Every time one of my friends asks me why I prefer open source software to free (as in doesn't cost anything) software, I'm unable to explain these kinds of situations to them. As soon as the program becomes profitable, they sell the program and things tend to go downhill from there.
Will this support having more than one monitor? Every time I hear about new eye candy for Linux (I've tried composite and XGL), there's no support for dual monitors. It seems like everything cool breaks TwinView and Xinerama.
If Google gets a Microsoft-like grip on the search market (>90%), they don't need to do evil. Doing nothing at all is bad enough. Once they own the market, they don't need to compete, and all those innovative features that keep streaming out of Google might dry up.
The private flag indicates that you should not share the torrent with people outside the tracker. The only way of preventing this without client cooperation is DRM, and if torrent communities begin using DRM systems on their content, I think the irony will finally just be too much for me.
We need the average user to start using Linux. Most users are average, and until we get some decent market penetration, we won't get proper hardware support. Graphics card, motherboard, and especially sound card makers all ignore Linux, because it's such a small market share. If Linux had even 10% of the market, you can bet that I would suddenly have hardware acceleration on my 3-year-old sound card.
The real benefit of the alliance that I see is that.deb packages should be compatible across multiple distros. Unfortunately, Ubuntu is not part of the alliance, and there are a lot of 3rd-party Ubuntu.debs out there.
It doesn't change much if they actually aren't going for a profit. If they're hoping for personal gain from this, small markets like the Linux desktop are suddenly going to look much less important to them.
Since Firefox started gaining press, I've noticed that much of the polish that they've been putting into their Windows releases has been missing in the Linux builds. If they want to make money, you can bet this trend will continue.
Re:Maybe if they froze Longhorn's feature set
on
Microsoft To Extend RSS
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
That doesn't make sense to me at all. Are they secretly letting their stockholders know that their next product isn't going to just be a new UI? How about all the 3rd-party software companies that need APIs before the release? Also, many of the features they originally promised are now available in alternative OSes. I also can't think of an example where a software company (or any other company) used this move.
Now, toss in a bit on top for the Mozilla project, the FSF, the Apache Foundation, or whoever is selling the software, and you have something that is eye catching and benefits us all.
How far down this road can they go before they're no longer legally a not-for-profit organization?
Javascript is not just used for flare. It's also used to do useful things like check forms, download date from a server as it's needed (instead of going to a whole new page), and some useful UI features (such as collapsable elements).
I wish that Mozilla would only allow these language extensions (such as the -moz CSS properties) to work in Mozilla extensions. These are obviously useful language tools, but the web is divided enough as it is.
This way, the browser extension development scene could serve as a test bed to language extensions. The new syntax and functions don't seem to have been widely tested. If somebody finds a problem with the initial release, will the next version of Mozilla have a new syntax?
These extensions should be proposed to a standards organization. People need to stop dumping more undocumented, unstandardized stuff into the web.
The way things are going, web developers will soon have to target 4 versions of Mozilla, 3 versions of Internet Explorer, Konqueror, 2 versions of Safari, and Opera.
Actually, Google AdSense already was at the very top of the page, even when it was "hijacked." Google puts its own sponsored links before the actual search results.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time one of my friends asks me why I prefer open source software to free (as in doesn't cost anything) software, I'm unable to explain these kinds of situations to them. As soon as the program becomes profitable, they sell the program and things tend to go downhill from there.
They're recommending really high performance systems, because they know you'll need to dedicate at least half your CPU to spyware.
Will this support having more than one monitor? Every time I hear about new eye candy for Linux (I've tried composite and XGL), there's no support for dual monitors. It seems like everything cool breaks TwinView and Xinerama.
So, uh, how many of the KHTML devs got MacBooks?
If Google gets a Microsoft-like grip on the search market (>90%), they don't need to do evil. Doing nothing at all is bad enough. Once they own the market, they don't need to compete, and all those innovative features that keep streaming out of Google might dry up.
The private flag indicates that you should not share the torrent with people outside the tracker. The only way of preventing this without client cooperation is DRM, and if torrent communities begin using DRM systems on their content, I think the irony will finally just be too much for me.
We need the average user to start using Linux. Most users are average, and until we get some decent market penetration, we won't get proper hardware support. Graphics card, motherboard, and especially sound card makers all ignore Linux, because it's such a small market share. If Linux had even 10% of the market, you can bet that I would suddenly have hardware acceleration on my 3-year-old sound card.
The real benefit of the alliance that I see is that .deb packages should be compatible across multiple distros. Unfortunately, Ubuntu is not part of the alliance, and there are a lot of 3rd-party Ubuntu .debs out there.
It doesn't change much if they actually aren't going for a profit. If they're hoping for personal gain from this, small markets like the Linux desktop are suddenly going to look much less important to them. Since Firefox started gaining press, I've noticed that much of the polish that they've been putting into their Windows releases has been missing in the Linux builds. If they want to make money, you can bet this trend will continue.
That doesn't make sense to me at all. Are they secretly letting their stockholders know that their next product isn't going to just be a new UI? How about all the 3rd-party software companies that need APIs before the release? Also, many of the features they originally promised are now available in alternative OSes. I also can't think of an example where a software company (or any other company) used this move.
Now all we need is an P2P identity-swapping scene. I can be anybody!
Javascript is not just used for flare. It's also used to do useful things like check forms, download date from a server as it's needed (instead of going to a whole new page), and some useful UI features (such as collapsable elements).
I wish that Mozilla would only allow these language extensions (such as the -moz CSS properties) to work in Mozilla extensions. These are obviously useful language tools, but the web is divided enough as it is. This way, the browser extension development scene could serve as a test bed to language extensions. The new syntax and functions don't seem to have been widely tested. If somebody finds a problem with the initial release, will the next version of Mozilla have a new syntax? These extensions should be proposed to a standards organization. People need to stop dumping more undocumented, unstandardized stuff into the web. The way things are going, web developers will soon have to target 4 versions of Mozilla, 3 versions of Internet Explorer, Konqueror, 2 versions of Safari, and Opera.
Actually, Google AdSense already was at the very top of the page, even when it was "hijacked." Google puts its own sponsored links before the actual search results.