I'd have to agree... I'm certain Borland is simply giving you the right to redistribute their headers/libraries as compiled into your program in executable form *but* you can't redistribute their headers and libraries.
Borland has always had very reasonable proprietary licenses. I do not expect that to change.
I found that out about my USR TotalSwitch a year ago. Really disappointing that though the hardware supports full-duplex they never released the firmware to support it. Ended up selling my TotalSwitch on ebay and buying a couple of Kingston 10/100Mbps full-duplex non-managed switches for what I got out of it.
Technically the Linux Kernel includes a GPL "clarification" (ie Linus thinks that's what it really means so he's making sure it's clear). The GPL only allows "exceptions" for "geographical" reasons.
Any GPL with an exception is not the GPL and is not compatible with the GPL.
Exactly... in fact when NSI had the $10 off on.org/.net domains they *specifically* stated that if you were a.com you should you should consider "protecting" your trademark by registering.org/.net domains also.
Depends what you mean by superior. I still throw template code at Borland and it pukes and dies. Last version of the Borland compiler I have been able to successfully use is 5.01 (right before they switched to the Builder compiler archtecture in 5.02).
gcc/egcs has handled everything I've thrown at it since a few months before 2.95 was released.
In fact here's a short bit of code showing the BC problem this time (albeit 5.5 is better than previous Builder series compilers). Guess I'll submit that to Borland.
Yep... exactly. And actually I believe the GPL implies that you can't modify it unless it is required for "geographical" compatibility. Otherwise the changes you make cause the license to no longer be the GPL and hence can't be used with anything else not under your specific GPL-mutated license. This is basically how numerous projects manage to violate the GPL.
Very true... though I'd bet with the amount of software using the GPL/LGPL that when they are challenged in court and shown to be bogus that we'll end up with a new version of the GPL that addresses the problems... more or less something along the lines of how people are treating (or ignoring however you look at it) the license is what it really means.
There is so much stuff out there violating the LGPL/GPL that it isn't even funny. Many people seem to like the license simply because they ignore the restrictions.
I really feel sorry for anyone who considers CodeWarrior a programming editor. The editing features are extremely poor... it's like using notepad with syntax highlighting. I pity anyone who thinks that is the way things should be (shoot, vi is a better programming editor when considering only editing commands).
There are other problems...can't have it open a file from the command-line, inflexible tab/space indenting, very contrained version control choices. The Linux version is even worse than the Windows one... bugs, missing features... anyways, I wrote a bug/suggestion report to CodeWarrior already.
For a company with all of 4 programmers as a side part of the business it doesn't do bad. As a development team we are free to use open source projects and contribute/submit to them as we feel it will benefit the company. The thing we use/contribute to the most is the YSLs (www.ysl.org) but we are constantly looking into new projects.
I did... they seem to come in the day after you reconfirm. What's even cuter is Etrade got 2 conditional offers from me (through misinformation on their IPO bulletins and screwups on their end)... I got one block of shares in the morning and sold them... then another a few hours later and sold them. Then 3 minutes before market close etrade sends out an alert... ooopppss we really didn't mean to give those to you, what our system told you was incorrect (the shares were in there, the buy order cleared -- but is now not listed in the activity logs -- , the selling system thought they were there, the account positions thought they were there, and it made logical sense based on the calls I got from Etrade this week)... this should be interesting... and I'm not the only one.
My personal hope is that some of the changes in the FS and SCSI layers for 2.4 will help out the stability problems. Currently I can't scan with my SCSI scanner for more than a handful of scans before the sg device or machine locks.
That's a ridiculous statement... regardless of your experience if you understand you could lose every dime the second you invest it, you have enough understanding to participate.
Re:Unfortunately its a "thanks for nothing"...
on
Red Hat IPO Surprise
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for the info... I am kind of coming to the opinion that current etrade customers are much more likely to get approved. Of course I don't think I should need a couple hundred thousand in the account to buy 100 shares:) I didn't think RedHat was aiming the directed shares at a group with that kind of money (in general).
I'll be really curious what the response is like on the 28th when everything is due in to etrade... people without etrade accounts will have gone through the process by then.
Re:Unfortunately its a "thanks for nothing"...
on
Red Hat IPO Surprise
·
· Score: 1
Interesting... I wonder how many people have been declined. I emailed RedHat about it and basically got... sorry, etrade expects 10% to be declined and the offering has so far been in line with that.
I still can't believe I'm in the lower 10% of those RedHat targetted with the directed shares in either financial status or trading experience. My guess is that by the time I filled out the eligibility form pretty much only previous etrade customers had tried (I FedEx next day'd the money and app after I got the letter)... and etrade gives preference to long standing customers when processing the eligibility form.
Unfortunately its a "thanks for nothing"...
on
Red Hat IPO Surprise
·
· Score: 1
I got one of the emails and appreciated. The next day I setup an etrade account and FedEx'd a $1500 check. My colleague who also got an email did the same.
Today I called etrade because their "Indicate Interest" pages don't work and did the eligibility form with a human. I failed... don't know what you have to pass this thing. I have a household income over $75k, 2+ years in stocks/mutual funds, and experience with electronic trading and full service. Coming up with the $1500 cash I was making available for 100 shares was no big deal.
Oh well... looks like RedHat's choice of etrade was bad for us. I'll take etrade's $75 bonus for opening the account and close it.
Of course their Windows drivers suck (resource contention race conditions anyone) so I'm really not hopeful about Linux support even if they wrote drivers.
