You can licence it through GPL, if you do open source work, or you can buy licences from Trolltech at a reasonalble price if you want to do closed source work.
"Reasonable" is a very relative word. Visual C++ costs $100 for the standard edition. QT standard edition for a single platform costs 15 times as much and doesn't include an IDE. Forget for a moment about all the other things that are included with Visual C++ and pretend it's just a license to distribute software developed with MFC. It's an absoloute bargain compared to QT.
But what about cross platform development, you're saying... Well, if you go the QT route your price jumps up to $2490 for both X11 and Win32. If you go the MFC/Visual Studio route your price stays at $100 and you invest a little effort in porting your MFC app to wxWidgets (they are very similar.) If you were thinking ahead you would have started with wxWidgets from the get-go and porting would be a non-issue.
Like I said though, "reasonable" is relative. Maybee you have thousands of dollars just burning a hole in your pocket. Personally, I don't.
The only realistic solution is for us geeks to install spam blockers, bayesian if possible, to as many friends' computers as possible, thus rendering mass mailings ineffective.
This is like virus scanning.. It's reactive rather than proactive. I'd rather see GPG with trust calculations properly integrated into Windows email clients and actively promoted. Tell your friends that you only read untrusted email once a week and encourage them to sign everything they send. Hell, I'd have no problem with trusted computing if end-users can choose who gets to certify that an application is trusted. The idea works well for Linux distros. You stick to the software provided by your distro and you know that some checking was done to make certain the software will not hose your system.
95% of the packages in testing or unstable would be obsolete within 2 weeks of burning the DVD anyway, so why waste the time?
It's not nearly that bad. Most of the packages in Debian are rarely updated, so it's fairly easy to keep the ISOs up to date with Jigdo. The real advantage is that it makes installation go faster and you can give a copy to someone with dial-up access.
It's a whopping huge deficiency in Debian's installation as a large number of people will assume that if they are able to boot then they have a kernel package installed and *MORE SERIOUSLY* that apt-get update/upgrade will install kernel security updates as they come along!
It's a known bug in the Woody installer and is fixed in the Sarge installer. Obviously a kernel is installed. The problem is that dpkg doesn't about it. You can fix the problem by installing the same kernel over itself if you're happy with the default 2.4 or 2.2 kernel.
I've burned Debian Woody DVDs using DVD+R, DVD-R and DVD+RW, and the compatability seems to be very bad with older DVD drives. Hopefully one of the Linux magazines will put out the 2 DVD set for Sarge once it's released. DVD recordables just don't cut it and CD sets are getting too large.
Actually, the best way is to just use Disc 1, get the base installation, and then do the rest via network (assuming you're on broadband - I shudder to think what an installation would be like over dialup).
When you can get a DVD+-R to work in another computer, the DVD's (1 for stable, 2 for testing or unstable) are quite nice. If you have hard-drive space to burn you can also grab the ISO's and mount them using loopback devices.
Where your analogy fails is that the price of Windows has been steadily dropping (for OEMs and corporations), or has stayed exactly the same for 10+ years (for retail).
Economies of scale should have driven the price of Windows throught the floor since they have certainly driven the cost or production per unit through the floor. The fact that the price has remained fairly steady while their profits have skyrocketed shows that they are eating up the vast price reductions that would have taken place if real competition existed.
So yes, even with the price remaining steady the added cost of Media Player and Internet Explorer is being passed down to consumers of Microsoft's operating system.
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute
on
Microsoft and EU Talks End
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm not an MS fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm curious as to what people here think is "fair" in a realistic sense.
Splitting up their products and selling them separately would be "fair". Bundling add-ons with a monopoly product is not fair.
Think back to the days when AT&T was the monopoly phone provider. AT&T sees the growing popularity of overnight delivery and says, "hey, we're a communication company, and overnight delivery is a type of communication. Let's get into that business as well."
At this point though FedEx is well established as the industry leader in overnight delivery. AT&T can't compete in this market without some help so it decides that free overnight delivery will be included with all phone subscriptions. At the same time it raises the price of phone service from $20/month to $100/month. In AT&T's version of events the new service is "free" and the price increase is unrelated, but obviously that service has a cost and that cost is being passed to consumers.
Microsoft would have you believe that Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player are integral parts of the OS and are given to consumers totally free of charge. They refuse to unbundle these components and reduce the price of the product appropriately. That's simply not fair. The line has to be drawn somewhere so that other companies can produce products for the Windows platform without the threat of Microsoft bundling in anything that proves comercially successful.
