You, my friend, gave me this idea for Thin Screen Computer - namely, to avoid outrageous import duties, only LCD screens would be imported (and keyboard/mouse, too) and the actual computer will remain in the U.S. or wherever.
I read somewhere that (the downsized) Turbolinux broke even in 2004. Still, that's because they're small, lean and focused, like other *small* Linux companies.
>Insiders are selling.
They'd better be; last time I checked their growth (newly added RHN subscriptions) was slowing down. Still, there were lucky that they went public when they did, else, they'd be a Sun department by now.
> Who do you know that uses Realplayer? How many Rhapsody users do you know? I bet they all fit on one hand.
How many AOL users do you know? I know none. And yet what is that supposed to mean? That AOL has no users?
And even though I don't know any RealPlayer users either, it doesn't mean that they have no customers or that those stupid comments are true. You can tell by their share price (RNWK) which has been stable in the past year.
> This seems like a good thing to me. One of the advantages of Linux not been driven by a need to produce revenue.
Yeah, and IBM & Friendz are members of ODSL because they're Caritas spinoffs.
No release date is given because: a) it's always been like that - it's gonna come out when it's ready and most likely there's a lot of work to be done. b) the post-BitKeeper CVS management with Git must be less convenient which slows down development.
>Will digital ever be as true as film, can an algorithm on a camera that converts colors and images to zero's and one's be as good as film which reacts naturally to the light?
Not an expert, but analog pics ARE no diff from digital - it's just that they come at a very high resolution (20mpix IIRC, so we're about half-way there). 20 years ago we had the same discussion of CD vs. LP - sampling, interpolation and all that crap. To "image nazis" it'll never be the same, to most folks who don't print it already is.
Why the poster is trying so hard to hype this thing up? What's wrong with PNG, TIFF or JPEG?
Sure, that new format may be useful for professional photographers (percentage-wise probably in low single numbers), but most of us will rarely need anything more sophisticated than 72dpi JPEG files (unless it's pr0n).
Who are they kidding? I can't even be bothered to go look at my printed/conventional photographs - any image that's not accessible via a URL or double- or single-click is to "expensive" to view:-) and this guy is talking about some new format...
The free Picasa was newsworthy (although I haven't looked at it after I installed it) but this thing is certainly not.
Their jobs should be outsourced to some dilligent people with (at least intermediate) English skills - for example some freelancers in India or the Phils.
Job Requirements: - Low-intermediate English skills - Owns a computer system with Internet access
Perhaps Slashdot editor position doesn't pay well, but I'm sure thousands would to do a great editing job for two-three hundred bucks a month.
Because "He's as mad as hell and he's not going take it any more" (http://www.filmsite.org/netw2.html) - and he's damn right.
The very fact that most (my guess) of Slashdot readership are held to relatively high standards while these fucking editor bozos are doing crappy job day-in day-out really pisses me off. Who the FUCK are those people?
I proposed that about a year ago and I'm sure others have done the same.
Aparently the editorial scum doesn't like the idea as the next natural step is asking for the ability to mod editors (whereby the lame ones would get fired). Stupid fucks.
>Doesn't that mean that the no-compete clause has been revoked with the rest of the license?
Of course not, as everyone who's ever read a similar agreement knows - because of survavibility of such non-compete and NDA clauses, those terms usually don't expire.
>Sure, there are maintainers, but it's possible to submit changes and get them approved.
True, but they have a proprietary CVS repository so the community can't submit their patches using non-proprietary tools.
It'd be nice if someone did a "shadow CVS" of government decisions, laws, etc. vs what should have been done and then critique would be very easy to document in real time with snapshots of this shadow CVS tree:-)
In all seriousness, closed source software, patents, etc. is nothing compared to the wasteful and corupt ways of the government.
> I think that they're being selfish and unreasonable
They're a for-profit company, after all.
If they have to spend extra time just to take out the bloat and re-QA - well, it's just gonna cost more to use Linux.
And it's not like you can "roll your own" - you change the kernel, you have to re-certify or else you're running an unsupported config, son. That's the case at least as far as enterprise distros and ISVs are concerned. It's all great but I just don't see how Gentoo, without h/w and s/w certifications, can replace enterprise distros and help solve this problem.
> 1. The full source code to the pieces that link or modified his code, or... > 2. That you no longer have the rights to use his code in your proprietary product > Again, at no point does YOUR PRODUCT somehow become GPL code
Some choice! Of course it becomes GPL-ed if I do everything by the spirit of GPL which calls for release of source code of derivative works. Your example describes a case of violation (not adherence) and settlement.
