don't personally keep close enough tabs on Microsoft acquisitions), is a sign of some sort of desperation on Microsoft's end. Rather than attempting to come up with any further new ideas (something I'm not certain Microsoft has really been interested in for a while now), they just seem to want to buy enough bits and pieces of the industry to increase their foothold. Does that mean Google is more desperate and has no new ideas? Google acquired 17 companies in 2007(including the behemoth DoubleClick) whereas MS acquired only 14. Well I shouldn't have replied to someone calling Microsoft M$.
Is this kind of merger a good argument for releasing server side software under the GNU Affero GPL ? If these services were using software licensed under something like the GNU Affero GPL, then a company like Microsoft wouldn't be able to go near them. Uhh. WTF? How will the Affero GPL prevent migration from FreeBSD/PHP to Win2k3/ASP.NET ?
Seriously, I was expecting something along the lines of a program that used the hum or whistle of the fan and speeded up or slowed down the fan to get the jingles. This isn't even funny.
From the wiki:
Kross scripting framework will be used to allow developers to write widgets in JavaScript, Ruby, and Python in addition to C++ [1]. No prizes for guessing what the gnome version will be called.
Maybe you should read your GP comment again? Let me quote:
Oh FFS. Open "about:blank" repeatedly and watch the memory footprint rise and rise. The issue was never with reporting, but with memory "sure we allocate it and never release it but that's not technically a leak, we just don't know what happened to it" leaks being bottom of every developer's priority list.
The strength of open source is that many people want to contribute. The weakness is that they only contribute what they want to contribute Reading Slashdot at work is at the top of my priority list and writing documentation for my code is at the very bottom. But my boss makes sure to let me know that [no documentation = no pay] and I get the documentation done. Why should Mozilla be any different? That quote is valid for only volunteer developers, not paid ones.
The issue was never with reporting, but with memory "sure we allocate it and never release it but that's not technically a leak, we just don't know what happened to it" leaks being bottom of every developer's priority list.
The strength of open source is that many people want to contribute. The weakness is that they only contribute what they want to contribute That is not strictly true. Mozilla gets a ton of money from Google, and spends it or can spend it on developers and UI folks etc. The management can demand them to fix these nagging issues which don't 'scratch the programmer's itch' because the employees are getting paid to work on Firefox/Gecko. Mozilla had revenues of about 75 million in 2006 and pays the CEO half a million a year. 12 Million was spent in 2006 on development.
I am going to quote myself from a previous comment:
Firefox does not look like a very typical FOSS program anymore in which developers don't get any money back from the masses of users. The developers working at Mozilla are getting paid directly from the money that the users are contributing with their clicks. Hence, I think the mantra of 'if you don't like it, fork it" is not really valid in this scenario. Note this is opposed to projects with paid developers like Apache and the Linux kernel which is supported by corporate entities and not end users.
Also, I remember that Mozilla wanted contributions for the NYT ad a few years ago and many of my friends who were students barely scraping by, contributed some of their much needed money to the project. Apart from that I guess a ton of people donated money to Mozilla in the past few years thinking that they needed funding badly. Did Mozilla really need it or were they getting enough money from Google to run that ad by themselves? The fact that the CEO of Mozilla gets a compensation of half a million dollars makes it worse.
Does this also mean the users(who are contributing to the coffers with their use of Firefox) can demand fixes to the nagging bugs and not get a 'if you don't like it fork it' reply? Take a look at this very annoying image captions wrapping bug that plagued users and web developers and was unfixed for seven years despite even stalwarts like XKCD's Randall Munroe complaining in this bugzilla thread. Note that you need to copy paste because bugzilla doesn't allow links from Slashdot https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 [mozilla.org]
How about using some of those tens of millions to help hire good programmers and pay for fixes to the bugs?
From http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=2:
As for PowerPlay, which is usually found in mobile GPUs, AMD has opted to include broader power management support in their desktop GPUs as well. While they aren't to wholly turn off parts of the chip, clock gaiting is used, as well as dynamic adjustment of core and memory clock speed and voltages. The command buffer is monitored to determine when power saving features need to be applied. This means that when applications need the power of the GPU it will run at full speed, but when less is going on (or even when something is CPU limited) we should see power, noise, and heat characteristics improve.
One of the cool side effects of PowerPlay is that clock speeds are no longer determined by application state. On previous hardware, 3d clock speeds were only enabled when a fullscreen 3D application started. This means that GPU computing software (like folding@home) was only run at 2D clock speeds. Since these programs will no doubt fill the command queue, they will get full performance from the GPU now. Hopefully, Nvidia will follow the lead.
