Esperanto hasn't been a complete failure. No, it hasn't succeeded like its creator and proponents would like, but then, neither has Linux. Esperanto is alive and doing pretty well over a century after its creation. I wouldn't call that failure, and I'm sorry you do. Go read up on it before you declare it dead.
Interlingua is interesting, but it's not a valid replacement for Esperanto. Do some research, and use common sense, and you'll come to the same conclusion.
Why don't you pick on the computer industry and start doing some muckraking on the extremely low quality of commercial software?
Actually, Nader is doing just that--one of his latest projects is Appraising Microsoft; their appraisal has been mostly negative, and that includes the quality of MS software, or rather the lack thereof. Nader's web site, Essential Information, covers a lot of areas, but rear-engined cars aren't among them. As for the Corvair, Nader happened to be right--I almost died in a Corvair spin-out. But that's ancient history; do you also still bemoan the South's failure to win an immediate victory in the US Civil War?
... you do know that when a disgruntled ex-worker followed Michael Moore around with a camera, your hero had him arrested for stalking, right?
Um, do you have a cite for this? I've scoured every resource I can lay my hands on, and I can't find a whisper about any such incident. Could you favor us with a reference, please? Answers containing the phrase "but I forget" don't count.
Note that I'm not saying it didn't happen, but given everything I know about Moore, if it did happen, I'm betting that there was more involved than a little following and filming. I'm willing to be proved wrong, however.
Okay wit yer Jethro Tull, but what I really want to know is... which one's Pink?
And two serious comments... er, more serious, I guess... first, isn't Tull still a band, at least sometimes? And second, I'm guessing it's possible for "the band" to have a dispute with an entity, but calling the band a "celebrity" is certainly wrong. Good catch!
Actually, I believe that as soon as a company's sales represent a certain fixed percentage (over 75?) of a given market, they are a monopoly, in the legal sense. Nobody, not even Microsoft themselves, tried to argue that they didn't have a monopoly. What they argued was whether they had used that monopoly to alter other business transactions in their favor.
And picking and choosing who is a criminal isn't the government's job, it's the court's job. And that's what has happened here.
You're right, you surely don't understand the nuances of the case very well. You don't even understand the roles of the major players.
But ya know what? That's okay. That doesn't make you a bad person, or ignorant, or a fool. It just means you are underinformed. Join the club--there are lots of us.
In this case, I disagree with you that this is troubling, for two reasons. First, Microsoft got what they deserved. No, I take that back--they got a tiny fraction of what they really deserved. But at least what they did get was justified. Second, it won't have much appreciable effect one way or the other. So take heart--nobody got hurt.
Justice is only fun until somebody puts an eye out. -- Mom
Excellent post, wish I had mod rights so I could send it to the 5 it deserves.
As an older programmer myself, I fully agree with every point, with one minor quibble: Not all "engineering" languages (as opposed to "hacking" languages) are dead--if Ada is dead, for example, it's an awfully lively zombie, especially on free OS's. So take heart, and take a look.
Despite this, it's a great time to be a programmer. Amen, brother. When I was starting out, I had fantasies about systems with a tenth the capability of what's on my desk right now. I never dreamed I'd actually own a system with this much power, with this wide a choice of languages, this much flexibility, etc. Sure, the software bites--but hey, that's just more opportunity, right? A target-rich environment.
Haven't seen this link here yet, so ...
on
On to Mars
·
· Score: 2
Nobody has yet mentioned the Artemis Society International's project for establishing a privately-funded colony on the moon. The Artemis Project was mentioned in an article by rocket scientist Gregory Bennett in the January 1995 issue of the Analog SF magazine. It has since grown into a fairly sizeable undertaking which looks like it might have a real chance to reach the moon within their proposed schedule. Check out their web site, join their mailing list, even send them money. It's worth a look.
I'd really prefer to see new titles as opposed to older titles ported. Oh, I wouldn't mind if some of my old faves got ported, but I'm not expecting it.
