growth and acceptance of F/OSS. Even the U.S. Navy has formally announced a serious look into F/OSS. Governments are turning to F/OSS, Lenovo has a viable PC business in the fastest growing economy in the world at present - China (aka PRC) and IBM is sitting in the catbird seat to provide middleware and aid development.
M$ is finding that the status quo is not being accepted wholesale and many former allies are looking to vet their markets by giving serious thought to F/OSS and Linux - this continues to threaten M$ and they're running out of options for FUD. Not many people believe the FUD M$ spews - at least not anywhere near the numbers they used to.
Look, let's face it. M$ is going to attempt, at every opportunity, to smear the perception that F/OSS and Linux are inferior and uncapable. Anyone that has ever read any comments I have posted on/. knows they I'm a stanch F/OSS and Linux advocate. So, in all honesty - Linux has a fair distance to go to realize its full potential. But giving the time and amount of progress F/OSS and Linux has made, they community has done a stellar job IMHO. And the bigboys in Redmond know this all too well - they're not stupid - just suffering form a monoculture and denial.
So expect more of the same from such as ADTI - they were paid and therefore must produce something anti-Linux. The only thing that I find well.., pathetic, is that ADTI claims are on the edge of being out and out ridiculous. And in my mind that goes to show just how desparate M$ is getting. M$ viewed F/OSS and Linux as a developers play toy and a non-starter. Now that this is clearly not the case M$ has for the last few years been on a FUD campaign. The "Open Source As Legal Time Bomb" stance is just another tactic along the same lines as the SCOX(E) attempt to thwart the growth of F/OSS and Linux - The is the "F" in FUD - its main focus is FEAR. M$ is the one that's feeling the fear - and uncertainty and doubt are growing in the ranks of Redmond and their likely to be former clientele.
Senator "where's the any key" is gonna make key decisions on every thing from whether or not M$ is going to get patents on the escape key and copyrights to anything I code on a windows boxen.
Maybe it's time to go back to using the abacus! Wait - didn't M$ just apply for that patent as well?
Moron! The federal law - aka CAN-SPAM act is not an obscure law (that is unless you live in a cave, bury your head in the sand, have a selective memory or are just plain stupid). I mean do you actually think that your position is defensible? (it's rhetorical you dweb - of course you think it's defensible - Res Ipso Liquator, that's latin moron for "the thing speaks of itself - that's another legel term fyi).
I, along with a few hundred million other internet user don't like getting an endless stream of junk emails (aka "SPAM") that often get hijacked by blackhats (if you don't know what that term means - learn to use google you idiot) in order to vector themselves covertly around the net, plant trojans, etc... It's mentalites such as yours that have turned the internet into a security breach waiting to happen - and actually how much business does it really generate? Statistics show that this form of solicitation to be the least effect and often ends up having the opposite effect that it was intended to - but thats ok I guess, as long as you make a buck right? And who cares if it's "legal" or not - it's just a white collar crime after all, not like anyone "really" gets hurts... RIGHT!
I could be way off base on this, it's a bit vague as to his "real" motives AFAICT. But, for arguments sake, let's say he does get a trademark for MAME, would he essentially be locking in the development for MAME for his own ends/profits? The issue is not about MAME, it's seems more about trying to get a market lock-in. Isn't this really about the fact that he tried to play it straight and paid for licensing for the roms and is now getting undercut in the market by his competitors that supply a platform and leave it up to the users to obtain the roms themsleves? It's about pirated wares and the unresolved issue around abandonware. It's sounds to me as if he really wants to have exclusive access/use of M.A.M.E. for his business and only his business.
His stance on pirated wares is a smoke screen IMHO. I really can't help but think "he" is the one trying to do and end-around around an end-around. He paid a lot of money to dev and market his product and now is losing money to competitors and his solution is to acquire some sort of exclusive rights to utilize this and lock-out competitors/potential future competitors under the guise of protection against pirateware.
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it - and apparently others aren't buying it as well. Which is probably why he's pulling this move in the first place.
Hmmmm! His he related to Mr McBride in some fashion (second cousin, in-law, etc).
True True. I went to school with a guy that had a sort of second site when it came to computers. I mean he had little if any problem hacking into corporate computers. He got caught, and made a deal. Uh... How do you think he paid for out of state tuition at a Big Ten University (I know how expensive it is - I'm up to debt to my eyeballs, and coincidently we came from the same town).
So, your point is not far from the reality. Boy (about 17 and an senior in high school) hax very well, gets caught, then gets subsidized by said company to attend a major University to get a degree in comp sci and go to work for them.
When I heard about this I said to myself... "I knew I should've payed more attention in my high school programming and networking classes.:)
In know you got modded down for your comment. But it raises an interesting point that those on the/. gamers list seem to wanna avoid (outside of anything negative about WIN-XP, etc).
The point is that all this "press" hype and posturing we see comming out of U.S. companies seem to think that the U.S. statutes and subsequent penalties apply globally.
In the case on non-U.S. players a ban would be the only real resort. I really don't see interpol getting involved with serving search warrents, writs, or subpoenas to someone living in say South Africa, Australia, Taiwan, India, etc, etc,...
This also begs the question: What else do American entities (corps, institutions, Federal agencies) think they can do that will have any "real" effect in an increasingly "global" market?
(And this is just why IBM sold "all" of its Desktop business and IP [read Intellectual Property] to Lenovo - it's in China and out of US jurisdiction should give you a clue).
Short of invading a country what would they do outside of a banning some Berliner using a combo of a wall hack and an aimbot? Nothing AFAICT.
Uh,.. let's think about this. "DON'T BLAME THE LAWYERS"! Hmmm, congress (the house and senate) are where U.S. laws are made (at the fed level-for states it's the assembly an state senate) and the overwhelming majority of those in the congress hold law degrees. So, we shouldn't blame the lawyers. Ok we'll blame the congress - which is made up of (what 80%, 90%) lawyers.
