What Sakai needs is a UI expert or even just a user as a UI advisor. That project has the absolute worst interface ever. They switched to a version of it at U of Michigan from an in-house product that had a MUCH better interface, and everybody hates it. I even suggested some UI changes at a meeting of theirs (U of M is big in the development of it so they were having a meeting there) and the response I got was essentially "yeah a lot of people have complained about that but that's the way we think it should be so we're not going to change it"
While we're at it...a string, a bareword, and another string without anything to join them? I'm not aware of any language that would be able to parse that (including human languages).:-)
That's a common misconception about the GPL. It simply requires that you provide source to people that you distribute the binary to. They of course are then free to distribute that source (or binaries compiled from it along with source) to whoever they want. In fact, the fact that you can download most distributions from their sites is simply a courtesy (or maybe marketing) on their part.
I wish it was like that here at U of Mich. Professors really seem to like.doc here. CS professors are a little better about that in general, but not all of them.
From what I understand, google's thing was using purely statistics (i.e. a matches with b all the time in translations so when you see a, translate it to b), while this one actually "understands" the underlying grammer.
That doesn't mean that they have to charge non profits. Let's take a look at the pricing structure in terms of revenue (post continued below after the chart):
Non-Profit Tier
Annual Fee = US$200 Fee = undef %
For Profit/Other Tier 1
[This is a "grandfather clause" for written sublicenses executed prior to August 1, 2004]
Annual Fee = $0 Fee = 0% (?)
For Profit/Other Tier 2
[Total projected annual gross revenue between zero and US $100,000] Annual Fee = US $200 Using average for the bracket of $50,000, fee = 0.4%
For Profit/Other Tier 3
[Total projected annual gross revenue between US $100,000 and US$200,000] Annual Fee = US $500 Using average of $150,000, fee = 0.33%
For Profit/Other Tier 4
[Total projected annual gross revenue between US $200,000 and US $1 million] Annual Fee = US $1000 Using average of $600,000, fee = 0.17%
For Profit/Other Tier 5
[Total projected annual gross revenue over US $1 million] Annual Fee = US $5000 Can't calculate this one, but you get the idea
Now, instead of charging say (for the sake of argument) 100 nonprofits $200 each, why not charge 5 multi-million dollar companies an additional $4000 a year? Who do you think would suffer more?
My point is that it is very clearly against the open source spirit to charge users who are making no profit off of their use, while it is somewhat less questionable (though admittedly it still is against the spirit, but less so) to charge those making millions.
I don't think he was refering to fair use in a legal sense, but rather a moral sense. In other words, that the trademark should only be enforced when it's being used to refer to something incorrectly.
I'm in the US... The motherboard that I personally had was the one that comes with the Asus Pundit. My friend, however, also had a couple Asus boards go bad on him (some came that way). I don't know the model of those offhand (I can find that if you really care)
But the point is that you are giving Lindows the information they need to file the form before they tell you the details of their "Instant Settlement" program.
Did anybody actually look at the results before believing the GP post? As much as I may dislike unsubstantiated MS-bashing, in this case it is partially substantiated. The MSN India results (linuxsucks.com and a dead link) are NOT featured sites. On the other hand, it is true that tehres about 3 pages of featured sites and sponsored sited beforer the actual results.
I had a floppy disk sitting in the "pencil pocket" of my backpack for a year without the metal slide cover, and it still worked perfectly even with the pencil lead coverign the rest of the disk. That's why it always confused me how so many people managed to have bad floppy disks for us to recover at school.:)
SCO is not only claiming that the GPL can't be applied to their code, they are also claiming through some twisted logic that the GPL is completely invalid in all cases.
I know this is kind of the wrong place to post for this, but I get inverted colors in winamp when using ffdshow with DivX files (WMP is fine). With the official DivX codec I don't get that problem. Any ideas?
The point that SCO is generally bashed for is not necessarily whether or not their claims are false. The problem is that SCO refuses to make clear what those claims are, and at the same time is spreading FUD before their claims are proven, or even revealed.
Do you mean your definition of polish? Polish is a generic term. He could be talking about graphical polish, polish in hardware detection (as he mentions below), or many other things.
Perhaps he is unqualified to judge operating systems for your purposes, but he is perfectly qualified to judge operating systems for his own purposes. I must say that I personally don't like RedHat (the distro), but it is illogical to say that because someone has different preferences for a distro than yours, that person becomes unqualified to judge operating systems.
The reason for the "not intended for individual resale" (more often "not labeled for individual resale") is because the nutrition info isn't printed on the individual units. AFAIK (i may be wrong) the companies have to put that on all the units they sell, thus when they sell a pack they just label the packaging and say the individual units aren't intended for resale.
