VAT does not work like you think it does. Businesses do not Pay VAT.
Sorry pal, but that's not how VAT works.
There is input VAT and output VAT.
Businesses do pay VAT, except for later they "cancel" it thanks to the input/output VAT compensation.
But that's only if input VAT and output VAT are at the same percentage. If you are paid 3% VAT by Amazon but you have to pay 20% VAT to IRS, then you are in trouble. That's exactly what publishers are complaining about.
This is not only a problem for publishers (which pay 20% instead of 3%) but also for the equivalents of the IRS. Amazon is paying a lot less taxes than it should in other countries by leveraging that extra 17% in two ways: benefits, and gaming the input/output VAT.
Will this license allow for more than 1 VM? So far, all the licensing vehicles for Windows 7 allow only exactly 1 VM (except for Windows 7 Enterprise with Software Assurance, but that's not for home users).
Allowing only 1 VM is a disconnection from reality. Lots of people are using desktop editions of Windows in VMs and all of them are pirating it, many of them just because Microsoft does not make any legal way available. Stupid.
In Spain, MAPFRE has been offering for at least 4 years the YCar line of insurance for young drivers which offers as much as a 40% discount if you install a GPS-like device which sends them information about when you drive, what speed you drive, how many kilometers, etc.
If you speed up, drive on "dangerous" hours (e. g. weekend 2 AM - 6 AM), etc, you lose the discount for next year.
There are several policies to choose and some of them even allow to adjust the policy clauses, for instance in case you are a young driver who works the night shift.
Assange: not even charged, more than doubtful testimonies, a "crime" which does not even exist outside Sweden (sex without condom!). UK verdict: all kinds of threaten and proposal to violate Vienna Convention
"Or maybe it’s about time to define actual “HTML5 profiles”. ACID3 seems to be too weak of a profile: two very different browsers may pass ACID3 yet a webapp would work with one browser and fail with the other due to bugs, missing features/added features, etc."
If you were implementing a Solaris based solution or something custom based on a real-time OS I could understand wanting to use a UNIX based system.
I was talking about supervision (SCADA) and control, not about weapons. Combat systems run on real-time operating systems such as VxWorks or QNX.
Re Solaris: there are several major reasons this kind of customers do not trust Windows: 1. Developed by a US company (Windows: check, Solaris: check) 2. Source code not available (Windows: check, Solaris: check) 3. Support on old/new hardware in the future (Windows: check, Solaris: check) 4. Common viruses (Windows: check)
A customer which does not trust Windows for reasons 1-3 will usually not trust Solaris either.
I know already three countries in three continents which have moved their Navy's (bespoke) SCADA and ship and control systems from Windows to Linux. A fourth country is already in the planning stage. How do I know? Because I ported the software, created a custom Linux distro, etc. Years of work.
Fun fact: at the beginning we charged a premium for the Linux version. Customer's answer? We want Linux. Windows was deprecated 3 years ago for this software due to no demand. But it's also understandable: I can tell you at least three countries which had to put their frigates and submarines in "manual sailing mode" due to Windows viruses (!!!). Not to speak of many countries not trusting the US more-than-influence on Microsoft, and also some features which were simply impossible to support on Windows due to Windows limitations.
Why not? There is SystemC, a dialect of C++ which can be implemented in hardware (FPGA, for instance). What Algotochip is claiming is just one little more step forward.
The normal behavior of an application is to create a Window object for every widget (window, button, combobox, etc) on screen. Usually that is done at the very low level, therefore most users (and even developers) do not know about it. This is true for every platform I know: Windows, X11 and Mac. I don't know the details about Wayland but I would be surprised if Wayland used a different approach.
The problem with the 1-window-per-widget approach is it causes a lot of unnecessary refreshes, which lead to flickering and a low performance over remote access protocols such as Remote Desktop, Citrix, etc. The reason is the graphics layer (GDI, X11, Quartz, etc) is responsible for refreshing the widgets and it will refresh the full widget even if only one pixel changed, or even if it didn't change at all and it was only the parent widget which changed.
