You'd expect better from Heathrow being one of the worlds largest airports. Does anyone know if it happens often at Heathrow or did it just decide to put on a special display for one of the biggest names in the Linux world? --
Never mind. I wasn't reading the BSoD (not that I could tell a Win9x one from a WinNT one), but running Win9x in this situation, even MS wouldn't approve of that!
It's a bad image for the customer to see. Someone who has never seen a computer wouldn't know what that message was on the flight info screens.
People who know better just laugh! --
Re:European Linux Shows?
on
OLS Wrap-up
·
· Score: 2
Well the UKUUG have a Linux event each year: Linux '99 was in June and we plan to hold an event next year. Linux 2000 will be a much bigger event. However everyone at Linux '99 had a great time. http://www.linux.ukuug.org/linux99/
Don't forget to check your pen for compliance as there's absolutely no chance that your computer and printer won't work after 2000 then make sure you have a compliant pen. --
Well everybody knows that even things that don't contain a date are still vunerable to the Y2K problem. This is because they can magically work out the date even though they don't store it internally. So be careful, your Microwave isn't going to work in the Y2K and neither is your electronic scales or your car.
(BTW I'm not being serious here. I've just seen so many people concerned with Y2K problems in things that don't even store the date, I'm just glad to see a company that isn't going overboard on this one) --
If you're viewing this through an MS operating system all will appear well.
Basically, MS has two different characters for an apostrophie (sp?) one of them is the standard character by for some reason MS also uses another one which isn't displayed properly on non MS platforms. --
I don't understand what you're getting at here. They haven't made it impossible to port to Win3.1 and would welcome anyone who was willing to help with a port. Netscape has to put it's own developers to work on the most important platforms which are Linux, Win32 and MacOS in terms of popularity. So if you've got Win16 programming skills why don't you offer to help out. --
I agree, I don't think the Open Source community is an ally of AOL and never has been. I can't imagine them releasing the entire IM protocol as an open standard either becasue they are in a dominant position (just like Microsoft with Office, Windows, etc). Personally I don't care if IM ever becomes a standard as I don't have a use for it. However if Microsoft want to show commitment then they need to open up some useful formats such as those used in office or the entire Win 32 api which would be more useful to most people than a stupid IM protocol. --
Mozilla is making progress. They are taking so long because they decided to ditch the original bloated Communicator source code and start a total rewrite.
Also they are trying a lot of new and experimental techniques to make their browser small, protable and standards compliant. For example, they are trying to use a cross platform front end only using platform specific widgets when absolutely necessary. They also want their layout engine to be fast and standards compliant. Take a look at some of the latest Mozilla builds they are getting more impressive particularly as they are not even alpha yet. The Getting Involved page on mozilla.org gives some advice for those who want to help. --
Although what they're doing is bad for the open source community I don't think they'll do the same with Mozilla. They need to produce a small, fast standards based browser if they want to compete with MS. Although they are currently using IE they'll probably change to Mozilla when it's ready and their agreement with MS is over.
Even if they did many people already have the source code and continue developing it (there are still some non-Netscape developers working on it, although not having Netscape's contribution would slow the project down). Mozilla needs more people to help track down bugs, if you visit www.mozilla.org and try out the nightly builds you'll be a great help to the project.
BTW if anyone does have the AOL IM code and it was under GRL like the article says you're perfectly entitled to make it available for download under the terms of GPL even if AOL has retracted it. --
Will GTK (gnome) and KDE themes be compatible or are there any plans for them to be?
I think competition in the desktop environments is great and some people may prefer coding in GTK and others may prefer Qt but for the end user who may not have much experience would like to set the theme once and then have the theme applied to both GTK and Qt apps. This will mean that they can use their favourite desktop environment but still have the same look and feel. At the moment the motif (Netscape) apps look different from the GTK apps (the GNOME utilities, GIMP, etc) and the KDE apps.