Figures. Leave it to the lawyers to quibble over symantics. Congressman or lawyer... What's the difference?
This ZINS variant is essentially a keystroke logger used by those infiltrating bank sites via stolen passwords and logins'. The point is that this new variant came out right after the 1st of the year, and was found by a F/OSS built for windows spybot finder. According to Symantec this changes settings in the ever wonderful microsoft master list *aka - the registry (gawd I hate it).
And Symantec gives intructions where to look and how to remove it. Funny thing though, it wasn't there. Could this spyware progie be kludged?...could be! But upon performing a search of said registry I sure enough found it. It was in the "google" search entries!!! Oh, great.
It only took "one" time, "one" use, in a windows environment to get attacked on this level. I do online banking from time to time -nothing fancy. I "almost" always do so in Linux using Konq or Moz, and for just such reasons than to avoid what happened. But being a musician that discovered DAWS systems with programs that only run in windows systems I have to keep a dual boot system. Well, I get careless (aka "stupid) and I use windows (firebird in win, FYI) one time to visit a "secure" bank site and BOOM!
Essentially, from and end-users point of view with a modicum of knowledge about computers, Microsofts patches mean didly! All I can say is...
So far SCO has done what it has in civil courts. And in America you can just about sue anyone for any reason (whether it gets past filing papers with the court and gets a date or last beyond the prelim hearing is another matter). But correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't fraud on the criminal side of the dockets? I mean fraud is Illegal in the sense the a D.A. (or some one from the D.A.'s office) brings a case to the courts in this case. And In the case of IBM and allegations of fraud that might also entail a Grand Jury hearing.
If I'm correct in this assumption, how is SCO going to get someone from a Justice department (State or Fed) to file the case - you have to have something to actually show in this event, and filing a bogus report is in turn a crime.
Then again perhaps you can bring a tort to the courts an the basis of some sort of civil fraud?
Sorry, I don't get it - other than it being yet another stall tactic because this is really about Wall Street more than being a business that actually sells a product to make their money.
So Darl you want to take on/. and Groklaw? Well....?
Ok,...
BRING IT - BITCH.
P.S. This guy has an uncanny knack for finding the most far fetched situations in which he undoubtedly gets soundly trounced... Often using his own words against him. Kinda like the troops throwing their rifle clips at the enemy and then wondering why the enemy continues to shoot at them and never seems to run out of ammo.
Talk about clueless. Let the games begin. Reminds me of fragging noobs online - it's just not that much of a challenge. Oh well, it's his funeral.
"It really takes a spectacularly lazy and inept journalist to miss this."
This pretty much sums up that state of the "Forth Estate". The press has become simply a mouth piece for whom ever they are supposedly "reporting" on. Most tech rags are in bed with who ever is paying the most for advertising space. And the same holds true for the non-tech rags. Bottom line, with all the entangled corporate subsidiaries pissing of some fringe company may have a direct impact on your clients desire to repurchase more advertising space.
In otherwords, without a score card you can't say anything negative about anybody your reporting on for fear of getting fired because you just pissed off the "client" of said rag. Pair this with the American penchant for suing at the drop of a hat and it's any wonder anything in the press these days is anything more than a thinly vailed advertisement.
Pity, the rest of us have to do the critical thinking for reporters - since their editors only publish articles that are corporately correct (as opposed to politically correct).
Groklaw is seriously/.ed. SCOX stock is still following it's downward trend closing at 4.38 a share with a percentage loss of 0.15 (3.31%).
Now BayStar is dealing with the SEC investigation related to the PIPE deal and it's bid to get out as clean as possible. Seems TSG is holding it's own corporate investors hostage as well. What needs to seriously happen in the rest of the cases is for courts to get SCO to finally decide what their case is about. I mean let's be realistic here, SCO has been on a "fishing" expedition essentially from day one. The lawyer that introduced himself to the DCC team is most likely from one of the three (IBM, Novell, Rhat) but regardless you can bet they're taking notes.
As this case is all but concluded (save for the 30 response time - which means what, a small and meager fine at worst?) I am hoping that it will at least hopefully set a trend. A trend wherein the judges in the other cases see SCO for what is really going on. The fishing expedition is mostly secondary to the primary goal of Darl and company - that is to pump and dump and then do it again. Speedy resolution to SCO's contention is counter to this since it lays to rest the controversy and leaves SCO with no "time" to play the market. Chances are fair that the judge has some inkling of this and didn't appreciate SCO's attempt to manipulate the courts for it's own gains, based on a case that has little if any merit.
The longer this crap floats around on court dockets the more SCO can play the stocks. The quicker the "SCO Question" is answered and layed to rest the quicker SCO's stock will tank and we can all go about get on with making a competitive OS that is stable, robust, and feature ladden, which is exactly what SCO is trying to kill.
Good Luck Darl, you'll need it. Not that it is likely to do you any great benefit. Just a clue Mr. McBride. You might have at least had something (no matter how small) tangible to pull out of your hat if things get sticky. The time to claim that revealing the code would destroy your case is gone. Your case is going down the tubes and waiting of the other foot to drop is most likely a waste of time. There ain't gonna be any other surprises - your case is vaporware. You know it, we know, and soon the judges will know it. Better hope that that sleeping dragon called the SEC doesn't wake - if it does you're most likely going to find yourself up shit creek, and not only without a paddle, but in a very leaky boat.
The question I have is this. When SCO finally tanks, and there investors find out that it was essentially a scam, how is Darl and company going to pay for a legal team? I mean all those investors filing torts and class action torts against SCO, Darl and the rest of the TSG clan, the legal fees are going to seriously start getting very expensive. Then there's the counter suits filed by.... hmmmm, let me think..... IBM, RedHat, Novell, and likely a few other corporations. All that money that Darl and his cavalcade of investors have made is essentially already spent - So what was the point again?
