You should be ashamed of yourself. This is a discussion about various versions of Windows, not Linux. In fact, there's been only one reference to Linux, and it was just a sidenote.
Microsoft tries this now with software downloads on their website. It's not terribly effective.
Re:Do they or do they not have the source legally?
on
Zeta Goes Gold
·
· Score: 1
Get off your high horse, mate.
I believe that telling people who make works based on your code isn't really free just as you do, which is why all my code is released into the public domain, but seriously.
GPL style open source is just aggressively Free, to the point where steps are taken to ensure that it doesn't stop being Free. If you close the source to something I've written, you copyright it, and you sell it, that code is no longer very free, is it?
Different ideas on which freedoms matter, that's all. As I said, get off your high horse.
Saying that their definite statement about the legality of the project is of questionable merit is a world different than saying that they've made no definite statement.
For one thing, the latter is provably false. How is it not trolling, given that fact?
I thought the same thing -- in fact, it was one of the first things I thought of when I heard about this. Then I thought of something else -- do they have to let us know of every single stray thought, idea, and theory that runs through their minds?
Get something substantial before shooting your mouth off!:P
I think apple realizes how futile something like that would be. Software Crackers are a slippery bunch -- something so simple as a hardware-embedded serial number would be circumvented so fast it would make your head spin.
Right, because every person who has ever graduated college to run out and work their way to six figures has done so by being a submissive little bitch.:P
I was about to blast the arguements to bits because it's based on a logical fallacy: Most people aren't Bill Gates, nor do they know Bill Gates. That blows the whole arguement out of the water.:)
Have you ever tried making use of professionally written manuals included with professionally developed products? How about the "manual" which comes with Windows? They do the exact same thing, because you'd need an encyclopedia the size of a buick to hold the body of knowlege required to properly troubleshoot A B C and D beyond a simple "is the power on?".
Writing good documentation for a system as complex as a program running within an operating system is hard -- damned hard, even at the best of times. There are more variables to account for in a single simple subtask than in entire systems elsewhere(and how long could you go on about a simple pocket knife? Probably long enough to fill a large book!). The fact that some people keep demanding some sort of divine bible which can dispense sage knowlege in all situations only raises the bar beyond where anything but a full time team working for hundreds of man-hours could possibly develop.
Frankly, I'm happy with a simple manual that lists the functions in a program, what they're supposed to do, and where to get help if you need to do anything more complicated.
The long standing myth that driver support in Linux is vastly inferior to anything else *IS* FUD. Someone repeating it on their own doesn't make it less so.
Sometimes stuff doesn't work. It happens. Windows 9x would completely croak on my old system, a beautiful nforce driven Athlon XP 1800+ with a Geforce 4 MX 460. Linux ran fine(Better than fine -- it was a damn good system for the time and the money). Does this suddenly mean that Windows has crap support for hardware?
To be fair, a Dell Dimension 2400 installs and runs Linux without any snags. I was using Debian, and even the 3d video was supported out of the box. Even my old Toshiba Satellite 1400 ran fine except that there was no 3d video because Trident refused to open the specs to the DRI project(at the time -- there's apparantly a project in the works now.)
If you use a standard piece of hardware like that, you generally don't have any problems. If you don't use standard hardware, even Windows will give you a hard time.
To be fair, that list doesn't exactly list 253 browesrs. I think I'm going to hang on to my mplayer, rather than bitch that someone made it and didn't make aRts.
You have a point. There have been a few times where I've wanted to run KDE under win32 because it really is a nicer WM, web browser, and file manager than explorer.
Yes, I'm trapped on win32. I use OSS regardless. The two needn't be hypocrisy.:P
Seems to me that when OSX comes to x86, he's going to end up in resonance. He'll move to OSX and find out the hardware support is shit, so he'll move to Linux, where he'll find out the hardware support is shit, then he'll move back to OSX again.
He'll move back and forth until someone hits him with a two-by-four, saying "Dude, if it's THAT big a problem, just use OSS on win32!"
Personally, I don't see a problem with sound if you're using aRtS. It even has a compatibility layer so apps which use the standard interface can use it instead.
Your inability to understand parallelism has no relevance to the argument presented.
I like windows because I can install nearly any application with only one click. AND I appreciate the seamless integration between applications which comes from a monolithic developer AND mplayer paired with video-lan seems to be the happiest under windows.
However, video-lan and mplayer have nothing to do with installing an application in one click. Funny, that.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, snuck that pot-shot at linux right in there.
You should be ashamed of yourself. This is a discussion about various versions of Windows, not Linux. In fact, there's been only one reference to Linux, and it was just a sidenote.
And Xenix sucks.(see? I can do it too!)
Microsoft tries this now with software downloads on their website. It's not terribly effective.
Get off your high horse, mate.
I believe that telling people who make works based on your code isn't really free just as you do, which is why all my code is released into the public domain, but seriously.