I pretty much skipped MS-Windows altogether--went directly from DOS to Linux. So I can't name a bunch of MS-Win-based titles that need porting. But I do know what kind of games I like!
I want flight sims. Combat flight sims. I used to spend considerable sums buying new flight sims for DOS. Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. Birds of Prey. Red Baron. Falcon. And my all-time favorite, for its balance, smoothness, and complexity--Domark's AV-8B Harrier. Man, that was a sim! On Linux we have, what, ACM and FlightGear? Both nice, but not in the same league.
I want space sims. I actually bought WABI so I could play MS's Space Flight Simulator. It was so pretty it made me drool. But just drooling can get boring after a while if there's nothing much to explore and no way to blow things up. Oh, I'll take the things in the Wing Commander, Mantis, and X-Wing category, too, but as far as I know, there isn't an existing full-bodies physics-based (that's also not afraid to allow a little plausible SF) space-flight and -combat sim out there to be ported.
And I want tactical combat sims. Something that will make me think of the old hex-based board wargames, like Squad Leader. I understand that there are actually a few MS-Win combat games out there, but I don't know any names. So, port those, I guess, or make something new especially for X.
Now, that's quite a shopping list, I know. And I'm not just sitting on my fat rear hoping someone will come along and feed my jones--I'm actually doing something about it. I have preliminary design work done, and some prototype code, for a space sim and a tactical combat sim. Both will be GPL'ed, will use X and OpenGL, and will be done as soon as my little fingers and my schedule permit.
I encourage everyone with the proper skills to do the same.
Oh, and lest I forget, I have played and loved Myst and Riven, too. But those are almost trivial from a programming standpoint--I made a "Myst clone" in a couple of days using Gtk and Python. But one needs actors, graphic artists, musicians, and storytellers to do justice to the concept, and I ain't none of those. So I'd love to see them, but I'm not holding my breath.
Cute story. Sadly, from a humor-related point of view, it's an urban legend.
I'll tell you something that is true, and that doesn't reflect particularly well on Ada's genesis. Ada's design was commissioned, though not actually executed, by the US Department of Defense. Just as with most military equipment, the Ada language would be put in the hands of poorly trained, minimally talented military programmers, and had to function acceptably under those conditions. I don't know if that goal was ever actually achieved, but that's the source of the language attributes which cause most younger programmers to chafe under its "fascist restrictiveness". Believe me, after you've written enough code, and made enough stupid errors that any rather bright chimp would probably have avoided, you begin to realize that all those "restrictions" are actually helping you.
Ada's real downfall was the mandate--something in human nature rebels at being forced, so the various DoD departments expended their creativity getting around the Ada mandate instead of using all that brainpower writing cool code. Now that the mandate is dropped, Ada is experiencing a resurgence in popularity, not the least in the free software world.
It's not a miracle language, regardless of what some real or imagined DoD hypemeister might have said about it, but it's damn nice, a pleasure to use when used properly, and a solid tool for the development of large, robust programs. But don't take my word for it... see for yourself.
If you're looking for a portable language that compiles to native machine code and which implements much of Java's semantics, check out Ada 95. You can find information here, or download a complete GPL'ed compiler here.
I'm totally serious, folks. Do not regale me with tales of how much Ada sucks--most originate from introductory CS classes where Ada83 was shoved down unwilling throats by indifferent or hostile educators. Please, go read and experience for yourself before replying. And for those who dispute my claim about Java semantics, please pay special attention to the links on this page before you comment.
At least Talisman hasn't bothered to respond to this discussion. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that he's reading it, though, despite what he said yesterday.
I was a bit surprised that he outed himself here in public. It says a lot about his social frame of reference, which appears to be quite different from my own.