OMG these guys can't even get a URL right. Doesn't matter what browser I use.
With IE I get:
http://http://www.sco.com/company/profile.html With Moz I get a statement saying http is an invalid server.
And they expect not to get trounced by IBM attorney's and win a court case. Yep, their best bet is play the press, pump then dump the stock, book a plane to Brazil, invest you money at 200% interest and hope the currency doesn't deflate to the point of being useless.
On the otherhand, Darl and Co don't seem to even be that bright. If this whole SCO debacle weren't pissin' me off so much I would probably find it beyond hilarious.
The writer obviously did little or absolutely no research about what she was supposedly reporting on. Either that or she has no understanding of legalese whatsoever. Not being able to grasp the finer points of "legalese" is not uncommon in the least. But, if you're going to report on something of this nature one would expect that you would at least "get the drift"!
Furthermore, though it is a Linux centric website habited by the Linux faithful, the commects to her article are "all" (every one) negative regarding her take on the case.
For the Love of Pete - Grog Law may be maintained by a F/OSS-Linux supporter, but they lay it out in a pretty fair and reasonably unbiased format. Five or ten minutes perusing their site would have allowed her to avoid sounding like a complete dote.
I expect this sort of slant on a M$ friendly site like Eweek or something Ziff-Davis since they are actually and formally partnered with M$. But on a Linux World site??? And Eweek had a more cogent and accurate interpretation of the events.
I think it's safe to say that Linux World needs to be a little more descriminating about who writes for them. And the editor needs to actually read these before approving them? Ya think?
This is what we get when you have a "Cotton Gin" mindset trying to comprehend modern technology.
M$ is banking on those at the PTO not having the slightest knowledge of the technology. Pair this with the PTO specific jargon and it is a pretty safe bet that those making the decision as to who gets what in terms of a pertinent technologies will not make the connection, and you can forget about any inkling of "prior" art being put into the equation - that is until someone else does it for them (that is point the PTO to pre-existing patents/technologies).
If I had my choice I would pay the musicians directly and hence let the musicain pay the record companies. Seems the RIAA faithful fear this as much as CD ripping and burning IMHO.
The RIAA remain purposefully ambigious on just what I pay for when purchasing a CD (licensing vs data on the CD). Likewise they seem to have a distinct problem breaking down just what the dollars they get for the product go for, e.g. recording studio, engineers, press/manufacturing, distribution, musician salaries, etc...
I would prefer to pay the artists directly for the material they provide and let them deal with the media companies in a position of power (or not - many musicians are clueless on subjects related to business while others can be quite savoy). IMHO the costs of producing a quality piece of music that is sufficiantly engineered can be done for much less than the RIAA would have us believe. The musician could bear the cost of the initial production and let the Music Labels do what they are really best at - Advertising and distribution.
Look at it this way. In the world of art (painting, sculpture, etc) most galleries take between 40 to 60% of the cost - pretty much a 50/50% proposition, wherein artist makes the work and the studio provides the venue and access to the patron. Only in the Music industry does the studio take 90% plus of the profits - a very good deal is 5 points on a contract.
The RIAA is running out of avenues to continue to lock in the artists and audience. Between indie labels, online distribution and users creating their own media (aka the CD) the big music labels are losing their grip - I say so be it. I would be much better if the Artists were allow to get the lions share of the monetary harvest since It have yet to see any Record industry exec that was able to create any music that I or others would be interested in hearing.... Let alone pay for!
Looking back at the 4 year activity of SCOX stock and it becomes apparent what is going on. All that have followed this debacle are painfully aware of SCOX business behavior. But just to paint the picture a couple of factoids.
Four years ago SCOX stock exceed over $100/share. In january of last year the stock was on the verge of dropping below $1/share and ran the risk of being delisted (as penny stocks are on NASDAQ). So we have this brilliant claim the "Linux ripped off SCOX via IBM". We (the F/OSS community) worried about the possibility of this being a reality. I and others scurried to dig up as much factual and cogent info on who contributed what, as well as when and where.
It was of course determined that many of the former Caldera (pre-SCOX) employees/devs had contribute source work to the Linux kernel. It was further determined that there appeared to be nothing out of the ordinary about the manner in which this was done. Then the discussions regarding SCOX' focused on fixing any possible problem insofar as determining what tainted the kernel in order to cut it out and replace it.
SCOX didn't like this in the slightest. They refused to be specific because they claimed that it would invalidate their claim and leave them with no recourse. Though this was not taking to kindly by the F/OSS community but it was understandable, wherein one doesn't invalidate ones torts by giving away the evidence in this manner. So be it.
However glaring inconsistencies began to appear in SCOX' claims and contentions. All the while SCOX stock was rising. They played the industry press like a fine fiddle and the industry press bought it hook, line, and sinker. They didn't delve into the deeper questions but simply repeated SCOX' claims and essentially became a mouth piece for these idiots.
So the question arose - "what the hell is really going on here"? Speculations abound and over time it became apparent the SCOX my well be a player for a bigger entity - many saw M$ behind this. Then evidence of the PIPE deal began to come to light. A convuluted cavalcade of backroom conversations and a lot of money changing hands and all the while SCOX stock was rising.
At every turn SCOX shows that it has no conpunction whatsoever to legally and economically assualt any one or any thing that they felt would further their cause - but just what really was the crux of their jihad? Ok let's get serious here. It wasn't about being ripped off, it wasn't about securing their market channels and product line. It was about money - no real shock here. But the logic was baffling to both tech head, end-user, corporates, and financial analysts. All the while SCOX is making the rounds with the bigger players, those being for example IDG, The Yankee Group, and many others (including Harvard Business School lectures?).
