Which is the web browsing portion of Konqueror (minus bookmark management and various other small UI thingies), which is what we're concerned about here as you point out later in your post. The port to AtheOS proves the portability of KHTML. And Konqueror/Embedded does NOT need KDE, that's the whole point of Konq/E. You wouldn't have to port all of KDE.
Fair enough, but at that point you're getting somewhat less impressive, since you're saying "KDE does more than Mozilla" rather than "Konqueror as a web browser spanks Mozilla", which still hasn't been proven.
Right. These things are all tangential to making a good web browser, as is an HTML editor and mail client and ICQ client and whatever else Mozilla has. I'm not necessarily arguing that Konqueror spanks Mozilla here, either, I'm just pointing out some things.
And as for "It'll be in 3.1", 3.0 isn't even out yet.
Tabs were planned for 3.0 but were too late for the freezes and such, so they got pushed back to 3.1. You can see it on the 3.1 planned features page. Note that David Faure has his name attatched to it - since he's a paid developer he'll surely get it done.
1) Stability. You can not honestly say Konqueror is any more stable than Mozilla
Konqueror from KDE 2.2.2 is quite stable on my machine. I don't use Mozilla in Linux but on Windows it seems quite stable as well. I don't think one has a huge advantage over the other in this area.
2) Cross-platform support. Konqueror is not available on Windows or Mac OS
And Mozilla isn't available on AtheOS;-). Konqueror is actually quite portable, due to it being based on the well-designed and cross-platform QT. A Windows or MacOS port of Konqueror/Embedded would probably be a fairly simple thing if you had a QT/Windows or/Mac license. Also, the KDE-Cygwin project is aiming to provide all of KDE on the Windows platform, using the GPL'd QT/Linux. And besides, cross-platform support doesn't directly benefit a Linux desktop user. Konqueror's aim was never to be the be-all end-all of browsers, just a good browser for KDE. And it has succeeded.
3) Standards support. Mozilla has better support for more standards than Konqueror
I don't know where you might get data to show this one way or the other, but I do know that Konqueror's from KDE 3's javascript implementation rocks. It works on many sites that Mozilla doesn't even try to run. Konqueror goes out of its way to be compatible with IE (as far as that is sensible with regards to standards support) and this helps it render sites designed by Windows users better.
4) Scope. Konqueror is just a web browser/file manager. Mozilla has a mail client and an HTML composer.
"Just" a web browser/file manager? It rips CDs, it interfaces with digital cameras, it browses Windows networks, it browses the web, it manages files, it does FTP, it burns CDs, it manages MP3s on your Nomad Jukebox, it browses your RPM database, it is totally integrated with KDE and previews tons of file types. "Just" a browser/file manager indeed! I think KMail is a great mail client, and I prefer the concept of Quanta+ to a WYSIWYG html editor.
5) Tabs:)
For the life of me I can't understand what the big fuss is about tabs, but they'll be in KDE 3.1.
Is anyone else out there having horrible performance with Mozilla on WinXP systems? If I use Mozilla's quick start option, when I load other programs WinXP always swaps Mozilla out to disk. Then when I try to bring Mozilla back up it takes LONGER to swap it all back in than it does to start in the first place! If I leave a mozilla window minimized, then run several other programs, then switch back to Mozilla, it freezes for something like 5-10 seconds while the hard drive crunches. Often WinXP brings up the "this program is not responding" dialog during this process.
I don't think internal consistency in the OS itself is a problem at all. The problem is legacy formats and protocols. Suppose there is a new metadata field for "author." Then suppose you download a file with this field over FTP. The metadata is lost since FTP has no method of transferring this data. Therefore you can't write software that depends on metadata being present because it gets lost all the time (transferring over old network protocols, moving to older filesystems and back, etc). Because you can't always depend on the metadata, your file formats still have to contain information that might otherwise have been better stored in metadata, so you're no better off than before. Therefore metatdata is next to worthless. Until almost every computer everywhere understands metadata and can process and transfer it, metadata will not be very useful.
