I'm a network security person and have always been intrigued by the concept of the 'hardened' BSD kernel (which isn't really THAT hard), and some of the role-based and compartmentalized systems out there.
What is the status of the security of Linux's internals compared with other OS'es, (mostly as regards potential buffer overflows and root hacks) and what do you see as the overall direction, if any, of Linux's security beyond the standard UNIX security model.
They were unlucky in running their own business, so they sold the patent to Rand Corp., who tried to use it to extort money from every other computing device manufacurer (this was in the NPR interview, not personal opinion).
This forced a federal judge to revoke the patent. It was either that, or give a monopoly to Rand in the computer industry.
I think the only way they really got screwed, was that their names aren't well known as the originators of Eniac, and this is what the NPR article brought out. But every great computer innovation seems to have gone this way.
Remember the names of the guy's that wrote the first spreadsheet? How about the guy(s) that invented the transistor. Or the mouse, or the joystick, or any one of thousands of VERY important inventions or innovations. You may know some of them, but these people are mostly unknown to the masses.
This is when you start really respecting RMS and FSF. To put out the volume of really important software, KNOWING that there would be next to 0% return (sometimes not even real credit given) has to be worth something.
Last time I checked, a typical school environment doesn't reflect the 'real world' in any shape or form. It is an artificial environment whose rules are for the most part barbaric and neo-fascist. (Note that I'm not talking about the administrators and teachers. Those are other rules, and they really aren't in control, anyway).
There are many places and opportunities to learn about other people and social skills. In the real 'real world' for instance...
..At the media for completely blowing this out of proportion. I've got a rant farther down on this list, but in short, all this is just an approved proposal that evolution will not be covered on state assessment tests. That's about it.
I'm NOT homeschooling my daughter for religious reasons. I personally don't like the US school system and feel that my family and I can do a better job than the school system did for me.
I live in Kansas, about 30 miles from the capitol, where all this happened.
I live in Lawrence, Kansas, which is about as liberal as you can get in the Midwest.
I was also raised on a farm, in the 'boonies'.
I am not a Repubican (nor a Democrat, for that matter). I believe that the 'Religious Right' is wrong most of the time. I am not currenly affiliated with any religious group.
It appears that once again, 'crap' journalism has arisen to take a pretty tame fact and blow it WAAAAAAAYYY out of proportion.
Here's the deal: In the passed proposal, it does not ban, decry, condemn, or pass any type of judgement on evolution. It simply does not make it a subject that the state school board recommends that students *have* to be tested on. That's it. Nothing more. Here's more information, a few paragraphs down.
Are there religious undertones for this vote? Sure! Are there private agendas here? Sure, on both sides of the fence. But this is NOT a ban on evolution or a proposal of creationism teachings. It simply does not require evolution to be a state assessment test subject. Schools are NOT required to follow this and may teach the subject any way they wish.
What really offends me, are the several articles I found (MSNBC, CNN, etc) that basically mention the vote, and then spend the rest of the article talking about other states efforts to pass creationist laws. They mostly ignore the nature of the proposal and immediatly start yelling about the "Scopes Monkey Trial" and separation of church and state. I find it interesting that they mostly interview scientific "experts", who talk about evolution as a fact-theory, and then real 'christian' cretins who are about as reasonable as Fred Phelps. What about just plain old normal people who don't have any axes to grind? This is really CRAP journalism.
I'm a Kansan, and for the most part, this decision doesn't really hold much interest for me, one way or the other. I'm home schooling my daughter, and this doesn't really affect me. (And yes, when she is old enough she will learn about the "Theory of Evolution", but not about the "Fact of Evolution").
Check your facts before you start make REALLY offensive remarks, okay?
And 90% of all stats are made up by operations managers looking for more budget for helpdesk functions.
And the other 90% are made up by consulting firms looking to court SSO (single-sign-on) product companies......
Let's look at the numbers, shall we? Let's say we work for a company that has 70,000 (I have one in mind) employees that use computer systems and have at least one password.
