The Umbrella you're postulating doesn't protect us unless we get the contested code from a commercial distribution.
Not true. What was meant is that if SCO can go after anyone, it's the distributor. They are the ones that are making copies of Linux and are "violating" copyright. You merely received a copy from a distributor. The difference in your case is that the distributor didn't charge you anything and is not commercial.
The SCO execs have pumped up the stock price drastically with this lawsuit and their FUD. They also seem to selling off some stock, though so far it doesn't seem like that much. If the SEC can prove that the SCO execs knew that this lawsuit was bullshit and profited by selling the inflated stock, then they can be in a bit of trouble. It's insider trading. They knew that the lawsuit had no merit, but used it to temporarily increase the value of the stock, knowing that it would eventually crash once the truth is known.
The code in question was originally developed as a theorhetical process and was then added to UNIX. Stating that because it was subsequently added to UNIX makes it the property of SCO would be like Ford saying that because Pioneer car stereos can be installed in Ford cars that gives them the right to sue Pioneer for making a kit that allows those same radios to be installed in Chevrolet cars.
You are confusing patent and copyright. Sequent developed the theoretical process of RCU, if they patent it, the patent is not transferred to SCO.
However, if they implement RCU by modifying code licensed from SCO, and then IBM put this code into Linux, SCO may have a case. But that's for the courts to decide.
Huh? There is no theft in his analogy. His analogy is:
* Copying part of Harry Potter, publishing it in the NYT.
* Customers subscribe to NYT and read part of the book.
Where is there theft involved? The NYT didn't steal anything, it copied something it was not supposed to. Nor did the subscribers steal anything. It's copyright infringement.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SCO did not defend itself in Europe or Australia so the courts there issued summary judgement.
Why didn't SCO defend itself? Because in thier estimate of the situation, the concluded that the outcome wasn't going to affect thier stock price back in the US
Plus, they knew they could still spout FUD in the US, which could be translated/read by people in Germany and Australia.
You are right. Stopping the FUD really hurts them here, so they are going to fight it.
Myself, Gentoo's biggest feature was the kernal compile options, adding patches for pre-emptive mulitasking, and improved responsiveness.
Ahem. I'm guessing you are talking about the preemptive kernel patch. Linux, and every other modern OS, already have preemptive multi-tasking. Preempting the kernel is different from preemptive multi-tasking.
Preemptive multi-tasking just means that a process can be interrupted at any point and another process, or the OS, can make use of the CPU. Preempting the kernel means that actual kernel code can be interrupted.
There are other distributions that include kernel patches as packages. Debian, for example, let's you patch your kernel with a compile option passed to make-kpkg.
Except... It's not Microsoft that he took to court. It's the computer manufacturer. The only way to hurt Microsoft in this way is to hurt the manufacturers enough that they restructure their license with MS and begin to offer computers with no OS installed.
I so wish I could support some open-source-collaborative browser, but Mozilla and its spinoffs (like Firebird) seem to be the only alternative -and I don't happen to agree at all with the direction the browser development is going.
Out of curiosity, what direction would you like them to go in? You praised Opera for being small and fast. The Mozilla project is trying to make Firebird small and fast, just a browser. It seems like they are taking it in the direction you want.
I used to compile mplayer from source, but I always had a bug or two. Any time I would bring up the GUI prefs, mplayer would crash. That wasn't a big deal though, since I'd never use the GUI prefs. But it also turned out that my compiled version of mplayer didn't support AC3 audio. At the time I think the instructions mentioned needing to get a CVS version of one of the libraries (don't remember exactly which one, it's been a while). Instead of going through that hassle, I installed decided to the installing the deb package. GUI worked fine, and it supported all the codecs, including AC3. All the codecs were even packaged up and listed as suggested or recommended packages in the dependencies. I haven't bothered compiling it since.
If someone has gone through the trouble of packaging some software for your distribution and making the package publicly available, why not use it? It's a resource.
I disagree. In some ways, a terrible article. Some examples:
If we really get down to it, who killed Explorer Mac? Safari did.
Earlier in his article he mentions that IE7 is probably a rewrite and it will use special functionality of the OS. If this is the case, how would you port this to the Mac? They would have to port this extra OS "functionality" as well. It's likely that Microsoft knew for a while that IE on the Mac was a dead end. Apple is lucky to have Safari to replace it.
