This is exactly what Smalltalk was supposed to be, back in the 70's.
The novelty here is the intention to show only bussiness logic and replace the interpeter with the desktop (Smalltalk was language-oriented). A great effort has to be done in hiding the GUI-management code.
Hope that they succeed with this project. I've been pondering for some time now that the whole idea of applications is almost always wrong, and something like this is the correct way to go. At least the concept is far better than the applications+scripting language that Gnome is pursuing.
Isn't this what the semantic web is supposed to achieve, but in the client side not in the server side? Instead of relaying on Google to supply new services from time to time, we would be able to use its database to build our own types of query.
it's the first time a story of mine got its way to the front page! Enjoy it, slashdotters.
I forgot to add a link to the Google News coverage of this news.
1) they mix the codes of the GPL program and their own. They distribute the mixture. The distributed code gets virused and it will always be GPL'ed!
2) they build prop. code that runs without getting mixed with the GPL'ed. Then someone else mixes it with a GPL program and illegally distributes the whole as closed. When this whole is GPL'ed, the prop. code must be removed or GPL'ed also, but it's the owners choice.
OK, I'm browsing Lindows.com and it seems that they're actually publishing the source code to everyone as the should, not just their clients, so they are complying with the GPL. Note that publishing for everybody is mandatory for them!
As soon as the someone redistributes binaries, then it is THEIR responsibility to provide sources. (B provides binaries to C and D. It is B's responsibility to provide sources to C and D. A has no such responsibility.)
Well, that's not what I've read at the Free Software Foundation site: If you [...] distribute binaries [without source code] you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users [...] redistribute the binaries [...], they must pass along a copy of this written offer. [...] people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer.
So A gives B binary code and a promise of sources. B gives C the binary and the promise, so C can ask A to fulfill her promise and give the code away.
If providing source were a responsability of the intermediates, you couldn't even give a friend a copy of Mandrake CD 1 without violating the GPL.
I don't know for sure if Lindows provides sources to their GPL'ed work in the distributed CD. I think they don't, they publish the sources only through their web, which are only accesible to their clients (there is no 'fee for transferring the copy', there is actually a subscription to their services).
So me as a 'third party' can't get the sources from them. If this is the case then Lindows would be actually breaking the GPL, although in a minor form.
The GPL requires that everyone who DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY gets a copy of your GPL'ed binaries should be able to download the sources from you.
Lindows allows to download the sources, but only for their customers. If some gives me a binary GPL'ed program from de Lindows distribution, I can't download its source. So Lindows is taking my rights away. Isn't it?
Doesn't work. They (the copyright owners) have every right to add whatever propietary code they want to the GPL'ed code (that's what the Free As In Free Software means, you know).
If they wanted to release their code merged with hanfeld's, they should release the source too, and hahnfeld couldn't be sued then. But they don't want.
NeuStar would be expected to police the subdomain to ensure it remains free of inappropriate content. Web sites in the domain would be prohibited from linking to sites outside it, and they could not set up chat rooms, instant messaging (news - web sites) or other interactive services unless they could certify that they did not expose children to pedophiles or pose other risks.
For me, it means that only sites designed specifically for the.kids domain would be allowed. And, the no-external-linking and no-forum-chat-messaging gives an experience completelly different to what Internet is, and more close to TV or educational CDs. What will happen when those children have later to use the real Internet?
There is a new emerging paradigm for programing, Constraint Satisfaction. If you like to learn a new tool with an estimated important future and possibilities on AI, hardware design, logistic, expert systems, distributed agents and computer training, take a look at Constraint Programming Languages and CLIPS.
A.D. 2000: On January 1st Microsoft NZ web site is first to announce that they have survived year 21000 bug. Slashdot community rejoices and lots of people swear the new millennium starts next year. ESR agrees that/. "gets it".
A.D. 2001: Mozilla release is expected during this millennium, although plans are to integrate it with the upcoming linux-2.4.0-test92-pre17-ac3.1-25.9, which would mean a slight delay.
A.D. 2002: Evolution reaches a New Milestone: Evolution v1.2. Management congratulates for it only delayed 1 year after the project deadline established by NostradArthur the Prophet.
Flaws can also be found with closed source software. On the other side, with open source
it is more likely that many people find the same bug, and with just one who publishes the flaw it's enough.
Everybody knows what Kazza Lite is, a bloated down (?) version of the same thing. Keep consistent - do the same with Mozilla.
The "-zilla" bit should be kept for advocacy. I was worried about the Phoenix name - now i had just convinced my friends to use Mozilla, i have to tell them to change to Phoenix instead.
BTW "Zilla" is a very good name! Both for how it sounds and for advocacy. If the new name is Zilla, well - half of the work is already done! 8)
Slashdot Mirror
Is that what you mean?
This is exactly what Smalltalk was supposed to be, back in the 70's.
The novelty here is the intention to show only bussiness logic and replace the interpeter with the desktop (Smalltalk was language-oriented). A great effort has to be done in hiding the GUI-management code.