Let's also assume that the helpdesk function at this company spends a 50/50 ratio on personel and equipment for help desk functions, and the median help desk person gets $40k per year (which is actually high to account for HR costs and benefits).
Lets do some math:
70,000 employees x $340 = $23,800,000
1/2 half of that is $1,190,000. At the median salary of $40k per year, that means that the helpdesk for this company has 297 1/2 people doing nothing but password recovery functions every year. I know for a fact that this is not true.
Now, not having read the article (I refuse to register to news sites), I'm sure that they figure things in such as lost productivity, research time, and so on. But I sincerly doubt that the actual costs are even approaching what Gartner gives.
You should take these things with a grain of salt. Different environments have different costs associated with password management. A large mainframe-based company can handle thousands of users with a very small staff for password functions. A loosly networked company, where everyone has Administrator on his NT box, and 15 servers to log into, will have higher. A large company will have smaller costs per capita than a mid-sized company.
As a matter of fact, you do. It's called fair-use.
Supreme Court case "Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.", 464 U.S. 417 (1984):
"The Court held that even unauthorized copying of television broadcasts may not be infringing, and embarked on a fair use analysis. Concerning the first factor, the purpose and character of the use, the Court stated: "If [home video recorders] were used to make copies for a commercial or profitmaking purpose, such use would presumptively be unfair." Id. at 449. The Court found the "contrary presumption" appropriate, however, since the evidence demonstrated thattimeshifting for home use was a noncommercial, nonprofit activity. Also significant was the nature of the work; timeshifting "merely enables a viewer to see... a work which he had been invited to witness in its entirety free of charge... " Id. Accordingly, the fact that the work was reproduced in its entirety "does not have its ordinary effect of militating against a fair use finding." Id. at 450."
As long as you don't sell it or use it in some commerical activity, it's okay.
Er..doesn't class action lawsuits require a, um, class of people to agree to sue? It seems to me that a bunch of geeks like myself to suing over what amounts to be nothing is pretty laughable.
The problem is that very money motivated individuals have problems understanding non-money motivated individuals.
The only thing that worries me is that a opportunistic lawyer could sucker a some into a lawsuit 'freeride', where they would bear the cost and you would get money (or consideration) if they won, and lose nothing if they lost. That seems to be where most supposed 'class-action' lawsuits come from these days.
Most of the distribution logistics have been worked out. For CTP, the online ordering was pretty good and quick (I got mine from Game Cellar), but the brick and mortar stores took much longer.
Now, however, with the lessons learned with CTP and the distribution channels established, and the obvious sucess of CTP for Linux (Heck I even saw it in our local Hastings bookstore!), the distribution of future Linux by Loki to mass distributors should be much faster, both in the US and Europe (GO, SUSE!)
"Breaker, this here is the Rubber Duck, and we got ourselves a convoy!"
What I am getting tired of is the 'wait-a-thons' that CNN (and this time ABC) put on for ANY type of 'interesting' or scandalous events. Rather than report on what happens as it happens, they pull so-called experts out of the woodwork, interview them until they are blue in the face, report that nothing has changed since five minutes ago, interview MORE people, report nothing has changed, repeat....Then after the 'event' happens (or doesn't), they sit and talk about why everyone's predictions were right or wrong. This happens for every major (US) event (and lots of minor) since the Gulf War. Report the news people, stop trying to make it.
At the top of if the JFK Jr. lunacy, they started interviewing REPORTERS who had interviewed JFK, like they were personal friends. And yes, I know that JFK Jr. was a journalist, or at least had a magazine, but I'm talking about people who have met him once during an interview.
The only thing really interesting I heard along this line was Pres. Clinton talking about a tour of the White House he took JFK Jr. on just a few months ago; in which JFK Jr. hadn't been in since JFK Sr. was shot. Everything else was kinda, well, forced.
The article was a bit misleading. The capsule won't be going on tour immediately. It's currently in a protective cannister, still submerged in water.
The capsule is being delivered to the Cosmosphere in Hutchision, KS for cleanup and restoration, which may take up to a year. The restoration process, I've heard, will be on full display in a glassed workroom.
