Are you sure? It has less noise made on Internet discussion forums about patents, that is certain. That doesn't mean the risk is less. Don't assume that only Sun holds patents relevant to Java, or that only Microsoft holds patents relevant to.NET.
OK, I should have clarified the statement "Java has less "patent liability" than Mono". I was referring to the open-source release of Java when Sun publically stated they were in negotaions with third-parties to remove patented/licensed code (I think it was the audio libraries and 2D graphical libraries that were at issue). Microsoft fiercly guard thier intellectual property and the Community Promise excludes other libraries(e.g. ado.net). If they were serious they would have included the other libraries as well. Software Patents are a danger to any software written these days (especially patent trolls and submarine patents).
I think this is the big difference: in Java you tend to program in a 'pure Java' bubble where almost all the libraries you use are in Java. Mono/C# applications like Banshee link to a lot of native Linux libraries like GTK+ and GStreamer. Of course there is nothing to stop Java using native libraries too (see java-gnome) but so far, this hasn't caught on to the extent it has for Mono. Remember that Mono was originally created by Linux desktop programmers as an easier way to make GNOME applications, while Java's heritage is as the One True Platform for writing code that runs on any OS, and so needs a complete set of Java libraries.
I think mono as a platform has a lot of potential but at present Java seems more "complete". You have two powerful IDEs - netbeans and eclipse (if you like that sort of thing). Mono has monodevelop - which, considering it's age is a great achievement - but for me still unstable.
I am looking at a software project at the moment and one of the issues are native access to libraries via Java. Compare it to Mono's equivalent (Pinvoke) and it is verrrry painful. This is where mono really shines, hence software like Banshee is possible and gtk# too. On the other hand developing software in Java *and* it's libraries is "safer" because I they encourage the use of thier platform on other environments.
Personally on technical merit I think Mono edges out ahead of Java. Miguel and his team have done an amazing Job with mono. But if I had to choose a platform to write software here and now I would have to go with Java. Hopefully this will change in the future. I just think the Community Promise falls a little short compared to Sun's *public* stance on Java's patent issues.
Thinking about it, the Community Promise is a huge win for Mono.
The Patent Trap was always a concern when I used Mono. I knew the external libraries ado.net, asp.net and winforms were "tainted" but was always unsure about the "core" on Mono itself.
Now that the "core" of Mono seems to be free from the patent threat from Microsoft Mono can take a new "patentless" path and develop equivalent versions of the libraries not mentioned in the Community Promise.
You won't be able to run Windows.net stuff (legally/safely) on Linux but you would be able to run Linux.net stuff on Windows.
GTK# seems to be a mature gui frontend the only major missing part is.ADO library for data access (unless something is already out there).
Mono does not *have to* follow Microsoft's upgrade treadmill and keep up-to-date compatibility with the latest version of.net instead concentrate on delivering applications on other systems - Linux, non-windows arm-based processors and macs.
In the end Mono could embrace, extend and extinquish Microsoft's own implementation.
I have been following Mono for a while but I am currently still using Java.
The question is which do I commit to?
The way I understand it is:
Java has less "patent liability" than Mono. All of Java is under an open license including "essential" libraries (e.g. data access, gui). Only the "core" (including the framework libraries?) of.net are covered by the Communtiy Promise but not some of the supporting libraries (e.g. ado.net, winforms).
I know that these.net libraries have been implemented in Mono but would we have to write new open-source libraries to replace thier functionality and remain "patent-threat" free?
If this is the case then I would imagine that Java would be the preferred choice IF you had to chose one.
What are the overheads of both the Java and Mono virtual machines running at the same time? Would we be better getting behind just one environment and using that.
For what it's worth I really like and prefer Mono - especially Banshee (is there an equivalent for Java?) and I want to develop for it but the Community Promise only covers the ECMA part of.net. Without the other libraries I fear Mono is hamstrung.
At least with Java I know where I stand, all the libraries are included and the functionality is already there.
Have wireless "issues" been fixed with this release.
I have a laptop with generic realtek rt2500 wifi hardware. For many kernel releases I have to compile seperate drivers (Legacy serialmonkey) because the "stock" drivers are woefully unstable. I either lose my connection, painfully slow( have tried the "rate 54" fix) or I cannot reconnect to my network at all.
I don't mind compiling seperate drivers (a huge benefit of open source stuff & Linux) but I am concerned how long I will be able to do this (E.g. something changes in the kernel makes the "external" driver break - in fact actual development of the legacy drivers has ceased - http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)?
I know I should not be moaning about this but this issue has been around for ages and seems to affect a lot of hardware.
This is my only niggle with Linux and I am grateful for everything. Computing become much more interesting and fun again.
Music companies would love to see digital downloads to disappear. It's destroying thier business model and it seems they are trying a new approach.
If they push the idea that digital downloads are now 'old hat' or 'not needed' and 'persuade' people that streamed music is the 'future'/'cool way' of listening to music then they can retain far more control of the format. Sure lock the vendor(e.g. radio station) into a 3-year deal - when the deal expires hike up the fees and/or the record companies force vendors to stream music directly from record company controlled servers only - thus full control of music property is preserved, artificial scarcety remains and profits increased for record companies.
This has already happened to the newspaper industry here in the UK. A central body controls all publishing rights to newspaper articles.
Of course mobile phone companies like this scenario as well.
I want my music (paid for) to be available for MY convenience to listen to not the other way round.
