Massive linux gamers market?
on
OpenGL 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Are you kidding?
Come on, thats no argument. There is NO linux gamers market worth mentioning, and there is NO massive linux market in the first place.
A better argument:
OpenGL is a long standing industry standard which give developers more control over the way stuff gets rendered. Its simple, straightforward and does not depend on a large, antropophagic competitor, platform owner like Microsoft.
And THATS why ID uses it. So the MS wont choke them by controlling that critical part of the API.
Not many developers have the muscle ID has to invest in remaking a lot of stuff DX already provides, but for some sizes, its worth it.
The chinnesse gvmnt will need their ugly spyware to remain out of the hands of smart chinnesse citizens.
So, what are we going to do about it?
I think we cannot do much. But it might be leveraged by Microsoft to single out linux as something that the Pinkos use to opress the chinnesse people, which will be true, although slightly out of context.
The main concern of fabian is how a language defined for cross platform syntax representation in general (XML), is used for a model that is, by nature, semantic.
His argument is impecable cause the shortcommings of a subset of XML, made to mimic SQL and SQL mistakes is not really an advancement, except to help close the gap between RDBMS's SQL implementations.
But, there is a language out there that can fully represent the relational model. Its called RDF and a subset of it can be serialized into XML. So maybe the question we should be asking is Is that subset of RDF enough to implement the relational model?
Cause, if it is, then kill XQUERY and use RDF-XML and alas, the best of both worlds (XML ubiquity plus RDF semantic strenght) is what we can use.
I think shareware is not a really well defined term. The problem is that FOSS is well defined as: Free software is licensed so that it abides by FSF guidelines and licenses, OSS is licensed by the OSI definition and OSI aproved licences.
Shareware is a way to distribute software, not a license per-se.
Shareware is generally proprietary as it REQUIRES you to pay in a certain amount of time and limits redistribution to this restrictions.
If its not shareware 'That Way', then why call it shareware at all. Call it FOSS.
A) If its shareware and linking to pure GPL libs, its in violation. B) If its shareware and linking only to LGPL libs, it is NOT in violation. C) In ANY case, the code that is their sole intelectual property or property of the FSF but sublicenced back to them (standard gig for FSF software), they have the right to make it as closed proprietary stuff as they want.
Loss of anonymity. But then, i dont think soldiers would mind that much.
All the rest would be good though, cause this could be through the internet, completely out in the open, and.mil has all the soldiers data in place and communication channels with each soldier well established
Well... i think its a project for many layers. For example, nautilus supports metadata for files. But is not connected to the filesystem, and the way it supports them is not favored by konqueror (or viceversa) so, its a project for the desktop so they define what they want to provide. And its a project for the filesystem developers, so that they implement those features at their level.
If its not filesystem/famd supported, it WILL be comparatively clunky. This is because, in other systems, you already will have full integration at the kernel-osService level. We cant have just a normal userspace daemon for this, we need at least famd (its a daemon, but its main functionality is kernel supported), and a complete standard api definition for most operations (categorize, set metadata, get metadata...at least those can be done at the lowest level).
Then let the games begin and it can be done in any way by the desktop guys. Any of them or, prefferably, all of them.
Okay. I think this is a great idea. Everyone that has seen how windows will work post-longhorn, how OSX works today, can see that the filesystem hierarchy metaphor is, thank god, on its way out.
But, this has to be done well. I mean, this has to be not desktop implementation centric, but filesystem/kernel centric. That is, in order for this to work really well, you need a filesystem that can categorize files and search through them efficiently (almost like a database).
Reiser4 may be able to do this, WinFS will do this (will have a mssql core), and if this all means a neat kde interface to locate or an extra indexing service, it will suck on linux.
So. It would be really cool if they put it up in freedesktop.org as an RFC so that the whole community may get involved. This cannot be the sole effort of KDE if it is to work well.
Okay... in another thread (the one about mozilla) some operah zealot was saying something or other about XUL being unimportant in response to a very aggressive message from myself which chalked it it up as a good reason why mozilla is quite better than opera as a piece of software.
