The land is controlled by the Presido Trust, not the City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco would not allow President Bush to appoint policy makers.
I think if were up to the locals, there would be no private development in the Presidio. This unusual arrangement for a National Park was the result of a comprimise devised by the Republican Congress who disliked such glorious pork in a Democratic stronghold.
free software is not just about a comunity of hippies writting software. Free software is about colaboration, it doesn't matter if it is colaboration of people or companies.
I've made it clear that I'm aware of that. Virtually all important OSS dev is corporate supported now days. The hippie-basement-hacker thing is a myth that Open Source community propagates about itself.
Again, the point is that there isn't a huge team of Mozilla engineers anymore.
It is staggering to see how much more efficient loosely-knit community is than mammoth-like corporation.
I think you missed my point. Products like Mozilla Firefox and OpenOffice exist because of big one-time-only investments from large coporations. They were not developed by a loose-knit community. The question is whether Firefox can remain competitive without that backing.
How soon we forget the lessons imparted unto us by MonkeyBoy. The cornerstone of MS's business has always been strong developer support and integration points. In the case of a free web browser, that's even more important. (Netscape used to understand this.)
Depends on how you do it. If you press Ctrl-N, it spawns a thread. Click on the IE icon, and it spawns a new process. Depending on your settings and how much free memory you have.
I wish I could find a way to run more than one Firefox process (Damn Adobe plugin).
Do you not understand what Open Source Software is? You see, there's no need to package and market it.
Firefox is one big packaging and marketing exercise, and a pretty good one at that. Mozilla tried the "base" thing for years and it never caught on, even with AOL/Netscape marketing.
Also, I'm not talking about declining web standards, my point is that you can actually do much more with web standards than "just a brower" lets you do.
So, you believe that the limited adoption of Desktop Linux, OpenOffice, and even Firefox is entirely due to FUD? I suppose that's the most convenient answer.
I thought it was somewhat interesting that Mozilla.org did a pretty minor overhaul with Firefox, and their previously stagnant marketshare instantly went up 500%. Which leads credence to the argument that open source products generally lack refinement, or "quality", and if they could rectify that, people would actually use their stuff.
As for the RSS support, this is Microsoft Extended RSS, guys!
RSS is an extremely simple pseudo-standard, that's been extended by dozens of people already. Unlike Kerberos, which is linked to your OS's authorization protocols, any change to RSS that is made by anyone can easily be accomodated.
Except that 5 years ago, Internet Explorer was a light-year ahead of the competition in client-side functionality. Despite Andreessen's hype, Microsoft did far more to legitimize web-based applications than Nutscrape ever did.
Don't forget that Microsoft is (at heart) a development tool vendor, and I'm sure they're fully aware that web application development is where the coding market is. And they've finally seemed to re-understand that browser features are critical to that market. Things like XHTML and CSS2 allow Microsoft to sell much effective web development tools (Visual Studio/ASP.NET), and that's a real revenue stream for them.
People romanticize the "Browser Wars", but it's really a big battle over nothing -- a bunch of almost zero-revenue eyeballs using a free product. The strategic value is what people build on top of the browser technologies.
As great of a browser as Firefox is, I don't believe that Mozilla.org still got the lessons of the last war. They spent a lot of time and money to build an enormous amount of developer technology, but have never seriously packaged and marketed it. You have to assume that Microsoft is not just trying to build a browser, but looking at this "holistically" (client/tools/server); while Mozilla isn't.
I seem to recall about 4 misleading stories on slashdot about the CSS2 situation, so perhaps that's where you like to get your misinformation.
What they actually said was they were targetting CSS 2.1, and that no browser would probably ever completely support that standard. Reading between the lines on the IEBlog, they seem like they are working on a competitive CSS implementation, but that remains to be seen.
Hmm -- My suspicion that Firefox is primarily optimizing and refining features that were funded and developed by AOL several years ago, or have been in progress forever (like SVG). While it's true that IE is playing catch-up now, it remains to be seen if a loosely-knit open source project can match a concerted development effort from Microsoft.
