1) You need experienced people to run closed source solutions aswell, cause we're talking about enterprise solutions, not notepad.
2) The open source solution is usually harder to set up and implement. But this is due to its mayor flexibility (ergo, it can be twisted to match your needs).
3) Closed source solutions have a oh-so-better-support is a myth. You probably didn't read the licenses you purchased
4) Once you've set up an open source solution, you don't have to put someone there to watch the app running. Really... the app won't try to escape outta the window. Believe me
5) It all comes down to what you want. You can hire a semi-alphabetized babboon to run your IT department. And he might be able to set up a windows network, but if shit happens (shit that the programmers didn't imagine could happen, and I saw a few of those things) he might not be able to save your beloved business.
What I and my boss always liked in open source solutions is the fact that we were given the opportunity to understand exactly what went wrong, and be able to understand if it was our mistake or the programmer's (all observed cases had been of the first class). And to me, that's a very valuable aspect because it allows me to work (I'm not paid to watch the apps running)
No. Linux fails not because of this attitude (which is just a loud minority among the community).
It fails because of its development model. Many problems of Linux comes from the fact that it ain't monolithic at all. It is founded over a large number of independent projects that, even if they do their best effort to tie things together, still have great problems in this.
Suppose for a second that Microsoft just programs the NT kernel, and lets another software house, that is completely independent from Microsoft, develop the graphic interface. And another one develop.Net, and another one developing filesystems etc etc etc. I bet that if some Microsoft executive is reading this he's gonna have shivers.
Said that, I'm not going to say that Linux development model sucks. But it surely has its advantages (one over all, high modularity and scalability) and its flaws (integration etc etc).
Also, the fact that many marginal projects are run by people who does that only as hobby is a main handicap in terms of reacting to users request.
Now I know why they hired Daniel Robbins.
People will just go "emerge halo2" and in a week you have your game, compiled for whichever console you are running:P
I've been a C developer for a long time (before being hybernated for 20 years, apparently).
When I came back to life (life at normal speed I mean, not life at 0.000001x you get inside the hybernator) I installed Linux and I met Mono.
Apart of jokes, I would like to know what Microsoft thinks of Mono. I like it alot because it allows me to produce fairly portable code (I just need to recompile it) with an environment that is simple and _very_ productive (C# rocks).
Do you think that Mono is mature for prime time? And do you think Mono/.NET has a future as "common ground" between Linux and Windows?
I'm so going to use that line on my customers, when they come to me screaming because the software I coded crashed miserably. "Name me one piece of software that doesn't crash!"
I'm not going to bash Microsoft because their software sometimes crashes (and anyway, it doesn't crash that much). On this point, both the OSS and MS solution does remarkably well.
But stating that it's not a problem if a software crashes because other software also does is simply idiot. If people thought like you, we'd be still living in the caves (hey, bears also does!). But luckily, you don't work at MS.
LGeneral uses OpenGL?
And btw, I tried the "AllowGLXWithComposite" and it does not work. By the way, enabling "AllowGLXWithComposite" lets the GL screensavers run just fine, and any app containing a gtkglarea control works fine as well. Also, cube works (even if not in fullscreen mode).
Or the problem might reside in LGeneral (even if I doubt this).
I started using the same algorythm since I was eight (1990).
Sometimes people will take me to terribly boring shows, and I couldn't help but let my mind wander away (I was a very creative boy, to use an euphemism). But, to carefully hide my total lack of intrest, I would clap my hands and fake to look intrested when I heard clappings or comments from people near me.
Btw, don't reply to my post, I won't be reading it, I'm on my way to the patent office...
Ok, that's gonna be terribly OT. But it seems like any SDL application HIGHLY dislikes the Composite extensions, killing the window manager and other nasty things when i try to fire them up with the composite extensions enabled. Other than that, I noticed it runs better on my old athlon 900 with a geforce2 than on my sempron 2600+ with an ati.
All's right but... what I've always enjoyed in Linux is that you can "make it".
If something doesn't work, I like to think I can "code my way out" of the problem (it works more or less like when, in an FPS, you're stuck in a building and you force your way out of it by firing in every direction continuosly, and getting killed in five secs). Of course, I never do that, but I like to think that if I really want I can code my driver and/or fix the bug. This doesn't happen with OSX or the mighty W.