A few months back I got the same response from Sigma.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd have to agree... I'm certain Borland is simply giving you the right to redistribute their headers/libraries as compiled into your program in executable form *but* you can't redistribute their headers and libraries.
Borland has always had very reasonable proprietary licenses. I do not expect that to change.
I found that out about my USR TotalSwitch a year ago. Really disappointing that though the hardware supports full-duplex they never released the firmware to support it. Ended up selling my TotalSwitch on ebay and buying a couple of Kingston 10/100Mbps full-duplex non-managed switches for what I got out of it.
Technically the Linux Kernel includes a GPL "clarification" (ie Linus thinks that's what it really means so he's making sure it's clear). The GPL only allows "exceptions" for "geographical" reasons.
Any GPL with an exception is not the GPL and is not compatible with the GPL.
Exactly... in fact when NSI had the $10 off on .org/.net domains they *specifically* stated that if you were a .com you should you should consider "protecting" your trademark by registering .org/.net domains also.
AMD is making no garrauntees that current Athlon processors will work in SMP configurations.
Ooopss... forget to escape the brackets... oh well, C++ programmers will know what I mean.
Depends what you mean by superior. I still throw template code at Borland and it pukes and dies. Last version of the Borland compiler I have been able to successfully use is 5.01 (right before they switched to the Builder compiler archtecture in 5.02).
gcc/egcs has handled everything I've thrown at it since a few months before 2.95 was released.
In fact here's a short bit of code showing the BC problem this time (albeit 5.5 is better than previous Builder series compilers). Guess I'll submit that to Borland.
template
class YBase
{
public:
YBase() {}
struct YInternal
{
};
protected:
friend YInternal;
};
void main()
{
YBase ob;
}
Yep... exactly. And actually I believe the GPL implies that you can't modify it unless it is required for "geographical" compatibility. Otherwise the changes you make cause the license to no longer be the GPL and hence can't be used with anything else not under your specific GPL-mutated license. This is basically how numerous projects manage to violate the GPL.
Very true... though I'd bet with the amount of software using the GPL/LGPL that when they are challenged in court and shown to be bogus that we'll end up with a new version of the GPL that addresses the problems... more or less something along the lines of how people are treating (or ignoring however you look at it) the license is what it really means.
There is so much stuff out there violating the LGPL/GPL that it isn't even funny. Many people seem to like the license simply because they ignore the restrictions.
I really feel sorry for anyone who considers CodeWarrior a programming editor. The editing features are extremely poor... it's like using notepad with syntax highlighting. I pity anyone who thinks that is the way things should be (shoot, vi is a better programming editor when considering only editing commands).
There are other problems...can't have it open a file from the command-line, inflexible tab/space indenting, very contrained version control choices. The Linux version is even worse than the Windows one... bugs, missing features... anyways, I wrote a bug/suggestion report to CodeWarrior already.
For a company with all of 4 programmers as a side part of the business it doesn't do bad. As a development team we are free to use open source projects and contribute/submit to them as we feel it will benefit the company. The thing we use/contribute to the most is the YSLs (www.ysl.org) but we are constantly looking into new projects.
I did... they seem to come in the day after you reconfirm. What's even cuter is Etrade got 2 conditional offers from me (through misinformation on their IPO bulletins and screwups on their end)... I got one block of shares in the morning and sold them... then another a few hours later and sold them. Then 3 minutes before market close etrade sends out an alert... ooopppss we really didn't mean to give those to you, what our system told you was incorrect (the shares were in there, the buy order cleared -- but is now not listed in the activity logs -- , the selling system thought they were there, the account positions thought they were there, and it made logical sense based on the calls I got from Etrade this week)... this should be interesting... and I'm not the only one.
My personal hope is that some of the changes in the FS and SCSI layers for 2.4 will help out the stability problems. Currently I can't scan with my SCSI scanner for more than a handful of scans before the sg device or machine locks.
That's a ridiculous statement... regardless of your experience if you understand you could lose every dime the second you invest it, you have enough understanding to participate.
Thanks for the info... I am kind of coming to the opinion that current etrade customers are much more likely to get approved. Of course I don't think I should need a couple hundred thousand in the account to buy 100 shares :) I didn't think RedHat was aiming the directed shares at a group with that kind of money (in general).
I'll be really curious what the response is like on the 28th when everything is due in to etrade... people without etrade accounts will have gone through the process by then.
Interesting... I wonder how many people have been declined. I emailed RedHat about it and basically got... sorry, etrade expects 10% to be declined and the offering has so far been in line with that.
I still can't believe I'm in the lower 10% of those RedHat targetted with the directed shares in either financial status or trading experience. My guess is that by the time I filled out the eligibility form pretty much only previous etrade customers had tried (I FedEx next day'd the money and app after I got the letter)... and etrade gives preference to long standing customers when processing the eligibility form.
I got one of the emails and appreciated. The next day I setup an etrade account and FedEx'd a $1500 check. My colleague who also got an email did the same.
Today I called etrade because their "Indicate Interest" pages don't work and did the eligibility form with a human. I failed... don't know what you have to pass this thing. I have a household income over $75k, 2+ years in stocks/mutual funds, and experience with electronic trading and full service. Coming up with the $1500 cash I was making available for 100 shares was no big deal.
Oh well... looks like RedHat's choice of etrade was bad for us. I'll take etrade's $75 bonus for opening the account and close it.
Of course their Windows drivers suck (resource contention race conditions anyone) so I'm really not hopeful about Linux support even if they wrote drivers.
A few months back I got the same response from Sigma.
It was supposedly in the 2.2.7-pre releases but you had to uncomment the line in config.in.