A personal opinion is that the only way this world will survive is the eventual conversion to a utopistic trade economy not unlike communism (please don't confuse the totalitarian state capitalisms of the USSR, China, Cuba and so on as communism.) I may, of course, be wrong.
State capitalism? That is an oxymoron. Statism is the opposite of capitalism. There is no such thing as state capitalism. By definition it wouldn't be capitalism. Maybe corporative socialism?.
At least, Cuba is currently a state with an economic system that is point between socialism (no private property, state controls everything and distributes wealth to each according to what (s)he produces) and communism (there is neither private property nor state and wealth is distributed to each according to what (s)he needs). In their system there is no private property, the state controls everything and distributes wealth to each according to what the government thinks they need.
In my country the government is trying to implement a system similar to Cuba's.
The worst cars I've seen in my country are a series of russian cars called Lada. Those are really crappy.
Another crappy car (but not as bad as the Ladas) were some things called Monza, which were sold by Chevrolet/GM. They were always on the shop for repairs.
But close to everyone in Windows runs as admin, while close to no one in Linux runs as root. In effect you wouldn't have to change anything in Linux, while you'd have to drop all your admin privileges in Windows.
You are right. At home I have a dual boot setup (W2K and Linux). I have accounts for my brother, sister and myself. I was sick of everyone having write access to everything and did the folowing:
Changed all permisions so that only Administrator had write access to everything and that every user only had write access to their respective "home" directory (in "Documents and Settings"). IIRC, I also changed everyone from being a "Power user"to a "Normal user".
When running as admin everything looked fine. The trouble came when my brother tried to run a simple program such as word on encarta. It didn't run. I changed his account to power user, but nothing worked. The result: Had to reinstall W2K and leave the default insecure permissions.
KDE is a shack built on a skyscraper foundation, and GNOME is a skyscraper built on a shack's foundation. GNOME is pretty damn low-tech. Its a nice, clean, elegant implementation of a Windows-style (circa 1996) platform. For god's sake, component technology (COM/OLE) has been in widespread use for a decade now. Yet, GNOME apps still don't use it!
The problem with GNOME leaders (especially Miguel de Icaza) is that they hava always tried to implement clones of the crappy Microsoft technology. Bonobo was their first attempt to implement a COM/DCOM clone. I was force once to program COM/DCOM and it's an absolute piece of crap. When I was reading some GNOME/Bonobo documentation it said that to understand Bonobo I had to understand COM and instructed me to red the horrible "Inside DCOM" book (which I had to read when I used DCOM).
COM was obsolete by the time Bonobo was developed and Microsoft deprecated it in favor of.Net.
What Migue & Co. did then was to focus on the new Microsoft clone instead of improving the crappy Bonobo.
Many people say that it is good that GNOME uses CORBA and many people say that it is bad. It doesn't matter. If you know CORBA (which I do), your skills are going to be nearly useless when programming Bonobo because they use CORBA simply as a backend technology. All the programming is COM like (except perhaps for the IDL).
A lot of people said that GNOME had a better architecture because of Bonobo. Bonobo is a copy of old deprecated MS COM technology. That is why the number of applications using it is very small. In fact, the number of GNOME applications is very small. Most "GNOME" applications are just GTK applications.
Another supposed advantage of GNOME was that KDE applications had to be C++, while you could write GNOME applications in any language. Wrong again. There are Qt and KDE bindings for several languages including C, Java and Python, I think.
I have only used the Qt Java bindings in small test applications and they are very easy to use.
He, that is the Spanish (as written on Spain) for Texas.
Tejas is the spanish for "tiles", the things used to cover a roof.
The Spaniards write Mexico as Mejico.
In spanish I always see Mexico written as Mexico. It is pronounced Mejico, though.
I always see the U.S. Texas state written as Texas. Sometimes people pronounce it with a "J" (especially in Mexico) as is Tejas and sometimes with an "X" as in Texas.
Someday one of Gnome and KDE will be obsolete. The remaining licence issues around Qt makes Gnome the obvious winner, as one cannot create commercial apps for Qt without paying fees.
That is questionable. There are more commercial apps based on Qt that on GTK.
If you think I'm wrong, can you give me a list of commercial GTK apps?
Many people think that you need to pay for QT licenses for in-house development and that is false because you can create GPL apps without releasing the code to the public. You are only required to give the source under GPL restrictions to the people you distribute binaries to.
