And don't forget the IE5-IIS nastiness, another example of trying to "own" the internet. MS munged the tcp stack to screw up the sequence numbering, allowing IE and IIS to know when they were communicating with one another, as opposed to Netscape or Apache or whatever. This allowed them to do such things as send RSTs rather than the normal FIN/ACK sequence, which made IE and IIS look faster when working in combination. We found this purely by accident when writing a packet sniffer for Windows. When they got called on it, they apparently fixed things. This was all back in the late '90s, quite a bad time web-wise really.
People use microsoft products because of the monopoly, not because they are good products. Well, I am NOT a MS advocate, but this isn't always true. For example, in the corporate environment, there is no competitor for Exchange or Active Directory (that has the same ease-of-use). Those guys swear by this stuff, and it does seem to generally work well for them.
No, if I recall (this was years ago), Sun's compiler had troubles with standard C++. Another problem I recall was const correctness - it was picky about that. I can't remember all the details now, but early versions of KDE3 wouldn't compile.
At the time, Sun claimed they picked Gnome for technical reasons, mainly the use of CORBA. Of course, now that Gnome officially discourages the use of Bonobo, that doesn't seem so smart. I remember a Register article that claimed that senior Sun execs were appalled at the horribleness of Gnome's code, and felt that a buyout of TrollTech and a subsequent opening of Qt would have been the smarter route. But that's the Register, so who knows really.
Anyway, there was never any mention of licensing that I can recall. I could be wrong though.
Right, I was only speaking to the C++ part of VS. But it looks like there's a whole bunch of crippled stuff. Still, it's probably enough for small projects and learning, which is just what MS intended it for.
It's also because Sun's compiler couldn't deal with C++ name-mangling issues, if I remember correctly. I don't recall Sun coming right out and saying Qt's GPL licensing was a problem, but that's entirely possible.
A friend tells me that Visual C++ Express has no Windows app library support (MFC, ATL) or resource editors, and also no 64 bit compiler. Also something about debugging and breakpoints being crippled?
Haha, good question - well, the simple fact is this: aside from those few apps that I mentioned, OS X is just amazingly great, far and away the best desktop available. I have access to all the commercial apps that I may need, including professional invoicing software, a real copy of Office, a way better supported Skype, Parallels, and so on and so forth. So in time I'll have access to the best of several worlds - commercial-quality software, various KDE apps to fill in the gaps, the whole collection of great stuff available via MacPorts, and a Unix back end. Really, the combo is unbeatable.
TextMate is okay, actually. I do use it on occasion. But I just got really used to Kate after using it for years on end.
Oh, another thing I look forward to is Kontact. Mail.app doesn't support GPG properly (it is a hack, and is broken in Leopard), and Thunderbird doesn't support the OS X address book. Kontact should support both GPG and the address book properly. I've heard the next version of Thunderbird will too, but I'm not holding my breath.
I understand your concerns. From what I know, it's hoped that the final KDE app releases on OS X won't be redundant and will integrate nicely. We'll just have to wait and see before passing premature judgement, I suppose.
As far as "the point", for me it's apps like Kate and Umbrello, which have no acceptable OS X alternatives. Konsole would be nice too, although iTerm is okay. The Finder is junk, and so Konqueror would be nice, particularly for the kio_slave stuff (although to be fair, I do most of that from the command line anyway). KTorrent is great, and I could rid myself of Azureus once it's available. Etc., etc. There are a lot of cool KDE apps that I either do without now or run under X11, which kind of sucks.
The desktop isn't being ported, just the apps. And they will run natively as Cocoa apps. Well, they already do, but they need a lot of polishing before they are usable.
You're wrong, Christian apologist. There are NO "better-attested" accounts of Jesus than many, many other historical figures, as none of the Jesus accounts are contemporaneous. Just read this and don't tell me what "opinions" I can and cannot utter: http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Sorry, are you proposing the Bible as a realistic source of third-party, first-hand, contemporaneous accounts of the existence of Jesus? That is laughable.