Wont data be missing if a shadow or a person walks in front of it and make it hard to put together?
I don't see how the problem would be any worse for this technique than for simply looking at a CRT through binoculars. If someone blocks the light, you won't be able to read the screen for a few seconds. Oh well. Besides, since this technique can be used on diffusely reflected light from a wall, it would be MORE resistant to obstructions than direct observation, because the person's shadow would have to obstruct almost all of the light coming from the CRT to keep it from reflecting off of other objects, instead of the person just blocking direct line of sight from the CRT to you. In fact, the whole point of the technique is that it doesn't require a direct line of sight to the screen to read it.
This might be occasionally helpful for an Internet user, but there are ways to implement it that don't involve sending any information to Microsoft, or providing Microsoft with a great source of advertising for their search engine and Internet portal. (checking likely urls that are a close match to the typed one, for example). Besides, if Microsoft really had the best interests of the customer in mind, they would redirect to Google, which everyone knows serves up hands-down the best search results on the Web, with a simple interface and quick loading.
The method of searching is pretty stupid too. It erases the URL you were typing (presumably one that had a typo you were about to fix) and replaces it with a monster of a URL at auto.search.msn.com, which is frustrating to no end. Also, if you type something that isn't of the form "foo.bar" you get a totally ad-laden page from MSN search.
It just makes me mad that Microsoft is using its position of power in the OS market to shove its own search engine down people's throats. Antitrust laws are supposed to prevent this sort of thing.
What's far worse is whenever you type something in the address bar that IE 6 doesn't immediately recognize as a valid URL, it takes you directly to their MSN search page by default, complete with links to their own ad-laden pages, without even asking! I've always thought this was a great example of MS's monopoly practices: don't find what you're looking for? Then we'll automatically redirect you to us so you can look at our ads and search results from our search engine! MS is using their monopoly in the OS market to get people to use their browser, and their near-monopoly in browsers to get people to visit MSN. And don't even get me started on the magically re-appearing links to Microsoft and partner companies in the default "Favorites" menu.
Re:Dirty Pool! But also confusing.
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 2
Doesn't the GPL say something about the "Preferred form for modification" of the work? This obfuscated source code would most definitely not be the preferred form for making modifications to the program. I don't see how this case is much different from somebody saying "Well you can get the source to our program by disassembling it, its easy!" Since assembler is not the preferred form for making modification to the program, this argument doesn't work.
KDE 3 will supposedly finally have decent clipboard managing. It will have one clipboard that will only be overwritten when a copy is performed, like Windows. It will have another clipboard that is overwritten whenever you select something with the mouse, like X. To paste the Windows-like clipboard, you press Ctrl-V (or whatever you have paste bound to), and to paste the X one you use the middle mouse button. This way people who prefer one type of clipboard can simply ignore the other one with no harm done. I hear this will also make KDE's clipboard more compatible with other X applications.
Here, let me turn that argument on its head for you. Much of it applies to programming too! Let's see if you like it from a different point of view:
Most moderately talented and experienced 'hobby programmers' (like the guys who write open software for free), with some practice, can produce a piece of software just as good as commercial software, occasionally better.
Professional quality compilers and development environments are available for free for all computer users.
Many programmers give away their software for little or no money simply because they enjoy doing it.
Let me summarize in one statement: Programming should be a pasttime, not a career!.
So.. why do we need software companies and paid programmers, again?
If the article is correct, then the z800's running zVM emulate Intel x86 architecture in order to run Linux.
No, you misunderstood. The VM doesn't emulate an x86, it emulates lots of smaller mainframes on one big mainframe. Like a beowulf cluster in one box. Emulating an x86 would be silly and slow.
