Sheesh, I've had to deal with that working on my local server for some time now with Netscape and Mozilla. What I usually do when I'm actively doing work is set my cache to 0 on both memory and disk and flush the cache. When I'm done, I set the cache back for regular browsing.
I've actually left the cache off and really didn't notice too much of a slowdown - most of the sites I visit have pragma no cache set anyway.
I know, it's a pain in the arse, but until our overworked friends at Mozilla decide to disable caching for source requests, we'll have to deal with it. I don't even know if it's on the wishlist. If it is, please bump it up - webdevelopers who use Mozilla (me) would be very happy.
Ever since AOL ditched the Netscape 4 codebase in favor of the AOL supported but still independent Mozilla code-base, I always figured that AOL and Netscape had gotten out of producing Netscape as a browser. To slap a Netscape icon on Mozilla and package in AIM does not make it Netscape. For all intents and purposes, Netscape died when Netscape Inc. opensourced it and the Mozilla crew tossed the old code-base and rewrote the thing in their image (a badly needed thing). I _am_ surprised that only now is the media catching on. What, do we have to hand-feed them now? Are they too lazy to keep up with stuff? Sheesh. Netscape is gone. No more. 4.77 is it. Netscape 6.0/6.1 is based on pre-beta free software - I'm ashamed that AOL did that. How dare they take a very incomplete and unready Open Source project and unleash it on the world as a "finished" project. Is this what goes on behind the closed doors of commercial software makers? "It's good enough - package it, give it a high version number and ship it." - what a crime. Because of that, people's attitude of Open Source software, and Netscape in general have plummetted. I sure as hell wouldn't use Netscape 6.* on Linux or Windows. BUT - I do use Mozilla 0.9 with great zeal and eagerly look forward to future releases. I've installed Mozilla 0.9 on several different platforms and have it out in the "wild" being used by my clients. I migrated from NN 4.77 to Mozilla 0.9 - so I missed most of the pre-alpha/beta stuff except my very brief foray into NN 6.0 (I promptly vomited that bad apple from my system). The guys at Mozilla are quickly doing final cleanup in preparation for the official Beta release - look at the updates on their site. It has the feeling of the final dusting and cleaning before a new house is sold. It's feature complete, rather stable (better now than Netscape and that's with Java, Javascript and CSS enabled) - and acceptably quick, all things considered. The primary focus on the 0.9 - 1.0 is final cleaning and _Optimization_ - following the regular development cycle of "Features first, then Debugging, then Optimization" I'd have to say that they're on the last legs of debugging and already in the midst of optimization. Future releases will be quicker, start up quicker and be stabler. Mozilla already has more features than IE by far - it's a powerful application platform where IE is just some cheesy Mosaic clone with a few improvements and OS integration.
In summery - Good Bye Netscape. It's been an interesting ride, but I'm glad it's over. Hello Mozilla. Your market share sucks, but since when does market share have anything to do with Open Sourse and Free software anyway? Of course, Mozilla now seems to be our best chance at keeping Microsoft from totally Microsoftizing the Internet. They've got their hooks in pretty deep - we'll see. If you've used an older version, try newer ones periodically. Migration from IE in inevitable. And, future versions of at least RedHat Linux will be shipping with only Mozilla and not Netscape (so they say). Lets hope more distros follow.
Please be aware that Mozilla is about producing a darn good browser (and more) that works on multiple systems. IE is about maintaining a monopoly. Do the math... Don't ditch your Netscape 4.77 for IE - give Mozilla a try. If it's too slow - give it a while and try again.
There's a difference between "ripping off ideas" and "ripping off code". Microsoft is more than welcome to jump in with it's own Linux distribution. It probably won't sell much, but they're still free to do it. They can even produce their own Jabber client. Or participate in any number of projects or base projects off existing ones. That's how it's done in the OSS world. The only hitch is if the original is GPL and they used code from the original, then their version has to be GPL too.
If, like some companies have tried to do mistakingly or on purpose, the code is closed up and is clearly based on GPL'd code, then you bet we'll be up in arms. If they like our ideas and decide to copy them, more power to them. That's what competition is about. If they like our code and steal it, then that's illegal and it doesn't matter if it's Microsoft or RedHat - there will be noise about it.
Proof is in the eyes of the beholder on something that largely lies with preferences, but I'll give it a go.
Please be aware the MS hasn't created a thing - they buy out small projects (like how DOS and IE got started) and repackage them, tweak them and slap the MS label on it. Innovation to Bill is to see someone doing something neat and aquiring them, or as with Netscape, force them out of business.
I used C# as an example, not an endorsement. So, for me, the wind stays true. As for people saying one thing isn't needed because there are other ways, that's just plain human nature. Why IE when there first was Netscape. And both were based on Mosaic. I seriously doubt that MS "invented" SOAP. There's probably some sap somewhere who is fondling his big fat MS check and signing a ND agreement.
Stability - my wife can testify to the endless fustration, lost data and crashed computers at 4am that Windows was to me. That was at home on my three systems doing multimedia homework, and at school on any one of their NT workstations. Saving often doesn't account for lost inspiration when the moment has passed. Sure, you could blame the user, but remember Bill and his blue-screen of death presentation. Or the Win2K server crack-challenge that wouldn't stay up long enough to be cracked. But with Linux, my wife now sleeps soundly sans my ranting and foaming. So that remark was based on personal experience and opinion (as is most of the remarks made on/.). I actually get work done, never experience crashes or lost data and that's while running largely beta software.
Which brings me to the "Bleeding Edge" point - you have a point with the recreation stuff, but to have a useable system, you need popular apps. To have a gui, you need, well, a windowing system. Wanna write a report in a wysiwyg prog? Well, there's where our "MS Office ripoffs" have come from. What's wrong with that? Our innovation is the fact that we created all this stuff mainly in our spare time and through open source cooperation - I'd have to say that's fairly innovative in itself. Bleeding edge isn't necessarily making a computer do a tapdance on the bar, but making it do something in a system that it previously didn't do in that system, which in our case is Linux. Mozilla is bleeding edge. Sure, IE can do a lot, but then, IE isn't on Linux. Additionally, Bleeding Edge can also mean developing alternatives to Microsoft under the gun of Microsoft and doing it successfully. Regardless of how you take it, if you like Microsoft and think they're "innovative", more power to you. That's your choice. Oh, and that indeed is a choice. The other is to use Linux. Something Microsoft would prefer you not do, but that you are able to do. The Bleeding Edge software that is being created on Linux isn't necessarily unique software - indeed some are dead knockoffs of other commercial packages (Gimp comes to mind) but it belongs to the community, not to a company. Linux a rehash of *nix? Perhaps. But what other *nix runs on virtually anything with a cpu? Hell, what other operating system, MS included runs on as many platforms. I'd call that innovative. OSS software got its features not through copying the code, but through serious volunteer development. And all this hard work is free for the rest of us. Tell me that's not Bleeding Edge. Even in your definition, OSS is a unique creature in the software world. It's true innovation is that it removes the shackles of closed, secretive development teams and brings about access to a resource of developers and information and help and examples that no closed source project can emulate.