After the restoration, it will be taken on tour and then it will be permanently housed at the Cosmosphere. If you are ever going through central Kansas, the Cosmophere is worth checking out. I'm only about an hour away, so I guess I'll go check it out when I can..
1) Install TrueType fonts. Use the xfs server from Redhat 6.0 or xfstt.
2) Install the Arial font from Windows according to instructions with the TT font renderer.
3) In Netscape's preferences Appearance/Fonts, use Arial as the default font, click on the Allow Scaling button.
4) In the same place, type the number 16 (16 point font) in the textbox next to the "Allow Scaling" button.
5) Save preferences
At this point your fonts should be MUCH better on all pages, and comparable to the Windows handling of fonts. This works for my home 15' monitor at 1024x768 and my 21' at work at 1024x1280. This is an OLD problem with Netscape, one that Mozilla doesn't have (thank god).
Oh, one problem with this setup. Netscape doesn't save the point size of scalable fonts, but rather defaults to 12. You have to enter the '16' into the text box every time you start Netscape...
jf
Re:Why is font handling so bad?
on
XFree86 News
·
· Score: 3
There are actually two issues here...
1) The Type1 font engine was donated by IBM many many moons ago. It works, and sometimes well, if you have a good font, but has never been optimized.
2) Many of the standard XFree fonts were donated and they weren't really high quality.
Personally, I find that TrueType fonts look very nice in X (with RedHat 6.0's xfs (freetype) or xfstt). I've compared them with the local NT box with a 'real' TT font renderer, and they are at least as good.
One thing to remmeber is that Netscape is broken as regards scaleable fonts. That's why some pages look really odd with tiny fonts. However, if you do a trick (deals with typing in the font size in preferences), my Netscape fonts look as good as NT's on all pages.
It's a very common reference to the complete absense of "minority status" in an online world at this point.
I don't buy that minorities are 'disadvantaged' on Internet access. Economic issues aside (which is what the stats are doing), saying that a minority (and let's cut the euphimisms, we're talking about black and hispanic people) family is less likely to have a computer and/or Internet access than a "white" family is not about racism. It's about interests and cultural values. It's also about attitudes toward education and learning, which frankly is very poor in most inner city environments, and among certain cultures within America.
These numbers seem to indicate that the interest of minority persons towards computer and network technology isn't up to the level of gadget-happy, white America.
No one will prevent a black man from buying a computer. The checkout person at Best Buy doesn't care. No one will prevent a hispanic person from getting an Internet account. I've never met anyone from my ISP's over the last several years.
Should economically disadvantaged be offered online access. Sure, but based on economy, not racial lines. Schools. Yes, regardless of economic stature. Should minorities be aware of possible opportunites they may be missing out on by not being "plugged in"? Maybe. But this should be done through education and encouragement, not through civil rights legislation, as I have heard is considered.
I expect that some of the above comments will be construed as racist. Of that I am sorry, as I am not trying to offend anyone. I judge people as individuals, regardless if they are black, white, red, yellow, purple, or polkadotted. However I don't believe that EVERYTHING has to do with race and the majority putting down the minority.
However, I also suppose that in some respects, this whole issue could be just another example of the majority dictating what is important and what isn't to the minority. There are many things that many people find important that have nothing to do with technology; Family, relationships, careers, quality of life, hiking, fishing, spirituality. Maybe being less plugged in is more important in the long run for many people. And maybe they may be right.
But you have to admit. It CAN be an issue and will be an issue in the future for other people for very interesting niche projects. (The 'matchbox' web server comes to mind)..
I have read most of the comments here, and although most are pretty positive, there are enough 'odd' ones that require I make the following statement:
MOZILLA IS CURRENTLY ALPHA SOFTWARE!!
Please remember this when you download the Milestone releases. Feedback on problems is very good, go to http://www.mozilla.org/bugs/ for more info. But griping and comparing the Mx releases to Communicator or IE is really counter productive. It's a lot like comparing early Linux versions (pre.9) to NT 3.0. Guess who would have won that one? The actual beta won't happen until about M12 (October 1), and by Jan 1 the Seamonkey browser should be finished.