And this leads me to a second thought: do we really need a desktop linux? Something "usable by the masses"? I don't need it. I like to bang my head for days over a non working driver, because I feel so good when I get it to work...
On the other side, I cannot honestly blame who doesn't like all this. It's not their fault if they're mentally healthy. But, for they needs, I think OSX or the mighty W suits better.
Let us mad people entertain ourselves with Linux, and don't worry, if we ever come out with a great idea, it's Open Source...
I think there is something missing tho. In games as well as in movies (well, the large majority of them) the violence isn't real.
I'm used to play WWII FPS. When I throw a grenade at someone, the guy is usually thrown away a dozen feet, losing a little blood, says "Uh" in a very British way (less noise man, you're only dying) and passes out.
In reality (I've asked my grandpa, who fought that war) it was different. The guy would probably have one of his legs chopped off, along with one arm, and would die after fifteen minutes, contorcing on the floor, with blood spraying out of his wounds like a broken water pipe and screaming in a way that would give you nightmares for ages.
Apologizing for the brutality of the post, I would point out that the most dangerous thing about such games isn't violence in itself, but is the harmless appearance it has. Which is what differs games from The Real World (tm): in games, violence does absolutely nothing. That's not the same once you turn off the comp.
Of course, you may object that actually GNOME and KDE do the same things, and in two different ways. But I'd say, that's a good thing.
Both have pros and cons, and this way everybody can choose what better fills his needs. Plus, I'd like to add, what made me love linux is the fact that I can choose. I can make MY system. A system that suits my needs.
Of course the average dumb user will never need this, but I don't think Linux should lose its spirit to run after people that aren't intrested in it.
There's already Microsoft providing single packaged, totally uncustomizable, elephant sized operating systems (for uncustomizable but really better OSes, there are shiny Apples).
Think different... or wait, just think. It's enough.
Well, I dunno. I'm talking about the Italian case, but I suspect that Norwegian law is similar on this point. Here, if someone sues you, the government has to charge you. Even if the prosecutor himself believes it's all bullshit. That's because it's only the judge who has the power of judging (pretty trivial, I know) if the charges are bullshit or not (also because, by law you are innocent until the opposite is proven).
Unluckily, not many people understand this, here in Italy. Including our prime minister, but that's another story.
I don't think there is any piracy or embarassment. Simply, Jon wasn't guilty according to Norwegian law.
And actually, Jon just made a program who was meant to be able to play DVDs. Accusing him of piracy is like accusing Boeing to help terrorism, or accusing gun shops for any shooting that happens.
This kind of argument only worked in Soviet Russia. In today's world, they're pretty ridiculous.
That's mainly because GNOME and KDe are following Windows. Anyway, I don't think the point was that.
The point isn't "GNOME is so fucking better". The point is: I do really need all this stuff? Look at Looking Glass and Avalon. Ohhh, they're so amazing to look at.
But honestly, if I had to use Looking Glass at work my productivity would drop dramatically, cause I'd spent half of my time spinning windows around instead of working. The same with 70% of the features of modern desktops environments.
PS: How you got the idea that the previous poster was hinting that GNOME was better?
In my point of view, the whole problem gets around gameplay and game immersion. As the article stated, difference between fair play and cheating ain't clear-cut.
So, for what regards me, I put the line between what still makes the game fun and what totally destroys the gaming experience. For example, invoking continuous air strikes over the zones where the attackers are forced to pass, and hiding in the bunkers, isn't cheating at all. But it is BORING. You keep repeating the same action over and over and make a carnage, but to me it ain't fun.
On both sides. I play a game to first be into an environment that isn't the real life, where I can think of being someone else (being a Rangers lieutenant ain't bad:D). And where I can have adventure and constant emotions... emotions that plain carnages and campering doesn't give me.
Spose you got the point. We were discussing this with the graphic artists at work just today (I'm the techie guy there) and they were pointing out that maybe it will be useful to have a vector tool that includes a little raster editing.
And I managed to see it with my eyes, when Illustrator succeeded in screwing up horribly a PNG image that we needed to import in order to create a brochure (I proposed to open the PNG with PS and re-save it as interlaced... it worked, but I have no clue of the reason behind it). Probably just a little more integration between two tools isn't that bad... as long as you're able to keep the program usable.
