Incorrect. You can make modifications to KDE without assigning copyright to Troll Tech. True, you can't change the underlying toolkit, but you can change KDE. Troll Tech in no way owns KDE. As for those who just can't accept the QPL as an acceptable toolkit license (which the KDE team has, after much careful discussion), go work on Harmony.
No, the FSF can only defend the license on code they hold the copyright to (most of the GNU stuff). Suing for copyright infringement is up to the copyright _holder_. In this case, that would be Sun, who has a lot more money than the FSF anyway. The fact that the FSF wrote the GPL has absolutely no legal significance. In the case of someone like Corel, who almost-but-wisely-didn't violate the GPL on the scale of an entire Linux distribution, there would be hundreds of plantiffs; anyone who owned a copyright on anything they had used; and certainly the FSF would be one of them. IANAL
So buy AMD chips, or Cyrix or IDT or something. Or better yet, go with a non-x86 architecture like Sparc or Alpha. And keep old cd's of Slackware or something around for when you need to install Linux on a 386-25 with 4MB RAM.
If you've ever seen one of those things during a rain storm, you know that the quality does not degrade at all until right up to the edge. Then you get obvious visual defects, then nothing. And duh, line-of-sight is still an issue, but it's LESS of an issue. Read.
Why do people seem to think that the government is some sort of wonderful problem-solving organization? As if ANYTHING would be solved if the government just took control of everything. HELLO??? Yes the government has done some things right, and others wrong, but there's definitely no reason to believe that FCC control would do better than big stupid corporations, and it would almost certainly cost more.
Actually these modern small dish things are digital, so if it rains or snows the reception does _not_ deteriorate, although if it rains REALLY HARD it'll lose the signal completely. And line-of-sight is less of an issue because there's only one satellite you need to be able to see, instead of a bunch. True of course, not everyone has a house.
Okay, the package for Linux that is capable of reading sensors on various motherboards (dunno about the abit, but it works on mine) is lm_sensors and is available at "http://www.netroedge.com/~lm78". It consists of kernel modules, a client program or two, and a C library for building apps that read the sensors. Good luck.
When RedHat releases a new version they don't stop releasing updated packages for previous versions. I'm running a server on 5.2 and when a security problem is found, they will release an update package for 5.2 as well. So there's no reason to update the entire system to just get one security fix. I personally will never consider an OS vendor that does not do things this way. I don't appreciate being forced into a vendor's release cycle. Red Hat's release cycle is short but you're not forced into it so it's all good.
Eat some chocolate chip cookies and milk then spend a nice evening contemplating a tree. Does wonders for that bitterness and vaguely directed hatred. I won't bother to state that if Corel was "doing something by themselves without help from the opensource community" then they wouldn't use said community's software. Just because we don't steal from our customers doesn't mean it's ok to steal from us. I also won't bother to suggest that you read some Marx or the Communist Manifesto before you try to apply their concepts to dissimilar movements.
ok that's understandable. Tho, my K6-2 350 runs at 30-45C and is rated at 70C, though I haven't compared that with the average. (A friend of mine had an Intel Pentium MMX, _not_ overclocked, and the top of the heatsink was always too hot to touch...) Btw, it's worthwhile to note that since AMD chips are often used in cheaper systems, it's not uncommon to see substandard motherboards (probably not in your case) that often cause problems. Of course, I'm by no means saying that AMD chips are perfect, or even better than Intel's... I just really don't trust Intel, and I see too many people who do. Actually, what I really would like to see is average lifespan of Intel vs AMD vs Sparc vs Alpha vs etc chips when run 24/7 in server environments, but that may be too much to ask for. Seems the media is too concerned with benchmarking Linux vs NT to provide any really worthwhile information. Sigh.
do you have a reference for your AMD claim, or is this only FUD? As if running Linux were some sort of "strain" on a CPU... do you think Linux uses some sort of bizarre motherboard feature to increase the CPU voltage? it is of course true that the early K6 had some bugs (coma?), but so did the Pentiums (fdiv, f00fc7c8) and Intel's handling of both those bugs ought to make the "trust Intel" theory seem odd. Of course, Intel's attempt at "We're quality and everyone else is cheap crap" has worked extremely well in the market so...
