Qt would be a Realy Good Thing (TM) if it was QPL'd for Windows too!
They've done a lot of work on Qt, if they won't let the "community" take advantage of their work porting Qt to Windows, then, well, they arn't being nice.
Didn't their mothers teach them to play nice and share when they were little kids? =P
Come on... The porting work has already been done. Troll Tech should play nice and share.
This is one of the major things about Free Software -> Work gets done *once*. If it gets done again it's to improve it. Porting X Qt to windows would just be a waste.
I highly doubt that Troll Tech is making very much money off of free software for Windows - The're making money off of *Commercial Software* for both Windows and X. I am going to make a token attempt to stay away from KDE until eithor Koffice gets RPM'd, KDE2.0 comes out, or Troll Tech releases Qt under Windows under the QPL for free software projects.
My point was that having your UI in a web browser window isn't an *Objective* for any but a few specific projects - It's an obnoxious disadvantage of Java (That java programs will only run on most PCs in a java window).
Getting a JRE to run "Real" java apps is similarly difficult to getting Perl - And Perl is faster than Java (At least with Sun's JRE - There are comments about a JRE by IBM, That might be different)
Having ACs start at 0 instead of 1 is a Good Thing (TM) because it promotes getting a user account. This is good for a bunch of reasons, but the best one is that Rob and co. want people to get user acounts and are therefore promoting it.
So, if you want to start at 1, Log In! It's not that hard, and all it does it lets people tell if the same person made two different posts. (I am ignoring the issue of people with a default rating of 2)
Re:Absence of Editorial Supervision?
on
Wired on Slashdot
·
· Score: 1
How does their being "college kids with squeaky voices" effect their ability to diferentiate between uninteresting stories and interesting stories?
Am I confused, or is it that every time someone wrights an article about Slashdot, they come up with a "better" moderation meathod - one that Rob already considered and rejected.
Oh well. Heck, I think we should get more moderation points than 5... mabie 8 or 10, so that more moderation gets done, especially on posts 3 or four levels deep (In a thread).
What you're missing is that it makes you pay for a licence if you want to port your free app to Windows. Now, they've already put the work in to get Qt to work on Windows, I want to be able to wright my app once and have it portable to windows just by changing the direction of some slashes in the config file!
No, they realy want the money, and won't let you use Windows Qt without paying $1000+. If it weren't for this, I'd not have problems with Qt any more than I have problems with GPL'd libs (Not LGPL'd, GPL'd). The only reason that I can see to only give access to the X version is 'cause they know that a commerical propriatary lib won't cut it on Linux, but they think they can get developers to want to use Qt enough to buy a licence to port their... Argghhh!!! I'm just repeating myself now, but am tired, hungry, and this cheasy psudo-free library pisses me off! Paraphrasing RMS: "Propriatary librarys can cause more damage to the Free Software Movement than propritary Apps can".
What you're missing is that it makes you pay for a licence if you want to port your free app to Windows. Now, they've already put the work in to get Qt to work on Windows, I want to be able to wright my app once and have it portable to windows just by changing the direction of some slashes in the config file!
I'm afraid of the QPL, not QT -- That ain't $1500/program, that's $3200/developer (if you want to take advantage of it's cross platform capabilities).
That's just nasty. I wouldn't complain so bad if Troll allowed Cross platform free software, but no, it's X only free software.
I don't like the idea of going to the trouble to wright somthing and then having to pay someone else thousands of $ to be able to fully use it - even if I'm giving it away.
A good movie will convey the understanding of events that the director/composer intended the audience have to the audience. BWP did not do this.
BWP was supposedly trying to be scary, it didn't acomplish this goal at all. Piles of rocks? Bundles of sticks that might possibly resemble the basic shape of a human? (Stick Figures? ). These things don't arn't scary, they don't even suggest "Witch".
When I watched it, I was sitting there waiting for what was happening, when it was going to get scary, and the whole story about what was going on with the witch. None of this ever happened.
Unlike what they told you in 6th grade english, a story must have, above all, *content*. If it has this it can ignore all the other "rules", and if it doesn't have this it will suck, reguardless of what else it has. (The exception to this is pornos, but mabie that's just a strech of "Content")
BWP was a movie, without content. Major hollywood movies mostly don't have content eithor, but at least they have pretty CG effects to watch.
Oh well, South Park: BLU is still the best movie yet this decade, without a single challenger!
Slashdot Mirror
RMS is right, for many reasons.
Qt would be a Realy Good Thing (TM) if it was QPL'd for Windows too!
They've done a lot of work on Qt, if they won't let the "community" take advantage of their work porting Qt to Windows, then, well, they arn't being nice.
Didn't their mothers teach them to play nice and share when they were little kids? =P
Come on... The porting work has already been done. Troll Tech should play nice and share.
This is one of the major things about Free Software -> Work gets done *once*. If it gets done again it's to improve it. Porting X Qt to windows would just be a waste.
I highly doubt that Troll Tech is making very much money off of free software for Windows - The're making money off of *Commercial Software* for both Windows and X. I am going to make a token attempt to stay away from KDE until eithor Koffice gets RPM'd, KDE2.0 comes out, or Troll Tech releases Qt under Windows under the QPL for free software projects.
If it were "QPL for Free Software/Commercial Licence for Commercial Software", I wouldn't complain at all.
I want to be able to buy my support seperately.
Mabie If we all e-mail Troll Tech "Release Windows Qt under QPL too!"... err, Yea Right; Oh well.