The Mozilla Project is in serious trouble... Mozilla should lose weight and change roles. Viable Alternative is a perfect fit. Mozilla is technically more than adequate and it descends from a long line of kings.
What a great idea. Maybe someone should inform him that is exactly what the Mozilla project is already doing. Mozilla Firebird is a trimmed down browser, and it's already quite usable. Try out their latest release.
I like the ideas of the article, but for a web designer he is not particularly well informed of the status of the Mozilla project.
One might be tempted to design a chip that does more in one cycle and then clock it as fast as a chip that does less in one cycle. Unfortunately, while reality is a little more complex than this, the basic reason is that the more a chip does per cycle, the more heat it generates per cycle. If you try to squeeze too many cycles through it in a second it will fry.
Err... no. In general, the more you do in one cycle, the longer each cycle will take, because there is only so much you can do in parallel for a single instruction. All modern CPUs are pipelined, this means that during each clock cycle the CPU does a portion of what it needs to complete the instruction. A very simple pipeline would be: instruction fetch, decode, register read, perform arithmetic logic, and write back the result. The clock rate of your CPU is determined by the slowest stage of your CPU pipeline. If you clock a stage of the pipeline too fast, the input signals to that stage may not have enough time to propagate through the circuit, thus giving incorrect output. The P4 has 20 pipeline stages, while the G5 has (I think) 13 stages. It's not heat that limits the clock rate, it's design decisions and the current fabrication technology.
I disagree on both points. Martin can be vulgar, without a doubt, but that is part of what makes him good. Bad things happen in his stories, and he is not afraid to describe it honestly. It's this harshness I admire.
As for Harry Potter, I also recently finished reading it and found the latest book the worst of the series. She tried to make this book more dark, and she did. As a consequence, it is missing the fun of the earlier books.
Re:What happened to Robert Jordan?
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
I have heard people say this before. Do you have a link that comfirms it?
Re:What happened to Robert Jordan?
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
I should tell you that the latest book, Crossroads of Twilight, is not a good read. It is slow going and adds little to what happened in Winter's Heart. The worst thing about this book is that you could probably skip it and move on to book 11 without missing much. It has been my least favorite book of the series.
If you insist on reading the book, I suggest getting it from the library or borrowing it. The book just isn't worth the money. Especially in hardcover.
There is an installation manual at debian.org. I'd suggest just downloading the first ISO, installing the base system from it and getting the rest of your packages from the net via apt.
That said, even better than an installation manual is to find yourself a knowledgable debian user for your first install. Not only could they help you with any installation troubles, they could also give you a quick tour of the system and a demonstration of apt.
Also, unless you are running a server, you should seriously consider the testing distribution. It's probably a little more buggy than the stable distribution, but much more up-to-date.
I definetely agree with you there. By some freak coincidence, I just got finished installing Debian yesterday - I'm typing this on a Debian system, in fact. Why, oh why, couldn't this article have been posted earlier? The installation was a huge pain in the ass - even Slackware was easier. The installer seems to try to put hurdles in your way with crummy UI and bad programs(dselect and the partition utility in particular), and I would most definitely *not* recommend Debian to anyone, even advanced users. Other distros seem to be catching up to apt-get in terms of remote updates, and it's just not worth the hassle of going through the Debian install.
The first time I installed Debian, it was quite hard for me. I needed a debhead friend with me to help me through things, especially some little bugs like the dhcp client not working with 2.4 kernels. Or cfdisk. Now it's not so bad though. I've done a few Debian installs since, and the biggest hassels come from hardware that isn't well supported under linux.
I skimmed this "hate mail". The words "MacNN" are mentioned more than once. It seems that this isn't hate mail, but instead the most extremist and unintelligent posts plucked from a message board. I won't defend those rants, becuase they are silly. But it seems to me that the author of the article is no better.
The article said 32% of pitches were called strikes? Either Sandy Alderson made a mistake, or the author got things reversed. About 1/3 of pitches are balls, not strikes.
There is one key difference. IE is integrated into Windows. Safari is an application that's bundled with MacOSX. Apple doesn't claim that their OS breaks if Safari is not installed.
Also; On my system (A mere Athlon XP 2000+ with a gig of ram) IE is faster than Mozilla
Mozilla is not the speediest browser on Earth. But have you tried one of the recent releases of Mozilla-Firebird? It has really improved in stability and is quite fast.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, there is a possibly downside.
