Absolutely agreed. Neat Image and Noise Ninja have nothing to fear here, the quality of images that I saw on the website was not very good. Whether that is representative of this open source application, or how good it's potential is, I don't know. Neat Image Pro+ works for me (yes, I didn't download a pirate version, I paid for my copy). But then I also use Capture One Pro (not cheap, legit copy) and Photoshop CS2 for my photography. You pay for what you get.
Agreed. I simply refused to use anything like this for these very reasons, bought my own domain instead, and did my own website. Sure, I'm not part of a 'community', sure I don't get as many visitors, but I quite frankly couldn't care less!!!
Big deal...it's just another game. I lost a lot of respect for Blizzard when they sued the open source battle.net guys...not to mention mass bannings on WoW, and their attitude in general. It might be their game, they might make good games, but things like DRM, and draconian rulings on battle.net have been a HUGE turnoff. As far as I'm concerned, Blizzard has lost respect for its customers, but sadly, most of those customers are too stupid (and addicted to WoW) to realise this.
Ah yes, but when it comes to someone using something that is GPL'd (Version 2), and supposedly offers freedoms, but doesn't because they're using DRM, and that person can't do what they want, is that right? Is that meeting the original design intent for the GPL? Nope.
Linus doesn't care about GPL v3 because he's worried about corporate interest in Linux dropping (and thus his income dropping), more than the spirit of the GPL. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure it all out..
hahaha, I say leave the videos up there, she looks rather hot;-)
From a moral point of view, it'll teach her to keep her legs closed, and stop doing Paris Hilton style home porn videos won't it? Let her learn the hard way.
That's because no US government body had the balls to take full legal action against Sony as a corporation for their illegal computer misconduct. It is clear to me that governments are at the 'beck and call' of corporations like Sony, instead of representing and SERVING the people who they are MEANT to serve.
And do you want to know what the sad thing is? Most people have been brainwashed so badly into being apathetic that they simply don't care. The future for our society looks like a bleak corporate lead dictatorship to my eyes - it will make George Orwell's 1984 look happy by comparison.
I for one believe in extra terrestial life forms - the number of star systems, and therefore planets out there is huge. The building blocks for life are common, humans, and the Earth is nothing special like we'd mostly like to believe. Ergo if there are other Earth like planets, there'll be other species. And it's safe to logically assume that a percentage of these other species, no matter how small will be intelligent, and that a smaller percentage of these will be capable of faster than light travel in some manner.
As someone who remembers seeing a UFO up close and personally when I was 11, I'm totally convinced. No, I wasn't smoking pot, doing drugs, drinking, or hallucinating. I saw what I saw, and can give a solid description of both size, shape, appearance, behaviour etc. I have no doubt that those workers saw a UFO, and this is all just a big cover up. The government knows that UFOs exist, that Aliens exist, but it doesn't feel that the normal populace is ready for this big shock. It would be nice if the governments let us decide what is good for us.
Get it right, please at least have some idea what you are talking about. George did the brief treatise for The Empire Strikes Back. It was then given to Leigh Brackett to write the actual screenplay. You might want to read the wiki entry for this movie:
I can't believe that this type of shite gets modded as "+5 insightful", it really does show that moderation on/. has gone to the dogs.
Anyways, this particular movie was the best of the entire Star Wars because it had a professional screenwriter write the screenplay, the others had George's usually poor efforts...
Why isn't Sony being criminally charged for various computer crimes? Why are they NOT being punished?
Are the laws different for big companies and rich people, than for the little bloke? (I know the answer to this, but couldn't help but pose the question anyways!).
I disagree. I'd rather see companies like Nvidia help the community by co-developer totally open code, not this binary crap that is at a complete disagreement to the whole ideal of the GPL - by the community, for the community. Allowing binary code just simply allows companies like Nvidia to do whatever they want, without respect for the community. Furthermore, I can't cound how many times in the past 2 years of the 2.6 kernel tree that Nvidia drivers have been broken and incompatible with a particular kernel release.
By Linus saying he doesn't want to get involved in the politics, he is. We all know Linus' stance on the FSF and its goals, and I have lost all respect for him, and the Linux kernel as part of his anti FSF behaviour.
Furthermore, some developers who's code is in the kernel might NOT like what these big companies do with their binary drivers. My suggestion to them is to remove their code from the kernel tree, and to walk away from helping develop the Linux kernel in protest. That's if they really value what the FSF is fighting for. If they just want to be trained monkeys sitting on the Linux kernel and riding Linus' back, then keep coding away and lack the courage to stand up for what we all know is right.