The problem is that every time they get called on this nonsence, the punishment is laughable. If they are allowed to continue selling the bundled version while being forced to sell an unbundle version at a slightly reduced price no-one will go for it. They have to be forced to unbundle conpletely and spin-off the portions of the company that produce the bundled items.
In the AT&T example I gave it would be like AT&T offering phone service w/o overnight delivery for $99.50. Obviously consumers are going to pay the 50 cents and get the overnight delivery service. The only way to avoid the problem is to tell AT&T that they simply can't get into the overnight delivery business.
Saying that "I don't have an obligation to my country" (like many of the people in this discussion have) and comparing the draft to slavery is disgusting.
I was in the military and I'm 100% against the draft. The only point of a draft in this day and age is to avoid paying a fair market value for the labor. The whole point of this nonsence is to avoid increasing taxes. Here's some food for thought, quoted from a statement by congressman Ron Paul (Republican):
Mr. Speaker, the most important reason to oppose reinstatement of a military draft is that conscription violates the very principles upon which this country was founded. The basic premise underlying conscription is that the individual belongs to the state, individual rights are granted by the state, and therefore politicians can abridge individual rights at will. In contrast, the philosophy which inspired America's founders, expressed in the Declaration of Independence, is that individuals possess natural, God-given rights which cannot be abridged by the government. Forcing people into military service against their will thus directly contradicts the philosophy of the Founding Fathers. A military draft also appears to contradict the constitutional prohibition of involuntary servitude.
During the War of 1812, Daniel Webster eloquently made the case that a military draft was unconstitutional: " Where is it written in the Constitution , in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents, and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty? Sir, I almost disdain to go to quotations and references to prove that such an abominable doctrine had no foundation in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to know that the instrument was intended as the basis of a free government, and that the power contended for is incompatible with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the substance of a free government. It is an attempt to show, by proof and argument, that we ourselves are subjects of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our government."
Another eloquent opponent of the draft was former President Ronald Reagan who in a 1979 column on conscription said: "...it rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state -- not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers -- to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn't a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea."
President Reagan and Daniel Webster are not the only prominent Americans to oppose conscription. In fact, throughout American history the draft has been opposed by Americans from across the political spectrum, from Henry David Thoreau to Barry Goldwater to Bill Bradley to Jesse Ventura. Organizations opposed to conscription range from the American Civil Liberties Union to the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society, and from the National Taxpayers Union to the Conservative Caucus. Other major figures opposing conscription include current Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to stand up for the long-term military interests of the United States, individual liberty, and values of the Declaration of Independence by cosponsoring my sense of Congress resolution opposing reinstatement of the military draft.
Apparently, they don't even run Linux (at least, not any more)!
I have one machine at EV1 (formerly Rackshack.net) and it continues to run GNU/Linux. I got the impression that the changes to RedHat's support policies were the real reason behind the switch from being a 100% linux shop to being a mixed shop with a Microsoft slant. I switched my box to Debian when RedHat dropped support for the 7.x versions, but I'm sure that wasn't an option for many customers. RedHat's licensing and support changes hit folks like EV1 particularly hard.
The news that EV1 has decided to support SCO is deeply disappointing to me and makes little sense considering the very limited amount of control they have over the machines they lease. Guess it's time to move my box over to Verio.
That's the key point isn't it. They claimed IE had no cost and that removing it would result in no price reduction. I'm sure they'll claim the same here. It will be interesting to see what sort of a price reduction they get pinned down to. Any judgement requiring unbundling that doesn't also require a price reduction is useless.
Let me paint you all a little picture of my world, maybe this will help in understanding why sampling is part of the industry. I'm a 3D artist
Whoa, stop right there. Music is on an entirely different level from any other artistic work. Music is protected to the point of absurdity.
Think of that stupid Intel jingle you hear on TV. It's four damn notes, and yet there is a copyright attached to the order of the notes, there is a copyright attached to the performance of the notes, and there is a copyright attached to the recording of those notes. You don't need to know anything at all about music to come up with four notes that sound interesting together, and it's laughable to imagine that in the last million years those notes have never been performed in that order.
Can you imagine any four bits of data that would have so much protection in any other endeavour? The written word doesn't offer that much protection, computer programming doesn't offer that much protection, why does humming a few notes offer it?