But as in Germany that unquestionably stated to SCOX "put up or shut up" the time has come in America as well and we see that SCOX has little or nothing at all to present. It's not about holding your cards to up the ante. It's about holding your cards because you hand has nothing but junk and bluffing in hopes that the other guy will blink. Well IBM didn't blink - as if you would expect them to.
But what about all those poor dumb saps (bless their souls) that just wanted to invest in a company that would afford them a margin of profit on their investment? The majority of -l users don't understand the deeper issues of this technology. They see computing as a tool to use (and one that is often extremely complicated and intimidating from their point of view - I mean hell I just showed my mother the virtues of right click menus in WinXP for crying out loud).
At the start of this fiasco SCOX started at just around one dollar per share and rose to over $22/share. Not a bad investment from a strictly market perspective. But now it's dropping and at the close of business this Friday it is down to $4.754/share - ouch. This would be ok if their was any validity
For ATI 3D drivers for 9.1 ia32 go to: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementar y/X/X Free86/ATI/suse91/fglrx/3.7.6
They work fine, except Tribes2 terrain textures are kludged. This could be T2 specific since UT2k3 and UT2k4Demo work without any problems.
I suspect a fresh install of T2 may clear the terrain texture issue up, either that or rename my ~/.loki/Tribes2 dir, restarting the game to let it create a new dir and then transferring my user specific files and scripts to the new dir.
And don't forget to add Load "dri" to your XF86Config file.
"First: XD2 is based on Gnome 2.2. SUSE Linux 9.1 has Gnome 2.4 and 9.2 will have something newer. So a direct inclusion of XD2 would mean going back to a rather old XD2."
"9.1 already contained the most important patches from the Ximian team and for 9.2, I expect more to be added,..."
Name of said dev shall remain anonymous. Since I do not have his permission directly to post his name on/., but this is legitimate.
I have access to this individual as one of the SuSE beta testers.
D2 will be on 9.2 (supposedly;) ). By the time Ximian got something to offer for SuSE, 9.1 was already in preproduction. Though some packages were added at the last minute (by popular demand of the Beta testers) dropping something as big and involved as Ximians D2 was just not feasible - that is and get the OS out by the release date.
In 6 months or so they should release 9.2 and I would suspect that Ximian D2 will be included. Hmmm! I know they said it would be but now I'm wondering? Will it be XD2 and labeled as such, or XD2 without the branding - i.e. D2 without all those monkey logos (I don't think monkeys and geekos necessarily go together). I have to ask.
Slashdot Mirror
About 5 years ago, I had just graduated Nursing School with my BSN. So, as one would expect I received a lot of solicitations for professional periodicals such as Nursing Weeky, etc. With one of these mags was offering to 2 free monthly issues - not an unheard of propositon. So I bit. Well the mag was relatively uninteresting and I opted not to persue a subscription.
Well guess what? You got it - I got a letter from the mag stating that my subscription was going to lapse and that I needed to renew asap. Funny thing is that I never subscribed, I just tried out the mags, so I ignored it. About a month later I got a letter from "North Shores" collections. I had to go to some lengths to get them off my back. I had to threaten the nursing rag by telling them that I would be forced to contact the States Attorney generals office (I lived in Madison, WI at the time). I also informed that I had recorded the phone conversation (which is legal in Wisconsin). After that conversation I received no further communiques from North Shores or the Nursing rag.
This tactic is pretty sleezy to say the least (and especially so from a professional medical periodical, or so I thought). Seems a not too uncommon tactic that many magazines attempt when their business are going to the into the red.
Wonderful business strategy. And by the way the magazine tanked. How pathetic.
Ya right. I'm 45 and have been playing guitar since i was 13. I'd like to see said robot follow me for 8 bars! I bet I can blow it up in less than 4. My days are numbered - Ya sure, right, ok, whatever!
:)
I'd be upset - but I can't stop laughing. I can play better than any machine - I'd really like to see this thing to improve jazz fusion. It doesn't stand a chance, poor sot!
Cheers.
Is it me? Or, does anyone else think the icons from the screenshot of IE7 looks alot like KDE Icons?
Look at the home icon - stock KDE imho.
Seems M$ is doing to Linux what they did with Apple. Apple came out with something cool - M$ ripped it of, branded it - and will swear up and down that it's their own "original" idea - hmmm! I smell another patent - something obscure, like a icon rendering protocol or two. lol.
To quote the frontpage (pun intended) of MSN UK competetion:
And when clicking on the "About TT partners one is presented with short blurbs about the "Film Education" org and a U.K. Film Councils "First Light" initiative for youth. And then at the bottom of the page is:
So M$ has funded a film contest about stealing thoughts and ideas... Anyone see anything hypocritical in this stance or is it just me? I also find it a bit sneaky (for lack of a better word) to see M$ U.K. using the films created in a "anti-piracy" campaign made by the very target aucience they want to "persuade". English youths make an anit-piracy/IP-theft film for English youth - but in a "not" so transparent manner.
To quote the catch phrase for me is the line:
Well, if your an M$ competitor (or former "partner") you'ld sue - many many have already and the list is growing. If anyone knows about stealing ideas and IP isn't it M$? Oh, I'm sorry, the preferred method is to cripple the company and then roll in with a low ball hostile bid. The only time they "steal" anything is if they think they won't get caught or it's too expensive.
And this comes in the midst of a big (and often dubious) patent filing blitz. I can't help but wonder if M$ thought that they could patent the alphabet they would - then we would all be paying and M$ tax, unless you wrote in cyrillic or a character based language.
I don't know - I just find the whole thing somewhat insulting. Not to mention how it somehow makes me think that those at the M$ U.K. office must think their citizens to be just short of out and out idiots. And what does that say of the U.K. educational groups behind this?
