Two quick responses to that: 1) How many people know enough to run their own servers but not enough to figure out the gimp? I'm betting not too many. 2) Banner ads, man, banner ads! They aren't there yet... but they will have to be at some point, unless they can come up with a google-like way of "selling" pics or maybe HD space/processor time. They've got to make that $25,000 back somehow:) Now that I've answered that, I just thought I'd add that the free picture distribution thing sounds really, really cool- royalty-free picture use for web-sites and such will get them a great deal of traffic in the long-run, I'm betting. Anyway, best of luck to them... ~luge
That sounds pretty cool. I read AICN pretty regularly, but I had missed that one. Of course, that would also involve the typical "what the heck happened?" scenario- think of the folks from the Foundation, trying to find the mythical Earth. That was great stuff... ~luge(who has a total weakness for dystopia)
If you'd actually bothered to read the article whose title dealt with anarchy, you'd see that it never claimed he was an anarchist. What he says is that the current situation is an anarchy- because the old rules are being applied to a new situation for which they weren't intended, they are being applied poorly, or not at all. In that sense, the current situation is an anarchy. He doesn't propose that we get rid of laws, but rather that we scrap the ones we have in order to write new ones that make better sense. Anyway, go read it... it's a fascinating look into legal history and how in the past this type of "anarchy" has led to huge changes in our legal system. He feels that this will occur again, and has some pretty convinving arguments as to why. Remember- someone is going to be in charge- no one is claiming that no one should be. The only question is who, and that is a stunningly important question in a way that it hasn't been in many, many years. ~luge
Washington and company were hardly outcasts. Saying he was an outcast is sort of like saying Bill Gates is an outcast- Washington was the richest man in the country at the time of the Revolution, and Franklin was the second wealthiest. These men were all members of an extremely wealthy aristocracy who were opinion leaders- their voices were widely heard and respected. Yes, there were certainly rabble-rousers involved (Tom Paine comes to mind immediately) but without Washington, Jefferson, and the like convincing the wealthy and powerful to support the revolution (remember, they all bought tons of war bonds) then we wouldn't have gotten anywhere. As far as your claim that most common people merely wanted to remain British subjects, I'll just suggest that if that was the case, it would have been difficult to raise armies. This is far from the case- there were tons of volunteers who suffered through ridiculous conditions and most of whom were never paid for their efforts. While there were many supporters of the crown, if their numbers were as large as you suggest, then I'd think they would have helped the Brits out more- the record would indicate that they were largely ineffective and never tried to organize in any meaningful way. As far as the corporations... well, wealthy farmers and traders controlled the government long before there was any notion of the modern "corporation." Remember, they held the bonds that financed the government and if they withdrew them they could bring down the whole show. So, they had a lot of say pretty much from day one. Just a handy history lesson... ~luge(4? informative? please...)
Ok, I didn't believe in a "conspiracy of the trolls" or anything like that until I saw this post and the moderation on it. I mean, it wasn't the brightest post in the world, but it was funny, it was well timed (it's #18 and is redundant?), brough up an arguably important point (lack of respect for Linux), and it's by someone who is clearly deserving of respect (instead of the jealousy he's obviously gotten.) I don't even know what else to say about the other implications of an actual organized plan to manipulate moderation- if moderation is actually that broken, then in the long term,/. won't be able to save itself and truly is destined to be flushed away. That's pretty sad. Go ahead, moderate me down. I've got plenty of karma to spare... ~luge
As the Mozilla people explain it, they didn't have much choice. From their point of view, in terms of time and resources, they could debug one GUI. Either that GUI could be Windows, or it could be something XP. They chose XP so that they could continue to support Mac and *nix (which they claimed they couldn't afford otherwise.) Having made that claim, they then explain there are other benefits: it's unique (got to beat IE at something, they figure.) It's flexible- I mean, they are turning it into a frontend for Zope, among other things. It's consistent across platforms, which is great for large businesses looking to put everything that they do onto intranets and then move to the cheapest possible HW. Oh, and it's skinnable- so if you don't want it to be the same as everyone else's, it doesn't have to be. Yet another advantage. Of course, the other advantage that the Mozilla people never mention is that it's 97% cross-platform. That means that when AOL wants to port it to some cheap-ass chip or OS to make internet appliances (which they announced they would do today, BTW) they can do it, and do it quickly and easily. For AOL, this is a huge, huge deal, and it makes a lot of sense for them. That is the biggest reason why we are stuck with XUL and the rest, for better or (as you list in painful detail above) for worse. ~luge(proud user of a new daily every day for more than 6 months)
