> Yup...I see CBS, NBC, ABC...the major network news, and CNN on cable as all having from a slight to major liberal slant.
Erm, all of those networks are quite conservative. But to see this, you'll have to leave the US for one year and watch TV in Canada or Europe, where even the most conservative countries have much more of a liberal media than the US has.
> I switched over to KDE from Gnome about 2 months ago after using Gnome since 1.4ish (and I used 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4).
Same, except I switched earlier. I absolutely loved GNOME 1.4, and I just find GNOME 2.x horrid. KDE (just works) for me in ways that GNOME 2.x doesn't.
I don't use half of the things in KDE, but then again, I didn't use half of the things in GNOME either.
Choice is good.
Oh yeah, directory opus is awesome. I like it better than Konqueror still, but Konq-cvs is getting there!
Hmm.. a company that's been around for more than 25 years like Apple probably should have more market share (which they do, but barely) compare to the handful of hackers that make up the KDE and GNOME teams.
Well, it's not their software that is lackluster. It's their very poor usage of it to get any sort of market share. OpenOffice/StarOffice has finally become a very viable enterprise application. However, I guarentee that it either fails horribly in the enterprise, or succeeds so well that Sun actually loses money off of it (like Java.. they analysts have told em to spin it off LONG ago)
> If takes a lot more engineering(and money) to make a powerful server in a 1U form factor
Where did you get that idea? 1U form factor servers are about the same price these days. Well, perhaps not from Sun, but in the commodity Intel market.. (dell)
By the fact that it actually has been a huge financial drain on Sun. In the end that's all that matters. They should heed what the investing companies have said all along and spin all of the unprofitable java-type products into a seperate company.
"Because on the desktop side of the story Linux is to OSX as SCO Unix is to... any other Unix out there."
Not true.. OSX was really nice when it was introduced, but I think the modern Linux desktops (kde && gnome) have actually started to eclipse it.
I was a Mac user from 1989 to around '99, and for a long time, I couldn't stand anything except for the classic MacOS. But then I discovered that people can actually use other things in an efficient manner.
> use OS X for a week or two and you'll see what i mean.
yeah, after getting my ibook, I ditched OSX in favor of Yellow Dog Linux after two weeks. Apple makes great hardware (perhaps not the fastest), but Linux can beat OSX in the desktop arena these days. Especially YDL, which is one the slickest Linux Distros around (and is PPC only)
Who the fuck said he was just talking about the windows world? Get a clue and add the "Other" and "Linux" to that, and you get 97%. This is a measure of non-MAC users.
Yes it does. It's part of the w3c's complete suite of XML related technologies. Technologies that will form the future of the web.
ECMAScript is one of these technologies. It's tied into SVG more than any other language is. It'll be a part of pretty much all implementations of SVG.
> Can he try to do it (to relicense it) a bit more often?
Do you the logistics of relicensing? Often, you have to track down contributors that have contributed to the project and ask them to relicense their contributions. The other option is to just rewrite the piece of code in question.
Mozilla had a horribly tough time doing this when they switched to the tri-license scheme. Other projects have also (parts of KDE even, like kmail)
> Libart is not good for Mozilla's SVG anyway, and as for today there is no other reliable SVG library.
Uhhhhh... do you even know what libart does or is used for? It isn't a SVG library. It's a library that draws certain graphics primitatives. Mozilla already has equivalent functionality in it's code base.
The original poster wasn't correct in their premise. Lack of SVG in the stable trunks of Mozilla isn't the lack of a suitable renderer.. They've already started with one. It's the lack of manpower for something that takes a large amount of time to do properly.
KSVG started to be developed around KDE 2.2. It was supposed to ship with KDE 3.0. It did not. It was supposed to ship with KDE 3.1. It did not. It will ship with KDE 3.2 however (it's finally stable/complete enough to)
Mozilla's SVG support just isn't there yet. It will be in time though.
Slashdot Mirror
> Yup...I see CBS, NBC, ABC...the major network news, and CNN on cable as all having from a slight to major liberal slant.
Erm, all of those networks are quite conservative. But to see this, you'll have to leave the US for one year and watch TV in Canada or Europe, where even the most conservative countries have much more of a liberal media than the US has.
Might have been true a few years back, but certainly not true anymore. Fox News is the #1 News Channel here in the US.
Mandrake really hasn't cracked the enterprise market like SuSE and RH have..
IBM and RedHat are hardly in the same market when it comes to Linux. I just bet IBM doesn't want vendor lockin to one vendor.
No.. the self-inflicited wounds in their belly.
> I switched over to KDE from Gnome about 2 months ago after using Gnome since 1.4ish (and I used 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4).
Same, except I switched earlier. I absolutely loved GNOME 1.4, and I just find GNOME 2.x horrid. KDE (just works) for me in ways that GNOME 2.x doesn't.
