Generally, An installer will: 1. Copy files to their correct locations(not all files for an application should be in the same folder) 2. Set file permissions on those files. 3. Setup associations with file types. 4. Registering the program, so that it can be uninstalled properly.
The issue is that windows users will find this to be a convneint way to install software. Making the need to download installers for free software an extra effort. I know that I find it quite a hassle to install software that isn't in portage on my gentoo system.
Microsoft isn't going to let competing free software products be distributed using their system.
People will still be able to install free software, it will just be more of a hassle.
If you're a developer with deep insight in the Mozilla codebase.
You could alway hire a developer(s) to make the changes for you and maintain the fork.
You can't do that with opera or IE.
news media dictionary:
a hack - a rough job done to achieve some result.
hacker - someone that breaks in to computer systems.
hacked - a computer system that was broken in to.
isn't it great to confuse one's audience?
Seems microsoft is trying to tie web services to windows. ie. Google threatens microsoft because many google applications run in a web browser that could be running on any platform. Now if microsoft can get everyone using what is basically Windows GUI in all there web apps then those web apps will be tied to windows.
Yay for microsofts World Domination Department. good job guys, thanks for making life difficult.
Seems microsoft is trying to tie web services to windows.
ie. Google threatens microsoft because many google applications run in a web browser that could be running on any platform.
Now if microsoft can get everyone using what is basically Windows GUI in all there web apps then those web apps will be tied to windows.
Yay for microsofts World Domination Department. good job guys, thanks for making life difficult.
Re:Open source and alternative browser support?
on
Flash, Meet Sparkle
·
· Score: 1
Agreed. Microsoft is trying to start up the browser wars again. I feel sorry for the web developers of the near future, 1995-2000 were very bad years. hopefully Microsofts new push for the web again won't fuck it up again.
If your information is important, then plain xhtml is best. If your content is targeted at teeny booper idiots then SPARKLE!:)
Sounds to me like a useless program. The sort of user who wouldn't be able to get around this, probably also wouldn't be able to get around right-click disabling javascript. Print screen?
yeah, use python. And stop melbourne bashing. Just because you're city is a global whore with annoying tourists and insane roads you think you can insult Melbourne.
In Australia they are enforced. To get a.com.au or.net.au address in Australia you need to have a registered business name equal to the domain name you wish to have. Same goes with.org.au and.asn.au which require that you have a registered not-for-profit organistaion. only.id.au is unrestricted, and most used for personal addresses.
I like this enforcement. It stops name squatters and generally stops nasty tricks being played on users. The only down side is that users expect everything to be a.com.au which makes it difficult if you want to set up a site that is not a business. eg. forums. which means a lot of Australian's just get.com or.net addresses because they are cheaper and less hassle.
Open document formats are great and the workers wouldn't actually require retraining if Microsoft would support the open document format in Microsoft Office.
It's about using the best tool for the job. Currently microsoft office can't even handle the format so it's the wrong tool for the job. Therefore a change is needed.
If you want it to "JUST WORK" then plain text is the way to go. It's supported on every platform and every word processor. It is compacted, wonderfully compressable and won't confuse your users. It will never be patent encumbed and you will never have trouble exchanging documents with other organisations.
Uneducationable users will always be the main security problem with computer systems. I find it hard to believe that users still run random attachments to emails. After 10 years people are still doing it.
You can't just remove all attachments from emails, so what should one do about it?
Software is not here to make up for the stupidity of people, it's here to help them utilises their intelligents. If you're not intelligent enough not to run random attachments to your emails, then you probaly won't find a computer very useful. - Jesse McNelis
I use elinks. maybe it's secure, maybe not. Due to the lack of graphics support and javascript there is a good chance it is more secure than most other browsers. Also nobody is going to target it.:)
Why do I need javascript enabled to download these links? Quite annoying, elinks doesn't do javascript. I'm sick of people using javascript for pointless reasons.
They aren't supporting firefox, they are just not supporting other browsers.
I will be terrible to see when everyone becomes locked in to firefox.
Free software is about freedom and compatibility.
This will be neither.
I agree, GIMP is very usable in comparison to photoshop.