Yes, I am aware of these details. But the definition of a sucessful political/economic system is not how may luxury items each person can get access to. As far as I am aware, there is no starvation going on in Cuba, and every citizen can get medical care (unlike the US). Cuba was always a poor country (unless you were a mobster or gov't official), and its too small to possess cattle ranches. That doesn't mean its proof that communism doesn't work. It could be a matter working in a bad situation, or the result of economic embargo by the capitalist US.
yeah, sure...
All I can tell you is that the average person in other similar latin american countries lives much better than almost everyone in Cuba (except for members of the government and a very few others).
That is only your contention. Dictatorships exist because they are supported (or at least not overthrown) by a majority of its people.
You are so wrong. Dictatorships exist because they have all the military power in a country. The only way to overthrow a dictatorship is through force. There is no way people without weapons can overthrow a dictatorship.
Capitalism is rife with corruption
Most economies in the world are mixed economies, where the power of the state varies. Corruption comes because of statism. It is not the fault of capitalism. Corruption can be reduced with appropriate laws.
Because they have rich relatives in Cuba? Because they can get more luxury items in the US. (again, not proof that US capitalism is a superior economic system.) If capitalism is so sucessful, why aren't they taking those boats to Mexico? After all, its a capitalist country, and has the built-in advantage of having the same native tongue.
Mexico is also a mixed economy with much more corruption than in the USA. They go to Miami because they can live better there than in Mexico and it is easier for them to legally stay in USA.
If they go to mexico they would live much better than in Cuba.
Mexican people live much much better than Cuban people.
A lot of cuban people is coming to my country (because our current government wants to implement a political system similar to Cuba's) and most do not want to go back, and Venezuelan people is currently among the poorest in latin america (in particular, we are poorer than mexicans).
Anarchism is that state of "utopia". It is not unimplementable in practice because of flawed theory, its unimplementable because currently there are fascist nations that actively prevent anarchism from evolving. Communism is a transition system that is supposed to combat and dissolve those fascist threats to anarchism.
You have no idea of what fascism is, do you?. I live in a fascist state which is trying to implement communism.
You can argue that communism/anarchism in theory is flawed, because it cannot outcompete a capitalist system (because greed (profit motive) makes capitalism a more efficient resource distributor), therefore can't aggregate enough power to defend itself from a capitalist system.
communism/anarchism is flawed at least in the current state of mankind.
Communism requires everyone to be a saint, but not only that, it also requires everyone to agree with everyone else's concept of "needs" so that everyone receives wealth according to their "needs". I do not see how my view of what you need is the same of what you think you need.
But that does not make communism/anarchism unworkable or inferior. The question is what is preferable, people who get the same allocation of resources and a system that discourages exploitation of others, or talented and fortunately positioned people permitted more accumulation of resources at the expense of talented and less fortunately positioned people.
One of the problems with communism is that it considers wealth as something that exists and has to be distributed. You say accumulation of resources as if they previously existed and were acumu
And *why* is socialism a bad idea? Don't hear much complaints about it from the Swedes. Oh, what's that, Sweden doesn't exist, its not in the Real World? Communism is merely supposed to be a transitional gov't state to Anarchistic gov't. (Which does not mean anarchy, BTW.) If its not moving to local gov't collectives, its not Communism. Don't mistake ideological perversion as Communism. Even that distorted Communism you accuse as unworkable hasn't disappeared in Cuba, and in fact, results in more infants surviving than in the USA.
There is no socialism in Sweden. In Sweden there is a mixed economy. If there were socialism, the means of production would be in the hands of the state. That is, there would be no private property. e.g. You wouldn't be able to buy ericsson shares in the stock market. You wouldn't even have a stock market.
Sweden is a perfect example of a successful mixed economy.
In Sweden your house is yours, your work capacity is yours. You pay a lot of taxes, but, I repeat, it is not socialism.
In practice, socialism (and communism) can only be applied by force because it implies the abolition of private property.
Regarding Cuba, You have no idea of how people live in Cuba. In Cuba you can't go to a supermarket and buy food. You get the food the government thinks you need. Then they only get one chicken a month. The practically do not know what beef is (the government gives them some crap called carnic paste). In Cuba, for a few dollars you can have all the sex you want, because many girls there are desperate. Fidel once said that cuban jineteras (cuban name for hookers) are the only ones with university titles. The sad part is that it is true.