My apologies- I didn't see that Netscape had set up separate QA for netscape (as opposed to Mozilla) for several hours after I posted. Still... besides that rathbun@spamcop isn't registered with Bugzilla (very possible you've used a different email, so I won't call you on that) I find it highly unlikely that you haven't received explanation or commentary from Mozilla folk, especially if it is a standards issue (as suggested by another poster.) They are always prompt to at least comment on the nature and quality of the bug, if nothing else. ~luge
we're expecting the skeletal remains now reanimated by AOL (who have also not set many records for software quality) to make a comeback? MS is the ultimate proof that SW quality means little. If AOL puts it on 20 million+ desktops (which they will within a year) then it'll be back. Trust me... ~luge
What, you mean an OS like Linux? The information is out there and has been out there for anyone who cares to work at it. For Linux/BSD, that means lots of people in their spare time. Considering how much income Be is making (read: not much) they don't have spare time, or spare engineers, to mess with testing and playing and fiddling until things are just right. That's all that's stopping them- it's not like there is some kind of secret, impossible to figure code inside Darwin. Be just doesn't feel it's profitable to waste their time with it anymore. Moral: don't hold your breath for Be to be on anything except Intel (and whatever BeIA runs on) anytime soon. ~lufe
Just found this over on Linuxtoday... AOL has finally announced "internet appliances" based on, of course, Linux. I think we just saw a burp in the Linux userbase of about 2-3 million people within a year... ~luge P.S. http://www.wideopennews.com/story/707.ht ml for the good, bad, whatever news...
As far as I know (and this probably wrong:) there is virtually no GTK left under all that blue-green. On the other platforms, there is (again, as I understand) no native widgetry at all. Nor is there any way to hack native widgets onto the system they've developed (though you could fake them with a skin.) Officially, the rationale here is to reduce debugging time (read: cost) by forcing netscape to debug only one widget set instead of 3 or more. Unofficially, while the above is true, that also makes it less difficult for netscape to port Moz to some future CheapAssAOLBox running CheapAssAOLOS. Just my two cents... someone who actually knows anything should feel free to correct me.:) ~luge
"Their server is not letting bug reports in." I don't even know where to start. Well, I guess I can start with "it's been open for nearly two years." At any point during that time, you could have submitted that bug. I'll follow up with: Since you never submitted the bug, how the heck do you expect it to get fixed? Those things don't just happen on their own, you know. You can't just download a beta product and expect things to magically be fixed. Finally, I'll just say you are full of it- all of these bugs have been submitted to day. Just a wild guess, but I'm thinking that maybe bugzilla is open and you've just been too lazy to find this page. Now go, run along, and put your money where your wide mouth is. P.S. Sorry to go off, but it's not just you- there are about 10 million complaints here (some good, most not so good) of people who just expect good, free, software to magically appear in front of them without investing any of their own energy.
Just an FYI, in the latest nightlies there are no keyboard commands in the pulldowns. We'll see what that means, I suppose. Also, in Mozilla, everything is skinnable- not just skinnable in the "I can make it look pretty" sense, but also in the "I can change it completely" sense. That includes keyboard shortcuts, menu layouts, menu content, etc., etc., not just getting rid of that horrific blue-green;) ~luge
I don't know if they'll work with the netscape beta, but if you are using a nightly build of mozilla, you can get skins from Chromezone. Since beta is nearly identical to the nightlies, these should work, but no guarantees from me. BTW, I strongly recommend Aphrodite and Sullivan- don't waste your time on the others (yet- classic could be really nice, eventually.) ~luge
Man, talk about being a karma whore. If/. had posted news about Evolution, you'd be right up there saying "this is news for freshmeat, not/." Instead, since they didn't, you get to turn around and complain instead. Sheesh. I mean, is it really that hard to follow links when they post about Helix? It was fairly easy to find tons of Evolution information when/. posted their Helix article. Just follow links past the first page and maybe you'll actually learn something one day...
