What's scary is, I'm betting Silverlight will be usable and well supported on 64-bit Linux before Flash is. Thanks to nspluginwrapper you can now use a 32 bit flash plugin in a 64 bit mozilla based browser on linux. Debian already has a flashplugin-nonfree package that will set things up this way in the testing and unstable repositries. Ubuntu gutsy has it too.
There are also built-in hard cores on modern FPGA's. You never used to be able to synthesize the statement "a = b * c;" in a verilog design, for example. Now that FPGA's have hardware multiplier blocks in them, it synthesises to a bunch of wires connecting up the LUTs to the built-in hardware. quartus 3 at least can synthisize a = b * c on a chip without a hardware multiplier, it takes a lot of logic cells though.
I saw it happen at the university of manchester recently (where they really don't want vista to be used at the momemnt due to compatibility issues with various internal stuff). The machine in question was a sony vaio and the person doing the build eventually got everything except the modem and the fingerprint scanner to work under XP but he was struggling with it for quite some time (and this person was not a newbie he does machine builds all the time).
At the university they have a site upgrade/downgrade license so normal practice is to buy the machine with the cheapest windows version the OEM offers and then install XP pro on it (images are used where a lot of identical machines are bought but often academics have thier own ideas about what machines they want;) ). Unfortunately people sometimes forget to check hardware compatibility first;).
When releasing under the GPL the author gives permission to use it under a certain set of terms. Doing so does not imply he cannot later give people permission to use it under other terms.
If their numbers say every 1 computer sold should have 1 OS copy sold with it, then even if you only install an otherwise legit downloaded version of Gentoo or Ubuntu on it, you still count as a pirate because that's 1 less copy sold than their tables say. on the other hand if the machine was bought with windows 98 and is now running a pirate copy of 2K or XP pro thier stats wouldn't show it.
I suspect most will (the probable exception being the FSF). The thing is unless specific steps are taken to avoid it right from the start of the project ownership of the code becomes rather a messy buisness. Also the whole reason many GPL apps are GPL in the first place is dependencies on GPL libraries some of which are copyrighted by the FSF.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party
I hope you're joking (or trolling). Have you ever sat down and done the math on those kinds of insurance? You are always losing money on those deals, since the expectation cost of equipment failure (probability of failure times cost of replacement) is much lower than the cost of the insurance. (If it wasn't, then the store would lose money on selling the insurance.) The bit you are missing is that getting hold of the parts, service manuals and so on becomes the suppliers problem and it is a problem they can easilly deal with because they are buying in huge bulk and therefore have leverage over the manufacturer.
For some laptops it is almost impossible to buy brand new parts and so you have to resort to parts that have been ripped out of failed laptops which may well be already on thier last legs.
but for the smaller electronics (less than £200 or so) you are right it's probablly cheaper to buy with minimal warranty and replace them if they fail out of warranty.
And, in addition to all I've just said, it's important to note that electronics devalue very quickly (as compared to property, which usually increases in value) that the replacement cost (for identical hardware) drops below the insurance cost in a surprisingly short amount of time. The new price of a well built laptop or a basic digital camera hasn't really dropped much afaict. Yes you get higher specs for your money but the base prices haven't come down much. Of course you can buy secondhand but the big problem there is that it is hard to tell how the previous owner treated the machine and if there are any faults he isn't telling you about. With computers there is also the issue of having to get hold of suitable media to reinstall it.
Beleive it or not most people are not rich extreme capitalists and in a democratic society the majority have the power if they care enough about an issue.
Most countries rich enough to afford it have socialised medicine (In the USA they make you go bankrupt and let your condition diteriorate horriblly first but they do provide eventually) and people like to know that if something terrible happens to them they will be cared for even if they don't at the time have the mony to pay for it.
P.S. If you really belive what you just said please go jump off a cliff. P.P.S This was in canada so her parents will not have payed for it.
I've seen plenty of reports of ubuntu upgrades failing from users who at least claim to never have used automatix and from what I can tell the recent automatix is a lot less naughty than the older versions.
Ubuntu seems to preffer to play the blame game regarding upgrade failures and then tell users to reinstall than to actually help users find out what is wrong with thier systems.
1) hardware compatibility issues, this can work the other way too, getting XP to work properly on a laptop that only ships with vista drivers can be rather difficult.