I have friends who have visited Cuba and they tell me it was very sad what they saw. My friends gave away all the toothpaste, toilet paper, soap, underware and other things they had left to the hotel employees because they have very limited or no access to those products.
OK, the communist regime still exists, but that is only because it is a dictatorship where the goverment has all the military power.
Why do you think so many Cubans take the risk of being eaten by sharks to escape Cuba and go to Florida in self-made rafts?
Communism (as in USSR & China) didn't survive into this century, not because its an unworkable form of gov't, but because it focused on trying to militarily compete with the Western (capitalist) nations. A more conscientious ruling elite probably would have resulted in the USSR's survival. If Communism is unworkable, how can Cuba still be communist, even with the demise of its benefactor?
Communism (as defiend by Marx) is a form of government where there is no state (and therefore no government, no courts, etc.). It is a state of utopia. It is unimplementable in practice.
In practice what you have is a government that owns everything (including you capacity to work) and distributes wealth to each according to its need.
For more information con communism read this
Totalitarianism (or monarchy), by your rule, must also be a good idea, because it can work in practice. Why, some Totalitarian gov'ts (like historical China) have lasted centuries! And totalitarian gov'ts exist to this very day.
I think I did not explain myself clearly. When I say an idea works in practice I mean it works well in practice. That is, the people live decent lives and are happy with the government. You can study, and if you are willing to work it is not very difficult to find a job, and if you have a job you can eat well and you can feed your children welland give them good education. You can have a place to live. You can have a car. You can expect reasonable levels of public security.
Totalitarian systems can last because they own the military power and nobody can oppose them. That does not mean the people living there are happy with the government.
I live in a neo-fascist quasi-totalita
Remember, Socialism and Communism are nice ideas on paper that have never worked in the Real World.
Wrong. Socialism is a bad idea. Communism isn't even implementable in real life. The only possible implementation of communism is a form of socialism that is even worse than the original.
If they were good ideas they would have worked in practice.
Capitalism is a good idea because it can work in practice (at least the approximation to real capitalsim that is implementable).
Many mixed economies approaches are good ideas and the fact that they have been seuccessfully implemented is a proof.
Openoffice is already 99% of the way there. If they fill in the Access hole they are done.
I constantly see people complain about the lack of an Access equivalent in OpenOffice.
IIRC Access is just a very low-quality pseudo RDBMS. Why would anyone want to use that crap when much better RDBMS are available for free?
I'm serious about it. I have never in my life had any use for such a thing as Access. Has Access changed to something different in the last years. What do people who use Acceess do with it? What is it useful for?
If an infinite loop is infinite, how can it be finished?
You only have to finish the first iteration in half a second. The second in 1/4th of a second. The third in 1/8th of a second. In general, the nth iteration in half the time required for the n-1th iteration.
This is absolutely false. A TopCoder solution must run in less than 8 seconds to be considered valid, so low performance solutions will be considered invalid.
The easier problems can often be solved using brute force approachs, but those are good solutions if problem size is small.
Try to solve the TopCoder Open Online Round 4 problems using brute force.....
And even though KDE is architecturally cool, and of course, it isn't really LIKE windows like you say, its freekin widgets get in the way of my productivity. Something's wrong if you're always wanting to get menus, toolbars and pop up shit out of the way:) So I use windowmaker and blackbox.
My respects to you. I do use KDE, but sometimes I use IceWM for the reasons you give. I do not understand Miguel de Icaza's thinking - I've read interviews last year where he explains what he's doing and why. I guess it boils down to he believes the.NET architecture is fantastic, allowing the platform-independent road into the future for all of us.
No. It boils down to the fact that Miguel de Icaza is a big Microsoft fan. He believes Microsoft technology is better, but he is also a free software supporter. His thinking is that the supposedly great Microsoft technology must be reimplemented as free software in *nix environments (especially free ones).
That is why he first tried to clone the ultra crappy COM/DCOM. Even Microsoft acknowledge the COM/DCOM programming model was crap and they deprecated it in favour of.Net.
Since it made no sense to continue pushing a clone of a deprecated technology, they decided to work on the.Net clone, which will probably be deprecated in a few years.
