However, there's a huge difference. The RIAA has a SHITLOAD of money, and can afford payola, and the lawyers. SCO is running out of money for their lawyers, unless MS is paying them.
I don't work at Lowe's, but we recently got a new house, and we've been there A LOT. You're a bit wrong on the hardware - while monitors, keyboards, and sometimes mice are IBM, the desktops are Wincor-Nixdorf Beetle/S (I think the image is wrong) systems. The POS systems are the same brand, too. As for the software, I can tell you that they're using an X Window System (I've seen a cash register boot, and I've seen XCalc running on one), and that they are using some form of *nix. The title bar on their terminal app says "GENESIS".
Assume Windows licenses are under a subscription model. You decide to switch to Linux, but need to run your Windows apps. So, you copy.DLLs from your Windows install to your Wine install on Linux - without renewing the Windows license.
THIS IS WHAT SCO IS CLAIMING, not necessarily what happened. If it did, it's the first time SCO has a strong case. However, one of the people behind the conversion has spoken on Groklaw, and said that they did not copy SCO libs.
Well, seeing as the Itanic isn't an x86 arch, I'd say yes on at least one. As for PPC, MIPS, and Alpha, however, I don't think it's been kept up to date.
Actually, I have one of those few "lucky dog" systems. A lucky dog is a box that runs Windows 95, and the OS never crashes, even when you do something insane like run Word 2000, Internet Explorer, and a game - with 16MB RAM. The only times I've gotten it to bluescreen were when I had put floppies on their last legs in there, for a while after I forgot to take it out of a truck in the middle of August (got 250,000 bad bytes, that way, too - before then, it was PERFECT - 0 bad bytes), and when some config that always messes up and then corrects itself on Win95/98 messed up (it was a warning, not a fatal error). These are the boxes that seem more stable than a W2K box, when you KNOW that W95 is inherently MUCH less stable than W2K.
BTW, the systems I tried DialPad on were Cyrixes, and they both fell over QUICKLY. My Cyrix was a MediaGX (never trick me like that again - tell me it's a 5x86, not a Pentium clone, next time), and the uptime would have impressed Bill Gates it was so low. The other system was a 6x86 PR150 (120MHz), and it got reloaded about every month. So, I never tried DialPad on a lucky dog, but since they made the two Cyrixes LESS stable, it'd probably crash a P75, too.
Your PDA? You mean Vulcan Flipstart, don't you? There's no PDA that can run X well enough for this, but the Flipstart, being a PC, could do the job. IIRC, Basilisk doesn't need much, though - the Win32 version ran OK on my old P75 with 16MB RAM, except the hard drive was filled to the brim and then some.
I remember having a very similar device to this. Basically, it was a transmitter that attached to the laptop, and you had a reciever. The reciever could be calibrated for 10 or 20 foot range, and anything outside of that would cause it to beep.
I remember DialPad. I also remember that their POS Java applet did not work well at all. Come to think of it, sound quality SUCKED ASS on a 33.6K, too. I also distinctly remember DialPad bluescreening multiple boxes running Win95 or Win98.
"Flash Crowd" is on pages 99-164 of the paperback edition of The Flight of the Horse, copyright 1973 by Larry Niven. The story (or parts of it) were originally published as "Flash Crowd" in Three Trips in Time and Space, copyright 1973 by Robert Silverberg, ed.
Re:Photos are Archived Here
on
Borg Cube Case
·
· Score: 1
8E6 R3000 and SonicWALL don't block it (I'm at my school, where the SonicWALL firewall filters a little bit, and then their nazi ISP's 8E6 system which will block Googling for "windows xp we suck more" as General Pornography for the word suck, and it STILL made it through!)
Actually, I was a bit off of what I posted here. Turns out, they're in violation of Section 5, and they are in violation of Section 4 BECAUSE they are in violation of Section 5.
However, it IS a question of SCO thinking the GPL is invalid. Because of that, they must utilize Section 5 of the GPL, which states that they must agree to the GPL to redistribute the software, which they have not, and they are in violation. Technically, although Fyodor is claiming Section 4 is where the violation is, it's really Section 5.
It would be sort of like you clicking "I Do Not Agree" on a Windows installation, then somehow getting the software installed anyway. Microsoft wouldn't RETRACT your license, rather, they'd sue you because you're using the software without one.