If I violate the licence (and get caught) it's even worse than cutting a deal and paying up. So of course I'll try not to get caught or perhaps I'll respect the licence (or avoid (mis)using GPL-ed code), but if I do use it, the only sensible action is to adhere to the licence, or else I'm fucked and I'd better just GPL-release whatever modification I've done.
>There is no way to continue to use GPL code in a violating way, period.
Exactly. And the cheapest way to get rid of licensing troubles is to release source code of your derivative works (or switch to a better licence). So, no, your code doesn't automatically become GPL, but it does in the end.
> Shareaza has a "commenting" system for just this purpose.
Ha, ha! Gazillions of dilligent sharers modding up "good" files - yea, right! Of course if I were a record company I'd mod all my fakes "excellent" and add some random comments ("ruL3z", "kewl", etc.).
> Especially when running 4 people on one box, open source (free) software is the only way to avoid killer software costs
Well if you ran 40 people on one box like Windows Terminal Service does you would have saved a lot of h/w expenses and maintenance as well. Besides the savings from using thin clients come from reduced cost of management (which lowers TCO) rather than savings on software licences.
> so I don't think Microsoft can compete in this arena.
Is that a fact? I would say their installed base of thin clients counts in millions.
Slashdot Mirror
>PDAs pre-stocked with videos (not language bound, if at all possible)
"pr0n for da poor"
That was a joke, hence the smiley
You, my friend, gave me this idea for Thin Screen Computer - namely, to avoid outrageous import duties, only LCD screens would be imported (and keyboard/mouse, too) and the actual computer will remain in the U.S. or wherever.
>You don't remember correctly. Linux was born in '91.
;-)
Really? He looks like 35-40 to me!
I read somewhere that (the downsized) Turbolinux broke even in 2004. Still, that's because they're small, lean and focused, like other *small* Linux companies.
>Insiders are selling.
They'd better be; last time I checked their growth (newly added RHN subscriptions) was slowing down.
Still, there were lucky that they went public when they did, else, they'd be a Sun department by now.
Riiiight, like they assimilated that French agency's news (and got sued).
And perhaps you might have heard of robots exclusion, too.
> Who do you know that uses Realplayer? How many Rhapsody users do you know? I bet they all fit on one hand.
How many AOL users do you know? I know none.
And yet what is that supposed to mean? That AOL has no users?
And even though I don't know any RealPlayer users either, it doesn't mean that they have no customers or that those stupid comments are true. You can tell by their share price (RNWK) which has been stable in the past year.
>Non-sublicensable meaning that it's not GPL2-compliant.
Meaning most users won't care (how many Linux users use it because it's GPL? probably less than 10%).
On the other hand, I am quite pessimistic about it taking off since PDF is so well entrenched.
I wonder if Microsoft will create an open source Linux implemenatation (using one of their licences).
> This seems like a good thing to me. One of the advantages of Linux not been driven by a need to produce revenue.
Yeah, and IBM & Friendz are members of ODSL because they're Caritas spinoffs.
No release date is given because:
a) it's always been like that - it's gonna come out when it's ready and most likely there's a lot of work to be done.
b) the post-BitKeeper CVS management with Git must be less convenient which slows down development.
> They're not even "giving" away 25 songs. It's 25 plays.
Perhaps the unspoken idea is that you ready your ripper before you play the songs.
And no matter what, that's still more than the competition.
Or, in other words, the number is pointless.
I downloaded ("deployed") Firefox on at least 20 systems and all but one (my notebook) were test machines.
>Will digital ever be as true as film, can an algorithm on a camera that converts colors and images to zero's and one's be as good as film which reacts naturally to the light?
Not an expert, but analog pics ARE no diff from digital - it's just that they come at a very high resolution (20mpix IIRC, so we're about half-way there).
20 years ago we had the same discussion of CD vs. LP - sampling, interpolation and all that crap.
To "image nazis" it'll never be the same, to most folks who don't print it already is.
Why the poster is trying so hard to hype this thing up?
:-) and this guy is talking about some new format...
What's wrong with PNG, TIFF or JPEG?
Sure, that new format may be useful for professional photographers (percentage-wise probably in low single numbers), but most of us will rarely need anything more sophisticated than 72dpi JPEG files (unless it's pr0n).