Slashdot Mirror
So then what exactly gives you the right to use the copyrighted software? (not meant to be a flame, it's an honest question)
What Sakai needs is a UI expert or even just a user as a UI advisor. That project has the absolute worst interface ever. They switched to a version of it at U of Michigan from an in-house product that had a MUCH better interface, and everybody hates it. I even suggested some UI changes at a meeting of theirs (U of M is big in the development of it so they were having a meeting there) and the response I got was essentially "yeah a lot of people have complained about that but that's the way we think it should be so we're not going to change it"
While we're at it...a string, a bareword, and another string without anything to join them? I'm not aware of any language that would be able to parse that (including human languages). :-)
That's a common misconception about the GPL. It simply requires that you provide source to people that you distribute the binary to. They of course are then free to distribute that source (or binaries compiled from it along with source) to whoever they want. In fact, the fact that you can download most distributions from their sites is simply a courtesy (or maybe marketing) on their part.
I wish it was like that here at U of Mich. Professors really seem to like .doc here. CS professors are a little better about that in general, but not all of them.
From what I understand, google's thing was using purely statistics (i.e. a matches with b all the time in translations so when you see a, translate it to b), while this one actually "understands" the underlying grammer.
Non-Profit Tier
Annual Fee = US$200
Fee = undef %
For Profit/Other Tier 1
[This is a "grandfather clause" for written sublicenses executed prior to August 1, 2004]
Annual Fee = $0
Fee = 0% (?)
For Profit/Other Tier 2
[Total projected annual gross revenue between zero and US $100,000]
Annual Fee = US $200
Using average for the bracket of $50,000, fee = 0.4%
For Profit/Other Tier 3
[Total projected annual gross revenue between US $100,000 and US$200,000]
Annual Fee = US $500
Using average of $150,000, fee = 0.33%
For Profit/Other Tier 4
[Total projected annual gross revenue between US $200,000 and US $1 million]
Annual Fee = US $1000
Using average of $600,000, fee = 0.17%
For Profit/Other Tier 5
[Total projected annual gross revenue over US $1 million]
Annual Fee = US $5000
Can't calculate this one, but you get the idea
Now, instead of charging say (for the sake of argument) 100 nonprofits $200 each, why not charge 5 multi-million dollar companies an additional $4000 a year? Who do you think would suffer more?
My point is that it is very clearly against the open source spirit to charge users who are making no profit off of their use, while it is somewhat less questionable (though admittedly it still is against the spirit, but less so) to charge those making millions.
That doesn't mean that you need to charge non-profits $200 a year though. A $1 fee or maybe even a cost-free license would suffice
I don't think he was refering to fair use in a legal sense, but rather a moral sense. In other words, that the trademark should only be enforced when it's being used to refer to something incorrectly.
I record my MythTV shows at around 230 MB/hr, and while I admit the quality isn't that great, I still consider it quite watchable.
I'm in the US... The motherboard that I personally had was the one that comes with the Asus Pundit. My friend, however, also had a couple Asus boards go bad on him (some came that way). I don't know the model of those offhand (I can find that if you really care)
I'm logging in for the first time in a long time just to post this...
I've had nothing but trouble with ASUS boards. On the other hand, both Gigabyte and DFI have been great for me.
I always thought March 14 was pi day because it's 3-14 ... didn't realize it was a brthday celebration.
But the point is that you are giving Lindows the information they need to file the form before they tell you the details of their "Instant Settlement" program.
Resumes for government jobs require SSN (at least in my experience).
Um where exactly in that comment does it specifically single out either site?
Did anybody actually look at the results before believing the GP post? As much as I may dislike unsubstantiated MS-bashing, in this case it is partially substantiated. The MSN India results (linuxsucks.com and a dead link) are NOT featured sites. On the other hand, it is true that tehres about 3 pages of featured sites and sponsored sited beforer the actual results.
I had a floppy disk sitting in the "pencil pocket" of my backpack for a year without the metal slide cover, and it still worked perfectly even with the pencil lead coverign the rest of the disk. That's why it always confused me how so many people managed to have bad floppy disks for us to recover at school. :)
SCO is not only claiming that the GPL can't be applied to their code, they are also claiming through some twisted logic that the GPL is completely invalid in all cases.
I know this is kind of the wrong place to post for this, but I get inverted colors in winamp when using ffdshow with DivX files (WMP is fine). With the official DivX codec I don't get that problem. Any ideas?
What's your point? Just because it doesn't say legal tender on it doesn't mean it isn't legal tender.
The point that SCO is generally bashed for is not necessarily whether or not their claims are false. The problem is that SCO refuses to make clear what those claims are, and at the same time is spreading FUD before their claims are proven, or even revealed.
Do you mean your definition of polish? Polish is a generic term. He could be talking about graphical polish, polish in hardware detection (as he mentions below), or many other things.
Perhaps he is unqualified to judge operating systems for your purposes, but he is perfectly qualified to judge operating systems for his own purposes. I must say that I personally don't like RedHat (the distro), but it is illogical to say that because someone has different preferences for a distro than yours, that person becomes unqualified to judge operating systems.
The reason for the "not intended for individual resale" (more often "not labeled for individual resale") is because the nutrition info isn't printed on the individual units. AFAIK (i may be wrong) the companies have to put that on all the units they sell, thus when they sell a pack they just label the packaging and say the individual units aren't intended for resale.