But the multiple windows thing still annoys me.
I use ratpoison, the best window manager around, which doesn't handle GIMPs strangeness very well.
DRM is a great idea. I don't understand why people think it's such a bad idea. If a company produces a product that they wish to sell and also wish to protect it with DRM then they can go ahead and do so. Since they were probably going to sue me for distributing it anyway.
The only way to fight the downsides of DRM is to have lots of free(as in freedom) content and products.
DRM has many upsides. Security, only signed code may run on the system. Allowing system adminstrators more control over what runs on their systems. This would probably cause a large decrease in maclious software running on properly adminstered networks.
DRM is never going to prevent people running their free software, because that's just insane. Most companies develop some sort of in house software that would have to be able to be run on the systems.
I agree that.NET is a bad implementation of a good idea. But it's still a good idea. No matter what language a program is written in, everything comes back to cpu instructions. Which are the same.
I see no reason why there should be such large incompatiblities between languages.
It seems crazy to translate a program to a different language just so it can be incorporated in to a program of the language of my choice.
There are too many scripting languages...actually there are too many interpreters for scripting languages. Except for the syntax differences, what is the difference between ruby,perl,php and python? Seeing as they are so similar why should I have to install four different interpreters and why should applications have to be ported between the languages? Seems like a large waste of time. I'm all for lots of versions of the same sort of tool as long as they are compatible.
This is some thing microsoft got right..NET is really great in that way. Many languages, one interpreter.
I agree.
Ajax doesn't work on any browser. examples include, links,elinks,lynx.
This is important, A user shouldn't have to run code from random servers just to gain access to information.
http is hyper text transfer protocal. Why is there less and less text.
Slashdot Mirror
Generally, An installer will:
1. Copy files to their correct locations(not all files for an application should be in the same folder)
2. Set file permissions on those files.
3. Setup associations with file types.
4. Registering the program, so that it can be uninstalled properly.
- Jesse McNelis
The issue is that windows users will find this to be a convneint way to install software.
Making the need to download installers for free software an extra effort.
I know that I find it quite a hassle to install software that isn't in portage on my gentoo system.
Microsoft isn't going to let competing free software products be distributed using their system.
People will still be able to install free software, it will just be more of a hassle.
- Jesse McNelis
If you're a developer with deep insight in the Mozilla codebase.
You could alway hire a developer(s) to make the changes for you and maintain the fork.
You can't do that with opera or IE.
news media dictionary: a hack - a rough job done to achieve some result. hacker - someone that breaks in to computer systems. hacked - a computer system that was broken in to. isn't it great to confuse one's audience?
Seems microsoft is trying to tie web services to windows.
ie. Google threatens microsoft because many google applications run in a web browser that could be running on any platform.
Now if microsoft can get everyone using what is basically Windows GUI in all there web apps then those web apps will be tied to windows.
Yay for microsofts World Domination Department. good job guys, thanks for making life difficult.
Seems microsoft is trying to tie web services to windows. ie. Google threatens microsoft because many google applications run in a web browser that could be running on any platform. Now if microsoft can get everyone using what is basically Windows GUI in all there web apps then those web apps will be tied to windows. Yay for microsofts World Domination Department. good job guys, thanks for making life difficult.
Agreed.
:)
Microsoft is trying to start up the browser wars again.
I feel sorry for the web developers of the near future, 1995-2000 were very bad years. hopefully Microsofts new push for the web again won't fuck it up again.
If your information is important, then plain xhtml is best. If your content is targeted at teeny booper idiots then SPARKLE!
Sounds to me like a useless program.
The sort of user who wouldn't be able to get around this, probably also wouldn't be able to get around right-click disabling javascript.
Print screen?
yeah, use python.
And stop melbourne bashing. Just because you're city is a global whore with annoying tourists and insane roads you think you can insult Melbourne.
In Australia they are enforced. .com.au or .net.au address in Australia you need to have a registered business name equal to the domain name you wish to have. .org.au and .asn.au which require that you have a registered not-for-profit organistaion. .id.au is unrestricted, and most used for personal addresses.
.com.au which makes it difficult if you want to set up a site that is not a business. .com or .net addresses because they are cheaper and less hassle.