So when does the list of "approved" thoughts come out - I don't what to be labelled a theif!
Ok, I'm 44 and have been playing guiter (and other assorted instruments) since I was 13. I have grew up with other musiciams that have had a lot of success (Jake E Lee - Ozzy, RATT) and played in many bands. I used to be all about "getting signed". Now the reality is that musicains are generally flakes and unreliable. Pair this with R&A reps and you've a hard time getting anywhere if you're serious.
Now, the computer age! Right now I have Ableton Live 4 and Steinberg's CubaseSX 2.1 (both music sequencing/mastering programs). The state of the art is now at the point where "quality" produced music can be done with a modest investment and a bit of talent. What really is at the crux of this "file sharing" BS that the RIAA is spewing is really about gaining control of media distribution.
Let me be direct. I don't need to hope to "get signed" in order to produce my music in an RIAA approved studio. I can record, mix and master my music. Now pair this with the plethera of indy music publishers popping up and their main means of exposure and distribution - the net. The way I would (and others) work it is to place a song or two (hopefully one that will hold interest) on to a p2p network - this gains exposure. Now if you like what I've produced you can go to "X" site and see my full album/CD and if so desired buy it! Gee what a novel idea.
Now, using the net, p2p, and the help of an indy publisher or three I actually start to sell my work. So, just for arguement, let's say That my song (released for free on a p2p) is getting attention in the U.S. and Europe. There are over 240 million in the U.S. and a few more million in Europe (to say the least). Now lets say i get $1 for each CD sold (actually more but let's keep it in round numbers). To get a Gold album you sell 500K, and platinium 1Mil. Between the U.S. and Europe I have catchy song and sell a million - I'm rich and who needs the RIAA and it's affiliates?
The only thing the RIAA members may afford me is distribution and advertising (and maybe concert arrangements). I don't need to sign my life away to "get signed" in order to ply my craft, and with the advent of p2p and indy publishers I really don't even need the distribution (though big record companies can provide some nice advertising).
If they get legislation to shutdown or hinder p2p networks then they set legal precedence and can use their legal teams to further gain back their deathgrip on who makes what music and whether or not it sees the light of day.
P2P is just a step in keeping the RIAA's domination over musicians and music creation and distribution. The idea of musicians creating, controlling, and making a sizable amount of money off their product seems to really bother the record moguls - Gee, imagine that. Musicains make money from their music without having to "sign" away the overwhelming majority of the money generation to a "contract" holder, and providing their fans with music "they've" decided they like at an affordable price.
I bet it keeps the RIAA big wigs up at night - any takers on that bet?
Does this surprise anyone? M$ stock has been flat for over 3 years. M$ is betting the farm on Longhorn and unless the code base isn't as porous as it's previous products M$ is going to have a lot of negative and very critical reviews and recommendation by various analysts in a wide spectrum of sectors. Pair this with the continuing growth and acceptance of F/OSS. Even the U.S. Navy has formally announced a serious look into F/OSS. Governments are turning to F/OSS, Lenovo has a viable PC business in the fastest growing economy in the world at present - China (aka PRC) and IBM is sitting in the catbird seat to provide middleware and aid development.
/. knows they I'm a stanch F/OSS and Linux advocate. So, in all honesty - Linux has a fair distance to go to realize its full potential. But giving the time and amount of progress F/OSS and Linux has made, they community has done a stellar job IMHO. And the bigboys in Redmond know this all too well - they're not stupid - just suffering form a monoculture and denial.
M$ is finding that the status quo is not being accepted wholesale and many former allies are looking to vet their markets by giving serious thought to F/OSS and Linux - this continues to threaten M$ and they're running out of options for FUD. Not many people believe the FUD M$ spews - at least not anywhere near the numbers they used to.
Look, let's face it. M$ is going to attempt, at every opportunity, to smear the perception that F/OSS and Linux are inferior and uncapable. Anyone that has ever read any comments I have posted on
So expect more of the same from such as ADTI - they were paid and therefore must produce something anti-Linux. The only thing that I find well.., pathetic, is that ADTI claims are on the edge of being out and out ridiculous. And in my mind that goes to show just how desparate M$ is getting. M$ viewed F/OSS and Linux as a developers play toy and a non-starter. Now that this is clearly not the case M$ has for the last few years been on a FUD campaign. The "Open Source As Legal Time Bomb" stance is just another tactic along the same lines as the SCOX(E) attempt to thwart the growth of F/OSS and Linux - The is the "F" in FUD - its main focus is FEAR. M$ is the one that's feeling the fear - and uncertainty and doubt are growing in the ranks of Redmond and their likely to be former clientele.
Senator "where's the any key" is gonna make key decisions on every thing from whether or not M$ is going to get patents on the escape key and copyrights to anything I code on a windows boxen.
Maybe it's time to go back to using the abacus! Wait - didn't M$ just apply for that patent as well?
I feel a headache starting to come on. pfft!
Moron! The federal law - aka CAN-SPAM act is not an obscure law (that is unless you live in a cave, bury your head in the sand, have a selective memory or are just plain stupid). I mean do you actually think that your position is defensible? (it's rhetorical you dweb - of course you think it's defensible - Res Ipso Liquator, that's latin moron for "the thing speaks of itself - that's another legel term fyi).
I, along with a few hundred million other internet user don't like getting an endless stream of junk emails (aka "SPAM") that often get hijacked by blackhats (if you don't know what that term means - learn to use google you idiot) in order to vector themselves covertly around the net, plant trojans, etc... It's mentalites such as yours that have turned the internet into a security breach waiting to happen - and actually how much business does it really generate? Statistics show that this form of solicitation to be the least effect and often ends up having the opposite effect that it was intended to - but thats ok I guess, as long as you make a buck right? And who cares if it's "legal" or not - it's just a white collar crime after all, not like anyone "really" gets hurts... RIGHT!