Yeah well, the powers that be are interested in controlling the populace, and they're using the terrorism baloney to do this. Sadly, the average person is far too stupid to realise this.
I agree. I played the original NWN, and to be honest, thought Diablo was better. I didn't care too much for Diablo II, it lost a lot of the story, feel and playability in trying to become 'bigger'. If you haven't tried it, try grabbing a copy of a game called Darkstone. Based on the Diablo engine, but with a zoomable/pannable camera like NWN (but better imho). The graphics aren't half bad either imho, with a decent story.
Does IE run on other platforms? Nope. If you want to run IE, then you *must* use Microsoft Windows (I'm leaving out virtualisation here). That means more sales of Microsoft Windows. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise that by Microsoft making and bundling its own browser with the operating system, they are getting unfair leverage. Personally, the DOJ should have made either:
1. Microsoft totally remove MSN Messenger, Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer, ONLY offering them as separate downloads.
2. Microsoft port above mentioned software to other platforms like Linux and BSD (and make sure that Microsoft makes them work).
The only browser that uses ActiveX is IE, and let's face it, that ONLY runs on Windows. What happens if you come across a site that demands ActiveX (and won't function without it?).
Why do so many web designers bitch about having to fuck around with designing a website to comply with several different browser architectures? Because Microsoft's IE has long since refused to behave itself and abide by standards. Microsoft itself has taken and bastardised many standards, to suit its own needs. It is all designed for one thing:
Platform lock in.
Nothing more and nothing less. And platform lock in tactics (when you have a very wide margin of sale over your competitors) is regarded in most western countries as being anti competitive and monopolistic.
My real question is why did the DOJ settlement really do fuck all?
If you allow Business to have ANY input into goverments, this is what will happen. Like RMS, I believe that business should have absolute NO say, input, communication with government. Period. Governments are for the people, and only the people, no more, no less. A business entity is NOT the people.
As soon as the people of the US realise the current political system is stuffed, and forcibly move for an overthrow of the current government and political system, with the intent of putting in place a true democracy, the better. Of course, Australia is no better. It seems that apathy rules the majority of people these days. That, and disinterest.
Yup. I'm half way through the transcript of the chat log and let's just say I smell a big FAT rat. Nat was questioned about patents and exactly *what* the payments were for specifically, but sidestepped it with some bullshit about how patent deals are usually valued and struck [as a general rule].
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:39:53 bgerber: the reasons why GPLv3 is not liked for Novell is also valid for other companies. So, in the current state it would not be used by a large number of companies atm, I fear
No shit sherlock! Of course Novell doesn't like the GPL v3, cos it'll close up the nice little loopholes that they're abusing with GPL v2 and the current Microsoft/Novell deal. And they know it.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:40:44 So if you are customer A, and you buy Linux from one of those companies, they promise to step in and protect you from any patent lawsuits Nov 27 11:40:51 But that promise is only for their customers Nov 27 11:41:06 so if you make a copy of the software and give it to customer B, who did not pay Red Hat or Oracle, the promise does not extend to customer B
Well, as far as I'm concerned this is totally against the spirit of the GPL, and whilst GPL v2 might allow this via loopholes, GPL v3 will [rightly so] close this loophole. The GPL has always been about the user having the same rights as the person they bought the softare from, or where they might have received the software from (ie. given/lent/copied). With the scenarios above, you're giving patent protection to one customer, but if that customer gives the software to someone else, that other person loses that patent protection. This is not acceptable imho.
Then there's this line:
ov 27 11:43:27 We'll be adding Open XML support to OpenOffice
OpenOffice doesn't need it, and these patches should be rejected. ODF is the OpenOffice native format of choice, and this is what should be pushed. We don't need to taint OpenOffice with potential patent issues from the Microsoft Cancer.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:55:08 We will do everything we can to support you:-) Novell offers indemnification to our customers, MS promises not to sue Novell customers, and Novell has invested heavily in the Open Invention Network which protects EVERYONE against patent lawsuits.
Wouldn't it be better if Novell (and others) moved to force the US government to illegalise and remove software patents as they simply create monopolies, they are not innovative, and they're not legal anyways (despite what the US government might say). They do not result in a better deal for customers, they result in a better deal for the mega corporations tht want to screw over the little guy and remove any competition so that they can make a bigger buck and make their lazy shareholders make more money. I don't care one bit about shareholders, they can get off their fat asses and make a decent, honest buck as far as I'm concerned.
