Actually, in its current state, it does not sound like the merger will help Trillian and Gaim because they are just allowing IMs/presence announcements to pass between the networks. That is not the same as the AIM/ICQ merger where they currently use the same protocol (OSCAR). So, for now at least, multi-protocol clients will have to support both, just users will not need to login to both.
Couldn't this cause problems with legacy apps that assume that there is only one mouse pointer? I don't know about you, but I usually that onMouseOut is called when there is no mouse pointer over an object. I usually do not keep track of the number of mouse pointers in that instance. Then again, mouse overs are tend to be used for minor things like highlighting buttons the mouse is over.
Yes, I do know a few people who use Trillian but will not use Gaim. Personally, I would like people talking to me to be using Gaim so I can use gaim-encryption or OTR (via gaim-otr) to encrypt conversations, but they tend to switch for the interface/lack of ads. Trillian does not support any secure encryption last I checked.
I have switched hard drives into otherwise new computers (or even the hard drive new, but copied over) with Windows 98, Windows XP, and Debian Linux without reinstalling the OS without any problems. Why did you?
Or, better yet, blitz-chess with a 5-minute timer.
That sounds awesome. We may have to try that some time as an alternative.
If you are not experienced at blitz chess, you will likely be rather surprised at how badly you play. I used to play some with my friends, and we would end up with games where a player could accidently sac their queen for nothing and still win within the time limit. If nothing else, the games are quite amusing.
I thought he was referring to the DRM implemented by the electronics industry, not the content industry protecting their copyrights through lawsuits (although, they are sometimes the same companies). Crippling hardware like DVD's CSS preventing (legal) format-shifting and Blu-ray/HD-DVD's support for movies which cannot be played at full res on analog hardware does nothing but annoy paying customers. Everyone knows the protections will be cracked and pirated versions will be floating around on the internet, but it will be illegal to make an uncrippled player that that skip the annoying commericals.
What license? I did not sign a license the last time I bought a CD. (Which, admittedly, was a long time ago.) I bought a CD which is protected from copying by copyright law which has explicit exceptions for personal use, which includes format-shifting (although that is not explicitly specified).
20 years, actually. Sony could license the patent, but I doubt Nintendo and MS would like the idea of paying license money to their competitor for every console sold.
I believe the OpenDocument format(s) allow for extensibility, but I see your point. Application developers can only be expected to use the standard where one exists. If they want to add something that is not in the standard like, say, a new type of animation for a presentation, then as long as they follow the standard way of extending OpenDocument, that is fine. The problem is if they decide to create a new extension for something that is already possible like how in JavaScript there are several ways to do the same thing because IE does it one way and the standard does it another way.
On 3, if the dialog was fair, then it would only appear when there is a loss of information. Currently, if I open a new word document, type "hi" and save as RTF, it will warn me about a potiential loss of information, even though no such loss will occur. Would it be too much trouble to check before warning the user?
I agree. On the other hand, everyone that I have showed FireFox to has switched. Everyone I have showed Gaim to have not only switched, but suggested it to their friends. (I suspect the same occured with FireFox, but I have not heard about it.) If you want people using these apps, you have to show them that they are noticably better than what they are currently using.
Your argument makes sense, but there is one thing confusing me about this issue. Doesn't copyright only control the right to, well, copy? I know part of the process is to make a copy, but I do not see how that matters if the original is destroyed. It seems to me like the company is buying a DVD, modifying it, and then reselling it (not a copy of it), which should be allowed under the first-sale doctrine. Is there any significant difference between what they are currently doing and if, say, they figured out how exactly to scratch the DVD so that the "naughty" parts would be unplayable by the DVD player?
If your DVR is already downloading the channel listings and commerical skipping info off the internet, syncing to an internet time server should be no problem at all.
I agree. Maybe these new features are not really significantly adding to memory/resources usage, but, IMO, if something can be implemented as an extension/plug-in, it should be. A spell-checker extension already exists. SpellBound was discussed in another thread. Does the new spell checking feature do anything that SpellBound could not do? If so, why is it built-in instead of being implemented as a default-enabled extension like Talkback and DOM Inspector?
For a good example of a modular application, see WinAMP. Everything is a plug-in. With no input plugins, it cannot open any media files. With no output plugins, it cannot play any media files. With no other plug-ins, the GUI is very simple. (I realize that Amarok/GStreamer have similar very modular designs.) Everything is kept separate whenever possible, so unwanted parts can simply be removed by the user.
No, unlicensed MP3 players/encoders are not legal. They infringe on patents held by Thomson Consumer Electronics. The patents expire in April 2010. Until then, Thomson has every right within the law to sue you for using or distributing an unlicensed player. Of course, most people completely ignore this for free products. Ubuntu is just being extra careful, I guess.
Well, it is on my hard drive, which is about a year or two old. The Beatles is a bad example because their music is popular and has been rereleased on multiple mediums including the CD my copy was ripped from. Just talking about long copyrights being a problem, most music from that era is probably quite difficult, if not impossible, to get a copy of. Now, if you could find a copy, it would be within fair use to rip it to a digital format and keep copying it to new hard drives, so you would not lose it. But if the format was DRMed, not only would it be impossible to access if the DRM had not been cracked, it would be illegal to copy under the DMCA.
I think the point is what happens if it breaks in 20-30 years or so (or sooner?) when the format is no longer supported (but the discs are still protected by copyright/DMCA)?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, in its current state, it does not sound like the merger will help Trillian and Gaim because they are just allowing IMs/presence announcements to pass between the networks. That is not the same as the AIM/ICQ merger where they currently use the same protocol (OSCAR). So, for now at least, multi-protocol clients will have to support both, just users will not need to login to both.