If you rip a Audio CD to MP3,AAC,WMA or OGG that is lossy compression. There is no way of getting the original data back. If you compress it with FLAC, you can get the exact bits present on the original Audio CD. Note that we are talking about only digital conversions. How the CD was mastered from the analog source is a complete different matter and has nothing to do with FLAC.
I didn't say anything about DRM. Uhh? Do I have to quote your own posts to you now? You said a LOT about DRM.
Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Saturday November 17, @08:28PM (#21394079)
Any DRM system necessarily comes with some performance penalty by its nature. In this case, that means not only speed but also reliability, vulnerability to security flaws, and degraded output if you have the "wrong" software running, where "wrong" means not having jumped through Microsoft's and their partners' technical and financial hoops.
If you haven't read reviews citing numerous specific examples of this confirmed in labs then I don't know where you've been for the past couple of years...
If you haven't read reviews citing numerous specific examples of this confirmed in labs then I don't know where you've been for the past couple of years, but in any case, you're as capable as the rest of us of using a search engine to find them. Sorry, you are the one who's been living under a tree. The FUD about Vista has been thoroughly debunked. Looks like you have been getting your news only from Slashdot. You can use a search engine to find it.
Hard drives could also be improved. If you had intelligent drives, you could place the filesystem layer in an uploadable module and have that entirely offloaded to the drive. Just have the data DMAed directly to and from the drive, rather than shifted around all over the place, reformatted a dozen times and then DMAed down Uhh what? Just a couple of lines above you said CPUs were overpowered, and now you want the filesystem code to run on the hard drive ? Specialized hardware maybe faster but which filesystem are you gonna have running on your hard disk? NTFS? ext3? ZFS? Reiserfs?
From another comment from above:
According to BCN [yahoo.com], boxed OS sales doubled in October.
Microsoft and Apple's market shares in Japan on typical month is around 8 to 2. Microsoft jumped to 91.2% share when Vista came out and Apple had 51.2% share when Tiger came out. Apple just had 65.2% market share month with Leopard, that is nearly a 15% jump compared to the last OS update.
I doubt that personnel and infrastructure come close to making a dent in $74 million, so you're still not answering the question of what the remaining tens of millions are going to be used for. Are volunteer devs going to get paid? Are you going to fund other OSS projects? How do you decide which volunteers get money?
In any case, Mozillas expenses in 2006 were just shy of $20 million at $19.77 million. The bulk of these expenses were for 90 people working full or part-time on Mozilla. Employees were 70 percent of expenses.
No, no more than individual users of large commercial software packages that are contributing by actually paying licensing fees can "demand" changes and compel a positive response. They can, of course, request changes, and they can, if they aren't satisfied with the response, stop supporting Mozilla with their use of Firefox or otherwise.
What you said is true, but then why do people who even request fixes and changes get a ton of +5 insightful 'if you don't like it, for it' replies here on Slashdot? Is that a reasonable response to someone who's asking to fix bugs and leaks?
Sure, if you don't like it, don't use it.
Then they don't get any money from you. How many users of Firefox do you think even know about the fact that Mozilla receives tens of millions of dollars from their clicks?
Yes the first thing I do after installing Linux is to search for "Internet Explorer" in Google to download and install it. Now because of your brilliant idea, people like me would install Firefox instead.
Firefox does not look like a very typical FOSS program anymore in which developers don't get any money back from the masses of users. The developers working at Mozilla are getting paid directly from the money that the users are contributing with their clicks. Hence, I think the mantra of 'if you don't like it, fork it" is not really valid in this scenario. Note this is opposed to projects with paid developers like Apache and the Linux kernel which is supported by corporate entities and not end users.
Also, I remember that Mozilla wanted contributions for the NYT ad a few years ago and many of my friends who were students barely scraping by, contributed some of their much needed money to the project. Apart from that I guess a ton of people donated money to Mozilla in the past few years thinking that they needed funding badly. Did Mozilla really need it or were they getting enough money from Google to run that ad by themselves? The fact that the CEO of Mozilla gets a compensation of half a million dollars makes it worse.
Does this also mean the users(who are contributing to the coffers with their use of Firefox) can demand fixes to the nagging bugs and not get a 'if you don't like it fork it' reply? Take a look at this very annoying image captions wrapping bug that plagued users and web developers and was unfixed for seven years despite even stalwarts like XKCD's Randall Munroe complaining in this bugzilla thread. Note that you need to copy paste because bugzilla doesn't allow links from Slashdot https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
It makes for very entertaining reading. I personally use Opera(I used to be a big supporter of Firefox back in the day) for it's leanness and speed. I would switch over to Firefox in a flash if they fix the bloatness.