My point was that having your UI in a web browser window isn't an *Objective* for any but a few specific projects - It's an obnoxious disadvantage of Java (That java programs will only run on most PCs in a java window).
Getting a JRE to run "Real" java apps is similarly difficult to getting Perl - And Perl is faster than Java (At least with Sun's JRE - There are comments about a JRE by IBM, That might be different)
Having ACs start at 0 instead of 1 is a Good Thing (TM) because it promotes getting a user account. This is good for a bunch of reasons, but the best one is that Rob and co. want people to get user acounts and are therefore promoting it.
So, if you want to start at 1, Log In! It's not that hard, and all it does it lets people tell if the same person made two different posts. (I am ignoring the issue of people with a default rating of 2)
How does their being "college kids with squeaky voices" effect their ability to diferentiate between uninteresting stories and interesting stories?
Am I confused, or is it that every time someone wrights an article about Slashdot, they come up with a "better" moderation meathod - one that Rob already considered and rejected.
Oh well. Heck, I think we should get more moderation points than 5... mabie 8 or 10, so that more moderation gets done, especially on posts 3 or four levels deep (In a thread).
You should have learned this by now:
You can't ignore OS updates and complain when your out of date components arn't supported in new software.
If you are running somthing that can use glibc 2.1, you should upgrade.
Hmm... BTW, Hasn't Penguin Computing been selling 8 way PIII boxes for Linux for months now? (not that Linux can realy do 8 way, but...)
Hasn't Penguin Computing been selling 8 way PIII boxes for Linux for months now? (not that Linux can realy do 8 way, but...)
Actualy, that and IRIX are about it, AFAIK.
The neat thing is: Linux has Merced support *now*. No other OS can say that.
I believe he is refering to NT as a "Horse drawn cart" and Alpha as a "Superhighway"
You mean "Trade in your new Huffy for a Ross"?
I'm pretty sure it was Merced-native Linux, because *everyone* *including Intel* has been working on making Linux-Merced work beautifully.
I want it fast, pretty, and stable. GTK seems to be close enough to that for me!
What you're missing is that it makes you pay for a licence if you want to port your free app to Windows. Now, they've already put the work in to get Qt to work on Windows, I want to be able to wright my app once and have it portable to windows just by changing the direction of some slashes in the config file!
No, they realy want the money, and won't let you use Windows Qt without paying $1000+. If it weren't for this, I'd not have problems with Qt any more than I have problems with GPL'd libs (Not LGPL'd, GPL'd). The only reason that I can see to only give access to the X version is 'cause they know that a commerical propriatary lib won't cut it on Linux, but they think they can get developers to want to use Qt enough to buy a licence to port their... Argghhh!!! I'm just repeating myself now, but am tired, hungry, and this cheasy psudo-free library pisses me off! Paraphrasing RMS: "Propriatary librarys can cause more damage to the Free Software Movement than propritary Apps can".
What you're missing is that it makes you pay for a licence if you want to port your free app to Windows. Now, they've already put the work in to get Qt to work on Windows, I want to be able to wright my app once and have it portable to windows just by changing the direction of some slashes in the config file!
I'm afraid of the QPL, not QT -- That ain't $1500/program, that's $3200/developer (if you want to take advantage of it's cross platform capabilities).
That's just nasty. I wouldn't complain so bad if Troll allowed Cross platform free software, but no, it's X only free software.
I don't like the idea of going to the trouble to wright somthing and then having to pay someone else thousands of $ to be able to fully use it - even if I'm giving it away.
Your memory'll fit in GIGABYTES?
Arthur C Clark says Petabytes, and he's obviously clueless (On this subject, otherwize, he's brilliant).
I'd need at least a couple of Extabyte chips to fit my memory in!
Python isn't as cross platform as Perl is.
It also has that nasty "Level of indentation effects program flow" thing, but...
The browser based UI is a Java-Kludge. It's sometimes what is wanted, but it's realy all that Java can do with any efficiencly/accuracy/dependability.
As for a high quality GUI that runs on most platforms... Perl'll do that fine.
I think what the origional poster ment is that Perl does "Wright Once, Run Anywhere" better than Java does.
You can only go for 30 seconds without Oxygen before it's all you can think about? Wow. I can go for 40-50 seconds usually =P
But then I sleep for 9-11 hours a day, so...
A good movie will convey the understanding of events that the director/composer intended the audience have to the audience. BWP did not do this.
BWP was supposedly trying to be scary, it didn't acomplish this goal at all. Piles of rocks? Bundles of sticks that might possibly resemble the basic shape of a human? (Stick Figures? ). These things don't arn't scary, they don't even suggest "Witch".
When I watched it, I was sitting there waiting for what was happening, when it was going to get scary, and the whole story about what was going on with the witch. None of this ever happened.
Unlike what they told you in 6th grade english, a story must have, above all, *content*. If it has this it can ignore all the other "rules", and if it doesn't have this it will suck, reguardless of what else it has. (The exception to this is pornos, but mabie that's just a strech of "Content")
BWP was a movie, without content. Major hollywood movies mostly don't have content eithor, but at least they have pretty CG effects to watch.
Oh well, South Park: BLU is still the best movie yet this decade, without a single challenger!
No, but rivers will *never* go in circles, and they will always lead to *something*, probably an ocean or larger river.
Oceans and large rivers tend to have citys a/or towns on their banks... especially in the USA.
Bugs in gcc/egcs:
A.) Make sure it's a bug; and make sure that it's not ultra-simple to work around.
B.) If (is bug) { report bug to egcs/gcc team }
C.) Bug becomes fixed or unimportant.