Why, sure it does - Browser doubling as a file manager, start button, task bar, system drive icons on the desktop, you can drag a URL string from the browser or file manager somewhere else like onto the desktop to create a link (or dare I say SHORTCUT).
Out of the box it looks like Windows, unless you re-theme it.
You have a point, but these days almost everything looks similar. BTW, the default theme is not windows. There is a Redmond theme that makes it work more like windows.
Ok, right, not the underlying architecture using QT - we weren't really talking about the underlying architecture - discussion was more about end-user adoption.. I agree the QT choice was excellent.
Then we agree on something.
I don't use GNOME simply because it has been a project to copy the crappy (non-)design of COM into Unix. Now that Microsoft deprecated COM/DCOM in favour of.Net, the original GNOME proponents are working on a new clone of the new MS technology called Mono.
I don't know if they are going to deprecate bonobo.
Anyway, most "GNOME" applications are just GTK applications and don't use bonobo.
KDE looks and acts like Windows. This is the reason a lot of Linux people don't like it or use it, myself included.
Gnome also looks like Windows at first, but less so. Lots of cool things going on in Gnome, all not very Windows-like.
KDE neither looks nor acts like Windows. It can on the surface look like windoze if you want to, but it's foundations are completely different.
A large part of GNOME infrastructure (especially Bonobo) is very much like Windows. In fact, once I was trying to learn what Bonobo was about I was directed to Microsoftt COM/DCOM programming books.
This Bonobo thing is just an attempt to implement in UNIX the most horrible programming model ever invented by Microsoft. It is simply the addition of prorpietary (as in non-standard) extensions to CORBA to make it look like COM.
If there is anything in the Unix world that resembles Windows is GNOME.
And regarding perfection, QT and KDE are IMHO much closer to perfection than GTK and GNOME.
Consider the word "America" as an analogy. "Technically" it refers to a continent - but in practice, if I say "America", nearly everyone will think of the USA - even many Canadians!
In Latin America and Spain (don't know about other countries) when you say America we think about a continent. We only think about USA when you say Estados Unidos.
Slashdot Mirror
A personal opinion is that the only way this world will survive is the eventual conversion to a utopistic trade economy not unlike communism (please don't confuse the totalitarian state capitalisms of the USSR, China, Cuba and so on as communism.) I may, of course, be wrong.
State capitalism? That is an oxymoron. Statism is the opposite of capitalism. There is no such thing as state capitalism. By definition it wouldn't be capitalism. Maybe corporative socialism?.
At least, Cuba is currently a state with an economic system that is point between socialism (no private property, state controls everything and distributes wealth to each according to what (s)he produces) and communism (there is neither private property nor state and wealth is distributed to each according to what (s)he needs). In their system there is no private property, the state controls everything and distributes wealth to each according to what the government thinks they need.
In my country the government is trying to implement a system similar to Cuba's.
TopCoder uses this system to pay developers who want to participate in their projects. IIRC, their projects are not open source.
Can this sort of thing be patented in the USA? that system is perverted.
The worst cars I've seen in my country are a series of russian cars called Lada. Those are really crappy.
Another crappy car (but not as bad as the Ladas) were some things called Monza, which were sold by Chevrolet/GM. They were always on the shop for repairs.
But close to everyone in Windows runs as admin, while close to no one in Linux runs as root. In effect you wouldn't have to change anything in Linux, while you'd have to drop all your admin privileges in Windows.
You are right. At home I have a dual boot setup (W2K and Linux). I have accounts for my brother, sister and myself. I was sick of everyone having write access to everything and did the folowing: Changed all permisions so that only Administrator had write access to everything and that every user only had write access to their respective "home" directory (in "Documents and Settings"). IIRC, I also changed everyone from being a "Power user"to a "Normal user".
When running as admin everything looked fine. The trouble came when my brother tried to run a simple program such as word on encarta. It didn't run. I changed his account to power user, but nothing worked. The result: Had to reinstall W2K and leave the default insecure permissions.
I think we're entitled to anyway, after the hell microsoft put us through with their (initially) unstable products.
Initially?
KDE is a shack built on a skyscraper foundation, and GNOME is a skyscraper built on a shack's foundation. GNOME is pretty damn low-tech. Its a nice, clean, elegant implementation of a Windows-style (circa 1996) platform. For god's sake, component technology (COM/OLE) has been in widespread use for a decade now. Yet, GNOME apps still don't use it!
