I'm amazed that so many slashdotters don't understand that companies have to pay their bills and most employees don't work for free.
Not my problem.
Seriously, if the paradigm shift has indeed begun (and many think it has) towards an Open Source model for mass-appeal software, how is it the user's concern how software vendors stay afloat? That is something for the vendors to figure out.
Whether the vendors want things to change is wholly irrelevant. What the users want is ultimately what will decide under what circumstances software is distributed and sold. And if those users decide that Open Source is what they want, all the whining in the world by proprietary software houses is going to amount to squat.
I forgot that I, as a Linux user/advocate, am not allowed to believe in something. I'm supposed to just be a good boy, and buy the closed-ware from the nice man at the counter.
I forgot that only anti-Linux people are allowed to bash others' choices/beliefs.
I forgot that for a Linux user to even argue a point with a closed-ware advocate is a sin of the highest sort. We're just supposed to shut up and take our lumps.
I will do that now. Excuse me for having an opinion. Sorry.
NTFS is pretty good, but it fragments pretty bad. Then again, ext2 also fragments quite a bit.
vxfs (Veritas' file system) seems to fragment hardly at all, and actually HPFS (the OS/2 native file system) does quite well at resisting fragmentation, plus it has the handy 'extended attributes' built in to the file system for file type information, custom icons, etc.
If only HPFS has security, journaling and open source...
--
Re:QT is free (beer) software
on
qt 2.0 released
·
· Score: 1
Sometimes you just want to (must to) write some commercial software and then QT just isn't the option.
Pardon me, but this seems *extremely* hypocritical. You want to write binary-only software (presumably for pay), and you criticize Troll for wanting you to pay them for their software.
Despite its flaws, that is probably the best thing about the QPL; it discourages closed software, and makes those who would write closed software pay for the privilege. For that reason, I like it better than the LGPL (but I still prefer plain old GPL).
--
Re:So when will we see the new KDE?
on
qt 2.0 released
·
· Score: 1
As the KDE team is made up of volunteers, they don't have a scheduled release date, AFAIK. I've played with the stuff on CVS recently, though, and my (un)educated guess would be late this year or early next year for KDE 2.0.
It really is shaping up to be a nice package. Already, at pre-alpha stage, you can see the vast improvement of konqueror over kfm. When you pick up an item in the current kfm, there is a noticeable delay, and some disk thrashing. When you pick up an konqueror object, *bang*, you have it immediately. The drag-and-drop should be very fast and smooth.
Currently, most things compile (the switch from Qt 1.4x to 2.x caused a bit of a setback in this regard, but it of course had to be done some time). I believe the current thought is to bundle KOffice with KDE 2.0. KOffice is shaping up to be a commercial-grade office productivity suite. KWord looks very, very nice, and should have most, if not all, of the functionality of the big boys (plus DTP functionality). KPresenter is a presentation program vis-a-vis PowerPoint. KIllustrator is a Corel Draw-type vector graphics program. There are a number of other smaller programs in there. The only thing that probably is a bit feature-starved (from my brief perusal of it) would be KSpread, the spreadsheet program. It's fairly simple, and doesn't have all the doo-dads of Excel or StarCalc.
All in all, KDE 2.0 will be a fantastic Unix desktop environment! As a subscriber to kde-devel, I can tell you that the KDE developers are serious about avoiding bloat whereever possible, and creating a desktop that anyone can use, not just programmers and/or sysadmins.
While a lot of people gripe about Microsoft's dominance, the KDE team, rather than complain, are doing something about it. KDE 2.0 (as well as GNOME) will definitely make Linux and Unix a desktop contender for the masses. And with the price advantage, I predict it will start putting the hurt on Microsoft's market share.
I've been noticing here over the past few months that while the level of idiocy by Linux users has remained relatively low, the amount of *whining* about idiocy by Linux users has increased greatly.
The majority of commentary by people who seem to support Linux or other free software is intelligent and fair. I don't see a lot of mindless anti-anything flaming by open source fans. What I do see is whining about any criticism of anything that is not Linux, even when that criticism is valid and well-argued.
I guess you guys figure that if you repeat the same lie enough times, people will believe it. It has worked before...
That seems incredible. The thing that confuses me is why very many Windows users would even be interested in Slashdot. Sure, a certain amount can be explained by people who aren't allowed to use Linux at work, but 94%? Kinda depressing. I use vnc to administer the couple of Windows boxes we still have at work. I just can't imagine having to actually use Windows on my desktop machine. Ewww.
