Their differential pricing model in general hints at monopoly abuse - by this I mean the fact they can charge different prices for 7 different versions of Windows (XP Home, XP Pro, the various Server 2003's), which ultimately aren't very different under the hood, combined with the fact that they'll practically give software to anyone with a good enough excuse (governments, universities, the third world...). Clearly their mark-up on Windows is pretty huge, given that they don't need to be making lots of money on every single copy.
Yeah, that building is in Cambridge, UK, right next to the University's Computer Laboratory, where I'm sitting, typing this, on a Red Hat Linux workstation...
Doesn't the tablet have Wi-Fi? Why not use this as your communication medium instead? You wouldn't need to have a line of sight or even write special software (just ssh into the robot and type commands at the console;)).
Using a suitable video application (streaming server?) it would be possible to look through the webcam and steer around the house. The advantage of using a standard x86 tablet PC are that all of the things you need are already available, and there's very little to "work on".
There is quite a bit of good useful content on Webmonkey. Has anyone considered saving it all for future reference? I know it would probably be illegal to put them up for free access somewhere else on the web due to copyrights, but it seems a shame for it all to go to waste completely:(
What the heck have the Slashcoders done to the user info page? It looks terrible. I real improvement over the clean functional layout that was there before! Well done guys!
How about you guys stop sharing illegal copyrighted files?
I am pissed off at the RIAA's tactics as much as the next man, but when I download music, at least I'm paying for the connection. It's mine to do with as I please.
When I'm at university, I play by their rules since they're giving me free LAN access. If you want to share files that badly, get DSL wired up to your dorm and pay for the connection yourself. It's not that expensive, even for a student.
Replying to make the point that when I say "Oh, that and the fact 6% Trolltech is owned by Canopy Group", I mean that every person who pays Trolltech for their "7 years of hard work" on QT is also funding SCO's little war against Linux. Yet another reason to avoid the Trolltech Tax.
Erm... if I want to develop for Win32, I don't need to pay for the toolkit. I pay for the development environment (or not, there are plenty of free ones). You can create Win32 applications using GNU GCC.
I just see that there's a fundamental difference between toolkits and kernels. If I develop an application for Linux, I can choose any license for said application. If I develop an application for Linux + QT, I must develop under the GPL. If I develop an application for Linux + GTK, I can choose any license. Which is more "free"? (not as in beer or as in democracy, free as in "Let's get Linux on more peoples' desktops and stop limiting commercial development for what is supposed to be an open platform").
There are plenty of companies that make money from BSD-licensed or LGPL-licensed projects. Typically they provide support packages and problem solving. This could equally apply to a toolkit. However, I think that QT should have been turned into a community project years ago, the same way the vast majority of Linux desktop software is developed. There's just no need for corperate development with a toolkit. QT is big, but there are plenty of other bigger open source projects doing fine without a Trolltech-equivilent.
If you don't believe me, then believe Sun and Ximian, both of whom chose not to use QT based on the fact it was GPL rather than LGPL'd. Maybe they'd think different if Trolltech's prices for developers weren't to horrendous, but the fact is that they didn't want to spend money filling another company's pockets just because they wanted to potentially create closed-source applications for their open-sourced desktops.
Oh, that and the fact 6% Trolltech is owned by Canopy Group.
As a long time Gnome user, and as someone who will go on record as disliking Trolltech and their business model, I must say I am extremely impressed with KDE 3.2. Whilst I still think there is some tidying to go WRT options dialog boxes, this release strikes me as a massive leap forward. The new features and the improvements to Konqueror and the Kicker and so forth are really impressive. So much so, for the first time ever I spent the day working in KDE instead of Gnome and actually enjoyed it, rather than being constantly frustrated by inconsistencies and the general looks of the desktop.
Plastik is the first theme I've seen that makes KDE really start to look like a professional desktop rather than a mish-mash of poorly concieved applications. The underlying framework (KParts, kioslaves) and QT have always been superior to Gnome's, that much I'll admit. I still think it's a shame that QT is licensed under the GPL rather than a BSD-style license, but I guess I'll live.
I might even switch permanently if KDE 3.3 brings as many improvements.
It will be interesting to see how sought after any well-preserved games will be in their original packaging. I can easily imagine they'll be our grandchildren's baseball cards.
You know, long before Microsoft ever created Windows, I remember both Macintosh and the other GUI systems being described as "WIMP", or "Windows, Icons, Mouse and Pointer" systems. Surely this use of Windows represents a clear prior usage of Microsoft's supposed trademark to describe what were very similar products? Can you still trademark terms that have been used before? IANAL, but it would seem like a pretty silly idea.