I wouldn't agree with your statement that "computers either work or they don't." Bad RAM or CPU can drop bits and have no visible effect other than an occasional odd crash or even "Excel doesn't seem to work very well on this computer." Dropping bits between CPU and RAM is actually a lot more common than most people realize. Further, there are the mechanical components... hard drives should last a lot longer than two years, but they often don't. There are a lot of ways a computer can fail in a non-complete fashion, and I see them all the time.
Well, hence the "if", but I'd argue that it isn't completely trivial. Sure, you can probably get oxygen and water and food, but that isn't all you need. What about machinery? Stuff breaks. Either you have factories capable of producing every single piece of equipment you use, or you have to import. This includes everything from walls to computers to rockets to cars... to parts required by the factories that build the parts. Making a fully self-sufficient colony in a hostile atmosphere is never an easy task.
Biosphere II was experimental, and the first of its kind. Anyone who actually expected it to succeed was being unrealistic. The purpose of scientific experiments is to collect data. Biosphere II did. Hopefully there will be more experimenting in the future, so eventually there will actually be a project that _isn't_ experimental. To put it another way, if you go download the CVS tree of KDE 2.0, you don't actually expect it to WORK, do you?
"ownership" in international politics is really entirely a concept of what can be defended (through numerous means, military, economic, or diplomatic) well enough that taking it would be more expense than it's worth. For example, in current world politics, gaining land through warfare is frowned upon by the big boys, who are willing to uphold this frowning with big bombs in some circumstances. But it's still a matter of what can be taken. "Ownership" in international politics is a null word. So what this all means is, since nobody's defending the moon, it's public domain until someone lands there and sets up a base. It'll probably be relatively easy to defend a moon base at first, since there'll be no space problem for a very long time, and attacking a moon base would be expensive and worthless. By the time space becomes an issue, you can be certain there will be groups with large strong claims staked out. Of course, if the moon base is not self-sufficent, that changes things. It could be "attacked" by shutting down its Earth supply lines. So it's all up in the air. I don't know why I'm even bothering to think about this, except that it's 10:42am. Moon bases are not interesting to me unless they have better net links than I do. And even with the best tech that can exist in _theory_ currently, there'll always be a really bad RTT. So I don't find moon bases interesting at all. So I'll shut up now.
Just so you know; X does make a very important optimization when the server and client are running on the same machine. It uses shared memory instead of any sort of real "network" design; so X and the application communicate directly through your system's RAM, which is much faster than any network or pipe could be. Try compiling your kernel without SHM support, and see what kind of framerate you get in Quake:) This is one of several reasons that X sometimes appears to take up more RAM than it ought to. The argument that "X is slow because of its network capability" doesn't hold any water and is really used only by people who don't understand X. X is slow (in some ways, it is) for other reasons... ones that, generally, can be solved.
Re:I'm looking forward to the day they ditch X
on
Some KDE news
·
· Score: 1
If you'll notice Microsoft these days spends a LOT of time and effort on the _appearance_ of responsiveness. In fact you could probably say that they consider the appearance more important than the actuality. That's why Word's toolbar shows up long before it's ready to handle any clicks... if you click it during that time you just have to wait, but if you don't, it *seems* like it was ready for you.
Re:I'm looking forward to the day they ditch X
on
Some KDE news
·
· Score: 1
the X protocol, running locally, is far far more efficient than a pipe. It uses shared memory. Pipes are much much slower than SHM.
its primary real weakness... in the default GNOME setup, you have two conflicting interfaces: GNOME and E. I have to say that, while I like E as a windowmanager, I don't think it's an appropriate default GNOME wm. KDE's biggest strength is its presentation of a unified interface, since kfm and the rest _are_ integrated. wm independence sounds good on paper, but the wm is too central to the interface to build a unified look&feel without involving the wm. GNOME needs to come up with a small, GTK-based wm, that makes sense.
Re:I was actually refering to windows and not MS
on
Some KDE news
·
· Score: 1
Win98 *is* Win95 and IE. Shipping win98 as a product is just a Microsoft distribution mechanism designed to spread IE as much as possible. Other than that there's no real difference between win98 and win95. MS now considers the win9x platform essentially dead, remember? That's what all this hype about win2k is really about; MS is trying to move people off the win95 arch as fast as they possibly can. win95 was a mistake and has been soiling MS's reputation since the day it was released.
Slashdot Mirror
Incorrect. You can make modifications to KDE without assigning copyright to Troll Tech. True, you can't change the underlying toolkit, but you can change KDE. Troll Tech in no way owns KDE.