Since version 4.4, Qt takes a new approach: create ONE (and only one) top level window for the application, then simulate all the other widgets by "drawing" them on screen. This allows the Qt painting system to have a finer-grained control over what needs to be repainted and translates into no flickering without the need for double-buffering.
Given that AutoIt is expecting full-fledged Window objects, it will fail with any application using Qt 4.4 because there is only ONE Window object.
Now that we know why AutoIt fails, we can try to find out what needs to be done.
The first approach is to just tell Qt to use native widgets, i. e. 1-window-per-widget. The Qt documentation, which you have not read, explains how to do this:
As you are very lazy, let me summarize that for you: set the QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS environment variable to 1 and now you can use AutoIt. Performance will degrate a bit, though.
The proper approach, which needs to be implemented in AutoIt, would be to hook into the Qt painting system and "learn" about the internal representation of the emulated Window objects. That way AutoIt would be able to automate any Qt application, not matter if QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS is used or not. This is what GUI testing automation tools such as TestComplete, Squish and others do: toolkit-specific plugins for Qt, Gtk, WPF, DevExpress, Telerik, etc.
That's of course only true for applications using QWidgets. For applications using Qt Quick, there is nothing like QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS and the only possible approach is to create a toolkit-specific approach.
Desktop Linux will be a reality when people have a reason to choose Linux over Mac and Windows.
Let's assume all the eye-candy, hardware support, etc is there.
There is also a lot of good applications, yet people want more. Desktop Linux needs closed source shareware, freeware, etc applications. Not because there is no open source alternative but because people want to have 10,000 applications to choose from instead of 10. Also, by having shareware on Linux, those microISVs will be promoting Linux amongst their customers, which will in turn make Linux more popular.
So what do we not have shareware, freeware and other closed-source applications on Linux? Because of binary compatibility. When an ISV wants to release an application for Linux, he has to test with a gazillion Linux distributions, do all kind of tricks and ship his own version of every dependency down to glibc (it's a nightmare even with Listaller!), explain how the average Joe -who knows nothing about root, package managers, etc- can install it on Linux, etc Just not worth it.
Can we solve that? Sure we can. Canonical started by offering the "partner" closed-source repository but it's not exactly successful. There are very few closed-source applications there. What we need is a single appstore for all the distributions. Intel AppUp looks like a good start but again it's not popular. It will never be unless we solve the binary compatibility issues.
Please do not answer with "but closed source does away with my freedom", etc. 99% of the people do not care. Even slashdotters. Android Market, the Apple AppStore, the Kindle, etc show even most of those who boast about software freedom are carrying a Kindle and an iPhone, which are the epitome of closed-sourceness.
Wt is the best one I have tried. I use the C++ version, although there is also a Java version (JWt).
What makes Wt unique is its approach: widgets. You develop web applications like you were developing desktop applications. Also, the API is Qt-like (but using Boost).
I gave up on Rails after I used Wt.
Want a virtualization console? Take Wt, libvirt and an HTML5 VNC client and you are done.
Need Active Directory authentication? Wt, Samba (or Windows APIs if you are on Windows), done.
Streaming? Wt, ffmpeg libraries, done.
Forgetting about bindings and being able to use the millions of C/C++ libraries out there was a huge relief.
Also, size: Rails, Django (and even PHP) just do not fit in an embedded environment. Wt does.
That depends on the impact that the frontend has on the whole system; if it's small, 9 hours optimizing the Python code might be more valuable than 90 learning C++ and a new framework.
The opposite is also true: being a C++ developer, I'd rather go with Wt than (re-) learn Rails, PHP or Django.
Also, size: Rails, Django (and even PHP) just do not fit in an embedded environment. Wt does.
Wt is the best one I have tried. I use the C++ version, although there is also a Java version (JWt).
What makes Wt unique is its approach: widgets. You develop web applications like you were developing desktop applications. Also, the API is Qt-like (but using Boost).
