X.Org is something very new. It is just a complete fork of Xfree86 4.4 rc2, which was the last version before the license change. X.Org's sole reason of existence, is the license change in XFree86.
Xouvert is also based on Xfree86, but it is a bit different than X.Org. Xouvert was started when it became apparent that XFree86 guys were too reluctant to change, and to commit new codes and technologies. If I am not mistaken, the Xouvert project started in summer of last year, with the goal of being a more experimental branch of Xfree86 i.e: they would accept code more easily than XFree86 guys. They also stated that they want to seperate the drivers from other parts, so that one can add a driver of a new chip, to a old release of X. I don't know how succesful they have been in this front.
And aside from all of these, is the Free Desktop.org's X Server. This X Server, mostly written by Keith Packard is not mature for every-day use yet, but I think of it as the future of Open Source X. It is mostly a complete rewrite, and it is not a fork of XFree86, though it has borrowed some libraries from the latter one.
OK you see, I agree with you in many points, and disagree with some of your arguments. The thing is, you have to underestand that wether you like a movie or not depends on your taste. I actually like Lost in translation a lot, I thought Benicio Del Toro should have won the Best Supporting Actor award, I thought Noami Watts should have won the Best Leading Actress award, I thought Jennifer Connoly should certainly have been nomeenated (hell, it was the best performance of the year on my opinion), and above all these I thought Sir Ben Kingsly should have certainly won the oscar for best actor; not just because I am an Iranian and I loved the movie, but also because as an Iranian, I undrestood how he really played like an Iranian Colonel. It was simply brilliant.
But when you think at the big picture, it wouldn't have been great if Sean Penn hadn't win. His oscar wasn't just for his performance in Mystic River, he won the oscar because he has been playing terrificly for the past couple of years. He had been nominated 3 times before, and this time, he desereved to win. Same with the LOTR. As I said I liked Lost in Translation, and I also think LOTR (tough a brilliant movie) could have been made much better. But wouldn't it have been a shame if none of the 3 movies had won the Oscar for the best picture? They didn't give the oscar to any of the previous two ones, so it was time that they give it to the last one, and recognize one of the great trilogies ever made. It wasn't ROTK that won the oscar, it was the whole 3 of them, the whole LOTR, and I am bound to say that they deserved it. Even if it wasn't the best movie of the year (and that is arguable)
At least from now on, I don't have to tell everyone whenever we see a Pixar film that the animations weren't really made by Disney, but by Pixar. The creative guys at Pixar have made these beautifull movies with their blood and sweat (and some Linux clusters) and Disney the 'distributor' was getting half of the earnings as well as credit on these movies. This isn't fair, maybe it was fair in 1995 when no one knew Pixar, but not anymore.
John Lasseter (sp?) and his crew have made such memorable pictures that I think the audience are now familiar with the name Pixar. Now I admit that 'Pixar' doesn't still produce the same kind of effect that 'Disnay' produces on kids, but I also know of many adults that had never enjoyed watching an animation, before Toy Story. Besides, as others have noted, just mentioning 'from the creators of Toy Story and Nemo and Monsters Inc' is perhaps enough to make it a must-see for many. Jobs is smarter than Eisner, and Lasseter is perhaps the most creative brain in the movie industry right now. They used Disnay to promote their own brand name, and now it was time for them to end this unfair cooperation, and get full credit for their creations.
I haven't watched L&S, but to be honest I have not enjoyed watching any of Disney's animations after Lions' King (Which, surprise! was made by Lasseter himself when he was still in Disney). Making so many boring pictures in the past decade was enough to make the unthinkable happen; and that is: I feel reluctant to watch a Disney movie these days; and this comes to you from a long time adoring fan of animations and cartoons. Someone who used to whorship Disney when he was a kid.
And BTW, last time I checked, Disney's total income from it's own productions was less than what it was getting trough distributing Pixar's films. The way I see it, Disney needs Pixar more than the other way. I'm sure that Pixar will always be able to find someone to distribute their movies.I suppose you are very much mistaken, if you think that Eisner is sleeping happily these days.