To get a
Same goes with
only
I like this enforcement. It stops name squatters and generally stops nasty tricks being played on users.
The only down side is that users expect everything to be a
eg. forums.
which means a lot of Australian's just get
- Jesse McNelis
Open document formats are great and the workers wouldn't actually require retraining if Microsoft would support the open document format in Microsoft Office.
It's about using the best tool for the job. Currently microsoft office can't even handle the format so it's the wrong tool for the job. Therefore a change is needed.
- Jesse McNelis
"Aren't you dying to know first hand if it's actually just that easy and we can all quit theorizing about how viable this whole thing is?"
Yes I am.
I think I might do this tonight.
Will be fun.
I will drink cola.
- Jesse McNelis
If you want it to "JUST WORK" then plain text is the way to go. It's supported on every platform and every word processor.
It is compacted, wonderfully compressable and won't confuse your users.
It will never be patent encumbed and you will never have trouble exchanging documents with other organisations.
I 3 plain text, make it your friend too.
- Jesse McNelis
Uneducationable users will always be the main security problem with computer systems.
I find it hard to believe that users still run random attachments to emails.
After 10 years people are still doing it.
You can't just remove all attachments from emails, so what should one do about it?
Software is not here to make up for the stupidity of people, it's here to help them utilises their intelligents. If you're not intelligent enough not to run random attachments to your emails, then you probaly won't find a computer very useful.
- Jesse McNelis
I use elinks. :)
maybe it's secure, maybe not.
Due to the lack of graphics support and javascript there is a good chance it is more secure than most other browsers.
Also nobody is going to target it.
Why do I need javascript enabled to download these links?
Quite annoying, elinks doesn't do javascript.
I'm sick of people using javascript for pointless reasons.
They aren't supporting firefox, they are just not supporting other browsers. I will be terrible to see when everyone becomes locked in to firefox. Free software is about freedom and compatibility. This will be neither.
It's about profit.
Records sales are booming.
File sharing isn't affecting them at all.
Most of the stuff I would download would be stuff I wouldn't pay for anyway. old tv shows, crappy music.
But if they sue me for $20,000, they make money.
I agree, GIMP is very usable in comparison to photoshop. But the multiple windows thing still annoys me. I use ratpoison, the best window manager around, which doesn't handle GIMPs strangeness very well.
DRM is a great idea.
I don't understand why people think it's such a bad idea.
If a company produces a product that they wish to sell and also wish to protect it with DRM then they can go ahead and do so. Since they were probably going to sue me for distributing it anyway.
The only way to fight the downsides of DRM is to have lots of free(as in freedom) content and products.
DRM has many upsides. Security, only signed code may run on the system. Allowing system adminstrators more control over what runs on their systems. This would probably cause a large decrease in maclious software running on properly adminstered networks.
DRM is never going to prevent people running their free software, because that's just insane.
Most companies develop some sort of in house software that would have to be able to be run on the systems.
Wonderful,
Parrot looks quite interesting.
Thank for the tip.
- Jessta
I agree that .NET is a bad implementation of a good idea.
But it's still a good idea.
No matter what language a program is written in, everything comes back to cpu instructions.
Which are the same.
I see no reason why there should be such large incompatiblities between languages.
It seems crazy to translate a program to a different language just so it can be incorporated in to a program of the language of my choice.
There are too many scripting languages...actually there are too many interpreters for scripting languages.
.NET is really great in that way.
Except for the syntax differences, what is the difference between ruby,perl,php and python?
Seeing as they are so similar why should I have to install four different interpreters and why should applications have to be ported between the languages?
Seems like a large waste of time.
I'm all for lots of versions of the same sort of tool as long as they are compatible.
This is some thing microsoft got right.
Many languages, one interpreter.
- Jessta
I don't understand why do current operating systems still have drivers that are run in the kernel instead of in the user space.
Because everyone is developing the linux kernel with hardly any developers working in HURD.
I agree. Ajax doesn't work on any browser. examples include, links,elinks,lynx. This is important, A user shouldn't have to run code from random servers just to gain access to information. http is hyper text transfer protocal. Why is there less and less text.