.Net.
The problem with GNOME leaders (especially Miguel de Icaza) is that they hava always tried to implement clones of the crappy Microsoft technology. Bonobo was their first attempt to implement a COM/DCOM clone. I was force once to program COM/DCOM and it's an absolute piece of crap. When I was reading some GNOME/Bonobo documentation it said that to understand Bonobo I had to understand COM and instructed me to red the horrible "Inside DCOM" book (which I had to read when I used DCOM).
COM was obsolete by the time Bonobo was developed and Microsoft deprecated it in favor of
What Migue & Co. did then was to focus on the new Microsoft clone instead of improving the crappy Bonobo.
Many people say that it is good that GNOME uses CORBA and many people say that it is bad. It doesn't matter. If you know CORBA (which I do), your skills are going to be nearly useless when programming Bonobo because they use CORBA simply as a backend technology. All the programming is COM like (except perhaps for the IDL).
A lot of people said that GNOME had a better architecture because of Bonobo. Bonobo is a copy of old deprecated MS COM technology. That is why the number of applications using it is very small. In fact, the number of GNOME applications is very small. Most "GNOME" applications are just GTK applications.
Another supposed advantage of GNOME was that KDE applications had to be C++, while you could write GNOME applications in any language. Wrong again. There are Qt and KDE bindings for several languages including C, Java and Python, I think. I have only used the Qt Java bindings in small test applications and they are very easy to use.
He, that is the Spanish (as written on Spain) for Texas.
Tejas is the spanish for "tiles", the things used to cover a roof.
The Spaniards write Mexico as Mejico.
In spanish I always see Mexico written as Mexico. It is pronounced Mejico, though.
I always see the U.S. Texas state written as Texas. Sometimes people pronounce it with a "J" (especially in Mexico) as is Tejas and sometimes with an "X" as in Texas.
Someday one of Gnome and KDE will be obsolete. The remaining licence issues around Qt makes Gnome the obvious winner, as one cannot create commercial apps for Qt without paying fees.
That is questionable. There are more commercial apps based on Qt that on GTK.
If you think I'm wrong, can you give me a list of commercial GTK apps?
Many people think that you need to pay for QT licenses for in-house development and that is false because you can create GPL apps without releasing the code to the public. You are only required to give the source under GPL restrictions to the people you distribute binaries to.
Yes, I am aware of these details. But the definition of a sucessful political/economic system is not how may luxury items each person can get access to. As far as I am aware, there is no starvation going on in Cuba, and every citizen can get medical care (unlike the US). Cuba was always a poor country (unless you were a mobster or gov't official), and its too small to possess cattle ranches. That doesn't mean its proof that communism doesn't work. It could be a matter working in a bad situation, or the result of economic embargo by the capitalist US.
yeah, sure... All I can tell you is that the average person in other similar latin american countries lives much better than almost everyone in Cuba (except for members of the government and a very few others).
That is only your contention. Dictatorships exist because they are supported (or at least not overthrown) by a majority of its people.
You are so wrong. Dictatorships exist because they have all the military power in a country. The only way to overthrow a dictatorship is through force. There is no way people without weapons can overthrow a dictatorship.
Capitalism is rife with corruption
Most economies in the world are mixed economies, where the power of the state varies. Corruption comes because of statism. It is not the fault of capitalism. Corruption can be reduced with appropriate laws.
Because they have rich relatives in Cuba? Because they can get more luxury items in the US. (again, not proof that US capitalism is a superior economic system.) If capitalism is so sucessful, why aren't they taking those boats to Mexico? After all, its a capitalist country, and has the built-in advantage of having the same native tongue.
Mexico is also a mixed economy with much more corruption than in the USA. They go to Miami because they can live better there than in Mexico and it is easier for them to legally stay in USA. If they go to mexico they would live much better than in Cuba.
Mexican people live much much better than Cuban people.
A lot of cuban people is coming to my country (because our current government wants to implement a political system similar to Cuba's) and most do not want to go back, and Venezuelan people is currently among the poorest in latin america (in particular, we are poorer than mexicans).
Anarchism is that state of "utopia". It is not unimplementable in practice because of flawed theory, its unimplementable because currently there are fascist nations that actively prevent anarchism from evolving. Communism is a transition system that is supposed to combat and dissolve those fascist threats to anarchism.