This stinks of serious astroturfing and a feeble attempt to change consumer's attitudes to ownership.
Just say NO!
Personally I would to see something like; offer a 'lossy compressed' track for very low cost or free. If you really like it - buy a pristine copy of the music (e.g.lossless compressed - flac) the difference in sound quality is obvious. Of course DRM would kill this idea.
Then again record companies seem to be risk adverse or just don't get the nature of the Internet. Out-of-touch music executives (looking at you Sony!) are hurting the music industry more than anybody else and you cannot blame pirating of music for the decline of an industry. Ultimatly, pointing your finger and blaming something else is not your answer. You need to take stock of your business and figure-out how can you change to meet the ever-changing state of the market. If you think it should be the other way round - well you are doomed to failure - it's inevitable.
There must be "internet savvy" executives out there who can do something credible and create a workable solution.
I've been playing with Mono recently and one thing I would like to see is some kind of desktop alternative, something a little more focused than Gnome and KDE.
Personally I think Mono is a superior implementation of Microsoft's.NET and given the chance Mono could really benefit the community given the chance.
I've used both desktops and of course there are good and bad things about both of them. I am grateful that we have an actual choice.
What really impresses is me is how powerful QT 4.5 has become - for me this is where the true power of KDE comes from and the current QT is way beyond GTK (for the record I am a Gnome user).
Have you seen the QT demos(included with QT) - very impressive!
I think the tag "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense" could not be further from the truth!
After *Overwhelming* opposition via petitions, public outcry, comments from a "large ISP" and *Google* the "Govt" eventually backed down hours before this law passed.
This absolutely stinks of arrogance, grim determination and bloody-mindedness demonstrated by the "Govt" to try and *force* this law through despite widespread popular opinion and only backed-down at the last "conceivable moment".
If this was down to common sense the "Govt" would have abandonded this months ago or even at the earliest stages of discussion.
One way or another this law in some form is going to be passed. As other posts have said it will be pushed through some obscure law out of the publiic eye.
Obviously, the "Govt" do not think IT industry, Google and the *New Zealand People* are important enough to have an opinion.
Just look at the U.K. (where I live) to see what is happening.
Do now let this continue the fight is not over yet!
Any government should be the voice and representation of the people - we DO NOT serve the government for it's own purposes - THEY SERVE US.
Don't allow a retard like kdawson to make you leave - judging by your id surely you must remember how "popular" Jon Katz was?
I always make a point of noting who wrote the summary if it is kdawson I usually know the title and/or summary is going to be bullshit.
Why should you leave - Slashdot isn't perfect but compared to other sites it still better.
If anything kdawson should go - he is unpopular with many people here - if Slashdot potentially loses readers because of this then they really need to consider doing something about it.
As typical of "our" "Government" this policy is ill-thought-out, completely out-of-touch with voter's opinions and as usual the "Government" listen to the wrong people.
1)A legal right to broadband in every home is *up to* 2Mb only. I know people who "technically" have broadband and *at best* up to 512Mb.
2) If a £20 "tax" were introduced, the piracy rate would increase because people will want to justify the increased cost - "If I have to pay the music publishers a levy even if I do not pirate thier music - I must as well start doing it then"
3) The "Government" & Music industry want to monitor our connections for illegal material (thankfully but idiotically only over P2P traffic). The early stages of monitoring ("because of crime and terrorism") our connections is already under way.
I know that many ISPs and other telecommunication companies have criticized the report this announcement was based on.
Intrestingly the European Human Rights act guarantees an individual's right to privacy - as far as I know the U.K. have not officailly signed-up to it yet.
Slackware was my first experience with Linux many years ago...(1997/98ish?). Especially installing from floppy disks.
However, I now use Ubuntu & Mint linux on my pcs at the moment.
The way to look at the Slackware "distribution" is to see it as a bare bones, vanilla-type system.
Not having a "package" system is a *feature* of Slackware and it still uses tarball-type packages to this day. Slackware is based on a different philosophy from today's distributions and I think it's refreshing to see this.
As far as I know there are no "corporate sponsors" funding Slackware's development - Patrick does it in his spare time.
One thing that most people on Slashdot seem to miss is that this is the original spirit of Linux and any software associated with it.
In fact I may install it on an old 450mhz PIII laptop I've got kicking about.
Good Luck Patrick you have my utmost respect and I hope Slackware continues for a very long time.
My theory is the big IT contractors that work for the Government have probably pursuaded ministers that this is a good thing.
These IT contractors are mainly responsible for computerising the various departments within the Government (e.g. the NHS, "chipped" passports and implementing National ID Cards). These systems have cost the tax payer millions and millions of pounds and two of these are complete. There are probably just a handful of these companies (and close may have ties to the established "old boys" network) working for the Government and have shareholders(some are also Government ministers) to answer to.
This has been a major cash cow for these companies and now they need to persuade the Government to spend even more money to keep them afloat. As you can imagine the Government is a *huge* client to have on your order books, the last thing you want as a contractor is to lose your client - your survival may depend on it.
The contractor and Government minister(probably a shareholder) will influence Government policy and departments (e.g. the police think monitoring the internet is a "great" idea) to ensure this cash cow is alive and kicking and everybody "wins". The police get a "mine" of "evidence" to "convict criminals", the Government can justify thier existance, the minister shares gain value (and maybe get a promotion), the contracter gets paid and of course the Government patronisingly "pats us on the head" and tell us they are looking after our best interests.