But, once again, it's largely in the eye of the beholder. If you think Microsoft is truely innovative, then you're entitled to that totally wrong opinion.:) If you think I'm full of crap - well, only for the next few minutes.
Microsoft built itself up by stepping on the shoulders of others. It bought a cheap non-quite-*nix clone and sold it to IBM as their own. It cloned Mac and Xenix. It cloned WordPerfect. It cloned Netscape. It cloned OS/2 Warp. And it calls all this innovation and bleeding edge. You fault me then for calling the hard work of OSS developers bleeding edge too? Well, this probably won't turn you, but it's the best I could do 5 minutes before dinner...
The cycle of software development (at least for OSS that I know of) seems to follow this pattern:
Features
Debugging
Optimization
Mozilla, as of v0.9 is now entering the serious Optimization faze. That's why it was a serious mistake for AOL to produce Netscape 6 based on Mozilla v0.6. Lotsa features, but lotsa bugs and virtually zero optimization. Bad Form, AOL. I'd be happy if AOL killed Netscape altogether - Mozilla certainly isn't dependent on Netscape - of course a few of the developers may have to find other jobs so I'll bite my tongue:). Sure, there's still a lot of debugging going on - that'll happen right up to and after the 1.0 release just like it happens with every other OSS project, Linux included, but the concentration now is making things more efficient and faster. While we probably won't see as quick a Mozilla as, say, Opera, it'll certainly be as quick as or faster than the Netscape 4 series, which for decent computers (or even slow ones) was fast enough. Work is also progressing on making startup faster. IE only seems to start up faster because the core of it starts up when MS Windows starts up. Mozilla and other apps don't have that luxury, but there are other tricks to get things cooking a little faster.
Mozilla is also more than just a classic browser. It has to be to survive in the upcoming state of computing. Ideally, there will come a time when the only app you'll need is Mozilla. You'll have your Office apps, messenging, graphics and general applications rolled up into one shell. These apps will be able to either be located on your system, or remotely on servers. This may not set will with everyone, but then that's what freedom of choice is for.
If you're not satisfied with the speed of things but still like Mozilla, then jump in and help out. There can't be too much help. OSS projects are what you make of them - and as long as there are interested developers and users, the project will live on.
Does Linux matter anymore? We have Windows. Does Netscape matter anymore? We have IE. Does BSD matter anymore? We have Linux. Does C matter anymore? We have C++. Does C++ matter anymore? We have C#. Does Gnome matter anymore? We have KDE. Dude, listen to yourself. If you like Opera - knock yourself out. Mozilla lives because people are honestly interested in it. I'm interested in it. Not because it's better than so-n-so. There are features in Mozilla that extend it beyond just being a browser - in fact it seems to be heading towards the next generation of web-based application services via XUL. If you don't want all that jaz, grab Opera and be happy. But don't say the ship has passed - you don't say that about an Open Source project. Ships only pass commercial ventures. Hell, Windows has the basket of eggs when it comes to market-share. So does that mean the ship has passed for Linux? I couldn't care less if every commercial venture using Linux fails - as long as there is Open Source, I'm happy. For me, the ship is in and will remain so as long as I'm happy with the choice I've made. If you prefer Microsoft, or KDE or balloons in your ears - it's fine by me. That's the beauty about true freedom.
Please be aware that most of the software you use every day on your Linux box is pre-1.0. Even then, it's often better and more stable than any MS product. Most of the rest is some beta version of this or that - pretty much, to use Linux is to live with the bleeding edge. Just because Mozilla hasn't released a 1.0 product doesn't mean 0.9 sucks. Hell, check out the versioning of Windowmaker and Enlightenment. Or Bluefish. Better yet - the time it took for kernel 2.4 to be released. Does that mean that 2.2 sucks or that the ship has passed for Linux? Hell no - I still use 2.2 on my box. It suites me fine. One of these days I'll mosey around to getting it upgraded to 2.4 - but at my convenience. I'm in no hurry. I use Mozilla 0.9 as my primary browser, mail client and test platform for web applications development. It tickles my fancy. I'll continue using Mozilla because I like it. Its got bugs, but I can live with it. It may not be as fast as Opera, but my system kicks butt, so it's not such a big deal for me. But I'm the last person to critisize someone for using Opera or Konquerer. I use Opera on my win-boxes to test CSS layout. And IE 5 and 5.5. And even Netscape 4.77. (all but Mozilla strictly for testing purposes). If you think Mozilla has some problems, rather than complaining about the "ship passing", contribute to the project and make it better. Code, or debug, or whatnot. That's how Open Source works. There's no room for complaints without offers to help.
"Hey, great landing. The press is going mad over here. Just for kicks, we've decided to send you back up for another landing." Poor guys will end up hopping all over Mars. At least until something breaks.:)
That's funny sarcasm guys. I do think it's amazing that they were able to land this thing from millions of miles away and do it successfully. Imagine controling your remote control buggy with a lag time of minutes to hours. Heh, try flying your remote control airplane with the same lag time AND without actually being there to see it do it's thing. Pretty cool stuff they're doing.
I doubt the lawyers are stupid. They aren't banking on winning the law suit - but on a settlement, which seems all to often the case in these kinds of things (remember Microsoft's recent settlement?). A few million dollars to make it go away is worth it to Prodigy - public stocks are affected by lawsuits of any kind and Prodigy stands to loose hundreds of millions, lost oportunities and angry shareholders just for having lawsuits against it regardless of how outragious the lawsuit is. Sometimes it's just cheaper to pay the extortioners off and be done with it. Unfortunantly, a payoff sets a precedent for the BT lawyers that can be used in future lawsuits which could eventually solidify their "ownership" of hyperlinks just by perceived acknowledgement from the corperations settling out. I seriously doubt Prodigy will take this all the way to court and fear that common US corporate practices could very easily jepardize our freedom when it comes to seemingly open technology...
Find a project that you like. Read the code. Use the app. Play with it and tinker. Find something in the application that YOU would like to use yourself. Write it. Improve it. If it works for you, submit a patch to the maintainer. Don't feel hurt if it doesn't make it into the distro. Write something else - use it, improve it, submit it. Don't feel hurt if it doesn't make it into the distro and so forth. While you're doing all this writing, you're getting experience even if it's never used in the official release. Additionally, take a poke at the TODO list and challenge yourself. When you finally do get something included in the distro of whatever OSS project you've selected, it'll be worth it - you'll have written a lot of code, gotten a lot of experience, learned how to work with a distributed team of writers and hopefully had a blast doing it...
