in his letter to microsoft, one of the assertions whil hentzen makes is:
2. The EULA seems to prohibit the distribution of certain Microsoft components on non-Windows operating systems - specifically, the files listed in REDIST.TXT, which include the MSMs. However, it is physically possible to distribute and run an executable created by the VFP project manager in conjunction with the VFP runtime DLLs, without needing to bother with the MSMs. Thus it is our opinion that deploying VFP apps to customer workstations or servers using a developer created EXE and the VFP runtime DLLs, regardless of the operating system, is legal.
Also, with old-fashioned schedule-driven tv watching, there are times (most of the time, usually) when nothing on the tube is of much interest to me.
And personally, I rather prefer things this way. Because it limits the amount of time I am willing to spend watching tv, as opposed to doing something creative, recreational, charitable, etc
What about modifying the invariant sections while still including the original texts as appendices?
Also, the GFDL sez that invariant sections only apply to secondary material (ie something which doesn't address the primary subject matter of the document - eg biographical details about mathematicians in a math textbook) - ie, stuff I don't see anybody having a burning need to modify in the first place (other than plagarists). So this non-free claim seems to be splitting hairs, imho.
Slashdot Mirror
uh..... qdos?
--TRR
"uhh, that's ignor-ahh-mus" -- love and death
I was under the impression there was but a single thread of development for the Linux (kernel of the GNU Linux OS).
As opposed to windows with its DOS and VMS(ie "new technology technology") kernels.
Or perhaps you were confusing Linux with *BSD??? (which has 4)
--TRR
What kind of moron chooses the root of the word "fossile" as the name of a movement trying to develop technology?
FOSS makes me think of "FOSS-ILE"! who the hell started using this acronym? the MSFT FUD Dept?
in his letter to microsoft, one of the assertions whil hentzen makes is:
in case anyone wonders what MSM files are, here is microsoft's definition.
(basically, config files for their installer program)
An earlier post shows how you are mistaken.
See what Colonel Klink has to say...
well, maybe if someone installed kiosks in the toilet stalls you could.
i wouldn't want to use the typical touch-screen setup for this though!
--TRR
Also, with old-fashioned schedule-driven tv watching, there are times (most of the time, usually) when nothing on the tube is of much interest to me.
And personally, I rather prefer things this way. Because it limits the amount of time I am willing to spend watching tv, as opposed to doing something creative, recreational, charitable, etc
--TRR
What about modifying the invariant sections while still including the original texts as appendices?
Also, the GFDL sez that invariant sections only apply to secondary material (ie something which doesn't address the primary subject matter of the document - eg biographical details about mathematicians in a math textbook) - ie, stuff I don't see anybody having a burning need to modify in the first place (other than plagarists). So this non-free claim seems to be splitting hairs, imho.
No-no-no - For organizations with very limited budgets, such as schools, a better admin would also consider the most economical solution:
windows (which ever version is already installed) AND oss (Open Office)
And that's probably what's got Microsoft's panties all tied in a knot.
As you can see, FBCB2 was developed on Solaris, ported to VxWorks and then LynxOS. No MS OS or Exceed.
Hmmm, I'm pretty certain the Applique/Fbcb2 boxes (made by TRW) were running Solaris X86. And the GUI was Xrt, not Motif.
Graffiti2 ???