It supports PNG enough as to substitute GIF in any case.
Your comment makes no sense in this context.
IE doesn't support alpha transparency in PNGs, and that's substandard on their part, but I don't think the web would change much if it did unless everybody started bloating their sites with transparent effects where it is not needed.
You couldn't be more wrong. If people could use PNG the way it's supposed to be used, we could have rounded corner graphics that don't suck, change background colors without having to modify all images to match, have different background colors on different pages without the need for extra graphics for each different color background, allow user-selectable page colors, et cetera. It would actually save a lot of bandwidth.
As it is, there is very little benefit to using PNG in most cases, so people don't switch.
And PNGs with alpha-transparency are not "bloated" by any means.
IE does not support the #1 most useful aspect of PNG, namely, alpha transparency. Without alpha transparency, you may as well use JPEG or GIF in most circumstances.
Indeed, the web would be much more beautiful if IE supported alpha transparency in PNGs.
The cameras you speak of are only in public areas, where there is simply no expectation of privacy at all anyway. Is a camera somehow more invasive than other people? Maybe a little, by the fact that it makes a (near) perfect, permanent recording, whereas peoples' memories are "fuzzy." It is also more invasive by the fact that the government is doing it, although police walk around in public areas too, so...
No, 1984 would require surveilance in the privacy of your own home, tracking your sexual habits, hobbies, et cetera. Keeping track of everywhere you go, your political opinions, and taking action against you for them. It will be 1984 when your television records YOU.
Hehe:) Apache has had several relatively high-profile security problems in the past year or so. Sendmail's track record used to be pretty terrible, and in fact, IIRC, the very first Internet worm targeted a Sendmail vulnerability. Anyway, Apache has had several remotely exploitable vulnerabilities in recent months. I believe only specific configurations were vulnerable.
Apache powers close to 70% of the web servers yet has not had ONE single episode of an exploit that matched the amount of damage that IIS exploits have done.
Exactly! That is because it isn't even close to the piece of utter trash that IIS is. In its most embarrassing times, Apache takes IIS to the cleaners! Hence the smiley face in my previous post:) Even when times are rough for many OSS projects, they're still pretty good times:)
Apache and sendmail can be acquired for zero cost. If one could (legally) get MS Windows XP with IE for zero cost as well, then it would be in the same boat as Apache/sendmail.
Conversely, you can pay for Apache/Sendmail, packaged as part of another product or by itself, with support, etc., and the vendor would then have the same responsibilities as MS has for its software.
Eg. if there's a(nother*) major Apache hole, and RedHat fails to deliver the fix to customers, or if RedHat continued shipping their OS with wu-ftpd, they could very easily be held responsible for not making enough effort at mitigating the risks their customers face.
* Lately, it seems like Apache has become the new Sendmail:D
No. That is totally inaccurate. This is a question of negligence, specifically, extreme, actionable negligence. Many companies have been successfully sued for extreme negligence. I believe there are legal definitions that define what constitutes extreme negligence.
Sometimes juries allow negligence laws to be abused, eg. the McDonald's coffee fiasco*, but that a slippery slope does not make.
* Yes, I have read about the whole case. No, just because the coffee was extremely hot does not make McDonald's liable. Good coffee _should_ be extremely fucking hot. The only negligence going on there was an old woman squeezing a styrofoam cup between her legs, a woman too old to jump up immediately to mitigate the damage. The case was won because the jury sympathized with the old woman and because McDonald's handled the case very callously. IMO, McDonald's deserved it, but it still constitutes an abuse of the law.
I don't agree here. I would buy their packages just for convenience (5$/month... peanuts) even if the whole thing was LGPLed.
I would too, so perhaps you're right. I guess they don't think so, though. In fact, if they didn't break their promise, I would still be paying the $5 / month just to support them.
Gotta think about this license thing a little more before I take out the credit card, though...
Well, they do have a good product... I would consider spending the money again, but their broken promise would weigh heavily into my decision.
No problem. They had me fooled before too. I subscribed right away, because they were talking the talk, but then nothing ever came of it.
I'm not surprised though, as I don't think their business model would work otherwise. It's rather unfortuneate. They've done some good work, and their developers seem like alright guys, not making good on a promise tarnishes their rep.
They seem to be branching out; perhaps if/when their WineX product becomes only a small part of their business, they will contribute more back to Wine.
