all the Open Source software available for Windows is there by accident. It wasn't written for Windows, it just was ported to Windows from some unix variant. Nobody writes GPL software with Windows in mind
I believe Firefox is an exception to the former, if not the latter.
Using the GNU GPL will require that all the released improved versions be free software. This means you can avoid the risk of having to compete with a proprietary modified version of your own work. However, in some special situations it can be better to use a more permissive license.
Although, as someone (Martin Gardner?) once put it: If a stool weighs ten pounds, then the planet weighs ten pounds relative to the stool. (Turn the stool upside down!)
Seconded, for the benefit of those who (understandably) take the words of all ACs with a grain of salt.
Most of the code I write at my day job is custom mods for individual clients, on top of a commercial accounting software package. None of it is OSS, but we routinely leave a copy of our code on the client system for convenience. They could have someone else work on it, but their easiest option is to keep us involved (because we grok it, because we wrote it); this holds true unless we disappear or piss them off.
Granted, this is less true of entire software packages, but some businesses even work around that - they give the software away for free, then charge for services such as tech support. Red Hat Enterprise, for instance.
How do you figure? I tried Miranda a few years ago and thought its UI was terrible. I suppose they may have improved since then... Anyway, in what specific areas do you feel they trump gaim?
I think the spammers are trying to reach the market where someone else (the ISP, the employer, a geek friend) has imposed layer upon layer of spam filters, but the person who actually reads the box is a fair mark for spam.
I would suggest "CustomerHasSpecialNeeds", based on a similar phrase apparently used by some hotels (particularly as a codeword for racism. Hello, GNAA trolls, you can go somewhere else now.)
people also waste space giving google a handjob for an idea that has already existed for years. The personalized google portal and the google satellite pictures are two examples that come to the top of my head. Both of these things had been done by other sites for years and then google comes out with them and in the case of satellite pics did not improve upon the existing sites out there
Sure, the pictures themselves are of equal quality, but IMO Google's "drag/click/cursor and move/reload just the images" interface is a vast improvement over the "click and wait a second for the whole page to reload" interface used by the existing sites.
and in the case of the portal made an inferior product.
Again, the interface (drag-and-drop in this case) is the impressive part. Certainly there's room for offering additional content.
Many web sites generally don't require Gecko/KDE, not because the authors have IE in mind, but because the authors don't bother with more than simple years-old things that pretty much any browser (IE included) renders just fine.
My company recently purchased a PC from a supposedly legitimate vendor. On the itemized list of stuff that was included was "Microsoft Windows XP Home".
This is already a mistake in a corporate environment (and in a home environment too, if you ask me). If you must use Windows, at least avoid all the crippled "home versions". My wife has XP Home (she didn't pick out the computer) and the absence of a Power Users group is rather annoying.
Slashdot Mirror
Using the GNU GPL will require that all the released improved versions be free software. This means you can avoid the risk of having to compete with a proprietary modified version of your own work. However, in some special situations it can be better to use a more permissive license.
Although, as someone (Martin Gardner?) once put it: If a stool weighs ten pounds, then the planet weighs ten pounds relative to the stool. (Turn the stool upside down!)
Seconded, for the benefit of those who (understandably) take the words of all ACs with a grain of salt.
Most of the code I write at my day job is custom mods for individual clients, on top of a commercial accounting software package. None of it is OSS, but we routinely leave a copy of our code on the client system for convenience. They could have someone else work on it, but their easiest option is to keep us involved (because we grok it, because we wrote it); this holds true unless we disappear or piss them off.
Granted, this is less true of entire software packages, but some businesses even work around that - they give the software away for free, then charge for services such as tech support. Red Hat Enterprise, for instance.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
(insert favorite Zippy the Pinhead joke here)
Matches X, apply label Y, skip inbox. Voila, tags that work almost exactly like folders.
How do you figure? I tried Miranda a few years ago and thought its UI was terrible. I suppose they may have improved since then... Anyway, in what specific areas do you feel they trump gaim?
I think the spammers are trying to reach the market where someone else (the ISP, the employer, a geek friend) has imposed layer upon layer of spam filters, but the person who actually reads the box is a fair mark for spam.
I suggested this to them (as a companion piece to The Onion in History) like two years ago, but am I seeing any royalty checks? Noooooo...
Am I the only one whose first reaction to this headline was "whoa, now that's an impressive entry in the Miss America talent competition"?
I would suggest "CustomerHasSpecialNeeds", based on a similar phrase apparently used by some hotels (particularly as a codeword for racism. Hello, GNAA trolls, you can go somewhere else now.)
Heh. Google "dhcmp"...
MGBs, Tanks, and Batmobiles
Already has. One of my work clients sells earplugs - I should ask them for a couple. :)
Many web sites generally don't require Gecko/KDE, not because the authors have IE in mind, but because the authors don't bother with more than simple years-old things that pretty much any browser (IE included) renders just fine.
I don't understand what you're suggesting here. Could you explain in a little more detail, please?
No, he was later revealed to have escaped. ("The Sarlaac found me somewhat indigestible.")
Okay, that produces a working link, but it's discussing "orthogonal functions" in the mathematical sense rather than the programming sense.
Er, that's a nonexistent article. Fortunately, a Wikipedia search on "orthogonal" did lead to another article that does exist.
What planet do you live on that has 22-hour days? :)