Couldn't this cause problems with legacy apps that assume that there is only one mouse pointer? I don't know about you, but I usually that onMouseOut is called when there is no mouse pointer over an object. I usually do not keep track of the number of mouse pointers in that instance. Then again, mouse overs are tend to be used for minor things like highlighting buttons the mouse is over.
Yes, I do know a few people who use Trillian but will not use Gaim. Personally, I would like people talking to me to be using Gaim so I can use gaim-encryption or OTR (via gaim-otr) to encrypt conversations, but they tend to switch for the interface/lack of ads. Trillian does not support any secure encryption last I checked.
I have switched hard drives into otherwise new computers (or even the hard drive new, but copied over) with Windows 98, Windows XP, and Debian Linux without reinstalling the OS without any problems. Why did you?
I thought he was referring to the DRM implemented by the electronics industry, not the content industry protecting their copyrights through lawsuits (although, they are sometimes the same companies). Crippling hardware like DVD's CSS preventing (legal) format-shifting and Blu-ray/HD-DVD's support for movies which cannot be played at full res on analog hardware does nothing but annoy paying customers. Everyone knows the protections will be cracked and pirated versions will be floating around on the internet, but it will be illegal to make an uncrippled player that that skip the annoying commericals.
What license? I did not sign a license the last time I bought a CD. (Which, admittedly, was a long time ago.) I bought a CD which is protected from copying by copyright law which has explicit exceptions for personal use, which includes format-shifting (although that is not explicitly specified).
20 years, actually. Sony could license the patent, but I doubt Nintendo and MS would like the idea of paying license money to their competitor for every console sold.
Yes, I know. I mainly use OOo, not Word, and I do not like OOo doing it either. I guess it would be extra effort.
I believe the OpenDocument format(s) allow for extensibility, but I see your point. Application developers can only be expected to use the standard where one exists. If they want to add something that is not in the standard like, say, a new type of animation for a presentation, then as long as they follow the standard way of extending OpenDocument, that is fine. The problem is if they decide to create a new extension for something that is already possible like how in JavaScript there are several ways to do the same thing because IE does it one way and the standard does it another way.
On 3, if the dialog was fair, then it would only appear when there is a loss of information. Currently, if I open a new word document, type "hi" and save as RTF, it will warn me about a potiential loss of information, even though no such loss will occur. Would it be too much trouble to check before warning the user?
I agree. On the other hand, everyone that I have showed FireFox to has switched. Everyone I have showed Gaim to have not only switched, but suggested it to their friends. (I suspect the same occured with FireFox, but I have not heard about it.) If you want people using these apps, you have to show them that they are noticably better than what they are currently using.
Your argument makes sense, but there is one thing confusing me about this issue. Doesn't copyright only control the right to, well, copy? I know part of the process is to make a copy, but I do not see how that matters if the original is destroyed. It seems to me like the company is buying a DVD, modifying it, and then reselling it (not a copy of it), which should be allowed under the first-sale doctrine. Is there any significant difference between what they are currently doing and if, say, they figured out how exactly to scratch the DVD so that the "naughty" parts would be unplayable by the DVD player?
What? The topic is copyright fair use and first sale doctrine, not anti-trust laws.
If your DVR is already downloading the channel listings and commerical skipping info off the internet, syncing to an internet time server should be no problem at all.
I agree. Maybe these new features are not really significantly adding to memory/resources usage, but, IMO, if something can be implemented as an extension/plug-in, it should be. A spell-checker extension already exists. SpellBound was discussed in another thread. Does the new spell checking feature do anything that SpellBound could not do? If so, why is it built-in instead of being implemented as a default-enabled extension like Talkback and DOM Inspector?
For a good example of a modular application, see WinAMP. Everything is a plug-in. With no input plugins, it cannot open any media files. With no output plugins, it cannot play any media files. With no other plug-ins, the GUI is very simple. (I realize that Amarok/GStreamer have similar very modular designs.) Everything is kept separate whenever possible, so unwanted parts can simply be removed by the user.
No, unlicensed MP3 players/encoders are not legal . They infringe on patents held by Thomson Consumer Electronics. The patents expire in April 2010. Until then, Thomson has every right within the law to sue you for using or distributing an unlicensed player. Of course, most people completely ignore this for free products. Ubuntu is just being extra careful, I guess.
The Zoom Image extension has a similar option for FireFox, although I think Opera's works a bit better.
Well, it is on my hard drive, which is about a year or two old. The Beatles is a bad example because their music is popular and has been rereleased on multiple mediums including the CD my copy was ripped from. Just talking about long copyrights being a problem, most music from that era is probably quite difficult, if not impossible, to get a copy of. Now, if you could find a copy, it would be within fair use to rip it to a digital format and keep copying it to new hard drives, so you would not lose it. But if the format was DRMed, not only would it be impossible to access if the DRM had not been cracked, it would be illegal to copy under the DMCA.
Good point, the Beatles song I am listening to is more like 40 years old.
There would be no one to recieve real e-mails from?
Exactly my point. Phone wiretaps are completely different than the issue at hand. I was replying to something suggesting the opposite.
Your vomit looks like square blocks lined up to a grid? You should probably talk to a doctor about that. ;)
I think the point is what happens if it breaks in 20-30 years or so (or sooner?) when the format is no longer supported (but the discs are still protected by copyright/DMCA)?