Once in Dubai Airport, I was stopped by a security guard to open and show my notebook computer. I had no prior experience of travelling with a notebook, so I didn't know that they were a security concern. Anyway, the guy wanted to see that my notebook "worked", and unfortunate me, I had just wiped the hard disk of my shiny new Thinkpad, as it was waiting for Linux to be installed on it. Hence, I got into all sortes of troubles you can imagine, as the security guys couldn't underestand that a computer might be phisycally OK, but have no OS installed on it. luckily, I suddenly remembered that I had a Knoppix CD with me. putting it in, and showing it boot, saved my day.
Yet another way of how Knoppix can save you!!
A few days ago, when I read Bruce Perens response (or rather defence) on his choice of GUI, there was one part of his response that caught my eye: He said that individual support companies can add KDE and support it if they want. "It's not that we are removing KDE from Debian" he said.
I contacted the UserLinux mailing list on behalf of a group/company that is considering becoming a support company for UserLinux in Iran. We badly need an Iranian distro with full support for the Farsi language, in Iran and as far as I can see there is a good market here for such a product. For months we have been thinking about wether we should roll out our own Debian-based distro, but haven't yet made our decision. (Well we have made Shabdix, which is a Live CD distro based on Knoppix). As everyone knows, maintaining a Linux distro is not a trivial task, and there is not enough financial incentive in it. UserLinux with it's proposed structure would have made an excellent choice for us.
The problem is, during the past 1.5 year, our small group of Linux enthusiasts translated KDE to Farsi. Currently it has (near) full Farsi support, and right now offers something which Windows does not: a Farsi Graphical User Interface. KDE is the only environment which has been translated to Farsi, and as far as I know no one is planning on translating Gnome to Farsi, anytime soon. The situation here, is that if people are going to use Linux in Iran, the only player here is KDE. Gnome (currently) lacks Farsi support.
Bruce's decision on GUI has made life hard for us. I Contacted UserLinux discussion mailing list to ask a couple of questions and to make things clear for myself (namely to ask how I as a support company will be able to add KDE, and still be considered UserLinux). Unfortunetely I didn't get a single reply on the mailing list. What actualy surprised me was that on UserLinux's only mailing list, most people were just trolls, engaging in endless flame wars. I didn't saw a single developer there, nothing cunstructive, just flame wars. Bruce Perens loudly speaks everywhere of UserLinux' more than 200 posts a day. What he doesn't speak about, is that these are mostly just flame wars.
However Aaron Seigo, a respected KDE developer took the time to address some of my questions, and he made me aware of the other side of the coin: what KDE developers are doing. I am posting some parts of his mails, so that the slashdot community can also use his thoughts.
He Wrote:
"I've cc'd the kde-debian list on this, since doing User Linux but with KDE is what this project is about! there's no need to sacrifice KDE, or deal with putting KDE into User Linux on your own. simply join our efforts and we can all work together on this solution. we have dozens already involved and code is being written.
After congradulating on his work I also wrote:
" However I should note that while I will look with greatinterest to your project, it is a shame that such an old issue (GnomeVs. KDE) has seperated the community in this way.
His responded:
"please note that this old issue was not raised by us (people interested in KDE) but by Bruce Perens and some random GNOME fanatics. my position was and is based on market realities and inclusivity that does not suffer from choice proliferation (e.g. the "10 CD players, 20 text editors" problem) nor from economic drags on support (as Bruce tried to submit).
I don't think GNOME should be excluded from User Linux, and i feel the same way about PostgreSQL vs MySQL as I do about GNOME vs KDE in User Linux, despite note liking MySQL as a RDBMs solution very much... so you see it isn't so much a "KDE passion", but a realism."
I also wrote:
"UserLinux was/is a great idea, but it's strengh lies in the power of it's core organization,and how much it will be successful in getting IHV and ISV support Having two such projects competeing with each other will only damage both of these projects, as we all know that ISVs (and to so
I don't know if bruce is still reading this story or not, but here is my comment on his initiative after reading his draft.
First of all, we all agree for the need for a UserLinux. SuSE/Novell and RedHat as you mention are now lock-in situations. I also think that most of the community agrees on basing the whole thing on Debian. It is a true and tested ditribution, that works. Criticism to Debian ofcourse is valid, woody installer isn't great, and debian stable is out of date. But that doesn't mean that UserLinux should also face these disadvantages.