TheMatt writes "Scientists at the University of this place you've never heard of have analyzed Slashdot and found that it is almost like real society. The team studied the statistical properties of each user, the stories they posted in, and who else replied to their posts (through resources like the Slashdot archives). While there were some similarities to real society, a close look revealed the artificiality. For example,/. isn't very clustered, only 1.5x that of a random network; real life is about 10x more clustered. Of course, the realities of web boards (the interface) are why this occurs. Also, they found the most networked of all Slashdot users was CowboyNeal, the default poll choice."
If Dell signs an exclusive agreement with MS, and Be can't break into it, there's absolutely nothing illegal that has gone on.
But OEMs signed no such exclusive agreement with MS. They simply licensed Windows. MS then used provisions of the (mandatory) license of their monopoly product to block OEMs from offering a competitor's product. That is illegal. Also, MS used questionable pricing practices as punishment for anyone who considered offering Be.
I'm not so sure that a monopoly forcing people to sign exclusive agreements in exchange for product is legal either. If Dell decides to sign an exclusive contract with MS all by itself, that's not illegal, but if Microsoft leverages its monopoly status to coerce Dell to sign the agreement, I think that is definitely antitrust material. And I don't think any OEM would sign an exclusive agreement with any OS manufacturer if they could help it.
The case is based on the fact that Microsoft wouldn't let OEMs sell dual-boot systems with Be and Windows. It doesn't say anything about single-OS computers. Be is saying that in order to overcome the "applications barrier to entry" (lack of prominent Be applications due to small user base combined with small user base from lack of applications), their strategy was to offer dual-boot systems. They are claiming that Microsoft's pricing practices and licenses prevented dual-boot systems from coming about. To me the case seems pretty solid, but IANAL so I'm almost certainly totally wrong.
What are you talking about? It's a BIG step. I hear stock kernel (2.4.x) worst-case latencies are in the 100-300 ms range. While the low-latency patch isn't going to solve many "real time" computer science problems, it will let me play mp3s under load with no skips and a reasonably small buffering delay, and it will increase the responsiveness of my mouse pointer. It is a good thing for desktop Linux. That's all it needs to be. It doesn't need to guarantee 100us max latency to be useful.
There is so much concern over existing infrastructure. What I wonder is this: If you set out today to determine the perfect use for each part of the entire radio spectrum, what would you come up with? What amazingly cool applications would suddenly become possible? (Broadband for everyone, GPS only better, etc).
How much is our dependence on legacy technology really holding us back?
I can confirm this. If you ever need to install StarCraft on a computer w/o the reg. number, just type in all 3s. I've never tried it on Battle.net though.
Here are the relevant portions of the ruling (italics mine):
[quote]
Courts have required that assent to the formation of a contract be manifested in some way, by words or other conduct, if the contract is to be effective. [...] In the instant case, the Court finds that there is only assent on the part of the consumer, if at all, when the consumer loads the Adobe program and begins the installation process. It is undisputed that SoftMan has never attempted to load the software that it sells. Consequently, the Court finds that SoftMan is not subject to the Adobe EULA.
[/quote]
The court made no decision on the validity of EULAs (in fact it explicitly skirted the issue by saying if at all). This is only affirming the fact that if you don't agree to the EULA by performing some action then you are not bound by it.
Actually phones *are* somewhat guaranteed by the government. It's usually called Universal Lifeline service, read all about it here. Basically the govt. says that phone service is a necessity of modern life and that it is an important goal to provide telephone service at a reasonable cost to all Americans.
If you're using a program that cycles through all available memory + 10Mb, of COURSE it will be slow! The VM can't squeeze 1044 Mb of data in 1024 Mb of RAM, no matter what ugly hacks it uses, and as soon as it needs more memory than it has, it has to hit the disk. As soon as you start hitting the disk, you get horrible performance decreases because your program is stalled until the data can be read from disk (which is orders of magnitude slower than RAM).
