Oh and also it sounds like maybe Mozilla wants to do an eclispe plugin so you can generate your xul from eclipse...
"The slides from Brendan Eich's Mozilla Futures session are the first be available online. In the presentation, the Mozilla Foundation's Chief Architect outlined Mozilla's strengths and weaknesses and described a future strategy plan. Proposals include accelerating work on integrating SVG, implementing support for more scripting and programming languages (such as JavaScript 2, Python and Perl 5), creating a XUL builder plug-in for the Eclipse platform, improving native widget and desktop integration and setting up a new developer.mozilla.org site with programmer documentation. Collaboration with Opera and Apple to advance Web standards was also floated and several possible end-user innovations were discussed.
Hasn't Luxor done this? Or at least they claim...:" Martin Weindel hacked together an Eclipse SWT ("Standard" Widget Toolkit) Luxor prototype proving that XUL works with any GUI toolkit not just Swing. Get your two-meg Luxor SWT seeing-is-believing package today."
But in terms of choice, its was a good point. Using Linux, with KDE's KHTML Kpart integrated already, and GNOME's integration evolving, you *aren't* locked in the way you are with MS Windows. Sure, you can use mozilla, but you can't change your rendering engine. In Linux you can change your Desktop Enviornment and/or your Desktop Manager, and even within KDE/Konqueror, you can choose to use either KHTML or Gecko with which to render. No lock-in. Open standards, open sourcecode, *open-ness*.
"Vixen is designed to be a Visual XUL IDE similar to Visual Basic, Delphi, Macromedia Dreamweaver and Glade, but for the XPToolkit technology developed by the Mozilla project. The initial goal of Vixen is to allow developers to quickly develop professional quality dialogs and windows without having to write any (or at least much) XUL or CSS by hand. The long term goal is to create a comprehensive development environment for rapid development of XUL applications."
What I want is XUL and GTK-xml to merge, along with Glade and Mozilla Composer. I'd like to be able to drag and drop menus, use table wizzards, define popups and buttons, and then save it as XML, and use it to create the gui for webpages and linux apps. Seems like C, C++, and Java (at least) could be targets.
The layout for a table is just that, the layout for a table. Abstract it, and use that abstraction for *every* table (so merge with OpenOffice's XML too).
Why not go another step, since java is the OpenOffice extension language, and merge Glade/Mozilla Composer with NetBeans?
Ok, now its time to wakeup and come back to reality...the xml for XUL and GTK-xml are (pretty radically) different... but why is that? Why is the xml for a table in OpenOffice different?
Isn't it part of the KDE philosophy to reproduce everything as a KPart? That way their commercial offerings are "complete". Although you can choose to use Gecko in Konqueror (its a dropin replacement for KHTML) I doubt that KDE would have ever considered Gecko as "their" KPart.
Three IPs for the Linux kings under the sky,
Seven for IBM in their halls of stone,
Nine for SGI doomed to die,
One for the dark Darl on his dark throne
In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
One IP to rule them all, one IP to find them,
One IP to sue them all, and in the courtrooms bind them
In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
"Classpath is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License with the following clarification and special exception.
Linking this library statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on this library. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination.
As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give you permission to link this library with independent modules to produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet, for each linked independent module, the terms and conditions of the license of that module. An independent module is a module which is not derived from or based on this library. If you modify this library, you may extend this exception to your version of the library, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception statement from your version.
As such, it can be used to run, create and distribute a large class of applications and applets. When GNU Classpath is used unmodified as the core class library for a virtual machine, compiler for the java languge, or for a program written in the java programming language it does not affect the licensing for distributing those programs directly."
Less encumbered than.net, yes, but what about mono? If Java is never going to be GPLed by Sun, then I have to ask, "Who is further ahead, GNU Classpath or Mono?" I'm disinclined to move in a.net direction, but it seems that Longhorn is approaching... so maybe I should read a C# book or three this summer. Damn, and I'm just now taking a second semester of Java. Oh well.