I personlay like Anaconda very much, I think it's the best installer for any OS now a days. I don't know of your relationf with Ian, but I encourage you to work with progeny and their port of Anaconda on Debian. While I have also tested the debian-installer for sarge (beta 1) my vote still goes with Anaconda. Anaconda can be UserLinux's installer, and put an end to the installer issue for good.
As for being out of date, well UserLinux can address this, like Libranet has addressed it, by upgrading some packages to their testing/unstable version. But this process should be done carefuly, so that the distro still works with Debian apt's repositories.
I find the argument of 'Why don't do all these inside the Debian project" a valid argument. But your answer for a need for the Debian to work with for-profit organizations also seems valid. The whole thing sounds good to me. UserLinux can be an umbrella project for Debian/SPI, in which debian produces the core system, and UserLinux builds on top of it.
Slecting from competeing packages can be a painful task, but you have to face it.
Bruce, tell me if you have ties with Progeny, and if they are interested in working with you/User Linux.
I personlay don't like the name UserLinux, I propose Debian Enterprise GNU/Linux (if Debian can accept it) or GoLinux (if the name can be cleared).
Also, you seem to think $1M is a lot of money. Well, it is, but not for the task that you are going to face.
The FLOSS community needs people like you Bruce. I am proud of you, and proud of the work you have done. Good Luck with UserLinux, hope it becomes another success.
You certainly don't have any clue about what you are talking about? "Staying with Windows"? What do you mean staying with windows? Wind River is/was a traditional Unix and BSD player. They bought BSDI a couple of years ago for god's sake. Now it seems they are moving to Linux. What do you mean by staying with Windows? No company in it's right mind, is using Windows in the embeded systems (in the kind of systems that Wind River produces).
Also of note (though off topic), according to statistics, no one is delaying their Linux plans because of SCO.
Re:Does Germany Count?
on
Linux in 2004?
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Nah! How many years will it take people like you, to realize that "the old europe" is not a 1st world country?!! Get over it, it's old, it can't be first !!
Novel Lost the mid 90s server wars to Microsoft, just because it did not have a desktop offering. At the time, Although Novel had a superior technology in the field of file/print servers, they depended on Microsoft for the client, and expected Microsoft to play nice. Everyone knows that Microsoft's dominance in the desktop market eventualy made them also a big player in the (low-end) server market, and win the war with Novel.
Mr.Szulik, now that you have adviced home and SOHO users to use Windows, don't you think you are making the same mistakes that Novel did? People tend to go wit integrated soloutions. If it is Windows on the desktop, then they would rather also have Windows on the server. Don't you think, that your push in the Enterprise Desktop Market, and leaving the SOHO and the Academia markets, is going to cost you in the server market?
Hey, It wasn't/.'s fault. I saw this message on LWN, and thought it was important, so sent it to/. And BTW, editors at first rejected my article, it seems later they changed their minds and accepted it. Even now, on my sublit page it is written: * 2003-06-22 20:08:10 Provo Linux users protest at SCO (articles,caldera) (rejected).
Dude, You should multiply your figures by 5. Five licenses for Windows XP plus office XP will be $2605. This is without any support. SuSE is giving a OS plus a bunch of software (office, image manipulation, etc ) for $600. And this is for 5 licenses, including 1 year support.
So on one hand you have $2605 for office and OS, without support, on the other hand you have $600 for office and OS and a bunch of applications, plus support. I call the SuSE offering, very cheap, and very strategically priced.
I actually find it interesting that IE 5 for mac is far more standard complaint that the windows counterpart. As you noted IE for Mac supports PNG transparency. It also ofeers complete CSS 1 support, while the windows version (though more recent) lacks these features. It makes me wonder wether apple have some infulence in the making of IE for Mac, or not.
QPL is also free software. (According to FSF). It is not GPL compatible. So, if you like QPL (Which is free software), you can use Qt, if you like GPL, then accept it and use Qt. If you don't want either of them (i.e you want to produce proprietary software with Qt), the buy Qt from TrollTech (like Opera does with for it's browser, ans sharp does for it's Zaurus). It is maximum freedom, in anyway that you can interprete the freedom meaning. Kudos to Trolltech.
