.. was the object of open source to "fight back against Redmond"? Sure, if they create some new product that's a good idea, theres no reason not to implement our own open version. This happens all the time. But if Microsoft released "Inflatable Dartboard v1.0" I get the impression that some jerk would release a free version, just because they feel the need to compete with MS.
From my point of view, I just want tools to get the jobs done that I need to do. If those tools happen to be similar to something released by MS, then fine. If not, thats just fine too. In my opinion, some of the best free software is that which was created to fill a niche of its own, not to compete against MS.
And when is this likely to happen? Never. So we're stuck with having patents and big companies making and selling the products to save peoples lives, or no products and a lot of dead people. Make your choice.
Imagine someone who created a cure to AIDS and patented it, that person could charge ridiculous amounts of money for this cure even if it was something simple and cheap to make. People who couldn't afford this cure would die simply because John Doe patented his cure.
Interesting you should use this analogy. I've just recently been asked to participate in a genetic study of diabetes (I've been a diabetic since I was 4). All I have to do for now is provide a blood sample. In the information I was given, they specifically say that you have to give up any rights to products that may be derived from research. Specifically, they want to be able to patent the products that they produce from this research so that pharmaceutical companies can license the rights to manufacture them.
So, do I have a problem with this. Nope, none whatsoever. Because, if the big pharmaceutical companies can't protect their product then they won't manufacture it. And if they don't, who will? Who else can afford the R&D? It may be that by giving up my rights to this research I will help to provide a cure or prevention for diabetes. I'm happy with that.
Solaris has had a similar capability since 7. You just stick the logging option in your vfstab and you're off. Its not vxFS, but its quick and easy, and a lot more robust than no logging at all. It will be nice when Linux users can do the same. Playing with a new fs is all very well if you have the free space and time to implement it. Sticking one word in a config file is a lot easier though;)
Re:I could create another compiler to...
on
Galeon At A Glance
·
· Score: 2
He's just a troll. But, he makes some valid points. I've just decided to use the KDE libs for an app I'm writing because the Gnome ones are in such a bad state. Hardly anything seems to be stable, and what there is is pretty poor in comparision to KDE/QT. Also, the documentation for KDE and QT is complete, whereas the docs for Gnome are unfinished. Not even GTK 1.2 has a fully documented API, and thats been around for ages.
The trouble with Gnome is it wants to run before it can walk. Nothing ever seems to get finished. Libraries are half-writtten and then dropped in favour of something new.
It's a shame, because I think Gnome could be really good.
Of course, you should realize that this is, in fact, the system that will one day send Arnold Schwarzenegger back in time in order to kill a young pretty lass by the name of Sarah Connor.
Use that old fashioned off switch before it gets up to any dirty tricks. It does have an off switch, right? Even Data has an off switch...;-)
Have the KDE crowd had any similar problems? There will always be dissagreements about how to go about things, but it always seems to me that Gnome is trying to do too much and isn't getting anwhere. At least, not anywhere stable.
Better than nothing though right? And you could always build in support for the extended SMTP into the mail clients themselves. That way everything is encrypted without user intervention.
I've been thinking about email encryption a lot lately. Rather than encrypting the mail at the user level, what would be involved in doing it at the mail server? In other words, create an extended SMTP protocol which allows for two mail servers to talk to each other via encypted messages. Then *any* messages sent via these servers, whether encrypted at source or not, will not be easily read in transit. I realise that creating a new mail transfer protocol is not something you can do overnight, but is anyone involved in making SMTP a little more secure?
I have been using the nightlies. They're just as bad. I'm not dissing anyone's work, Evolution has great potential. But I can't yet trust it to handle my everyday mail here at work, which is where I'd get the most benefit from it.
...but its not something I could ever get on with. I always found it quicker to hit the G key for grabbing than I did moving the mouse around in some arcane squiggle. Still, I guess it has its uses.
Last time I looked the 2.4 kernels were in woody. In fact, I downloaded one the other day. So if this is the case I would assume all the other necessary programs have been upgraded to the relavent versions.
I'm in the UK too. I love Robot Wars, its a very cool program with some real ingenoius designs. But Battlebots is just terrible. I couldn't watch more than 5 mintures before I had to turn the TV off. Its no wonder so many Americans want to go out and shoot each other, there's obviously sod all decent TV. Why not shoot those commentators. That I *would* like to see.
I don't know much about Amiga's, I never used them. I do know that BeOS was supposed to have some shit hot multimedia capabilities. It was built from the ground to do that kind of thing. It still died, at least as a desktop OS. What makes you think that AmigaOS will succeed where BeOS couldn't?
Kind of like that electronic paper? It has small balls which are white on one side and black on the other. Passing a current accross them makes them flip, creating a black or white point on the paper. I guess in theory you could produce red, green and blue balls, and vary the amount that they get flipped, making a colour display.
Slashdot Mirror
.. was the object of open source to "fight back against Redmond"? Sure, if they create some new product that's a good idea, theres no reason not to implement our own open version. This happens all the time. But if Microsoft released "Inflatable Dartboard v1.0" I get the impression that some jerk would release a free version, just because they feel the need to compete with MS.
From my point of view, I just want tools to get the jobs done that I need to do. If those tools happen to be similar to something released by MS, then fine. If not, thats just fine too. In my opinion, some of the best free software is that which was created to fill a niche of its own, not to compete against MS.