I'm sure Google will release code that is interesting, ie. show how their search engine works on a technology level, but I doubt they will release code that would enable someone else to build another Google-quality engine without doing their own work. For example, their pageranking algorithms are mostly understood, but I doubt they will reveal how to finely tune the process as Google has done.
Of course, I could be wrong, I couldn't even RTFA...
However, don't complain about them using the original Wine code under the license it was distributed with, instead complain about their broken promises, et cetera, which you pointed out.
You are very misinformed. Their code is not open by any stretch of the imagination. You cannot modify it, distribute it, or include it in anything else, ie. their code is unusable by the open source community, including the original Wine project.
And no, AFAIK, they do not send a lot of patches upstream. They said they would, but have so far failed to send any patches that are of significant value.
Yeah, many people agree with you about Transgaming, and I understand and mostly agree. However, the original Wine license allowed them to do this, so there's really no point in complaining.
Transgaming has chosen a business-model that requires them to keep their source closed. I'm not sure they have a viable alternative for running a for-profit business.
So, I think the answer is absolutely no, they will never work with the open source community. They will continue to sell useful software to those willing to buy it.
Personally, I see Transgaming as a necessary evil, for a lot of people. They are helping many ditch Windows completely, while enabling them to still enjoy their #1 hobby.
Next you'll be telling us that it isn't wrong to treat your customers as criminals/the enemy... Oh... right, nevermind:)
Seriously, what you said may sound paranoid, but it's also the most logical, simple explanation. What they want is for people to buy the album and related albums as many times as possible. Mixed CDs? No! You buy Greatest Hits albums. Et cetera...
I'm not denying the existence of this bug, but we NEVER WITNESSED THIS BUG.
Mail.app has had exceptionally buggy IMAP support. Eg. it would hang when changing folders, often, similar to the Thunderbird bug you describe except we saw it all the time. The latest versions of Mail.app are finally pretty good.
API's are a black box: you pass them values, they return some.
Hahahahahahaha!:)
Hold on... HAHAHAHAHAHA!
If only that were true! If only that were true...
When getting into any serious programming task, even something small, ie. < 1k lines of code, I always end up looking through the source of some part of the API I'm using.
Actually, at my (admittedly small) company, we have already standardized on Mozilla Thunderbird for email. There _are_ some bugs, but they are easier to live with than the shortcomings of other, lesser email software.
We even use it on the Macs, which came with... Mail.app? iMail.app? whatever... We use it on the Macs, because it just does IMAP better. It still amazes me how poorly most email clients handle IMAP.
Thunderbird also supports TLS for all mail communications, which is very nice to have out of the box support for in free software.
Bullshit. If you're a non-programmer using PHP, you'll follow an example. If you're a non-programmer using Perl, you'll follow an example. You don't have to understand why abstraction is good, or even understand that there is any abstraction going on at all. That's what's so damn nice about DBI, it gives you a nice abstraction layer without any added complexity.
But please, if 80% of PHP "programmers" don't understand programming, please do everything in your power to keep them using PHP:P
Holy shit man, sorry for offending you so much that you marked me a foe... I'm sorry if I misunderstood a bit, but my point that it can be done "good enough" is still valid. Most people won't care if they have to downsample to 2 channels.
You are correct, of course, that recording 5.1 in analog is a problem. However, if DVD-A or SCDA catch on and decryption is too difficult, recording 5.1 won't stay a problem for long, heh:)
Back to decryption... If decryption will be possible in software, it will be crackable relatively easily. Will there be / is there any consumer software that can play these formats, where the decryption is done in software, not hardware? If so, game over. If not, then the utility of these formats is severely degraded vs. what people are currently used to.
Meh, in any case, I'll be refraining from buying any of this shit, and I'll encourage others to do the same.
Someone knows how it works, considering they are made by people... Ok, duh... but the point is that if anyone knows how it works, it won't stay secret forever. After that, it's just a matter of extracting keys. And if the files can be decoded with software, then ripping with software will be possible.
And the analog hole is always an option. I don't know what you're smoking by saying that most consumer soundcards can't record two-channel audio very well... That's how I made my first MP3s back in 97, in stereo. When I got the levels right, I couldn't tell the difference between them and the ones I ripped digitally later.
That's right, consumer soundcard and it could record stereo, and do so with no noticable noise or loss of audio quality.