There's nothing much we can do about motif but it's use is decreasing so it's not too much a concern but having the same themes between GTK and Qt is the way to go. --
At the UKUUG Linux '99 conference there was a presentation explaining how they implemented a large scalable mail server using open source software. It was also explained how the total cost of ownership would be much higher if they used an NT solution (even using the figures supplied by MS they'd need more machines and more administrators to keep the servers runnig).
The open source solution was much more cost effective and has proved fairly stable.
Unfortunately the proceedings from the event are not yet online, however I'll try and forward you a copy (or post a link to this thread) as it may prove useful to you. --
Saying that these releases are pre alpha for the entire purpose of finding bugs then I think the fact that they've been compiled with the debugging code is a feature rather than a bug! --
Such a system already exists and is supported by IE (versions 3.0 onwards) and Netscape (4 onwards). It's called RASCi - http://www.rasc.org/
It helps if many sites register for the scheme and if people know how to use it. In Netscape you have to go to Help menu to set it up (it's under NetWatch)! IE's setup is in a more logical location (with the other preferences). --
We know the only reason MS want open standards on this one is so they can gain market share from the market leader. Perhaps their argument would be good in court to insist that they open up their standards to remove the monopoly and increase competition?
Anyway, my main point is why don't we use this situation to try and persude MS to release their messenger as open source. As they seem to want to push for a standard to gain market share lets make them realise that the best way to do so is an open source solution.
My reasoning for this: 1) if a standard does arrive it would be very easy to port an open source instant messenger to Linux.
2) It would be harder for them to make undocumented extensions to their messenger as they'd have to revert to closed source and that would be very bad publicity for them. --
There's a few things that I'm sure Alan Cox wouldn't say but he is quoted as saying here such as Linux was shipped with KDE as its GUI.
No Linux is shipped with a kernel and then certain distributions then decide what desktop environment + other software they want to ship. Why can't the journalists get that bit right? --
No they didn't, they own Netscape but don't use it in their products.
They had an agreement with MS that they had to distribute IE in return for getting an icon in the 'Online Services' folder on the Windows desktop.
Ironically the only reason the 'Online Serivces' folder appeared in Windows was so that they couldn't be accused of trying to make MSN a monoploy but to get your icon on the desktop you had to distribute IE encouraging that to become a monopoly. --
There's a project called the Linux Security Audit. They were talking about it at the UKUUG Linux '99 Conference nad basically they do what you say - go through open source software contained in Linux distributions and look for security holes.
I can't remember their URL so if anyone does have any info on them post it here. --
1) If they build networking support in future models this should be fairly easy.
2) It doesn't say you can't have strategy games for a console
3)The PC wins in that respect, but some of these aspects may improve in the future. The thing is many newbies will not know how to do this anyway, so a console would be convenient for them.
4) Yep.
A PC is just so difficult to master for the average person in the street who is constantly been convinced they just have to have one by the adverts on TV. The machine then crashes, they get confused, they disover explorer and accidentailly delete some system files. PC's are just too complicated for those that don't need them.
BTW: I don't own a console, I use Linux but for those I know who know nothing about computers they'd rather have a console as a PC is just so much to do so little and is very complicated for them. --
I didn't even know sega still existed. Although Linux is a great OS you can't really compare it as a games platform as the number of games are so few.
Although I'd like to see the people who buy computers just to play games buy consoles instead as they don't often have the skills to use a computer, I would like to see the PC game market moving over to Linux (or making Linux and Windows versions would be the best idea) as Linux provides a stable platform and also we'd have the important fact that users would then not have to pay the Microsoft 'tax' just to play games. --
For the average person in the street a computer is simply too complicated for them to use as well as been too powerful for their needs. You then also have the problems which have been outlined before - changing hardware (does my PC have a compatible video card, enough memory, the right OS?) is much less of a problem with game consoles. You buy a playstation and get a game for a playstation and it works. You buy a game for the PC and you have to check how much memory you've got, the video card, sound card, processor, memory, OS, etc. This is just too difficult for the average person who still hasn't worked out what to do with those AOL CD's and think they're a new form of music.