I just can't believe people still take Apple's side on this. The phone is not really open, you can't make your own ringtones from MP3s. You can't see the filesystem. Both of which you can even do with a MS WM phone. All iPhone got is Visual Voicemail from the carrier's side.
I am just going to repost what in a post below.
Lets do the math on Apple "wresting power" from the carriers. Carriers typically discount the phone from the retail unlocked price. For example, a HTC Mogul(a 3G phone with a ton of features) has a retail unlocked price of around $550. Sprint sells it for $300 with a 2 year contract. In fact, many companies deeply discount phones to such an extent that you can get $50 BACK with some phones(check on Amazon or Wirefly). The phone manufacturer makes a fixed profit and moves on.
But what did Apple do with the iPhone? It charges a hefty premium(note how they were able to drop $200 off the phone in just 2 months) and makes a nice profit with the price($400 now or whatever) and then makes about $450 MORE over two years from the $60 a month that AT&T charges the consumer who takes up the 2 yr contract. The user gets a nice phone, visual voicemail etc. in return, at a VERY HIGH premium.
After a ton of iPhone articles and about a hundered +5 insightful comments on Slashdot about how Apple will "change the game" and make it better for consumers, that is the bottomline. This is the real reason why Apple hates unlockers and not just because of exclusivity contract with AT&T. For every unlocker they potentially lose close to $400.
Apple did change the game of carriers ripping off customers and ushered in the golden era of carriers AND phone companies raping consumers. All this right under the noses of otherwise wise and intelligent people who seem to have been taken in by the "RDF.
Uhh what? Lets do the math on Apple "wresting power" from the carriers. Carriers typically discount the phone from the retail unlocked price. For example, a HTC Mogul(a 3G phone with a ton of features) has a retail unlocked price of around $550. Sprint sells it for $300 with a 2 year contract. In fact, many companies deeply discount phones to such an extent that you can get $50 BACK with some phones(check on Amazon or Wirefly). The phone manufacturer makes a fixed profit and moves on.
But what did Apple do with the iPhone? It charges a hefty premium(note how they were able to drop $200 off the phone in just 2 months) and makes a nice profit with the price($400 now or whatever) and then makes about $450 MORE over two years from the $60 a month that AT&T charges the consumer who takes up the 2 yr contract. The user gets a nice phone, visual voicemail etc. in return, at a VERY HIGH premium.
After a ton of iPhone articles and about a hundered +5 insightful comments on Slashdot about how Apple will "change the game" and make it better for consumers, that is the bottomline. This is the real reason why Apple hates unlockers and not just because of exclusivity contract with AT&T. For every unlocker they potentially lose close to $400.
Apple did change the game of carriers ripping off customers and ushered in the golden era of carriers AND phone companies raping consumers. All this right under the noses of otherwise wise and intelligent people who seem to have been taken in by the "RDF.
Apple did change the game of just the
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, I was expecting something along the lines of a program that used the hum or whistle of the fan and speeded up or slowed down the fan to get the jingles. This isn't even funny.
Relax. It's a doctored screenshot.
So you mean to say fixing memory leaks in Firefox that plague users are not what the Mozilla Foundation desires?
Also, I remember that Mozilla wanted contributions for the NYT ad a few years ago and many of my friends who were students barely scraping by, contributed some of their much needed money to the project. Apart from that I guess a ton of people donated money to Mozilla in the past few years thinking that they needed funding badly. Did Mozilla really need it or were they getting enough money from Google to run that ad by themselves? The fact that the CEO of Mozilla gets a compensation of half a million dollars makes it worse.
Does this also mean the users(who are contributing to the coffers with their use of Firefox) can demand fixes to the nagging bugs and not get a 'if you don't like it fork it' reply? Take a look at this very annoying image captions wrapping bug that plagued users and web developers and was unfixed for seven years despite even stalwarts like XKCD's Randall Munroe complaining in this bugzilla thread. Note that you need to copy paste because bugzilla doesn't allow links from Slashdot https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 [mozilla.org]
How about using some of those tens of millions to help hire good programmers and pay for fixes to the bugs?Firefox gets 55 million from Google because of all it's users, the CEO gets half a million a year, and the users have to pay for fixing bugs?
If you rip a Audio CD to MP3,AAC,WMA or OGG that is lossy compression. There is no way of getting the original data back. If you compress it with FLAC, you can get the exact bits present on the original Audio CD. Note that we are talking about only digital conversions. How the CD was mastered from the analog source is a complete different matter and has nothing to do with FLAC.
To add to your question, I would like to know how he knows that the performance difference is because of the DRM.