Netscape will probably start tweaking Mozilla into Communicator 5 about this time (M12), if not before.
Also please note that Mozilla is not Netscape! the Milestone releases are actually Seamonkey, which is the reference browser for Mozilla, and will not be the same as Netscape 5.0, although Netscape 5.0 will be almost completely Mozilla components (including much of Seamonkey), with some 3rd party additions.
The Mozilla project develops code, design, and modules that may be used by anyone (under the Mozilla License) to create their own browsers or app that requires HTML, CSS, or XML rendering.
Personally, I think it is going great, and the Mozilla guys are still right on track.
This is a great example of what I have been seeing as the true destiny of computer systems.
Here you have an advanced system developed by a reletively underfunded organization. They apparently have hardware experience, and some development experience, but needed an OS for their system. Licensing a commerical OS for this would be very expensive for development and the limited number of systems they want to build. The cost per unit would probably have to be almost half again what they are currently asking just to pay for the the embedded OS and break even. Using an embedded version of Linux, however, severely reduces the development and manufacturing costs, and makes this possible.
Linux, Open Source, and free software allow people and companies to do this. It makes the OS a very inexpensive commodity and enables development for things that would not be economicly possible otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a network security person and have always been intrigued by the concept of the 'hardened' BSD kernel (which isn't really THAT hard), and some of the role-based and compartmentalized systems out there.
What is the status of the security of Linux's internals compared with other OS'es, (mostly as regards potential buffer overflows and root hacks) and what do you see as the overall direction, if any, of Linux's security beyond the standard UNIX security model.
jf
They were unlucky in running their own business, so they sold the patent to Rand Corp., who tried to use it to extort money from every other computing device manufacurer (this was in the NPR interview, not personal opinion).
This forced a federal judge to revoke the patent. It was either that, or give a monopoly to Rand in the computer industry.
I think the only way they really got screwed, was that their names aren't well known as the originators of Eniac, and this is what the NPR article brought out. But every great computer innovation seems to have gone this way.
Remember the names of the guy's that wrote the first spreadsheet? How about the guy(s) that invented the transistor. Or the mouse, or the joystick, or any one of thousands of VERY important inventions or innovations. You may know some of them, but these people are mostly unknown to the masses.
This is when you start really respecting RMS and FSF. To put out the volume of really important software, KNOWING that there would be next to 0% return (sometimes not even real credit given) has to be worth something.
jf
Trust me.
Last time I checked, a typical school environment doesn't reflect the 'real world' in any shape or form. It is an artificial environment whose rules are for the most part barbaric and neo-fascist. (Note that I'm not talking about the administrators and teachers. Those are other rules, and they really aren't in control, anyway).
There are many places and opportunities to learn about other people and social skills. In the real 'real world' for instance...
jf
HuH? You have a reference for this?
1) It's not a 'law'. It's part of the recommended curriculum by the state school board.
2) It does not talk about 'not preventing' anyone from doing anything. It simply removes evolution from being a state tested subject.
3) For someone talking about fair play, you sure do get insulting pretty fast, don't you?
Please...
jf
..At the media for completely blowing this out of proportion. I've got a rant farther down on this list, but in short, all this is just an approved proposal that evolution will not be covered on state assessment tests. That's about it.
Please..
jf
And like anyone knew that?
Get a life...
jf
And before anyone picks up on this:
I'm NOT homeschooling my daughter for religious reasons. I personally don't like the US school system and feel that my family and I can do a better job than the school system did for me.
And yes, she will take achievement tests.....
jf
Kansas isn't in the south.....
I live in Kansas, about 30 miles from the capitol, where all this happened.
I live in Lawrence, Kansas, which is about as liberal as you can get in the Midwest.
I was also raised on a farm, in the 'boonies'.
I am not a Repubican (nor a Democrat, for that matter). I believe that the 'Religious Right' is wrong most of the time. I am not currenly affiliated with any religious group.