As for those who just can't accept the QPL as an acceptable toolkit license (which the KDE team has, after much careful discussion), go work on Harmony.
No, the FSF can only defend the license on code they hold the copyright to (most of the GNU stuff). Suing for copyright infringement is up to the copyright _holder_. In this case, that would be Sun, who has a lot more money than the FSF anyway. The fact that the FSF wrote the GPL has absolutely no legal significance. In the case of someone like Corel, who almost-but-wisely-didn't violate the GPL on the scale of an entire Linux distribution, there would be hundreds of plantiffs; anyone who owned a copyright on anything they had used; and certainly the FSF would be one of them.
IANAL
So buy AMD chips, or Cyrix or IDT or something. Or better yet, go with a non-x86 architecture like Sparc or Alpha. And keep old cd's of Slackware or something around for when you need to install Linux on a 386-25 with 4MB RAM.
If you want the gpl'd part, go download Debian. For the rest you'll have to wait.
If you've ever seen one of those things during a rain storm, you know that the quality does not degrade at all until right up to the edge. Then you get obvious visual defects, then nothing.
And duh, line-of-sight is still an issue, but it's LESS of an issue. Read.
Why do people seem to think that the government is some sort of wonderful problem-solving organization? As if ANYTHING would be solved if the government just took control of everything. HELLO??? Yes the government has done some things right, and others wrong, but there's definitely no reason to believe that FCC control would do better than big stupid corporations, and it would almost certainly cost more.
Actually these modern small dish things are digital, so if it rains or snows the reception does _not_ deteriorate, although if it rains REALLY HARD it'll lose the signal completely. And line-of-sight is less of an issue because there's only one satellite you need to be able to see, instead of a bunch. True of course, not everyone has a house.
if you're getting internal compiler errors, then you're seeing either compiler bugs or signs of bad hardware.
Okay, the package for Linux that is capable of reading sensors on various motherboards (dunno about the abit, but it works on mine) is lm_sensors and is available at "http://www.netroedge.com/~lm78". It consists of kernel modules, a client program or two, and a C library for building apps that read the sensors. Good luck.
When RedHat releases a new version they don't stop releasing updated packages for previous versions. I'm running a server on 5.2 and when a security problem is found, they will release an update package for 5.2 as well. So there's no reason to update the entire system to just get one security fix. I personally will never consider an OS vendor that does not do things this way. I don't appreciate being forced into a vendor's release cycle. Red Hat's release cycle is short but you're not forced into it so it's all good.
Eat some chocolate chip cookies and milk then spend a nice evening contemplating a tree. Does wonders for that bitterness and vaguely directed hatred.
I won't bother to state that if Corel was "doing something by themselves without help from the opensource community" then they wouldn't use said community's software. Just because we don't steal from our customers doesn't mean it's ok to steal from us.
I also won't bother to suggest that you read some Marx or the Communist Manifesto before you try to apply their concepts to dissimilar movements.
ok that's understandable. Tho, my K6-2 350 runs at 30-45C and is rated at 70C, though I haven't compared that with the average. (A friend of mine had an Intel Pentium MMX, _not_ overclocked, and the top of the heatsink was always too hot to touch...) Btw, it's worthwhile to note that since AMD chips are often used in cheaper systems, it's not uncommon to see substandard motherboards (probably not in your case) that often cause problems. Of course, I'm by no means saying that AMD chips are perfect, or even better than Intel's... I just really don't trust Intel, and I see too many people who do.
Actually, what I really would like to see is average lifespan of Intel vs AMD vs Sparc vs Alpha vs etc chips when run 24/7 in server environments, but that may be too much to ask for. Seems the media is too concerned with benchmarking Linux vs NT to provide any really worthwhile information. Sigh.
do you have a reference for your AMD claim, or is this only FUD? As if running Linux were some sort of "strain" on a CPU... do you think Linux uses some sort of bizarre motherboard feature to increase the CPU voltage?
it is of course true that the early K6 had some bugs (coma?), but so did the Pentiums (fdiv, f00fc7c8) and Intel's handling of both those bugs ought to make the "trust Intel" theory seem odd.
Of course, Intel's attempt at "We're quality and everyone else is cheap crap" has worked extremely well in the market so...