See this line:
Nov 27 12:11:33 I do not fear Shuttleworth, because people who fear that openSUSE might violate GPL will notgo to a distro which actually is doing it.;)
This *proves* without doubt that that other distribution (obviously Ubuntu) infringes on patents (obviously Microsoft patents) as far as Novell and Adrian is concerned. So, Nat, and others have blatantly lied earlier on in the conversation when they said that they did not with specificity which patents are involved in the deal. I hate liers.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 12:14:56 The way I heard their statements, they were more of a threat to Microsoft than to Novell.
No Nat, it's a threat to *both* Novell and Microsoft. The door swings both ways, if it threatens Microsoft [because the patent convenant breaches the GPL [v3]), then it'll also threaten Novell, because it's agreeing to this patent covenant with Microsoft. That's not a hard concept to understand, no?
Well...I think that if enough FSF/FLOSS applications migrate to a GPL v3 licence, it still won't be enough. What will happen? Novell (and others) will take GPL v2 stuff and either use it as is, or improve it. Will they give improvements/changes back to the community? I honestly doubt it. Think about it - in the US, legal court cases are decided by who has the most amount of money, not who is legally right.
Another/. poster above said that the US would be shooting itself in the foot, and US business would be left behind the rest of the world, not so. Most US business couldn't care less about the GPL, or the principles of the GPL. And guess where most of the worlds major PC hardware and software development companies come from? Yes, the US. As soon as Europe, South America, etc, start sanctioning US based hardware/software, they'd be cutting themselves off. Munich still hasn't implemented Linux on its desktops, despite over 3 years of 'development'. If the US government took sanctions stopping software/hardware from being sold to the EU, there is NO way that the EU could recover. Set up a PC hardware manufacturing business to support the entire EU quick enough to avoid issues with businesses not having said supply of PC? I doubt it. Software conversion to FLOSS alternatives? I highly doubt it.
To put it simply, the US has far too much of a business anchor in the rest of the world, and on technology/hardware/software that is necessary for most of the world outside of the US to operate. Some might argue that the US economy would fail due to sanctions from other countries, etc, but I doubt it. It 's possible, but I doubt it.
FLOSS is about 20 years too late. I hate to say it, but it is.
If the Linux kernel was able to be moved to GPL v3, then Novell would be in serious trouble. Then, there are the BSD tools, many businesses like Novell would use that instead of GPL software. Big business can throw big money to hire developers to develop new software based on BSD software. What would happen to GPL software? It'd still remain, but only used by the community. Business would lose interest in Linux and would stop developing interoperative software and hardware. Furthermore, I foresee that big business wouldn't be so nice to Linux if it can't use it [without restrictions]. Big business would probably join Microsoft and Novell in a patent lawsuit against Linux and FLOSS. And again, we come back to our big point, that small developers/companies cannot afford the legal fight against big business. Not in a US style legal system.
For things to work, FSF tools AND the Linux kernel need to be moved to GPL v3 pronto. Software patents need to be abolished in the US, and copyright reduced back to 20 years. ALL Linux development and deployment must be moved overseas, away from the US, and developed in pro GPL countries. Over an extended period of time, the US software industry would NOT be able to compete with the lower costs of FSF based software etc, and non US countries would adopt it for several reasons:
1. Cost 2. Freedom to modify 3. Availability of the source code to determine if back doors are implemented etc
Once US based software is no longer so importantant to the global economy, then you'll see software patents relax in the US, and costs reduce in order to compete with FSF offerings. Then, and only then will we have a more competitive based software system.
The key thing is that South America and Europe and Asia MUST resist software patents and proprietary software for probably another 20 odd years. The big problem is proprietary hardware that only really supports proprietary software like Microsoft Windows, excluding FSF software offerings. If this isn't resolved, then uptake of FSF and GNU/Linux in particular will never achieve more than a small percentage of the user base, no matter how much cheaper it is.
Remember one thing:
The average computer user doesn't even remotely care about the goals of th
The power of the movie industry is strong. I can hear New Line Cinema referring to the Lord of the Rings trilogy as 'my precious, they wantse you, but they can't have you'.
In an ideal world, the Lord of the Rings novels should have returned to the public domain a long time ago, and licensing fees et al would be irrelevant. I'm not sure if copyright is transferable or not, but if so, that pretty much makes copyright periods a very moot point.