The reason VMs usually work well is because most programs don't actively use all the memory they allocate at once, so the VM swaps out the memory that isn't being used. If your program uses all the memory it allocates, the VM has no choice but to use the slow disk to store some of it. No magic VM will solve your troubles.
Oh, and here's an interesting proof of the possibility of a "brain simulator." It requires one big assumption: all information about a human's brain is contained in the matter making up the brain and its interations; there is no supernatural "life-force" or "spirit" in a brain.
Now, if you have a computer, you can program it with a simulation of the brain's matter. You can simulate the behavior of the brain down to the very last electron and quark using theoretical physics. If it is not an incredibly fast computer, this simulation would run very slowly, but it would run nonetheless. If you accept the above assumption, you have just created a computer simulation of the human brain and thus created a computer that is conscious, has a will of its own, and all that jazz.
There are only two ways I know of to defeat this argument: You can argue that simulating the behavior of matter is impossible, or you can argue for the existence of a supernatural "life-force." Which one is your argument?
Slashdot Mirror
Which is the web browsing portion of Konqueror (minus bookmark management and various other small UI thingies), which is what we're concerned about here as you point out later in your post. The port to AtheOS proves the portability of KHTML. And Konqueror/Embedded does NOT need KDE, that's the whole point of Konq/E. You wouldn't have to port all of KDE.
Fair enough, but at that point you're getting somewhat less impressive, since you're saying "KDE does more than Mozilla" rather than "Konqueror as a web browser spanks Mozilla", which still hasn't been proven.
Right. These things are all tangential to making a good web browser, as is an HTML editor and mail client and ICQ client and whatever else Mozilla has. I'm not necessarily arguing that Konqueror spanks Mozilla here, either, I'm just pointing out some things.
And as for "It'll be in 3.1", 3.0 isn't even out yet.
Tabs were planned for 3.0 but were too late for the freezes and such, so they got pushed back to 3.1. You can see it on the 3.1 planned features page. Note that David Faure has his name attatched to it - since he's a paid developer he'll surely get it done.
Konqueror from KDE 2.2.2 is quite stable on my machine. I don't use Mozilla in Linux but on Windows it seems quite stable as well. I don't think one has a huge advantage over the other in this area.
2) Cross-platform support. Konqueror is not available on Windows or Mac OS
And Mozilla isn't available on AtheOS ;-). Konqueror is actually quite portable, due to it being based on the well-designed and cross-platform QT. A Windows or MacOS port of Konqueror/Embedded would probably be a fairly simple thing if you had a QT/Windows or /Mac license. Also, the KDE-Cygwin project is aiming to provide all of KDE on the Windows platform, using the GPL'd QT/Linux. And besides, cross-platform support doesn't directly benefit a Linux desktop user. Konqueror's aim was never to be the be-all end-all of browsers, just a good browser for KDE. And it has succeeded.
3) Standards support. Mozilla has better support for more standards than Konqueror
I don't know where you might get data to show this one way or the other, but I do know that Konqueror's from KDE 3's javascript implementation rocks. It works on many sites that Mozilla doesn't even try to run. Konqueror goes out of its way to be compatible with IE (as far as that is sensible with regards to standards support) and this helps it render sites designed by Windows users better.
4) Scope. Konqueror is just a web browser/file manager. Mozilla has a mail client and an HTML composer.
"Just" a web browser/file manager? It rips CDs, it interfaces with digital cameras, it browses Windows networks, it browses the web, it manages files, it does FTP, it burns CDs, it manages MP3s on your Nomad Jukebox, it browses your RPM database, it is totally integrated with KDE and previews tons of file types. "Just" a browser/file manager indeed! I think KMail is a great mail client, and I prefer the concept of Quanta+ to a WYSIWYG html editor.
5) Tabs :)
For the life of me I can't understand what the big fuss is about tabs, but they'll be in KDE 3.1.