I wouldn't agree with your statement that "computers either work or they don't." Bad RAM or CPU can drop bits and have no visible effect other than an occasional odd crash or even "Excel doesn't seem to work very well on this computer." Dropping bits between CPU and RAM is actually a lot more common than most people realize. Further, there are the mechanical components... hard drives should last a lot longer than two years, but they often don't. There are a lot of ways a computer can fail in a non-complete fashion, and I see them all the time.
Note that every even remotely sizable soft drink distributor does this (Coke, Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper)
How many perfectly usable clones for Windows NT can you name?
Compare that to the P3...
Well, hence the "if", but I'd argue that it isn't completely trivial. Sure, you can probably get oxygen and water and food, but that isn't all you need. What about machinery? Stuff breaks. Either you have factories capable of producing every single piece of equipment you use, or you have to import. This includes everything from walls to computers to rockets to cars... to parts required by the factories that build the parts. Making a fully self-sufficient colony in a hostile atmosphere is never an easy task.
Biosphere II was experimental, and the first of its kind. Anyone who actually expected it to succeed was being unrealistic. The purpose of scientific experiments is to collect data. Biosphere II did. Hopefully there will be more experimenting in the future, so eventually there will actually be a project that _isn't_ experimental.
To put it another way, if you go download the CVS tree of KDE 2.0, you don't actually expect it to WORK, do you?
"ownership" in international politics is really entirely a concept of what can be defended (through numerous means, military, economic, or diplomatic) well enough that taking it would be more expense than it's worth. For example, in current world politics, gaining land through warfare is frowned upon by the big boys, who are willing to uphold this frowning with big bombs in some circumstances. But it's still a matter of what can be taken. "Ownership" in international politics is a null word. So what this all means is, since nobody's defending the moon, it's public domain until someone lands there and sets up a base. It'll probably be relatively easy to defend a moon base at first, since there'll be no space problem for a very long time, and attacking a moon base would be expensive and worthless. By the time space becomes an issue, you can be certain there will be groups with large strong claims staked out.
Of course, if the moon base is not self-sufficent, that changes things. It could be "attacked" by shutting down its Earth supply lines. So it's all up in the air.
I don't know why I'm even bothering to think about this, except that it's 10:42am. Moon bases are not interesting to me unless they have better net links than I do. And even with the best tech that can exist in _theory_ currently, there'll always be a really bad RTT. So I don't find moon bases interesting at all. So I'll shut up now.
And this is different from the billboards, tv ads, etc that contaminate your awareness ("consciousness pollution"?) because...?
Just so you know; X does make a very important optimization when the server and client are running on the same machine. It uses shared memory instead of any sort of real "network" design; so X and the application communicate directly through your system's RAM, which is much faster than any network or pipe could be. Try compiling your kernel without SHM support, and see what kind of framerate you get in Quake :) This is one of several reasons that X sometimes appears to take up more RAM than it ought to.
The argument that "X is slow because of its network capability" doesn't hold any water and is really used only by people who don't understand X. X is slow (in some ways, it is) for other reasons... ones that, generally, can be solved.
If you'll notice Microsoft these days spends a LOT of time and effort on the _appearance_ of responsiveness. In fact you could probably say that they consider the appearance more important than the actuality. That's why Word's toolbar shows up long before it's ready to handle any clicks... if you click it during that time you just have to wait, but if you don't, it *seems* like it was ready for you.
the X protocol, running locally, is far far more efficient than a pipe. It uses shared memory. Pipes are much much slower than SHM.
its primary real weakness... in the default GNOME setup, you have two conflicting interfaces: GNOME and E. I have to say that, while I like E as a windowmanager, I don't think it's an appropriate default GNOME wm. KDE's biggest strength is its presentation of a unified interface, since kfm and the rest _are_ integrated. wm independence sounds good on paper, but the wm is too central to the interface to build a unified look&feel without involving the wm. GNOME needs to come up with a small, GTK-based wm, that makes sense.
Win98 *is* Win95 and IE. Shipping win98 as a product is just a Microsoft distribution mechanism designed to spread IE as much as possible. Other than that there's no real difference between win98 and win95. MS now considers the win9x platform essentially dead, remember? That's what all this hype about win2k is really about; MS is trying to move people off the win95 arch as fast as they possibly can. win95 was a mistake and has been soiling MS's reputation since the day it was released.