You have no idea of what fascism is, do you?. I live in a fascist state which is trying to implement communism.
You can argue that communism/anarchism in theory is flawed, because it cannot outcompete a capitalist system (because greed (profit motive) makes capitalism a more efficient resource distributor), therefore can't aggregate enough power to defend itself from a capitalist system.
communism/anarchism is flawed at least in the current state of mankind.
Communism requires everyone to be a saint, but not only that, it also requires everyone to agree with everyone else's concept of "needs" so that everyone receives wealth according to their "needs". I do not see how my view of what you need is the same of what you think you need.
But that does not make communism/anarchism unworkable or inferior. The question is what is preferable, people who get the same allocation of resources and a system that discourages exploitation of others, or talented and fortunately positioned people permitted more accumulation of resources at the expense of talented and less fortunately positioned people.
One of the problems with communism is that it considers wealth as something that exists and has to be distributed. You say accumulation of resources as if they previously existed and were acumu
And *why* is socialism a bad idea? Don't hear much complaints about it from the Swedes. Oh, what's that, Sweden doesn't exist, its not in the Real World? Communism is merely supposed to be a transitional gov't state to Anarchistic gov't. (Which does not mean anarchy, BTW.) If its not moving to local gov't collectives, its not Communism. Don't mistake ideological perversion as Communism. Even that distorted Communism you accuse as unworkable hasn't disappeared in Cuba, and in fact, results in more infants surviving than in the USA.
There is no socialism in Sweden. In Sweden there is a mixed economy. If there were socialism, the means of production would be in the hands of the state. That is, there would be no private property. e.g. You wouldn't be able to buy ericsson shares in the stock market. You wouldn't even have a stock market.
Sweden is a perfect example of a successful mixed economy.
In Sweden your house is yours, your work capacity is yours. You pay a lot of taxes, but, I repeat, it is not socialism.
In practice, socialism (and communism) can only be applied by force because it implies the abolition of private property.
Regarding Cuba, You have no idea of how people live in Cuba. In Cuba you can't go to a supermarket and buy food. You get the food the government thinks you need. Then they only get one chicken a month. The practically do not know what beef is (the government gives them some crap called carnic paste). In Cuba, for a few dollars you can have all the sex you want, because many girls there are desperate. Fidel once said that cuban jineteras (cuban name for hookers) are the only ones with university titles. The sad part is that it is true.
I have friends who have visited Cuba and they tell me it was very sad what they saw. My friends gave away all the toothpaste, toilet paper, soap, underware and other things they had left to the hotel employees because they have very limited or no access to those products.
OK, the communist regime still exists, but that is only because it is a dictatorship where the goverment has all the military power.
Why do you think so many Cubans take the risk of being eaten by sharks to escape Cuba and go to Florida in self-made rafts?
Communism (as in USSR & China) didn't survive into this century, not because its an unworkable form of gov't, but because it focused on trying to militarily compete with the Western (capitalist) nations. A more conscientious ruling elite probably would have resulted in the USSR's survival. If Communism is unworkable, how can Cuba still be communist, even with the demise of its benefactor?
Communism (as defiend by Marx) is a form of government where there is no state (and therefore no government, no courts, etc.). It is a state of utopia. It is unimplementable in practice. In practice what you have is a government that owns everything (including you capacity to work) and distributes wealth to each according to its need.
For more information con communism read this Totalitarianism (or monarchy), by your rule, must also be a good idea, because it can work in practice. Why, some Totalitarian gov'ts (like historical China) have lasted centuries! And totalitarian gov'ts exist to this very day. I think I did not explain myself clearly. When I say an idea works in practice I mean it works well in practice. That is, the people live decent lives and are happy with the government. You can study, and if you are willing to work it is not very difficult to find a job, and if you have a job you can eat well and you can feed your children welland give them good education. You can have a place to live. You can have a car. You can expect reasonable levels of public security. Totalitarian systems can last because they own the military power and nobody can oppose them. That does not mean the people living there are happy with the government. I live in a neo-fascist quasi-totalita
Remember, Socialism and Communism are nice ideas on paper that have never worked in the Real World.
Wrong. Socialism is a bad idea. Communism isn't even implementable in real life. The only possible implementation of communism is a form of socialism that is even worse than the original.
If they were good ideas they would have worked in practice.