So here is an example of a XUL app that can be built with pure XML and javascript, and delivered by the web.
Yes. This technology will replace most of the application-oriented web because html is just not well suited to do this.
So again, when most of the web is accessible by either xul or xaml, what will opera fans do?
Use mozilla, naturaly. Or use windows... obviously.
BAH.... Spammers will have a field day with this thing.
No need to reengineer it, theyll just fill it up with likely addresses and it will be shot into the ground and spit on.
Re:Does it matter? Opera's still the best browser.
on
Netscape 7.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As an experienced web developer i get tired of this opera fans all over.
Ok, its a good browser. Its neat and all that.
BUT ITS NO ZILLA.
I mean. Is that thing XUL compatible? And what im really heading for here is: the web (as in html) is dead, long live the web (as in xaml/xul).
The only decent, multiplatform web browser/platform that will survive the advent of long horn will be mozilla.
So shut up about footprint, opera does not sport a hugely compatible XML suite, it doesnt sport decent, fully compliant, object oriented friendly ECMAScript, it will not sport (for the short term) and built-in svg engine (latest zilla's do).
So thats where the size comes from. Mozilla is a remote application delivery and execution platform. Its secure, ready, stable and very fast at what it does.
Granted, this is all obscurish for joe user, but this guy also needs email (zillas got it), with spam protection (zillas got it), with a good activedirectory compatible addressbook (zillas got it), with good support for HTML WYSIWYG editors out there (zillas got it). And throw in the geek bonus of AOL IM and/or IRC (pretty shabby, but zilla's got it) and somehow that footprint doesnt seem that big now does it?
If all you need is web browsing well ok, use the damned opera. But maybe then youll also wanna check out the lower memory gecko based thingies out there. Epiphany is the fastest little piece of software in unix (worth skwat, which takes out konqueror really).
So use your damned opera, just dont come crying to me when microsoft takes over the web with xaml and you have nowhere else to run but windows baby.
Well... you see, this is what irks me about religious people (of ALL religions).
They tend to think that the principles embeded in their body of knowledge/book/heresay (henceforth, theology) are a universal thing.
They need their religion so they can impose, on themselves (if said religious people is smart) and/or on others (if said religious people are Evil...!)....!!!
See what i did just now?
Would you agree with me that imposing a way of thought through whichever mean is an inherently evil act?
No?
Why not?.... ah, yes, i see. You are a religious person. You persue a basic, material truth that has yet to be proven: you think you have good enough proof to know that your theology is RIGHT!
We also call this blind belief in unproven facts "FAITH".
So thats what irks me. No religion that i know of has anywhere in its books a clause that says: "Let other people think what they want, it is not your place to judge them. To separate yourself from others based on what this book says is sacrilege. Defend the different."
Islam maybe is the only one that includes other religions as acceptable... but it hasnt helped all religious islamist people cause they were manipulated by later, apocriphal writings (the Omar scripts and other modifications).
Slashdot Mirror
Says your NUTS....
I mean come on man... phisics in high school teaches you this.
Pumpng water produces heat, loss of energy
A water turbine also produces heat, loss of energy
All in all, i doubt you can get 30% of the potential energy with this method. Im pretty shure a row of triple A batteries will give you more.
Terrorist Scientists if bush gets his way.
If the world converted to wind in the next 15 years, the saudis and the bush clan would take a Great Big DUmp the size of Texas
So much for User Friendly....
Maybe by tomorrow afternoon, ill have a review.
Are you kidding?
Come on, thats no argument. There is NO linux gamers market worth mentioning, and there is NO massive linux market in the first place.
A better argument:
OpenGL is a long standing industry standard which give developers more control over the way stuff gets rendered. Its simple, straightforward and does not depend on a large, antropophagic competitor, platform owner like Microsoft.
And THATS why ID uses it. So the MS wont choke them by controlling that critical part of the API.
Not many developers have the muscle ID has to invest in remaking a lot of stuff DX already provides, but for some sizes, its worth it.