From my experience, Nikon fanboys are just as bad as Canon fanboys. Most of the Canon guys I know (via the POTN forums) aren't rabid Canon fans - they realise that the camera is simply a tool to get the job done.
I personally prefer the ergonomics of the Canon cameras, they just make more sense to me. That doesn't mean to say that Nikon's ergonomics are bad, they're just not my cuppa tea. In terms of AF, Canon wins, hands down. There's a reason why sports photographers predominantly use a Canon DSLR - as high as 90%. Look at major sporting events you'll see a never ending see of Canon L series lenses, and very few from camera/lenses from other manufacturers. Wildlife photography seems to be pretty even. Most fashion/model photographers seem to prefer Nikons, probably cos the Nikon flash system and metering system is better than Canon's offerings, although with e-ttl II and flash metering to suit, Canon has caught up a fair bit I personally believe.
Lenses - they're pretty even, although each side has some stunners that the other doesn't match. Canon's 70-200 f2.8 (both non IS and IS), and 300mm f2.8 IS lenses are probably the best in their respective fields. Canon's 400mm f2.8 IS and 600mm f4 IS are both just as good optically as their Nikon equivalents, and I believe both are cheaper to boot. I really haven't used Canon's wide angles (at least their primes), I have an older 20-35 f2.8 L series lens, which I think is reasonably good. I haven't tried any of Nikon's wide angle primes.
Canon's market share is dwindling, and this isn't because of the others catching up I might add. Canon has sat on its ass for the past 2 years, releasing a 30D, which at best is a point update to the 20D, and the 400D, again a minor update. Nothing truly innovative. The only true innovative release is the 5D, stunning images, stunning noise performance (but AF is so-so in all honesty and build quality is so-so). Canon is doing what Nvidia did - it has plenty up its sleeves and its only doing just enough to keep the market share. I personally hate this type of marketing behaviour, as its bad for the customer.
In general, Canon's CMOS sensors are better than Nikon's, but the gap has closed. Typically, the Canon sensor has bettered the opposition in resolution (it's not all about the number of pixels you know), and noise performance. With the D80, Nikon has caught up, and in all honesty, I think surpassed Canon's efforts with the 400D, which is very interesting. From a technology point of view, CMOS is always going to offer a better noise performance, and also a better usage performance from batteries. If you check the pixel peeping tests over at dpreview, you'll see that Canon/Nikon are very close now with the 400D/D80 respectively. Note that the D80 is around $200 more expensive than the Canon.
My personal thoughts on the top end cameras, is that the 1Ds Mark II is probably the best DSLR on the market, but I do feel that it has too many pixels. The laws of physics don't change, not even for Canon, and with 16mp on a full frame sensor, you're hitting diffraction issues at f5.6-f8. A good page on diffraction in DSLRs is:
Nikon's D2X hits diffraction issues at f5.6! We've become so enamoured of the megapixel race that we've forgot that there's more to it than just the number count. Sure, you can pack in more pixels, but then you seriously start to lose resolution. The D200 is a very nice camera, excellent value for money as well. Either way, Canon/Nikon you can't really go wrong, as long as your competent with the camera.
I do wholeheartedly agree with you that both systems are very competitive, it all evens out. A good photographer will take great images with either system.
I will take issue with your comment that Nikon's macro lenses are better than Canons. The 100mm f2.8 is one of
Can you provide your source as to proving that Canon DSLRs alter the sharpening and do colour enhancement on RAW images? I simply ask, as to the best of my knowledge this is completely false. RAW is simply the RAW data, the number of photons hitting the pixels on the sensor. Nothing more and nothing less. Canon, like Nikon stores the WB data, and interpolates colours from the Bayer RGB filter in place. This is not colour enhancement as you put it, it is necessary, otherwise all digital images would be monotone.
Wow, those damn cavemen and women must have farted an awful lot to create all of that greenhouse effect to warm the Earth up. Remind me to never eat Mastodons and Sabre Tooth Tigers:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Yay, we get bullettime finally!!!
Dave
Has to be solitaire!!!
Dave
It just goes to show that you shouldn't piss off Messrs Vader & Tarkin - the Kuiper belt is really the remains of Alderaan!!!