I gave up on Rails after I used Wt.
Want a virtualization console? Take Wt, libvirt and an HTML5 VNC client and you are done.
Need Active Directory authentication? Wt, Samba (or Windows APIs if you are on Windows), done.
Streaming? Wt, ffmpeg libraries, done.
Forgetting about bindings and being able to use the millions of C/C++ libraries out there was a huge relief.
The Sokal affair, also known as the Sokal hoax,[1] was a publishing hoax perpetrated by Alan Sokal, a physics professor at New York University. In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text, an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies. The submission was an experiment to test the publication's intellectual rigor and, specifically, to learn if such a journal would "publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if it (a) sounded good and (b) flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions."
Slashdot Mirror
Trying to port Linux to Android tablets is a dead end. They will get Mer, OpenWrt, etc running on ONE tablet a year. If at all.
The alternative is to consider Android as a different Unix platform, with its limitations, and port KDE, Gnome, etc to Android. More details here:
http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1191
That path would reach potentially every Android tablet (and phone!). Easy? No. Doable? Sure thing.
VAT does not work like you think it does. Businesses do not Pay VAT.
Sorry pal, but that's not how VAT works.
There is input VAT and output VAT.
Businesses do pay VAT, except for later they "cancel" it thanks to the input/output VAT compensation.
But that's only if input VAT and output VAT are at the same percentage. If you are paid 3% VAT by Amazon but you have to pay 20% VAT to IRS, then you are in trouble. That's exactly what publishers are complaining about.
This is not only a problem for publishers (which pay 20% instead of 3%) but also for the equivalents of the IRS. Amazon is paying a lot less taxes than it should in other countries by leveraging that extra 17% in two ways: benefits, and gaming the input/output VAT.
Will this license allow for more than 1 VM? So far, all the licensing vehicles for Windows 7 allow only exactly 1 VM (except for Windows 7 Enterprise with Software Assurance, but that's not for home users).
Allowing only 1 VM is a disconnection from reality. Lots of people are using desktop editions of Windows in VMs and all of them are pirating it, many of them just because Microsoft does not make any legal way available. Stupid.
Because it's when you are back home from partying, probably drunk-driving, or at least not paying enough attention to traffic.
If you are a night-shift worker, you'll have to choose a policy.
Being a piece of electronics that is fitted to your car is exactly what guarantees your insurance company you are abiding by the terms of the policy.
If it's a phone app, fraud will be rampant: I'd rather install it in my mom's phone and I'll get the maximum discount.
How is this new?
In Spain, MAPFRE has been offering for at least 4 years the YCar line of insurance for young drivers which offers as much as a 40% discount if you install a GPS-like device which sends them information about when you drive, what speed you drive, how many kilometers, etc.
If you speed up, drive on "dangerous" hours (e. g. weekend 2 AM - 6 AM), etc, you lose the discount for next year.
http://www.mapfre.com/seguros/es/particulares/soluciones/seguros-coches-jovenes-ycar.shtml
There are several policies to choose and some of them even allow to adjust the policy clauses, for instance in case you are a young driver who works the night shift.
Pinochet: well-known and repeatedly convicted dictator. UK verdict: let go free
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet
Assange: not even charged, more than doubtful testimonies, a "crime" which does not even exist outside Sweden (sex without condom!). UK verdict: all kinds of threaten and proposal to violate Vienna Convention
Way to go UK, way to go.
So when browsers claim to be fully HTML5 compliant, will that even have any meaning anymore?
That was one of the points I made in my "HTML5 for everything?" post 7 months ago:
http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1134
"Or maybe it’s about time to define actual “HTML5 profiles”. ACID3 seems to be too weak of a profile: two very different browsers may pass ACID3 yet a webapp would work with one browser and fail with the other due to bugs, missing features/added features, etc."
If you were implementing a Solaris based solution or something custom based on a real-time OS I could understand wanting to use a UNIX based system.
I was talking about supervision (SCADA) and control, not about weapons. Combat systems run on real-time operating systems such as VxWorks or QNX.