Amen to that. I'm grappling with 30,000 lines of perl code now.
The thing with Perl is, it's a wonderful language when you're writing the code, and a royal pain in the arse 6 months later when you have to debug it.
And when is this likely to happen? Never. So we're stuck with having patents and big companies making and selling the products to save peoples lives, or no products and a lot of dead people. Make your choice.
Imagine someone who created a cure to AIDS and patented it, that person could charge ridiculous amounts of money for this cure even if it was something simple and cheap to make. People who couldn't afford this cure would die simply because John Doe patented his cure.
Interesting you should use this analogy. I've just recently been asked to participate in a genetic study of diabetes (I've been a diabetic since I was 4). All I have to do for now is provide a blood sample. In the information I was given, they specifically say that you have to give up any rights to products that may be derived from research. Specifically, they want to be able to patent the products that they produce from this research so that pharmaceutical companies can license the rights to manufacture them.
So, do I have a problem with this. Nope, none whatsoever. Because, if the big pharmaceutical companies can't protect their product then they won't manufacture it. And if they don't, who will? Who else can afford the R&D? It may be that by giving up my rights to this research I will help to provide a cure or prevention for diabetes. I'm happy with that.
Solaris has had a similar capability since 7. You just stick the logging option in your vfstab and you're off. Its not vxFS, but its quick and easy, and a lot more robust than no logging at all. It will be nice when Linux users can do the same. Playing with a new fs is all very well if you have the free space and time to implement it. Sticking one word in a config file is a lot easier though ;)
He's just a troll. But, he makes some valid points. I've just decided to use the KDE libs for an app I'm writing because the Gnome ones are in such a bad state. Hardly anything seems to be stable, and what there is is pretty poor in comparision to KDE/QT. Also, the documentation for KDE and QT is complete, whereas the docs for Gnome are unfinished. Not even GTK 1.2 has a fully documented API, and thats been around for ages.
The trouble with Gnome is it wants to run before it can walk. Nothing ever seems to get finished. Libraries are half-writtten and then dropped in favour of something new.
It's a shame, because I think Gnome could be really good.
the reason sun hardware is so expensive is cuz people are willing to pay that much (though, who knows why that is).
Because their support is so damn good.
Of course, you should realize that this is, in fact, the system that will one day send Arnold Schwarzenegger back in time in order to kill a young pretty lass by the name of Sarah Connor.
;-)
Use that old fashioned off switch before it gets up to any dirty tricks. It does have an off switch, right? Even Data has an off switch...
Have the KDE crowd had any similar problems? There will always be dissagreements about how to go about things, but it always seems to me that Gnome is trying to do too much and isn't getting anwhere. At least, not anywhere stable.
this man of principle is one boring arsehole then ;)
Sorry, but selling out is not attractive to a man of principle...
;)
No, but it'll probably get them lots of sex. Hmm.. tough call
Better than nothing though right? And you could always build in support for the extended SMTP into the mail clients themselves. That way everything is encrypted without user intervention.
I've been thinking about email encryption a lot lately. Rather than encrypting the mail at the user level, what would be involved in doing it at the mail server? In other words, create an extended SMTP protocol which allows for two mail servers to talk to each other via encypted messages. Then *any* messages sent via these servers, whether encrypted at source or not, will not be easily read in transit. I realise that creating a new mail transfer protocol is not something you can do overnight, but is anyone involved in making SMTP a little more secure?
What if you did something silly like placing your filesystem encryption module on your encrypted filesystem... Get outta that one Houdini ;)
If you need a CNN logo to remind you you're watching TV, then you're probably watching too much of it... ;-)
I have been using the nightlies. They're just as bad. I'm not dissing anyone's work, Evolution has great potential. But I can't yet trust it to handle my everyday mail here at work, which is where I'd get the most benefit from it.
I hope they've made it clear that evolution is still pre-beta. Its still extremely unstable atm, and would give a poor impression to new users.
...but its not something I could ever get on with. I always found it quicker to hit the G key for grabbing than I did moving the mouse around in some arcane squiggle. Still, I guess it has its uses.
Last time I looked the 2.4 kernels were in woody. In fact, I downloaded one the other day. So if this is the case I would assume all the other necessary programs have been upgraded to the relavent versions.
Mebbe cos they're so damn complicated they induce regular bowel movements? ;-)
here's the whole problem of Brits not getting most of the humor.
Ah! There was humour (with two u's)? Must have missed that. I just found it, well, loud and annoying. Read American.
I'm in the UK too. I love Robot Wars, its a very cool program with some real ingenoius designs. But Battlebots is just terrible. I couldn't watch more than 5 mintures before I had to turn the TV off. Its no wonder so many Americans want to go out and shoot each other, there's obviously sod all decent TV. Why not shoot those commentators. That I *would* like to see.
I don't know much about Amiga's, I never used them. I do know that BeOS was supposed to have some shit hot multimedia capabilities. It was built from the ground to do that kind of thing. It still died, at least as a desktop OS. What makes you think that AmigaOS will succeed where BeOS couldn't?
Are you using unstable or testing (woody)? I'm using woody and X 4 works fine for me. Whats broken?
Kind of like that electronic paper? It has small balls which are white on one side and black on the other. Passing a current accross them makes them flip, creating a black or white point on the paper. I guess in theory you could produce red, green and blue balls, and vary the amount that they get flipped, making a colour display.