Ok, that's a bit offtopic, but the review reminded me a thing that happened a couple months ago at work.
Premitted that I use Windows and MS Office only at work, and that I'm there only from three months (so I don't know much of Word) a funny thing happened to me, and I would like to know who is the genius at MS that programmed the new autospellchecking and correction function.
I'm Italian, and hence the dictionary used by default is the Italian one. A pity that, in the official italian (intended as language), there is no word to properly translate to click. People usually use the verb cliccare, which is commonly recognized but, as I said, not considered an italian word. Anyway, my boss had to write down a little administrator manual for a site we designed (our customer ain't exactly a geek, quite the opposite). In this manual, every two line he was like "click here, click there" and so he wrote a paper which contained a fair amount of cliccare.
But Word 2003, without giving anyone some sort of advice (my boss said he hasn't activated the feature, and he ain't a geek himself, so I think this comes activated when you install Office) decided that cliccare was wrong, and corrected it automatically (with absolutely no warnings! Neither a lil flashy icon) with ciccare (in English, to spit).
My boss saved the doc and suddenly mailed them to our customer. I'll let the reader imagine what kind of phone call I received from our customer, who seemed pretty shocked that he had to humiliate his brand new 19'' inch monitor in order to use our site.
So, if uncle Bill reads this (yes, Mr William Gates III, I'm talking with you), I would like to ask him to fire the idiot that added such a function.
I think your example doesn't apply to the situation. It's more like if someone comes out with a car that can also be a ship (they did, already, several times). And how many of those they sold out?
Example number two: Mozilla. Just look at the leap Mozilla made when it focused on just browsing the internet and got rid of all the additional stuff that just slowed it down (putting them in external packages).
Of course, reading mails, chatting and editing html pages and having coffee are all part of the amazing internet experience, as much as designing logos and brochures and editing photos are part of the graphic work. But this doesn't mean you have to put them in one mastodontic swiss army knife that's as much easy to drive as a pig on the ice (with apologies to Graham Hill).
Unless you really think Mozilla was better than IE or Firefox.
Ok, wait a second and enlighten my darkened and not really fast mind.
I didn't really followed the Acrylic/Expression development, but from what I heard here on/. its revolutionary feature stands in the fact it combines raster and vector editing in one single software.
Now, what's the damned point in this?
In my little opinion, the whole thing is useless. I was perfectly fine with having separate programs for raster and vector editing, and absolutely no need to mix them.
I hate this stuff. Why those fuckers don't actually WORK instead of blabbering around? I pay them by buying consoles.
I want them to work hard and give me some really revolutionary thing, not just some technology that was forgotten in some drawer for 20 years and then brought back and presented as "the biggest revolution in computer gaming experience (cash is over there, thank you)".
I would like someone to explain me why PS3 or XBox360 are so revolutionary. I read about the XBox and it doesn't seem like that. It's nice, okay, but the technologies behind it have been out for ages.
PS Graphics is not all. Gaming industry is developing the Holliwood syndrome. Lot of special effects, but you exactly know how the movie's gonna end... the plot is lame and predictable and already seen. Give us something different
That's incredible. Now, Microsoft HAS to release Longhorn. C'mon, you can't let the Debian guys be faster than you....
Apart from jokes, I'm curious to know if Debian still holds a share of the "market". It was a gooddistribution, but a lil too static. I honestly think they should consider doubling the release speed, or atleast provide significant updates for a release from time to time (who said "and why not call 'em Service Packs?").
And Iraq had more hacking capabilities than North Korea anyway. At least they dropped off the good guy list only in the 90es (meaning, they had access to all the technologies dveloped in the meantime. Plus, they had oil, so I think Putin sold his mother to them too, before the war).
Anyway, what's the problem with North Korea is that they're fucking aliens. I mean, in Iraq, nobody loved Saddam, and nobody wants him back. But in NK, they got their brains washed for ages. They'll bomb us the next day with nukes, if they actually HAVE some. I seriously doubt they have. Along with hacking capabilities.
Now, we might invade them tomorrow, with maybe 10 losses from our side and give them democracy and such shit. But then, they'll probably start making cars instead of nukes and kill our economy even more.
Long life to Kim Jong-Il!
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. And considering how badly Macromedia Apps uses windows XP widgets, I wonder what will happen with Vista.
This makes me wonder.... how much does the NYT pays his coders?
