The window manager could create a new workspace "on the fly."
As far as they key bindings go, it would be nice if window managers could be the first to receive keypress events. WMs should always be the first to get them because end user applications should work within the window manager, not the other way around.
I gotcha...so what you really need is an option to run an application in it's own workspace. You could add a wm hint for it, or you could have, say, gnome-panel store the information in the menu system. Since pure xlib is workspace-agnostic (iirc workspaces are an invention of the wm code itself), I think the latter would make more sense. Of course, there could already be hints relating to workspaces...I'm not much of an xlib programmer, so I don't really know.
There is no need for a standard way of doing it. The xrandr extension allows the possibility of resolution and depth changing on-the-fly. All window managers need to do is write their own code to bind Alt-Enter with changing the resolution to match (as closely as possible) the size of the active window.
Ummm...quite a bit. If all you use are cli apps, then X isn't even useful. Try fb.
If I'm going to use X, I'm going to want a desktop environment (Gnome or KDE), a graphical e-mail client, web browser, text editor, office software, etc.
I don't understand people that use X like a high-resolution vc. What's the point of it again?
It is known that corporate funded proprietary software is almost always better than non corporate funded software.
Not so. Look at Windows ten years after it's inception, and Linux now. Open source development is a process that works, given time. Free sofware has no development model attached to it, but the simple ability for end users to test and submit bug reports often negates any monetary incentives proprietary software provides in terms of progress.
A good example would be games.>/i>
Games are outside the scope of mere software development. These days, they're developed more by "Hollywood" than "Silicon Valley." Can the open source development model work for artwork, music, cinematics, etc.? Possibly, but there hasn't yet been a proper project to test this. Furthermore, there aren't many OSS-inspired artists like there are OSS-inspired developers.
Most programmers (including me) do not want to work for free. I want to be paid to program something because there is no way in hell that I'm going to be a cashier for a living.
That has nothing to do with whether or not proprietary software will fail.
But, not everyone who gives to charity is doing so out of genuine caring. Just look at the facts, and draw your own conclusion. I don't think you're wrong in thinking that Bill Gates' motives are more or less altruistic; I'm merely positing that labeling an article that disagrees with your viewpoint as cooky tinfoil hat nonsense justbecause of the site it's posted on is unfair.
What defines a conspiracy theory? The article the parent links to contains facts, and while there is some speculation, labeling something a "conspiracy theory" in order to summarily dismiss it only makes the theory look "correct." At least in my book.
People are free to speculate when they're basing their conclusions on relatively sound facts and logic. There are disinformation agents out there. For example, I saw one site claiming that because we have the technology to take pictures from space at high detail, the recent fires in California could have been prevented. There was no mention of the difficulty of monitoring every acre of forest from space, and the article went on to suggest that because the fires were preventable, they were a satanic ritual "welcoming" Arnold into office.
Think with your head. It is safe to dismiss the Arnold-Satan-fire article as being proposterous, but I challenge you to find any flaw in the GNN article worthy of being patently dismissed as "conspiracy theory" garbage. If anything it is just overly cynical.
Re:Branding, PHP, ASP not quite, tsarkon reports..
on
The Riches of Open Source
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
How arrogant. I'll entertain your kneejerk reactions.
1) Well, it seemed like you were saying "why would anyone pay for this?" I was simply saying that you don't have to (you do miss out on copy protection code). 2) I don't feel the need to explain why the Windows 95 line of operating systems sucks. Even most Windows apologists I know agree on this. I really don't care if you think I haven't "proven" anything. I'm not here to argue the technical flaws of Windows 98 (of which there are many). Anyways, if someone thinks Windows 98 is "cool," then they aren't buying winex anyways, now are they? You're asking why people who have switched over to Linux from Windows don't just buy Windows to play games, and I'm saying you're the one with the poorly-thought out points. 3) Inefficient? To say that my system is inefficient without knowing what I use my system for (primarily) is ridiculous. Besides, I believe that Quake 3 supports SMP. 4) Ad hominem. The sign of a poorly thought out response. Whether I'm selfish or not, no one has to pay 60$ to use WineX, so when you say that a copy of Windows 98 will be cheaper, you are basing your price assertion on a flawed view of what WineX actually costs. Hell, a 5 year subscription of WineX costs 300$....does that mean it costs 300$ to play Windows games in Linux? 5) Charging 5$ a month for a subscription that grants the user access to their binaries is their business plan. Even if they're not in it to make money, you're still mincing words.