Re Solaris: there are several major reasons this kind of customers do not trust Windows:
1. Developed by a US company (Windows: check, Solaris: check)
2. Source code not available (Windows: check, Solaris: check)
3. Support on old/new hardware in the future (Windows: check, Solaris: check)
4. Common viruses (Windows: check)
A customer which does not trust Windows for reasons 1-3 will usually not trust Solaris either.
I know already three countries in three continents which have moved their Navy's (bespoke) SCADA and ship and control systems from Windows to Linux. A fourth country is already in the planning stage. How do I know? Because I ported the software, created a custom Linux distro, etc. Years of work.
Fun fact: at the beginning we charged a premium for the Linux version. Customer's answer? We want Linux. Windows was deprecated 3 years ago for this software due to no demand. But it's also understandable: I can tell you at least three countries which had to put their frigates and submarines in "manual sailing mode" due to Windows viruses (!!!). Not to speak of many countries not trusting the US more-than-influence on Microsoft, and also some features which were simply impossible to support on Windows due to Windows limitations.
You don't just #include and magically get shit that can go onto silicon
I never said so. The fact that is a dialect of C++, not pure C++, speaks volumes already.
Why not? There is SystemC, a dialect of C++ which can be implemented in hardware (FPGA, for instance). What Algotochip is claiming is just one little more step forward.
The reason Qt 4.4+ applications do not work with AutoIt, or any other WinSpy-like application, is the so-called "alien widgets":
http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2007/08/09/qt-invaded-by-aliens-the-end-of-all-flicker/
The normal behavior of an application is to create a Window object for every widget (window, button, combobox, etc) on screen. Usually that is done at the very low level, therefore most users (and even developers) do not know about it. This is true for every platform I know: Windows, X11 and Mac. I don't know the details about Wayland but I would be surprised if Wayland used a different approach.
The problem with the 1-window-per-widget approach is it causes a lot of unnecessary refreshes, which lead to flickering and a low performance over remote access protocols such as Remote Desktop, Citrix, etc. The reason is the graphics layer (GDI, X11, Quartz, etc) is responsible for refreshing the widgets and it will refresh the full widget even if only one pixel changed, or even if it didn't change at all and it was only the parent widget which changed.
Since version 4.4, Qt takes a new approach: create ONE (and only one) top level window for the application, then simulate all the other widgets by "drawing" them on screen. This allows the Qt painting system to have a finer-grained control over what needs to be repainted and translates into no flickering without the need for double-buffering.
Given that AutoIt is expecting full-fledged Window objects, it will fail with any application using Qt 4.4 because there is only ONE Window object.
Now that we know why AutoIt fails, we can try to find out what needs to be done.
The first approach is to just tell Qt to use native widgets, i. e. 1-window-per-widget. The Qt documentation, which you have not read, explains how to do this:
http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.8/qwidget.html#native-widgets-vs-alien-widgets
As you are very lazy, let me summarize that for you: set the QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS environment variable to 1 and now you can use AutoIt. Performance will degrate a bit, though.
The proper approach, which needs to be implemented in AutoIt, would be to hook into the Qt painting system and "learn" about the internal representation of the emulated Window objects. That way AutoIt would be able to automate any Qt application, not matter if QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS is used or not. This is what GUI testing automation tools such as TestComplete, Squish and others do: toolkit-specific plugins for Qt, Gtk, WPF, DevExpress, Telerik, etc.
That's of course only true for applications using QWidgets. For applications using Qt Quick, there is nothing like QT_USE_NATIVE_WINDOWS and the only possible approach is to create a toolkit-specific approach.
Desktop Linux will be a reality when people have a reason to choose Linux over Mac and Windows.
Let's assume all the eye-candy, hardware support, etc is there.
There is also a lot of good applications, yet people want more. Desktop Linux needs closed source shareware, freeware, etc applications. Not because there is no open source alternative but because people want to have 10,000 applications to choose from instead of 10. Also, by having shareware on Linux, those microISVs will be promoting Linux amongst their customers, which will in turn make Linux more popular.