I'd sure like to see some updated Slashdot platform stats.
And how! That guy has been trolling for weeks now, posting anti-Linux, anti-GPL screeds, and attacking this site and its readers/particpants. Indeed it makes you wonder why he sticks around here. Some people just like to be miserable, I guess, and want to spread their misery around.
Isn't Star Office or Word Perfect roughly equivalent to Word? I don't understand what the heck she's trying to say there. Heck, StarOffice is practically an MS Office clone.
The fact that some Linux users flame is a pretty stupid reason to use or not use Linux itself.
Probably not that many FreeBSD users flame (a couple here on Slashdot do, though). But there are a lot less FreeBSD users than Linux users, so that is to be expected.
I've been flamed by Windows users plenty of times. Doesn't bother me. I base my opinion of Windows on the performance/reliability (or lack thereof) of the operating system itself, not its users or advocates.
The multimedia speed is there, but I didn't like the interface, nor the networking, nor the lack of decent apps for it. I'm no Open Source bigot, but I fear BeOS will go the way of OS/2 unless it itself goes Open Source...BeOS and OS/2 are both high-class OSes, one died, one isn't gaining popularity as rapidly as it should.
I'm sure someone will jump in here and point out that OS/2 isn't really dead.
Practically speaking, it is dead, though. I know; I used to be one of the biggest OS/2 advocates around (yes, member of Team OS/2 and all). OS/2 is, of course, proprietary/closed. As a result, the OS/2 user base is unable to take the good parts of OS/2 (and there are many) and roll them into Linux/BSD/Hurd (actually, more likely into KDE and/or GNOME) because of the closed nature of OS/2.
Who wins by OS/2 being closed source? IBM? Not really, since they're just trying to make it go away as quickly as possible. OS/2 users? Nope. They're stranded with an operating system that seems likely to become less and less maintained. OS/2 commercial developers? Hardly. IBM is leaving them holding the bag. The answer is: no one wins with closed source software, at least in the long run.
That is why I am never going back to using a proprietary operating system. I really want to move away from closed source software for any kind of important work, but in some cases that's not practical. For the OS, however, I cannot go back to a situation like the OS/2 situation. BeOS users may scoff at the idea now, but in a few years, they could well find themselves in a similar situation to OS/2 users. Believe me, we OS/2 users didn't believe IBM would ever throw in the towel on OS/2, either...but here we are, with no real upgrade path on the horizon.
Is Linux (or BSD, or the Hurd) the be-all, end-all solution for every use? No. However, for the things I use a computer for, Linux works quite well, supports my hardware (allowing me extraordinary platform flexibility), and has programs available to do about anything I can think of doing with my computer. And, thanks to its open source nature, it just gets better and better, at an unbelievable pace. BeOS may well have some advantages over Linux, but I believe that any shortcomings in Linux will be addressed by the open source community, and in a way that benefits the users, not the interest of a particular company.
If BeOS works for you, fine. I don't criticize people for using it. I just hope people will look before they leap, and realize what they may be getting themselves into with a proprietary operating system. Some of us have learned what can happen the hard way.
But stop whining about all your Windows buddies suddenly using Linux.
Boy, have you hit the nail on the head. I hadn't really thought about it much, but this makes perfect sense, as far as why I've seen an increase lately in bitter anti-Linux trolls.
These guys feel threatened, because their friends are now using something they know nothing about.
When everyone was using Windows, they felt safe; now, there's some uncertainty, so they lash out at The Penguin.
Already got that module. Slow and kinda buggy (at least as of a few weeks ago). It's got a long way to go to be usable. Not that I'm complaining...I'm glad that the people working on it are doing so. I'm just unhappy that Matrox didn't write a Linux driver like nVidia.
I hear ya. Although I like the performance of my G200 for 2D X stuff, Matrox hasn't really taken the Linux/BSD user community seriously, and apparently refuses to release *all* the specs.
I'm not a big gamer, but heck, I'd like to try out Q3 just like everybody else...:-P
I'll probably buy a TNT card instead of another Matrox.
I used to be a SCSI True Believer. I had an all-SCSI PC for years. Now, however, for my workstations I use UDMA IDE HDDs. The CPU usage has been reduced quite a bit from the old days of IDE, and the bang for the buck is just too good to go with SCSI for non-server machines.