Hey, it's Eugenia Loli-Queru!When you see an article by her, you should expect what you ae going to see! Ofcourse I really liked one part of her story: "I have a BeOS machine around, but I don't use it much anymore". haha! poor gal, she has suffered more than anyone in the world because of demise of BeOS.
ESR I really don't see why you are looking around for people who might have seen the Unix source code. Everybody has seen a Unix source code. In order to prove in the court, that they don't have any trade secrets, and that the design of Unix has been in public domain, you just have to point out a couple of things. First and most important is BSD, which does classify as Unix (Not according to open group, but it qualifies as a Unix-like system anyway). BSD has already been cleard in court, so just pointing out BSD and the fact that anyone could have seen and used it's design should be sufficent. Then you can reffer to SCO's own publication of the Unix System 7 source code, which this time even qualifies as a standard-unix and the fact that it's source code has been available for a couple of years now is also sufficent. Add to this, a couple of Unix books with some source code in them, and the fact that the Unix design is teached at every computer sience college in the world, and you win the argument. You don't need to show that people have had access to Irix or Solaris or AIX, the AT&T Unix and the BSDs are sufficent.
Same here. I used 4.x and 5.x when I still had windoze. At the time I have to say that it was cool, having tabbed browsing and mouse gesture. I really give them credit for these innovations. These are real innovations. But I kinda didn't like 6.x and then dumped it. I am now a happy Moz/Konqueror user.
About the mouse gesture thing, I remember there was once a project on MozDev to add mouse gesture support to Mozilla. I used it on Mozilla 1.0
Wine only runs on x86. As WineX is also based on Wine, I guess the same applies to it.However, you have the option of wrting a mail to apple, and request a x86 port of OS X. Just make it clear that you want this, because you want to compile WineX on OS X, and then, you might have a chance, who knows.. And Oh one more thing, if you manage to persuade them to release OS X under GNU GPL, then I will personally do the porting for you;-)
Slashdot Mirror
X.Org is something very new. It is just a complete fork of Xfree86 4.4 rc2, which was the last version before the license change. X.Org's sole reason of existence, is the license change in XFree86.
Xouvert is also based on Xfree86, but it is a bit different than X.Org. Xouvert was started when it became apparent that XFree86 guys were too reluctant to change, and to commit new codes and technologies. If I am not mistaken, the Xouvert project started in summer of last year, with the goal of being a more experimental branch of Xfree86 i.e: they would accept code more easily than XFree86 guys. They also stated that they want to seperate the drivers from other parts, so that one can add a driver of a new chip, to a old release of X. I don't know how succesful they have been in this front.
And aside from all of these, is the Free Desktop.org's X Server. This X Server, mostly written by Keith Packard is not mature for every-day use yet, but I think of it as the future of Open Source X. It is mostly a complete rewrite, and it is not a fork of XFree86, though it has borrowed some libraries from the latter one.
OK you see, I agree with you in many points, and disagree with some of your arguments. The thing is, you have to underestand that wether you like a movie or not depends on your taste. I actually like Lost in translation a lot, I thought Benicio Del Toro should have won the Best Supporting Actor award, I thought Noami Watts should have won the Best Leading Actress award, I thought Jennifer Connoly should certainly have been nomeenated (hell, it was the best performance of the year on my opinion), and above all these I thought Sir Ben Kingsly should have certainly won the oscar for best actor; not just because I am an Iranian and I loved the movie, but also because as an Iranian, I undrestood how he really played like an Iranian Colonel. It was simply brilliant. But when you think at the big picture, it wouldn't have been great if Sean Penn hadn't win. His oscar wasn't just for his performance in Mystic River, he won the oscar because he has been playing terrificly for the past couple of years. He had been nominated 3 times before, and this time, he desereved to win. Same with the LOTR. As I said I liked Lost in Translation, and I also think LOTR (tough a brilliant movie) could have been made much better. But wouldn't it have been a shame if none of the 3 movies had won the Oscar for the best picture? They didn't give the oscar to any of the previous two ones, so it was time that they give it to the last one, and recognize one of the great trilogies ever made. It wasn't ROTK that won the oscar, it was the whole 3 of them, the whole LOTR, and I am bound to say that they deserved it. Even if it wasn't the best movie of the year (and that is arguable)
At least from now on, I don't have to tell everyone whenever we see a Pixar film that the animations weren't really made by Disney, but by Pixar. The creative guys at Pixar have made these beautifull movies with their blood and sweat (and some Linux clusters) and Disney the 'distributor' was getting half of the earnings as well as credit on these movies. This isn't fair, maybe it was fair in 1995 when no one knew Pixar, but not anymore.
