Seriously, you can't believe these companies because they want to say they have the greatest thing since sliced bread to pitch to music execs and to collect royalties on all the CDs it will be installed on.
This just isn't possible, as if the disc is able to present itself as an ordinary audio CD to anything it's fecked. Computer CD players, DVD players and ordinary CD players are just not built to recognise different types of CDs - they recognise CDs, and that's it.
Quite right, and I always have. My basic rule is that whatever people say about Evolution, Gnome, Ximian Desktop, Mono or Dash board I just wait and see if it ships. That then tells a different story.
I don't know where the Novell Desktop fits in though. Is Suse 9.2 the Novell desktop, as various people said it would ship in the autumn, or is there a separate Novell Desktop reslease? If there is then how is it any different from Suse 9.2?
That seems logical, but really, Novell has been in such a mess even before their Linux purchases that it is extremely difficult to tell.
You're right about Novell thinking that they bought Mono though, and I'm sure that's what they believed. Unfortunately they got conned, as Mono is an open source LGPL-oriented project - anyone can use and contribute to it.
Whether Suse or Ximian people direct desktop development? God knows. Ximian people say it's Ximian and it's all happening with Gnome, Suse say nothing but their supporters say it's them and the executives haven't got the foggiest what's going on.
People often talk up KDE reflexively yet fail to address the rot that has existed in many key apps like KOffice
Apart from Open Office, in terms of functionality, KOffice has no equal. There are also way more applications in it than Open Office. I fail to see Gnome Office, or AbiWords etc. doing any better.
Without GPL (and QPL), KDE could have been embraced as the standard Linux desktop environment ages ago.
Without these, and without Qt, KDE would never have been good enough anyway. Go figure.
So far it only has the most users, but that's not enough if it's not "strategically viable"
It has the most users, and god bloody knows what strategically available is. Derrrrrrrr, McFly?
(if you work for Trolltech/KDE: please spare the lecture about corps affording $1500/dev/year, we've all seen it).
I don't work for Trolltech, but I understand it perfectly. If you want to develop everything for free then use the GPL, invest in good toolkits and tools, or use crap toolkits and tools and whinge and bitch that Qt isn't free for all development.
KDE could really collect the jackpot by allowing development of native KDE apps via Gtk/other LGPL'd lib. I assume QtGtk isn't up to the task yet?
This could very well happen. You can't develop proprietary/custom Qt applications for free, but what I think will happening is the exposing of KDE infrastructure, look and feel, to other toolkits and licenses. If there is demand, and it is good enough, there wil be free LGPL options as there are even on Windows. People will pay for Qt because they know what they will get out of it.
DCOP, BTW, is a very sweet and underadvertised technology. We need DCOP-like scriptability for all the applications. It has a very transparent feel, just like a good Unix methodology should.
Is it me, or does anyone else think that stuff like this is just the RIAA being taken for a ride rather than some masterplan?
We've had companies like Macrovision and others telling the RIAA and everyone else that they have the anti-piracy technology to end all others because they see the dollar signs. These technologies never materialize, or we find out that they are total crap, easy to get around and not worth the royalties or fees to anyone.
If Microsoft and Hotmail would be subjected to the same treatment if they did the same thing. Considering what Microsoft is proposing to lump into Longhorn, would a bill be passed to limit what they pass onto third parties etc.
This shows just how important SP2 is to Microsoft - and I don't mean from security perspective. Security is an excuse. We'll have to keep an eye on this thing.
They have axed it - or at the very least scaled it right back. forcing hardware changes on such a scale as demanded by Microsoft does not make economic sense for hardware makers, and Microsoft realised that the impact on legacy systems would be catastrophic. Imagine not being able to connect to your thirty-year old mainframe because Windows does not see it as a trusted system. Bye, bye Windows!
However, that doesn't mean that Microsoft still isn't keen on conclusively trying to lock everyone, and open source software, from communicating with Windows.
