Main problem with generic terms used as patents is that if they prevail, all that people should do is register idea that is not possible yet, but it's possible in the future and wait for progress, then sue everybody.
Patent cases without exact blueprints or without real product should never be considered as proof. So if someone registers a "something car-sized used for transportation, but using nature friendly material, that works something like a common fuel" he can sue anybody that would try to make a progress on car technologies.
In my opinion patents should have exact blueprints and timeline as obligate in order to make possible to differentiate that 20%.
http://www.agnula.org//project/dynamic_schedule Rehmudi (Agnula) seems to be a day or two late, or is it more than half year). I guess dynamic_schedule just isn't so dynamic
One should write a software that's free. After that he hopes that there would be enough people making donations to put bread on the table.
I was controversing parent post about OSS or not. But in case of your attitude I actualy agree that parent had right and I was the one that was wrong.
It is a differece when someone provides distro like Redhat, than some coder writes a small software and hopes it will be seen enough to be appreciated so people would donate him some money.
After turning your opinion into reality: Does job like a coder still exist. NO 1. No! They are not coders professionaly because they need other line of work to support themselves, they are called hobby-coders 2. Yes it does, but it's now called beggar
Fact1: Coder can't benefite of their work (other than being supported from users like you), they don't have the right that users have (just to use, not code anything and benefit from that). Fact2: Red cross will support from now on coders too
I write just as OSS under GPL as closed source commercial (with full specs), and I appreciate GPL as far as it gets, but funny I can't find your point.
I think Janis Joplin described that:) "Freedom is when you've got nothing to loose"
But "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" isn't really correct. Sometimes hardware might be needing to include tools.
Let's take a peak at Avid or Digi & Pro Tools. Stripping software out of the box might not be favourable position for them. They would get them in a position where one product would be usable and one would be a bad review for the other.
Here is where "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" starts getting wrong.
What is important is where to draw a line between open and closed. Mainly writting drivers is way shorter than writing specs, because drivers are not some huge peace of code and on the other side specs could be. But making complete application OSS would be bad, if that company sells hardware just because what software offers and hardware alone isn't worth shit just because you can get comparable hardware for more affordable price and use OSS app for hardware you haven't bought.
I find that very acceptable. But you made a magic mistake.
driver!=software
I for one write just as OSS as proprietary (both for Linux). The only real need in being open is to be open to correct extent.
If drivers are proprietary and company goes to drain, your hardware goes with company too. Just look at older TV Tuners under XP. No drivers no fun. But if drivers are made as OSS someone might continue to support your hardware even then.
As far as I was talking about sotware needing to be open to the correct extent. Take two this as example. Accounting software >> can be proprietary, the only thing that must be open are correctly documented tables and their relations. Software for editing some type of file >> Make a complete specification of document type.
There are points that company must revise. 1. What will happen if they go down with their customers, I was there and to tell you the truth as a customer I didn't liked it. That's why I had to drag one machine running Win3.1 until a year ago, It was the only possibility to access documents that were made. 2. Let's take something more simple now. You're the one man band and you're administering servers on companies. You die in a car crash. Do customers have to break in to continue to work. Or would it be more simple to use an envelope, write password in and protect it to be used just in case.
As far as paying, my customers were paying me when I was making Win software, and they are paying me now. Where's the difference?
And you should probably brush your mouth after such comments:)
p.s. Few questions: 1. Is that Open Software/Gay a new software topic? 2. Never heard of software type like that? And could you describe it's functionality since it's probably reserved for gay people like you 3. Since Gay open source is shit, does that mean that Gay proprietary software is better?
p.p.s. Sorry for such a list of questions, but I'm not gay (obviously that topic is reserved for gays and you sound like a well informed person), so you should cover your topic and comments with more facts and explain to us non-gay public that might be interested in your points and views, even if no other reason than maybe try to contradict you.
RH AS 3.0 will be faster. Everything goes in favour of disk-access. I can't really speak for SCSI but for extra large LVM Volumes on IDE drives it will make a great difference.
Yeah, right. And then you'll probably ask for a review how good is RH Advanced Server for desktop.
Just like people were reviewing M$ Server 2003
Server is SERVER, but if you expect some fancy tools, you're wrong. Differences between RH AS and Desktop are mainly for what purpose it was compiled together, and for what services, oh yes and RH AS 2.1 has Java server.