I tend to agree with most of what Mr. Katz has said in this essay. I've witnessed the formation of several "specialized" (i.e. women-only, etc.) discussion groups, and the conditions which forced their creation weren't pretty. And the participants on both sides of the fence were the poorer for their separation. I wish I could see a good solution to this problem, but sadly, I haven't yet.
Yes, we have always hated it when people have domain names taken from them. But the reason this is different is not because "it's our beloved Linux trademark."
We hate it when monied corporations bully people who have otherwise legitimate claims on their own domain names. I wouldn't mind if, say, Microsoft went against someone trying to register "microsoft-software.com" just to capitalize on their name. But the recent cases, like eToy, the Gumby kid, Amazon, and so on, were just cases of corporations throwing their weight around because their legal staffs didn't have anything else to occupy their time.
In this case, Joe Opportunist thought he could make a buck off the popularity of the Linux name, and he was quite properly stopped. I would be a bit upset if Linus sicced his lawyers on Mr. J. Howard Linux III, who has had "linux-family.org" registered since 1975 or something. And I don't think Linus would do that.
Love is not the issue here--opportunism is. To draw a parallel between this case and other recent domain disputes presented here on Slashdot is to err.
Are da bomb! Keep up the good work, Frank and colleagues. I'm going to be ordering two G400's in the next couple of weeks, just based on the presence of good Linux OpenGL support for them. A rousing hoo-raw to you all from out here in the sticks!
Any solution that fails to address pre-loads is doomed to fail, or to make things even worse.
And until hardware vendors start shipping drivers for alternative PC OS's with their products, and until software vendors start releasing alternative PC versions, no real change will take place.
The zero-choice pre-load is, I think, the causative factor of the other two--if computers start appearing in stores and on web sites pre-loaded with something besides MS-Windows, then vendors will start addressing those other choices.
I'll repeat my solution, which I've posted here before. Unfortunately, it involves doing very little to Microsoft; fortunately, it doesn't single anyone out for special punishment:
Require all system vendors to offer a minimum of two choices of preloaded OS, if they offer any preloads at all. The different OS preloads must be on equal terms--same level of support, same hardware supported, and so on. Only the price difference in the base OS can be passed along.
Require all hardware that comes with specialized drivers to provide drivers for a minimum of two OS's. As an alternative, they could publish complete specifications of their device's interface. Any provided drivers must provide equivalent functionality.
Require all software that communicates with other software (like over a network) to be accompanied by complete and accurate specifications of the protocols and formats involved in that communication.
Require all software that saves data in files to be accompanied by a complete and accurate description of the formats of those files.
The trouble we're having with Microsoft is only a symptom of a larger problem. If not them, then somebody else would be doing it. If they are only broken up, the problem will continue.
Because of my rather unusual workstation setup, I need an articulated monitor arm. When I first developed the layout, I figured the arm would be easy to find.
Think again! I've scoured local and on-line office supply stores, and have found exactly two places that claim to sell them--Innovative Office Products, and TechRack. And both of those are geared more to large buyers and resellers than to small businesses and individuals. And the prices! Holy moley! I'd love it if someone could recommend another good place to find these things.
I'm looking for something that will hold a 19-inch monitor (about 80 pounds) and a keyboard, and that will work when turned 90 degrees on its mounting. All leads appreciated.
As for other ergonomics, I'd have to agree with the 3-button mouse recommendation; I lean toward Logitech. And a large monitor, and a Dvorak keyboard layout. If I could just get that blasted arm, my workstation would really start to shape up.
It's like anyone who makes money incurs the wrath of RMS these days.
Maybe that's true, but it doesn't explain this case. Unless they've started within the past two or three months, Amazon.com has never turned a profit since their virtual doors have been open.
I've been using AccelX on and off for years now, since before Caldera bundled it with their first product. And here's my analysis of the company, to add a data point to help folks make an informed decision.
Pros:
They sign NDAs and pay for hardware specs, so they'll nearly always support a new board before XFree does. These days, more vendors seem to be releasing specs freely, so this may change. But Xig will still have paid staff to devote to supporting even unpopular cards, so it won't change completely.