I think you missed the point- Evolution is a client, not a server. As such, it obviously can't replace a server of any type, Exchange or otherwise. What Miguel was trying to explain was that once you transparently switch all your users to Evolution (which you can do, without messing with your Exchange server) then one night while all your users are in bed *poof* away goes the exchange server, replaced by anything else- either yourproduct or someone elses with some other protocol. Since it'll all be transparent to Evolution end users, the transition will be easy for them, and in that sense, Evolution will have made it easier. ~luge(take the time to understand before you start advertising next time)
Point is that the new games have lost that character. You can't go to a q3 server and meet people. You can (or could) play a door game and actually communicate- meet, talk, gain lifelong friends. Maybe if people spent a little less time on graphics and a little more on gameplay, that would change. But hey... ~luge
Sure would be nice to get a Batmobile..
on
BeOS For Linux!
·
· Score: 1
But my driveway isn't compatible. If Be wants to remain closed, so be it. Assuming they don't turn into bullies(*cough*MS*cough*), I wish them all the success in the world. But their decision (at this point) to be closed doesn't make sense. See, maybe they've left this Batmobile in my driveway, but since they don't support my motherboadrd, it might as well be a Yugo. (Heck, if it takes up 512 Megs, it might as well be a steaming pile of dog sh**.) But I digress. My point was that an OS with no market position and no money to write drivers with is going to be in a constant hole, because it'll never support the latest hardware, or the oldest hardware, and probably not much of the stuff in between. If you are Windows, you can get away with this. If you are Linux, you just ask people to write drivers. If you are Be, you tell people "eh, we didn't want your business anyway." And that's too bad. ~luge
Or at least those last two volumes? Seriously! I really liked the last couple of volumes. They were very different from Bowie's normal stuff, but they were still very cool- one has been my background for a couple of weeks. I'd love to get my hands on those last two sets before they disappear forever... please take out the SPAM and drop me a note... ~luge
It's a controversy because there are people on kernel-dev who feel both ways. There are people who believe that we need a journaling fs now, and believe (despite the code inaccuracies) that ReiserFS should go in with an "experimental" tag as a result. If no one on kernel-dev had expressed that, and everyone had agreed wholeheartedly with Linus,/then/ there would be no controversy. But there was, at least some, and has been more in the past. Get over the anti-/. stuff already. ~luge(relevant KT threads are here)
Re:This is great but...
on
Netscape 6
·
· Score: 1
Nope. Their approach is just to support all standards perfectly and hope people will come around to those. They are not going to build in support for MSisms. If you think about it, it makes sense- playing the game by MS's rules guarantees you will always be behind, and as a result, always lose. If they change the playing field on MS (and try to make it a standards-based battle) then they at least have some chance. ~luge
Re:Whatever happened to Netscape 5? Did I miss it?
on
Netscape 6
·
· Score: 1
They never did a public binary build, nor did they ever, anywhere, call it NS 5. Skipping 5 is purely a marketing/psychological thing in the competition with IE. ~luge
Actually, Lucas is on record as saying that (computationally) the PS2 is roughly as powerful as the gear they used for SW:TPM. Obviously, the storage and memory capability isn't there for storing all the FMV, but the computational ability to generate it is. Also, remember that the resolution being generated for a movie screen is obscenely high. Doing calculations at the same speed, but for a 640x480 NTSC TV screen instead, really helps, since the amount of data that needs to be generated is much lower. ~luge
Darwin (and therefore OS X)is BSD on PPC, with some additional stuff thrown on top. Recompiling Mac Classic apps may not be possible (depending on how abstracted the Classic emulation layer is) but recompiling OS X apps should be the equivalent of "./configure, make all, make install" which is all it takes to recompile well-written Unix apps on other Unices, including Darwin, Be, Next, Linux, and BSD. Geez... get a clue. ~luge
Slashdot Mirror
Two quick responses to that: :)
1) How many people know enough to run their own servers but not enough to figure out the gimp? I'm betting not too many.