What if we all have to move to BSD before the party gets over? That would be a shame (especially for those whove dedicated tons of time and effort to the Linux kernel).
Nobody has quit with the trite Hitler references, either. I would say that Godwin's law still has a place, even if invoking it doesn't make me laugh by itself.
1) You can use cvs to build winex for free (I have).
2) Windows 98 sucks. Something fierce.
3) Windows 98 doesn't fully support my hardware (think dual processors)
4) You can buy a months subscription and discontinue it if the games you want to play already work and you don't feel like building cvs.
5) Precisely what's wrong with this business plan again?
Could you explain more? I was under the impression that the broken windows "fallacy" was that if you, for example, clean up graffiti in a bad neighborhood, you'll prevent more violent crimes. I was also under the impression that this worked.
Look, if you're going to put someone against the EU, then put North America against them. I bet EU would still have more computers, but that's beside the point. It would be a lot closer than one might think.
You're very right in that Microsoft has to look at markets outside the US as much as it looks at the US itself.
Dude. I'm a Linux user and advocate. I'm sorry you wasted your time preaching to the choir.
The point of my post was that the grandparent asserted that the actions taken by whatever company is releasing Best Buy's pricing strategies are hurting Best Buy's business, and by saying "Linux hurts businesses too," I was challenging that viewpoint. Kind of like "Linux hurts businesses...does that mean Linux should be shut down or something?"
Slashdot Mirror
As far as they key bindings go, it would be nice if window managers could be the first to receive keypress events. WMs should always be the first to get them because end user applications should work within the window manager, not the other way around.
I gotcha...so what you really need is an option to run an application in it's own workspace. You could add a wm hint for it, or you could have, say, gnome-panel store the information in the menu system. Since pure xlib is workspace-agnostic (iirc workspaces are an invention of the wm code itself), I think the latter would make more sense. Of course, there could already be hints relating to workspaces...I'm not much of an xlib programmer, so I don't really know.
There is no need for a standard way of doing it. The xrandr extension allows the possibility of resolution and depth changing on-the-fly. All window managers need to do is write their own code to bind Alt-Enter with changing the resolution to match (as closely as possible) the size of the active window.
If I'm going to use X, I'm going to want a desktop environment (Gnome or KDE), a graphical e-mail client, web browser, text editor, office software, etc.
I don't understand people that use X like a high-resolution vc. What's the point of it again?
Guess it wasn't the Sound of Silence that did it this time, eh?
Whether it will fail or not is pure speculation.
It is known that corporate funded proprietary software is almost always better than non corporate funded software.
Not so. Look at Windows ten years after it's inception, and Linux now. Open source development is a process that works, given time. Free sofware has no development model attached to it, but the simple ability for end users to test and submit bug reports often negates any monetary incentives proprietary software provides in terms of progress.
A good example would be games.>/i>
Games are outside the scope of mere software development. These days, they're developed more by "Hollywood" than "Silicon Valley." Can the open source development model work for artwork, music, cinematics, etc.? Possibly, but there hasn't yet been a proper project to test this. Furthermore, there aren't many OSS-inspired artists like there are OSS-inspired developers.
Most programmers (including me) do not want to work for free. I want to be paid to program something because there is no way in hell that I'm going to be a cashier for a living.
That has nothing to do with whether or not proprietary software will fail.
If RedHat gave you trouble, it's because no one was qualified enough to admin the boxes.