It appears that once again, 'crap' journalism has arisen to take a pretty tame fact and blow it WAAAAAAAYYY out of proportion.
Here's the deal: In the passed proposal, it does not ban, decry, condemn, or pass any type of judgement on evolution. It simply does not make it a subject that the state school board recommends that students *have* to be tested on. That's it. Nothing more. Here's more information, a few paragraphs down.
Are there religious undertones for this vote? Sure! Are there private agendas here? Sure, on both sides of the fence. But this is NOT a ban on evolution or a proposal of creationism teachings. It simply does not require evolution to be a state assessment test subject. Schools are NOT required to follow this and may teach the subject any way they wish.
What really offends me, are the several articles I found (MSNBC, CNN, etc) that basically mention the vote, and then spend the rest of the article talking about other states efforts to pass creationist laws. They mostly ignore the nature of the proposal and immediatly start yelling about the "Scopes Monkey Trial" and separation of church and state. I find it interesting that they mostly interview scientific "experts", who talk about evolution as a fact-theory, and then real 'christian' cretins who are about as reasonable as Fred Phelps. What about just plain old normal people who don't have any axes to grind? This is really CRAP journalism.
I'm a Kansan, and for the most part, this decision doesn't really hold much interest for me, one way or the other. I'm home schooling my daughter, and this doesn't really affect me. (And yes, when she is old enough she will learn about the "Theory of Evolution", but not about the "Fact of Evolution").
Check your facts before you start make REALLY offensive remarks, okay?
jf
I'm not arguing that password changes cost money, it's just that these figures get WAY out of hand out after a while.
You may notice that MY numbers were just as abitrary and meaningless...
jf
>1/2 half of that is $1,190,000.
> um.... (no further commenting needed.)
Okay, so I forgot a '0'.. $11,900,000... The rest of the math was right...297 1/2 people changing passwords....
jf
And 90% of all stats are made up by operations managers looking for more budget for helpdesk functions.
And the other 90% are made up by consulting firms looking to court SSO (single-sign-on) product companies......
Let's look at the numbers, shall we? Let's say we work for a company that has 70,000 (I have one in mind) employees that use computer systems and have at least one password.
Let's also assume that the helpdesk function at this company spends a 50/50 ratio on personel and equipment for help desk functions, and the median help desk person gets $40k per year (which is actually high to account for HR costs and benefits).
Lets do some math:
70,000 employees x $340 = $23,800,000
1/2 half of that is $1,190,000. At the median salary of $40k per year, that means that the helpdesk for this company has 297 1/2 people doing nothing but password recovery functions every year. I know for a fact that this is not true.
Now, not having read the article (I refuse to register to news sites), I'm sure that they figure things in such as lost productivity, research time, and so on. But I sincerly doubt that the actual costs are even approaching what Gartner gives.
You should take these things with a grain of salt. Different environments have different costs associated with password management. A large mainframe-based company can handle thousands of users with a very small staff for password functions. A loosly networked company, where everyone has Administrator on his NT box, and 15 servers to log into, will have higher. A large company will have smaller costs per capita than a mid-sized company.
jf
As a matter of fact, you do. It's called fair-use.
... a work which he had been invited to witness in its entirety free of charge ... " Id. Accordingly, the fact that the work was reproduced in its entirety "does not have its ordinary effect of militating against a fair use finding." Id. at 450."
Supreme Court case "Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.", 464 U.S. 417 (1984):
"The Court held that even unauthorized copying of television broadcasts may not be infringing, and embarked on a fair use analysis. Concerning the first factor, the purpose and character of the use, the Court stated: "If [home video recorders]
were used to make copies for a commercial or profitmaking purpose, such use would presumptively be unfair." Id. at 449. The Court found the "contrary presumption" appropriate, however, since the evidence demonstrated thattimeshifting for home use was a noncommercial, nonprofit activity. Also significant was the nature of the work; timeshifting "merely enables a viewer to see
As long as you don't sell it or use it in some commerical activity, it's okay.
jf
Er..doesn't class action lawsuits require a, um, class of people to agree to sue? It seems to me that a bunch of geeks like myself to suing over what amounts to be nothing is pretty laughable.