Not really, because, unlike Kerberos, any change to RSS could be trivially reverse-engineered and supported in other readers. An extended protcol is often better than a brand-new protocol.
Besides, who cares about dominating RSS? It has no strategic value.
That's true that quite a few ISPs use BSD, as well as some older dotcoms like Yahoo. However, I've never seen any corporate use of BSD, hipsters or not. Not to say it doesn't exist, but it's certainly no where near the level of Solaris or Linux (and the commercial app support reflects this.)
For the most part, all Unixes are pretty identical as a regular user.
But Linux is largely a SV/Solaris clone on the command level, and Solaris & BSD are both riding on Linux oriented desktop projects. There's still system adminstration differences of course, and that's where the Unix-specific jobs are.
Calling Solaris a *BSD is a rather perverse rewriting of history.
(Like all UNIXes it has BSD code, but the *BSD revival movement was primarily spurred by Sun/Bill Joy's decision switch to the more modern and performant and more complex System V.)
Solaris is also THE real option other than Linux/BSD, so learning it can't hurt. Unlike BSD, it might get you a job.:)
That this story has entered the Unix meme is pretty pathetic.
Oh yeah, David Korn pwnd some MS marketing dweeb over some non-MS product! It was Unix's one shining moment in a time they were getting totally steamrolled by Windows. Way to take it to the man, Dr. Bell Labs Scientist!
On topic, I haven't played with Monad, but it seems like MS has finally figured out you can't just put ksh on Windows and say, "There's your shell, you hippies!" -- you need to have something that actually works with the system.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortuanately the feds (not SF) gave LucasFilm a 90 year lease, and they have the right to sublet the land for profit.
I cite the Bay Guardian with caution, but I think this outlines how little SF gains from this deal:
http://www.sfbg.com/News/33/44/presidio.html
The land is controlled by the Presido Trust, not the City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco would not allow President Bush to appoint policy makers.
I think if were up to the locals, there would be no private development in the Presidio. This unusual arrangement for a National Park was the result of a comprimise devised by the Republican Congress who disliked such glorious pork in a Democratic stronghold.
free software is not just about a comunity of hippies writting software. Free software is about colaboration, it doesn't matter if it is colaboration of people or companies.
I've made it clear that I'm aware of that. Virtually all important OSS dev is corporate supported now days. The hippie-basement-hacker thing is a myth that Open Source community propagates about itself.
Again, the point is that there isn't a huge team of Mozilla engineers anymore.
Hilarious! You should first post this on another story.
It is staggering to see how much more efficient loosely-knit community is than mammoth-like corporation.
I think you missed my point. Products like Mozilla Firefox and OpenOffice exist because of big one-time-only investments from large coporations. They were not developed by a loose-knit community. The question is whether Firefox can remain competitive without that backing.
How soon we forget the lessons imparted unto us by MonkeyBoy. The cornerstone of MS's business has always been strong developer support and integration points. In the case of a free web browser, that's even more important. (Netscape used to understand this.)
Depends on how you do it. If you press Ctrl-N, it spawns a thread. Click on the IE icon, and it spawns a new process. Depending on your settings and how much free memory you have.
I wish I could find a way to run more than one Firefox process (Damn Adobe plugin).
Do you not understand what Open Source Software is? You see, there's no need to package and market it.
Firefox is one big packaging and marketing exercise, and a pretty good one at that. Mozilla tried the "base" thing for years and it never caught on, even with AOL/Netscape marketing.
Also, I'm not talking about declining web standards, my point is that you can actually do much more with web standards than "just a brower" lets you do.
method of introducing new methods into html to make NetScape not work with all websites.
Oh god, nobody can be this stupid, so you have to be kidding. If not, please do some research on JSSS and Layers.
Was that an issue of the standard being flawed? Or was it that nobody uses MNG, and the code sucked? Or all of the above?
So, you believe that the limited adoption of Desktop Linux, OpenOffice, and even Firefox is entirely due to FUD? I suppose that's the most convenient answer.
