IMAP's version of push is insufficient, however. It requires an already-established TCP/IP. This means that you could not use the device to make phone calls or send/receive SMS messages if you wanted to be notified of new incoming mail.
I really wish I could post a comment refuting your claim but my TCP/IP connection is already in use by the internet radio station I'm listening to.
But seriously, how does having an established TCP/IP connection prevent the phone from doing other things?
Just in case you didn't know, X11 has been doing remote 3d calls for years. You have a point though, RDP works much better over low bandwidth/high latency links. NX bring that kind of performance to X11 but its not really X11.
Well, your wrong on several points. First off, the output of GPL programs is not required to be licensed under the GPL. For this reason it is irrelevant what licenses GCC and your obfuscator are covered by. But you seem convinced otherwise so lets assume your right.
Its also irrelevant at what point the software becomes bound by the GPL. At the point you distribute your software it is already under the GPL by your own argument. According to the GPL you are required to make the source code available for any GPL software you distribute. In this case, source code is defined as the prefered form for modification of the software. By definition obfuscated code isn't this prefered form, so you are in violation of the GPL.
As for your last statement, IANAL, but I think it would be pretty easy to prove that your code was obfuscated and not simply following some unusual standards.
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.
So code that has been run through an obfuscator is not "source code" as defined by the GPL and you are not satisfying the terms of the license if that is all you are releasing.
I'd rather do business with a group that's motivated by money because I have something to bargain with. If it's just a group who does it for fun, who's to say they won't just stop? Or find another interest? What then?
Then you can start paying them for service you had been happily receiving for free. I have a feeling that paying them to support something they've put so much of their time into just might motivate them to keep at it.
Unsanctioned? So I should be required to have Microsoft's permission to modify my own property (X-Box)? I should be required to get permission from Microsoft to run the X-Box Media Player (an inovative little piece of perfectly legal software)? Running Linux on my X-Box? There are plenty of legitimate reasons for modding an X-Box.
In the end it comes down to Microsoft wanting to control your property after they've sold it to you. Its about restricting fair use.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, its not San Francisco, but we do have 2 nuclear power plants operating along the California coast. Frisco isn't the only place in California that has earthquakes, either. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_Station http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_Canyon_Power_Plant How bout Japan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan
Your argument would be lot stronger if the person you were replying to (Alexander Limi) wasn't a major contributor to Plone.
Just in case you didn't know, X11 has been doing remote 3d calls for years. You have a point though, RDP works much better over low bandwidth/high latency links. NX bring that kind of performance to X11 but its not really X11.
Well, your wrong on several points. First off, the output of GPL programs is not required to be licensed under the GPL. For this reason it is irrelevant what licenses GCC and your obfuscator are covered by. But you seem convinced otherwise so lets assume your right.
Its also irrelevant at what point the software becomes bound by the GPL. At the point you distribute your software it is already under the GPL by your own argument. According to the GPL you are required to make the source code available for any GPL software you distribute. In this case, source code is defined as the prefered form for modification of the software. By definition obfuscated code isn't this prefered form, so you are in violation of the GPL.
As for your last statement, IANAL, but I think it would be pretty easy to prove that your code was obfuscated and not simply following some unusual standards.
In Korea, only old people use Debian Stable.
root DNS server... you keep using that term, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
But do they have a flag?
Why does Linus refuse to address this issue? Is it because he's a horse, or because hes got blinders on! No peripheral vision!
Maybe because its a security risk.
Unsanctioned? So I should be required to have Microsoft's permission to modify my own property (X-Box)? I should be required to get permission from Microsoft to run the X-Box Media Player (an inovative little piece of perfectly legal software)? Running Linux on my X-Box? There are plenty of legitimate reasons for modding an X-Box. In the end it comes down to Microsoft wanting to control your property after they've sold it to you. Its about restricting fair use.