It's much more watchable than most of the rubbish that seems to come out of Paramount's Star Trek franchise these days. I find Enterprise totally unwatchable and couldn't even be bothered to see the last film in the cinemas. I made the right decision too, cos the DVD was a major dissapointment.
That said, I think Stargate has become too sciency/technical. Did anyone else prefer it when all the technology like the Gates themselves were much more mystical and incomprehensible? Somehow, talking about Gates and DHDs in terms of lines of software code, mathematical equations and matter dematerialisation doesn't seem quite as mystical as the original movie and the earlier episodes, where much of it was still based in Egyption mythology and the technology seemed more magical (neither human nor Goa'uld understanding how it really worked) rather than increasingly Trek-like technobabble descriptions of how things work.
I will, of course, be watching Atlantis as Stargate and its spin-offs are still some of the most watchable sci-fi about at the moment. I just wouldn't have taken it in quite the same direction if it were left up to me.
If the worst comes to the worst, we can always stick around on XF4.3 for however long it takes him to make XServer production-ready code. With Red Hat, Debian, Gentoo and OpenBSD potentially looking for alterative solutions, it seems there might be sufficient clout to persuade nVidia and ATI to write new drivers for the new server, too.
Here's hoping. This will damage the Linux-on-the-desktop movement, but it's very good fortune that an alternative is nearly ready to step in to the fray.
Well, you might be right, but I heard nasty stories about the Dual 1.25GHz G4s that Apple were selling just before the G5 was released. Weren't they 1GHz overclocks and didn't they have a tendancy to lock up more than a Macintosh should?
Slashdot Mirror
I think the grandparent was joking.
Their differential pricing model in general hints at monopoly abuse - by this I mean the fact they can charge different prices for 7 different versions of Windows (XP Home, XP Pro, the various Server 2003's), which ultimately aren't very different under the hood, combined with the fact that they'll practically give software to anyone with a good enough excuse (governments, universities, the third world...). Clearly their mark-up on Windows is pretty huge, given that they don't need to be making lots of money on every single copy.
Yeah, that building is in Cambridge, UK, right next to the University's Computer Laboratory, where I'm sitting, typing this, on a Red Hat Linux workstation...
Xouvert is dead. If you don't believe me check their mailing lists.
Using a suitable video application (streaming server?) it would be possible to look through the webcam and steer around the house. The advantage of using a standard x86 tablet PC are that all of the things you need are already available, and there's very little to "work on".
Very nice idea, though.
There is quite a bit of good useful content on Webmonkey. Has anyone considered saving it all for future reference? I know it would probably be illegal to put them up for free access somewhere else on the web due to copyrights, but it seems a shame for it all to go to waste completely :(
What the heck have the Slashcoders done to the user info page? It looks terrible. I real improvement over the clean functional layout that was there before! Well done guys!
Yes, they have distributed Linux under a more restrictive license than the GPL. Therefore they are in violation.
Is it really too hard to actually learn how to do a hyperlink? Besides, the Google cache is useless because it doesn't grab images.
How about you guys stop sharing illegal copyrighted files?
I am pissed off at the RIAA's tactics as much as the next man, but when I download music, at least I'm paying for the connection. It's mine to do with as I please.
When I'm at university, I play by their rules since they're giving me free LAN access. If you want to share files that badly, get DSL wired up to your dorm and pay for the connection yourself. It's not that expensive, even for a student.
Replying to make the point that when I say "Oh, that and the fact 6% Trolltech is owned by Canopy Group", I mean that every person who pays Trolltech for their "7 years of hard work" on QT is also funding SCO's little war against Linux. Yet another reason to avoid the Trolltech Tax.
Erm... if I want to develop for Win32, I don't need to pay for the toolkit. I pay for the development environment (or not, there are plenty of free ones). You can create Win32 applications using GNU GCC.
I just see that there's a fundamental difference between toolkits and kernels. If I develop an application for Linux, I can choose any license for said application. If I develop an application for Linux + QT, I must develop under the GPL. If I develop an application for Linux + GTK, I can choose any license. Which is more "free"? (not as in beer or as in democracy, free as in "Let's get Linux on more peoples' desktops and stop limiting commercial development for what is supposed to be an open platform").