They're fast. In only one case have I seen XFree outperform AccelX, and that didn't last long. In most cases, AccelX is faster (sometimes considerably faster) and almost always more compliant with X specs. Especially in certain obscure points of the spec, that only a programmer would notice.
Their installation is almost always smooth and trouble-free. XFree has come a long way in this area, but AccelX still has a bit of an edge.
The price isn't prohibitive. Higher than it needs to be, probably, but not outrageous.
Cons:
Their tech support is wretched. Their personnel are surly, and their fixes are released Microsoft-style, in periodic large patches.
They're inflexible. XFree often supports more of a card's modes, and always allows more tweaking, than AccelX. (On the downside, XFree often requires more tweaking to achieve acceptable operation.)
Their software quality is only average. I've seen far far more outright crashes with AccelX than ever with XFree. Their non-crash bug rate is comparable to XFree, if not a tad higher.
Their corporate attitude is reprehensible. As others have pointed out here, they have frequently tried to promote their own products not by extolling their own virtues, but by bashing the competition. They have been especially vicious and outspoken in their attacks on XFree. And their attitude toward Linux as a platform is one of reluctant tolerance.
On the other hand, I've never actually gotten a MetroX server to even work, so I cannot even compare their product to the others.
I hope this helps folks in their quest for knowledge.
Commercial software gives people someone to rightfully bitch to if it doesn't work.
As a rather unsatisfied Xig customer, let me address this comment. Yes, you can "rightfully bitch" to Xig if you aren't happy with their product. I hope it makes you happy to do so, because it won't do much else--the only satisfaction I have ever gotten from Xig about some serious failures of their servers is "Hmm. We may have a fix for that coming up. Watch our ftp site for the next patch, which should be out sometime in the future."
And that's when they're being pleasant. The normal tone of their tech support is rather more caustic... I'd have to rate it as "grudging". Like they were doing me a favor by fixing their own mistakes. Jeremy Chatfield especially seems to have a chip on his shoulder.
I am now using AccelX 4.1 with my Matrox Millenium II. It has all the latest patches, and it still biffs one or two characters on every page. It's a transient failure--if I repaint the page, different letters are blotted out. Probably why they haven't fixed it yet. So why don't I use XFree? Because the latest version I've tried (3.3.1--old now, admittedly) had even more serious problems. I'd drop AccelX in a heartbeat if those were fixed. Hmm... maybe I should download the latest and try again!
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, forgot to include these links in prior message: Esperanto.org, the Multlingva Inform-Centro, and the Esperanto League for North America, three good starting places. Now go do some research!
Esperanto hasn't been a complete failure. No, it hasn't succeeded like its creator and proponents would like, but then, neither has Linux. Esperanto is alive and doing pretty well over a century after its creation. I wouldn't call that failure, and I'm sorry you do. Go read up on it before you declare it dead.
Interlingua is interesting, but it's not a valid replacement for Esperanto. Do some research, and use common sense, and you'll come to the same conclusion.
Why don't you pick on the computer industry and start doing some muckraking on the extremely low quality of commercial software?
Actually, Nader is doing just that--one of his latest projects is Appraising Microsoft; their appraisal has been mostly negative, and that includes the quality of MS software, or rather the lack thereof. Nader's web site, Essential Information, covers a lot of areas, but rear-engined cars aren't among them. As for the Corvair, Nader happened to be right--I almost died in a Corvair spin-out. But that's ancient history; do you also still bemoan the South's failure to win an immediate victory in the US Civil War?
Um, do you have a cite for this? I've scoured every resource I can lay my hands on, and I can't find a whisper about any such incident. Could you favor us with a reference, please? Answers containing the phrase "but I forget" don't count.