There may be a definition of free market in copyright law, but it is the way the market behaves that dictates whether or not it is "free."
But, not everyone who gives to charity is doing so out of genuine caring. Just look at the facts, and draw your own conclusion. I don't think you're wrong in thinking that Bill Gates' motives are more or less altruistic; I'm merely positing that labeling an article that disagrees with your viewpoint as cooky tinfoil hat nonsense justbecause of the site it's posted on is unfair.
Not from a strict logic standpoint, but it does make sense.
It's clearly wrong too. The idea that Bill Gates doesn't have people approach him at social functions is laughably stupid.
Think Microsoft is an evil mega-corp? Don't use their software. That is, of course, why I vote libertarian.
People are free to speculate when they're basing their conclusions on relatively sound facts and logic. There are disinformation agents out there. For example, I saw one site claiming that because we have the technology to take pictures from space at high detail, the recent fires in California could have been prevented. There was no mention of the difficulty of monitoring every acre of forest from space, and the article went on to suggest that because the fires were preventable, they were a satanic ritual "welcoming" Arnold into office.
Think with your head. It is safe to dismiss the Arnold-Satan-fire article as being proposterous, but I challenge you to find any flaw in the GNN article worthy of being patently dismissed as "conspiracy theory" garbage. If anything it is just overly cynical.
And I am not afraid to stand by my words.
How arrogant. I'll entertain your kneejerk reactions.
1) Well, it seemed like you were saying "why would anyone pay for this?" I was simply saying that you don't have to (you do miss out on copy protection code).
2) I don't feel the need to explain why the Windows 95 line of operating systems sucks. Even most Windows apologists I know agree on this. I really don't care if you think I haven't "proven" anything. I'm not here to argue the technical flaws of Windows 98 (of which there are many). Anyways, if someone thinks Windows 98 is "cool," then they aren't buying winex anyways, now are they? You're asking why people who have switched over to Linux from Windows don't just buy Windows to play games, and I'm saying you're the one with the poorly-thought out points.
3) Inefficient? To say that my system is inefficient without knowing what I use my system for (primarily) is ridiculous. Besides, I believe that Quake 3 supports SMP.
4) Ad hominem. The sign of a poorly thought out response. Whether I'm selfish or not, no one has to pay 60$ to use WineX, so when you say that a copy of Windows 98 will be cheaper, you are basing your price assertion on a flawed view of what WineX actually costs. Hell, a 5 year subscription of WineX costs 300$....does that mean it costs 300$ to play Windows games in Linux?
5) Charging 5$ a month for a subscription that grants the user access to their binaries is their business plan. Even if they're not in it to make money, you're still mincing words.
It is not an established fact that Microsoft is funding SCO, just a popular opinion around here.
What if we all have to move to BSD before the party gets over? That would be a shame (especially for those whove dedicated tons of time and effort to the Linux kernel).
Nobody has quit with the trite Hitler references, either. I would say that Godwin's law still has a place, even if invoking it doesn't make me laugh by itself.
For example, some of the causes of death are listed as "car bomb." Exactly which politician murdered these people?
1) You can use cvs to build winex for free (I have).
2) Windows 98 sucks. Something fierce.
3) Windows 98 doesn't fully support my hardware (think dual processors)
4) You can buy a months subscription and discontinue it if the games you want to play already work and you don't feel like building cvs. 5) Precisely what's wrong with this business plan again?
They do so in order to comply with Wine's licensing. I doubt they took it down.
Heh...Windows 2000 competes with SCO products.
Could you please enlighten me here?
You're very right in that Microsoft has to look at markets outside the US as much as it looks at the US itself.
The point of my post was that the grandparent asserted that the actions taken by whatever company is releasing Best Buy's pricing strategies are hurting Best Buy's business, and by saying "Linux hurts businesses too," I was challenging that viewpoint. Kind of like "Linux hurts businesses...does that mean Linux should be shut down or something?"