Hmmm, I wonder how it'll stand up to a Pit Bull...perhaps I should limit it's dog kicking job to those rats with big ears (yo quero taco) or that obnoquous yipping poodle my aunt keeps bringing over.
Okay - your cat keeps scratching at the sofa. Darned it, your aim with the water spray bottle isn't what it used to be, now your TV is smoking. Bring out Mr. Walker - "Kick the Cat!"
Disclaimer - "No real pets were used in this hypothetical situation - only stunt dogs and stunt cats"
Oh, I'm sorry. You must be miserable. Here, have a soothing glass of OpenGL and be free to write 3D apps on whatever platform you choose...:)
BTW - if you use Windows to write 3D and all the indepth programming that involves, why do you feel you have to use Linux to write quick text programs? Not that you shouldn't use Linux, but if you're going to use Linux, there's so much more you're missing if you're just writing quick text programs. It's kinda like driving a Ferrari in a school zone when the highway is right over there... And C++ just for text programs? Dude, if you want a quicky, do Perl or something. Isn't C++ a little bit of an overkill just for a measly text program?
Anyway, to each his own, but don't think for a moment that OpenGL is any kind of a Standard. It's a proprietory one platform OpenGL clone and that's all it will ever be. True, they've made great strides in quality from the first totally abysmal versions (which thankfully opened my eyes to OpenGL), but once again, if in the future you ever want to introduce portability into your applications, using DirectX is like shooting yourself in the foot...
Let's see, I think even my watch can run OpenGL/MesaGL code. Come on, if you want to use DickX, you have to use Microsoft Windows. There's no standard to it other than Microsoft's agenda. OpenGL ran fine on Win32, but no, MS couldn't have someone else succeeding on their platform. It's the same with Netscape. MS wants to dominate everything that runs on MS and will go to all ends to kill competition. OpenGL/MesaGL runs on more platforms than I can spit at - it's as close to a Standard as you'll come in 3D development. DirectX is just another Microsoft trap. Once you've developed in that, you'll be trapped in Microsoft and porting to another platform is sheer hell. IE - Lokisoft expended much effort porting Heavy Gear from DickX to OpenGL. Now it just needs to be tweaked a little to run on any of a number of platforms, including Microsoft.
But then, you know all this and are just stoking the flames, right?
The research team may have "good intentions", but all in all, when the chips fall, it's up to Microsoft how to use all that research, so regardless of how progressive the research is, it'll still be molded into Microsoft's embrace and extend philosophy and like Kerberos, they'll certainly attempt to make it so that only Win2K products can talk to Win2K products and to hell with everyone else, because, after all, they are the enemy. Please do not forget and always bear in mind - Microsoft isn't interested in competing, only in destroying the enemy at all costs and regardless if the DoJ is looking or not - if we followed their tactics the world would be one big nuclear parking lot populated only by those darned persistent roaches... They've even been legally declared as untrustworthy - so keep in mind, nothing they do that appears to be "good" is good for us, only for them. This isn't blind Microsoft bashing - this is an honest opinion after reading countless news articles, following the DoJ trials closely, reading press releases and watching Microsoft closely. To them, there is no level playing field - in their eyes, you either use Microsoft or they're going to make it so you have to use Microsoft. No room for other players at all.
After scanning the messages in response to the report, it's all very, well "who cares" with few exceptions. No crying here, and no surprise either.
But you're right - as long as we keep trying to piggyback on corporate shoulders, we'll always get bucked sooner or later. Hit up Jabber for IM. Use Vorbis instead of MP3. Use Icecast instead of Shoutcast. While it wasn't true a little while ago, there are now quality alternatives to a lot of the stuff we get used to that don't carry the weight and consequances of corporate decision-making. I used AIM progs to communicate with a pal. Now he'll communicate with me using Jabber. Big deal. No loss, and big gain - as long as these companies keep doing what they're doing, the Open Souce alternatives are going to win and there will come a time when these corporate companies are going to be all alone with no one to harrass... So, hurray AOL. Thanks for giving me the motivation to use Free (as in Free Speach) alternatives to your pathetic services...
Frankly, if I spend $500+ bucks for a processors, I'd be less inclined to take risks with it. Cheap processors on the other hand make it easier for us to experiment because if we burn one up it's no great loss and replacing it isn't a wallet-emptier.
When I spend a lot of money on a CPU specifically for performance, I tend to lean towards the reliability of it's stated speed rather than the risk and relative unreliability of overclocking - after all, I've already got performance. But if I want to see just how far I can push a CPU - well, I expect unreliability and I expect to crater some chips. That's part of the fun...
A couple of things to consider.
1. Companies create products for target markets. HP is targetting the current and most lucrative market - the Windows user market. It's nothing personal, just business.
2. If they're allowing Windows to print to a Linux print server, then perhaps they are using Samba or an equivalent. Linux can print to a Samba print share. Dunno about the others, but I assume you could get in an hack it a little. HP may not give support or advice on printing this way, but that's what the How-To's are for.
I'd like to see HP come around and publish documents on configuring alternative OS's to print to their print server, but they've picked their market. They've committed support personel qualified in supporting that market. And for some reason they've decided not to target other less lucrative markets. We've dealt with that from the beginning, no use whining about it now. It's good that they're using Linux rather than NT for a product. If you want them to document Linux client-side setup and hire a support staff qualified in Linux client setup, don't flame them - just let them know you're a Linux user or part of an office of Linux users that would like to be supported - business is determined by demand (which is why the DEA will never win), so if they feel there's enough of a demand they'll surely capitulate...
Be aware that the average Linux user is miles ahead of the average Windows user in knowledge and capability in system management and may very well not need HP to hire a support staff for Linux. Documentation would be helpfull, but redundant - we've got enough of that already.
No one will ever get an accurate count or prediction - which drives business types crazy. Everyone has their own ideas, but since most distributions are purchased and installed on many computers per disk (numbers which aren't reported to anyone), downloaded and copied to media for cheap resale ala Cheapbytes, and just plain downloaded there's no way to make a comparison based on recorded sales and revenue. Revenue will always lag way behind Windows because of the outrageous pricing and licensing Windows has. Lets see - $1.99 for a Cheapbytes disk vs $92 OEM for Win98 (much more retail) - a graph like that would make Windows look like it's wildly more successfull than Linux when viewed by the uneducated. Labs will typically get one Linux disk (like the one I'm providing for the local HighSchool labs) and stick it on dozens of computers. There's no effective way to provide exhaustive accounting on that. And there are those few crazies that role their own. And lets not forget those that don't feel compelled to upgrade with every kernel release. Linux is friendly that way - many systems have kernel 2.0 and are still kicking with no reason to upgrade. Windows practically forces you to upgrade. How many 3.11 systems are still hanging around? Or NT 3.5? Anyone trying to get a grasp on the numbers of Linux installations will fail miserably, which is kind-of a shame - since much of the cool software we'd like to have like Quicken or Quickbooks are written by people who haven't a clue when it comes to trends and only read the numbers on the stats. Oh well, better will come around and when these guys pull their heads out they'll be too late and quickly out of business...