I have quite a bit of respect for modelers and artists. The attention they recieve doesn't come close to the impact their work makes on a finished product. But the equivalent of these sampling cases to the modeller's world would be suing over 4 or 5 pixels in a texture. Can you imagine how fast that would be laughed out of court? The minimum bar for what constitutes a musical work is set far too low to shed a tear for the poor artists in these sorts of lawsuits.
So...anyone want to take bets on how many people actually buy a license? Probably fewer than the number of people who have bought X-10 minicams from those popup windows.
Do they have an affiliate program? I could definitely see selling licenses in a sort of evidence-eliminator way.
YOU ARE RUNNING UNLICENSED UNIX CODE Penalties for violating the SCO group's copyrights are $50,000 per line of infringing code. Our source scanner shows you are using 1,102,213 lines of proprietary and confidential SCO source code. CLICK HERE to purchase a SCO binary runtime license. Failure to do so will result in $55,110,650,000 of legal liability! This offer will not be repeated.
UT2003 is not as fast under Linux as it is under XP, which is disappointing. I'm not sure why that is...
UT2003 uses an OpenGL wrapper that makes it noticeably slower on Linux, even with optimal hardware. Enemy Territory would be a better way of comparing between the two, but I'd expect the ATI drivers on Linux to slow things down a bit.
Guess I'll stick with the SK41G until SATA is 100% reliable.
I just built out my own Shuttle system a couple of weeks ago, based around the SB65G2 and a P4 3Ghz.
I have four of the SK41G Shuttle boxes running Debian stable as web servers. I have to agree that the construction it top notch and the cooling system is very effective. The integrated sound chipset is also quite nice once you set up ALSA. The integrated video is unimpressive for a desktop, but works well enough on a server and there's an AGP 4x slot open with plenty of room for a decent video card (air circulation might be a problem though.) The only downsides I've noticed are that you need a newer kernel than Debian stable offers to get IDE DMA working properly, and the memory is limited to PC2100.
Do all of the features of the SB65G2 work with a 2.4 kernel? I'd rather not migrate to a 2.6 kernel or rely on proprietary drivers for AGP 8x and SATA. Other than that, the SB65G sounds like a worthwhile improvement.
If this keeps up, pretty soon the old Slashdot saying " I run Windows for my games" will be obsolete and you guys won't have an excuse to support Microsoft anymore.
If Linux had the same quantity of games available as Windows, my productivity would drop back down to virtually nothing. Sure, Savage and Enemy Territory offer unlimited replay value but sooner or later you get bored with the same games and go back to work.
Speaking of backlash, it's hard to imagine a more interesting target for the next MyDoom type worm. Could a worm that tries to get the index page off random domains bring down VeriSign?
Don't folks get it? All Mandrake is doing is... In other words, just adding another "super stable" release to the current release cycle.
Right... It looks more like an admission by Mandrake that they are unable to address the QA problems that have plagued their distro for years. Rather than putting even more effort into testing, they're just going to wait for all the major bugs to hit the folks that download before pressing CDs.
It's a good strategy on Mandrake's part since it's cheaper than hiring additional developers, but personally I wouldn't touch the new download version with a ten foot pole.
I wonder how this will affect the 18 month EOL schedule Mandrake announced after RedHat switched to a 12 month EOL schedule.
Like SCO's malloc fiasco, it's another case of, "Linux has it, but we're older than Linux, so we had it first!"
To be accurate, SGI admitted that the lineage of atealloc/atefree was questionable. Besides that, SCO didn't notice those functions...they were pointed out on Slashdot before SCO ever mentioned them. It seems that the best SCO's pattern recognition experts can find is that different UNIX like operating systems have similar define statements (the current header files) and switch statements (Berkeley Packet Filter).
When I was comparing the ancient Unix source against Linux I ignored those types of matches as being too stupid to bother examining.
Slashdot Mirror
You can licence it through GPL, if you do open source work, or you can buy licences from Trolltech at a reasonalble price if you want to do closed source work.
"Reasonable" is a very relative word. Visual C++ costs $100 for the standard edition. QT standard edition for a single platform costs 15 times as much and doesn't include an IDE. Forget for a moment about all the other things that are included with Visual C++ and pretend it's just a license to distribute software developed with MFC. It's an absoloute bargain compared to QT.