The whole thing stinks and will get worse while our Labour "Government" is in power.
What D-Link should have done was to advertise the "Secure Spot" feature on the "firmware" download page, be up-front about it and actually explain what it does. At least you can make an informed decision.
A router is a commodity item and should behave as expected - there should not be any "surprises" during it's operation. It should work as "clockwork" *quietly* performing the function is was *designed* for, if you don't notice it - then it's doing it's job.
On the other hand, if it does something to draw your attention to it and does something *unexpected* then you are going to question it's reliability then "fix" the problem. The expectation of this equipment *should* be mundane, day-to-day predictability and "un-glamourous" functionality. The last thing you should be thinking is what is this router going to do next or be apprehensive in installing it. It should just be a matter of; buy router, install it then forget about it.
If anything, D-Link have further damaged thier reputation as an IT company, especially when people read about it on Slashdot (D-Link's potential customers!). As a company this is a *dreadful* mistake to make.
Personally speaking, if I need to buy any networking tech I'll be *very* suspicious of D-Link equipment and be more inclined to look at a competitor's product it's a natural reaction.
Well done D-Link, your current management team have managed to alienate your core customers. The person/people who actually gave this "feature" the go-ahead to be installed should be fired.
What a *stupid* way to advertise a product! It just shows you how out of touch with thier customers they are - they don't even understand their own product!
1) "Lawyer" firms trawl P2P traffic and compile list of "illegal" file sharers and thier details (e.g.IP addresses, time/dates, torrent files)
2) Contact ISP, handover "evidence" of illegal activity, ISP monitors user's activity and examines previous usage logs.
3) If activity is "confirmed" then "warning" letter is issued to user.
4) ISP continues to monitor user's activity and "liase" with "lawyer" firm.
5) If user's activity ~= "illegal" then possibly issue further letters and/or throttle user's bandwidth.
I'm tempted to type "6)....Profit!":)
What if the user contests the evidence? What if a mistake was made identifying the user? Will it entail an expensive legal battle to prove innocence (I thought *guilt* had to be proven)?
This raises many questions and I doubt this is a workable solution.
If it is only P2P traffic that is monitored then I will not be to concerned at the moment. There are many other ways illegal content can be obtained and quite frankly let them monitor P2P. It will make "lawyers" feel they are doing their job, Copyright owners will feel "justice" is served, ISPs keep our Orwellian Govt of their backs and smart users will find alternatives.
Business as usual.
I'm more worried that the Govt want a central database of email and internet usage rather something short-sighted like this.
As usual the Govt and content holders are one step behind the internet generation and will continue to stumble through all this "new-fangled" technology.
Kidding aside, something like this is desperatly needed for the internet.
What really worries me is that it's from Microsoft and the needs of thier OS *always* comes first no matter what happens.
Just look at.Net, version 2 seemed to be the sweet-spot on size and features. Version 3.x included yet more libraries, the bloat is growing at an alarming rate and seems to be more Windows-centric.
If the Silverlight technology was truly open-source and not affected by patents then people would jump at something like this.
There is still alot of dis-trust at the moment because Steve "Throw me a monkey-ass chair" Ballmer has threatened to use patents against companies in the past.
I have great respect for the Developers (specifically the development products) at Microsoft, they have produced some great software.
Unfortunately it is "the management" of the company I have a problem with and will I probably avoid Silverlight for the time being.
Actually, I've always liked Enlightenment - it's small and very powerful and at the time it's effects were ahead of compiz. It also runs on an old 500Mhz, 192Mb ram laptop (on my other computer it just flys - and I don't mean in a "throw it out the window" kind of way!)
It's the simplicity of software like this that makes me think that modern desktops today seem to be almost a "law unto itself".
Compiz et all make great eye candy but after a while I like to disable the effects and give my laptop cpu fan a rest.
I know it's progress and computers are more powerful etc.. but really how powerful does a computer need to be to run a "desktop"? (I'd be as well installing Vista if I want that experience - I know cheap shot!)
For me, the desktop should be unintrusive and let the applications be the star and not hog my cpu time generating special effects.
I'm glad Rasterman has not included opengl support in e17, if he does include it in the future I hope it will be optional component.
At the end of the day I want my computer to have as much resources as possible to run applications.
From an user's point of view "using" a computer needs to be simpler (and I don't mean in a Gnome "let's remove all options" kind of way!).
"...Internet service providers could easily be seen by the public as "overreaching," making it harder to get public support for efforts of law enforcement. What's needed, said the group's executive director, Grier Weeks, is for cops to investigate the leads they already have..."
and
"The Department of Justice and all 50 attorneys general are sitting on a mountain of evidence leading straight to the doors of child pornography traffickers," Weeks said. "We could rescue hundreds of thousands of child sexual assault victims tomorrow in America, without raising any constitutional issues whatsoever. But government simply won't spend the money to protect these children. Instead of arrests by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the child exploitation industry now faces Internet pop-ups from the Friendly Bus Investigators. That was always the fundamental difference between the Biden bill and the McCain bill. Biden wanted to fund cops to rescue children. McCain wanted to outsource the job."
This my friends is about the money!
The U.S. Government and Brilliant Digital (ironic business name!) both know this won't work. Brilliant Digital see this as a market to exploit and make millions of dollars. The U.S. Government get a "cheap" way of "dealing" with child pornography and a perception from the general public as "something being done".
I'm sure the Government know about Brilliant Digital's dubious past but the percieved "benefits" are too good to miss.