That said, I'd love to see on-board SCSI MBs drop in price, and SCSI HDDs, too, to compete with IDE more effectively. I just don't see that happening any time soon.
Well, I'm not sure, but NetBSD/x86 would imply support for all x86 chips, including 8086 and 80286 (yes, there was an 80186, but I don't think it was ever used as a PC CPU).
Slashdot Mirror
Not my problem.
Seriously, if the paradigm shift has indeed begun (and many think it has) towards an Open Source model for mass-appeal software, how is it the user's concern how software vendors stay afloat? That is something for the vendors to figure out.
Whether the vendors want things to change is wholly irrelevant. What the users want is ultimately what will decide under what circumstances software is distributed and sold. And if those users decide that Open Source is what they want, all the whining in the world by proprietary software houses is going to amount to squat.
--
Yes.
Did you read the article?
Last couple of months Slashdot has been mostly a bash-Linux fest, with lots of vitriolic anti-Linux/GPL posts like yours.
Even well-argued pro-Linux posts are dismissed as ignorant lock-step rantings; anti-Linux rants are seen as "different," and therefore valuable.
Quite frankly, I don't know what this place is coming to.
I don't think Linux/GPL is the only answer; but I certainly think it deserves the attention it has finally gotten recently.
--
I forgot that only anti-Linux people are allowed to bash others' choices/beliefs.
I forgot that for a Linux user to even argue a point with a closed-ware advocate is a sin of the highest sort. We're just supposed to shut up and take our lumps.
I will do that now. Excuse me for having an opinion. Sorry.
--
Unfortunately, this story isn't on the web; I guess it's only in the hard copy magazine.
Can anyone in Germany provide some more details?
--
A gentleman who goes by the name of "CoolAss" tells us to grow up!
--
Depends. If you just run the operating system, it's stable. Once you start doing anything else, watch out.
I know; I've had to deal with NT for years. Hint: try running a web site using ASP and FoxPro.
Also...ever hear of SP2? Eeek.
And how about the IIS .htr hole?
And as far as costs go, you forget that most businesses are small businesses. For them, a $1000 Linux box makes a lot of sense.
--
vxfs (Veritas' file system) seems to fragment hardly at all, and actually HPFS (the OS/2 native file system) does quite well at resisting fragmentation, plus it has the handy 'extended attributes' built in to the file system for file type information, custom icons, etc.
If only HPFS has security, journaling and open source...
--
Pardon me, but this seems *extremely* hypocritical. You want to write binary-only software (presumably for pay), and you criticize Troll for wanting you to pay them for their software.
Despite its flaws, that is probably the best thing about the QPL; it discourages closed software, and makes those who would write closed software pay for the privilege. For that reason, I like it better than the LGPL (but I still prefer plain old GPL).
--
It really is shaping up to be a nice package. Already, at pre-alpha stage, you can see the vast improvement of konqueror over kfm. When you pick up an item in the current kfm, there is a noticeable delay, and some disk thrashing. When you pick up an konqueror object, *bang*, you have it immediately. The drag-and-drop should be very fast and smooth.
Currently, most things compile (the switch from Qt 1.4x to 2.x caused a bit of a setback in this regard, but it of course had to be done some time). I believe the current thought is to bundle KOffice with KDE 2.0. KOffice is shaping up to be a commercial-grade office productivity suite. KWord looks very, very nice, and should have most, if not all, of the functionality of the big boys (plus DTP functionality). KPresenter is a presentation program vis-a-vis PowerPoint. KIllustrator is a Corel Draw-type vector graphics program. There are a number of other smaller programs in there. The only thing that probably is a bit feature-starved (from my brief perusal of it) would be KSpread, the spreadsheet program. It's fairly simple, and doesn't have all the doo-dads of Excel or StarCalc.
All in all, KDE 2.0 will be a fantastic Unix desktop environment! As a subscriber to kde-devel, I can tell you that the KDE developers are serious about avoiding bloat whereever possible, and creating a desktop that anyone can use, not just programmers and/or sysadmins.
While a lot of people gripe about Microsoft's dominance, the KDE team, rather than complain, are doing something about it. KDE 2.0 (as well as GNOME) will definitely make Linux and Unix a desktop contender for the masses. And with the price advantage, I predict it will start putting the hurt on Microsoft's market share.