No voting without being a member for a set amount of time, and no voting on issues presented before joining come to mind. I think that would make things worse because it would make it much harder for those opposing standards to play dirty while having little affect on those proposing them (since if you are proposing something you control approximately when it will be proposed and can therefore make sure your minions are in place for long enough before doing so).
Very few consider following links to be a big no no. and honestly it shouldn't be. We follow links to sites we don't know on the web in search of information all the time if browsers can't handle that safely they are not fit for purpose. If browser authors can't write high enough quality code then other measures (such as running the browser in a sandbox) need to be considered.
It also says that neither you nor none of your users may take away any of those rights, by redistributing the program in a closed-source manner. The GPL is a license you are granting other people permission to redistribute your code and derivitive works of it under particular terms. You can still make your own derivitives of it and distribute them under whatever terms you like.
Or at least asking them for the source. It's a common misconception that a GPLd app must be accompanied by source code. The company only has to make it available upon request. They have to either include the source or include a written offer valid for at least 3 years to provide the source on request.
what makes the office versioning (and the windows versioning for that matter) rather messy was they went to a scheme based on two digit years just before a century rollover. Not a very smart thing to do imo.
One meaning of "edgy" is "on edge, unstable" - not the kind of thing you want associated with your OS! It was a deliberate choice, edgy wasn't meant to be a particuarlly stable release those who needed stability were meant to stay on the long term support release before it. Edgy was a release for radical changes that had big potential for improvement but also big potential for breakage.
the debian way of dealing with patch testing would be to create a custom repositry and then install packages you download from the official repositry into the custom one.
IMO "dapper drake" and "hardy heron" give a very different impression to "edgy eft" , "feisty fawn" and "gutsy gibbon". I strongly suspect this is deliberate.
Anyway if you think the codenames are going to be laughed at just don't mention them and just use the version number like ubuntu themselves do in more official contexts.
My latest attempt was thwarted, at least in part, when the IT staff had a good laugh at the "Feisty Fawn" name. and you were planning to use a short lived ricer release for a server why exactly?
Slashdot Mirror
A few used RTGs for electrical power yes but afaict none had a full reactor and none used nuclear power for anything related to space propulsion.
What's scary is, I'm betting Silverlight will be usable and well supported on 64-bit Linux before Flash is.
Thanks to nspluginwrapper you can now use a 32 bit flash plugin in a 64 bit mozilla based browser on linux. Debian already has a flashplugin-nonfree package that will set things up this way in the testing and unstable repositries. Ubuntu gutsy has it too.
mind you if you have the box rooted it's not too hard to put a sniffer in place to get the actual passwords as users login.
There are also built-in hard cores on modern FPGA's. You never used to be able to synthesize the statement "a = b * c;" in a verilog design, for example. Now that FPGA's have hardware multiplier blocks in them, it synthesises to a bunch of wires connecting up the LUTs to the built-in hardware.
quartus 3 at least can synthisize a = b * c on a chip without a hardware multiplier, it takes a lot of logic cells though.
I saw it happen at the university of manchester recently (where they really don't want vista to be used at the momemnt due to compatibility issues with various internal stuff). The machine in question was a sony vaio and the person doing the build eventually got everything except the modem and the fingerprint scanner to work under XP but he was struggling with it for quite some time (and this person was not a newbie he does machine builds all the time).
;) ). Unfortunately people sometimes forget to check hardware compatibility first ;).
At the university they have a site upgrade/downgrade license so normal practice is to buy the machine with the cheapest windows version the OEM offers and then install XP pro on it (images are used where a lot of identical machines are bought but often academics have thier own ideas about what machines they want
When releasing under the GPL the author gives permission to use it under a certain set of terms. Doing so does not imply he cannot later give people permission to use it under other terms.
I was under the impression that this worm only resorted to the "tell the user to download the exe" tactic if the exploits failed.
:(
but yes unfortunately humans are very often the weak point in many systems
If their numbers say every 1 computer sold should have 1 OS copy sold with it, then even if you only install an otherwise legit downloaded version of Gentoo or Ubuntu on it, you still count as a pirate because that's 1 less copy sold than their tables say.
on the other hand if the machine was bought with windows 98 and is now running a pirate copy of 2K or XP pro thier stats wouldn't show it.
I suspect most will (the probable exception being the FSF). The thing is unless specific steps are taken to avoid it right from the start of the project ownership of the code becomes rather a messy buisness. Also the whole reason many GPL apps are GPL in the first place is dependencies on GPL libraries some of which are copyrighted by the FSF.
have you ever actually read the damn license?