Note that I'm not saying it didn't happen, but given everything I know about Moore, if it did happen, I'm betting that there was more involved than a little following and filming. I'm willing to be proved wrong, however.
Jethro Tull was a band.
Okay wit yer Jethro Tull, but what I really want to know is ... which one's Pink?
And two serious comments ... er, more serious, I guess ... first, isn't Tull still a band, at least sometimes? And second, I'm guessing it's possible for "the band" to have a dispute with an entity, but calling the band a "celebrity" is certainly wrong. Good catch!
Is anyone else disgusted by this?
No, Joe, I think you're the only one. The rest of us are overjoyed, or at least indifferent.
Actually, I believe that as soon as a company's sales represent a certain fixed percentage (over 75?) of a given market, they are a monopoly, in the legal sense. Nobody, not even Microsoft themselves, tried to argue that they didn't have a monopoly. What they argued was whether they had used that monopoly to alter other business transactions in their favor.
And picking and choosing who is a criminal isn't the government's job, it's the court's job. And that's what has happened here.
You're right, you surely don't understand the nuances of the case very well. You don't even understand the roles of the major players.
But ya know what? That's okay. That doesn't make you a bad person, or ignorant, or a fool. It just means you are underinformed. Join the club--there are lots of us.
In this case, I disagree with you that this is troubling, for two reasons. First, Microsoft got what they deserved. No, I take that back--they got a tiny fraction of what they really deserved. But at least what they did get was justified. Second, it won't have much appreciable effect one way or the other. So take heart--nobody got hurt.
Justice is only fun until somebody puts an eye out. -- Mom
Excellent post, wish I had mod rights so I could send it to the 5 it deserves.
As an older programmer myself, I fully agree with every point, with one minor quibble: Not all "engineering" languages (as opposed to "hacking" languages) are dead--if Ada is dead, for example, it's an awfully lively zombie, especially on free OS's. So take heart, and take a look.
Despite this, it's a great time to be a programmer. Amen, brother. When I was starting out, I had fantasies about systems with a tenth the capability of what's on my desk right now. I never dreamed I'd actually own a system with this much power, with this wide a choice of languages, this much flexibility, etc. Sure, the software bites--but hey, that's just more opportunity, right? A target-rich environment.
Nobody has yet mentioned the Artemis Society International's project for establishing a privately-funded colony on the moon. The Artemis Project was mentioned in an article by rocket scientist Gregory Bennett in the January 1995 issue of the Analog SF magazine. It has since grown into a fairly sizeable undertaking which looks like it might have a real chance to reach the moon within their proposed schedule. Check out their web site, join their mailing list, even send them money. It's worth a look.
What we want is a Linux implementation of the codecs Apple has licensed for its player.
Then that's what your petition should say, and it should be sent to people like Sorenson, not Apple.
I'd really prefer to see new titles as opposed to older titles ported. Oh, I wouldn't mind if some of my old faves got ported, but I'm not expecting it.
I pretty much skipped MS-Windows altogether--went directly from DOS to Linux. So I can't name a bunch of MS-Win-based titles that need porting. But I do know what kind of games I like!
I want flight sims. Combat flight sims. I used to spend considerable sums buying new flight sims for DOS. Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. Birds of Prey. Red Baron. Falcon. And my all-time favorite, for its balance, smoothness, and complexity--Domark's AV-8B Harrier. Man, that was a sim! On Linux we have, what, ACM and FlightGear? Both nice, but not in the same league.
I want space sims. I actually bought WABI so I could play MS's Space Flight Simulator. It was so pretty it made me drool. But just drooling can get boring after a while if there's nothing much to explore and no way to blow things up. Oh, I'll take the things in the Wing Commander, Mantis, and X-Wing category, too, but as far as I know, there isn't an existing full-bodies physics-based (that's also not afraid to allow a little plausible SF) space-flight and -combat sim out there to be ported.