Capitalism is a good idea because it can work in practice (at least the approximation to real capitalsim that is implementable). Many mixed economies approaches are good ideas and the fact that they have been seuccessfully implemented is a proof.
Openoffice is already 99% of the way there. If they fill in the Access hole they are done.
I constantly see people complain about the lack of an Access equivalent in OpenOffice.
IIRC Access is just a very low-quality pseudo RDBMS. Why would anyone want to use that crap when much better RDBMS are available for free?
I'm serious about it. I have never in my life had any use for such a thing as Access. Has Access changed to something different in the last years. What do people who use Acceess do with it? What is it useful for?
If an infinite loop is infinite, how can it be finished?
You only have to finish the first iteration in half a second. The second in 1/4th of a second. The third in 1/8th of a second. In general, the nth iteration in half the time required for the n-1th iteration.
After one second the loop will be finished.
This is absolutely false. A TopCoder solution must run in less than 8 seconds to be considered valid, so low performance solutions will be considered invalid.
The easier problems can often be solved using brute force approachs, but those are good solutions if problem size is small.
Try to solve the TopCoder Open Online Round 4 problems using brute force.....
And even though KDE is architecturally cool, and of course, it isn't really LIKE windows like you say, its freekin widgets get in the way of my productivity. Something's wrong if you're always wanting to get menus, toolbars and pop up shit out of the way:) So I use windowmaker and blackbox. .NET architecture is fantastic, allowing the platform-independent road into the future for all of us. .Net. .Net clone, which will probably be deprecated in a few years.
My respects to you. I do use KDE, but sometimes I use IceWM for the reasons you give.
I do not understand Miguel de Icaza's thinking - I've read interviews last year where he explains what he's doing and why. I guess it boils down to he believes the
No. It boils down to the fact that Miguel de Icaza is a big Microsoft fan. He believes Microsoft technology is better, but he is also a free software supporter. His thinking is that the supposedly great Microsoft technology must be reimplemented as free software in *nix environments (especially free ones).
That is why he first tried to clone the ultra crappy COM/DCOM. Even Microsoft acknowledge the COM/DCOM programming model was crap and they deprecated it in favour of
Since it made no sense to continue pushing a clone of a deprecated technology, they decided to work on the
Why, sure it does - Browser doubling as a file manager, start button, task bar, system drive icons on the desktop, you can drag a URL string from the browser or file manager somewhere else like onto the desktop to create a link (or dare I say SHORTCUT). Out of the box it looks like Windows, unless you re-theme it. You have a point, but these days almost everything looks similar. BTW, the default theme is not windows. There is a Redmond theme that makes it work more like windows. Ok, right, not the underlying architecture using QT - we weren't really talking about the underlying architecture - discussion was more about end-user adoption.. I agree the QT choice was excellent. Then we agree on something. I don't use GNOME simply because it has been a project to copy the crappy (non-)design of COM into Unix. Now that Microsoft deprecated COM/DCOM in favour of .Net, the original GNOME proponents are working on a new clone of the new MS technology called Mono.
I don't know if they are going to deprecate bonobo.
Anyway, most "GNOME" applications are just GTK applications and don't use bonobo.
Venezuela has the second largest oil reserve in the world, but most of it is extre-heavy oil.
KDE looks and acts like Windows. This is the reason a lot of Linux people don't like it or use it, myself included. Gnome also looks like Windows at first, but less so. Lots of cool things going on in Gnome, all not very Windows-like.
KDE neither looks nor acts like Windows. It can on the surface look like windoze if you want to, but it's foundations are completely different. A large part of GNOME infrastructure (especially Bonobo) is very much like Windows. In fact, once I was trying to learn what Bonobo was about I was directed to Microsoftt COM/DCOM programming books. This Bonobo thing is just an attempt to implement in UNIX the most horrible programming model ever invented by Microsoft. It is simply the addition of prorpietary (as in non-standard) extensions to CORBA to make it look like COM.
If there is anything in the Unix world that resembles Windows is GNOME.
And regarding perfection, QT and KDE are IMHO much closer to perfection than GTK and GNOME.
Consider the word "America" as an analogy. "Technically" it refers to a continent - but in practice, if I say "America", nearly everyone will think of the USA - even many Canadians!
In Latin America and Spain (don't know about other countries) when you say America we think about a continent. We only think about USA when you say Estados Unidos.