I could be way off base on this, it's a bit vague as to his "real" motives AFAICT. But, for arguments sake, let's say he does get a trademark for MAME, would he essentially be locking in the development for MAME for his own ends/profits? The issue is not about MAME, it's seems more about trying to get a market lock-in. Isn't this really about the fact that he tried to play it straight and paid for licensing for the roms and is now getting undercut in the market by his competitors that supply a platform and leave it up to the users to obtain the roms themsleves? It's about pirated wares and the unresolved issue around abandonware. It's sounds to me as if he really wants to have exclusive access/use of M.A.M.E. for his business and only his business.
His stance on pirated wares is a smoke screen IMHO. I really can't help but think "he" is the one trying to do and end-around around an end-around. He paid a lot of money to dev and market his product and now is losing money to competitors and his solution is to acquire some sort of exclusive rights to utilize this and lock-out competitors/potential future competitors under the guise of protection against pirateware.
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it - and apparently others aren't buying it as well. Which is probably why he's pulling this move in the first place.
Hmmmm! His he related to Mr McBride in some fashion (second cousin, in-law, etc).
True True. I went to school with a guy that had a sort of second site when it came to computers.
:)
I mean he had little if any problem hacking into corporate computers. He got caught, and made a deal. Uh... How do you think he paid for out of state tuition at a Big Ten University (I know how expensive it is - I'm up to debt to my eyeballs, and coincidently we came from the same town).
So, your point is not far from the reality. Boy (about 17 and an senior in high school) hax very well, gets caught, then gets subsidized by said company to attend a major University to get a degree in comp sci and go to work for them.
When I heard about this I said to myself... "I knew I should've payed more attention in my high school programming and networking classes.
In know you got modded down for your comment. But it raises an interesting point that those on the /. gamers list seem to wanna avoid (outside of anything negative about WIN-XP, etc).
The point is that all this "press" hype and posturing we see comming out of U.S. companies seem to think that the U.S. statutes and subsequent penalties apply globally.
In the case on non-U.S. players a ban would be the only real resort. I really don't see interpol getting involved with serving search warrents, writs, or subpoenas to someone living in say South Africa, Australia, Taiwan, India, etc, etc,...
This also begs the question: What else do American entities (corps, institutions, Federal agencies) think they can do that will have any "real" effect in an increasingly "global" market?
(And this is just why IBM sold "all" of its Desktop business and IP [read Intellectual Property] to Lenovo - it's in China and out of US jurisdiction should give you a clue).
Short of invading a country what would they do outside of a banning some Berliner using a combo of a wall hack and an aimbot? Nothing AFAICT.
Uh,.. let's think about this. "DON'T BLAME THE LAWYERS"! Hmmm, congress (the house and senate) are where U.S. laws are made (at the fed level-for states it's the assembly an state senate) and the overwhelming majority of those in the congress hold law degrees. So, we shouldn't blame the lawyers. Ok we'll blame the congress - which is made up of (what 80%, 90%) lawyers.
Figures. Leave it to the lawyers to quibble over symantics. Congressman or lawyer... What's the difference?
This ZINS variant is essentially a keystroke logger used by those infiltrating bank sites via stolen passwords and logins'. The point is that this new variant came out right after the 1st of the year, and was found by a F/OSS built for windows spybot finder. According to Symantec this changes settings in the ever wonderful microsoft master list *aka - the registry (gawd I hate it).
...could be! But upon performing a search of said registry I sure enough found it. It was in the "google" search entries!!! Oh, great.
And Symantec gives intructions where to look and how to remove it. Funny thing though, it wasn't there. Could this spyware progie be kludged?
It only took "one" time, "one" use, in a windows environment to get attacked on this level. I do online banking from time to time -nothing fancy. I "almost" always do so in Linux using Konq or Moz, and for just such reasons than to avoid what happened. But being a musician that discovered DAWS systems with programs that only run in windows systems I have to keep a dual boot system. Well, I get careless (aka "stupid) and I use windows (firebird in win, FYI) one time to visit a "secure" bank site and BOOM!
Essentially, from and end-users point of view with a modicum of knowledge about computers, Microsofts patches mean didly! All I can say is...
Ya, OK. That was fun.
So far SCO has done what it has in civil courts. And in America you can just about sue anyone for any reason (whether it gets past filing papers with the court and gets a date or last beyond the prelim hearing is another matter). But correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't fraud on the criminal side of the dockets? I mean fraud is Illegal in the sense the a D.A. (or some one from the D.A.'s office) brings a case to the courts in this case. And In the case of IBM and allegations of fraud that might also entail a Grand Jury hearing.
If I'm correct in this assumption, how is SCO going to get someone from a Justice department (State or Fed) to file the case - you have to have something to actually show in this event, and filing a bogus report is in turn a crime.
Then again perhaps you can bring a tort to the courts an the basis of some sort of civil fraud?
Sorry, I don't get it - other than it being yet another stall tactic because this is really about Wall Street more than being a business that actually sells a product to make their money.
Cheers
So Darl you want to take on /. and Groklaw? Well....?
Ok,...
BRING IT - BITCH.
P.S. This guy has an uncanny knack for finding the most far fetched situations in which he undoubtedly gets soundly trounced... Often using his own words against him. Kinda like the troops throwing their rifle clips at the enemy and then wondering why the enemy continues to shoot at them and never seems to run out of ammo.
Talk about clueless. Let the games begin. Reminds me of fragging noobs online - it's just not that much of a challenge. Oh well, it's his funeral.
"It really takes a spectacularly lazy and inept journalist to miss this."