It's a win-win for both parties!
I have children myself and I find developments like this horrifying.
Someone does not become a paedophile by looking at images on the internet, it's deeper and more complex then this - blocking content will not cure the problem or reduce related crimes in any way.
The last quoted paragraph sends chills down my spine and really makes me angry.
Children can be rescued if the funding is available but a company like Brilliant Digital will recieve the funding instead and the problem is never solved - people are made richer instead.
.."squeeze out a new release...several times a day.."
Wow, maybe you should see a doctor!
Ohhhh, you meant software...sorry.
Mind you Microsoft have.."squeezed out" a few releases (it would explain a lot!)
Re:Thanks for the hard work....but...my wifi....
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 1
Wow, thanks for the that. I am planning to do this at the weekend and I have all the information right here.
Thanks for your post this is really helpful.:)
However, you would think that Linux distributions like Ubuntu or Fedora would make this an easy process. SUSE have taken the line of "this is not a supported chipset" in their current release. If the hardware worked in a previous release then tough luck we won't support it now.
I get this kind of experience from MS Windows and quite frankly unacceptable.
If Linux distributions want to continue to make money and attract more users then they had better improve communication and effort to keep things consistant.
Why can't the distribution companies and the kernel developers get together and manage these problems properly?
I am a programmer myself and completely understand that things don't always go your way when writing software.
Bugs happen!
If you are going rewrite something or make major changes then at least provide a mechanism to go back to the previous known working state. Do not ignore it.
My father-in-law keeps asking about this "Linux thing" and I tell him to stick with what you know (MS Windows). Until problems like these can be trivially "worked-round" or solved I can't recommend he switches over.
My biological father bought an Asus "eeeppppcccc"(whatever) and was happy with it until he tried to install a wireless dongle (to connect to internet via mobile phone network). The installation instructions were similar to the above. There is no way he could understand this or even talk him through it over the phone. His solution? He bought and installed XP. From a user's perspective it's an understandable reaction and he can surf the internet now.
This is what Linux distributions should be working on, it may an unglamorous part to develop but it will make a huge difference to casual linux users.
Most of us who post here can go through the above steps quite easily, we're geeks we are expected to.
If anybody who reads this post that works for any of the Distribution companies please do something about it. Provide some mechanism to make these changes easy or provide a way to install legacy drivers. All it will take is a some kind of simple "gui" type option to ask the user which driver to install or activate. You can do it with proprietary video drivers why not anything else?
As far as I know the kernel developers are not interested in "desktop" enhancements to the kernel they leave this up to the distro providers.
This has turned into a bit of a rant (Hey it's Friday afternoon and I have drank waaaayyy to much coffee).
But after *years* of experiencing smooth upgrades of my Linux installation and then suddenly something as basic as wifi hardware not working really annoys me.
Thanks for the hard work....but...my wifi....
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
First I would just like to say thank-you to everybody that develops the Linux kernel, without it I would have been stuck with the "other" OS that everybody loves to hate!
Linux (through various distros) has been my OS of choice for about 9 years now, has enriched my IT life and quite frankly made IT actually interesting again.
But one thing has been bothering me!
I recently upgraded my OS to Ubuntu 8.04 then hit a problem - my wifi network connection became unusable (very weak signal and slooowwww internet access). I tried pretty much most fixes but it still wasn't working right (slightly better wifi signal but then would randomally stop altogether). If I booted into my "production" partition (Ubuntu 7.10) everything was fine and the "balance of the force" was restored. I had a spare partition on the hard drive and installed Fedora 9(? It may have been 10 - can't remember). This also exhibited "dodgy wifi behaviour". Of course, it was a kernel(2.6.22) driver problem and I need to find the time to download the latest drivers and compile. Thankfully I can do this but it still irritating! I have gone back to Ubuntu 7.10 (kernel 2.6.14?) and it's been fine since.
My wifi hardware is based on the rt2500 chipset series and is quite common on most laptops and until recently were reliable. As far as I remember the drivers were being rewritten for the kernel - which is fine but if it breaks hardware (which until that time had been reliable) then people should have been made aware of this or even work with the distos for a interm fix.
At least include the compiled legacy drivers with the distro and not force people to download them from the internet and recompile.
I have just had a look at the patent and it seems to be *how* the "dock" is *presented*.
E.g. the patent constantly mentions things like *fading-in* the program name over a "tile" (icon?), *magnification* of a tile and it uses the term "bar" instead of "dock". The patent even specifies formulas!
Does this mean that a "dock" can be implemented by using different "effects" and formulas?
Also, the "magnification" seems to be specifically defined in the patent. I'm sure there are other ways this can be done without "violating" the patent.
Certain parts of the patent seem very narrow. It seems to cover direct clones of the Mac "dock".
If this is the case then this seems to be an expensive patent for a trivial issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure? It has less noise made on Internet discussion forums about patents, that is certain. That doesn't mean the risk is less. Don't assume that only Sun holds patents relevant to Java, or that only Microsoft holds patents relevant to .NET.
OK, I should have clarified the statement "Java has less "patent liability" than Mono". I was referring to the open-source release of Java when Sun publically stated they were in negotaions with third-parties to remove patented/licensed code (I think it was the audio libraries and 2D graphical libraries that were at issue). Microsoft fiercly guard thier intellectual property and the Community Promise excludes other libraries(e.g. ado.net). If they were serious they would have included the other libraries as well. Software Patents are a danger to any software written these days (especially patent trolls and submarine patents).