I was refering to the fact that the Netscape vulnerability is a flaw in the Java VM which is the baby of Sun. Even if Netscape authored the VM they use, it's still a very close approximation of what Sun wants. In fact, just a straight Java VM can run this guy's code. I'm sure a little tweaking of the code will expose a similar problem in IE, but it's still largely a Java issue. Sorry if my wording was confusing. Secondly, (disclaimer - personal opinion) unless it's agreeable or comparible to other Open Source licenses like GPL and possibly (no flames) QPL it's not really Open Source. NDA's and restrictive proprietory licensing, IMHO, disqualifies it as Open Source. But then, that's strictly my personal opinion. The poster made a troll against Open Source that could easily be a symptom of popular opinion of the less informed and I tried to clear it up by indicating that Netscape and Java are not Open Source, and while the exploit is in Netscape, it's really a Java issue - fixable by turning off java. Hopefully the Netscape and Java guys are paying attention and publishes a fix. Most of the Linux/Netscape users I run across use Netscape with Java turned off, myself included. I feel with this vulnerability even more people will be turning Java off, but web-java is about useless and gimicky anyway (with few exceptions).
Hey Troll, this is yesterday's news. The newer versions of Netscape may have pieces of Mozilla in it, but that doesn't mean that your friendly neighborhood Netscape is Open Source. Secondly, this is a flaw in the Java Virtual Machine based on Sun's implimentation and if I remember, Java is not Open Source though there are OS clones. If you want to count eggs you'll find that most of the problems related to Open Source actually have to do with commercial and proprietory software and don't forget to count your open source blessings while browsing 64% of the internet - which seems to be an example of why Open Source _DOES_ work. While you're the type to point fingers at a little glich that you haven't even taken the time to find out exactly where the problem is coming from, others welcome this kind of input and use it to make a better product. While commercial interprises try to hide their faults (65,000+ in Windows 2000 - Another Example Why Closed Source Software Doesn't Work), typical Open Source projects are happy to post discovered bugs - why? Because that's how they get fixed. Sheesh... It is clear that the guy who discovered this loophole in Java is doing us a great favor by releasing the source code and informing the community as a whole of the problem. So thanks to Him.
Moderators - this is extremely off topic - please remove this thread altogether...
Okay, we've got a decent audio-streamer in Icecast, anyone working an Open Souce alternative to Real? That is both server & player though I'd like to see cross client compatibility like Icecast has...
Sorry for the Off Topic post, but it seems everything that matters to us like this bit of IBM news or a Linus interview is being broadcast in Real and nothing appears to be in the works to rectify that... Naturally, we'd have to convince people like IBM to use the OS alternative, but then an OS client could just as well be written to accept Real streams, right?
Considering that the German SAMBA is, well, German, and our Samba is worldwide and has been around for a while, and considering that the German SAMBA is a banking program and our Samba is a server program for Winblows/Linux network integration, it's likely this will be shit-canned in court or will become a travesty of justice - depending on how the judge feels. If I wrote a banking program and called it SAMBA and marketed it in Germany, well they may have a horn to toot. But it is impossible to come up with a 100% unique name for a totally unrelated product that will make every nation happy, and unjustified to expect our Samba to have a different name for each nation it's used in. These people need to get a life. Sue me because I'm using Samba? Get real... Sheesh. I thought Microsoft was stupid...
c) In dire need to pay all their bumbling lawyers and legal fees without cutting into regular profits. Hey, the Judge said they were untrustworthy - I wouldn't put it past them...
Heh, I was thinking the same thing as I went over to read the article. Well, I enjoy reading this crap - I love people proclaiming to be experts smucking themselves in public. But, given is pro-microsoft book and his other articles like "Microsoft Greed is Good", I sense that he's doing nothing more than writing a quicky column based on the very last site he went to with 0 (zero) research only to meet a deadline and get something published. ABC on the other hand publishes his crap because they know it'll get to Slashdot and they'll get a ton of traffic, boosting advert hits and revenue. What a twisted world we live in that rather than publishing something factual and with thought these guys publish garbage based on nothing more than a bar-graph and no education solely to generate hits regardless the gulible morons out there that would actually take his sentiment to heart...
But, it's business, right? "Nothing personal" to quote many a mobster while their victim bleeds to death...
Bugtrack should point out very clearly that it's Linux Open nature that causes such bugs to be openly exposed for the sake of fixing. We hide nothing and make no excuses - if there's a bug then we make sure we know about it and it gets fixed. No commercial OS like Microsoft or Solaris will sit there and publish every bug they find. 37 bugs for Win2000??? Last I heard it was over 65,000. Quite a site more than our measily 47...
Blender was first and foremost developed as an inhouse animation tool, being pretty isn't at the top of the list. Tools like Lightwave 3D and 3D Studio Max are serious tools that cram an absolutely amazing amount of functionality into a single 21" screen and woe to you if you screen is smaller. Blender is comparable. Here there can't be enough hands. Mouse and keyboard work together - the buttons you see are actually just a tiny part of the functionality of Blender - there's no way it could perform all the tasks it needed to perform with just mouse-clicks. The app has modeling, animation, post-production and everything inbetween and beyond. Frankly, I think they really did a good job cramming the buttons in there. Many of the buttons are actually miniature sliders - click and move your mouse left or right to change the value or type a value in. That's some really neat stuff. And it's rendering is very quick. No complaints on this side. It'd be nice if they went totally GPL - but, frankly, I couldn't care less. I've paid far more for tools that did far less...
BTW - There are command-line capabilities to explore as well as multi-node rendering. Nifty for a free animation suite.
If you want something easy for an absolute beginner, keep looking. I'm sure there's a lot of simple modeling and rendering tools out there. Many are actually front-ends to POV. But if you're used to a little complexity, Blender is a breeze to use and real neat to explore...
Hmmm, my main concern is that their government has also alocated the same frequencies for listening and we're both sitting there listening to the same "station" but no one's broadcasting. Figures...:)
Slashdot Mirror
Sheesh, I've had to deal with that working on my local server for some time now with Netscape and Mozilla. What I usually do when I'm actively doing work is set my cache to 0 on both memory and disk and flush the cache. When I'm done, I set the cache back for regular browsing.