2) Banner ads, man, banner ads! They aren't there yet... but they will have to be at some point, unless they can come up with a google-like way of "selling" pics or maybe HD space/processor time. They've got to make that $25,000 back somehow
Now that I've answered that, I just thought I'd add that the free picture distribution thing sounds really, really cool- royalty-free picture use for web-sites and such will get them a great deal of traffic in the long-run, I'm betting. Anyway, best of luck to them...
~luge
That sounds pretty cool. I read AICN pretty regularly, but I had missed that one. Of course, that would also involve the typical "what the heck happened?" scenario- think of the folks from the Foundation, trying to find the mythical Earth. That was great stuff...
~luge(who has a total weakness for dystopia)
If you'd actually bothered to read the article whose title dealt with anarchy, you'd see that it never claimed he was an anarchist. What he says is that the current situation is an anarchy- because the old rules are being applied to a new situation for which they weren't intended, they are being applied poorly, or not at all. In that sense, the current situation is an anarchy. He doesn't propose that we get rid of laws, but rather that we scrap the ones we have in order to write new ones that make better sense.
Anyway, go read it... it's a fascinating look into legal history and how in the past this type of "anarchy" has led to huge changes in our legal system. He feels that this will occur again, and has some pretty convinving arguments as to why.
Remember- someone is going to be in charge- no one is claiming that no one should be. The only question is who, and that is a stunningly important question in a way that it hasn't been in many, many years.
~luge
Washington and company were hardly outcasts. Saying he was an outcast is sort of like saying Bill Gates is an outcast- Washington was the richest man in the country at the time of the Revolution, and Franklin was the second wealthiest. These men were all members of an extremely wealthy aristocracy who were opinion leaders- their voices were widely heard and respected. Yes, there were certainly rabble-rousers involved (Tom Paine comes to mind immediately) but without Washington, Jefferson, and the like convincing the wealthy and powerful to support the revolution (remember, they all bought tons of war bonds) then we wouldn't have gotten anywhere.
As far as your claim that most common people merely wanted to remain British subjects, I'll just suggest that if that was the case, it would have been difficult to raise armies. This is far from the case- there were tons of volunteers who suffered through ridiculous conditions and most of whom were never paid for their efforts. While there were many supporters of the crown, if their numbers were as large as you suggest, then I'd think they would have helped the Brits out more- the record would indicate that they were largely ineffective and never tried to organize in any meaningful way.
As far as the corporations... well, wealthy farmers and traders controlled the government long before there was any notion of the modern "corporation." Remember, they held the bonds that financed the government and if they withdrew them they could bring down the whole show. So, they had a lot of say pretty much from day one.
Just a handy history lesson...
~luge(4? informative? please...)
Ok, I didn't believe in a "conspiracy of the trolls" or anything like that until I saw this post and the moderation on it. I mean, it wasn't the brightest post in the world, but it was funny, it was well timed (it's #18 and is redundant?), brough up an arguably important point (lack of respect for Linux), and it's by someone who is clearly deserving of respect (instead of the jealousy he's obviously gotten.) /. won't be able to save itself and truly is destined to be flushed away. That's pretty sad.
I don't even know what else to say about the other implications of an actual organized plan to manipulate moderation- if moderation is actually that broken, then in the long term,
Go ahead, moderate me down. I've got plenty of karma to spare...
~luge
As the Mozilla people explain it, they didn't have much choice. From their point of view, in terms of time and resources, they could debug one GUI. Either that GUI could be Windows, or it could be something XP. They chose XP so that they could continue to support Mac and *nix (which they claimed they couldn't afford otherwise.)
Having made that claim, they then explain there are other benefits: it's unique (got to beat IE at something, they figure.) It's flexible- I mean, they are turning it into a frontend for Zope, among other things. It's consistent across platforms, which is great for large businesses looking to put everything that they do onto intranets and then move to the cheapest possible HW. Oh, and it's skinnable- so if you don't want it to be the same as everyone else's, it doesn't have to be. Yet another advantage.