Is anyone else out there having horrible performance with Mozilla on WinXP systems? If I use Mozilla's quick start option, when I load other programs WinXP always swaps Mozilla out to disk. Then when I try to bring Mozilla back up it takes LONGER to swap it all back in than it does to start in the first place! If I leave a mozilla window minimized, then run several other programs, then switch back to Mozilla, it freezes for something like 5-10 seconds while the hard drive crunches. Often WinXP brings up the "this program is not responding" dialog during this process.
I don't think internal consistency in the OS itself is a problem at all. The problem is legacy formats and protocols. Suppose there is a new metadata field for "author." Then suppose you download a file with this field over FTP. The metadata is lost since FTP has no method of transferring this data. Therefore you can't write software that depends on metadata being present because it gets lost all the time (transferring over old network protocols, moving to older filesystems and back, etc). Because you can't always depend on the metadata, your file formats still have to contain information that might otherwise have been better stored in metadata, so you're no better off than before. Therefore metatdata is next to worthless. Until almost every computer everywhere understands metadata and can process and transfer it, metadata will not be very useful.
I don't see how the problem would be any worse for this technique than for simply looking at a CRT through binoculars. If someone blocks the light, you won't be able to read the screen for a few seconds. Oh well. Besides, since this technique can be used on diffusely reflected light from a wall, it would be MORE resistant to obstructions than direct observation, because the person's shadow would have to obstruct almost all of the light coming from the CRT to keep it from reflecting off of other objects, instead of the person just blocking direct line of sight from the CRT to you. In fact, the whole point of the technique is that it doesn't require a direct line of sight to the screen to read it.
The method of searching is pretty stupid too. It erases the URL you were typing (presumably one that had a typo you were about to fix) and replaces it with a monster of a URL at auto.search.msn.com, which is frustrating to no end. Also, if you type something that isn't of the form "foo.bar" you get a totally ad-laden page from MSN search.
It just makes me mad that Microsoft is using its position of power in the OS market to shove its own search engine down people's throats. Antitrust laws are supposed to prevent this sort of thing.
What's far worse is whenever you type something in the address bar that IE 6 doesn't immediately recognize as a valid URL, it takes you directly to their MSN search page by default, complete with links to their own ad-laden pages, without even asking! I've always thought this was a great example of MS's monopoly practices: don't find what you're looking for? Then we'll automatically redirect you to us so you can look at our ads and search results from our search engine! MS is using their monopoly in the OS market to get people to use their browser, and their near-monopoly in browsers to get people to visit MSN. And don't even get me started on the magically re-appearing links to Microsoft and partner companies in the default "Favorites" menu.
Doesn't the GPL say something about the "Preferred form for modification" of the work? This obfuscated source code would most definitely not be the preferred form for making modifications to the program. I don't see how this case is much different from somebody saying "Well you can get the source to our program by disassembling it, its easy!" Since assembler is not the preferred form for making modification to the program, this argument doesn't work.
So Germany should use KDE 3!
- Most moderately talented and experienced 'hobby programmers' (like the guys who write open software for free), with some practice, can produce a piece of software just as good as commercial software, occasionally better.
- Professional quality compilers and development environments are available for free for all computer users.
- Many programmers give away their software for little or no money simply because they enjoy doing it.
Let me summarize in one statement: Programming should be a pasttime, not a career!.So.. why do we need software companies and paid programmers, again?
No, you misunderstood. The VM doesn't emulate an x86, it emulates lots of smaller mainframes on one big mainframe. Like a beowulf cluster in one box. Emulating an x86 would be silly and slow.
TheMatt writes "Scientists at the University of this place you've never heard of have analyzed Slashdot and found that it is almost like real society. The team studied the statistical properties of each user, the stories they posted in, and who else replied to their posts (through resources like the Slashdot archives). While there were some similarities to real society, a close look revealed the artificiality. For example, /. isn't very clustered, only 1.5x that of a random network; real life is about 10x more clustered. Of course, the realities of web boards (the interface) are why this occurs. Also, they found the most networked of all Slashdot users was CowboyNeal, the default poll choice."