John Lasseter (sp?) and his crew have made such memorable pictures that I think the audience are now familiar with the name Pixar. Now I admit that 'Pixar' doesn't still produce the same kind of effect that 'Disnay' produces on kids, but I also know of many adults that had never enjoyed watching an animation, before Toy Story. Besides, as others have noted, just mentioning 'from the creators of Toy Story and Nemo and Monsters Inc' is perhaps enough to make it a must-see for many. Jobs is smarter than Eisner, and Lasseter is perhaps the most creative brain in the movie industry right now. They used Disnay to promote their own brand name, and now it was time for them to end this unfair cooperation, and get full credit for their creations.
I haven't watched L&S, but to be honest I have not enjoyed watching any of Disney's animations after Lions' King (Which, surprise! was made by Lasseter himself when he was still in Disney). Making so many boring pictures in the past decade was enough to make the unthinkable happen; and that is: I feel reluctant to watch a Disney movie these days; and this comes to you from a long time adoring fan of animations and cartoons. Someone who used to whorship Disney when he was a kid.
And BTW, last time I checked, Disney's total income from it's own productions was less than what it was getting trough distributing Pixar's films. The way I see it, Disney needs Pixar more than the other way. I'm sure that Pixar will always be able to find someone to distribute their movies.I suppose you are very much mistaken, if you think that Eisner is sleeping happily these days.
Once in Dubai Airport, I was stopped by a security guard to open and show my notebook computer. I had no prior experience of travelling with a notebook, so I didn't know that they were a security concern. Anyway, the guy wanted to see that my notebook "worked", and unfortunate me, I had just wiped the hard disk of my shiny new Thinkpad, as it was waiting for Linux to be installed on it. Hence, I got into all sortes of troubles you can imagine, as the security guys couldn't underestand that a computer might be phisycally OK, but have no OS installed on it. luckily, I suddenly remembered that I had a Knoppix CD with me. putting it in, and showing it boot, saved my day. Yet another way of how Knoppix can save you!!
A few days ago, when I read Bruce Perens response (or rather defence) on his choice of GUI, there was one part of his response that caught my eye: He said that individual support companies can add KDE and support it if they want. "It's not that we are removing KDE from Debian" he said.
... so you see it isn't so much a "KDE passion", but a realism."
I contacted the UserLinux mailing list on behalf of a group/company that is considering becoming a support company for UserLinux in Iran. We badly need an Iranian distro with full support for the Farsi language, in Iran and as far as I can see there is a good market here for such a product. For months we have been thinking about wether we should roll out our own Debian-based distro, but haven't yet made our decision. (Well we have made Shabdix, which is a Live CD distro based on Knoppix). As everyone knows, maintaining a Linux distro is not a trivial task, and there is not enough financial incentive in it. UserLinux with it's proposed structure would have made an excellent choice for us.
The problem is, during the past 1.5 year, our small group of Linux enthusiasts translated KDE to Farsi. Currently it has (near) full Farsi support, and right now offers something which Windows does not: a Farsi Graphical User Interface. KDE is the only environment which has been translated to Farsi, and as far as I know no one is planning on translating Gnome to Farsi, anytime soon. The situation here, is that if people are going to use Linux in Iran, the only player here is KDE. Gnome (currently) lacks Farsi support.