Fucking good enough for me, and good enough for 99.9% of other people.
Eh? This is perhaps a few characters shorter than the same thing in Perl, but the Perl version would have an abstracted database interface. This is just plain sick.
Besides, size isn't the point, simplicity and ease of use are. Both are equally simple and easy, while the Perl version is much more powerful and elegant.
mysql_connect? mysql_select_db? mysql_query? Ewww! You are hard-coding for a specific database everywhere. That is disgusting. Doesn't PHP have an abstraction layer for database queries?
Let's get even stupider...
#!/usr/bin/perl
use DBI;
DBI->connect("dbi:mysql:host:db", "u", "p") ->do("UPDATE users SET pwn3d=1 WHERE lang_pref='PHP'");
Lol, I see an AC already did almost the exact same thing:)
Anyway, the point is, PHP simply does not make accessing databases any easier. That is an unfortunate myth believed by many PHP fans.
That is patently ridiculous. PHP is not in any way shape or form like a lightweight Java. Java was built with OO in mind, while PHP was built as a quick hack without even variable scoping. PHP is what the bastard child of Perl and Qbasic would look like.
They are polar opposites.
Java was engineered from the ground up to be a powerful programming language, while PHP was built as a quick hack for quick and dirty web stuff.
Frankly, I don't like either of them as they currently are.
Slashdot Mirror
It also requires delivering a modified page to IE users, or some javascript.
Your comment makes no sense in this context.
IE doesn't support alpha transparency in PNGs, and that's substandard on their part, but I don't think the web would change much if it did unless everybody started bloating their sites with transparent effects where it is not needed.
You couldn't be more wrong. If people could use PNG the way it's supposed to be used, we could have rounded corner graphics that don't suck, change background colors without having to modify all images to match, have different background colors on different pages without the need for extra graphics for each different color background, allow user-selectable page colors, et cetera. It would actually save a lot of bandwidth.
As it is, there is very little benefit to using PNG in most cases, so people don't switch.
And PNGs with alpha-transparency are not "bloated" by any means.
Indeed, the web would be much more beautiful if IE supported alpha transparency in PNGs.
Cheers.
No, 1984 would require surveilance in the privacy of your own home, tracking your sexual habits, hobbies, et cetera. Keeping track of everywhere you go, your political opinions, and taking action against you for them. It will be 1984 when your television records YOU.
Hehe :) Apache has had several relatively high-profile security problems in the past year or so. Sendmail's track record used to be pretty terrible, and in fact, IIRC, the very first Internet worm targeted a Sendmail vulnerability. Anyway, Apache has had several remotely exploitable vulnerabilities in recent months. I believe only specific configurations were vulnerable.
Apache powers close to 70% of the web servers yet has not had ONE single episode of an exploit that matched the amount of damage that IIS exploits have done.
Exactly! That is because it isn't even close to the piece of utter trash that IIS is. In its most embarrassing times, Apache takes IIS to the cleaners! Hence the smiley face in my previous post :) Even when times are rough for many OSS projects, they're still pretty good times :)
Cheers.
Conversely, you can pay for Apache/Sendmail, packaged as part of another product or by itself, with support, etc., and the vendor would then have the same responsibilities as MS has for its software.
Eg. if there's a(nother*) major Apache hole, and RedHat fails to deliver the fix to customers, or if RedHat continued shipping their OS with wu-ftpd, they could very easily be held responsible for not making enough effort at mitigating the risks their customers face.
* Lately, it seems like Apache has become the new Sendmail :D
Sometimes juries allow negligence laws to be abused, eg. the McDonald's coffee fiasco*, but that a slippery slope does not make.
* Yes, I have read about the whole case. No, just because the coffee was extremely hot does not make McDonald's liable. Good coffee _should_ be extremely fucking hot. The only negligence going on there was an old woman squeezing a styrofoam cup between her legs, a woman too old to jump up immediately to mitigate the damage. The case was won because the jury sympathized with the old woman and because McDonald's handled the case very callously. IMO, McDonald's deserved it, but it still constitutes an abuse of the law.
I would too, so perhaps you're right. I guess they don't think so, though. In fact, if they didn't break their promise, I would still be paying the $5 / month just to support them.
Gotta think about this license thing a little more before I take out the credit card, though ...