Dave
Absolutely agreed. Neat Image and Noise Ninja have nothing to fear here, the quality of images that I saw on the website was not very good. Whether that is representative of this open source application, or how good it's potential is, I don't know. Neat Image Pro+ works for me (yes, I didn't download a pirate version, I paid for my copy). But then I also use Capture One Pro (not cheap, legit copy) and Photoshop CS2 for my photography. You pay for what you get.
Dave
Agreed. I simply refused to use anything like this for these very reasons, bought my own domain instead, and did my own website. Sure, I'm not part of a 'community', sure I don't get as many visitors, but I quite frankly couldn't care less!!!
Dave
Big deal...it's just another game. I lost a lot of respect for Blizzard when they sued the open source battle.net guys...not to mention mass bannings on WoW, and their attitude in general. It might be their game, they might make good games, but things like DRM, and draconian rulings on battle.net have been a HUGE turnoff. As far as I'm concerned, Blizzard has lost respect for its customers, but sadly, most of those customers are too stupid (and addicted to WoW) to realise this.
Dave
Ah yes, but when it comes to someone using something that is GPL'd (Version 2), and supposedly offers freedoms, but doesn't because they're using DRM, and that person can't do what they want, is that right? Is that meeting the original design intent for the GPL? Nope.
Linus doesn't care about GPL v3 because he's worried about corporate interest in Linux dropping (and thus his income dropping), more than the spirit of the GPL. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure it all out..
Dave
hahaha, I say leave the videos up there, she looks rather hot ;-)
From a moral point of view, it'll teach her to keep her legs closed, and stop doing Paris Hilton style home porn videos won't it? Let her learn the hard way.
Dave
That's because no US government body had the balls to take full legal action against Sony as a corporation for their illegal computer misconduct. It is clear to me that governments are at the 'beck and call' of corporations like Sony, instead of representing and SERVING the people who they are MEANT to serve.
And do you want to know what the sad thing is? Most people have been brainwashed so badly into being apathetic that they simply don't care. The future for our society looks like a bleak corporate lead dictatorship to my eyes - it will make George Orwell's 1984 look happy by comparison.
Dave
I for one believe in extra terrestial life forms - the number of star systems, and therefore planets out there is huge. The building blocks for life are common, humans, and the Earth is nothing special like we'd mostly like to believe. Ergo if there are other Earth like planets, there'll be other species. And it's safe to logically assume that a percentage of these other species, no matter how small will be intelligent, and that a smaller percentage of these will be capable of faster than light travel in some manner.
As someone who remembers seeing a UFO up close and personally when I was 11, I'm totally convinced. No, I wasn't smoking pot, doing drugs, drinking, or hallucinating. I saw what I saw, and can give a solid description of both size, shape, appearance, behaviour etc. I have no doubt that those workers saw a UFO, and this is all just a big cover up. The government knows that UFOs exist, that Aliens exist, but it doesn't feel that the normal populace is ready for this big shock. It would be nice if the governments let us decide what is good for us.
Dave
Get it right, please at least have some idea what you are talking about. George did the brief treatise for The Empire Strikes Back. It was then given to Leigh Brackett to write the actual screenplay. You might want to read the wiki entry for this movie:
_ The_Empire_Strikes_Back
/. has gone to the dogs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_V:
I can't believe that this type of shite gets modded as "+5 insightful", it really does show that moderation on
Anyways, this particular movie was the best of the entire Star Wars because it had a professional screenwriter write the screenplay, the others had George's usually poor efforts...
Dave
Welcome to America, the land of no freedoms! No rights! Enjoy your stay.
Dave
Why isn't Sony being criminally charged for various computer crimes? Why are they NOT being punished?
Are the laws different for big companies and rich people, than for the little bloke? (I know the answer to this, but couldn't help but pose the question anyways!).
Dave
I disagree. I'd rather see companies like Nvidia help the community by co-developer totally open code, not this binary crap that is at a complete disagreement to the whole ideal of the GPL - by the community, for the community. Allowing binary code just simply allows companies like Nvidia to do whatever they want, without respect for the community. Furthermore, I can't cound how many times in the past 2 years of the 2.6 kernel tree that Nvidia drivers have been broken and incompatible with a particular kernel release.
By Linus saying he doesn't want to get involved in the politics, he is. We all know Linus' stance on the FSF and its goals, and I have lost all respect for him, and the Linux kernel as part of his anti FSF behaviour.