GPL style open source is just aggressively Free, to the point where steps are taken to ensure that it doesn't stop being Free. If you close the source to something I've written, you copyright it, and you sell it, that code is no longer very free, is it?
Different ideas on which freedoms matter, that's all. As I said, get off your high horse.
Saying that their definite statement about the legality of the project is of questionable merit is a world different than saying that they've made no definite statement.
For one thing, the latter is provably false. How is it not trolling, given that fact?
Many people will steal a 200 dollar piece of software before ever downloading a free one.
It's all about percieved value.
I thought the same thing -- in fact, it was one of the first things I thought of when I heard about this. Then I thought of something else -- do they have to let us know of every single stray thought, idea, and theory that runs through their minds?
:P
Get something substantial before shooting your mouth off!
I think apple realizes how futile something like that would be. Software Crackers are a slippery bunch -- something so simple as a hardware-embedded serial number would be circumvented so fast it would make your head spin.
Right, because every person who has ever graduated college to run out and work their way to six figures has done so by being a submissive little bitch. :P
Sure, you can learn almost anything in a book, but can you meet a business student soon to command a VC funding agency?
The question I'm asking is, Would you WANT to?
There are far more fun roads to bankruptcy than starting your own business right out of college.
U of Waterloo has some renoun for it's CompSci programs, if I recall.
I find a slashdotting rather humorous.
So the only way to be successful in KFG-world is to be at the top?
Lonely place, that KFG world.
If you're that weak, it wasn't meant to be.
(/me went to college three years after high school. You'd be suprised how motivating a shit job at minimum wage is.)
Thanks for pointing that out.
:)
I was about to blast the arguements to bits because it's based on a logical fallacy: Most people aren't Bill Gates, nor do they know Bill Gates. That blows the whole arguement out of the water.
Have you ever tried making use of professionally written manuals included with professionally developed products? How about the "manual" which comes with Windows? They do the exact same thing, because you'd need an encyclopedia the size of a buick to hold the body of knowlege required to properly troubleshoot A B C and D beyond a simple "is the power on?".
Writing good documentation for a system as complex as a program running within an operating system is hard -- damned hard, even at the best of times. There are more variables to account for in a single simple subtask than in entire systems elsewhere(and how long could you go on about a simple pocket knife? Probably long enough to fill a large book!). The fact that some people keep demanding some sort of divine bible which can dispense sage knowlege in all situations only raises the bar beyond where anything but a full time team working for hundreds of man-hours could possibly develop.
Frankly, I'm happy with a simple manual that lists the functions in a program, what they're supposed to do, and where to get help if you need to do anything more complicated.
The long standing myth that driver support in Linux is vastly inferior to anything else *IS* FUD. Someone repeating it on their own doesn't make it less so.
Sometimes stuff doesn't work. It happens. Windows 9x would completely croak on my old system, a beautiful nforce driven Athlon XP 1800+ with a Geforce 4 MX 460. Linux ran fine(Better than fine -- it was a damn good system for the time and the money). Does this suddenly mean that Windows has crap support for hardware?
To be fair, a Dell Dimension 2400 installs and runs Linux without any snags. I was using Debian, and even the 3d video was supported out of the box. Even my old Toshiba Satellite 1400 ran fine except that there was no 3d video because Trident refused to open the specs to the DRI project(at the time -- there's apparantly a project in the works now.)
If you use a standard piece of hardware like that, you generally don't have any problems. If you don't use standard hardware, even Windows will give you a hard time.
Man, you would've DIED if you had to install windows XP on a Dell with what they give you.
To be fair, that list doesn't exactly list 253 browesrs. I think I'm going to hang on to my mplayer, rather than bitch that someone made it and didn't make aRts.
Well...Except they did.
But just ignore that.
You have a point. There have been a few times where I've wanted to run KDE under win32 because it really is a nicer WM, web browser, and file manager than explorer.
:P
Yes, I'm trapped on win32. I use OSS regardless. The two needn't be hypocrisy.
Seems to me that when OSX comes to x86, he's going to end up in resonance. He'll move to OSX and find out the hardware support is shit, so he'll move to Linux, where he'll find out the hardware support is shit, then he'll move back to OSX again.
He'll move back and forth until someone hits him with a two-by-four, saying "Dude, if it's THAT big a problem, just use OSS on win32!"
Personally, I don't see a problem with sound if you're using aRtS. It even has a compatibility layer so apps which use the standard interface can use it instead.
Somehow, deep in my heart of hearts, I think we'll manage.
Icon?
If he's an open source icon for his contributions, then so am I.
Star Phalanx, anyone?
When you throw a Radeon without the flash bios hack into your mac, you may find that the hardware you have is very much apple hardware. :P
Your inability to understand parallelism has no relevance to the argument presented.
I like windows because I can install nearly any application with only one click. AND I appreciate the seamless integration between applications which comes from a monolithic developer AND mplayer paired with video-lan seems to be the happiest under windows.
However, video-lan and mplayer have nothing to do with installing an application in one click. Funny, that.