But OEMs signed no such exclusive agreement with MS. They simply licensed Windows. MS then used provisions of the (mandatory) license of their monopoly product to block OEMs from offering a competitor's product. That is illegal. Also, MS used questionable pricing practices as punishment for anyone who considered offering Be.
I'm not so sure that a monopoly forcing people to sign exclusive agreements in exchange for product is legal either. If Dell decides to sign an exclusive contract with MS all by itself, that's not illegal, but if Microsoft leverages its monopoly status to coerce Dell to sign the agreement, I think that is definitely antitrust material. And I don't think any OEM would sign an exclusive agreement with any OS manufacturer if they could help it.
Of course not. IBM holds no monopoly in operating systems. MS does.
Signing exclusive agreements is NOT illegal!
But when you're a monopoly it changes the rules. You're missing the key word here, and that word is monopoly.
The case is based on the fact that Microsoft wouldn't let OEMs sell dual-boot systems with Be and Windows. It doesn't say anything about single-OS computers. Be is saying that in order to overcome the "applications barrier to entry" (lack of prominent Be applications due to small user base combined with small user base from lack of applications), their strategy was to offer dual-boot systems. They are claiming that Microsoft's pricing practices and licenses prevented dual-boot systems from coming about. To me the case seems pretty solid, but IANAL so I'm almost certainly totally wrong.
What are you talking about? It's a BIG step. I hear stock kernel (2.4.x) worst-case latencies are in the 100-300 ms range. While the low-latency patch isn't going to solve many "real time" computer science problems, it will let me play mp3s under load with no skips and a reasonably small buffering delay, and it will increase the responsiveness of my mouse pointer. It is a good thing for desktop Linux. That's all it needs to be. It doesn't need to guarantee 100us max latency to be useful.
The article says that the proportion was about 2:1 against the settlement. I.E., a two-thirds majority against. Didn't you read it?
One of the comments against the settlement is from the KDE League. It's nice to see that the KDE League is actually doing something.
How much is our dependence on legacy technology really holding us back?
I can confirm this. If you ever need to install StarCraft on a computer w/o the reg. number, just type in all 3s. I've never tried it on Battle.net though.
[quote]
Courts have required that assent to the formation of a contract be manifested in some way, by words or other conduct, if the contract is to be effective. [...] In the instant case, the Court finds that there is only assent on the part of the consumer, if at all, when the consumer loads the Adobe program and begins the installation process. It is undisputed that SoftMan has never attempted to load the software that it sells. Consequently, the Court finds that SoftMan is not subject to the Adobe EULA.
[/quote]The court made no decision on the validity of EULAs (in fact it explicitly skirted the issue by saying if at all). This is only affirming the fact that if you don't agree to the EULA by performing some action then you are not bound by it.
It has already been done.
Actually phones *are* somewhat guaranteed by the government. It's usually called Universal Lifeline service, read all about it here. Basically the govt. says that phone service is a necessity of modern life and that it is an important goal to provide telephone service at a reasonable cost to all Americans.
The reason VMs usually work well is because most programs don't actively use all the memory they allocate at once, so the VM swaps out the memory that isn't being used. If your program uses all the memory it allocates, the VM has no choice but to use the slow disk to store some of it. No magic VM will solve your troubles.
Now, if you have a computer, you can program it with a simulation of the brain's matter. You can simulate the behavior of the brain down to the very last electron and quark using theoretical physics. If it is not an incredibly fast computer, this simulation would run very slowly, but it would run nonetheless. If you accept the above assumption, you have just created a computer simulation of the human brain and thus created a computer that is conscious, has a will of its own, and all that jazz.
There are only two ways I know of to defeat this argument: You can argue that simulating the behavior of matter is impossible, or you can argue for the existence of a supernatural "life-force." Which one is your argument?