The operating systems are too difficult to use for the average person. You can't make an OS which is idiot proof without frustrating experienced users. Should we expect someone to learn how to use an OS just to play a few games? With Windows 9x it's just far too easy to delete system files and make your system unbootable, also when it crashes a new user doesn't know this is normal they think they've done something wrong. Linux is a great OS for most of us Slashdot readers and if someone spends the time and sets it up correctly it can be easier to use for a beginner than Windows. However Linux out of the box is extremely difficult for a beginner to master and however much work is done on the usability of any OS it'll still be too difficult for many people to get to grips with.
When you have a games console, it works, it's there, it's what the average user wants. Put in a CD or a cartridge and the program runs. No mounting disks (Linux), no strange crashes or complaints about lack of memory, incompatible hardware, etc. If the next generation games consoles can support printers and keyboards you have an ideal platform for internet access and simple word processing. Just add enoungh memory to these machines and a method for saving files and you've finally got something that the average user can appreciate.
The main problem with games consoles is they are proprietry at the moment. You can only run playstation games on a playstation and N64 games on a N64 (I'm not taking emulators into account - that would involve using a computer). This gives the manufacturer a monopoly in their platform and then the besat software will be developed for that platform, it'd be great if an open standard could be defined for game consoles that all consoles could be based upon. That would make it easy to make games that would work on all platforms and would give the user a choice in which platform to buy. Of course there's problems in this idea but there does need to be some openness in the game consoles or we'll get another Microsoft type situation. --
Slashdot Mirror
You'd expect better from Heathrow being one of the worlds largest airports. Does anyone know if it happens often at Heathrow or did it just decide to put on a special display for one of the biggest names in the Linux world?
--
Never mind. I wasn't reading the BSoD (not that I could tell a Win9x one from a WinNT one), but running Win9x in this situation, even MS wouldn't approve of that!
It's a bad image for the customer to see. Someone who has never seen a computer wouldn't know what that message was on the flight info screens.
People who know better just laugh!
--
Well the UKUUG have a Linux event each year:
Linux '99 was in June and we plan to hold an event next year. Linux 2000 will be a much bigger event. However everyone at Linux '99 had a great time.
http://www.linux.ukuug.org/linux99/
--
You can't beat Alan Cox's pic from the airport on his return from Ottawa:
;)
http://www.uk.linux.org/FEATURE/Canada/A/54.jpg
One reason not to use NT in public places
--
Don't forget to check your pen for compliance as there's absolutely no chance that your computer and printer won't work after 2000 then make sure you have a compliant pen.
--
Well everybody knows that even things that don't contain a date are still vunerable to the Y2K problem. This is because they can magically work out the date even though they don't store it internally. So be careful, your Microwave isn't going to work in the Y2K and neither is your electronic scales or your car.
(BTW I'm not being serious here. I've just seen so many people concerned with Y2K problems in things that don't even store the date, I'm just glad to see a company that isn't going overboard on this one)
--
If you're viewing this through an MS operating system all will appear well.
Basically, MS has two different characters for an apostrophie (sp?) one of them is the standard character by for some reason MS also uses another one which isn't displayed properly on non MS platforms.
--
I don't understand what you're getting at here. They haven't made it impossible to port to Win3.1 and would welcome anyone who was willing to help with a port. Netscape has to put it's own developers to work on the most important platforms which are Linux, Win32 and MacOS in terms of popularity. So if you've got Win16 programming skills why don't you offer to help out.
--
I agree, I don't think the Open Source community is an ally of AOL and never has been. I can't imagine them releasing the entire IM protocol as an open standard either becasue they are in a dominant position (just like Microsoft with Office, Windows, etc). Personally I don't care if IM ever becomes a standard as I don't have a use for it. However if Microsoft want to show commitment then they need to open up some useful formats such as those used in office or the entire Win 32 api which would be more useful to most people than a stupid IM protocol.