But what about cross platform development, you're saying... Well, if you go the QT route your price jumps up to $2490 for both X11 and Win32. If you go the MFC/Visual Studio route your price stays at $100 and you invest a little effort in porting your MFC app to wxWidgets (they are very similar.) If you were thinking ahead you would have started with wxWidgets from the get-go and porting would be a non-issue.
Like I said though, "reasonable" is relative. Maybee you have thousands of dollars just burning a hole in your pocket. Personally, I don't.
The only realistic solution is for us geeks to install spam blockers, bayesian if possible, to as many friends' computers as possible, thus rendering mass mailings ineffective.
This is like virus scanning.. It's reactive rather than proactive. I'd rather see GPG with trust calculations properly integrated into Windows email clients and actively promoted. Tell your friends that you only read untrusted email once a week and encourage them to sign everything they send. Hell, I'd have no problem with trusted computing if end-users can choose who gets to certify that an application is trusted. The idea works well for Linux distros. You stick to the software provided by your distro and you know that some checking was done to make certain the software will not hose your system.
95% of the packages in testing or unstable would be obsolete within 2 weeks of burning the DVD anyway, so why waste the time?
It's not nearly that bad. Most of the packages in Debian are rarely updated, so it's fairly easy to keep the ISOs up to date with Jigdo. The real advantage is that it makes installation go faster and you can give a copy to someone with dial-up access.
It's a whopping huge deficiency in Debian's installation as a large number of people will assume that if they are able to boot then they have a kernel package installed and *MORE SERIOUSLY* that apt-get update/upgrade will install kernel security updates as they come along!
It's a known bug in the Woody installer and is fixed in the Sarge installer. Obviously a kernel is installed. The problem is that dpkg doesn't about it. You can fix the problem by installing the same kernel over itself if you're happy with the default 2.4 or 2.2 kernel.
Some recent discussion of the problem.
I've burned Debian Woody DVDs using DVD+R, DVD-R and DVD+RW, and the compatability seems to be very bad with older DVD drives. Hopefully one of the Linux magazines will put out the 2 DVD set for Sarge once it's released. DVD recordables just don't cut it and CD sets are getting too large.
Actually, the best way is to just use Disc 1, get the base installation, and then do the rest via network (assuming you're on broadband - I shudder to think what an installation would be like over dialup).
When you can get a DVD+-R to work in another computer, the DVD's (1 for stable, 2 for testing or unstable) are quite nice. If you have hard-drive space to burn you can also grab the ISO's and mount them using loopback devices.
Where your analogy fails is that the price of Windows has been steadily dropping (for OEMs and corporations), or has stayed exactly the same for 10+ years (for retail).
Economies of scale should have driven the price of Windows throught the floor since they have certainly driven the cost or production per unit through the floor. The fact that the price has remained fairly steady while their profits have skyrocketed shows that they are eating up the vast price reductions that would have taken place if real competition existed.
So yes, even with the price remaining steady the added cost of Media Player and Internet Explorer is being passed down to consumers of Microsoft's operating system.
I'm not an MS fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm curious as to what people here think is "fair" in a realistic sense.
Splitting up their products and selling them separately would be "fair". Bundling add-ons with a monopoly product is not fair.
Think back to the days when AT&T was the monopoly phone provider. AT&T sees the growing popularity of overnight delivery and says, "hey, we're a communication company, and overnight delivery is a type of communication. Let's get into that business as well."
At this point though FedEx is well established as the industry leader in overnight delivery. AT&T can't compete in this market without some help so it decides that free overnight delivery will be included with all phone subscriptions. At the same time it raises the price of phone service from $20/month to $100/month. In AT&T's version of events the new service is "free" and the price increase is unrelated, but obviously that service has a cost and that cost is being passed to consumers.
Microsoft would have you believe that Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player are integral parts of the OS and are given to consumers totally free of charge. They refuse to unbundle these components and reduce the price of the product appropriately. That's simply not fair. The line has to be drawn somewhere so that other companies can produce products for the Windows platform without the threat of Microsoft bundling in anything that proves comercially successful.
The problem is that every time they get called on this nonsence, the punishment is laughable. If they are allowed to continue selling the bundled version while being forced to sell an unbundle version at a slightly reduced price no-one will go for it. They have to be forced to unbundle conpletely and spin-off the portions of the company that produce the bundled items.