Of course, this is one problem with most installers for GPL apps. You see, clicking "I Agree" lets you install it. However, clicking "I Do Not Agree", rather than showing something saying that you cannot distribute or modify it, and then installing, prevents installation.
The strength of Open Source/Free Software is that it is available to all without restrictions on fields of endeavor, as the Samba Team believes the ability to freely use, modify and learn from software code is one of the grounding principles of computer science, and a basic freedom for all.
Because of this, we believe that the Samba Team must remain true to our principles and our code must be freely available to use even in ways we personally disapprove of.
Even when used by rank hypocrites like SCO.
It's not the moral high ground to sit back and allow BLATANT GPL VIOLATIONS (see sections 4 and 5) to occur.
BTW, you didn't get the memo about the new litigious bastards, did you? Click on my sig link, and read my journal.
Actually, they're violating section 4 by utilizing a clause in section 5 that they don't have to agree to it to use it, but they can't modify or distribute it.
SECTION 5 OF THE GPL: 5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
I'd consider declaring it invalid is not accepting the license. Therefore, they're in violation of Section 5 (for distributing without agreeing to the license), and Section 4 (for distributing without being allowed to by the GPL, due to Section 5)
IANAL, but if I were a judge, I'd see that their declaring the GPL invalid is a disagreement with the GPL, which says that you can use the software, but not distribute it if you disagree with the GPL.
Before I'm modded troll, realize that this will probably be VERY FPU intensive, and I was not knocking it's usefulness in a cluster. I was simply referring to the fact that for FPU, it would take about 2.2GHz to be equivalent to a 1.3GHz P3/Athlon.
Slashdot Mirror
However, there's a huge difference. The RIAA has a SHITLOAD of money, and can afford payola, and the lawyers. SCO is running out of money for their lawyers, unless MS is paying them.
http://www.acer.com/APP/AKC/INTERNET/AACPubli.nsf/ allDocs/RWP5316796DAD14705D88256D55007A13CB?OpenDo cument
Go there, and see that THEY USE THE CHECKMARK WHEN IT'S UNDER 7LB!
I don't work at Lowe's, but we recently got a new house, and we've been there A LOT. You're a bit wrong on the hardware - while monitors, keyboards, and sometimes mice are IBM, the desktops are Wincor-Nixdorf Beetle/S (I think the image is wrong) systems. The POS systems are the same brand, too. As for the software, I can tell you that they're using an X Window System (I've seen a cash register boot, and I've seen XCalc running on one), and that they are using some form of *nix. The title bar on their terminal app says "GENESIS".
He could have run it on his web server (Netcraft link), which is running Apache 1.3.27 on RedHat.
Actually, think more like this way:
.DLLs from your Windows install to your Wine install on Linux - without renewing the Windows license.
Assume Windows licenses are under a subscription model. You decide to switch to Linux, but need to run your Windows apps. So, you copy
THIS IS WHAT SCO IS CLAIMING, not necessarily what happened. If it did, it's the first time SCO has a strong case. However, one of the people behind the conversion has spoken on Groklaw, and said that they did not copy SCO libs.
As others have said, keeping quiet about Linux may not be a good thing, as it helps Microsoft.
However, if every Linux-using company publically says that they're using it, SCO will have 20 zillion lawsuits to file.
Well, seeing as the Itanic isn't an x86 arch, I'd say yes on at least one. As for PPC, MIPS, and Alpha, however, I don't think it's been kept up to date.
Never released it? Got an NT4 CD? Throw it in, and look for a "ppc" directory.
I've found that I scream into the phone if I'm in a poor service area, and I speak VERY... SLOWLY... SO... THE... OTHER... PERSON... CAN... HEAR...
Of course, thanks to my work, Johnstown, OH now seems to be assigned to a bunch of DHCP IP addresses, and it RARELY forgets me.
Actually, I have one of those few "lucky dog" systems. A lucky dog is a box that runs Windows 95, and the OS never crashes, even when you do something insane like run Word 2000, Internet Explorer, and a game - with 16MB RAM. The only times I've gotten it to bluescreen were when I had put floppies on their last legs in there, for a while after I forgot to take it out of a truck in the middle of August (got 250,000 bad bytes, that way, too - before then, it was PERFECT - 0 bad bytes), and when some config that always messes up and then corrects itself on Win95/98 messed up (it was a warning, not a fatal error). These are the boxes that seem more stable than a W2K box, when you KNOW that W95 is inherently MUCH less stable than W2K.