I've actually left the cache off and really didn't notice too much of a slowdown - most of the sites I visit have pragma no cache set anyway.
I know, it's a pain in the arse, but until our overworked friends at Mozilla decide to disable caching for source requests, we'll have to deal with it. I don't even know if it's on the wishlist. If it is, please bump it up - webdevelopers who use Mozilla (me) would be very happy.
Mike
God I love starting responses like that. :)
Ever since AOL ditched the Netscape 4 codebase in favor of the AOL supported but still independent Mozilla code-base, I always figured that AOL and Netscape had gotten out of producing Netscape as a browser. To slap a Netscape icon on Mozilla and package in AIM does not make it Netscape. For all intents and purposes, Netscape died when Netscape Inc. opensourced it and the Mozilla crew tossed the old code-base and rewrote the thing in their image (a badly needed thing). I _am_ surprised that only now is the media catching on. What, do we have to hand-feed them now? Are they too lazy to keep up with stuff? Sheesh. Netscape is gone. No more. 4.77 is it. Netscape 6.0/6.1 is based on pre-beta free software - I'm ashamed that AOL did that. How dare they take a very incomplete and unready Open Source project and unleash it on the world as a "finished" project. Is this what goes on behind the closed doors of commercial software makers? "It's good enough - package it, give it a high version number and ship it." - what a crime. Because of that, people's attitude of Open Source software, and Netscape in general have plummetted. I sure as hell wouldn't use Netscape 6.* on Linux or Windows. BUT - I do use Mozilla 0.9 with great zeal and eagerly look forward to future releases. I've installed Mozilla 0.9 on several different platforms and have it out in the "wild" being used by my clients. I migrated from NN 4.77 to Mozilla 0.9 - so I missed most of the pre-alpha/beta stuff except my very brief foray into NN 6.0 (I promptly vomited that bad apple from my system). The guys at Mozilla are quickly doing final cleanup in preparation for the official Beta release - look at the updates on their site. It has the feeling of the final dusting and cleaning before a new house is sold. It's feature complete, rather stable (better now than Netscape and that's with Java, Javascript and CSS enabled) - and acceptably quick, all things considered. The primary focus on the 0.9 - 1.0 is final cleaning and _Optimization_ - following the regular development cycle of "Features first, then Debugging, then Optimization" I'd have to say that they're on the last legs of debugging and already in the midst of optimization. Future releases will be quicker, start up quicker and be stabler. Mozilla already has more features than IE by far - it's a powerful application platform where IE is just some cheesy Mosaic clone with a few improvements and OS integration.
In summery - Good Bye Netscape. It's been an interesting ride, but I'm glad it's over. Hello Mozilla. Your market share sucks, but since when does market share have anything to do with Open Sourse and Free software anyway? Of course, Mozilla now seems to be our best chance at keeping Microsoft from totally Microsoftizing the Internet. They've got their hooks in pretty deep - we'll see. If you've used an older version, try newer ones periodically. Migration from IE in inevitable. And, future versions of at least RedHat Linux will be shipping with only Mozilla and not Netscape (so they say). Lets hope more distros follow.
Please be aware that Mozilla is about producing a darn good browser (and more) that works on multiple systems. IE is about maintaining a monopoly. Do the math... Don't ditch your Netscape 4.77 for IE - give Mozilla a try. If it's too slow - give it a while and try again.
There's a difference between "ripping off ideas" and "ripping off code". Microsoft is more than welcome to jump in with it's own Linux distribution. It probably won't sell much, but they're still free to do it. They can even produce their own Jabber client. Or participate in any number of projects or base projects off existing ones. That's how it's done in the OSS world. The only hitch is if the original is GPL and they used code from the original, then their version has to be GPL too.
If, like some companies have tried to do mistakingly or on purpose, the code is closed up and is clearly based on GPL'd code, then you bet we'll be up in arms. If they like our ideas and decide to copy them, more power to them. That's what competition is about. If they like our code and steal it, then that's illegal and it doesn't matter if it's Microsoft or RedHat - there will be noise about it.
Mike
Proof is in the eyes of the beholder on something that largely lies with preferences, but I'll give it a go.
/.). I actually get work done, never experience crashes or lost data and that's while running largely beta software.
:) If you think I'm full of crap - well, only for the next few minutes.
Please be aware the MS hasn't created a thing - they buy out small projects (like how DOS and IE got started) and repackage them, tweak them and slap the MS label on it. Innovation to Bill is to see someone doing something neat and aquiring them, or as with Netscape, force them out of business.
I used C# as an example, not an endorsement. So, for me, the wind stays true. As for people saying one thing isn't needed because there are other ways, that's just plain human nature. Why IE when there first was Netscape. And both were based on Mosaic. I seriously doubt that MS "invented" SOAP. There's probably some sap somewhere who is fondling his big fat MS check and signing a ND agreement.
Stability - my wife can testify to the endless fustration, lost data and crashed computers at 4am that Windows was to me. That was at home on my three systems doing multimedia homework, and at school on any one of their NT workstations. Saving often doesn't account for lost inspiration when the moment has passed. Sure, you could blame the user, but remember Bill and his blue-screen of death presentation. Or the Win2K server crack-challenge that wouldn't stay up long enough to be cracked. But with Linux, my wife now sleeps soundly sans my ranting and foaming. So that remark was based on personal experience and opinion (as is most of the remarks made on
Which brings me to the "Bleeding Edge" point - you have a point with the recreation stuff, but to have a useable system, you need popular apps. To have a gui, you need, well, a windowing system. Wanna write a report in a wysiwyg prog? Well, there's where our "MS Office ripoffs" have come from. What's wrong with that? Our innovation is the fact that we created all this stuff mainly in our spare time and through open source cooperation - I'd have to say that's fairly innovative in itself. Bleeding edge isn't necessarily making a computer do a tapdance on the bar, but making it do something in a system that it previously didn't do in that system, which in our case is Linux. Mozilla is bleeding edge. Sure, IE can do a lot, but then, IE isn't on Linux. Additionally, Bleeding Edge can also mean developing alternatives to Microsoft under the gun of Microsoft and doing it successfully. Regardless of how you take it, if you like Microsoft and think they're "innovative", more power to you. That's your choice. Oh, and that indeed is a choice. The other is to use Linux. Something Microsoft would prefer you not do, but that you are able to do. The Bleeding Edge software that is being created on Linux isn't necessarily unique software - indeed some are dead knockoffs of other commercial packages (Gimp comes to mind) but it belongs to the community, not to a company. Linux a rehash of *nix? Perhaps. But what other *nix runs on virtually anything with a cpu? Hell, what other operating system, MS included runs on as many platforms. I'd call that innovative. OSS software got its features not through copying the code, but through serious volunteer development. And all this hard work is free for the rest of us. Tell me that's not Bleeding Edge. Even in your definition, OSS is a unique creature in the software world. It's true innovation is that it removes the shackles of closed, secretive development teams and brings about access to a resource of developers and information and help and examples that no closed source project can emulate.