In the AT&T example I gave it would be like AT&T offering phone service w/o overnight delivery for $99.50. Obviously consumers are going to pay the 50 cents and get the overnight delivery service. The only way to avoid the problem is to tell AT&T that they simply can't get into the overnight delivery business.
Although the notable difference is there doesn't seem to be any way to do alternate steps this time around.
Try the expert mode. It lets you jump around an specify options for the various kernel modules.
Saying that "I don't have an obligation to my country" (like many of the people in this discussion have) and comparing the draft to slavery is disgusting.
I was in the military and I'm 100% against the draft. The only point of a draft in this day and age is to avoid paying a fair market value for the labor. The whole point of this nonsence is to avoid increasing taxes. Here's some food for thought, quoted from a statement by congressman Ron Paul (Republican):
Mr. Speaker, the most important reason to oppose reinstatement of a military draft is that conscription violates the very principles upon which this country was founded. The basic premise underlying conscription is that the individual belongs to the state, individual rights are granted by the state, and therefore politicians can abridge individual rights at will. In contrast, the philosophy which inspired America's founders, expressed in the Declaration of Independence, is that individuals possess natural, God-given rights which cannot be abridged by the government. Forcing people into military service against their will thus directly contradicts the philosophy of the Founding Fathers. A military draft also appears to contradict the constitutional prohibition of involuntary servitude.
During the War of 1812, Daniel Webster eloquently made the case that a military draft was unconstitutional: " Where is it written in the Constitution , in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents, and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty? Sir, I almost disdain to go to quotations and references to prove that such an abominable doctrine had no foundation in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to know that the instrument was intended as the basis of a free government, and that the power contended for is incompatible with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the substance of a free government. It is an attempt to show, by proof and argument, that we ourselves are subjects of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our government."
Another eloquent opponent of the draft was former President Ronald Reagan who in a 1979 column on conscription said: "...it rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state -- not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers -- to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn't a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea."
President Reagan and Daniel Webster are not the only prominent Americans to oppose conscription. In fact, throughout American history the draft has been opposed by Americans from across the political spectrum, from Henry David Thoreau to Barry Goldwater to Bill Bradley to Jesse Ventura. Organizations opposed to conscription range from the American Civil Liberties Union to the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society, and from the National Taxpayers Union to the Conservative Caucus. Other major figures opposing conscription include current Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to stand up for the long-term military interests of the United States, individual liberty, and values of the Declaration of Independence by cosponsoring my sense of Congress resolution opposing reinstatement of the military draft.
It'll take a while to get rid of my server with EV1 as well.
I'll just have to host a copy of the 2.4.25 kernel
in protest for the time being.
Apparently, they don't even run Linux (at least, not any more)!
I have one machine at EV1 (formerly Rackshack.net) and it continues to run GNU/Linux. I got the impression that the changes to RedHat's support policies were the real reason behind the switch from being a 100% linux shop to being a mixed shop with a Microsoft slant. I switched my box to Debian when RedHat dropped support for the 7.x versions, but I'm sure that wasn't an option for many customers. RedHat's licensing and support changes hit folks like EV1 particularly hard.
The news that EV1 has decided to support SCO is deeply disappointing to me and makes little sense considering the very limited amount of control they have over the machines they lease. Guess it's time to move my box over to Verio.
That's the key point isn't it. They claimed IE had no cost and that removing it would result in no price reduction. I'm sure they'll claim the same here. It will be interesting to see what sort of a price reduction they get pinned down to. Any judgement requiring unbundling that doesn't also require a price reduction is useless.
Let me paint you all a little picture of my world, maybe this will help in understanding why sampling is part of the industry. I'm a 3D artist
Whoa, stop right there. Music is on an entirely different level from any other artistic work. Music is protected to the point of absurdity.
Think of that stupid Intel jingle you hear on TV. It's four damn notes, and yet there is a copyright attached to the order of the notes, there is a copyright attached to the performance of the notes, and there is a copyright attached to the recording of those notes. You don't need to know anything at all about music to come up with four notes that sound interesting together, and it's laughable to imagine that in the last million years those notes have never been performed in that order.
Can you imagine any four bits of data that would have so much protection in any other endeavour? The written word doesn't offer that much protection, computer programming doesn't offer that much protection, why does humming a few notes offer it?