The problem is that very money motivated individuals have problems understanding non-money motivated individuals.
The only thing that worries me is that a opportunistic lawyer could sucker a some into a lawsuit 'freeride', where they would bear the cost and you would get money (or consideration) if they won, and lose nothing if they lost. That seems to be where most supposed 'class-action' lawsuits come from these days.
jf
I believe that it started out flawed: Here have ALL THIS REALLY UGLY code and go wild!
However, since then, the processes has really shaped up, and almost all of Mozilla is new code, especially the layout engine.
Whee!
jf
Most of the distribution logistics have been worked out. For CTP, the online ordering was pretty good and quick (I got mine from Game Cellar), but the brick and mortar stores took much longer.
Now, however, with the lessons learned with CTP and the distribution channels established, and the obvious sucess of CTP for Linux (Heck I even saw it in our local Hastings bookstore!), the distribution of future Linux by Loki to mass distributors should be much faster, both in the US and Europe (GO, SUSE!)
"Breaker, this here is the Rubber Duck, and we got ourselves a convoy!"
jf
What I am getting tired of is the 'wait-a-thons' that CNN (and this time ABC) put on for ANY type of 'interesting' or scandalous events. Rather than report on what happens as it happens, they pull so-called experts out of the woodwork, interview them until they are blue in the face, report that nothing has changed since five minutes ago, interview MORE people, report nothing has changed, repeat....Then after the 'event' happens (or doesn't), they sit and talk about why everyone's predictions were right or wrong. This happens for every major (US) event (and lots of minor) since the Gulf War. Report the news people, stop trying to make it.
At the top of if the JFK Jr. lunacy, they started interviewing REPORTERS who had interviewed JFK, like they were personal friends. And yes, I know that JFK Jr. was a journalist, or at least had a magazine, but I'm talking about people who have met him once during an interview.
The only thing really interesting I heard along this line was Pres. Clinton talking about a tour of the White House he took JFK Jr. on just a few months ago; in which JFK Jr. hadn't been in since JFK Sr. was shot. Everything else was kinda, well, forced.
The article was a bit misleading. The capsule won't be going on tour immediately. It's currently in a protective cannister, still submerged in water.
The capsule is being delivered to the Cosmosphere in Hutchision, KS for cleanup and restoration, which may take up to a year. The restoration process, I've heard, will be on full display in a glassed workroom.
After the restoration, it will be taken on tour and then it will be permanently housed at the Cosmosphere. If you are ever going through central Kansas, the Cosmophere is worth checking out. I'm only about an hour away, so I guess I'll go check it out when I can..
More information is here.
jf
Netscape is broken. Try this:
1) Install TrueType fonts. Use the xfs server from Redhat 6.0 or xfstt.
2) Install the Arial font from Windows according to instructions with the TT font renderer.
3) In Netscape's preferences Appearance/Fonts, use Arial as the default font, click on the Allow Scaling button.
4) In the same place, type the number 16 (16 point font) in the textbox next to the "Allow Scaling" button.
5) Save preferences
At this point your fonts should be MUCH better on all pages, and comparable to the Windows handling of fonts. This works for my home 15' monitor at 1024x768 and my 21' at work at 1024x1280. This is an OLD problem with Netscape, one that Mozilla doesn't have (thank god).
Oh, one problem with this setup. Netscape doesn't save the point size of scalable fonts, but rather defaults to 12. You have to enter the '16' into the text box every time you start Netscape...
jf
There are actually two issues here...
1) The Type1 font engine was donated by IBM many many moons ago. It works, and sometimes well, if you have a good font, but has never been optimized.
2) Many of the standard XFree fonts were donated and they weren't really high quality.
Personally, I find that TrueType fonts look very nice in X (with RedHat 6.0's xfs (freetype) or xfstt). I've compared them with the local NT box with a 'real' TT font renderer, and they are at least as good.