There are plenty of companies that make money from BSD-licensed or LGPL-licensed projects. Typically they provide support packages and problem solving. This could equally apply to a toolkit. However, I think that QT should have been turned into a community project years ago, the same way the vast majority of Linux desktop software is developed. There's just no need for corperate development with a toolkit. QT is big, but there are plenty of other bigger open source projects doing fine without a Trolltech-equivilent.
If you don't believe me, then believe Sun and Ximian, both of whom chose not to use QT based on the fact it was GPL rather than LGPL'd. Maybe they'd think different if Trolltech's prices for developers weren't to horrendous, but the fact is that they didn't want to spend money filling another company's pockets just because they wanted to potentially create closed-source applications for their open-sourced desktops.
Oh, that and the fact 6% Trolltech is owned by Canopy Group.
As a long time Gnome user, and as someone who will go on record as disliking Trolltech and their business model, I must say I am extremely impressed with KDE 3.2. Whilst I still think there is some tidying to go WRT options dialog boxes, this release strikes me as a massive leap forward. The new features and the improvements to Konqueror and the Kicker and so forth are really impressive. So much so, for the first time ever I spent the day working in KDE instead of Gnome and actually enjoyed it, rather than being constantly frustrated by inconsistencies and the general looks of the desktop.
Plastik is the first theme I've seen that makes KDE really start to look like a professional desktop rather than a mish-mash of poorly concieved applications. The underlying framework (KParts, kioslaves) and QT have always been superior to Gnome's, that much I'll admit. I still think it's a shame that QT is licensed under the GPL rather than a BSD-style license, but I guess I'll live.
I might even switch permanently if KDE 3.3 brings as many improvements.
It will be interesting to see how sought after any well-preserved games will be in their original packaging. I can easily imagine they'll be our grandchildren's baseball cards.
I think Firewire is somewhat equivilent to wired Bluetooth as it allows similar device to device connections rather than host to device like USB.
IIRC, the correct name is actually "The X Windowing System", correctly abbreviated to "X". The common term "X Windows" is incorrect.
s/Egyption/Egyptian. Maybe I ought to get a G5 so I get squiggly red underlines when I misspell something on a form.
You know, long before Microsoft ever created Windows, I remember both Macintosh and the other GUI systems being described as "WIMP", or "Windows, Icons, Mouse and Pointer" systems. Surely this use of Windows represents a clear prior usage of Microsoft's supposed trademark to describe what were very similar products? Can you still trademark terms that have been used before? IANAL, but it would seem like a pretty silly idea.
It's much more watchable than most of the rubbish that seems to come out of Paramount's Star Trek franchise these days. I find Enterprise totally unwatchable and couldn't even be bothered to see the last film in the cinemas. I made the right decision too, cos the DVD was a major dissapointment.
That said, I think Stargate has become too sciency/technical. Did anyone else prefer it when all the technology like the Gates themselves were much more mystical and incomprehensible? Somehow, talking about Gates and DHDs in terms of lines of software code, mathematical equations and matter dematerialisation doesn't seem quite as mystical as the original movie and the earlier episodes, where much of it was still based in Egyption mythology and the technology seemed more magical (neither human nor Goa'uld understanding how it really worked) rather than increasingly Trek-like technobabble descriptions of how things work.
I will, of course, be watching Atlantis as Stargate and its spin-offs are still some of the most watchable sci-fi about at the moment. I just wouldn't have taken it in quite the same direction if it were left up to me.
I think I might have to open some wind^H^H^H^Hframed glass panes attached to hinges!
Seriously... this trademarking of generic words is just silly. Is someone going to trademark the word "The" next, so no company name can contain it?
... and hence the fork is licensed purely under the GPL, since the QPL is a commercial license and does not permit forks.
I may be wrong (IANABio) but I read that brain cells don't divide or die after childhood anyway. So what damage can this actually do?
If the worst comes to the worst, we can always stick around on XF4.3 for however long it takes him to make XServer production-ready code. With Red Hat, Debian, Gentoo and OpenBSD potentially looking for alterative solutions, it seems there might be sufficient clout to persuade nVidia and ATI to write new drivers for the new server, too.
Here's hoping. This will damage the Linux-on-the-desktop movement, but it's very good fortune that an alternative is nearly ready to step in to the fray.
Way to go posting the same text four times, dumbass.
Well, you might be right, but I heard nasty stories about the Dual 1.25GHz G4s that Apple were selling just before the G5 was released. Weren't they 1GHz overclocks and didn't they have a tendancy to lock up more than a Macintosh should?