Thanks for this interesting list! But they cannot give me enough incentive to move away from Thunderbird. Yes, Thunderbird is more buggy and less feature-complete than what I want, but still it is actively supported - it created a prosperous enough future to wait for.
Don't assume everyone do not contribute. I did, to some open-source projects. Mozilla, together with XUL, XBL, XPCOM, IDL,..., is however too complicated for me.
Undoubtedly, open source projects normally gets more contributions than otherwise, not because necessarily we got the liberty to distribute, but we can touch and feel the source code.
Someone may just pay for a boxed version of Debian, because it makes installation easier. Open source never means free-of-charge. If they have done enough non-code enhancements, some people in the world may pay. Fair is fair.
Don't assume that open source is wrong economics. If it is "Public Good" in terms of economics, then it is wrong. But we do "pay" for them. Paid support created Red Hat. Ads created Google. Even MySQL is given free because it wants publicity and word of mouth.
You may think an e-mai client worths $50, but I just don't. Open source is just complete price discriminiation - I think it worths $30 so I use whatever ways I can to contribute back $30-equivalent to the project.
When I am moving half-way into the spirit of libre, this problem is always faced. Not until all software I use have open-source replacement or running well under WINE can I move away from Windows. Then some open source software has no Windows version. postfix, postgresql, procmail, evolution,...
Sorry, I should have said "Graphical" e-mail clients in parent. Thank you for your suggestions and it really confirms my belief: we really have no choice, except text-based and much less well-known ones. But we do have some choices for browser, though most of them are still Gecko-based.
Agree. When I was running it on PIII 700 + 128MB RAM, it is really a lot slower than Outlook Express. But on P4 1.4G + 256MB RAM it rocks! Even better on faster machines.
Why can't you just buy the copyright of all code, by asking all authors to transfer their copyright, in writing, to you? Then you own the kernel, and you can distribute in BSD license if you wish.
D programs can import and link against C code and libraries, providing D with free access to a huge amount of pre-written code. Note, however, that D is not link-compatible with C++, so pure C wrappers are required to access C++ code in D.
When can we expect to see a "port" of Windows to run as a driver aside with Linux? Essentially they look the same, but it is politically more correct to have Linux as master and Windows as slave.
Your point essentially means: I would choose VMWare because it has been polished for a longer time, period. So given coLinux is no emulation, why we cannot wait for a few years so it also has emulated most that we have in GSX? (It would never resemble ESX though)
Good point. When we only have 1 PC, and we want to port all processes on a server from Windows to Linux gradually, 1. run coLinux, 2. for each process, move it to the Linux side, either switch to an FOSS alternative or under Wine. 3. Remove Windows and run the Linux natively. So this is why we would run Wine under coLinux.
I think the Wiki site has explained it in detail.
It is a kernel driver.
It emulates:
- A VGA console with keyboard and plain text
- An ethernet device which pipes to the TAP driver
- Block device which maps to a file in Windows, essentially also possible for a partition and a drive
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for this interesting list! But they cannot give me enough incentive to move away from Thunderbird. Yes, Thunderbird is more buggy and less feature-complete than what I want, but still it is actively supported - it created a prosperous enough future to wait for.
FYI, I tried as well - just can't imagine I have done not enough :-)
Agree, if XUL is fast enough.
When I am moving half-way into the spirit of libre, this problem is always faced. Not until all software I use have open-source replacement or running well under WINE can I move away from Windows. Then some open source software has no Windows version. postfix, postgresql, procmail, evolution, ...
I think very very few people really need regex search/filtering. For detached attachment, Thunderbird planned it for 2004 originally but dropped finally. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/thunderbird/plans. html
Sorry, I should have said "Graphical" e-mail clients in parent. Thank you for your suggestions and it really confirms my belief: we really have no choice, except text-based and much less well-known ones. But we do have some choices for browser, though most of them are still Gecko-based.
Sorry for confusion. The original sentense didn't mean Outlook Express is open source, but what "I don't want to use".
Thank you. I really google'd before I asked. But without the quotes, it is really impossible to reach the one you found.
Just an e-mail client which has a *G*UI. Evolution, and KMail cannot run on Windows. Pine, elm, mutt are not graphical. What left?
Agree. When I was running it on PIII 700 + 128MB RAM, it is really a lot slower than Outlook Express. But on P4 1.4G + 256MB RAM it rocks! Even better on faster machines.
If I don't want Outlook Express, Mozilla Mail&News and Mozilla Thunderbird, what else *Open Source* e-mail clients can I choose in Windows?
I don't think anyone would agree with you.
Which of Perl and Postgresql needs root? If webmasters need root access, then who else don't need?
But we witnessed how Mozilla is becoming trilicensed. Could we have imagined that a few years ago?
Suppose you are OSDL, and you promised to migrate all code to GPLv3 after the acquisition, I think it is not as difficult as you thought.
Why can't you just buy the copyright of all code, by asking all authors to transfer their copyright, in writing, to you? Then you own the kernel, and you can distribute in BSD license if you wish.
why can't other companies provide support for it? This is why we need open source.
I would say it is Java's (ugly) solution to no function pointer support.
IIRC, Lotus Development Corp v Paperback Software Intl demonstrated us in 1990 that copying the look and feel in exact form is copyright infringement.
Imagine how much more time you need if incidentially this document does not exist?
When can we expect to see a "port" of Windows to run as a driver aside with Linux? Essentially they look the same, but it is politically more correct to have Linux as master and Windows as slave.
Your point essentially means: I would choose VMWare because it has been polished for a longer time, period. So given coLinux is no emulation, why we cannot wait for a few years so it also has emulated most that we have in GSX? (It would never resemble ESX though)
Good point. When we only have 1 PC, and we want to port all processes on a server from Windows to Linux gradually, 1. run coLinux, 2. for each process, move it to the Linux side, either switch to an FOSS alternative or under Wine. 3. Remove Windows and run the Linux natively. So this is why we would run Wine under coLinux.
I think the Wiki site has explained it in detail. It is a kernel driver. It emulates: - A VGA console with keyboard and plain text - An ethernet device which pipes to the TAP driver - Block device which maps to a file in Windows, essentially also possible for a partition and a drive