One thing to remmeber is that Netscape is broken as regards scaleable fonts. That's why some pages look really odd with tiny fonts. However, if you do a trick (deals with typing in the font size in preferences), my Netscape fonts look as good as NT's on all pages.
jf
"On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog".
It's a very common reference to the complete absense of "minority status" in an online world at this point.
I don't buy that minorities are 'disadvantaged' on Internet access. Economic issues aside (which is what the stats are doing), saying that a minority (and let's cut the euphimisms, we're talking about black and hispanic people) family is less likely to have a computer and/or Internet access than a "white" family is not about racism. It's about interests and cultural values. It's also about attitudes toward education and learning, which frankly is very poor in most inner city environments, and among certain cultures within America.
These numbers seem to indicate that the interest of minority persons towards computer and network technology isn't up to the level of gadget-happy, white America.
No one will prevent a black man from buying a computer. The checkout person at Best Buy doesn't care. No one will prevent a hispanic person from getting an Internet account. I've never met anyone from my ISP's over the last several years.
Should economically disadvantaged be offered online access. Sure, but based on economy, not racial lines. Schools. Yes, regardless of economic stature. Should minorities be aware of possible opportunites they may be missing out on by not being "plugged in"? Maybe. But this should be done through education and encouragement, not through civil rights legislation, as I have heard is considered.
I expect that some of the above comments will be construed as racist. Of that I am sorry, as I am not trying to offend anyone. I judge people as individuals, regardless if they are black, white, red, yellow, purple, or polkadotted. However I don't believe that EVERYTHING has to do with race and the majority putting down the minority.
However, I also suppose that in some respects, this whole issue could be just another example of the majority dictating what is important and what isn't to the minority. There are many things that many people find important that have nothing to do with technology; Family, relationships, careers, quality of life, hiking, fishing, spirituality. Maybe being less plugged in is more important in the long run for many people. And maybe they may be right.
Oh, yeah. That too. :)
But you have to admit. It CAN be an issue and will be an issue in the future for other people for very interesting niche projects. (The 'matchbox' web server comes to mind)..
I have read most of the comments here, and although most are pretty positive, there are enough 'odd' ones that require I make the following statement:
.9) to NT 3.0. Guess who would have won that one? The actual beta won't happen until about M12 (October 1), and by Jan 1 the Seamonkey browser should be finished.
MOZILLA IS CURRENTLY ALPHA SOFTWARE!!
Please remember this when you download the Milestone releases. Feedback on problems is very good, go to http://www.mozilla.org/bugs/ for more info. But griping and comparing the Mx releases to Communicator or IE is really counter productive. It's a lot like comparing early Linux versions (pre
Netscape will probably start tweaking Mozilla into Communicator 5 about this time (M12), if not before.
Also please note that Mozilla is not Netscape! the Milestone releases are actually Seamonkey, which is the reference browser for Mozilla, and will not be the same as Netscape 5.0, although Netscape 5.0 will be almost completely Mozilla components (including much of Seamonkey), with some 3rd party additions.
The Mozilla project develops code, design, and modules that may be used by anyone (under the Mozilla License) to create their own browsers or app that requires HTML, CSS, or XML rendering.
Personally, I think it is going great, and the Mozilla guys are still right on track.
jf
Most of the problems on the Linux version that I have seen (in M6 and M7, haven't done M8 yet) is versioning problems with GTK and friends.
Fresh compiles seem to operate MUCH cleaner.
jf
This is a great example of what I have been seeing as the true destiny of computer systems.
Here you have an advanced system developed by a reletively underfunded organization. They apparently have hardware experience, and some development experience, but needed an OS for their system. Licensing a commerical OS for this would be very expensive for development and the limited number of systems they want to build. The cost per unit would probably have to be almost half again what they are currently asking just to pay for the the embedded OS and break even. Using an embedded version of Linux, however, severely reduces the development and manufacturing costs, and makes this possible.
Linux, Open Source, and free software allow people and companies to do this. It makes the OS a very inexpensive commodity and enables development for things that would not be economicly possible otherwise.
Ain't world domination grand?
jf