I thought it was somewhat interesting that Mozilla.org did a pretty minor overhaul with Firefox, and their previously stagnant marketshare instantly went up 500%. Which leads credence to the argument that open source products generally lack refinement, or "quality", and if they could rectify that, people would actually use their stuff.
As for the RSS support, this is Microsoft Extended RSS, guys!
RSS is an extremely simple pseudo-standard, that's been extended by dozens of people already. Unlike Kerberos, which is linked to your OS's authorization protocols, any change to RSS that is made by anyone can easily be accomodated.
Except that 5 years ago, Internet Explorer was a light-year ahead of the competition in client-side functionality. Despite Andreessen's hype, Microsoft did far more to legitimize web-based applications than Nutscrape ever did.
Don't forget that Microsoft is (at heart) a development tool vendor, and I'm sure they're fully aware that web application development is where the coding market is. And they've finally seemed to re-understand that browser features are critical to that market. Things like XHTML and CSS2 allow Microsoft to sell much effective web development tools (Visual Studio/ASP.NET), and that's a real revenue stream for them.
People romanticize the "Browser Wars", but it's really a big battle over nothing -- a bunch of almost zero-revenue eyeballs using a free product. The strategic value is what people build on top of the browser technologies.
As great of a browser as Firefox is, I don't believe that Mozilla.org still got the lessons of the last war. They spent a lot of time and money to build an enormous amount of developer technology, but have never seriously packaged and marketed it. You have to assume that Microsoft is not just trying to build a browser, but looking at this "holistically" (client/tools/server); while Mozilla isn't.
I seem to recall about 4 misleading stories on slashdot about the CSS2 situation, so perhaps that's where you like to get your misinformation.
What they actually said was they were targetting CSS 2.1, and that no browser would probably ever completely support that standard. Reading between the lines on the IEBlog, they seem like they are working on a competitive CSS implementation, but that remains to be seen.
Hmm -- My suspicion that Firefox is primarily optimizing and refining features that were funded and developed by AOL several years ago, or have been in progress forever (like SVG). While it's true that IE is playing catch-up now, it remains to be seen if a loosely-knit open source project can match a concerted development effort from Microsoft.
Not really, because, unlike Kerberos, any change to RSS could be trivially reverse-engineered and supported in other readers. An extended protcol is often better than a brand-new protocol.
Besides, who cares about dominating RSS? It has no strategic value.
That's true that quite a few ISPs use BSD, as well as some older dotcoms like Yahoo. However, I've never seen any corporate use of BSD, hipsters or not. Not to say it doesn't exist, but it's certainly no where near the level of Solaris or Linux (and the commercial app support reflects this.)
For the most part, all Unixes are pretty identical as a regular user.
But Linux is largely a SV/Solaris clone on the command level, and Solaris & BSD are both riding on Linux oriented desktop projects. There's still system adminstration differences of course, and that's where the Unix-specific jobs are.
Naw, it just destroys the resale value of people's homes. No biggie.
Calling Solaris a *BSD is a rather perverse rewriting of history.
:)
(Like all UNIXes it has BSD code, but the *BSD revival movement was primarily spurred by Sun/Bill Joy's decision switch to the more modern and performant and more complex System V.)
Solaris is also THE real option other than Linux/BSD, so learning it can't hurt. Unlike BSD, it might get you a job.
That's not correct -- Apple designed the G5's chipset, including the superfast memory bus that almost equals the Opterons'.
If they did "fix" it, it would break tons of stuff, including Microsoft's own products (like ASP.NET). Bug Compatible Forever....
No, it proves the quote wrong. Windows is not a reinvention of Unix, which is exactly why a Unix-style shell isn't very useful.
Knee-jerk much? Eunuchs didn't have testicles, that was the whole joke.
That this story has entered the Unix meme is pretty pathetic.
Oh yeah, David Korn pwnd some MS marketing dweeb over some non-MS product! It was Unix's one shining moment in a time they were getting totally steamrolled by Windows. Way to take it to the man, Dr. Bell Labs Scientist!
On topic, I haven't played with Monad, but it seems like MS has finally figured out you can't just put ksh on Windows and say, "There's your shell, you hippies!" -- you need to have something that actually works with the system.