Don't ask what open source can do for you, ask yourself what you can do for open source!
And let's hope RMS doesn't see this....
1) You need experienced people to run closed source solutions aswell, cause we're talking about enterprise solutions, not notepad.
2) The open source solution is usually harder to set up and implement. But this is due to its mayor flexibility (ergo, it can be twisted to match your needs).
3) Closed source solutions have a oh-so-better-support is a myth. You probably didn't read the licenses you purchased
4) Once you've set up an open source solution, you don't have to put someone there to watch the app running. Really... the app won't try to escape outta the window. Believe me
5) It all comes down to what you want. You can hire a semi-alphabetized babboon to run your IT department. And he might be able to set up a windows network, but if shit happens (shit that the programmers didn't imagine could happen, and I saw a few of those things) he might not be able to save your beloved business.
What I and my boss always liked in open source solutions is the fact that we were given the opportunity to understand exactly what went wrong, and be able to understand if it was our mistake or the programmer's (all observed cases had been of the first class). And to me, that's a very valuable aspect because it allows me to work (I'm not paid to watch the apps running)
No. Linux fails not because of this attitude (which is just a loud minority among the community). .Net, and another one developing filesystems etc etc etc. I bet that if some Microsoft executive is reading this he's gonna have shivers.
It fails because of its development model. Many problems of Linux comes from the fact that it ain't monolithic at all. It is founded over a large number of independent projects that, even if they do their best effort to tie things together, still have great problems in this.
Suppose for a second that Microsoft just programs the NT kernel, and lets another software house, that is completely independent from Microsoft, develop the graphic interface. And another one develop
Said that, I'm not going to say that Linux development model sucks. But it surely has its advantages (one over all, high modularity and scalability) and its flaws (integration etc etc).
Also, the fact that many marginal projects are run by people who does that only as hobby is a main handicap in terms of reacting to users request.
Now I know why they hired Daniel Robbins. :P
People will just go "emerge halo2" and in a week you have your game, compiled for whichever console you are running
I've been a C developer for a long time (before being hybernated for 20 years, apparently).
When I came back to life (life at normal speed I mean, not life at 0.000001x you get inside the hybernator) I installed Linux and I met Mono.
Apart of jokes, I would like to know what Microsoft thinks of Mono. I like it alot because it allows me to produce fairly portable code (I just need to recompile it) with an environment that is simple and _very_ productive (C# rocks). Do you think that Mono is mature for prime time? And do you think Mono/.NET has a future as "common ground" between Linux and Windows?
I'm so going to use that line on my customers, when they come to me screaming because the software I coded crashed miserably.
"Name me one piece of software that doesn't crash!"
I'm not going to bash Microsoft because their software sometimes crashes (and anyway, it doesn't crash that much). On this point, both the OSS and MS solution does remarkably well.
But stating that it's not a problem if a software crashes because other software also does is simply idiot. If people thought like you, we'd be still living in the caves (hey, bears also does!). But luckily, you don't work at MS.
LGeneral uses OpenGL? And btw, I tried the "AllowGLXWithComposite" and it does not work. By the way, enabling "AllowGLXWithComposite" lets the GL screensavers run just fine, and any app containing a gtkglarea control works fine as well. Also, cube works (even if not in fullscreen mode). Or the problem might reside in LGeneral (even if I doubt this).
I started using the same algorythm since I was eight (1990). Sometimes people will take me to terribly boring shows, and I couldn't help but let my mind wander away (I was a very creative boy, to use an euphemism). But, to carefully hide my total lack of intrest, I would clap my hands and fake to look intrested when I heard clappings or comments from people near me. Btw, don't reply to my post, I won't be reading it, I'm on my way to the patent office...
Ok, that's gonna be terribly OT. But it seems like any SDL application HIGHLY dislikes the Composite extensions, killing the window manager and other nasty things when i try to fire them up with the composite extensions enabled. Other than that, I noticed it runs better on my old athlon 900 with a geforce2 than on my sempron 2600+ with an ati.
All's right but... what I've always enjoyed in Linux is that you can "make it". If something doesn't work, I like to think I can "code my way out" of the problem (it works more or less like when, in an FPS, you're stuck in a building and you force your way out of it by firing in every direction continuosly, and getting killed in five secs). Of course, I never do that, but I like to think that if I really want I can code my driver and/or fix the bug. This doesn't happen with OSX or the mighty W.