Needless, to say, I see it as a good thing. :-)
--
The majority of commentary by people who seem to support Linux or other free software is intelligent and fair. I don't see a lot of mindless anti-anything flaming by open source fans. What I do see is whining about any criticism of anything that is not Linux, even when that criticism is valid and well-argued.
I guess you guys figure that if you repeat the same lie enough times, people will believe it. It has worked before...
--
I'd sure like to see some updated Slashdot platform stats.
--
And how! That guy has been trolling for weeks now, posting anti-Linux, anti-GPL screeds, and attacking this site and its readers/particpants. Indeed it makes you wonder why he sticks around here. Some people just like to be miserable, I guess, and want to spread their misery around.
--
Fair enough. I grabbed the Linux build, and it does indeed rock! Even compared to M6.
--
I would think you would just link to the ftp site, or at least the Linux version.
--
The fact that some Linux users flame is a pretty stupid reason to use or not use Linux itself.
Probably not that many FreeBSD users flame (a couple here on Slashdot do, though). But there are a lot less FreeBSD users than Linux users, so that is to be expected.
I've been flamed by Windows users plenty of times. Doesn't bother me. I base my opinion of Windows on the performance/reliability (or lack thereof) of the operating system itself, not its users or advocates.
--
Point well taken. I should have caught that...
--
I'm sure someone will jump in here and point out that OS/2 isn't really dead.
Practically speaking, it is dead, though. I know; I used to be one of the biggest OS/2 advocates around (yes, member of Team OS/2 and all). OS/2 is, of course, proprietary/closed. As a result, the OS/2 user base is unable to take the good parts of OS/2 (and there are many) and roll them into Linux/BSD/Hurd (actually, more likely into KDE and/or GNOME) because of the closed nature of OS/2.
Who wins by OS/2 being closed source? IBM? Not really, since they're just trying to make it go away as quickly as possible. OS/2 users? Nope. They're stranded with an operating system that seems likely to become less and less maintained. OS/2 commercial developers? Hardly. IBM is leaving them holding the bag. The answer is: no one wins with closed source software, at least in the long run.
That is why I am never going back to using a proprietary operating system. I really want to move away from closed source software for any kind of important work, but in some cases that's not practical. For the OS, however, I cannot go back to a situation like the OS/2 situation. BeOS users may scoff at the idea now, but in a few years, they could well find themselves in a similar situation to OS/2 users. Believe me, we OS/2 users didn't believe IBM would ever throw in the towel on OS/2, either...but here we are, with no real upgrade path on the horizon.
Is Linux (or BSD, or the Hurd) the be-all, end-all solution for every use? No. However, for the things I use a computer for, Linux works quite well, supports my hardware (allowing me extraordinary platform flexibility), and has programs available to do about anything I can think of doing with my computer. And, thanks to its open source nature, it just gets better and better, at an unbelievable pace. BeOS may well have some advantages over Linux, but I believe that any shortcomings in Linux will be addressed by the open source community, and in a way that benefits the users, not the interest of a particular company.
If BeOS works for you, fine. I don't criticize people for using it. I just hope people will look before they leap, and realize what they may be getting themselves into with a proprietary operating system. Some of us have learned what can happen the hard way.
--
Boy, have you hit the nail on the head. I hadn't really thought about it much, but this makes perfect sense, as far as why I've seen an increase lately in bitter anti-Linux trolls.
These guys feel threatened, because their friends are now using something they know nothing about.
When everyone was using Windows, they felt safe; now, there's some uncertainty, so they lash out at The Penguin.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
...check this guy's user info. He's an anti-Linux troll. Don't get too worked up, folks; save your energy for another day.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
Already got that module. Slow and kinda buggy (at least as of a few weeks ago). It's got a long way to go to be usable. Not that I'm complaining...I'm glad that the people working on it are doing so. I'm just unhappy that Matrox didn't write a Linux driver like nVidia.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
If you're that concerned about throughput, why the heck are you running Solaris on *PCs*?
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
It's even worse...it's single user!
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
I'm not a big gamer, but heck, I'd like to try out Q3 just like everybody else... :-P
I'll probably buy a TNT card instead of another Matrox.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
That said, I'd love to see on-board SCSI MBs drop in price, and SCSI HDDs, too, to compete with IDE more effectively. I just don't see that happening any time soon.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
Well, I'm not sure, but NetBSD/x86 would imply support for all x86 chips, including 8086 and 80286 (yes, there was an 80186, but I don't think it was ever used as a PC CPU).
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!