BTW, the systems I tried DialPad on were Cyrixes, and they both fell over QUICKLY. My Cyrix was a MediaGX (never trick me like that again - tell me it's a 5x86, not a Pentium clone, next time), and the uptime would have impressed Bill Gates it was so low. The other system was a 6x86 PR150 (120MHz), and it got reloaded about every month. So, I never tried DialPad on a lucky dog, but since they made the two Cyrixes LESS stable, it'd probably crash a P75, too.
Your PDA? You mean Vulcan Flipstart, don't you? There's no PDA that can run X well enough for this, but the Flipstart, being a PC, could do the job. IIRC, Basilisk doesn't need much, though - the Win32 version ran OK on my old P75 with 16MB RAM, except the hard drive was filled to the brim and then some.
I remember having a very similar device to this. Basically, it was a transmitter that attached to the laptop, and you had a reciever. The reciever could be calibrated for 10 or 20 foot range, and anything outside of that would cause it to beep.
I remember DialPad. I also remember that their POS Java applet did not work well at all. Come to think of it, sound quality SUCKED ASS on a 33.6K, too. I also distinctly remember DialPad bluescreening multiple boxes running Win95 or Win98.
From Wikipedia:
"Flash Crowd" is on pages 99-164 of the paperback edition of The Flight of the Horse, copyright 1973 by Larry Niven. The story (or parts of it) were originally published as "Flash Crowd" in Three Trips in Time and Space, copyright 1973 by Robert Silverberg, ed.
8E6 R3000 and SonicWALL don't block it (I'm at my school, where the SonicWALL firewall filters a little bit, and then their nazi ISP's 8E6 system which will block Googling for "windows xp we suck more" as General Pornography for the word suck, and it STILL made it through!)
Actually, I was a bit off of what I posted here. Turns out, they're in violation of Section 5, and they are in violation of Section 4 BECAUSE they are in violation of Section 5.
However, it IS a question of SCO thinking the GPL is invalid. Because of that, they must utilize Section 5 of the GPL, which states that they must agree to the GPL to redistribute the software, which they have not, and they are in violation. Technically, although Fyodor is claiming Section 4 is where the violation is, it's really Section 5.
It would be sort of like you clicking "I Do Not Agree" on a Windows installation, then somehow getting the software installed anyway. Microsoft wouldn't RETRACT your license, rather, they'd sue you because you're using the software without one.
Of course, this is one problem with most installers for GPL apps. You see, clicking "I Agree" lets you install it. However, clicking "I Do Not Agree", rather than showing something saying that you cannot distribute or modify it, and then installing, prevents installation.
The strength of Open Source/Free Software is that it is available to all without restrictions on fields of endeavor, as the Samba Team believes the ability to freely use, modify and learn from software code is one of the grounding principles of computer science, and a basic freedom for all.
Because of this, we believe that the Samba Team must remain true to our principles and our code must be freely available to use even in ways we personally disapprove of.
Even when used by rank hypocrites like SCO.
It's not the moral high ground to sit back and allow BLATANT GPL VIOLATIONS (see sections 4 and 5) to occur.
BTW, you didn't get the memo about the new litigious bastards, did you? Click on my sig link, and read my journal.
Actually, they're violating section 4 by utilizing a clause in section 5 that they don't have to agree to it to use it, but they can't modify or distribute it.
SECTION 5 OF THE GPL:
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
I'd consider declaring it invalid is not accepting the license. Therefore, they're in violation of Section 5 (for distributing without agreeing to the license), and Section 4 (for distributing without being allowed to by the GPL, due to Section 5)
They're in violation of the GPL, by not fulfilling the terms necessary to be allowed to distribute the software under Section 4.
IANAL, but if I were a judge, I'd see that their declaring the GPL invalid is a disagreement with the GPL, which says that you can use the software, but not distribute it if you disagree with the GPL.
Before I'm modded troll, realize that this will probably be VERY FPU intensive, and I was not knocking it's usefulness in a cluster. I was simply referring to the fact that for FPU, it would take about 2.2GHz to be equivalent to a 1.3GHz P3/Athlon.