And this leads me to a second thought: do we really need a desktop linux? Something "usable by the masses"? I don't need it. I like to bang my head for days over a non working driver, because I feel so good when I get it to work...
On the other side, I cannot honestly blame who doesn't like all this. It's not their fault if they're mentally healthy. But, for they needs, I think OSX or the mighty W suits better.
Let us mad people entertain ourselves with Linux, and don't worry, if we ever come out with a great idea, it's Open Source...
I think there is something missing tho. In games as well as in movies (well, the large majority of them) the violence isn't real.
I'm used to play WWII FPS. When I throw a grenade at someone, the guy is usually thrown away a dozen feet, losing a little blood, says "Uh" in a very British way (less noise man, you're only dying) and passes out.
In reality (I've asked my grandpa, who fought that war) it was different. The guy would probably have one of his legs chopped off, along with one arm, and would die after fifteen minutes, contorcing on the floor, with blood spraying out of his wounds like a broken water pipe and screaming in a way that would give you nightmares for ages.
Apologizing for the brutality of the post, I would point out that the most dangerous thing about such games isn't violence in itself, but is the harmless appearance it has. Which is what differs games from The Real World (tm): in games, violence does absolutely nothing. That's not the same once you turn off the comp.
What disturbs you so much about GNOME?
Of course, you may object that actually GNOME and KDE do the same things, and in two different ways. But I'd say, that's a good thing.
Both have pros and cons, and this way everybody can choose what better fills his needs. Plus, I'd like to add, what made me love linux is the fact that I can choose. I can make MY system. A system that suits my needs.
Of course the average dumb user will never need this, but I don't think Linux should lose its spirit to run after people that aren't intrested in it.
There's already Microsoft providing single packaged, totally uncustomizable, elephant sized operating systems (for uncustomizable but really better OSes, there are shiny Apples).
Think different... or wait, just think. It's enough.
Well, I dunno. I'm talking about the Italian case, but I suspect that Norwegian law is similar on this point. Here, if someone sues you, the government has to charge you. Even if the prosecutor himself believes it's all bullshit. That's because it's only the judge who has the power of judging (pretty trivial, I know) if the charges are bullshit or not (also because, by law you are innocent until the opposite is proven).
Unluckily, not many people understand this, here in Italy. Including our prime minister, but that's another story.
I don't think there is any piracy or embarassment. Simply, Jon wasn't guilty according to Norwegian law.
And actually, Jon just made a program who was meant to be able to play DVDs. Accusing him of piracy is like accusing Boeing to help terrorism, or accusing gun shops for any shooting that happens.
This kind of argument only worked in Soviet Russia. In today's world, they're pretty ridiculous.
That's mainly because GNOME and KDe are following Windows. Anyway, I don't think the point was that.
The point isn't "GNOME is so fucking better". The point is: I do really need all this stuff? Look at Looking Glass and Avalon. Ohhh, they're so amazing to look at.
But honestly, if I had to use Looking Glass at work my productivity would drop dramatically, cause I'd spent half of my time spinning windows around instead of working. The same with 70% of the features of modern desktops environments.
PS: How you got the idea that the previous poster was hinting that GNOME was better?
In my point of view, the whole problem gets around gameplay and game immersion. As the article stated, difference between fair play and cheating ain't clear-cut. So, for what regards me, I put the line between what still makes the game fun and what totally destroys the gaming experience. For example, invoking continuous air strikes over the zones where the attackers are forced to pass, and hiding in the bunkers, isn't cheating at all. But it is BORING. You keep repeating the same action over and over and make a carnage, but to me it ain't fun. On both sides. I play a game to first be into an environment that isn't the real life, where I can think of being someone else (being a Rangers lieutenant ain't bad :D). And where I can have adventure and constant emotions... emotions that plain carnages and campering doesn't give me.
Spose you got the point. We were discussing this with the graphic artists at work just today (I'm the techie guy there) and they were pointing out that maybe it will be useful to have a vector tool that includes a little raster editing. And I managed to see it with my eyes, when Illustrator succeeded in screwing up horribly a PNG image that we needed to import in order to create a brochure (I proposed to open the PNG with PS and re-save it as interlaced... it worked, but I have no clue of the reason behind it). Probably just a little more integration between two tools isn't that bad... as long as you're able to keep the program usable.