I think this is the big difference: in Java you tend to program in a 'pure Java' bubble where almost all the libraries you use are in Java. Mono/C# applications like Banshee link to a lot of native Linux libraries like GTK+ and GStreamer. Of course there is nothing to stop Java using native libraries too (see java-gnome) but so far, this hasn't caught on to the extent it has for Mono. Remember that Mono was originally created by Linux desktop programmers as an easier way to make GNOME applications, while Java's heritage is as the One True Platform for writing code that runs on any OS, and so needs a complete set of Java libraries.
I think mono as a platform has a lot of potential but at present Java seems more "complete". You have two powerful IDEs - netbeans and eclipse (if you like that sort of thing). Mono has monodevelop - which, considering it's age is a great achievement - but for me still unstable.
I am looking at a software project at the moment and one of the issues are native access to libraries via Java. Compare it to Mono's equivalent (Pinvoke) and it is verrrry painful. This is where mono really shines, hence software like Banshee is possible and gtk# too. On the other hand developing software in Java *and* it's libraries is "safer" because I they encourage the use of thier platform on other environments.
Personally on technical merit I think Mono edges out ahead of Java. Miguel and his team have done an amazing Job with mono. But if I had to choose a platform to write software here and now I would have to go with Java.
Hopefully this will change in the future. I just think the Community Promise falls a little short compared to Sun's *public* stance on Java's patent issues.
Thinking about it, the Community Promise is a huge win for Mono.
The Patent Trap was always a concern when I used Mono. I knew the external libraries ado.net, asp.net and winforms were "tainted" but was always unsure about the "core" on Mono itself.
Now that the "core" of Mono seems to be free from the patent threat from Microsoft Mono can take a new "patentless" path and develop equivalent versions of the libraries not mentioned in the Community Promise.
You won't be able to run Windows .net stuff (legally/safely) on Linux but you would be able to run Linux .net stuff on Windows.
GTK# seems to be a mature gui frontend the only major missing part is .ADO library for data access (unless something is already out there).
Mono does not *have to* follow Microsoft's upgrade treadmill and keep up-to-date compatibility with the latest version of .net instead concentrate on delivering applications on other systems - Linux, non-windows arm-based processors and macs.
In the end Mono could embrace, extend and extinquish Microsoft's own implementation.
I have been following Mono for a while but I am currently still using Java.
The question is which do I commit to?
The way I understand it is:
Java has less "patent liability" than Mono. .net are covered by the Communtiy Promise but not some of the supporting libraries (e.g. ado.net, winforms).
All of Java is under an open license including "essential" libraries (e.g. data access, gui).
Only the "core" (including the framework libraries?) of
I know that these .net libraries have been implemented in Mono but would we have to write new open-source libraries to replace thier functionality and remain "patent-threat" free?
If this is the case then I would imagine that Java would be the preferred choice IF you had to chose one.
What are the overheads of both the Java and Mono virtual machines running at the same time? Would we be better getting behind just one environment and using that.
For what it's worth I really like and prefer Mono - especially Banshee (is there an equivalent for Java?) and I want to develop for it but the Community Promise only covers the ECMA part of .net. Without the other libraries I fear Mono is hamstrung.
At least with Java I know where I stand, all the libraries are included and the functionality is already there.
That's right - think it was that version of the kernel I started having problems.
Maybe the rt2500 in some laptops may affect the driver - I'm not sure.
I have to blacklist the following drivers; rt2x00pci, rt2500pci and rt2500lib. (I think thats right)
They just don't seem to work properly.
I then compile the legacy version of the rt2500 drivers.
(Mind you I could not get the drivers to compile properly on SUSE 11.1 - it's the only thing that stopped me using SUSE)
Have wireless "issues" been fixed with this release.
I have a laptop with generic realtek rt2500 wifi hardware.
For many kernel releases I have to compile seperate drivers (Legacy serialmonkey) because the "stock" drivers are woefully unstable.
I either lose my connection, painfully slow( have tried the "rate 54" fix) or I cannot reconnect to my network at all.
I don't mind compiling seperate drivers (a huge benefit of open source stuff & Linux) but I am concerned how long I will be able to do this (E.g. something changes in the kernel makes the "external" driver break - in fact actual development of the legacy drivers has ceased - http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)?
I know I should not be moaning about this but this issue has been around for ages and seems to affect a lot of hardware.
This is my only niggle with Linux and I am grateful for everything. Computing become much more interesting and fun again.
Huge thanks to Linus and the kernel developers.
Music companies would love to see digital downloads to disappear. It's destroying thier business model and it seems they are trying a new approach.
If they push the idea that digital downloads are now 'old hat' or 'not needed' and 'persuade' people that streamed music is the 'future'/'cool way' of listening to music then they can retain far more control of the format. Sure lock the vendor(e.g. radio station) into a 3-year deal - when the deal expires hike up the fees and/or the record companies force vendors to stream music directly from record company controlled servers only - thus full control of music property is preserved, artificial scarcety remains and profits increased for record companies.
This has already happened to the newspaper industry here in the UK. A central body controls all publishing rights to newspaper articles.
Of course mobile phone companies like this scenario as well.
I want my music (paid for) to be available for MY convenience to listen to not the other way round.
This stinks of serious astroturfing and a feeble attempt to change consumer's attitudes to ownership.
Just say NO!