This pretty much sums up that state of the "Forth Estate". The press has become simply a mouth piece for whom ever they are supposedly "reporting" on. Most tech rags are in bed with who ever is paying the most for advertising space. And the same holds true for the non-tech rags. Bottom line, with all the entangled corporate subsidiaries pissing of some fringe company may have a direct impact on your clients desire to repurchase more advertising space.
In otherwords, without a score card you can't say anything negative about anybody your reporting on for fear of getting fired because you just pissed off the "client" of said rag. Pair this with the American penchant for suing at the drop of a hat and it's any wonder anything in the press these days is anything more than a thinly vailed advertisement.
Pity, the rest of us have to do the critical thinking for reporters - since their editors only publish articles that are corporately correct (as opposed to politically correct).
Groklaw is seriously /.ed. SCOX stock is still following it's downward trend closing at 4.38 a share with a percentage loss of 0.15 (3.31%).
Now BayStar is dealing with the SEC investigation related to the PIPE deal and it's bid to get out as clean as possible. Seems TSG is holding it's own corporate investors hostage as well. What needs to seriously happen in the rest of the cases is for courts to get SCO to finally decide what their case is about. I mean let's be realistic here, SCO has been on a "fishing" expedition essentially from day one. The lawyer that introduced himself to the DCC team is most likely from one of the three (IBM, Novell, Rhat) but regardless you can bet they're taking notes.
As this case is all but concluded (save for the 30 response time - which means what, a small and meager fine at worst?) I am hoping that it will at least hopefully set a trend. A trend wherein the judges in the other cases see SCO for what is really going on. The fishing expedition is mostly secondary to the primary goal of Darl and company - that is to pump and dump and then do it again. Speedy resolution to SCO's contention is counter to this since it lays to rest the controversy and leaves SCO with no "time" to play the market. Chances are fair that the judge has some inkling of this and didn't appreciate SCO's attempt to manipulate the courts for it's own gains, based on a case that has little if any merit.
The longer this crap floats around on court dockets the more SCO can play the stocks. The quicker the "SCO Question" is answered and layed to rest the quicker SCO's stock will tank and we can all go about get on with making a competitive OS that is stable, robust, and feature ladden, which is exactly what SCO is trying to kill.
Good Luck Darl, you'll need it. Not that it is likely to do you any great benefit. Just a clue Mr. McBride. You might have at least had something (no matter how small) tangible to pull out of your hat if things get sticky. The time to claim that revealing the code would destroy your case is gone. Your case is going down the tubes and waiting of the other foot to drop is most likely a waste of time. There ain't gonna be any other surprises - your case is vaporware. You know it, we know, and soon the judges will know it. Better hope that that sleeping dragon called the SEC doesn't wake - if it does you're most likely going to find yourself up shit creek, and not only without a paddle, but in a very leaky boat.
The question I have is this. When SCO finally tanks, and there investors find out that it was essentially a scam, how is Darl and company going to pay for a legal team? I mean all those investors filing torts and class action torts against SCO, Darl and the rest of the TSG clan, the legal fees are going to seriously start getting very expensive. Then there's the counter suits filed by.... hmmmm, let me think..... IBM, RedHat, Novell, and likely a few other corporations. All that money that Darl and his cavalcade of investors have made is essentially already spent - So what was the point again?
OMG these guys can't even get a URL right. Doesn't matter what browser I use.
With IE I get:
http://http://www.sco.com/company/profile.html
With Moz I get a statement saying http is an invalid server.
And they expect not to get trounced by IBM attorney's and win a court case. Yep, their best bet is play the press, pump then dump the stock, book a plane to Brazil, invest you money at 200% interest and hope the currency doesn't deflate to the point of being useless.
On the otherhand, Darl and Co don't seem to even be that bright. If this whole SCO debacle weren't pissin' me off so much I would probably find it beyond hilarious.
The writer obviously did little or absolutely no research about what she was supposedly reporting on.
Either that or she has no understanding of legalese whatsoever. Not being able to grasp the finer points of "legalese" is not uncommon in the least. But, if you're going to report on something of this nature one would expect that you would at least "get the drift"!
Furthermore, though it is a Linux centric website habited by the Linux faithful, the commects to her article are "all" (every one) negative regarding her take on the case.
For the Love of Pete - Grog Law may be maintained by a F/OSS-Linux supporter, but they lay it out in a pretty fair and reasonably unbiased format. Five or ten minutes perusing their site would have allowed her to avoid sounding like a complete dote.
I expect this sort of slant on a M$ friendly site like Eweek or something Ziff-Davis since they are actually and formally partnered with M$. But on a Linux World site??? And Eweek had a more cogent and accurate interpretation of the events.
I think it's safe to say that Linux World needs to be a little more descriminating about who writes for them. And the editor needs to actually read these before approving them? Ya think?
This is what we get when you have a "Cotton Gin" mindset trying to comprehend modern technology.
M$ is banking on those at the PTO not having the slightest knowledge of the technology. Pair this with the PTO specific jargon and it is a pretty safe bet that those making the decision as to who gets what in terms of a pertinent technologies will not make the connection, and you can forget about any inkling of "prior" art being put into the equation - that is until someone else does it for them (that is point the PTO to pre-existing patents/technologies).
If I had my choice I would pay the musicians directly and hence let the musicain pay the record companies. Seems the RIAA faithful fear this as much as CD ripping and burning IMHO.
The RIAA remain purposefully ambigious on just what I pay for when purchasing a CD (licensing vs data on the CD). Likewise they seem to have a distinct problem breaking down just what the dollars they get for the product go for, e.g. recording studio, engineers, press/manufacturing, distribution, musician salaries, etc...