Ok, that's a bit offtopic, but the review reminded me a thing that happened a couple months ago at work.
Premitted that I use Windows and MS Office only at work, and that I'm there only from three months (so I don't know much of Word) a funny thing happened to me, and I would like to know who is the genius at MS that programmed the new autospellchecking and correction function.
I'm Italian, and hence the dictionary used by default is the Italian one. A pity that, in the official italian (intended as language), there is no word to properly translate to click. People usually use the verb cliccare, which is commonly recognized but, as I said, not considered an italian word. Anyway, my boss had to write down a little administrator manual for a site we designed (our customer ain't exactly a geek, quite the opposite). In this manual, every two line he was like "click here, click there" and so he wrote a paper which contained a fair amount of cliccare.
But Word 2003, without giving anyone some sort of advice (my boss said he hasn't activated the feature, and he ain't a geek himself, so I think this comes activated when you install Office) decided that cliccare was wrong, and corrected it automatically (with absolutely no warnings! Neither a lil flashy icon) with ciccare (in English, to spit).
My boss saved the doc and suddenly mailed them to our customer. I'll let the reader imagine what kind of phone call I received from our customer, who seemed pretty shocked that he had to humiliate his brand new 19'' inch monitor in order to use our site.
So, if uncle Bill reads this (yes, Mr William Gates III, I'm talking with you), I would like to ask him to fire the idiot that added such a function.
I think your example doesn't apply to the situation. It's more like if someone comes out with a car that can also be a ship (they did, already, several times). And how many of those they sold out?
Example number two: Mozilla. Just look at the leap Mozilla made when it focused on just browsing the internet and got rid of all the additional stuff that just slowed it down (putting them in external packages).
Of course, reading mails, chatting and editing html pages and having coffee are all part of the amazing internet experience, as much as designing logos and brochures and editing photos are part of the graphic work. But this doesn't mean you have to put them in one mastodontic swiss army knife that's as much easy to drive as a pig on the ice (with apologies to Graham Hill).
Unless you really think Mozilla was better than IE or Firefox.
Ok, wait a second and enlighten my darkened and not really fast mind. /. its revolutionary feature stands in the fact it combines raster and vector editing in one single software.
I didn't really followed the Acrylic/Expression development, but from what I heard here on
Now, what's the damned point in this?
In my little opinion, the whole thing is useless. I was perfectly fine with having separate programs for raster and vector editing, and absolutely no need to mix them.
I hate this stuff. Why those fuckers don't actually WORK instead of blabbering around? I pay them by buying consoles.
I want them to work hard and give me some really revolutionary thing, not just some technology that was forgotten in some drawer for 20 years and then brought back and presented as "the biggest revolution in computer gaming experience (cash is over there, thank you)".
I would like someone to explain me why PS3 or XBox360 are so revolutionary. I read about the XBox and it doesn't seem like that. It's nice, okay, but the technologies behind it have been out for ages.
PS Graphics is not all. Gaming industry is developing the Holliwood syndrome. Lot of special effects, but you exactly know how the movie's gonna end... the plot is lame and predictable and already seen. Give us something different
That's incredible. Now, Microsoft HAS to release Longhorn. C'mon, you can't let the Debian guys be faster than you....
Apart from jokes, I'm curious to know if Debian still holds a share of the "market". It was a gooddistribution, but a lil too static. I honestly think they should consider doubling the release speed, or atleast provide significant updates for a release from time to time (who said "and why not call 'em Service Packs?").
And Iraq had more hacking capabilities than North Korea anyway. At least they dropped off the good guy list only in the 90es (meaning, they had access to all the technologies dveloped in the meantime. Plus, they had oil, so I think Putin sold his mother to them too, before the war).
Anyway, what's the problem with North Korea is that they're fucking aliens. I mean, in Iraq, nobody loved Saddam, and nobody wants him back. But in NK, they got their brains washed for ages. They'll bomb us the next day with nukes, if they actually HAVE some. I seriously doubt they have. Along with hacking capabilities.
Now, we might invade them tomorrow, with maybe 10 losses from our side and give them democracy and such shit. But then, they'll probably start making cars instead of nukes and kill our economy even more.
Long life to Kim Jong-Il!