This is a very, very old memo sent out by Steve Ballmer months, if not years, ago. There is nothing new to read hear and it is all there. No centre of gravity, an apparent endorsement by IBM, blah, blah, blah.
No, sound support is definitely not as good as it should be (non existent in some cases), particularly for on board sound. However, the Linux community does not have manufacturers writing drivers for it as they do for Microsoft. Sound cards working on Windows is not down to how hard poor Microsoft or Windows have been working - it is about weight of support from manufacturers.
The troll articles are happening because many people are now very, very worried. Note the following phrases liberally sprinkled throughout:
So I contacted XYZ's paid tech support--remember, this was a commercial Linux that cost as much as a Windows XP upgrade, and tech support is built into the price.
All this is amplified now that some companies in the Linux community are charging Microsoft-level prices.
I also see I'm not the only one starting to do the math, as this survey of 1,000 IT managers shows. According to that survey, it can cost three to four times as much as moving from one version of Windows to another.
This hardly sounds like an article about sound support problems.
The article does have a point in that onboard sound has some way to go, but it would be foolish to suggest that Windows is totally responsible for a sound card working. It is the support and commitment of manufacturers to make it work on that platform.
However, make no mistake that what you are feeling in these articles - particularly in the last couple of months - is raw fear.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, you can't believe these companies because they want to say they have the greatest thing since sliced bread to pitch to music execs and to collect royalties on all the CDs it will be installed on.
This just isn't possible, as if the disc is able to present itself as an ordinary audio CD to anything it's fecked. Computer CD players, DVD players and ordinary CD players are just not built to recognise different types of CDs - they recognise CDs, and that's it.
Quite right, and I always have. My basic rule is that whatever people say about Evolution, Gnome, Ximian Desktop, Mono or Dash board I just wait and see if it ships. That then tells a different story.
I don't know where the Novell Desktop fits in though. Is Suse 9.2 the Novell desktop, as various people said it would ship in the autumn, or is there a separate Novell Desktop reslease? If there is then how is it any different from Suse 9.2?
That seems logical, but really, Novell has been in such a mess even before their Linux purchases that it is extremely difficult to tell.
You're right about Novell thinking that they bought Mono though, and I'm sure that's what they believed. Unfortunately they got conned, as Mono is an open source LGPL-oriented project - anyone can use and contribute to it.
Whether Suse or Ximian people direct desktop development? God knows. Ximian people say it's Ximian and it's all happening with Gnome, Suse say nothing but their supporters say it's them and the executives haven't got the foggiest what's going on.
Sun are arseholes with nothing left in the tank.
Thanks for the obligatory Monty Python quote.
People often talk up KDE reflexively yet fail to address the rot that has existed in many key apps like KOffice
Apart from Open Office, in terms of functionality, KOffice has no equal. There are also way more applications in it than Open Office. I fail to see Gnome Office, or AbiWords etc. doing any better.
And yes I know KHTML is in Safari, and no I don't really think it really has that much meaning for KDE users.
Indirectly, yes it does.
What GNOME does have in its corner is the apps that have the mindshare of most users - Mozilla, Evolution, GAIM, OpenOffice etc.
Mozilla and Open Office are not Gnome applications.
occupation of 440mb out of 512mb when i open two apps...
You do know how memory works, right?
Already, I can't get into the site because they insist on Flash 5 for some reason. Oh well....
'If he knows you'll faint at the sight of blood, he'll cut himself just to watch you pass out.'
What I generally do with these people is lie, tell them I hate ths sight of blood, and then watch them bleed to death.
Without GPL (and QPL), KDE could have been embraced as the standard Linux desktop environment ages ago.
Without these, and without Qt, KDE would never have been good enough anyway. Go figure.
So far it only has the most users, but that's not enough if it's not "strategically viable"
It has the most users, and god bloody knows what strategically available is. Derrrrrrrr, McFly?
(if you work for Trolltech/KDE: please spare the lecture about corps affording $1500/dev/year, we've all seen it).
