gcc: Pretty sweet, I still prefer Digital's compiler.
gimp: Interesting interface, give me Photoshop or Paintshop any day of the week.
gnome: Spare me. gnome, kde, windowmaker, twm: What do they have in common? They all suck. I use Afterstep. It is small, fast, and doesn't give me a lot of crap I don't need.
emacs: I use vi. There are (or were?) alternate implementations of emacs which are not covered by the GPL.
Oh it works, just not as well as BSD-licensed projects do. Compare how much money RedHat, Suse, Caldera has made with Linux to how much Sun, NeXT, Apple, DEC (now Compaq), SCO, Unisys, SGI, anyone who sells code based on BSD, SVR4, or X. Tell me again the GPL is more popular than a truly free license.
You obviously have not read the GPL otherwise you would know that the GPL is *almost* as restrictive as any commercial license whereas a BSD or X license is truly free.
I think the GPL is to the detriment of the industry. Once a program has the virus attached, it becomes useless for real work.
I didn't bother to back it up because facts do not matter on Slashdot. As the AC (who was me, I slipped) posted, unless it says "GPL r00lz" you are a troll.
I went ahead with the troll work because you Slashdotters make it so much fun. Someone should conduct a real, scientific study and demonstrate that Slashdot moderators will moderate down any critisms of the GPL or Linux regardless of the validity of the statements.
I would rather see that they not GPL the client. It would be far too valuable under a BSD license or an X Consortium license. Whereas if the software were placed under the GPL the code becomes useless for general use.
Hotmail runs FreeBSD on the front end and Solaris on the backend, last I heard.
As for the 70% of ISPs, I am surprised it is that low. I know many people at many different ISPs. With one exception, they run FreeBSD or BSD/OS. The exception is one site running Solaris. When you ask them why they do not run Linux, they all give the same basic responses: too slow, crash-prone, weak under heavy loads, easily hacked.
But they must be able to retain direct control over the Java environment. If they did not, anyone could go off and create their own Java that is not compatible with Sun's. Microsoft did this even with the restrictions in place.
Java's key feature is its platform independence. Anyone can implement an open standard, but can you run a Solaris program on DEC UNIX?
I really doubt this is much of a surprise to anyone. I avoided upgrading to a K6-3 last quarter because I am waiting on K7 to come down enough to be affordable. I am certain I am not the only one in this boat. The forthcoming (at the time) K7 probably also put most of that dent in Intel sales.
Proprietary and standard are not mutually exclusive. Take Windows. How much more proprietary does it get? Still, it is the standard desktop operating system. Netscape once held the same position in browsers. Vax once did in mini-computers. Intel does among microprocessors. AutoCAD did among CAD applications. This list just goes on and on. Don't listen too much to what the anti-Microsoft people would have you believe otherwise your world view will become quite warped.
I think it is kind of funny that those who agree with me post sensible, well-thought out responses and (the majority of) those who don't post messages one step above (and below) name calling.
Moderators also moderate down anything that is not pro-Linux/pro-GNU. "News for Nerds" does not mean "News for Linuxers". Anything that is pro-BSD is usually moderated down. Anything that is pro-Be is frequently moderated down.
It is not unusual to see random comments and junk marked "interesting" or "informative" regardless of the validity of the content. This is unacceptable behaviour the Slashdot moderators.
If I recall correctly, Clarke was on the development teams for both RADAR and the first communication satellite (Early Bird?). Can someone correct me on this?
Slashdot Mirror
gcc: Pretty sweet, I still prefer Digital's compiler.
gimp: Interesting interface, give me Photoshop or Paintshop any day of the week.
gnome: Spare me. gnome, kde, windowmaker, twm: What do they have in common? They all suck. I use Afterstep. It is small, fast, and doesn't give me a lot of crap I don't need.
emacs: I use vi. There are (or were?) alternate implementations of emacs which are not covered by the GPL.
Oh it works, just not as well as BSD-licensed projects do. Compare how much money RedHat, Suse, Caldera has made with Linux to how much Sun, NeXT, Apple, DEC (now Compaq), SCO, Unisys, SGI, anyone who sells code based on BSD, SVR4, or X. Tell me again the GPL is more popular than a truly free license.