And I want tactical combat sims. Something that will make me think of the old hex-based board wargames, like Squad Leader. I understand that there are actually a few MS-Win combat games out there, but I don't know any names. So, port those, I guess, or make something new especially for X.
Now, that's quite a shopping list, I know. And I'm not just sitting on my fat rear hoping someone will come along and feed my jones--I'm actually doing something about it. I have preliminary design work done, and some prototype code, for a space sim and a tactical combat sim. Both will be GPL'ed, will use X and OpenGL, and will be done as soon as my little fingers and my schedule permit.
I encourage everyone with the proper skills to do the same.
Oh, and lest I forget, I have played and loved Myst and Riven, too. But those are almost trivial from a programming standpoint--I made a "Myst clone" in a couple of days using Gtk and Python. But one needs actors, graphic artists, musicians, and storytellers to do justice to the concept, and I ain't none of those. So I'd love to see them, but I'm not holding my breath.
What you are really talking about is stenography.
No, what he was talking about was steganography. "Stenography" is the process of taking shorthand. :-)
Other than that misspelling, your description was accurate and informative.
Cute story. Sadly, from a humor-related point of view, it's an urban legend.
I'll tell you something that is true, and that doesn't reflect particularly well on Ada's genesis. Ada's design was commissioned, though not actually executed, by the US Department of Defense. Just as with most military equipment, the Ada language would be put in the hands of poorly trained, minimally talented military programmers, and had to function acceptably under those conditions. I don't know if that goal was ever actually achieved, but that's the source of the language attributes which cause most younger programmers to chafe under its "fascist restrictiveness". Believe me, after you've written enough code, and made enough stupid errors that any rather bright chimp would probably have avoided, you begin to realize that all those "restrictions" are actually helping you.
Ada's real downfall was the mandate--something in human nature rebels at being forced, so the various DoD departments expended their creativity getting around the Ada mandate instead of using all that brainpower writing cool code. Now that the mandate is dropped, Ada is experiencing a resurgence in popularity, not the least in the free software world.
It's not a miracle language, regardless of what some real or imagined DoD hypemeister might have said about it, but it's damn nice, a pleasure to use when used properly, and a solid tool for the development of large, robust programs. But don't take my word for it ... see for yourself.
If you're looking for a portable language that compiles to native machine code and which implements much of Java's semantics, check out Ada 95. You can find information here, or download a complete GPL'ed compiler here.
I'm totally serious, folks. Do not regale me with tales of how much Ada sucks--most originate from introductory CS classes where Ada83 was shoved down unwilling throats by indifferent or hostile educators. Please, go read and experience for yourself before replying. And for those who dispute my claim about Java semantics, please pay special attention to the links on this page before you comment.
At least Talisman hasn't bothered to respond to this discussion. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that he's reading it, though, despite what he said yesterday.
I was a bit surprised that he outed himself here in public. It says a lot about his social frame of reference, which appears to be quite different from my own.
I tend to agree with most of what Mr. Katz has said in this essay. I've witnessed the formation of several "specialized" (i.e. women-only, etc.) discussion groups, and the conditions which forced their creation weren't pretty. And the participants on both sides of the fence were the poorer for their separation. I wish I could see a good solution to this problem, but sadly, I haven't yet.
Yes, we have always hated it when people have domain names taken from them. But the reason this is different is not because "it's our beloved Linux trademark."
We hate it when monied corporations bully people who have otherwise legitimate claims on their own domain names. I wouldn't mind if, say, Microsoft went against someone trying to register "microsoft-software.com" just to capitalize on their name. But the recent cases, like eToy, the Gumby kid, Amazon, and so on, were just cases of corporations throwing their weight around because their legal staffs didn't have anything else to occupy their time.
In this case, Joe Opportunist thought he could make a buck off the popularity of the Linux name, and he was quite properly stopped. I would be a bit upset if Linus sicced his lawyers on Mr. J. Howard Linux III, who has had "linux-family.org" registered since 1975 or something. And I don't think Linus would do that.