--
Mozilla is making progress. They are taking so long because they decided to ditch the original bloated Communicator source code and start a total rewrite.
Also they are trying a lot of new and experimental techniques to make their browser small, protable and standards compliant. For example, they are trying to use a cross platform front end only using platform specific widgets when absolutely necessary. They also want their layout engine to be fast and standards compliant. Take a look at some of the latest Mozilla builds they are getting more impressive particularly as they are not even alpha yet. The Getting Involved page on mozilla.org gives some advice for those who want to help.
--
Although what they're doing is bad for the open source community I don't think they'll do the same with Mozilla. They need to produce a small, fast standards based browser if they want to compete with MS. Although they are currently using IE they'll probably change to Mozilla when it's ready and their agreement with MS is over.
Even if they did many people already have the source code and continue developing it (there are still some non-Netscape developers working on it, although not having Netscape's contribution would slow the project down). Mozilla needs more people to help track down bugs, if you visit www.mozilla.org and try out the nightly builds you'll be a great help to the project.
BTW if anyone does have the AOL IM code and it was under GRL like the article says you're perfectly entitled to make it available for download under the terms of GPL even if AOL has retracted it.
--
I think it would probably be the other way round.
--
Will GTK (gnome) and KDE themes be compatible or are there any plans for them to be?
I think competition in the desktop environments is great and some people may prefer coding in GTK and others may prefer Qt but for the end user who may not have much experience would like to set the theme once and then have the theme applied to both GTK and Qt apps. This will mean that they can use their favourite desktop environment but still have the same look and feel. At the moment the motif (Netscape) apps look different from the GTK apps (the GNOME utilities, GIMP, etc) and the KDE apps.
There's nothing much we can do about motif but it's use is decreasing so it's not too much a concern but having the same themes between GTK and Qt is the way to go.
--
Try
uname -a
e.g.
$ uname -a
Linux bc00778.guardian.co.uk 2.2.5-15 #1 Mon Apr 19 23:00:46 EDT 1999 i686 unknown
or
$ uname -a
SunOS kenobi 5.6 Generic_105181-13 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-4
--
At the UKUUG Linux '99 conference there was a presentation explaining how they implemented a large scalable mail server using open source software. It was also explained how the total cost of ownership would be much higher if they used an NT solution (even using the figures supplied by MS they'd need more machines and more administrators to keep the servers runnig).
The open source solution was much more cost effective and has proved fairly stable.
Unfortunately the proceedings from the event are not yet online, however I'll try and forward you a copy (or post a link to this thread) as it may prove useful to you.
--
Saying that these releases are pre alpha for the entire purpose of finding bugs then I think the fact that they've been compiled with the debugging code is a feature rather than a bug!
--
Such a system already exists and is supported by IE (versions 3.0 onwards) and Netscape (4 onwards). It's called RASCi - http://www.rasc.org/
It helps if many sites register for the scheme and if people know how to use it. In Netscape you have to go to Help menu to set it up (it's under NetWatch)! IE's setup is in a more logical location (with the other preferences).
--
Such a system already exists and is supported by IE (versions 3.0 onwards) and Netscape (4 onwards). It's called RASCi - http://www.rasc.org/
It helps if many sites register for the scheme and if people know how to use it. In Netscape you have to go to Help menu to set it up!
--
We know the only reason MS want open standards on this one is so they can gain market share from the market leader. Perhaps their argument would be good in court to insist that they open up their standards to remove the monopoly and increase competition?
Anyway, my main point is why don't we use this situation to try and persude MS to release their messenger as open source. As they seem to want to push for a standard to gain market share lets make them realise that the best way to do so is an open source solution.
My reasoning for this:
1) if a standard does arrive it would be very easy to port an open source instant messenger to Linux.
2) It would be harder for them to make undocumented extensions to their messenger as they'd have to revert to closed source and that would be very bad publicity for them.