That book you suggest I read seems to accept Jesus's existence a priori, and just discusses his purported divinity - which also presupposes a belief in God. Again, no.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it's not illegal to sell GPL software binaries. However, you have to supply the source to the buyer if they ask for it. From the GNU "Selling Free Software" essay:
"Actually we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to you, please read on."
Your NySql company would have to comply with this, of course. Maybe you meant they were just selling the binaries and not distributing the source to their customers and I misunderstood.
Actually, there's no first-person accounts of Jesus actually having existed at all. So the whole thing is really not worth discussing, since the guy was probably a literary invention.
No, I am not mad that people use it without paying me for it or not writing code themselves. And I don't care about people who make money with it (as that's not the point of this Slashdot story). I am talking about breathtakingly rude complainers who hold those who write software in their free time accountable for missing features, etc., as though they were paid to do it. They're not. It disillusions a lot of people and makes them quit writing software. That's what I'm talking about (and so was the original poster).
And quit telling people they "miss the point". There is no point. People write software and make it available. Others use it as they wish, license restrictions notwithstanding. Quit acting like there's some big revelation here; there isn't.
It's funny how the most shrill and offputting types in the software world are rarely the programmers themselves. You sound like one of those "You just don't get it!" New Economy types I used to have to deal with all the time.
He's talking about people who use it and give back nothing. Instead, they bug you for features and get all mad if it doesn't work exactly as they think it should. Rather than take a proactive role in getting the software up to their standards (say, by giving you money), they sit on the mailing lists/message boards and say all kinds of rude stuff. You see it on Slashdot all the time. Then in the next breath, these idiots are referring to "the community" and how much they are a part of it. Bullshit.
The people you are talking about are not freeloaders, and those are not the people the original poster was referring to. And I think he understands open source software perfectly well.
Slashdot Mirror
And don't forget the IE5-IIS nastiness, another example of trying to "own" the internet. MS munged the tcp stack to screw up the sequence numbering, allowing IE and IIS to know when they were communicating with one another, as opposed to Netscape or Apache or whatever. This allowed them to do such things as send RSTs rather than the normal FIN/ACK sequence, which made IE and IIS look faster when working in combination. We found this purely by accident when writing a packet sniffer for Windows. When they got called on it, they apparently fixed things. This was all back in the late '90s, quite a bad time web-wise really.
Well, a quick search found this for Office 2007 concerning its initial sales success:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9011237
http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197006187
Speaking anecdotally, I can say that I've seen it widely deployed. Not the case for Vista though.
No, if I recall (this was years ago), Sun's compiler had troubles with standard C++. Another problem I recall was const correctness - it was picky about that. I can't remember all the details now, but early versions of KDE3 wouldn't compile.
At the time, Sun claimed they picked Gnome for technical reasons, mainly the use of CORBA. Of course, now that Gnome officially discourages the use of Bonobo, that doesn't seem so smart. I remember a Register article that claimed that senior Sun execs were appalled at the horribleness of Gnome's code, and felt that a buyout of TrollTech and a subsequent opening of Qt would have been the smarter route. But that's the Register, so who knows really.
Anyway, there was never any mention of licensing that I can recall. I could be wrong though.
Right, I was only speaking to the C++ part of VS. But it looks like there's a whole bunch of crippled stuff. Still, it's probably enough for small projects and learning, which is just what MS intended it for.
It's also because Sun's compiler couldn't deal with C++ name-mangling issues, if I remember correctly. I don't recall Sun coming right out and saying Qt's GPL licensing was a problem, but that's entirely possible.
A friend tells me that Visual C++ Express has no Windows app library support (MFC, ATL) or resource editors, and also no 64 bit compiler. Also something about debugging and breakpoints being crippled?
Apache license != Apache web server
From the article:
"Enterprises on average used a whopping 94 different open source packages last year, compared to 75 in 2006..."
Hey, thanks for that, I'll check it out.
Really? Where did you hear that about the desktop? Well, very interesting if true.