Furthermore, some developers who's code is in the kernel might NOT like what these big companies do with their binary drivers. My suggestion to them is to remove their code from the kernel tree, and to walk away from helping develop the Linux kernel in protest. That's if they really value what the FSF is fighting for. If they just want to be trained monkeys sitting on the Linux kernel and riding Linus' back, then keep coding away and lack the courage to stand up for what we all know is right.
Dave
And how does this stop me (an Australian citizen, in Australia) from melting down US coins :)
Dave
Yeah well, the powers that be are interested in controlling the populace, and they're using the terrorism baloney to do this. Sadly, the average person is far too stupid to realise this.
Dave
I agree. I played the original NWN, and to be honest, thought Diablo was better. I didn't care too much for Diablo II, it lost a lot of the story, feel and playability in trying to become 'bigger'. If you haven't tried it, try grabbing a copy of a game called Darkstone. Based on the Diablo engine, but with a zoomable/pannable camera like NWN (but better imho). The graphics aren't half bad either imho, with a decent story.
Dave
Does IE run on other platforms? Nope. If you want to run IE, then you *must* use Microsoft Windows (I'm leaving out virtualisation here). That means more sales of Microsoft Windows. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise that by Microsoft making and bundling its own browser with the operating system, they are getting unfair leverage. Personally, the DOJ should have made either:
1. Microsoft totally remove MSN Messenger, Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer, ONLY offering them as separate downloads.
2. Microsoft port above mentioned software to other platforms like Linux and BSD (and make sure that Microsoft makes them work).
The only browser that uses ActiveX is IE, and let's face it, that ONLY runs on Windows. What happens if you come across a site that demands ActiveX (and won't function without it?).
Why do so many web designers bitch about having to fuck around with designing a website to comply with several different browser architectures? Because Microsoft's IE has long since refused to behave itself and abide by standards. Microsoft itself has taken and bastardised many standards, to suit its own needs. It is all designed for one thing:
Platform lock in.
Nothing more and nothing less. And platform lock in tactics (when you have a very wide margin of sale over your competitors) is regarded in most western countries as being anti competitive and monopolistic.
My real question is why did the DOJ settlement really do fuck all?
Dave
Well, what did you guys expect?
I'll spell it out for you all:
If you allow Business to have ANY input into goverments, this is what will happen. Like RMS, I believe that business should have absolute NO say, input, communication with government. Period. Governments are for the people, and only the people, no more, no less. A business entity is NOT the people.
As soon as the people of the US realise the current political system is stuffed, and forcibly move for an overthrow of the current government and political system, with the intent of putting in place a true democracy, the better. Of course, Australia is no better. It seems that apathy rules the majority of people these days. That, and disinterest.
Dave
Yup. I'm half way through the transcript of the chat log and let's just say I smell a big FAT rat. Nat was questioned about patents and exactly *what* the payments were for specifically, but sidestepped it with some bullshit about how patent deals are usually valued and struck [as a general rule].
:-) Novell offers indemnification to our customers, MS promises not to sue Novell customers, and Novell has invested heavily in the Open Invention Network which protects EVERYONE against patent lawsuits.
;)
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:39:53 bgerber: the reasons why GPLv3 is not liked for Novell is also valid for other companies. So, in the current state it would not be used by a large number of companies atm, I fear
No shit sherlock! Of course Novell doesn't like the GPL v3, cos it'll close up the nice little loopholes that they're abusing with GPL v2 and the current Microsoft/Novell deal. And they know it.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:40:44 So if you are customer A, and you buy Linux from one of those companies, they promise to step in and protect you from any patent lawsuits
Nov 27 11:40:51 But that promise is only for their customers
Nov 27 11:41:06 so if you make a copy of the software and give it to customer B, who did not pay Red Hat or Oracle, the promise does not extend to customer B
Well, as far as I'm concerned this is totally against the spirit of the GPL, and whilst GPL v2 might allow this via loopholes, GPL v3 will [rightly so] close this loophole. The GPL has always been about the user having the same rights as the person they bought the softare from, or where they might have received the software from (ie. given/lent/copied). With the scenarios above, you're giving patent protection to one customer, but if that customer gives the software to someone else, that other person loses that patent protection. This is not acceptable imho.