Love is not the issue here--opportunism is. To draw a parallel between this case and other recent domain disputes presented here on Slashdot is to err.
If we play fair, we will win ... Isn't this the phrase that's engraved on the tombstones of countless optimists throughout history?
It's a pretty thought, but it doesn't work out that way in practice. We will probably win, but it won't be just because we played fair.
Are da bomb! Keep up the good work, Frank and colleagues. I'm going to be ordering two G400's in the next couple of weeks, just based on the presence of good Linux OpenGL support for them. A rousing hoo-raw to you all from out here in the sticks!
Any solution that fails to address pre-loads is doomed to fail, or to make things even worse.
And until hardware vendors start shipping drivers for alternative PC OS's with their products, and until software vendors start releasing alternative PC versions, no real change will take place.
The zero-choice pre-load is, I think, the causative factor of the other two--if computers start appearing in stores and on web sites pre-loaded with something besides MS-Windows, then vendors will start addressing those other choices.
I'll repeat my solution, which I've posted here before. Unfortunately, it involves doing very little to Microsoft; fortunately, it doesn't single anyone out for special punishment:
The trouble we're having with Microsoft is only a symptom of a larger problem. If not them, then somebody else would be doing it. If they are only broken up, the problem will continue.
Because of my rather unusual workstation setup, I need an articulated monitor arm. When I first developed the layout, I figured the arm would be easy to find.
Think again! I've scoured local and on-line office supply stores, and have found exactly two places that claim to sell them--Innovative Office Products, and TechRack. And both of those are geared more to large buyers and resellers than to small businesses and individuals. And the prices! Holy moley! I'd love it if someone could recommend another good place to find these things.
I'm looking for something that will hold a 19-inch monitor (about 80 pounds) and a keyboard, and that will work when turned 90 degrees on its mounting. All leads appreciated.
As for other ergonomics, I'd have to agree with the 3-button mouse recommendation; I lean toward Logitech. And a large monitor, and a Dvorak keyboard layout. If I could just get that blasted arm, my workstation would really start to shape up.
It's like anyone who makes money incurs the wrath of RMS these days.
Maybe that's true, but it doesn't explain this case. Unless they've started within the past two or three months, Amazon.com has never turned a profit since their virtual doors have been open.
Next theory, please.
What, no Weiner Dog Art? No velvet Elvis? Not even Dogs Playing Poker? Sheesh--these people may know art, but they don't know what they like.
I've been using AccelX on and off for years now, since before Caldera bundled it with their first product. And here's my analysis of the company, to add a data point to help folks make an informed decision.
Pros:
Cons:
On the other hand, I've never actually gotten a MetroX server to even work, so I cannot even compare their product to the others.
I hope this helps folks in their quest for knowledge.
Commercial software gives people someone to rightfully bitch to if it doesn't work.
As a rather unsatisfied Xig customer, let me address this comment. Yes, you can "rightfully bitch" to Xig if you aren't happy with their product. I hope it makes you happy to do so, because it won't do much else--the only satisfaction I have ever gotten from Xig about some serious failures of their servers is "Hmm. We may have a fix for that coming up. Watch our ftp site for the next patch, which should be out sometime in the future."
And that's when they're being pleasant. The normal tone of their tech support is rather more caustic ... I'd have to rate it as "grudging". Like they were doing me a favor by fixing their own mistakes. Jeremy Chatfield especially seems to have a chip on his shoulder.
I am now using AccelX 4.1 with my Matrox Millenium II. It has all the latest patches, and it still biffs one or two characters on every page. It's a transient failure--if I repaint the page, different letters are blotted out. Probably why they haven't fixed it yet. So why don't I use XFree? Because the latest version I've tried (3.3.1--old now, admittedly) had even more serious problems. I'd drop AccelX in a heartbeat if those were fixed. Hmm ... maybe I should download the latest and try again!