One of the biggest problems with the extreamism that exists in any set of belifs is that those in the moderate view never get the attention.
If there was a group of free software developers who wanted to convert people to the "free" religion, but didn't want to force, they would work passivly.
They would build good software, easy to use. They would let people use it.. promote ease of use in expanding it with new modules and the like. They would make it profitable, for people have to eat. They would show the advantage/functionality of "free".
They would believe no less than the ones wishing to "force" the beliefs. Their efforts would pay off, but they would never be recognized as paying off.
The press likes controversy, and so they would focus on the conflict. The "moderates" sympathizing with the "extreamists" would make comments and those opposing the "extreamists" would accuse the moderates of being being "extream" in their views.
With the lack of attention on "moderates", the conflict would continue, ripping a group of people who were having a poisitive influnce, apart. Even the "moderates" would begin to question themselves, as even they read the media and are not immune to its effects.
This, is what I think is happening.
Control the conflict give exposure to the moderates stay smarter than the situation stay humble
and things will work out for the best
(one can be extream in views, but moderate in expressing their views. Humbleness is they key)
Given that you won't visit the USA given the enactment of the DMCA. If the DMCA equivalent passes in Europe, will you move? If so, is there anywhere that is safe from this kind of insane law (it sounds like peru may be a new haven for free software)?
There are plenty of things that Mozilla does that IE dosen't now.
One example I ran into recently is PNG alpha transparency.
IE dosen't do it, Mozilla does.
The other feature that has made all of my friends that run windows look into looking at/running mozilla is the lovely "Scripts and Windows" preferences, that can stop pop-unders and pop-up ads.
I can't speak as well for abiword. Tables are quite a necessary thing.
I can relate to what you're saying, but in this case, the driver actually dosen't have to be compiled into the kernel, and that's what I think will confuse the customers.
They are used to plugging in any device and already having the driver on their system (unless it indeed is a device like what you are describing.. where you need to download a binary module or something of the like).
I fear that when we have our "firmware download script" available for our usb device.. that users will be asking millions of questions, because they've never had to do this for a device before.
With the advent of hotplug, and firmware uploading, there are going to be lots of firms offering support for linux, but it won't be included with the kernel.
I work for a company that will be releasing firmware for our devices, and a script that makes it work with hotplug. We can GPL.
I worry that drivers like these won't get the attention that ones in the kernel do because they aren't included.
I hope that there will be some common method of installing firmwares or a commmon repository of firmwares in the future.
Linux users seem to depend on drivers being included with the kernel, having nothing else to get.
I'm sure, because it's my experience. Much like it is some of my peer's experience that Microsoft dosen't fix bugs.
Here's some of the examples that feed my experience
Examples of "closed" linux products with problems:
nvidia drivers
real player
Examples of "open/free" linux products that have problems that get fixed:
mozilla
apache
linux
I'm not going to dedicate my resources to fixing a closed product that I have no desire to run, which may end me caught in some kinda software patent lawsuit. (I'm a novice to multimedia graphics programming)
That needs to be documented somewhere on the XFree86 documentation. I kept looking at XFree86 documentation trying to find out which video cards were supported and I couldn't figure it out.
I made the asssumption after a while that those names must refer to some of the newer cards, so I just took the risk and bought a lower numbered radeon at a computer show. I got lucky, I had guessed right.
Given that some of the responces here say that people have synced with outlook with no problem, could his problem be with the fact that it is outlook on XP?
Anybody got one that can try?
I'd not use it, but it would be fun to show how picky (it dosen't work for MY setup) a journalist could be.
I've had the experience with NVIDIA drivers working perfect on one machine, and on another it randomly crashes all the time.
I just bought an ati7000 for building an audio machine (no emphasis on graphics) and the 3d accell worked alsmo outta the box on a debian "testing" install (I had to switch it so the agpart module was loaded BEFORE the radeon module).
I'm tired of reading about the people that have it work "perfectly" at the expense of those that don't. I've had it both ways, and I like the ATI way better.
(however the ATI drivers need to be labeled better, they refer to things like radeon VE, while consumers just know radeon 7000,7500,8500)
As a paying user of winex, I'd have to disagree.
Loki's games are so much better/easier than having to "kludge" it with winex.
I can only hope that someday there will be enough of a DESKTOP usage of Linux that games will be viable. I was hoping that this would happen before loki had to fold.
I still wonder how a "critical section" would fair on Linux if one implemented a threading library using co-routines, or some other method.
I imagine this would be a better comparison. I know there isn't much of a context switch in linux threads, because they don't necessarily swap out the memory map and what not, but there is apparently still overhead (the study found the windows critical section faster).
Hehe.. of course, the entire Knuth book is in assembly:)
I guess I just wonder about the usefullness of in-process threading. Guess the whole thing is kinda goofy as they qualified "critcal sections" as an IPC method, but then said it only worked with threads (which are in-process on windows).
Where's the IPC?
Never really use them (in-proc threads) much myself.