But, once again, it's largely in the eye of the beholder. If you think Microsoft is truely innovative, then you're entitled to that totally wrong opinion.
Microsoft built itself up by stepping on the shoulders of others. It bought a cheap non-quite-*nix clone and sold it to IBM as their own. It cloned Mac and Xenix. It cloned WordPerfect. It cloned Netscape. It cloned OS/2 Warp. And it calls all this innovation and bleeding edge. You fault me then for calling the hard work of OSS developers bleeding edge too? Well, this probably won't turn you, but it's the best I could do 5 minutes before dinner...
Be well.
The cycle of software development (at least for OSS that I know of) seems to follow this pattern:
:). Sure, there's still a lot of debugging going on - that'll happen right up to and after the 1.0 release just like it happens with every other OSS project, Linux included, but the concentration now is making things more efficient and faster. While we probably won't see as quick a Mozilla as, say, Opera, it'll certainly be as quick as or faster than the Netscape 4 series, which for decent computers (or even slow ones) was fast enough. Work is also progressing on making startup faster. IE only seems to start up faster because the core of it starts up when MS Windows starts up. Mozilla and other apps don't have that luxury, but there are other tricks to get things cooking a little faster.
Features
Debugging
Optimization
Mozilla, as of v0.9 is now entering the serious Optimization faze. That's why it was a serious mistake for AOL to produce Netscape 6 based on Mozilla v0.6. Lotsa features, but lotsa bugs and virtually zero optimization. Bad Form, AOL. I'd be happy if AOL killed Netscape altogether - Mozilla certainly isn't dependent on Netscape - of course a few of the developers may have to find other jobs so I'll bite my tongue
Mozilla is also more than just a classic browser. It has to be to survive in the upcoming state of computing. Ideally, there will come a time when the only app you'll need is Mozilla. You'll have your Office apps, messenging, graphics and general applications rolled up into one shell. These apps will be able to either be located on your system, or remotely on servers. This may not set will with everyone, but then that's what freedom of choice is for.
If you're not satisfied with the speed of things but still like Mozilla, then jump in and help out. There can't be too much help. OSS projects are what you make of them - and as long as there are interested developers and users, the project will live on.
Does Linux matter anymore? We have Windows. Does Netscape matter anymore? We have IE. Does BSD matter anymore? We have Linux. Does C matter anymore? We have C++. Does C++ matter anymore? We have C#. Does Gnome matter anymore? We have KDE. Dude, listen to yourself. If you like Opera - knock yourself out. Mozilla lives because people are honestly interested in it. I'm interested in it. Not because it's better than so-n-so. There are features in Mozilla that extend it beyond just being a browser - in fact it seems to be heading towards the next generation of web-based application services via XUL. If you don't want all that jaz, grab Opera and be happy. But don't say the ship has passed - you don't say that about an Open Source project. Ships only pass commercial ventures. Hell, Windows has the basket of eggs when it comes to market-share. So does that mean the ship has passed for Linux? I couldn't care less if every commercial venture using Linux fails - as long as there is Open Source, I'm happy. For me, the ship is in and will remain so as long as I'm happy with the choice I've made. If you prefer Microsoft, or KDE or balloons in your ears - it's fine by me. That's the beauty about true freedom.
Please be aware that most of the software you use every day on your Linux box is pre-1.0. Even then, it's often better and more stable than any MS product. Most of the rest is some beta version of this or that - pretty much, to use Linux is to live with the bleeding edge. Just because Mozilla hasn't released a 1.0 product doesn't mean 0.9 sucks. Hell, check out the versioning of Windowmaker and Enlightenment. Or Bluefish. Better yet - the time it took for kernel 2.4 to be released. Does that mean that 2.2 sucks or that the ship has passed for Linux? Hell no - I still use 2.2 on my box. It suites me fine. One of these days I'll mosey around to getting it upgraded to 2.4 - but at my convenience. I'm in no hurry. I use Mozilla 0.9 as my primary browser, mail client and test platform for web applications development. It tickles my fancy. I'll continue using Mozilla because I like it. Its got bugs, but I can live with it. It may not be as fast as Opera, but my system kicks butt, so it's not such a big deal for me. But I'm the last person to critisize someone for using Opera or Konquerer. I use Opera on my win-boxes to test CSS layout. And IE 5 and 5.5. And even Netscape 4.77. (all but Mozilla strictly for testing purposes). If you think Mozilla has some problems, rather than complaining about the "ship passing", contribute to the project and make it better. Code, or debug, or whatnot. That's how Open Source works. There's no room for complaints without offers to help.
"Hey, great landing. The press is going mad over here. Just for kicks, we've decided to send you back up for another landing." Poor guys will end up hopping all over Mars. At least until something breaks. :)
That's funny sarcasm guys. I do think it's amazing that they were able to land this thing from millions of miles away and do it successfully. Imagine controling your remote control buggy with a lag time of minutes to hours. Heh, try flying your remote control airplane with the same lag time AND without actually being there to see it do it's thing. Pretty cool stuff they're doing.
Mike
I doubt the lawyers are stupid. They aren't banking on winning the law suit - but on a settlement, which seems all to often the case in these kinds of things (remember Microsoft's recent settlement?). A few million dollars to make it go away is worth it to Prodigy - public stocks are affected by lawsuits of any kind and Prodigy stands to loose hundreds of millions, lost oportunities and angry shareholders just for having lawsuits against it regardless of how outragious the lawsuit is. Sometimes it's just cheaper to pay the extortioners off and be done with it. Unfortunantly, a payoff sets a precedent for the BT lawyers that can be used in future lawsuits which could eventually solidify their "ownership" of hyperlinks just by perceived acknowledgement from the corperations settling out. I seriously doubt Prodigy will take this all the way to court and fear that common US corporate practices could very easily jepardize our freedom when it comes to seemingly open technology...
Mike
Find a project that you like. Read the code. Use the app. Play with it and tinker. Find something in the application that YOU would like to use yourself. Write it. Improve it. If it works for you, submit a patch to the maintainer. Don't feel hurt if it doesn't make it into the distro. Write something else - use it, improve it, submit it. Don't feel hurt if it doesn't make it into the distro and so forth. While you're doing all this writing, you're getting experience even if it's never used in the official release. Additionally, take a poke at the TODO list and challenge yourself. When you finally do get something included in the distro of whatever OSS project you've selected, it'll be worth it - you'll have written a lot of code, gotten a lot of experience, learned how to work with a distributed team of writers and hopefully had a blast doing it...