Then there's this line:
ov 27 11:43:27 We'll be adding Open XML support to OpenOffice
OpenOffice doesn't need it, and these patches should be rejected. ODF is the OpenOffice native format of choice, and this is what should be pushed. We don't need to taint OpenOffice with potential patent issues from the Microsoft Cancer.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 11:55:08 We will do everything we can to support you
Wouldn't it be better if Novell (and others) moved to force the US government to illegalise and remove software patents as they simply create monopolies, they are not innovative, and they're not legal anyways (despite what the US government might say). They do not result in a better deal for customers, they result in a better deal for the mega corporations tht want to screw over the little guy and remove any competition so that they can make a bigger buck and make their lazy shareholders make more money. I don't care one bit about shareholders, they can get off their fat asses and make a decent, honest buck as far as I'm concerned.
See this line:
Nov 27 12:11:33 I do not fear Shuttleworth, because people who fear that openSUSE might violate GPL will notgo to a distro which actually is doing it.
This *proves* without doubt that that other distribution (obviously Ubuntu) infringes on patents (obviously Microsoft patents) as far as Novell and Adrian is concerned. So, Nat, and others have blatantly lied earlier on in the conversation when they said that they did not with specificity which patents are involved in the deal. I hate liers.
Then there's this line:
Nov 27 12:14:56 The way I heard their statements, they were more of a threat to Microsoft than to Novell.
No Nat, it's a threat to *both* Novell and Microsoft. The door swings both ways, if it threatens Microsoft [because the patent convenant breaches the GPL [v3]), then it'll also threaten Novell, because it's agreeing to this patent covenant with Microsoft. That's not a hard concept to understand, no?
and
Well...I think that if enough FSF/FLOSS applications migrate to a GPL v3 licence, it still won't be enough. What will happen? Novell (and others) will take GPL v2 stuff and either use it as is, or improve it. Will they give improvements/changes back to the community? I honestly doubt it. Think about it - in the US, legal court cases are decided by who has the most amount of money, not who is legally right.
/. poster above said that the US would be shooting itself in the foot, and US business would be left behind the rest of the world, not so. Most US business couldn't care less about the GPL, or the principles of the GPL. And guess where most of the worlds major PC hardware and software development companies come from? Yes, the US. As soon as Europe, South America, etc, start sanctioning US based hardware/software, they'd be cutting themselves off. Munich still hasn't implemented Linux on its desktops, despite over 3 years of 'development'. If the US government took sanctions stopping software/hardware from being sold to the EU, there is NO way that the EU could recover. Set up a PC hardware manufacturing business to support the entire EU quick enough to avoid issues with businesses not having said supply of PC? I doubt it. Software conversion to FLOSS alternatives? I highly doubt it.
Another
To put it simply, the US has far too much of a business anchor in the rest of the world, and on technology/hardware/software that is necessary for most of the world outside of the US to operate. Some might argue that the US economy would fail due to sanctions from other countries, etc, but I doubt it. It 's possible, but I doubt it.
FLOSS is about 20 years too late. I hate to say it, but it is.
If the Linux kernel was able to be moved to GPL v3, then Novell would be in serious trouble. Then, there are the BSD tools, many businesses like Novell would use that instead of GPL software. Big business can throw big money to hire developers to develop new software based on BSD software. What would happen to GPL software? It'd still remain, but only used by the community. Business would lose interest in Linux and would stop developing interoperative software and hardware. Furthermore, I foresee that big business wouldn't be so nice to Linux if it can't use it [without restrictions]. Big business would probably join Microsoft and Novell in a patent lawsuit against Linux and FLOSS. And again, we come back to our big point, that small developers/companies cannot afford the legal fight against big business. Not in a US style legal system.
For things to work, FSF tools AND the Linux kernel need to be moved to GPL v3 pronto. Software patents need to be abolished in the US, and copyright reduced back to 20 years. ALL Linux development and deployment must be moved overseas, away from the US, and developed in pro GPL countries. Over an extended period of time, the US software industry would NOT be able to compete with the lower costs of FSF based software etc, and non US countries would adopt it for several reasons:
1. Cost
2. Freedom to modify
3. Availability of the source code to determine if back doors are implemented etc
Once US based software is no longer so importantant to the global economy, then you'll see software patents relax in the US, and costs reduce in order to compete with FSF offerings. Then, and only then will we have a more competitive based software system.
The key thing is that South America and Europe and Asia MUST resist software patents and proprietary software for probably another 20 odd years. The big problem is proprietary hardware that only really supports proprietary software like Microsoft Windows, excluding FSF software offerings. If this isn't resolved, then uptake of FSF and GNU/Linux in particular will never achieve more than a small percentage of the user base, no matter how much cheaper it is.
