Not only is there a Unix History tree, a friend of mine and I have been putting together a whole computer history tree. Check it out at comp-hist.sourceforge.net.
>>On the other hand, we have DWG, which is a fairly >>rich format that deals with the description of 3D >>objects. Could decoding a file format that deals >>with text and it's presentation really be that >>much more difficult to reverse engineer?
>Well considering DOC can store ANYTHING - >including the description of 3D objects yes
OK, about a minute ago you said in an earlier post that.doc wasn't that hard to decode and now you say it is. Well, which is it?
Yes it's prettier, but nothing else. This is due to the fact that it/is/ lilo, only with a nice GUI pasted on top of it and support for BeOS hacked in.
If I remember correctly from all the sources I've read, if the licence is BSD or X-ish, anyone can make a licence change to future versions. For GPL-ish licences, everyone who has contributed more than 20 lines of code to the program must agree to change the licence. However,/all/ licence changes apply only to future versions of the software. All versions out and under a licence must forever stay under that licence (hence OpenSSH)
OK, here's how I am working to get Linux into my school (Mid School, but part of a K-12 private school). I started by making friends with the computer department. Then I wrangled for a couple months to get permission to put an old 586 w/ Linux in the library to demonstrate. The next step is to get the unix-knowing comp teacher (there's one on every campus, trust me) to bring the iMac w/ MacOS and Linux from the Upper School to the MS Comp Lab. The cummulation of all of this will be a proposal I will submit to the head of the comp department proposing phasing in X-terminals instead of Win boxes (note that they're in the process of trying to upgrade the three comp labs). Anyway, just my $0.02 -Scott Fenton
QT may be useful for things other than KDE, but since RHat doesn't make anything on QT, it makes it kind of pointless to distribute it (kinda like giving an engine but not a car).
We're Generation Y (don't know where I heard that first, but it came up in Time recently).
Re:What Mozilla is (for those who don't know)
on
Mozilla M10 Released
·
· Score: 1
Then Mozilla gains market share as Linux does
Don't forget also, Moz1 =! NS5. Other people can use Gecko to build their own browser. These little browsers will push Moz on very effectivly. There are even musings that IE5 for mac uses gecko!
This isn't supposed to be ready to browse with yet... BTW, what about Mozilla's html composer? I'm asking myself..., see, I'm starting to get excited about this. I guess it's reasonable to assume I'll be browsing with Mozilla in another 2-3 months or so, but still composing with Netscape composer.
It's accually pretty good. Mozilla Composer is to Netscape Composer right now what Mozilla Navigator is to Netscape Navigator (as in, good, but not prime time yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Acually,it does.
Why not try?
That's just becausewe haven't gotten around to adding them yet. If you have info on them, make a data file.
Try this.
Not only is there a Unix History tree, a friend of mine and I have been putting together a whole computer history tree. Check it out at comp-hist.sourceforge.net.
Which SCO holds a controlling interest in.
Well, one thing I would like to see out of this is the open sourcing to the early unixes, which SCO currently holds the rights to.
/I know a signifigant number of people still running 3.3.6 because 4.0 was more of a beta than anything./
/was/ a beta?
Um, didn't they say that 4.0.0
What if you used just an IP address (eg no DNS entry)
>>On the other hand, we have DWG, which is a fairly
.doc wasn't that hard to decode and now you say it is. Well, which is it?
>>rich format that deals with the description of 3D
>>objects. Could decoding a file format that deals >>with text and it's presentation really be that >>much more difficult to reverse engineer?
>Well considering DOC can store ANYTHING -
>including the description of 3D objects yes
OK, about a minute ago you said in an earlier post that
>The .DOC format is documented on the MSDN CD's
.doc is on the MSDN CDs. Just enough is kept out to make it impossible to build an office clone from it.
The problem there is that only part of
qt header files my friend, qt header files
acually, /they/ care
But the part of the GPL that makes it GPL is the viral clause. RMS (with all due respect) will never remove it.
Not true. You forgot three letters. AMD
Yes it's prettier, but nothing else. This is due to the fact that it /is/ lilo, only with a nice GUI pasted on top of it and support for BeOS hacked in.
If I remember correctly from all the sources I've read, if the licence is BSD or X-ish, anyone can make a licence change to future versions. For GPL-ish licences, everyone who has contributed more than 20 lines of code to the program must agree to change the licence. However, /all/ licence changes apply only to future versions of the software. All versions out and under a licence must forever stay under that licence (hence OpenSSH)
OK, here's how I am working to get Linux into my school (Mid School, but part of a K-12 private school). I started by making friends with the computer department. Then I wrangled for a couple months to get permission to put an old 586 w/ Linux in the library to demonstrate. The next step is to get the unix-knowing comp teacher (there's one on every campus, trust me) to bring the iMac w/ MacOS and Linux from the Upper School to the MS Comp Lab. The cummulation of all of this will be a proposal I will submit to the head of the comp department proposing phasing in X-terminals instead of Win boxes (note that they're in the process of trying to upgrade the three comp labs). Anyway, just my $0.02
-Scott Fenton
I thought that was !100
You forgot the 94-95 'clipper' proposal and the (*cough* idiotic *cough* pointless) CDA in 1996.
QT may be useful for things other than KDE, but since RHat doesn't make anything on QT, it makes it kind of pointless to distribute it (kinda like giving an engine but not a car).
Probably all of them. Plus Linus, of course.
We're Generation Y (don't know where I heard that first, but it came up in Time recently).
Then Mozilla gains market share as Linux does
Don't forget also, Moz1 =! NS5. Other people can use Gecko to build their own browser. These little browsers will push Moz on very effectivly. There are even musings that IE5 for mac uses gecko!
This isn't supposed to be ready to browse with yet... BTW, what about Mozilla's html composer? I'm asking myself..., see, I'm starting to get excited about this. I guess it's reasonable to assume I'll be browsing with Mozilla in another 2-3 months or so, but still composing with Netscape composer.
It's accually pretty good. Mozilla Composer is to Netscape Composer right now what Mozilla Navigator is to Netscape Navigator (as in, good, but not prime time yet.