Hope that they succeed with this project. I've been pondering for some time now that the whole idea of applications is almost always wrong, and something like this is the correct way to go. At least the concept is far better than the applications+scripting language that Gnome is pursuing.
Isn't this what the semantic web is supposed to achieve, but in the client side not in the server side? Instead of relaying on Google to supply new services from time to time, we would be able to use its database to build our own types of query.
Thanks martinnt,
your'e the only one who understand me.
(As you can see, im a very polite bot)
and obtaining another 195 comments (and growing)? No please! 8)
Hey, if you don't like my spelling don't read it! ;P
Or contribute to Slashcode with a spellchecker.
Ok but that one scores to my Babylon translator, not me. I'm really learning English tonight! 8D
We would likely self-replicate a lot easier if we were crowded together in a small dark room, isn't it?
Ok, don't kill me. I'm not native E speaker and I got that wrong this time. Weren't editors supposed to oversee those errors? ;)
it's the first time a story of mine got its way to the front page! Enjoy it, slashdotters. I forgot to add a link to the Google News coverage of this news.
Oh wait... is the Japanese Borg Army who says that.
There are two possible scenarios here.
1) they mix the codes of the GPL program and their own. They distribute the mixture. The distributed code gets virused and it will always be GPL'ed!
2) they build prop. code that runs without getting mixed with the GPL'ed. Then someone else mixes it with a GPL program and illegally distributes the whole as closed. When this whole is GPL'ed, the prop. code must be removed or GPL'ed also, but it's the owners choice.
OK, I'm browsing Lindows.com and it seems that they're actually publishing the source code to everyone as the should, not just their clients, so they are complying with the GPL. Note that publishing for everybody is mandatory for them!
Well, that's not what I've read at the Free Software Foundation site: If you [...] distribute binaries [without source code] you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users [...] redistribute the binaries [...], they must pass along a copy of this written offer. [...] people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer.
So A gives B binary code and a promise of sources. B gives C the binary and the promise, so C can ask A to fulfill her promise and give the code away.
If providing source were a responsability of the intermediates, you couldn't even give a friend a copy of Mandrake CD 1 without violating the GPL.
I don't know for sure if Lindows provides sources to their GPL'ed work in the distributed CD. I think they don't, they publish the sources only through their web, which are only accesible to their clients (there is no 'fee for transferring the copy', there is actually a subscription to their services).
So me as a 'third party' can't get the sources from them. If this is the case then Lindows would be actually breaking the GPL, although in a minor form.
Lindows allows to download the sources, but only for their customers. If some gives me a binary GPL'ed program from de Lindows distribution, I can't download its source. So Lindows is taking my rights away. Isn't it?
Doesn't work. They (the copyright owners) have every right to add whatever propietary code they want to the GPL'ed code (that's what the Free As In Free Software means, you know).
If they wanted to release their code merged with hanfeld's, they should release the source too, and hahnfeld couldn't be sued then. But they don't want.
For me, it means that only sites designed specifically for the .kids domain would be allowed. And, the no-external-linking and no-forum-chat-messaging gives an experience completelly different to what Internet is, and more close to TV or educational CDs. What will happen when those children have later to use the real Internet?
There is a new emerging paradigm for programing, Constraint Satisfaction. If you like to learn a new tool with an estimated important future and possibilities on AI, hardware design, logistic, expert systems, distributed agents and computer training, take a look at Constraint Programming Languages and CLIPS.
A.D. 2000: On January 1st Microsoft NZ web site is first to announce that they have survived year 21000 bug. Slashdot community rejoices and lots of people swear the new millennium starts next year. ESR agrees that /. "gets it".
A.D. 2001: Mozilla release is expected during this millennium, although plans are to integrate it with the upcoming linux-2.4.0-test92-pre17-ac3.1-25.9, which would mean a slight delay.
A.D. 2002: Evolution reaches a New Milestone: Evolution v1.2. Management congratulates for it only delayed 1 year after the project deadline established by NostradArthur the Prophet.
Flaws can also be found with closed source software. On the other side, with open source it is more likely that many people find the same bug, and with just one who publishes the flaw it's enough.
Maybe you would enjoy Akira. As long as I can remember it has no annoying bouncing kid. Rather the opposite ;)
8( Am I a troll? One of those pesty hairy creatures? Snif snif! 8'(( I've never felt so insulted.
Everybody knows what Kazza Lite is, a bloated down (?) version of the same thing. Keep consistent - do the same with Mozilla.
The "-zilla" bit should be kept for advocacy. I was worried about the Phoenix name - now i had just convinced my friends to use Mozilla, i have to tell them to change to Phoenix instead.
BTW "Zilla" is a very good name! Both for how it sounds and for advocacy. If the new name is Zilla, well - half of the work is already done! 8)
Zilla is a very good name! Both for how it sounds and for advocacy.
I was worried about the Phoenix name - now i had just convinced my friends to use Mozilla, i have to tell them to change to Phoenix instead.
But if the new name is Zilla, well - half of the work is already done! 8)
He learnt it in this academy.