Of course, the other advantage that the Mozilla people never mention is that it's 97% cross-platform. That means that when AOL wants to port it to some cheap-ass chip or OS to make internet appliances (which they announced they would do today, BTW) they can do it, and do it quickly and easily. For AOL, this is a huge, huge deal, and it makes a lot of sense for them. That is the biggest reason why we are stuck with XUL and the rest, for better or (as you list in painful detail above) for worse.
~luge(proud user of a new daily every day for more than 6 months)
My apologies- I didn't see that Netscape had set up separate QA for netscape (as opposed to Mozilla) for several hours after I posted. Still... besides that rathbun@spamcop isn't registered with Bugzilla (very possible you've used a different email, so I won't call you on that) I find it highly unlikely that you haven't received explanation or commentary from Mozilla folk, especially if it is a standards issue (as suggested by another poster.) They are always prompt to at least comment on the nature and quality of the bug, if nothing else.
~luge
we're expecting the skeletal remains now reanimated by AOL (who have also not set many records for software quality) to make a comeback? MS is the ultimate proof that SW quality means little. If AOL puts it on 20 million+ desktops (which they will within a year) then it'll be back. Trust me...
~luge
What, you mean an OS like Linux? The information is out there and has been out there for anyone who cares to work at it. For Linux/BSD, that means lots of people in their spare time. Considering how much income Be is making (read: not much) they don't have spare time, or spare engineers, to mess with testing and playing and fiddling until things are just right. That's all that's stopping them- it's not like there is some kind of secret, impossible to figure code inside Darwin. Be just doesn't feel it's profitable to waste their time with it anymore. Moral: don't hold your breath for Be to be on anything except Intel (and whatever BeIA runs on) anytime soon.
~lufe
Just found this over on Linuxtoday... AOL has finally announced "internet appliances" based on, of course, Linux. I think we just saw a burp in the Linux userbase of about 2-3 million people within a year...
~luge
P.S. http://www.wideopennews.com/story/707.ht ml for the good, bad, whatever news...
As far as I know (and this probably wrong :) there is virtually no GTK left under all that blue-green. On the other platforms, there is (again, as I understand) no native widgetry at all. Nor is there any way to hack native widgets onto the system they've developed (though you could fake them with a skin.) Officially, the rationale here is to reduce debugging time (read: cost) by forcing netscape to debug only one widget set instead of 3 or more. Unofficially, while the above is true, that also makes it less difficult for netscape to port Moz to some future CheapAssAOLBox running CheapAssAOLOS. Just my two cents... someone who actually knows anything should feel free to correct me. :)
~luge
"Their server is not letting bug reports in." I don't even know where to start. Well, I guess I can start with "it's been open for nearly two years." At any point during that time, you could have submitted that bug. I'll follow up with: Since you never submitted the bug, how the heck do you expect it to get fixed? Those things don't just happen on their own, you know. You can't just download a beta product and expect things to magically be fixed. Finally, I'll just say you are full of it- all of these bugs have been submitted to day. Just a wild guess, but I'm thinking that maybe bugzilla is open and you've just been too lazy to find this page. Now go, run along, and put your money where your wide mouth is. P.S. Sorry to go off, but it's not just you- there are about 10 million complaints here (some good, most not so good) of people who just expect good, free, software to magically appear in front of them without investing any of their own energy.
Just an FYI, in the latest nightlies there are no keyboard commands in the pulldowns. We'll see what that means, I suppose. ;)
Also, in Mozilla, everything is skinnable- not just skinnable in the "I can make it look pretty" sense, but also in the "I can change it completely" sense. That includes keyboard shortcuts, menu layouts, menu content, etc., etc., not just getting rid of that horrific blue-green
~luge
I don't know if they'll work with the netscape beta, but if you are using a nightly build of mozilla, you can get skins from Chromezone. Since beta is nearly identical to the nightlies, these should work, but no guarantees from me. BTW, I strongly recommend Aphrodite and Sullivan- don't waste your time on the others (yet- classic could be really nice, eventually.)