Actually I think that has to depend on the law, doesn't it? Would you say that members of the underground railroad should have instead been returning runaway slaves? I agree the DCMA is obnoxious only to a level that legal recourses suffice. I think moving development to India is such a recourse.
Interestingly enough, when I left my USB Flash drive in and rebooted into Linux (I dualboot Linux/WinXP, as well as run WinXP via VMWare) Mandrake did the "found new hardware", and I did end up with an Icon for it. So not all Linux distributions exhibit the same behavior.
So why don't AMD and Sun get closer? Could Sun raise the cash to buy AMD? Would anyone want a 4xOpteron built by Sun? Could AMD use any of Sun's IP in regards to SPARC?
When you improve or extend GPL-ed code, don't you then own the changes you made? Wouldn't you and the orignal author then have copyright interests in your derived work?
My problem with Macs is that they are 1)less than intuitive, and 2)constantly get in my way.
It felt like "just what *we* think you need, and nothing more".
From trying to find a text editor, to the system not letting me edit an HTML file (had to be.txt or.rtf) to not letting me change the extension so that I could edit it ("changing extensions would confuse the programs designed to work with this file"). I couldn't edit a simple HTML file until I found their XTerm.
I had been seriously considering Apple for my next computer, and am glad I had the chance to gnash my teeth for a few hours first. Sorry, but thats not a system I want. Make it anymore "usable" and you might as well just ship it without a powersupply.
So then every app that needs to call glibc will have its own copy of glibc in its own app/lib? I know that diskspace is cheap these days, but I'm thinking like worse case: multiply ( sizeOf(/usr/lib) + sizeOf(/usr/local/lib) ) * number of apps in both/usr/bin and/usr/local/bin...thats BIG. Of course not everything depends of everything...but still!
And when Walmart releases GreatValue Linux (compare to Lindows!) they will make sure it is AOL compatible, too. Thats a kick in the pants idea, for sure.
Now don't you think that if these Walmart Linux boxen start selling (of any shape or variety) that at some magic number AOL will port to Linux? Its not like they'd have alot of trouble with it if there where enough (consumer-type) people.
Actually DR-DOS was ahead of the curve on features by a couple release points. PC-DOS may have been cheaper, though. The rest of your comments seem to skid right off that "interstate/backroad" metaphor and into the ditch of sullied backwaters and wishy-washy wiperblades. "Pretty much run any app..." Name something that ran on MS-DOS that didn't run on PC-DOS. Anything.
Now it could be that anyone (or their kin) who'd get "pretty pissed at the assumption that he couldn't afford the market leader" would see Linux as a backroads. But if the interstate = standards, or even if we look at the number of roads = number of platforms, it seems to me that Linux runs everywhere and the other OS is stuck in a rut.
And if I've been trolled, damn, 'cause I gave up mod points to respond! Silly me.
But if you can charge royalties for *using* the API, does it matter if its a cleanroom reverse engineering of the API? Wouldn't the royalty charges still apply?
I think the one major benefit Sun would realize is *relevance* within the Linux community. OpenOffice is fully extensible via Java. What if the Linux desktops were as well? Java *should* be our answer to.net, and probably would be, if Java were opened. Since Java won't be opened, its going to be necessary to design and implement a competing solution. Is that what Sun needs? More competition?
Looking at how Sun is doing, I'd say its their problem. (I doubt anyone really expects Sun to outlive Linux.) Now I can and have installed Sun's Java, under Win9x thru XP and various Linux distributions. I play with it using NetBeans IDE. I don't actually *use* it though. It can't be core. It really is that simple.
Not needing to register each work simply puts the burden on the "fair use" user.
Actually, no. If its fair use, there is no burdern
If they want to use my work, then I can grant them the rights to use it.
You have no authority to "grant" fair use rights. Thats like my saying that if you want to walk down the sidewalk, contact me and "I can grant you the right" to be outside in public.
Slashdot Mirror
Myself, I'm waiting for Mono's C# port of KDE.
Oh and also it sounds like maybe Mozilla wants to do an eclispe plugin so you can generate your xul from eclipse...