Personally I would to see something like; offer a 'lossy compressed' track for very low cost or free. If you really like it - buy a pristine copy of the music (e.g.lossless compressed - flac) the difference in sound quality is obvious. Of course DRM would kill this idea.
Then again record companies seem to be risk adverse or just don't get the nature of the Internet.
Out-of-touch music executives (looking at you Sony!) are hurting the music industry more than anybody else and you cannot blame pirating of music for the decline of an industry. Ultimatly, pointing your finger and blaming something else is not your answer. You need to take stock of your business and figure-out how can you change to meet the ever-changing state of the market. If you think it should be the other way round - well you are doomed to failure - it's inevitable.
There must be "internet savvy" executives out there who can do something credible and create a workable solution.
I've been playing with Mono recently and one thing I would like to see is some kind of desktop alternative, something a little more focused than Gnome and KDE.
Personally I think Mono is a superior implementation of Microsoft's .NET and given the chance Mono could really benefit the community given the chance.
I've used both desktops and of course there are good and bad things about both of them. I am grateful that we have an actual choice.
What really impresses is me is how powerful QT 4.5 has become - for me this is where the true power of KDE comes from and the current QT is way beyond GTK (for the record I am a Gnome user).
Have you seen the QT demos(included with QT) - very impressive!
Absolutely agree - we better contact the police and ask for thier permission (as required by current law)!
"..protest near Parliament.."
As far as I know, I think our Govt defines "near" as a 4 mile radius! - this covers the whole of inner London!
I think the tag "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense" could not be further from the truth!
After *Overwhelming* opposition via petitions, public outcry, comments from a "large ISP" and *Google* the "Govt" eventually backed down hours before this law passed.
This absolutely stinks of arrogance, grim determination and bloody-mindedness demonstrated by the "Govt" to try and *force* this law through despite widespread popular opinion and only backed-down at the last "conceivable moment".
If this was down to common sense the "Govt" would have abandonded this months ago or even at the earliest stages of discussion.
One way or another this law in some form is going to be passed. As other posts have said it will be pushed through some obscure law out of the publiic eye.
Obviously, the "Govt" do not think IT industry, Google and the *New Zealand People* are important enough to have an opinion.
Just look at the U.K. (where I live) to see what is happening.
Do now let this continue the fight is not over yet!
Any government should be the voice and representation of the people - we DO NOT serve the government for it's own purposes - THEY SERVE US.
Don't allow a retard like kdawson to make you leave - judging by your id surely you must remember how "popular" Jon Katz was?
I always make a point of noting who wrote the summary if it is kdawson I usually know the title and/or summary is going to be bullshit.
Why should you leave - Slashdot isn't perfect but compared to other sites it still better.
If anything kdawson should go - he is unpopular with many people here - if Slashdot potentially loses readers because of this then they really need to consider doing something about it.
DON'T GO!
As typical of "our" "Government" this policy is ill-thought-out, completely out-of-touch with voter's opinions and as usual the "Government" listen to the wrong people.
1)A legal right to broadband in every home is *up to* 2Mb only. I know people who "technically" have broadband and *at best* up to 512Mb.
2) If a £20 "tax" were introduced, the piracy rate would increase because people will want to justify the increased cost - "If I have to pay the music publishers a levy even if I do not pirate thier music - I must as well start doing it then"
3) The "Government" & Music industry want to monitor our connections for illegal material (thankfully but idiotically only over P2P traffic). The early stages of monitoring ("because of crime and terrorism") our connections is already under way.
I know that many ISPs and other telecommunication companies have criticized the report this announcement was based on.
Intrestingly the European Human Rights act guarantees an individual's right to privacy - as far as I know the U.K. have not officailly signed-up to it yet.
Slackware was my first experience with Linux many years ago...(1997/98ish?). Especially installing from floppy disks.
However, I now use Ubuntu & Mint linux on my pcs at the moment.
The way to look at the Slackware "distribution" is to see it as a bare bones, vanilla-type system.
Not having a "package" system is a *feature* of Slackware and it still uses tarball-type packages to this day.
Slackware is based on a different philosophy from today's distributions and I think it's refreshing to see this.
As far as I know there are no "corporate sponsors" funding Slackware's development - Patrick does it in his spare time.
One thing that most people on Slashdot seem to miss is that this is the original spirit of Linux and any software associated with it.
In fact I may install it on an old 450mhz PIII laptop I've got kicking about.
Good Luck Patrick you have my utmost respect and I hope Slackware continues for a very long time.
I have to say the book is beautifully put together - a real work of art.
But I have read the poem (a copy of it is on Gibson's website) isn't it a bit pretentious?
However as a piece of art it is an interesting idea (minus the poem).
My theory is the big IT contractors that work for the Government have probably pursuaded ministers that this is a good thing.
These IT contractors are mainly responsible for computerising the various departments within the Government (e.g. the NHS, "chipped" passports and implementing National ID Cards). These systems have cost the tax payer millions and millions of pounds and two of these are complete. There are probably just a handful of these companies (and close may have ties to the established "old boys" network) working for the Government and have shareholders(some are also Government ministers) to answer to.
This has been a major cash cow for these companies and now they need to persuade the Government to spend even more money to keep them afloat. As you can imagine the Government is a *huge* client to have on your order books, the last thing you want as a contractor is to lose your client - your survival may depend on it.
The contractor and Government minister(probably a shareholder) will influence Government policy and departments (e.g. the police think monitoring the internet is a "great" idea) to ensure this cash cow is alive and kicking and everybody "wins".