I have quite a bit of respect for modelers and artists. The attention they recieve doesn't come close to the impact their work makes on a finished product. But the equivalent of these sampling cases to the modeller's world would be suing over 4 or 5 pixels in a texture. Can you imagine how fast that would be laughed out of court? The minimum bar for what constitutes a musical work is set far too low to shed a tear for the poor artists in these sorts of lawsuits.
So...anyone want to take bets on how many people actually buy a license? Probably fewer than the number of people who have bought X-10 minicams from those popup windows.
Do they have an affiliate program? I could definitely see selling licenses in a sort of evidence-eliminator way.
YOU ARE RUNNING UNLICENSED UNIX CODE
Penalties for violating the SCO group's copyrights
are $50,000 per line of infringing code. Our source
scanner shows you are using 1,102,213 lines of
proprietary and confidential SCO source code.
CLICK HERE to purchase a SCO
binary runtime license. Failure to do so will result
in $55,110,650,000 of legal liability!
This offer will not be repeated.
UT2003 is not as fast under Linux as it is under XP, which is disappointing. I'm not sure why that is...
UT2003 uses an OpenGL wrapper that makes it noticeably slower on Linux, even with optimal hardware. Enemy Territory would be a better way of comparing between the two, but I'd expect the ATI drivers on Linux to slow things down a bit.
Guess I'll stick with the SK41G until SATA is 100% reliable.
I just built out my own Shuttle system a couple of weeks ago, based around the SB65G2 and a P4 3Ghz.
I have four of the SK41G Shuttle boxes running Debian stable as web servers. I have to agree that the construction it top notch and the cooling system is very effective. The integrated sound chipset is also quite nice once you set up ALSA. The integrated video is unimpressive for a desktop, but works well enough on a server and there's an AGP 4x slot open with plenty of room for a decent video card (air circulation might be a problem though.) The only downsides I've noticed are that you need a newer kernel than Debian stable offers to get IDE DMA working properly, and the memory is limited to PC2100.
Do all of the features of the SB65G2 work with a 2.4 kernel? I'd rather not migrate to a 2.6 kernel or rely on proprietary drivers for AGP 8x and SATA. Other than that, the SB65G sounds like a worthwhile improvement.
If this keeps up, pretty soon the old Slashdot saying " I run Windows for my games" will be obsolete and you guys won't have an excuse to support Microsoft anymore.
If Linux had the same quantity of games available as Windows, my productivity would drop back down to virtually nothing. Sure, Savage and Enemy Territory offer unlimited replay value but sooner or later you get bored with the same games and go back to work.
Speaking of backlash, it's hard to imagine a more interesting target for the next MyDoom type worm. Could a worm that tries to get the index page off random domains bring down VeriSign?
Not that I'm suggesting anything.
Don't folks get it? All Mandrake is doing is... In other words, just adding another "super stable" release to the current release cycle.
Right... It looks more like an admission by Mandrake that they are unable to address the QA problems that have plagued their distro for years. Rather than putting even more effort into testing, they're just going to wait for all the major bugs to hit the folks that download before pressing CDs.
It's a good strategy on Mandrake's part since it's cheaper than hiring additional developers, but personally I wouldn't touch the new download version with a ten foot pole.
I wonder how this will affect the 18 month EOL schedule Mandrake announced after RedHat switched to a 12 month EOL schedule.
I believe that C/C++ is more portable across more platforms than Java will ever be, not to mention it's more solid and efficient.
That's not what the parent poster was claiming. He was comparing QT with Java. Does QT run on OS2 or Mac OS9?
Ah, but little do you know that 15" is a brand-name, used to describe the series of laptops with 8-inch screens...
This would be hysterical if it wasn't so damn true.
besides possible GPL violation what i find disturbing is that apparently no credit was given to the mplayer developers.
While I fully agree that anyone stealing GPL software deserves whatever lawsuits they get, the Mplayer team has violated the GPL in the past as well.
You're looking at the wrong domain. Wikipedia.org ranks roughly the same as Slashdot.
Like SCO's malloc fiasco, it's another case of, "Linux has it, but we're older than Linux, so we had it first!"
To be accurate, SGI admitted that the lineage of atealloc/atefree was questionable. Besides that, SCO didn't notice those functions...they were pointed out on Slashdot before SCO ever mentioned them. It seems that the best SCO's pattern recognition experts can find is that different UNIX like operating systems have similar define statements (the current header files) and switch statements (Berkeley Packet Filter).
When I was comparing the ancient Unix source against Linux I ignored those types of matches as being too stupid to bother examining.