~luge
Man, talk about being a karma whore. If /. had posted news about Evolution, you'd be right up there saying "this is news for freshmeat, not /." Instead, since they didn't, you get to turn around and complain instead. Sheesh. I mean, is it really that hard to follow links when they post about Helix? It was fairly easy to find tons of Evolution information when /. posted their Helix article. Just follow links past the first page and maybe you'll actually learn something one day...
I think you missed the point- Evolution is a client, not a server. As such, it obviously can't replace a server of any type, Exchange or otherwise. What Miguel was trying to explain was that once you transparently switch all your users to Evolution (which you can do, without messing with your Exchange server) then one night while all your users are in bed *poof* away goes the exchange server, replaced by anything else- either yourproduct or someone elses with some other protocol. Since it'll all be transparent to Evolution end users, the transition will be easy for them, and in that sense, Evolution will have made it easier.
~luge(take the time to understand before you start advertising next time)
Point is that the new games have lost that character. You can't go to a q3 server and meet people. You can (or could) play a door game and actually communicate- meet, talk, gain lifelong friends. Maybe if people spent a little less time on graphics and a little more on gameplay, that would change. But hey...
~luge
But my driveway isn't compatible. If Be wants to remain closed, so be it. Assuming they don't turn into bullies(*cough*MS*cough*), I wish them all the success in the world. But their decision (at this point) to be closed doesn't make sense. See, maybe they've left this Batmobile in my driveway, but since they don't support my motherboadrd, it might as well be a Yugo. (Heck, if it takes up 512 Megs, it might as well be a steaming pile of dog sh**.) But I digress. My point was that an OS with no market position and no money to write drivers with is going to be in a constant hole, because it'll never support the latest hardware, or the oldest hardware, and probably not much of the stuff in between. If you are Windows, you can get away with this. If you are Linux, you just ask people to write drivers. If you are Be, you tell people "eh, we didn't want your business anyway." And that's too bad.
~luge
Or at least those last two volumes? Seriously! I really liked the last couple of volumes. They were very different from Bowie's normal stuff, but they were still very cool- one has been my background for a couple of weeks. I'd love to get my hands on those last two sets before they disappear forever... please take out the SPAM and drop me a note...
~luge
It's a controversy because there are people on kernel-dev who feel both ways. There are people who believe that we need a journaling fs now, and believe (despite the code inaccuracies) that ReiserFS should go in with an "experimental" tag as a result. If no one on kernel-dev had expressed that, and everyone had agreed wholeheartedly with Linus, /then/ there would be no controversy. But there was, at least some, and has been more in the past. Get over the anti-/. stuff already.
~luge(relevant KT threads are here)
Nope. Their approach is just to support all standards perfectly and hope people will come around to those. They are not going to build in support for MSisms. If you think about it, it makes sense- playing the game by MS's rules guarantees you will always be behind, and as a result, always lose. If they change the playing field on MS (and try to make it a standards-based battle) then they at least have some chance.
~luge
They never did a public binary build, nor did they ever, anywhere, call it NS 5. Skipping 5 is purely a marketing/psychological thing in the competition with IE.
~luge
Actually, Lucas is on record as saying that (computationally) the PS2 is roughly as powerful as the gear they used for SW:TPM. Obviously, the storage and memory capability isn't there for storing all the FMV, but the computational ability to generate it is. Also, remember that the resolution being generated for a movie screen is obscenely high. Doing calculations at the same speed, but for a 640x480 NTSC TV screen instead, really helps, since the amount of data that needs to be generated is much lower.
~luge
Darwin (and therefore OS X)is BSD on PPC, with some additional stuff thrown on top. Recompiling Mac Classic apps may not be possible (depending on how abstracted the Classic emulation layer is) but recompiling OS X apps should be the equivalent of "./configure, make all, make install" which is all it takes to recompile well-written Unix apps on other Unices, including Darwin, Be, Next, Linux, and BSD. Geez... get a clue.
~luge
Heh? Anyone know what the article is talking about?