So what do we not have shareware, freeware and other closed-source applications on Linux? Because of binary compatibility. When an ISV wants to release an application for Linux, he has to test with a gazillion Linux distributions, do all kind of tricks and ship his own version of every dependency down to glibc (it's a nightmare even with Listaller!), explain how the average Joe -who knows nothing about root, package managers, etc- can install it on Linux, etc Just not worth it.
Can we solve that? Sure we can. Canonical started by offering the "partner" closed-source repository but it's not exactly successful. There are very few closed-source applications there. What we need is a single appstore for all the distributions. Intel AppUp looks like a good start but again it's not popular. It will never be unless we solve the binary compatibility issues.
Please do not answer with "but closed source does away with my freedom", etc. 99% of the people do not care. Even slashdotters. Android Market, the Apple AppStore, the Kindle, etc show even most of those who boast about software freedom are carrying a Kindle and an iPhone, which are the epitome of closed-sourceness.
I said that one year ago:
A wish a day 7: make emerge a generic package manager for Windows
A wish a day 6: AppStore-like installer for KDE on Windows
Intel AppUp includes open source software but it's not *only* open source.
It's sad how open source and Linux distributions failed to capitalize on this appstore-frenzy.
I think scorp1us and I might be the only /.ers to have ever used witty?
I too use Wt (I'm the Debian packager)
Are you sure you are not confusing Wt with something else? Wt works with 2 MB of RAM.
http://redmine.webtoolkit.eu/projects/wt/wiki/Wt_embedded
Wt is the best one I have tried. I use the C++ version, although there is also a Java version (JWt).
What makes Wt unique is its approach: widgets. You develop web applications like you were developing desktop applications. Also, the API is Qt-like (but using Boost).
I gave up on Rails after I used Wt.
Want a virtualization console? Take Wt, libvirt and an HTML5 VNC client and you are done.
Need Active Directory authentication? Wt, Samba (or Windows APIs if you are on Windows), done.
Streaming? Wt, ffmpeg libraries, done.
Forgetting about bindings and being able to use the millions of C/C++ libraries out there was a huge relief.
Also, size: Rails, Django (and even PHP) just do not fit in an embedded environment. Wt does.
That depends on the impact that the frontend has on the whole system; if it's small, 9 hours optimizing the Python code might be more valuable than 90 learning C++ and a new framework.
The opposite is also true: being a C++ developer, I'd rather go with Wt than (re-) learn Rails, PHP or Django.
Also, size: Rails, Django (and even PHP) just do not fit in an embedded environment. Wt does.
Sorry but no. With ASP.NET you still have the concept of page, session, etc very very present. With Wt, you don't. It makes a huge difference.
Wt is the best one I have tried. I use the C++ version, although there is also a Java version (JWt).
What makes Wt unique is its approach: widgets. You develop web applications like you were developing desktop applications. Also, the API is Qt-like (but using Boost).
I gave up on Rails after I used Wt.
Want a virtualization console? Take Wt, libvirt and an HTML5 VNC client and you are done.
Need Active Directory authentication? Wt, Samba (or Windows APIs if you are on Windows), done.
Streaming? Wt, ffmpeg libraries, done.
Forgetting about bindings and being able to use the millions of C/C++ libraries out there was a huge relief.
Obligatory reference to the Sokal Affair.
The Sokal affair, also known as the Sokal hoax,[1] was a publishing hoax perpetrated by Alan Sokal, a physics professor at New York University. In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text, an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies. The submission was an experiment to test the publication's intellectual rigor and, specifically, to learn if such a journal would "publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if it (a) sounded good and (b) flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions."
Your Spanish is funny, lumia doesn't exist as a spanish word nor slang in Spain.
Have you even looked in a dictionary? No, of course you have not!
> Wrong, punta is whore in spanish.
You meant "puta", not "punta". Like in English (bitch, whore, etc), there are many words in Spanish for that.