--
There's a few things that I'm sure Alan Cox wouldn't say but he is quoted as saying here such as Linux was shipped with KDE as its GUI.
No Linux is shipped with a kernel and then certain distributions then decide what desktop environment + other software they want to ship. Why can't the journalists get that bit right?
--
> and dropped MSIE as its browser for Netscape
No they didn't, they own Netscape but don't use it in their products.
They had an agreement with MS that they had to distribute IE in return for getting an icon in the 'Online Services' folder on the Windows desktop.
Ironically the only reason the 'Online Serivces' folder appeared in Windows was so that they couldn't be accused of trying to make MSN a monoploy but to get your icon on the desktop you had to distribute IE encouraging that to become a monopoly.
--
There's a project called the Linux Security Audit. They were talking about it at the UKUUG Linux '99 Conference nad basically they do what you say - go through open source software contained in Linux distributions and look for security holes.
I can't remember their URL so if anyone does have any info on them post it here.
--
1) If they build networking support in future models this should be fairly easy.
2) It doesn't say you can't have strategy games for a console
3)The PC wins in that respect, but some of these aspects may improve in the future. The thing is many newbies will not know how to do this anyway, so a console would be convenient for them.
4) Yep.
A PC is just so difficult to master for the average person in the street who is constantly been convinced they just have to have one by the adverts on TV. The machine then crashes, they get confused, they disover explorer and accidentailly delete some system files. PC's are just too complicated for those that don't need them.
BTW: I don't own a console, I use Linux but for those I know who know nothing about computers they'd rather have a console as a PC is just so much to do so little and is very complicated for them.
--
I didn't even know sega still existed. Although Linux is a great OS you can't really compare it as a games platform as the number of games are so few.
Although I'd like to see the people who buy computers just to play games buy consoles instead as they don't often have the skills to use a computer, I would like to see the PC game market moving over to Linux (or making Linux and Windows versions would be the best idea) as Linux provides a stable platform and also we'd have the important fact that users would then not have to pay the Microsoft 'tax' just to play games.
--
For the average person in the street a computer is simply too complicated for them to use as well as been too powerful for their needs. You then also have the problems which have been outlined before - changing hardware (does my PC have a compatible video card, enough memory, the right OS?) is much less of a problem with game consoles. You buy a playstation and get a game for a playstation and it works. You buy a game for the PC and you have to check how much memory you've got, the video card, sound card, processor, memory, OS, etc. This is just too difficult for the average person who still hasn't worked out what to do with those AOL CD's and think they're a new form of music.
The operating systems are too difficult to use for the average person. You can't make an OS which is idiot proof without frustrating experienced users. Should we expect someone to learn how to use an OS just to play a few games?
With Windows 9x it's just far too easy to delete system files and make your system unbootable, also when it crashes a new user doesn't know this is normal they think they've done something wrong.
Linux is a great OS for most of us Slashdot readers and if someone spends the time and sets it up correctly it can be easier to use for a beginner than Windows. However Linux out of the box is extremely difficult for a beginner to master and however much work is done on the usability of any OS it'll still be too difficult for many people to get to grips with.
When you have a games console, it works, it's there, it's what the average user wants. Put in a CD or a cartridge and the program runs. No mounting disks (Linux), no strange crashes or complaints about lack of memory, incompatible hardware, etc. If the next generation games consoles can support printers and keyboards you have an ideal platform for internet access and simple word processing. Just add enoungh memory to these machines and a method for saving files and you've finally got something that the average user can appreciate.
The main problem with games consoles is they are proprietry at the moment. You can only run playstation games on a playstation and N64 games on a N64 (I'm not taking emulators into account - that would involve using a computer). This gives the manufacturer a monopoly in their platform and then the besat software will be developed for that platform, it'd be great if an open standard could be defined for game consoles that all consoles could be based upon. That would make it easy to make games that would work on all platforms and would give the user a choice in which platform to buy. Of course there's problems in this idea but there does need to be some openness in the game consoles or we'll get another Microsoft type situation.
--