Mike
Hmmm, I wonder how it'll stand up to a Pit Bull...perhaps I should limit it's dog kicking job to those rats with big ears (yo quero taco) or that obnoquous yipping poodle my aunt keeps bringing over.
Okay - your cat keeps scratching at the sofa. Darned it, your aim with the water spray bottle isn't what it used to be, now your TV is smoking. Bring out Mr. Walker - "Kick the Cat!"
Disclaimer - "No real pets were used in this hypothetical situation - only stunt dogs and stunt cats"
Oh, I'm sorry. You must be miserable. Here, have a soothing glass of OpenGL and be free to write 3D apps on whatever platform you choose... :)
BTW - if you use Windows to write 3D and all the indepth programming that involves, why do you feel you have to use Linux to write quick text programs? Not that you shouldn't use Linux, but if you're going to use Linux, there's so much more you're missing if you're just writing quick text programs. It's kinda like driving a Ferrari in a school zone when the highway is right over there... And C++ just for text programs? Dude, if you want a quicky, do Perl or something. Isn't C++ a little bit of an overkill just for a measly text program?
Anyway, to each his own, but don't think for a moment that OpenGL is any kind of a Standard. It's a proprietory one platform OpenGL clone and that's all it will ever be. True, they've made great strides in quality from the first totally abysmal versions (which thankfully opened my eyes to OpenGL), but once again, if in the future you ever want to introduce portability into your applications, using DirectX is like shooting yourself in the foot...
Let's see, I think even my watch can run OpenGL/MesaGL code. Come on, if you want to use DickX, you have to use Microsoft Windows. There's no standard to it other than Microsoft's agenda. OpenGL ran fine on Win32, but no, MS couldn't have someone else succeeding on their platform. It's the same with Netscape. MS wants to dominate everything that runs on MS and will go to all ends to kill competition. OpenGL/MesaGL runs on more platforms than I can spit at - it's as close to a Standard as you'll come in 3D development. DirectX is just another Microsoft trap. Once you've developed in that, you'll be trapped in Microsoft and porting to another platform is sheer hell. IE - Lokisoft expended much effort porting Heavy Gear from DickX to OpenGL. Now it just needs to be tweaked a little to run on any of a number of platforms, including Microsoft.
But then, you know all this and are just stoking the flames, right?
-- I think, therefore I...Uhm, what was I saying?
Damn - now they bombed Japan with it.
The research team may have "good intentions", but all in all, when the chips fall, it's up to Microsoft how to use all that research, so regardless of how progressive the research is, it'll still be molded into Microsoft's embrace and extend philosophy and like Kerberos, they'll certainly attempt to make it so that only Win2K products can talk to Win2K products and to hell with everyone else, because, after all, they are the enemy. Please do not forget and always bear in mind - Microsoft isn't interested in competing, only in destroying the enemy at all costs and regardless if the DoJ is looking or not - if we followed their tactics the world would be one big nuclear parking lot populated only by those darned persistent roaches... They've even been legally declared as untrustworthy - so keep in mind, nothing they do that appears to be "good" is good for us, only for them. This isn't blind Microsoft bashing - this is an honest opinion after reading countless news articles, following the DoJ trials closely, reading press releases and watching Microsoft closely. To them, there is no level playing field - in their eyes, you either use Microsoft or they're going to make it so you have to use Microsoft. No room for other players at all.
After scanning the messages in response to the report, it's all very, well "who cares" with few exceptions. No crying here, and no surprise either.
But you're right - as long as we keep trying to piggyback on corporate shoulders, we'll always get bucked sooner or later. Hit up Jabber for IM. Use Vorbis instead of MP3. Use Icecast instead of Shoutcast. While it wasn't true a little while ago, there are now quality alternatives to a lot of the stuff we get used to that don't carry the weight and consequances of corporate decision-making. I used AIM progs to communicate with a pal. Now he'll communicate with me using Jabber. Big deal. No loss, and big gain - as long as these companies keep doing what they're doing, the Open Souce alternatives are going to win and there will come a time when these corporate companies are going to be all alone with no one to harrass... So, hurray AOL. Thanks for giving me the motivation to use Free (as in Free Speach) alternatives to your pathetic services...
Mike
Frankly, if I spend $500+ bucks for a processors, I'd be less inclined to take risks with it. Cheap processors on the other hand make it easier for us to experiment because if we burn one up it's no great loss and replacing it isn't a wallet-emptier.
When I spend a lot of money on a CPU specifically for performance, I tend to lean towards the reliability of it's stated speed rather than the risk and relative unreliability of overclocking - after all, I've already got performance. But if I want to see just how far I can push a CPU - well, I expect unreliability and I expect to crater some chips. That's part of the fun...
Mike
A couple of things to consider.
1. Companies create products for target markets. HP is targetting the current and most lucrative market - the Windows user market. It's nothing personal, just business.
2. If they're allowing Windows to print to a Linux print server, then perhaps they are using Samba or an equivalent. Linux can print to a Samba print share. Dunno about the others, but I assume you could get in an hack it a little. HP may not give support or advice on printing this way, but that's what the How-To's are for.
I'd like to see HP come around and publish documents on configuring alternative OS's to print to their print server, but they've picked their market. They've committed support personel qualified in supporting that market. And for some reason they've decided not to target other less lucrative markets. We've dealt with that from the beginning, no use whining about it now. It's good that they're using Linux rather than NT for a product. If you want them to document Linux client-side setup and hire a support staff qualified in Linux client setup, don't flame them - just let them know you're a Linux user or part of an office of Linux users that would like to be supported - business is determined by demand (which is why the DEA will never win), so if they feel there's enough of a demand they'll surely capitulate...
Be aware that the average Linux user is miles ahead of the average Windows user in knowledge and capability in system management and may very well not need HP to hire a support staff for Linux. Documentation would be helpfull, but redundant - we've got enough of that already.