Im offended that you WATCH jeopardy as a national sport.
I mean DAMN, get a life!
Its his (wads of) money, his idea, his movies, his studios and his story.
So fuck off.
If the guy wants to turn it into the porn version of pokemon its his problem.
Wonderful question with an obvious answer:
No. Not a chance in hell.
The chinnesse gvmnt will need their ugly spyware to remain out of the hands of smart chinnesse citizens.
So, what are we going to do about it?
I think we cannot do much. But it might be leveraged by Microsoft to single out linux as something that the Pinkos use to opress the chinnesse people, which will be true, although slightly out of context.
What the hell am I going to buy today?
And maybe he just gets on the phone and asks his broker:
hey Al, how much would it cost say, China?
The main concern of fabian is how a language defined for cross platform syntax representation in general (XML), is used for a model that is, by nature, semantic.
His argument is impecable cause the shortcommings of a subset of XML, made to mimic SQL and SQL mistakes is not really an advancement, except to help close the gap between RDBMS's SQL implementations.
But, there is a language out there that can fully represent the relational model. Its called RDF and a subset of it can be serialized into XML. So maybe the question we should be asking is Is that subset of RDF enough to implement the relational model?
Cause, if it is, then kill XQUERY and use RDF-XML and alas, the best of both worlds (XML ubiquity plus RDF semantic strenght) is what we can use.
Okay, consider:
A) Symbian being in the hands of a monopolist like Nokia (instead of a monopolist, like sony and/or ericsson)
B) Linux not in the radar
C) Windows not really being friends with bluetooth
Now you tell me.,.... my take? S/Ericsson is going winCE and is going to fuck everybody over with little blue cards and vaio-windows connectivity.
Now i say let them! They do not dominate anyhow so..let them do it
I think shareware is not a really well defined term. The problem is that FOSS is well defined as: Free software is licensed so that it abides by FSF guidelines and licenses, OSS is licensed by the OSI definition and OSI aproved licences.
Shareware is a way to distribute software, not a license per-se.
Shareware is generally proprietary as it REQUIRES you to pay in a certain amount of time and limits redistribution to this restrictions.
If its not shareware 'That Way', then why call it shareware at all. Call it FOSS.
A) If its shareware and linking to pure GPL libs, its in violation.
B) If its shareware and linking only to LGPL libs, it is NOT in violation.
C) In ANY case, the code that is their sole intelectual property or property of the FSF but sublicenced back to them (standard gig for FSF software), they have the right to make it as closed proprietary stuff as they want.
Problem:
.mil has all the soldiers data in place and communication channels with each soldier well established
Loss of anonymity. But then, i dont think soldiers would mind that much.
All the rest would be good though, cause this could be through the internet, completely out in the open, and
Well... i think its a project for many layers. For example, nautilus supports metadata for files. But is not connected to the filesystem, and the way it supports them is not favored by konqueror (or viceversa) so, its a project for the desktop so they define what they want to provide. And its a project for the filesystem developers, so that they implement those features at their level.
If its not filesystem/famd supported, it WILL be comparatively clunky. This is because, in other systems, you already will have full integration at the kernel-osService level. We cant have just a normal userspace daemon for this, we need at least famd (its a daemon, but its main functionality is kernel supported), and a complete standard api definition for most operations (categorize, set metadata, get metadata...at least those can be done at the lowest level).
Then let the games begin and it can be done in any way by the desktop guys. Any of them or, prefferably, all of them.
Okay. I think this is a great idea. Everyone that has seen how windows will work post-longhorn, how OSX works today, can see that the filesystem hierarchy metaphor is, thank god, on its way out.
But, this has to be done well. I mean, this has to be not desktop implementation centric, but filesystem/kernel centric. That is, in order for this to work really well, you need a filesystem that can categorize files and search through them efficiently (almost like a database).
Reiser4 may be able to do this, WinFS will do this (will have a mssql core), and if this all means a neat kde interface to locate or an extra indexing service, it will suck on linux.