Bruce's decision on GUI has made life hard for us. I Contacted UserLinux discussion mailing list to ask a couple of questions and to make things clear for myself (namely to ask how I as a support company will be able to add KDE, and still be considered UserLinux). Unfortunetely I didn't get a single reply on the mailing list. What actualy surprised me was that on UserLinux's only mailing list, most people were just trolls, engaging in endless flame wars. I didn't saw a single developer there, nothing cunstructive, just flame wars. Bruce Perens loudly speaks everywhere of UserLinux' more than 200 posts a day. What he doesn't speak about, is that these are mostly just flame wars.
However Aaron Seigo, a respected KDE developer took the time to address some of my questions, and he made me aware of the other side of the coin: what KDE developers are doing. I am posting some parts of his mails, so that the slashdot community can also use his thoughts.
He Wrote:
"I've cc'd the kde-debian list on this, since doing User Linux but with KDE is what this project is about! there's no need to sacrifice KDE, or deal with putting KDE into User Linux on your own. simply join our efforts and we can all work together on this solution. we have dozens already involved and code is being written.
After congradulating on his work I also wrote:
" However I should note that while I will look with greatinterest to your project, it is a shame that such an old issue (GnomeVs. KDE) has seperated the community in this way.
His responded:
"please note that this old issue was not raised by us (people interested in KDE) but by Bruce Perens and some random GNOME fanatics. my position was and is based on market realities and inclusivity that does not suffer from choice proliferation (e.g. the "10 CD players, 20 text editors" problem) nor from economic drags on support (as Bruce tried to submit).
I don't think GNOME should be excluded from User Linux, and i feel the same way about PostgreSQL vs MySQL as I do about GNOME vs KDE in User Linux, despite note liking MySQL as a RDBMs solution very much
I also wrote:
"UserLinux was/is a great idea, but it's strengh lies in the power of it's core organization,and how much it will be successful in getting IHV and ISV support Having two such projects competeing with each other will only damage both of these projects, as we all know that ISVs (and to so
I don't know if bruce is still reading this story or not, but here is my comment on his initiative after reading his draft. First of all, we all agree for the need for a UserLinux. SuSE/Novell and RedHat as you mention are now lock-in situations. I also think that most of the community agrees on basing the whole thing on Debian. It is a true and tested ditribution, that works. Criticism to Debian ofcourse is valid, woody installer isn't great, and debian stable is out of date. But that doesn't mean that UserLinux should also face these disadvantages. I personlay like Anaconda very much, I think it's the best installer for any OS now a days. I don't know of your relationf with Ian, but I encourage you to work with progeny and their port of Anaconda on Debian. While I have also tested the debian-installer for sarge (beta 1) my vote still goes with Anaconda. Anaconda can be UserLinux's installer, and put an end to the installer issue for good. As for being out of date, well UserLinux can address this, like Libranet has addressed it, by upgrading some packages to their testing/unstable version. But this process should be done carefuly, so that the distro still works with Debian apt's repositories. I find the argument of 'Why don't do all these inside the Debian project" a valid argument. But your answer for a need for the Debian to work with for-profit organizations also seems valid. The whole thing sounds good to me. UserLinux can be an umbrella project for Debian/SPI, in which debian produces the core system, and UserLinux builds on top of it. Slecting from competeing packages can be a painful task, but you have to face it. Bruce, tell me if you have ties with Progeny, and if they are interested in working with you/User Linux. I personlay don't like the name UserLinux, I propose Debian Enterprise GNU/Linux (if Debian can accept it) or GoLinux (if the name can be cleared). Also, you seem to think $1M is a lot of money. Well, it is, but not for the task that you are going to face. The FLOSS community needs people like you Bruce. I am proud of you, and proud of the work you have done. Good Luck with UserLinux, hope it becomes another success.
You certainly don't have any clue about what you are talking about? "Staying with Windows"? What do you mean staying with windows? Wind River is/was a traditional Unix and BSD player. They bought BSDI a couple of years ago for god's sake. Now it seems they are moving to Linux. What do you mean by staying with Windows? No company in it's right mind, is using Windows in the embeded systems (in the kind of systems that Wind River produces). Also of note (though off topic), according to statistics, no one is delaying their Linux plans because of SCO.
Nah! How many years will it take people like you, to realize that "the old europe" is not a 1st world country?!! Get over it, it's old, it can't be first !!