"The slides from Brendan Eich's Mozilla Futures session are the first be available online. In the presentation, the Mozilla Foundation's Chief Architect outlined Mozilla's strengths and weaknesses and described a future strategy plan. Proposals include accelerating work on integrating SVG, implementing support for more scripting and programming languages (such as JavaScript 2, Python and Perl 5), creating a XUL builder plug-in for the Eclipse platform, improving native widget and desktop integration and setting up a new developer.mozilla.org site with programmer documentation. Collaboration with Opera and Apple to advance Web standards was also floated and several possible end-user innovations were discussed.
Hasn't Luxor done this? Or at least they claim...:" Martin Weindel hacked together an Eclipse SWT ("Standard" Widget Toolkit) Luxor prototype proving that XUL works with any GUI toolkit not just Swing. Get your two-meg Luxor SWT seeing-is-believing package today."
There is a prototype and a beta at sourceforge.
But in terms of choice, its was a good point. Using Linux, with KDE's KHTML Kpart integrated already, and GNOME's integration evolving, you *aren't* locked in the way you are with MS Windows. Sure, you can use mozilla, but you can't change your rendering engine. In Linux you can change your Desktop Enviornment and/or your Desktop Manager, and even within KDE/Konqueror, you can choose to use either KHTML or Gecko with which to render. No lock-in. Open standards, open sourcecode, *open-ness*.
The project is called Vixen.>
"Vixen is designed to be a Visual XUL IDE similar to Visual Basic, Delphi, Macromedia Dreamweaver and Glade, but for the XPToolkit technology developed by the Mozilla project. The initial goal of Vixen is to allow developers to quickly develop professional quality dialogs and windows without having to write any (or at least much) XUL or CSS by hand. The long term goal is to create a comprehensive development environment for rapid development of XUL applications."
What I want is XUL and GTK-xml to merge, along with Glade and Mozilla Composer. I'd like to be able to drag and drop menus, use table wizzards, define popups and buttons, and then save it as XML, and use it to create the gui for webpages and linux apps. Seems like C, C++, and Java (at least) could be targets.
The layout for a table is just that, the layout for a table. Abstract it, and use that abstraction for *every* table (so merge with OpenOffice's XML too).
Why not go another step, since java is the OpenOffice extension language, and merge Glade/Mozilla Composer with NetBeans?
Ok, now its time to wakeup and come back to reality...the xml for XUL and GTK-xml are (pretty radically) different... but why is that? Why is the xml for a table in OpenOffice different?
*sigh*
Isn't it part of the KDE philosophy to reproduce everything as a KPart? That way their commercial offerings are "complete". Although you can choose to use Gecko in Konqueror (its a dropin replacement for KHTML) I doubt that KDE would have ever considered Gecko as "their" KPart.
Totally "seamless" (but not cheap) linux music tool: lionstracs
Three IPs for the Linux kings under the sky, Seven for IBM in their halls of stone, Nine for SGI doomed to die, One for the dark Darl on his dark throne In the land of Utah where the shadows lie. One IP to rule them all, one IP to find them, One IP to sue them all, and in the courtrooms bind them In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.
"Classpath is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License with the following clarification and special exception. Linking this library statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on this library. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination.
As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give you permission to link this library with independent modules to produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet, for each linked independent module, the terms and conditions of the license of that module. An independent module is a module which is not derived from or based on this library. If you modify this library, you may extend this exception to your version of the library, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception statement from your version.
As such, it can be used to run, create and distribute a large class of applications and applets. When GNU Classpath is used unmodified as the core class library for a virtual machine, compiler for the java languge, or for a program written in the java programming language it does not affect the licensing for distributing those programs directly."
Less encumbered than .net, yes, but what about mono? If Java is never going to be GPLed by Sun, then I have to ask, "Who is further ahead, GNU Classpath or Mono?" I'm disinclined to move in a .net direction, but it seems that Longhorn is approaching... so maybe I should read a C# book or three this summer. Damn, and I'm just now taking a second semester of Java. Oh well.