If I read it correctly, LVM was present in 7.3, but 8.0 was the first version that introduced autodetecting of LVM volume in booting up
In 7.3 you had to edit rc.local and add commands to scan volumes, 8.0 contains
# LVM initialization if [ -f/etc/lvmtab -a ! -e/proc/lvm ] ; then
modprobe lvm-mod >/dev/null 2>&1 fi if [ -e/proc/lvm -a -x/sbin/vgchange -a -f/etc/lvmtab ]; then
action $"Setting up Logical Volume Management:"/sbin/vgscan &&/sbin/vgchange -a y fi
in/etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit, that's difference as much as I see it
Are you gonna file a suit after the company that put code in Linux by your opinion. After all it was Caldera that did that thing and McBride would sue him self.
Sued for supposed allegations, that aren't proven yet. Or more explicitely possible bussiness losses that are provoked with false advertising. I mean, I can use advertising for describing events when someone says fals allegations about the other one. Well it sounds to me like SCO is acting like accuser, judge and jury in this case without asking anyone.
btw. I don't like fudge, not even that one that your momma makes, but still thanks
Slashdot Mirror
that you'd have to sign up to their Licensing Agreement 6.0 if you'd wanna breath there
Main problem with generic terms used as patents is that if they prevail, all that people should do is register idea that is not possible yet, but it's possible in the future and wait for progress, then sue everybody.
Patent cases without exact blueprints or without real product should never be considered as proof. So if someone registers a "something car-sized used for transportation, but using nature friendly material, that works something like a common fuel" he can sue anybody that would try to make a progress on car technologies.
In my opinion patents should have exact blueprints and timeline as obligate in order to make possible to differentiate that 20%.
heh, my first reduntant:)
For a completely valid question:)
http://www.agnula.org//project/dynamic_schedule
Rehmudi (Agnula) seems to be a day or two late, or is it more than half year). I guess dynamic_schedule just isn't so dynamic
The most recent version of PLANET CCRMA and AGNULA project, DeMuDi & RehMuDI, will be presented during the BYOL.
Anyone knows when those two will be out??
Thanks.
So if I understand correctly this attitude.
One should write a software that's free. After that he hopes that there would be enough people making donations to put bread on the table.
I was controversing parent post about OSS or not. But in case of your attitude I actualy agree that parent had right and I was the one that was wrong.
It is a differece when someone provides distro like Redhat, than some coder writes a small software and hopes it will be seen enough to be appreciated so people would donate him some money.
After turning your opinion into reality:
Does job like a coder still exist. NO
1. No! They are not coders professionaly because they need other line of work to support themselves, they are called hobby-coders
2. Yes it does, but it's now called beggar
Fact1: Coder can't benefite of their work (other than being supported from users like you), they don't have the right that users have (just to use, not code anything and benefit from that).
Fact2: Red cross will support from now on coders too
I write just as OSS under GPL as closed source commercial (with full specs), and I appreciate GPL as far as it gets, but funny I can't find your point.
I'm willing to pay for software, just not when it's proprietary. I'll only play for Free Software.
Doesn't this funny sound strikes you?
Pay for free???
You probably meant Open Source;)
I think Janis Joplin described that:)
"Freedom is when you've got nothing to loose"
But "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" isn't really correct. Sometimes hardware might be needing to include tools.
Let's take a peak at Avid or Digi & Pro Tools.
Stripping software out of the box might not be favourable position for them. They would get them in a position where one product would be usable and one would be a bad review for the other.
Here is where "closer to hardware > more necessary the openess" starts getting wrong.
What is important is where to draw a line between open and closed. Mainly writting drivers is way shorter than writing specs, because drivers are not some huge peace of code and on the other side specs could be. But making complete application OSS would be bad, if that company sells hardware just because what software offers and hardware alone isn't worth shit just because you can get comparable hardware for more affordable price and use OSS app for hardware you haven't bought.
I find that very acceptable. But you made a magic mistake.
driver!=software
I for one write just as OSS as proprietary (both for Linux). The only real need in being open is to be open to correct extent.
If drivers are proprietary and company goes to drain, your hardware goes with company too. Just look at older TV Tuners under XP. No drivers no fun. But if drivers are made as OSS someone might continue to support your hardware even then.
As far as I was talking about sotware needing to be open to the correct extent. Take two this as example.