Novel Lost the mid 90s server wars to Microsoft, just because it did not have a desktop offering. At the time, Although Novel had a superior technology in the field of file/print servers, they depended on Microsoft for the client, and expected Microsoft to play nice. Everyone knows that Microsoft's dominance in the desktop market eventualy made them also a big player in the (low-end) server market, and win the war with Novel. Mr.Szulik, now that you have adviced home and SOHO users to use Windows, don't you think you are making the same mistakes that Novel did? People tend to go wit integrated soloutions. If it is Windows on the desktop, then they would rather also have Windows on the server. Don't you think, that your push in the Enterprise Desktop Market, and leaving the SOHO and the Academia markets, is going to cost you in the server market?
Hey, It wasn't /.'s fault. I saw this message on LWN, and thought it was important, so sent it to /. And BTW, editors at first rejected my article, it seems later they changed their minds and accepted it. Even now, on my sublit page it is written :
* 2003-06-22 20:08:10 Provo Linux users protest at SCO (articles,caldera) (rejected).
And what the hell was a Sun4/260 doing a dormitory room?
Dude, You should multiply your figures by 5. Five licenses for Windows XP plus office XP will be $2605. This is without any support. SuSE is giving a OS plus a bunch of software (office, image manipulation, etc ) for $600. And this is for 5 licenses, including 1 year support.
So on one hand you have $2605 for office and OS, without support, on the other hand you have $600 for office and OS and a bunch of applications, plus support. I call the SuSE offering, very cheap, and very strategically priced.
I actually find it interesting that IE 5 for mac is far more standard complaint that the windows counterpart. As you noted IE for Mac supports PNG transparency. It also ofeers complete CSS 1 support, while the windows version (though more recent) lacks these features. It makes me wonder wether apple have some infulence in the making of IE for Mac, or not.
QPL is also free software. (According to FSF). It is not GPL compatible. So, if you like QPL (Which is free software), you can use Qt, if you like GPL, then accept it and use Qt. If you don't want either of them (i.e you want to produce proprietary software with Qt), the buy Qt from TrollTech (like Opera does with for it's browser, ans sharp does for it's Zaurus). It is maximum freedom, in anyway that you can interprete the freedom meaning. Kudos to Trolltech.
Hey, it's Eugenia Loli-Queru!When you see an article by her, you should expect what you ae going to see! Ofcourse I really liked one part of her story: "I have a BeOS machine around, but I don't use it much anymore". haha! poor gal, she has suffered more than anyone in the world because of demise of BeOS.
Can I have a copy of this form which you mentioned? If you could email them to me, I woule be obliged.
ESR I really don't see why you are looking around for people who might have seen the Unix source code. Everybody has seen a Unix source code. In order to prove in the court, that they don't have any trade secrets, and that the design of Unix has been in public domain, you just have to point out a couple of things. First and most important is BSD, which does classify as Unix (Not according to open group, but it qualifies as a Unix-like system anyway). BSD has already been cleard in court, so just pointing out BSD and the fact that anyone could have seen and used it's design should be sufficent. Then you can reffer to SCO's own publication of the Unix System 7 source code, which this time even qualifies as a standard-unix and the fact that it's source code has been available for a couple of years now is also sufficent. Add to this, a couple of Unix books with some source code in them, and the fact that the Unix design is teached at every computer sience college in the world, and you win the argument. You don't need to show that people have had access to Irix or Solaris or AIX, the AT&T Unix and the BSDs are sufficent.
Same here. I used 4.x and 5.x when I still had windoze. At the time I have to say that it was cool, having tabbed browsing and mouse gesture. I really give them credit for these innovations. These are real innovations. But I kinda didn't like 6.x and then dumped it. I am now a happy Moz/Konqueror user.
About the mouse gesture thing, I remember there was once a project on MozDev to add mouse gesture support to Mozilla. I used it on Mozilla 1.0
Wine only runs on x86. As WineX is also based on Wine, I guess the same applies to it.However, you have the option of wrting a mail to apple, and request a x86 port of OS X. Just make it clear that you want this, because you want to compile WineX on OS X, and then, you might have a chance, who knows.. ;-)
And Oh one more thing, if you manage to persuade them to release OS X under GNU GPL, then I will personally do the porting for you