I don't use half of the things in KDE, but then again, I didn't use half of the things in GNOME either.
Choice is good.
Oh yeah, directory opus is awesome. I like it better than Konqueror still, but Konq-cvs is getting there!
> The licensing of QT sucks ass, and when Microsoft buys Troll Tech, KDE will be stolen from...
If Microsoft buys TrollTech and they change the license, the last GPL'd version of Qt will automatically become BSD-licensed.
> their GPL'd libraries in a commercial application
By commercial, they assume that you also mean propeitary. which most commercial software is.
And people also claimed KDE 1.x was too OS/2 like..
Hmm.. a company that's been around for more than 25 years like Apple probably should have more market share (which they do, but barely) compare to the handful of hackers that make up the KDE and GNOME teams.
Well, it's not their software that is lackluster. It's their very poor usage of it to get any sort of market share. OpenOffice/StarOffice has finally become a very viable enterprise application. However, I guarentee that it either fails horribly in the enterprise, or succeeds so well that Sun actually loses money off of it (like Java.. they analysts have told em to spin it off LONG ago)
> We all know that eventually Sun will merge - get bought out by IBM. IBM can't wait to get their hands on JAVA too.
Yup, I agree... hmmm.. IBM/Sun vs. Compaq/Digital/HP vs. Dell..
> If takes a lot more engineering(and money) to make a powerful server in a 1U form factor
Where did you get that idea? 1U form factor servers are about the same price these days. Well, perhaps not from Sun, but in the commodity Intel market.. (dell)
By the fact that it actually has been a huge financial drain on Sun. In the end that's all that matters. They should heed what the investing companies have said all along and spin all of the unprofitable java-type products into a seperate company.
Looking forward to using this once it sufficiently maturizes (i'll have to try and see how mature it really is).
> And does anyone else see the possible conflict of interest with PC World running these benchmarks?
Um, it says earlier that the Mac benchmarks were performed by MacWorld (the sister magazine of PC World)
"Because on the desktop side of the story Linux is to OSX as SCO Unix is to... any other Unix out there."
Not true.. OSX was really nice when it was introduced, but I think the modern Linux desktops (kde && gnome) have actually started to eclipse it.
I was a Mac user from 1989 to around '99, and for a long time, I couldn't stand anything except for the classic MacOS. But then I discovered that people can actually use other things in an efficient manner.
> use OS X for a week or two and you'll see what i mean.
yeah, after getting my ibook, I ditched OSX in favor of Yellow Dog Linux after two weeks. Apple makes great hardware (perhaps not the fastest), but Linux can beat OSX in the desktop arena these days. Especially YDL, which is one the slickest Linux Distros around (and is PPC only)
>
for example, the photshop tests used files of only 50Mb. That's pretty small of a pro-user.
Yeah, any more would have helped the Athlon64. It has the fastest memory controller by far of the bunch.
> And what would be your analogue for Poisoned?
Probably Apollon.. both of them use giFT after all.
> Another example is Apples involvement with KDE!
Their involvement with KDE is pretty much limited to KDE's libraries, like it's html and javascript libraries, which Apple uses in OSX.
As for the rest of KDE, the rest is almost in competition with OSX.
Who the fuck said he was just talking about the windows world? Get a clue and add the "Other" and "Linux" to that, and you get 97%. This is a measure of non-MAC users.
> Besides, SVG has nothing to do with XHTML.
Yes it does. It's part of the w3c's complete suite of XML related technologies. Technologies that will form the future of the web.
ECMAScript is one of these technologies. It's tied into SVG more than any other language is. It'll be a part of pretty much all implementations of SVG.
> Can he try to do it (to relicense it) a bit more often?
Do you the logistics of relicensing? Often, you have to track down contributors that have contributed to the project and ask them to relicense their contributions. The other option is to just rewrite the piece of code in question.
Mozilla had a horribly tough time doing this when they switched to the tri-license scheme. Other projects have also (parts of KDE even, like kmail)
> Libart is not good for Mozilla's SVG anyway, and as for today there is no other reliable SVG library.
Uhhhhh... do you even know what libart does or is used for? It isn't a SVG library. It's a library that draws certain graphics primitatives. Mozilla already has equivalent functionality in it's code base.
The original poster wasn't correct in their premise. Lack of SVG in the stable trunks of Mozilla isn't the lack of a suitable renderer.. They've already started with one. It's the lack of manpower for something that takes a large amount of time to do properly.
KSVG started to be developed around KDE 2.2. It was supposed to ship with KDE 3.0. It did not. It was supposed to ship with KDE 3.1. It did not. It will ship with KDE 3.2 however (it's finally stable/complete enough to)
Mozilla's SVG support just isn't there yet. It will be in time though.
> I guess that option never worked with the libart's author. To bad for him to have so closed mind.
He already relicensed it once (GPL->LGPL)
Mozilla already has drawing classes that are more complex than libart anyways.