You obviously have not read the GPL otherwise you would know that the GPL is *almost* as restrictive as any commercial license whereas a BSD or X license is truly free.
Responses to everyone:
I think the GPL is to the detriment of the industry. Once a program has the virus attached, it becomes useless for real work.
I didn't bother to back it up because facts do not matter on Slashdot. As the AC (who was me, I slipped) posted, unless it says "GPL r00lz" you are a troll.
I went ahead with the troll work because you Slashdotters make it so much fun. Someone should conduct a real, scientific study and demonstrate that Slashdot moderators will moderate down any critisms of the GPL or Linux regardless of the validity of the statements.
Any questions I missed?
I would rather see that they not GPL the client. It would be far too valuable under a BSD license or an X Consortium license. Whereas if the software were placed under the GPL the code becomes useless for general use.
I saw it at the Uptown opening night (I was on TV afterwards), it totally ruled. It was probably one of the best movies ever made.
TOG is a software consortium of which SCO is one of many members. For a complete list of members, refer to http://www.opengroup.or g/overview/members/membership_list.htm
The Open Group owns the UNIX name and you pay the Open Group, not SCO. The Open Group also administers the tests.
Do your homework before posting.
Hotmail runs FreeBSD on the front end and Solaris on the backend, last I heard.
As for the 70% of ISPs, I am surprised it is that low. I know many people at many different ISPs. With one exception, they run FreeBSD or BSD/OS. The exception is one site running Solaris. When you ask them why they do not run Linux, they all give the same basic responses: too slow, crash-prone, weak under heavy loads, easily hacked.
UNIX is not owned by SCO nor do you have to pay and pass SCO tests.
ÂÀÑÊ ...
Êîãäà âû ýàáàòèòå äîâîëüíî
âîðîâàòü íàñòîÿùèé ëó÷øèé
I hope I spelled that correctly.
But they must be able to retain direct control over the Java environment. If they did not, anyone could go off and create their own Java that is not compatible with Sun's. Microsoft did this even with the restrictions in place.
Java's key feature is its platform independence. Anyone can implement an open standard, but can you run a Solaris program on DEC UNIX?
Cyrix.
IBM was also producing Cyrix chips for a while, I doubt they still do.
And is Transmeta working on an x86 clone?
I really doubt this is much of a surprise to anyone. I avoided upgrading to a K6-3 last quarter because I am waiting on K7 to come down enough to be affordable. I am certain I am not the only one in this boat. The forthcoming (at the time) K7 probably also put most of that dent in Intel sales.
Proprietary and standard are not mutually exclusive. Take Windows. How much more proprietary does it get? Still, it is the standard desktop operating system. Netscape once held the same position in browsers. Vax once did in mini-computers. Intel does among microprocessors. AutoCAD did among CAD applications. This list just goes on and on. Don't listen too much to what the anti-Microsoft people would have you believe otherwise your world view will become quite warped.
I think it is kind of funny that those who agree with me post sensible, well-thought out responses and (the majority of) those who don't post messages one step above (and below) name calling.
Moderators also moderate down anything that is not pro-Linux/pro-GNU. "News for Nerds" does not mean "News for Linuxers". Anything that is pro-BSD is usually moderated down. Anything that is pro-Be is frequently moderated down.
It is not unusual to see random comments and junk marked "interesting" or "informative" regardless of the validity of the content. This is unacceptable behaviour the Slashdot moderators.
Why was it uninformative? It provided correct information. I cannot help it if you cannot parse a mutli-clause sentence.
They should bother to read the entire post before commenting on it then.
This is built up frustration at the Slashdot moderators. They consistantly moderate posts incorrectly. The entire concept should be dropped.
Because Slashdot moderators are stupid. See my previous comments.
Considering that Beowulf is based on PVM and MPI, I forget which, maybe both, it should not be too difficult once those are ported.
This guy should be moderated up and funny.
If I recall correctly, Clarke was on the development teams for both RADAR and the first communication satellite (Early Bird?). Can someone correct me on this?
With luck, they'll be better Slashdot moderators.