I thought they used a sand box to lower the structure into position. I saw it on TLC after all.;-)
Actually it was on NOVA. While I think the kite idea is a fun and interesting idea, it really is a stretch to think kites were a likely or very reasonable solution. People powered the egyptian golden age and the only solutions proper;y using the available mass of people are the sand pit or wench theories.
I don't know of anybody who uses any java application on a regular basis. In fact, most of them run their browser with Java turned off. Applications requiring Java on the client side should be able to include the latest JRE on the CD.
Now, if Sun would package up an install of Java without AWT or Swing and I'd be very happy.
If they really want to play with GUI applications they should take a look at the native compilation method used by TAOS and.NET, it beats JIT
The Sega Nomad was even better. It played Genesis carts and included a backlit LCD. The only downside is it takes 8 AA batteries and can eat through those in a day or two. They also released a TV tuner for it, but I was never able to actually get one of those.
It's about impossible for a small independent developer to even get a response to an Dev Kit request for a new console, much less afford the 4K-12K price tag that goes along with it. I've tried again and again, and even the Nuon people wouldn't respond.
"Open Source 2d game..." "Nintendo is stifling the market..." What are you talking about? I was going to point you to some tools that would allow you to develop for the thing and even test on real hardware, but it sounds like you are whoring open source for karma. If you want to be a zeolot be one, but don't bitch because your politics don't interact well with Nintendo of America's policies.
Of all the consoles that exist, the GameBoy line is the easiest for a small shop to actually develop and ship a cartridge to retail.
The hardware is *exactly* the same whether you imported it or waited around until the US release.
Also, the ommission of a backlight on the LCD is terrible. Good luck finding an indoor situation where it looks good. You need alot of ambiant light and you should not have it come from a single source, such as a halogen light or you'll also need to deal with glare problems.
I say linking, you say derivitive work
on
GPL FAQ
·
· Score: 3
So the distinction comes down to which process the GPL'd componant is run. This distinction isn't a grand as it once was... in fact it's a throw-away architectural issue in many cases. It would be very easy to argue that such a distinction is moot [COM+/shared memory]. The key distinction becoming the separation of the code into distinct files.
I'd bet against the FSF on this issue if it actually gets to court.
And, I'll bet the judge's head will explode when the experts put up block memory diagrams to 'illustrate' the differences.
but RMS has decided that dynamic linking in a DLL is not OK, but dynamic linking to non-GPL OS functions [at load time] is OK
That will be it's undoing. As soon as you get arbitrary, a good lawyer has a lot of room to manuver.
It will boil down to the fact that the GPL'd code is not in the same file. It's the only distincion that both techies and lay people both will find clear. The pipes/RPC/SOAP arguments you made will be thrown at whatever experts the FSF uses.
If dynamic linking requires the release of source code, then Linux is done with regards to commercial development. The C runtime is used by alot of commercial apps that are not open source. In fact, taken further, the use of basic system services such as sockets or files could be considered GPL violations.
I think Vidomi's in the clear on this one. They have open sourced the DLL and construing dynamic linking as inclusion is ignoring the last decade of software development.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought they used a sand box to lower the structure into position. I saw it on TLC after all. ;-)
Actually it was on NOVA. While I think the kite idea is a fun and interesting idea, it really is a stretch to think kites were a likely or very reasonable solution. People powered the egyptian golden age and the only solutions proper;y using the available mass of people are the sand pit or wench theories.
I don't know of anybody who uses any java application on a regular basis. In fact, most of them run their browser with Java turned off. Applications requiring Java on the client side should be able to include the latest JRE on the CD. Now, if Sun would package up an install of Java without AWT or Swing and I'd be very happy. If they really want to play with GUI applications they should take a look at the native compilation method used by TAOS and .NET, it beats JIT
Not true. Tax and other public moneys paid for my grad school plus a nice stipend that covered by books and apartment. Thanks!
The Sega Nomad was even better. It played Genesis carts and included a backlit LCD. The only downside is it takes 8 AA batteries and can eat through those in a day or two. They also released a TV tuner for it, but I was never able to actually get one of those.
It's about impossible for a small independent developer to even get a response to an Dev Kit request for a new console, much less afford the 4K-12K price tag that goes along with it. I've tried again and again, and even the Nuon people wouldn't respond.
"Open Source 2d game..." "Nintendo is stifling the market..."
What are you talking about? I was going to point you to some tools that would allow you to develop for the thing and even test on real hardware, but it sounds like you are whoring open source for karma. If you want to be a zeolot be one, but don't bitch because your politics don't interact well with Nintendo of America's policies.
Of all the consoles that exist, the GameBoy line is the easiest for a small shop to actually develop and ship a cartridge to retail.
The hardware is *exactly* the same whether you imported it or waited around until the US release.
Also, the ommission of a backlight on the LCD is terrible. Good luck finding an indoor situation where it looks good. You need alot of ambiant light and you should not have it come from a single source, such as a halogen light or you'll also need to deal with glare problems.
So the distinction comes down to which process the GPL'd componant is run. This distinction isn't a grand as it once was... in fact it's a throw-away architectural issue in many cases. It would be very easy to argue that such a distinction is moot [COM+/shared memory]. The key distinction becoming the separation of the code into distinct files.
I'd bet against the FSF on this issue if it actually gets to court.
And, I'll bet the judge's head will explode when the experts put up block memory diagrams to 'illustrate' the differences.
but RMS has decided that dynamic linking in a DLL is not OK, but dynamic linking to non-GPL OS functions [at load time] is OK
That will be it's undoing. As soon as you get arbitrary, a good lawyer has a lot of room to manuver.
It will boil down to the fact that the GPL'd code is not in the same file. It's the only distincion that both techies and lay people both will find clear. The pipes/RPC/SOAP arguments you made will be thrown at whatever experts the FSF uses.
If dynamic linking requires the release of source code, then Linux is done with regards to commercial development. The C runtime is used by alot of commercial apps that are not open source. In fact, taken further, the use of basic system services such as sockets or files could be considered GPL violations.
I think Vidomi's in the clear on this one. They have open sourced the DLL and construing dynamic linking as inclusion is ignoring the last decade of software development.
What proofreaders?
Of course, if the stories were open source we wouldn't have these problems 'cause someone would see the problem, fix it and issue a patch. bletch