What complaints? You can read some of the debunking of the DRM FUD here http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=309&page=1 Read parts 1 and 2 of that series too.
From another comment from above: According to BCN [yahoo.com], boxed OS sales doubled in October. Microsoft and Apple's market shares in Japan on typical month is around 8 to 2. Microsoft jumped to 91.2% share when Vista came out and Apple had 51.2% share when Tiger came out. Apple just had 65.2% market share month with Leopard, that is nearly a 15% jump compared to the last OS update.
From http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=6715
In any case, Mozillas expenses in 2006 were just shy of $20 million at $19.77 million. The bulk of these expenses were for 90 people working full or part-time on Mozilla. Employees were 70 percent of expenses.What you said is true, but then why do people who even request fixes and changes get a ton of +5 insightful 'if you don't like it, for it' replies here on Slashdot? Is that a reasonable response to someone who's asking to fix bugs and leaks?
Yes the first thing I do after installing Linux is to search for "Internet Explorer" in Google to download and install it. Now because of your brilliant idea, people like me would install Firefox instead.
Firefox does not look like a very typical FOSS program anymore in which developers don't get any money back from the masses of users. The developers working at Mozilla are getting paid directly from the money that the users are contributing with their clicks. Hence, I think the mantra of 'if you don't like it, fork it" is not really valid in this scenario. Note this is opposed to projects with paid developers like Apache and the Linux kernel which is supported by corporate entities and not end users.
Also, I remember that Mozilla wanted contributions for the NYT ad a few years ago and many of my friends who were students barely scraping by, contributed some of their much needed money to the project. Apart from that I guess a ton of people donated money to Mozilla in the past few years thinking that they needed funding badly. Did Mozilla really need it or were they getting enough money from Google to run that ad by themselves? The fact that the CEO of Mozilla gets a compensation of half a million dollars makes it worse.
Does this also mean the users(who are contributing to the coffers with their use of Firefox) can demand fixes to the nagging bugs and not get a 'if you don't like it fork it' reply? Take a look at this very annoying image captions wrapping bug that plagued users and web developers and was unfixed for seven years despite even stalwarts like XKCD's Randall Munroe complaining in this bugzilla thread. Note that you need to copy paste because bugzilla doesn't allow links from Slashdot https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375
It makes for very entertaining reading. I personally use Opera(I used to be a big supporter of Firefox back in the day) for it's leanness and speed. I would switch over to Firefox in a flash if they fix the bloatness.
I am just going to repost what in a post below.
Lets do the math on Apple "wresting power" from the carriers. Carriers typically discount the phone from the retail unlocked price. For example, a HTC Mogul(a 3G phone with a ton of features) has a retail unlocked price of around $550. Sprint sells it for $300 with a 2 year contract. In fact, many companies deeply discount phones to such an extent that you can get $50 BACK with some phones(check on Amazon or Wirefly). The phone manufacturer makes a fixed profit and moves on.
But what did Apple do with the iPhone? It charges a hefty premium(note how they were able to drop $200 off the phone in just 2 months) and makes a nice profit with the price($400 now or whatever) and then makes about $450 MORE over two years from the $60 a month that AT&T charges the consumer who takes up the 2 yr contract. The user gets a nice phone, visual voicemail etc. in return, at a VERY HIGH premium.
After a ton of iPhone articles and about a hundered +5 insightful comments on Slashdot about how Apple will "change the game" and make it better for consumers, that is the bottomline. This is the real reason why Apple hates unlockers and not just because of exclusivity contract with AT&T. For every unlocker they potentially lose close to $400.
Apple did change the game of carriers ripping off customers and ushered in the golden era of carriers AND phone companies raping consumers. All this right under the noses of otherwise wise and intelligent people who seem to have been taken in by the "RDF.
But what did Apple do with the iPhone? It charges a hefty premium(note how they were able to drop $200 off the phone in just 2 months) and makes a nice profit with the price($400 now or whatever) and then makes about $450 MORE over two years from the $60 a month that AT&T charges the consumer who takes up the 2 yr contract. The user gets a nice phone, visual voicemail etc. in return, at a VERY HIGH premium.
After a ton of iPhone articles and about a hundered +5 insightful comments on Slashdot about how Apple will "change the game" and make it better for consumers, that is the bottomline. This is the real reason why Apple hates unlockers and not just because of exclusivity contract with AT&T. For every unlocker they potentially lose close to $400.
Apple did change the game of carriers ripping off customers and ushered in the golden era of carriers AND phone companies raping consumers. All this right under the noses of otherwise wise and intelligent people who seem to have been taken in by the "RDF. Apple did change the game of just the
...to write a entire article about a technology while carefully sidestepping what it fudging actually is.