Actually I think that has to depend on the law, doesn't it? Would you say that members of the underground railroad should have instead been returning runaway slaves? I agree the DCMA is obnoxious only to a level that legal recourses suffice. I think moving development to India is such a recourse.
Interestingly enough, when I left my USB Flash drive in and rebooted into Linux (I dualboot Linux/WinXP, as well as run WinXP via VMWare) Mandrake did the "found new hardware", and I did end up with an Icon for it. So not all Linux distributions exhibit the same behavior.
So why don't AMD and Sun get closer? Could Sun raise the cash to buy AMD? Would anyone want a 4xOpteron built by Sun? Could AMD use any of Sun's IP in regards to SPARC?
When you improve or extend GPL-ed code, don't you then own the changes you made? Wouldn't you and the orignal author then have copyright interests in your derived work?
My problem with Macs is that they are 1)less than intuitive, and 2)constantly get in my way.
.txt or .rtf) to not letting me change the extension so that I could edit it ("changing extensions would confuse the programs designed to work with this file"). I couldn't edit a simple HTML file until I found their XTerm.
It felt like "just what *we* think you need, and nothing more".
From trying to find a text editor, to the system not letting me edit an HTML file (had to be
I had been seriously considering Apple for my next computer, and am glad I had the chance to gnash my teeth for a few hours first. Sorry, but thats not a system I want. Make it anymore "usable" and you might as well just ship it without a powersupply.
So then every app that needs to call glibc will have its own copy of glibc in its own app/lib? I know that diskspace is cheap these days, but I'm thinking like worse case: multiply ( sizeOf(/usr/lib) + sizeOf(/usr/local/lib) ) * number of apps in both /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin...thats BIG. Of course not everything depends of everything...but still!
And when Walmart releases GreatValue Linux (compare to Lindows!) they will make sure it is AOL compatible, too. Thats a kick in the pants idea, for sure.
Now don't you think that if these Walmart Linux boxen start selling (of any shape or variety) that at some magic number AOL will port to Linux? Its not like they'd have alot of trouble with it if there where enough (consumer-type) people.
Actually DR-DOS was ahead of the curve on features by a couple release points. PC-DOS may have been cheaper, though. The rest of your comments seem to skid right off that "interstate/backroad" metaphor and into the ditch of sullied backwaters and wishy-washy wiperblades. "Pretty much run any app..." Name something that ran on MS-DOS that didn't run on PC-DOS. Anything.
Now it could be that anyone (or their kin) who'd get "pretty pissed at the assumption that he couldn't afford the market leader" would see Linux as a backroads. But if the interstate = standards, or even if we look at the number of roads = number of platforms, it seems to me that Linux runs everywhere and the other OS is stuck in a rut.
And if I've been trolled, damn, 'cause I gave up mod points to respond! Silly me.
ahhh...how about decremeting the most sig. digit? Methinks I so strongly expected it to be in the 90% range...Thanks for correcting me :-)
But if you can charge royalties for *using* the API, does it matter if its a cleanroom reverse engineering of the API? Wouldn't the royalty charges still apply?
But since its IE5 or greater, you sum (IE5 = 11%) + (IE6=72%) = 93% of the browser population effected.
I think the one major benefit Sun would realize is *relevance* within the Linux community. OpenOffice is fully extensible via Java. What if the Linux desktops were as well? Java *should* be our answer to .net, and probably would be, if Java were opened. Since Java won't be opened, its going to be necessary to design and implement a competing solution. Is that what Sun needs? More competition?
Looking at how Sun is doing, I'd say its their problem. (I doubt anyone really expects Sun to outlive Linux.) Now I can and have installed Sun's Java, under Win9x thru XP and various Linux distributions. I play with it using NetBeans IDE. I don't actually *use* it though. It can't be core. It really is that simple.
Not needing to register each work simply puts the burden on the "fair use" user.
Actually, no. If its fair use, there is no burdern
If they want to use my work, then I can grant them the rights to use it.
You have no authority to "grant" fair use rights. Thats like my saying that if you want to walk down the sidewalk, contact me and "I can grant you the right" to be outside in public.