I don't work for Trolltech, but I understand it perfectly. If you want to develop everything for free then use the GPL, invest in good toolkits and tools, or use crap toolkits and tools and whinge and bitch that Qt isn't free for all development.
KDE could really collect the jackpot by allowing development of native KDE apps via Gtk/other LGPL'd lib. I assume QtGtk isn't up to the task yet?
This could very well happen. You can't develop proprietary/custom Qt applications for free, but what I think will happening is the exposing of KDE infrastructure, look and feel, to other toolkits and licenses. If there is demand, and it is good enough, there wil be free LGPL options as there are even on Windows. People will pay for Qt because they know what they will get out of it.
DCOP, BTW, is a very sweet and underadvertised technology. We need DCOP-like scriptability for all the applications. It has a very transparent feel, just like a good Unix methodology should.
DCOP is indeed very cool.
What on Earth is someone going to use 1 gig of space for webmail for?
Is it me, or does anyone else think that stuff like this is just the RIAA being taken for a ride rather than some masterplan?
We've had companies like Macrovision and others telling the RIAA and everyone else that they have the anti-piracy technology to end all others because they see the dollar signs. These technologies never materialize, or we find out that they are total crap, easy to get around and not worth the royalties or fees to anyone.
If Microsoft and Hotmail would be subjected to the same treatment if they did the same thing. Considering what Microsoft is proposing to lump into Longhorn, would a bill be passed to limit what they pass onto third parties etc.
Loving games is trolling. Fantastic!
This shows just how important SP2 is to Microsoft - and I don't mean from security perspective. Security is an excuse. We'll have to keep an eye on this thing.
Who the hell modded this a troll? The fact that we have only seen dubious screenshots is a valid point.
We might actually get a processor that doesn't take down the National Grid.
They have axed it - or at the very least scaled it right back. forcing hardware changes on such a scale as demanded by Microsoft does not make economic sense for hardware makers, and Microsoft realised that the impact on legacy systems would be catastrophic. Imagine not being able to connect to your thirty-year old mainframe because Windows does not see it as a trusted system. Bye, bye Windows!
However, that doesn't mean that Microsoft still isn't keen on conclusively trying to lock everyone, and open source software, from communicating with Windows.
This is a very, very old memo sent out by Steve Ballmer months, if not years, ago. There is nothing new to read hear and it is all there. No centre of gravity, an apparent endorsement by IBM, blah, blah, blah.
Could he, at least once, address the issue of KDE's future, now that the largest supporter is within Novell, and Ximian has a say, too.
:).
Given that he doesn't talk about KDE or Gnome, and shifts emphasis away from it, I think we all know what the future of KDE/Suse/Novell will be
Great - quicker porn, and more of it!
Qt is a heck of a lot more than a widget toolkit, which is why the comparisons to GTK are silly.
No, sound support is definitely not as good as it should be (non existent in some cases), particularly for on board sound. However, the Linux community does not have manufacturers writing drivers for it as they do for Microsoft. Sound cards working on Windows is not down to how hard poor Microsoft or Windows have been working - it is about weight of support from manufacturers.
The troll articles are happening because many people are now very, very worried. Note the following phrases liberally sprinkled throughout:
So I contacted XYZ's paid tech support--remember, this was a commercial Linux that cost as much as a Windows XP upgrade, and tech support is built into the price.
All this is amplified now that some companies in the Linux community are charging Microsoft-level prices.
I also see I'm not the only one starting to do the math, as this survey of 1,000 IT managers shows. According to that survey, it can cost three to four times as much as moving from one version of Windows to another.
This hardly sounds like an article about sound support problems.
The article does have a point in that onboard sound has some way to go, but it would be foolish to suggest that Windows is totally responsible for a sound card working. It is the support and commitment of manufacturers to make it work on that platform.
However, make no mistake that what you are feeling in these articles - particularly in the last couple of months - is raw fear.