Haha, good question - well, the simple fact is this: aside from those few apps that I mentioned, OS X is just amazingly great, far and away the best desktop available. I have access to all the commercial apps that I may need, including professional invoicing software, a real copy of Office, a way better supported Skype, Parallels, and so on and so forth. So in time I'll have access to the best of several worlds - commercial-quality software, various KDE apps to fill in the gaps, the whole collection of great stuff available via MacPorts, and a Unix back end. Really, the combo is unbeatable.
TextMate is okay, actually. I do use it on occasion. But I just got really used to Kate after using it for years on end.
Oh, another thing I look forward to is Kontact. Mail.app doesn't support GPG properly (it is a hack, and is broken in Leopard), and Thunderbird doesn't support the OS X address book. Kontact should support both GPG and the address book properly. I've heard the next version of Thunderbird will too, but I'm not holding my breath.
I understand your concerns. From what I know, it's hoped that the final KDE app releases on OS X won't be redundant and will integrate nicely. We'll just have to wait and see before passing premature judgement, I suppose.
As far as "the point", for me it's apps like Kate and Umbrello, which have no acceptable OS X alternatives. Konsole would be nice too, although iTerm is okay. The Finder is junk, and so Konqueror would be nice, particularly for the kio_slave stuff (although to be fair, I do most of that from the command line anyway). KTorrent is great, and I could rid myself of Azureus once it's available. Etc., etc. There are a lot of cool KDE apps that I either do without now or run under X11, which kind of sucks.
The desktop isn't being ported, just the apps. And they will run natively as Cocoa apps. Well, they already do, but they need a lot of polishing before they are usable.
Nope. The ability of certain people to invent new ways of making themselves seem important is astounding.
You're wrong, Christian apologist. There are NO "better-attested" accounts of Jesus than many, many other historical figures, as none of the Jesus accounts are contemporaneous. Just read this and don't tell me what "opinions" I can and cannot utter: http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Caesar has contemporaneous accounts, ie people verifiably living at the same time as him were recording his actions. There are none of Jesus.
Sorry, are you proposing the Bible as a realistic source of third-party, first-hand, contemporaneous accounts of the existence of Jesus? That is laughable.
That book you suggest I read seems to accept Jesus's existence a priori, and just discusses his purported divinity - which also presupposes a belief in God. Again, no.
Here's a link to take a look at when you have a moment: http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
There's just no evidence the guy existed. At all.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it's not illegal to sell GPL software binaries. However, you have to supply the source to the buyer if they ask for it. From the GNU "Selling Free Software" essay:
"Actually we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to you, please read on."
Your NySql company would have to comply with this, of course. Maybe you meant they were just selling the binaries and not distributing the source to their customers and I misunderstood.
Actually, there's no first-person accounts of Jesus actually having existed at all. So the whole thing is really not worth discussing, since the guy was probably a literary invention.
Wait a second, does this include Exchange? If so, that's huge.
The MacBook Air is silver. It has an aluminum case.
No, I am not mad that people use it without paying me for it or not writing code themselves. And I don't care about people who make money with it (as that's not the point of this Slashdot story). I am talking about breathtakingly rude complainers who hold those who write software in their free time accountable for missing features, etc., as though they were paid to do it. They're not. It disillusions a lot of people and makes them quit writing software. That's what I'm talking about (and so was the original poster).
And quit telling people they "miss the point". There is no point. People write software and make it available. Others use it as they wish, license restrictions notwithstanding. Quit acting like there's some big revelation here; there isn't.
It's funny how the most shrill and offputting types in the software world are rarely the programmers themselves. You sound like one of those "You just don't get it!" New Economy types I used to have to deal with all the time.
He's talking about people who use it and give back nothing. Instead, they bug you for features and get all mad if it doesn't work exactly as they think it should. Rather than take a proactive role in getting the software up to their standards (say, by giving you money), they sit on the mailing lists/message boards and say all kinds of rude stuff. You see it on Slashdot all the time. Then in the next breath, these idiots are referring to "the community" and how much they are a part of it. Bullshit.
The people you are talking about are not freeloaders, and those are not the people the original poster was referring to. And I think he understands open source software perfectly well.
I am 100% positive your sample size of 1 makes your argument anecdotal and thus irrelevant. But I'm sure you have no idea what I'm talking about.