So. It would be really cool if they put it up in freedesktop.org as an RFC so that the whole community may get involved. This cannot be the sole effort of KDE if it is to work well.
Well...
Okay... in another thread (the one about mozilla) some operah zealot was saying something or other about XUL being unimportant in response to a very aggressive message from myself which chalked it it up as a good reason why mozilla is quite better than opera as a piece of software.
So here is an example of a XUL app that can be built with pure XML and javascript, and delivered by the web.
Yes. This technology will replace most of the application-oriented web because html is just not well suited to do this.
So again, when most of the web is accessible by either xul or xaml, what will opera fans do?
Use mozilla, naturaly. Or use windows... obviously.
BAH....
Spammers will have a field day with this thing.
No need to reengineer it, theyll just fill it up with likely addresses and it will be shot into the ground and spit on.
As an experienced web developer i get tired of this opera fans all over.
Ok, its a good browser. Its neat and all that.
BUT ITS NO ZILLA.
I mean. Is that thing XUL compatible? And what im really heading for here is: the web (as in html) is dead, long live the web (as in xaml/xul).
The only decent, multiplatform web browser/platform that will survive the advent of long horn will be mozilla.
So shut up about footprint, opera does not sport a hugely compatible XML suite, it doesnt sport decent, fully compliant, object oriented friendly ECMAScript, it will not sport (for the short term) and built-in svg engine (latest zilla's do).
So thats where the size comes from. Mozilla is a remote application delivery and execution platform. Its secure, ready, stable and very fast at what it does.
Granted, this is all obscurish for joe user, but this guy also needs email (zillas got it), with spam protection (zillas got it), with a good activedirectory compatible addressbook (zillas got it), with good support for HTML WYSIWYG editors out there (zillas got it). And throw in the geek bonus of AOL IM and/or IRC (pretty shabby, but zilla's got it) and somehow that footprint doesnt seem that big now does it?
If all you need is web browsing well ok, use the damned opera. But maybe then youll also wanna check out the lower memory gecko based thingies out there. Epiphany is the fastest little piece of software in unix (worth skwat, which takes out konqueror really).
So use your damned opera, just dont come crying to me when microsoft takes over the web with xaml and you have nowhere else to run but windows baby.
Well... you see, this is what irks me about religious people (of ALL religions).
.... ah, yes, i see. You are a religious person. You persue a basic, material truth that has yet to be proven: you think you have good enough proof to know that your theology is RIGHT!
They tend to think that the principles embeded in their body of knowledge/book/heresay (henceforth, theology) are a universal thing.
They need their religion so they can impose, on themselves (if said religious people is smart) and/or on others (if said religious people are Evil...!)....!!!
See what i did just now?
Would you agree with me that imposing a way of thought through whichever mean is an inherently evil act?
No?
Why not?
We also call this blind belief in unproven facts "FAITH".
So thats what irks me. No religion that i know of has anywhere in its books a clause that says: "Let other people think what they want, it is not your place to judge them. To separate yourself from others based on what this book says is sacrilege. Defend the different."
Islam maybe is the only one that includes other religions as acceptable... but it hasnt helped all religious islamist people cause they were manipulated by later, apocriphal writings (the Omar scripts and other modifications).
And that, in general, is why im not religious.
'Enforce' SPF so that you cannot send to hotmail at all if you dont 'have' an SPF record.
What 'lists'?
SPF is not lists. Its a whole other thing (using DNS to authorize some ip's to send mail From: a particular domain).
Are we shure this is compatible with plain old spf? Didnt like the 'modification' bit
... Bring stuff back and arround with the help of pipes and some bashing?
Didnt think so....HA
Vi user 1: KILL THE TROLL
....
Vi user 2: Mesmerize this so-called-pico-mesiah
Slashdot winfiend1: I for one....
Slashdot winfiend2: Imagine a
Emacs user 1: Damn, the vimers beat us to the hangin!... we cant say kill him, they already did...
Emacs user 2: Its Gnu-Pic.... oh wait...