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party
I hope you're joking (or trolling). Have you ever sat down and done the math on those kinds of insurance? You are always losing money on those deals, since the expectation cost of equipment failure (probability of failure times cost of replacement) is much lower than the cost of the insurance. (If it wasn't, then the store would lose money on selling the insurance.)
The bit you are missing is that getting hold of the parts, service manuals and so on becomes the suppliers problem and it is a problem they can easilly deal with because they are buying in huge bulk and therefore have leverage over the manufacturer.
For some laptops it is almost impossible to buy brand new parts and so you have to resort to parts that have been ripped out of failed laptops which may well be already on thier last legs.
but for the smaller electronics (less than £200 or so) you are right it's probablly cheaper to buy with minimal warranty and replace them if they fail out of warranty.
And, in addition to all I've just said, it's important to note that electronics devalue very quickly (as compared to property, which usually increases in value) that the replacement cost (for identical hardware) drops below the insurance cost in a surprisingly short amount of time.
The new price of a well built laptop or a basic digital camera hasn't really dropped much afaict. Yes you get higher specs for your money but the base prices haven't come down much. Of course you can buy secondhand but the big problem there is that it is hard to tell how the previous owner treated the machine and if there are any faults he isn't telling you about. With computers there is also the issue of having to get hold of suitable media to reinstall it.
Beleive it or not most people are not rich extreme capitalists and in a democratic society the majority have the power if they care enough about an issue.
Most countries rich enough to afford it have socialised medicine (In the USA they make you go bankrupt and let your condition diteriorate horriblly first but they do provide eventually) and people like to know that if something terrible happens to them they will be cared for even if they don't at the time have the mony to pay for it.
P.S. If you really belive what you just said please go jump off a cliff.
P.P.S This was in canada so her parents will not have payed for it.
I've seen plenty of reports of ubuntu upgrades failing from users who at least claim to never have used automatix and from what I can tell the recent automatix is a lot less naughty than the older versions.
Ubuntu seems to preffer to play the blame game regarding upgrade failures and then tell users to reinstall than to actually help users find out what is wrong with thier systems.
1) hardware compatibility issues,
this can work the other way too, getting XP to work properly on a laptop that only ships with vista drivers can be rather difficult.
just remember when discussing this that w3schools primerally aims at web designers
i'd imagine you will see far more older software and far less win2K (2K was really a buisness edition) in something aimed more at home users.
No voting without being a member for a set amount of time, and no voting on issues presented before joining come to mind.
I think that would make things worse because it would make it much harder for those opposing standards to play dirty while having little affect on those proposing them (since if you are proposing something you control approximately when it will be proposed and can therefore make sure your minions are in place for long enough before doing so).
Very few consider following links to be a big no no.
and honestly it shouldn't be. We follow links to sites we don't know on the web in search of information all the time if browsers can't handle that safely they are not fit for purpose. If browser authors can't write high enough quality code then other measures (such as running the browser in a sandbox) need to be considered.
It also says that neither you nor none of your users may take away any of those rights, by redistributing the program in a closed-source manner.
The GPL is a license you are granting other people permission to redistribute your code and derivitive works of it under particular terms. You can still make your own derivitives of it and distribute them under whatever terms you like.
Or at least asking them for the source. It's a common misconception that a GPLd app must be accompanied by source code. The company only has to make it available upon request.
They have to either include the source or include a written offer valid for at least 3 years to provide the source on request.
what makes the office versioning (and the windows versioning for that matter) rather messy was they went to a scheme based on two digit years just before a century rollover. Not a very smart thing to do imo.
One meaning of "edgy" is "on edge, unstable" - not the kind of thing you want associated with your OS!
It was a deliberate choice, edgy wasn't meant to be a particuarlly stable release those who needed stability were meant to stay on the long term support release before it. Edgy was a release for radical changes that had big potential for improvement but also big potential for breakage.
the debian way of dealing with patch testing would be to create a custom repositry and then install packages you download from the official repositry into the custom one.
IMO "dapper drake" and "hardy heron" give a very different impression to "edgy eft" , "feisty fawn" and "gutsy gibbon". I strongly suspect this is deliberate.
Anyway if you think the codenames are going to be laughed at just don't mention them and just use the version number like ubuntu themselves do in more official contexts.
My latest attempt was thwarted, at least in part, when the IT staff had a good laugh at the "Feisty Fawn" name.
and you were planning to use a short lived ricer release for a server why exactly?