I would prefer to pay the artists directly for the material they provide and let them deal with the media companies in a position of power (or not - many musicians are clueless on subjects related to business while others can be quite savoy). IMHO the costs of producing a quality piece of music that is sufficiantly engineered can be done for much less than the RIAA would have us believe. The musician could bear the cost of the initial production and let the Music Labels do what they are really best at - Advertising and distribution.
Look at it this way. In the world of art (painting, sculpture, etc) most galleries take between 40 to 60% of the cost - pretty much a 50/50% proposition, wherein artist makes the work and the studio provides the venue and access to the patron. Only in the Music industry does the studio take 90% plus of the profits - a very good deal is 5 points on a contract.
The RIAA is running out of avenues to continue to lock in the artists and audience. Between indie labels, online distribution and users creating their own media (aka the CD) the big music labels are losing their grip - I say so be it. I would be much better if the Artists were allow to get the lions share of the monetary harvest since It have yet to see any Record industry exec that was able to create any music that I or others would be interested in hearing.... Let alone pay for!
Looking back at the 4 year activity of SCOX stock and it becomes apparent what is going on. All that have followed this debacle are painfully aware of SCOX business behavior. But just to paint the picture a couple of factoids.
Four years ago SCOX stock exceed over $100/share. In january of last year the stock was on the verge of dropping below $1/share and ran the risk of being delisted (as penny stocks are on NASDAQ). So we have this brilliant claim the "Linux ripped off SCOX via IBM". We (the F/OSS community) worried about the possibility of this being a reality. I and others scurried to dig up as much factual and cogent info on who contributed what, as well as when and where.
It was of course determined that many of the former Caldera (pre-SCOX) employees/devs had contribute source work to the Linux kernel. It was further determined that there appeared to be nothing out of the ordinary about the manner in which this was done. Then the discussions regarding SCOX' focused on fixing any possible problem insofar as determining what tainted the kernel in order to cut it out and replace it.
SCOX didn't like this in the slightest. They refused to be specific because they claimed that it would invalidate their claim and leave them with no recourse. Though this was not taking to kindly by the F/OSS community but it was understandable, wherein one doesn't invalidate ones torts by giving away the evidence in this manner. So be it.
However glaring inconsistencies began to appear in SCOX' claims and contentions. All the while SCOX stock was rising. They played the industry press like a fine fiddle and the industry press bought it hook, line, and sinker. They didn't delve into the deeper questions but simply repeated SCOX' claims and essentially became a mouth piece for these idiots.
So the question arose - "what the hell is really going on here"? Speculations abound and over time it became apparent the SCOX my well be a player for a bigger entity - many saw M$ behind this. Then evidence of the PIPE deal began to come to light. A convuluted cavalcade of backroom conversations and a lot of money changing hands and all the while SCOX stock was rising.
At every turn SCOX shows that it has no conpunction whatsoever to legally and economically assualt any one or any thing that they felt would further their cause - but just what really was the crux of their jihad? Ok let's get serious here. It wasn't about being ripped off, it wasn't about securing their market channels and product line. It was about money - no real shock here. But the logic was baffling to both tech head, end-user, corporates, and financial analysts. All the while SCOX is making the rounds with the bigger players, those being for example IDG, The Yankee Group, and many others (including Harvard Business School lectures?).
But as in Germany that unquestionably stated to SCOX "put up or shut up" the time has come in America as well and we see that SCOX has little or nothing at all to present. It's not about holding your cards to up the ante. It's about holding your cards because you hand has nothing but junk and bluffing in hopes that the other guy will blink. Well IBM didn't blink - as if you would expect them to.
But what about all those poor dumb saps (bless their souls) that just wanted to invest in a company that would afford them a margin of profit on their investment? The majority of -l users don't understand the deeper issues of this technology. They see computing as a tool to use (and one that is often extremely complicated and intimidating from their point of view - I mean hell I just showed my mother the virtues of right click menus in WinXP for crying out loud).
At the start of this fiasco SCOX started at just around one dollar per share and rose to over $22/share. Not a bad investment from a strictly market perspective. But now it's dropping and at the close of business this Friday it is down to $4.754/share - ouch. This would be ok if their was any validity
For ATI 3D drivers for 9.1 ia32 go to:r y/X/X Free86/ATI/suse91/fglrx/3.7.6
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/supplementa
They work fine, except Tribes2 terrain textures are kludged. This could be T2 specific since UT2k3 and UT2k4Demo work without any problems.
I suspect a fresh install of T2 may clear the terrain texture issue up, either that or rename my ~/.loki/Tribes2 dir, restarting the game to let it create a new dir and then transferring my user specific files and scripts to the new dir.
And don't forget to add
Load "dri"
to your XF86Config file.
Cheers!
This is straight from one of the main SUSE devs:
/., but this is legitimate.
"First: XD2 is based on Gnome 2.2. SUSE Linux 9.1 has Gnome 2.4 and 9.2 will have something newer. So a direct inclusion of XD2 would mean going back to a rather old XD2."
"9.1 already contained the most important patches from the Ximian team and for 9.2, I expect more to be added,..."
Name of said dev shall remain anonymous. Since I do not have his permission directly to post his name on
I have access to this individual as one of the SuSE beta testers.
Cheers.
D2 will be on 9.2 (supposedly ;) ). By the time Ximian got something to offer for SuSE, 9.1 was already in preproduction. Though some packages were added at the last minute (by popular demand of the Beta testers) dropping something as big and involved as Ximians D2 was just not feasible - that is and get the OS out by the release date.
In 6 months or so they should release 9.2 and I would suspect that Ximian D2 will be included. Hmmm! I know they said it would be but now I'm wondering? Will it be XD2 and labeled as such, or XD2 without the branding - i.e. D2 without all those monkey logos (I don't think monkeys and geekos necessarily go together). I have to ask.
I'll post again when I get an answer.
Cheers.