Maybe I'm just confused.
As I pointed out above (But realized I may have placed the response in the wrong thread). It would be a good idea to compare critical sections in threads against coroutines as they both involve transfer of data between different functions without a context change.
Is it really worth using threads with coroutines can be done? Why do round-robin scheduling when you can simply have your functions call each other?
I think that the press frequently misses on the point that Free software is glacial in how it is developed. It is huge and slow moving. To dismiss its effect because of how slow it moves is to miss the size.
You can't bankrupt free software...
The idea "information wants to be free" is more of a metaphor. Fact is, information tends to spread with little to no effort. This is what makes free software huge. It can slow down, it can stop for a bit, but.. if necessary, it can pick up again. So while it moves slowly, it never loses ground.
This guy is impatient. Think more monk like. It may take a long time, but if we keep trying, we will eventually get there. Nothing can prevent that.
1. We are trying to comply with the court even though the case is still going. See how much we are willing to compromise.....
(BS, but still good PR)
2. Oh, now that we have that deal to put AOL on the desktop, and they gave in some things in return for that. We'll allow other people to remove their icons. The best part, we're just trying to comply with a lawsuit that AOL is on the other side of.
"See, we're doing what netscape/AOL/SUN want, we're letting other people remove their icons from the desktop"
Slashdot Mirror
One of the biggest problems with the extreamism that exists in any set of belifs is that those in the moderate view never get the attention.
If there was a group of free software developers who wanted to convert people to the "free" religion, but didn't want to force, they would work passivly.
They would build good software, easy to use. They would let people use it.. promote ease of use in expanding it with new modules and the like. They would make it profitable, for people have to eat. They would show the advantage/functionality of "free".
They would believe no less than the ones wishing to "force" the beliefs. Their efforts would pay off, but they would never be recognized as paying off.
The press likes controversy, and so they would focus on the conflict. The "moderates" sympathizing with the "extreamists" would make comments and those opposing the "extreamists" would accuse the moderates of being being "extream" in their views.
With the lack of attention on "moderates", the conflict would continue, ripping a group of people who were having a poisitive influnce, apart. Even the "moderates" would begin to question themselves, as even they read the media and are not immune to its effects.
This, is what I think is happening.
Control the conflict
give exposure to the moderates
stay smarter than the situation
stay humble
and things will work out for the best
(one can be extream in views, but moderate in expressing their views. Humbleness is they key)
Given that you won't visit the USA given the enactment of the DMCA. If the DMCA equivalent passes in Europe, will you move? If so, is there anywhere that is safe from this kind of insane law (it sounds like peru may be a new haven for free software)?
Actually Mozilla is fair. I would want it on.
There are plenty of things that Mozilla does that IE dosen't now.
One example I ran into recently is PNG alpha transparency.
IE dosen't do it, Mozilla does.
The other feature that has made all of my friends that run windows look into looking at/running mozilla is the lovely "Scripts and Windows" preferences, that can stop pop-unders and pop-up ads.
I can't speak as well for abiword. Tables are quite a necessary thing.
I can relate to what you're saying, but in this case, the driver actually dosen't have to be compiled into the kernel, and that's what I think will confuse the customers.
b )
They are used to plugging in any device and already having the driver on their system (unless it indeed is a device like what you are describing.. where you need to download a binary module or something of the like).
I fear that when we have our "firmware download script" available for our usb device.. that users will be asking millions of questions, because they've never had to do this for a device before.
(the instructions I'm refereing to are at the bottom of http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net/?selected=us
Some kind of standard (non distrabution specific) repository or packaging shuold be used for this kinda thing.
With the advent of hotplug, and firmware uploading, there are going to be lots of firms offering support for linux, but it won't be included with the kernel.
I work for a company that will be releasing firmware for our devices, and a script that makes it work with hotplug. We can GPL.
I worry that drivers like these won't get the attention that ones in the kernel do because they aren't included.
I hope that there will be some common method of installing firmwares or a commmon repository of firmwares in the future.
Linux users seem to depend on drivers being included with the kernel, having nothing else to get.
Anybody know if this works under linux?
Which chipset are they using? ov511?
Just making sure it'd work before I grab one.
It's in the pay area, but you main want to look at Main Actor:
http://www.mainconcept.de/
I'm sure, because it's my experience. Much like it is some of my peer's experience that Microsoft dosen't fix bugs.
Here's some of the examples that feed my experience
Examples of "closed" linux products with problems:
nvidia drivers
real player
Examples of "open/free" linux products that have problems that get fixed:
mozilla
apache
linux
I'm not going to dedicate my resources to fixing a closed product that I have no desire to run, which may end me caught in some kinda software patent lawsuit. (I'm a novice to multimedia graphics programming)
This is the problem with flash on Linux
Another problem is that the macromedia plugin for linux may be unstable in some configurations.
On my machine, after I installed flash, some web pages would crash mozilla. I removed flash, and poof.. things worked fine.
Much like nvidia drivers, flash is closed, and this "closedness" causing inconsistant stability.