Remember one thing:
The average computer user doesn't even remotely care about the goals of th
The power of the movie industry is strong. I can hear New Line Cinema referring to the Lord of the Rings trilogy as 'my precious, they wantse you, but they can't have you'.
In an ideal world, the Lord of the Rings novels should have returned to the public domain a long time ago, and licensing fees et al would be irrelevant. I'm not sure if copyright is transferable or not, but if so, that pretty much makes copyright periods a very moot point.
Dave
From my experience, Nikon fanboys are just as bad as Canon fanboys. Most of the Canon guys I know (via the POTN forums) aren't rabid Canon fans - they realise that the camera is simply a tool to get the job done.
I personally prefer the ergonomics of the Canon cameras, they just make more sense to me. That doesn't mean to say that Nikon's ergonomics are bad, they're just not my cuppa tea. In terms of AF, Canon wins, hands down. There's a reason why sports photographers predominantly use a Canon DSLR - as high as 90%. Look at major sporting events you'll see a never ending see of Canon L series lenses, and very few from camera/lenses from other manufacturers. Wildlife photography seems to be pretty even. Most fashion/model photographers seem to prefer Nikons, probably cos the Nikon flash system and metering system is better than Canon's offerings, although with e-ttl II and flash metering to suit, Canon has caught up a fair bit I personally believe.
Lenses - they're pretty even, although each side has some stunners that the other doesn't match. Canon's 70-200 f2.8 (both non IS and IS), and 300mm f2.8 IS lenses are probably the best in their respective fields. Canon's 400mm f2.8 IS and 600mm f4 IS are both just as good optically as their Nikon equivalents, and I believe both are cheaper to boot. I really haven't used Canon's wide angles (at least their primes), I have an older 20-35 f2.8 L series lens, which I think is reasonably good. I haven't tried any of Nikon's wide angle primes.
Canon's market share is dwindling, and this isn't because of the others catching up I might add. Canon has sat on its ass for the past 2 years, releasing a 30D, which at best is a point update to the 20D, and the 400D, again a minor update. Nothing truly innovative. The only true innovative release is the 5D, stunning images, stunning noise performance (but AF is so-so in all honesty and build quality is so-so). Canon is doing what Nvidia did - it has plenty up its sleeves and its only doing just enough to keep the market share. I personally hate this type of marketing behaviour, as its bad for the customer.
In general, Canon's CMOS sensors are better than Nikon's, but the gap has closed. Typically, the Canon sensor has bettered the opposition in resolution (it's not all about the number of pixels you know), and noise performance. With the D80, Nikon has caught up, and in all honesty, I think surpassed Canon's efforts with the 400D, which is very interesting. From a technology point of view, CMOS is always going to offer a better noise performance, and also a better usage performance from batteries. If you check the pixel peeping tests over at dpreview, you'll see that Canon/Nikon are very close now with the 400D/D80 respectively. Note that the D80 is around $200 more expensive than the Canon.
My personal thoughts on the top end cameras, is that the 1Ds Mark II is probably the best DSLR on the market, but I do feel that it has too many pixels. The laws of physics don't change, not even for Canon, and with 16mp on a full frame sensor, you're hitting diffraction issues at f5.6-f8. A good page on diffraction in DSLRs is:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffrac tion-photography.htm
Nikon's D2X hits diffraction issues at f5.6! We've become so enamoured of the megapixel race that we've forgot that there's more to it than just the number count. Sure, you can pack in more pixels, but then you seriously start to lose resolution. The D200 is a very nice camera, excellent value for money as well. Either way, Canon/Nikon you can't really go wrong, as long as your competent with the camera.
I do wholeheartedly agree with you that both systems are very competitive, it all evens out. A good photographer will take great images with either system.
I will take issue with your comment that Nikon's macro lenses are better than Canons. The 100mm f2.8 is one of
Can you provide your source as to proving that Canon DSLRs alter the sharpening and do colour enhancement on RAW images? I simply ask, as to the best of my knowledge this is completely false. RAW is simply the RAW data, the number of photons hitting the pixels on the sensor. Nothing more and nothing less. Canon, like Nikon stores the WB data, and interpolates colours from the Bayer RGB filter in place. This is not colour enhancement as you put it, it is necessary, otherwise all digital images would be monotone.
Dave
Wow, those damn cavemen and women must have farted an awful lot to create all of that greenhouse effect to warm the Earth up. Remind me to never eat Mastodons and Sabre Tooth Tigers :-)
Dave