Accounting software >> can be proprietary, the only thing that must be open are correctly documented tables and their relations.
Software for editing some type of file >> Make a complete specification of document type.
There are points that company must revise.
1. What will happen if they go down with their customers, I was there and to tell you the truth as a customer I didn't liked it. That's why I had to drag one machine running Win3.1 until a year ago, It was the only possibility to access documents that were made.
2. Let's take something more simple now. You're the one man band and you're administering servers on companies. You die in a car crash. Do customers have to break in to continue to work. Or would it be more simple to use an envelope, write password in and protect it to be used just in case.
As far as paying, my customers were paying me when I was making Win software, and they are paying me now. Where's the difference?
(Dam'n, I'll byte that one)
And you should probably brush your mouth after such comments:)
p.s. Few questions:
1. Is that Open Software/Gay a new software topic?
2. Never heard of software type like that? And could you describe it's functionality since it's probably reserved for gay people like you
3. Since Gay open source is shit, does that mean that Gay proprietary software is better?
p.p.s. Sorry for such a list of questions, but I'm not gay (obviously that topic is reserved for gays and you sound like a well informed person), so you should cover your topic and comments with more facts and explain to us non-gay public that might be interested in your points and views, even if no other reason than maybe try to contradict you.
Hell, I've got some karma to burn
And one even better reason why.
Corel already got burned on Windows market. Their major losses started right after droping Linux and M$ deal
As I said this was what it is in LVM documentation. That means zoure completelz right. No change in support
Yep. SCSI change will be affected in 2.6 due to new scheduler, which includes simultaneous device write/read improvements.
But as I tested (on SCSI), it does make a little difference, when there are simultaneous connections over network to different files
Better not be some SCO product. They are gonna sue them for copy/paste of their IP rights:)
You forgot one little detail.
RH AS 3.0 will be faster. Everything goes in favour of disk-access. I can't really speak for SCSI but for extra large LVM Volumes on IDE drives it will make a great difference.
Yeah, right. And then you'll probably ask for a review how good is RH Advanced Server for desktop.
Just like people were reviewing M$ Server 2003
Server is SERVER, but if you expect some fancy tools, you're wrong. Differences between RH AS and Desktop are mainly for what purpose it was compiled together, and for what services, oh yes and RH AS 2.1 has Java server.
If I read it correctly, LVM was present in 7.3, but 8.0 was the first version that introduced autodetecting of LVM volume in booting up
/etc/lvmtab -a ! -e /proc/lvm ] ; then /proc/lvm -a -x /sbin/vgchange -a -f /etc/lvmtab ]; then /sbin/vgscan && /sbin/vgchange -a y
/etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit, that's difference as much as I see it
In 7.3 you had to edit rc.local and add commands to scan volumes, 8.0 contains
# LVM initialization
if [ -f
modprobe lvm-mod >/dev/null 2>&1
fi
if [ -e
action $"Setting up Logical Volume Management:"
fi
in
Yep, and next review announced on /. will be icon sized picture of some product.
Question you forgot
Are you gonna file a suit after the company that put code in Linux by your opinion. After all it was Caldera that did that thing and McBride would sue him self.
It's just as SCO said.
.
/. finally SCO got off the Linux Topic
Without them Linux community wouldn't have valid OS, and without IBM Linux community wouldn't have brains to react.
. . . ??? . .
mwaaaaaahahaaahaahaa *cough* hahahaaaaaaaa
SCO is getting funnier every day.
By the way kudos to
I think you mean "SLOW DOWN and don't catch up, that would be bad"
Some of us don't love wanna-be-eye-candy interfaces. Redhat Bluecurve does it's job better.
"The interface seems to be coming along very well, it looks nice."
Next headline looks even nicer, that's my answer to your final thought
O God, I'm really trying to be funny.
After reading a title I was wondering for a moment wondering if somebody put ad-ware in MPlayer CVS:) Nope.
OK, funny:)
Sued for supposed allegations, that aren't proven yet. Or more explicitely possible bussiness losses that are provoked with false advertising. I mean, I can use advertising for describing events when someone says fals allegations about the other one. Well it sounds to me like SCO is acting like accuser, judge and jury in this case without asking anyone.
btw. I don't like fudge, not even that one that your momma makes, but still thanks
Yep, this story sounds funny when posted on /.
You're right:)