(some people have no problem.. just like the nvidia drivers)
That needs to be documented somewhere on the XFree86 documentation. I kept looking at XFree86 documentation trying to find out which video cards were supported and I couldn't figure it out.
I made the asssumption after a while that those names must refer to some of the newer cards, so I just took the risk and bought a lower numbered radeon at a computer show. I got lucky, I had guessed right.
Given that some of the responces here say that people have synced with outlook with no problem, could his problem be with the fact that it is outlook on XP?
Anybody got one that can try?
I'd not use it, but it would be fun to show how picky (it dosen't work for MY setup) a journalist could be.
NVidia's is like a bratty girlfriend:
When they are good, they are very very good.
When they are bad, they are rotten.
I've had the experience with NVIDIA drivers working perfect on one machine, and on another it randomly crashes all the time.
I just bought an ati7000 for building an audio machine (no emphasis on graphics) and the 3d accell worked alsmo outta the box on a debian "testing" install (I had to switch it so the agpart module was loaded BEFORE the radeon module).
I'm tired of reading about the people that have it work "perfectly" at the expense of those that don't. I've had it both ways, and I like the ATI way better.
(however the ATI drivers need to be labeled better, they refer to things like radeon VE, while consumers just know radeon 7000,7500,8500)
Ok.. taking this idea for a stretch
will this make our buildings vulnerable to a
EM Pulse (like the one from a nuke).
EM Pulse comes through.. generates large amounts of voltage in building.. building melts.
Hrm...
I really don't think so.
I really think the free software movement is glacial.
It was started in the 80's nobody'd even heard of it till the mid 90's really.
These things all move gradually.
pessimism dosen't help
As a paying user of winex, I'd have to disagree.
Loki's games are so much better/easier than having to "kludge" it with winex.
I can only hope that someday there will be enough of a DESKTOP usage of Linux that games will be viable. I was hoping that this would happen before loki had to fold.
Goodbye Loki, we'll miss you.
Ok, yeah this fits what I was thinking.
I still wonder how a "critical section" would fair on Linux if one implemented a threading library using co-routines, or some other method.
I imagine this would be a better comparison. I know there isn't much of a context switch in linux threads, because they don't necessarily swap out the memory map and what not, but there is apparently still overhead (the study found the windows critical section faster).
hrm...
Hehe.. of course, the entire Knuth book is in assembly :)
I guess I just wonder about the usefullness of in-process threading. Guess the whole thing is kinda goofy as they qualified "critcal sections" as an IPC method, but then said it only worked with threads (which are in-process on windows).
Where's the IPC?
Never really use them (in-proc threads) much myself.
Maybe I'm just confused.
As I pointed out above (But realized I may have placed the response in the wrong thread). It would be a good idea to compare critical sections in threads against coroutines as they both involve transfer of data between different functions without a context change.
Is it really worth using threads with coroutines can be done? Why do round-robin scheduling when you can simply have your functions call each other?
As long as they were going to talk about critical sections, shouldn't they have discused
co-routines?
Don't they both have to do with communication without a context change?
I think that the press frequently misses on the point that Free software is glacial in how it is developed. It is huge and slow moving. To dismiss its effect because of how slow it moves is to miss the size.
You can't bankrupt free software...
The idea "information wants to be free" is more of a metaphor. Fact is, information tends to spread with little to no effort. This is what makes free software huge. It can slow down, it can stop for a bit, but.. if necessary, it can pick up again. So while it moves slowly, it never loses ground.
This guy is impatient. Think more monk like. It may take a long time, but if we keep trying, we will eventually get there. Nothing can prevent that.
What a clever move! (the bastards)
From the perspective of Microsoft:
1. We are trying to comply with the court even though the case is still going. See how much we are willing to compromise.....
(BS, but still good PR)
2. Oh, now that we have that deal to put AOL on the desktop, and they gave in some things in return for that. We'll allow other people to remove their icons. The best part, we're just trying to comply with a lawsuit that AOL is on the other side of.
"See, we're doing what netscape/AOL/SUN want, we're letting other people remove their icons from the desktop"
They are always scheming over there, aren't they.
In doing user interfaces you need to simplify things for the user.
Quick.. what does a program called "illustrator" do?
it illustrates!
Quick.. what does a program called "vektor" do?
Quick... how many end users know what a "vector" is?
They shouldn't have used a plain english word as their trademark.
yes.. this program is used for illustration, making pictures...
This is the problem with using english word trademarks.
It's an illustration program.. why don't we call it vektor... that way, nobody except people in the know will know what it does.
Quick reality check, how many laypeople know what a vector is?
Think of it as a defective product.
:)
:) )
It's got privacy problems
You don't have to get anywhere (we won't anyway.. just keep calling.. that's the annoying part
-This post is just for entertainment value, I am not encouraging a terrorist act.
Very simply.. bull.
I don't have to provide this information to access usenet.. the linux howto's or gcc! Why should I here?