No one will ever get an accurate count or prediction - which drives business types crazy. Everyone has their own ideas, but since most distributions are purchased and installed on many computers per disk (numbers which aren't reported to anyone), downloaded and copied to media for cheap resale ala Cheapbytes, and just plain downloaded there's no way to make a comparison based on recorded sales and revenue. Revenue will always lag way behind Windows because of the outrageous pricing and licensing Windows has. Lets see - $1.99 for a Cheapbytes disk vs $92 OEM for Win98 (much more retail) - a graph like that would make Windows look like it's wildly more successfull than Linux when viewed by the uneducated. Labs will typically get one Linux disk (like the one I'm providing for the local HighSchool labs) and stick it on dozens of computers. There's no effective way to provide exhaustive accounting on that. And there are those few crazies that role their own. And lets not forget those that don't feel compelled to upgrade with every kernel release. Linux is friendly that way - many systems have kernel 2.0 and are still kicking with no reason to upgrade. Windows practically forces you to upgrade. How many 3.11 systems are still hanging around? Or NT 3.5? Anyone trying to get a grasp on the numbers of Linux installations will fail miserably, which is kind-of a shame - since much of the cool software we'd like to have like Quicken or Quickbooks are written by people who haven't a clue when it comes to trends and only read the numbers on the stats. Oh well, better will come around and when these guys pull their heads out they'll be too late and quickly out of business...
I was refering to the fact that the Netscape vulnerability is a flaw in the Java VM which is the baby of Sun. Even if Netscape authored the VM they use, it's still a very close approximation of what Sun wants. In fact, just a straight Java VM can run this guy's code. I'm sure a little tweaking of the code will expose a similar problem in IE, but it's still largely a Java issue. Sorry if my wording was confusing. Secondly, (disclaimer - personal opinion) unless it's agreeable or comparible to other Open Source licenses like GPL and possibly (no flames) QPL it's not really Open Source. NDA's and restrictive proprietory licensing, IMHO, disqualifies it as Open Source. But then, that's strictly my personal opinion. The poster made a troll against Open Source that could easily be a symptom of popular opinion of the less informed and I tried to clear it up by indicating that Netscape and Java are not Open Source, and while the exploit is in Netscape, it's really a Java issue - fixable by turning off java. Hopefully the Netscape and Java guys are paying attention and publishes a fix. Most of the Linux/Netscape users I run across use Netscape with Java turned off, myself included. I feel with this vulnerability even more people will be turning Java off, but web-java is about useless and gimicky anyway (with few exceptions).
Hey Troll, this is yesterday's news. The newer versions of Netscape may have pieces of Mozilla in it, but that doesn't mean that your friendly neighborhood Netscape is Open Source. Secondly, this is a flaw in the Java Virtual Machine based on Sun's implimentation and if I remember, Java is not Open Source though there are OS clones. If you want to count eggs you'll find that most of the problems related to Open Source actually have to do with commercial and proprietory software and don't forget to count your open source blessings while browsing 64% of the internet - which seems to be an example of why Open Source _DOES_ work. While you're the type to point fingers at a little glich that you haven't even taken the time to find out exactly where the problem is coming from, others welcome this kind of input and use it to make a better product. While commercial interprises try to hide their faults (65,000+ in Windows 2000 - Another Example Why Closed Source Software Doesn't Work), typical Open Source projects are happy to post discovered bugs - why? Because that's how they get fixed. Sheesh... It is clear that the guy who discovered this loophole in Java is doing us a great favor by releasing the source code and informing the community as a whole of the problem. So thanks to Him.
Moderators - this is extremely off topic - please remove this thread altogether...
> It's in Real or Windows Media Player - bleah.
Okay, we've got a decent audio-streamer in Icecast, anyone working an Open Souce alternative to Real? That is both server & player though I'd like to see cross client compatibility like Icecast has...
Sorry for the Off Topic post, but it seems everything that matters to us like this bit of IBM news or a Linus interview is being broadcast in Real and nothing appears to be in the works to rectify that... Naturally, we'd have to convince people like IBM to use the OS alternative, but then an OS client could just as well be written to accept Real streams, right?
Mike
Considering that the German SAMBA is, well, German, and our Samba is worldwide and has been around for a while, and considering that the German SAMBA is a banking program and our Samba is a server program for Winblows/Linux network integration, it's likely this will be shit-canned in court or will become a travesty of justice - depending on how the judge feels. If I wrote a banking program and called it SAMBA and marketed it in Germany, well they may have a horn to toot. But it is impossible to come up with a 100% unique name for a totally unrelated product that will make every nation happy, and unjustified to expect our Samba to have a different name for each nation it's used in. These people need to get a life. Sue me because I'm using Samba? Get real... Sheesh. I thought Microsoft was stupid...
c) In dire need to pay all their bumbling lawyers and legal fees without cutting into regular profits. Hey, the Judge said they were untrustworthy - I wouldn't put it past them...
Heh, I was thinking the same thing as I went over to read the article. Well, I enjoy reading this crap - I love people proclaiming to be experts smucking themselves in public. But, given is pro-microsoft book and his other articles like "Microsoft Greed is Good", I sense that he's doing nothing more than writing a quicky column based on the very last site he went to with 0 (zero) research only to meet a deadline and get something published. ABC on the other hand publishes his crap because they know it'll get to Slashdot and they'll get a ton of traffic, boosting advert hits and revenue. What a twisted world we live in that rather than publishing something factual and with thought these guys publish garbage based on nothing more than a bar-graph and no education solely to generate hits regardless the gulible morons out there that would actually take his sentiment to heart...
But, it's business, right? "Nothing personal" to quote many a mobster while their victim bleeds to death...
Bugtrack should point out very clearly that it's Linux Open nature that causes such bugs to be openly exposed for the sake of fixing. We hide nothing and make no excuses - if there's a bug then we make sure we know about it and it gets fixed. No commercial OS like Microsoft or Solaris will sit there and publish every bug they find. 37 bugs for Win2000??? Last I heard it was over 65,000. Quite a site more than our measily 47...
Blender was first and foremost developed as an inhouse animation tool, being pretty isn't at the top of the list. Tools like Lightwave 3D and 3D Studio Max are serious tools that cram an absolutely amazing amount of functionality into a single 21" screen and woe to you if you screen is smaller. Blender is comparable. Here there can't be enough hands. Mouse and keyboard work together - the buttons you see are actually just a tiny part of the functionality of Blender - there's no way it could perform all the tasks it needed to perform with just mouse-clicks. The app has modeling, animation, post-production and everything inbetween and beyond. Frankly, I think they really did a good job cramming the buttons in there. Many of the buttons are actually miniature sliders - click and move your mouse left or right to change the value or type a value in. That's some really neat stuff. And it's rendering is very quick. No complaints on this side. It'd be nice if they went totally GPL - but, frankly, I couldn't care less. I've paid far more for tools that did far less...
BTW - There are command-line capabilities to explore as well as multi-node rendering. Nifty for a free animation suite.
If you want something easy for an absolute beginner, keep looking. I'm sure there's a lot of simple modeling and rendering tools out there. Many are actually front-ends to POV. But if you're used to a little complexity, Blender is a breeze to use and real neat to explore...
Hmmm, my main concern is that their government has also alocated the same frequencies for listening and we're both sitting there listening to the same "station" but no one's broadcasting. Figures... :)