Who are they kidding? I can't even be bothered to go look at my printed/conventional photographs - any image that's not accessible via a URL or double- or single-click is to "expensive" to view
The free Picasa was newsworthy (although I haven't looked at it after I installed it) but this thing is certainly not.
I'm kind of worried about him - the way he sits on that porch reminds me very much of Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind.
2 50 6530100.htm)
(http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/25/stories/200504
>Another fine proofreading job, Zonk.
Their jobs should be outsourced to some dilligent people with (at least intermediate) English skills - for example some freelancers in India or the Phils.
Job Requirements:
- Low-intermediate English skills
- Owns a computer system with Internet access
Perhaps Slashdot editor position doesn't pay well, but I'm sure thousands would to do a great editing job for two-three hundred bucks a month.
Because "He's as mad as hell and he's not going take it any more" (http://www.filmsite.org/netw2.html) - and he's damn right.
The very fact that most (my guess) of Slashdot readership are held to relatively high standards while these fucking editor bozos are doing crappy job day-in day-out really pisses me off.
Who the FUCK are those people?
I proposed that about a year ago and I'm sure others have done the same.
Aparently the editorial scum doesn't like the idea as the next natural step is asking for the ability to mod editors (whereby the lame ones would get fired). Stupid fucks.
>Doesn't that mean that the no-compete clause has been revoked with the rest of the license?
Of course not, as everyone who's ever read a similar agreement knows - because of survavibility of such non-compete and NDA clauses, those terms usually don't expire.
>Sure, there are maintainers, but it's possible to submit changes and get them approved.
:-)
True, but they have a proprietary CVS repository so the community can't submit their patches using non-proprietary tools.
It'd be nice if someone did a "shadow CVS" of government decisions, laws, etc. vs what should have been done and then critique would be very easy to document in real time with snapshots of this shadow CVS tree
In all seriousness, closed source software, patents, etc. is nothing compared to the wasteful and corupt ways of the government.
> I think that they're being selfish and unreasonable
They're a for-profit company, after all.
If they have to spend extra time just to take out the bloat and re-QA - well, it's just gonna cost more to use Linux.
And it's not like you can "roll your own" - you change the kernel, you have to re-certify or else you're running an unsupported config, son.
That's the case at least as far as enterprise distros and ISVs are concerned.
It's all great but I just don't see how Gentoo, without h/w and s/w certifications, can replace enterprise distros and help solve this problem.
> 1. The full source code to the pieces that link or modified his code, or...
> 2. That you no longer have the rights to use his code in your proprietary product
> Again, at no point does YOUR PRODUCT somehow become GPL code
Some choice!
Of course it becomes GPL-ed if I do everything by the spirit of GPL which calls for release of source code of derivative works.
Your example describes a case of violation (not adherence) and settlement.
If I violate the licence (and get caught) it's even worse than cutting a deal and paying up.
So of course I'll try not to get caught or perhaps I'll respect the licence (or avoid (mis)using GPL-ed code), but if I do use it, the only sensible action is to adhere to the licence, or else I'm fucked and I'd better just GPL-release whatever modification I've done.
>There is no way to continue to use GPL code in a violating way, period.
Exactly. And the cheapest way to get rid of licensing troubles is to release source code of your derivative works (or switch to a better licence). So, no, your code doesn't automatically become GPL, but it does in the end.
Bullshit, I couldn't login to Gmail for an hour yesterday.
n
Search for gmail down and find 1.87 million results (courtessy of Google, if it works):
http://www.google.com/search?q=gmail+dow
BTW, somewhere I have a screenshot of Google.com down.
> Shareaza has a "commenting" system for just this purpose.
Ha, ha!
Gazillions of dilligent sharers modding up "good" files - yea, right!
Of course if I were a record company I'd mod all my fakes "excellent" and add some random comments ("ruL3z", "kewl", etc.).
> Especially when running 4 people on one box, open source (free) software is the only way to avoid killer software costs
Well if you ran 40 people on one box like Windows Terminal Service does you would have saved a lot of h/w expenses and maintenance as well.
Besides the savings from using thin clients come from reduced cost of management (which lowers TCO) rather than savings on software licences.
> so I don't think Microsoft can compete in this arena.
Is that a fact?
I would say their installed base of thin clients counts in millions.
>Adobe PDF + Macromedia Flash = Annimated PDFs
The good news is you'll be able to use a "unified" keygen.