The SCO execs have pumped up the stock price drastically with this lawsuit and their FUD. They also seem to selling off some stock, though so far it doesn't seem like that much. If the SEC can prove that the SCO execs knew that this lawsuit was bullshit and profited by selling the inflated stock, then they can be in a bit of trouble. It's insider trading. They knew that the lawsuit had no merit, but used it to temporarily increase the value of the stock, knowing that it would eventually crash once the truth is known.
However, if they implement RCU by modifying code licensed from SCO, and then IBM put this code into Linux, SCO may have a case. But that's for the courts to decide.
Huh? There is no theft in his analogy. His analogy is:
* Copying part of Harry Potter, publishing it in the NYT.
* Customers subscribe to NYT and read part of the book.
Where is there theft involved? The NYT didn't steal anything, it copied something it was not supposed to. Nor did the subscribers steal anything. It's copyright infringement.
You are right. Stopping the FUD really hurts them here, so they are going to fight it.
Preemptive multi-tasking just means that a process can be interrupted at any point and another process, or the OS, can make use of the CPU. Preempting the kernel means that actual kernel code can be interrupted.
There are other distributions that include kernel patches as packages. Debian, for example, let's you patch your kernel with a compile option passed to make-kpkg.
Except... It's not Microsoft that he took to court. It's the computer manufacturer. The only way to hurt Microsoft in this way is to hurt the manufacturers enough that they restructure their license with MS and begin to offer computers with no OS installed.
Sometimes, it's just not worth the effort.
I used to compile mplayer from source, but I always had a bug or two. Any time I would bring up the GUI prefs, mplayer would crash. That wasn't a big deal though, since I'd never use the GUI prefs. But it also turned out that my compiled version of mplayer didn't support AC3 audio. At the time I think the instructions mentioned needing to get a CVS version of one of the libraries (don't remember exactly which one, it's been a while). Instead of going through that hassle, I installed decided to the installing the deb package. GUI worked fine, and it supported all the codecs, including AC3. All the codecs were even packaged up and listed as suggested or recommended packages in the dependencies. I haven't bothered compiling it since.
If someone has gone through the trouble of packaging some software for your distribution and making the package publicly available, why not use it? It's a resource.
First, your link is broken, there is a space in it.
Second, the question is where did Thurrott get the 80% figure. It's not in the Gartner report.
I like the ideas of the article, but for a web designer he is not particularly well informed of the status of the Mozilla project.
I disagree on both points. Martin can be vulgar, without a doubt, but that is part of what makes him good. Bad things happen in his stories, and he is not afraid to describe it honestly. It's this harshness I admire.
As for Harry Potter, I also recently finished reading it and found the latest book the worst of the series. She tried to make this book more dark, and she did. As a consequence, it is missing the fun of the earlier books.
I have heard people say this before. Do you have a link that comfirms it?
I should tell you that the latest book, Crossroads of Twilight, is not a good read. It is slow going and adds little to what happened in Winter's Heart. The worst thing about this book is that you could probably skip it and move on to book 11 without missing much. It has been my least favorite book of the series.
If you insist on reading the book, I suggest getting it from the library or borrowing it. The book just isn't worth the money. Especially in hardcover.
There is an installation manual at debian.org. I'd suggest just downloading the first ISO, installing the base system from it and getting the rest of your packages from the net via apt.
That said, even better than an installation manual is to find yourself a knowledgable debian user for your first install. Not only could they help you with any installation troubles, they could also give you a quick tour of the system and a demonstration of apt.
Also, unless you are running a server, you should seriously consider the testing distribution. It's probably a little more buggy than the stable distribution, but much more up-to-date.
I skimmed this "hate mail". The words "MacNN" are mentioned more than once. It seems that this isn't hate mail, but instead the most extremist and unintelligent posts plucked from a message board. I won't defend those rants, becuase they are silly. But it seems to me that the author of the article is no better.
Actually, now the game is only $30. It's really not that expensive.
I agree, the client really isn't complete. But it's definately enough to play the game with.
As a little bonus to us Linux folks, Shadows of Undrentide includes a file called movies-SoU.txt which is a text description of the cutscenes.
The article said 32% of pitches were called strikes? Either Sandy Alderson made a mistake, or the author got things reversed. About 1/3 of pitches are balls, not strikes.
There is one key difference. IE is integrated into Windows. Safari is an application that's bundled with MacOSX. Apple doesn't claim that their OS breaks if Safari is not installed.