The police get a "mine" of "evidence" to "convict criminals", the Government can justify thier existance, the minister shares gain value (and maybe get a promotion), the contracter gets paid and of course the Government patronisingly "pats us on the head" and tell us they are looking after our best interests.
The whole thing stinks and will get worse while our Labour "Government" is in power.
What D-Link should have done was to advertise the "Secure Spot" feature on the "firmware" download page, be up-front about it and actually explain what it does. At least you can make an informed decision.
A router is a commodity item and should behave as expected - there should not be any "surprises" during it's operation. It should work as "clockwork" *quietly* performing the function is was *designed* for, if you don't notice it - then it's doing it's job.
On the other hand, if it does something to draw your attention to it and does something *unexpected* then you are going to question it's reliability then "fix" the problem.
The expectation of this equipment *should* be mundane, day-to-day predictability and "un-glamourous" functionality.
The last thing you should be thinking is what is this router going to do next or be apprehensive in installing it. It should just be a matter of; buy router, install it then forget about it.
If anything, D-Link have further damaged thier reputation as an IT company, especially when people read about it on Slashdot (D-Link's potential customers!). As a company this is a *dreadful* mistake to make.
Personally speaking, if I need to buy any networking tech I'll be *very* suspicious of D-Link equipment and be more inclined to look at a competitor's product it's a natural reaction.
Well done D-Link, your current management team have managed to alienate your core customers. The person/people who actually gave this "feature" the go-ahead to be installed should be fired.
What a *stupid* way to advertise a product! It just shows you how out of touch with thier customers they are - they don't even understand their own product!
Yet another IT company that has lost it's way.
I used "lawyer" (in quotes) because I couldn't remember how to spell "solicitor" :)
So how is this actually enforced?
As I currently understand it:
1) "Lawyer" firms trawl P2P traffic and compile list of "illegal" file sharers and thier details (e.g.IP addresses, time/dates, torrent files)
2) Contact ISP, handover "evidence" of illegal activity, ISP monitors user's activity and examines previous usage logs.
3) If activity is "confirmed" then "warning" letter is issued to user.
4) ISP continues to monitor user's activity and "liase" with "lawyer" firm.
5) If user's activity ~= "illegal" then possibly issue further letters and/or throttle user's bandwidth.
I'm tempted to type "6)....Profit!" :)
What if the user contests the evidence?
What if a mistake was made identifying the user?
Will it entail an expensive legal battle to prove innocence (I thought *guilt* had to be proven)?
This raises many questions and I doubt this is a workable solution.
If it is only P2P traffic that is monitored then I will not be to concerned at the moment. There are many other ways illegal content can be obtained and quite frankly let them monitor P2P.
It will make "lawyers" feel they are doing their job, Copyright owners will feel "justice" is served, ISPs keep our Orwellian Govt of their backs and smart users will find alternatives.
Business as usual.
I'm more worried that the Govt want a central database of email and internet usage rather something short-sighted like this.
As usual the Govt and content holders are one step behind the internet generation and will continue to stumble through all this "new-fangled" technology.
Wow, a positive Microsoft post on Slashdot!
What's it like working at Microsoft? :)
Kidding aside, something like this is desperatly needed for the internet.
What really worries me is that it's from Microsoft and the needs of thier OS *always* comes first no matter what happens.
Just look at .Net, version 2 seemed to be the sweet-spot on size and features. Version 3.x included yet more libraries, the bloat is growing at an alarming rate and seems to be more Windows-centric.
If the Silverlight technology was truly open-source and not affected by patents then people would jump at something like this.
There is still alot of dis-trust at the moment because Steve "Throw me a monkey-ass chair" Ballmer has threatened to use patents against companies in the past.
I have great respect for the Developers (specifically the development products) at Microsoft, they have produced some great software.
Unfortunately it is "the management" of the company I have a problem with and will I probably avoid Silverlight for the time being.
Actually, I've always liked Enlightenment - it's small and very powerful and at the time it's effects were ahead of compiz.
It also runs on an old 500Mhz, 192Mb ram laptop (on my other computer it just flys - and I don't mean in a "throw it out the window" kind of way!)
It's the simplicity of software like this that makes me think that modern desktops today seem to be almost a "law unto itself".
Compiz et all make great eye candy but after a while I like to disable the effects and give my laptop cpu fan a rest.
I know it's progress and computers are more powerful etc.. but really how powerful does a computer need to be to run a "desktop"?
(I'd be as well installing Vista if I want that experience - I know cheap shot!)
For me, the desktop should be unintrusive and let the applications be the star and not hog my cpu time generating special effects.
I'm glad Rasterman has not included opengl support in e17, if he does include it in the future I hope it will be optional component.
At the end of the day I want my computer to have as much resources as possible to run applications.
From an user's point of view "using" a computer needs to be simpler (and I don't mean in a Gnome "let's remove all options" kind of way!).
Just the ramblings of a burnt-out programmer!
"...Internet service providers could easily be seen by the public as "overreaching," making it harder to get public support for efforts of law enforcement. What's needed, said the group's executive director, Grier Weeks, is for cops to investigate the leads they already have..."
and
"The Department of Justice and all 50 attorneys general are sitting on a mountain of evidence leading straight to the doors of child pornography traffickers," Weeks said. "We could rescue hundreds of thousands of child sexual assault victims tomorrow in America, without raising any constitutional issues whatsoever. But government simply won't spend the money to protect these children. Instead of arrests by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the child exploitation industry now faces Internet pop-ups from the Friendly Bus Investigators. That was always the fundamental difference between the Biden bill and the McCain bill. Biden wanted to fund cops to rescue children. McCain wanted to outsource the job."