Well, they do have a good product... I would consider spending the money again, but their broken promise would weigh heavily into my decision.
No problem. They had me fooled before too. I subscribed right away, because they were talking the talk, but then nothing ever came of it.
I'm not surprised though, as I don't think their business model would work otherwise. It's rather unfortuneate. They've done some good work, and their developers seem like alright guys, not making good on a promise tarnishes their rep.
They seem to be branching out; perhaps if/when their WineX product becomes only a small part of their business, they will contribute more back to Wine.
Cheers.
Of course, I could be wrong, I couldn't even RTFA...
However, don't complain about them using the original Wine code under the license it was distributed with, instead complain about their broken promises, et cetera, which you pointed out.
Cheers!
And no, AFAIK, they do not send a lot of patches upstream. They said they would, but have so far failed to send any patches that are of significant value.
Transgaming has chosen a business-model that requires them to keep their source closed. I'm not sure they have a viable alternative for running a for-profit business.
So, I think the answer is absolutely no, they will never work with the open source community. They will continue to sell useful software to those willing to buy it.
Personally, I see Transgaming as a necessary evil, for a lot of people. They are helping many ditch Windows completely, while enabling them to still enjoy their #1 hobby.
But I still don't particularly like them :-/
Next you'll be telling us that it isn't wrong to treat your customers as criminals/the enemy... Oh... right, nevermind :)
Seriously, what you said may sound paranoid, but it's also the most logical, simple explanation. What they want is for people to buy the album and related albums as many times as possible. Mixed CDs? No! You buy Greatest Hits albums. Et cetera...
I'm not denying the existence of this bug, but we NEVER WITNESSED THIS BUG.
Mail.app has had exceptionally buggy IMAP support. Eg. it would hang when changing folders, often, similar to the Thunderbird bug you describe except we saw it all the time. The latest versions of Mail.app are finally pretty good.
Hahahahahahaha! :)
Hold on... HAHAHAHAHAHA!
If only that were true! If only that were true...
When getting into any serious programming task, even something small, ie. < 1k lines of code, I always end up looking through the source of some part of the API I'm using.
We even use it on the Macs, which came with... Mail.app? iMail.app? whatever... We use it on the Macs, because it just does IMAP better. It still amazes me how poorly most email clients handle IMAP.
Thunderbird also supports TLS for all mail communications, which is very nice to have out of the box support for in free software.
YMMV.
But please, if 80% of PHP "programmers" don't understand programming, please do everything in your power to keep them using PHP :P
You are correct, of course, that recording 5.1 in analog is a problem. However, if DVD-A or SCDA catch on and decryption is too difficult, recording 5.1 won't stay a problem for long, heh :)
Back to decryption... If decryption will be possible in software, it will be crackable relatively easily. Will there be / is there any consumer software that can play these formats, where the decryption is done in software, not hardware? If so, game over. If not, then the utility of these formats is severely degraded vs. what people are currently used to.
Meh, in any case, I'll be refraining from buying any of this shit, and I'll encourage others to do the same.
And the analog hole is always an option. I don't know what you're smoking by saying that most consumer soundcards can't record two-channel audio very well... That's how I made my first MP3s back in 97, in stereo. When I got the levels right, I couldn't tell the difference between them and the ones I ripped digitally later.
That's right, consumer soundcard and it could record stereo, and do so with no noticable noise or loss of audio quality.
Fucking good enough for me, and good enough for 99.9% of other people.
Besides, size isn't the point, simplicity and ease of use are. Both are equally simple and easy, while the Perl version is much more powerful and elegant.
mysql_connect? mysql_select_db? mysql_query? Ewww! You are hard-coding for a specific database everywhere. That is disgusting. Doesn't PHP have an abstraction layer for database queries?
:)
Let's get even stupider...
#!/usr/bin/perl
use DBI;
DBI->connect("dbi:mysql:host:db", "u", "p")
->do("UPDATE users SET pwn3d=1 WHERE lang_pref='PHP'");
Lol, I see an AC already did almost the exact same thing
Anyway, the point is, PHP simply does not make accessing databases any easier. That is an unfortunate myth believed by many PHP fans.
They are polar opposites.
Java was engineered from the ground up to be a powerful programming language, while PHP was built as a quick hack for quick and dirty web stuff.
Frankly, I don't like either of them as they currently are.