This my friends is about the money! The U.S. Government and Brilliant Digital (ironic business name!) both know this won't work. Brilliant Digital see this as a market to exploit and make millions of dollars. The U.S. Government get a "cheap" way of "dealing" with child pornography and a perception from the general public as "something being done".
I'm sure the Government know about Brilliant Digital's dubious past but the percieved "benefits" are too good to miss.
It's a win-win for both parties!
I have children myself and I find developments like this horrifying.
Someone does not become a paedophile by looking at images on the internet, it's deeper and more complex then this - blocking content will not cure the problem or reduce related crimes in any way.
The last quoted paragraph sends chills down my spine and really makes me angry.
Children can be rescued if the funding is available but a company like Brilliant Digital will recieve the funding instead and the problem is never solved - people are made richer instead.
I really mean Think of the children
.."squeeze out a new release...several times a day.."
Wow, maybe you should see a doctor!
Ohhhh, you meant software...sorry.
Mind you Microsoft have .."squeezed out" a few releases (it would explain a lot!)
Wow, thanks for the that. I am planning to do this at the weekend and I have all the information right here.
Thanks for your post this is really helpful. :)
However, you would think that Linux distributions like Ubuntu or Fedora would make this an easy process. SUSE have taken the line of "this is not a supported chipset" in their current release. If the hardware worked in a previous release then tough luck we won't support it now.
I get this kind of experience from MS Windows and quite frankly unacceptable.
If Linux distributions want to continue to make money and attract more users then they had better improve communication and effort to keep things consistant.
Why can't the distribution companies and the kernel developers get together and manage these problems properly?
I am a programmer myself and completely understand that things don't always go your way when writing software.
Bugs happen!
If you are going rewrite something or make major changes then at least provide a mechanism to go back to the previous known working state. Do not ignore it.
My father-in-law keeps asking about this "Linux thing" and I tell him to stick with what you know (MS Windows).
Until problems like these can be trivially "worked-round" or solved I can't recommend he switches over.
My biological father bought an Asus "eeeppppcccc"(whatever) and was happy with it until he tried to install a wireless dongle (to connect to internet via mobile phone network). The installation instructions were similar to the above. There is no way he could understand this or even talk him through it over the phone.
His solution? He bought and installed XP. From a user's perspective it's an understandable reaction and he can surf the internet now.
This is what Linux distributions should be working on, it may an unglamorous part to develop but it will make a huge difference to casual linux users.
Most of us who post here can go through the above steps quite easily, we're geeks we are expected to.
If anybody who reads this post that works for any of the Distribution companies please do something about it. Provide some mechanism to make these changes easy or provide a way to install legacy drivers. All it will take is a some kind of simple "gui" type option to ask the user which driver to install or activate. You can do it with proprietary video drivers why not anything else?
As far as I know the kernel developers are not interested in "desktop" enhancements to the kernel they leave this up to the distro providers.
This has turned into a bit of a rant (Hey it's Friday afternoon and I have drank waaaayyy to much coffee).
But after *years* of experiencing smooth upgrades of my Linux installation and then suddenly something as basic as wifi hardware not working really annoys me.
First I would just like to say thank-you to everybody that develops the Linux kernel, without it I would have been stuck with the "other" OS that everybody loves to hate!
Linux (through various distros) has been my OS of choice for about 9 years now, has enriched my IT life and quite frankly made IT actually interesting again.
But one thing has been bothering me!
I recently upgraded my OS to Ubuntu 8.04 then hit a problem - my wifi network connection became unusable (very weak signal and slooowwww internet access). I tried pretty much most fixes but it still wasn't working right (slightly better wifi signal but then would randomally stop altogether). If I booted into my "production" partition (Ubuntu 7.10) everything was fine and the "balance of the force" was restored. I had a spare partition on the hard drive and installed Fedora 9(? It may have been 10 - can't remember). This also exhibited "dodgy wifi behaviour". Of course, it was a kernel(2.6.22) driver problem and I need to find the time to download the latest drivers and compile. Thankfully I can do this but it still irritating!
I have gone back to Ubuntu 7.10 (kernel 2.6.14?) and it's been fine since.
My wifi hardware is based on the rt2500 chipset series and is quite common on most laptops and until recently were reliable. As far as I remember the drivers were being rewritten for the kernel - which is fine but if it breaks hardware (which until that time had been reliable)
then people should have been made aware of this or even work with the distos for a interm fix.
At least include the compiled legacy drivers with the distro and not force people to download them from the internet and recompile.
I have just had a look at the patent and it seems to be *how* the "dock" is *presented*.
E.g. the patent constantly mentions things like *fading-in* the program name over a "tile" (icon?), *magnification* of a tile and it uses the term "bar" instead of "dock". The patent even specifies formulas!
Does this mean that a "dock" can be implemented by using different "effects" and formulas?
Also, the "magnification" seems to be specifically defined in the patent. I'm sure there are other ways this can be done without "violating" the patent.
Certain parts of the patent seem very narrow. It seems to cover direct clones of the Mac "dock".
If this is the case then this seems to be an expensive patent for a trivial issue.