I could care less when there's an "Official Release". I've been using the 2.0 betas for about 6 months, and the last 2 have rocked.
With OO.org 1.9.109, I am writing a book, creating presentations, preparing invoices, and all those other things which one expects to do with a functional office suite. If it stays in beta until 2010, that's fine with me - let it.
He stated that he believed the company to be engaged in illegal behaviour, and provided evidence of same. He said if the company didn't take steps to correct the problem, he'd go to the authorities.
What you're conveniently omitting is this, Derek: Under the law, if you witness the commission of a crime and you fail to report it, you can be charged as an accomplice.
He was giving the company an opportunity to cease behaving illegally, and covering his ass in the meantime.
The company responded by kicking him in the nutbag.
> By that logic no one could ever mod anything > off-topic.
I don't know about *that*... There are times when it's obvious someone doesn't understand an article, and is addressing the wrong issue.
>...I'd hardly call it 'unreasonable beyond any > stretch of the imagination'...
Well... it was quite late in my TZ... perhaps I could be excused the borderline bombast.;)
In any case, the point I was trying to get across is that there is a difference between "I don't know that this applies" and "I know that this doesn't apply" and someone stepped on the wrong side of it.
Parent might or might not be be indulging in copyright infringement rather than "fair use", and might or might not be sufficiently entertaining to deserve a +1 Funny mod, but does not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination merit -1 Off-Topic.
No government of which I'm aware has a law saying that Fords aren't allowed to be driven on the highway while Chevies are.
However, plenty of them have laws saying that any motor vehicle you plan to operate on public roads must be equipped with working brakes, headlights, etc.
Don't confuse enforcement of a standard with mandating a specific implementation of a standard.
We force our will on other people by force, toppling democratically elected governments and installing dictators who we then have to remove years later, or they end up fucking us over.
Or, sometimes, when the US doesn't move quite fast enough, the country in question handles the removal for them, and the successor regime screws them over instead.
Please stop linking to sites that run ads from text.burstnet.com. Or at least warn us in the article.
These ads are deceptive (e.g. Link with the text "Linux" that points to getthefacts.com), annoying (I expect a text link in the body of an article to point to something related to the article, don't you?), and an incredible waste of bandwidth and CPU power. (I have broadband, a 2.4 GHz processor, and 1 GB of RAM, and I can notice the slowdown. I shudder to think what these must do to someone running, say, an 800 Mhz with 256 MB on a dialup. Yow.)
Anybody got a pointer to a Mozilla or Firefox extension that kills these things? Or any advice on how to block them? I don't want to be responsible for BurstNet getting any hits from my surfing whatsoever. Banners I can accept as a necessary evil. Flash banners are incredibly annoying. These text-link-ad-horror-things, however, are simply evil and must be crushed.
I was trying to be funny and at the same time to to address what I see as a problem in Slashdot's recent decline in newworthiness and timeliness. It seems all too easy lately to get any old thing posted as front-page news on this site. Apparently nobody else got the joke, either.
I did look at your site. There's nothing wrong with it, but it is IMO fairly ordinary as such things go, and I have at least a dozen similar listings in my bookmarks.
Nothing personal, but I certainly don't think that it ranks up there with opening the source to an operating system, releasing a new version of a popular programming language, etc. It's just Not News, and the fact that the editors would consider it such is what's lame. That this topic only got about 20 posts should speak to that fairly handily. Sorry -- and call me petty if you will -- but that's what I honestly think.
> Or against Inkscape, which is open-source, and is > getting to be a reasonably stable, full-featured > piece of software. It runs on Windows and Linux.
I started using Inkscape recently. It's still a bit rough around the edges, but the latest version is quite stable on Linux, and it gets the job done. And because it uses SVG, it (a) lends itself to tweaking with a text editor (and even includes a basic textual interface of its own), and (b) interoperates easily with any other app that does likewise, including Dia and OpenOffice.org.
As for Acrylic... oh, XP only, too bad. guess I won't be using it since I won't run any version of Windows other than 2000. I did snag the Creature Effects download and might try that out at some point, though.
Well, I use SuSE on my desktop/work machine, so I've had to do very little tinkering. FreeBSD and Solaris are another story, those are mostly hobby boxes for now, but I learn a little something every time I use them.;)
I'm not a gamer... OTOH, Windows is one of the (many) platforms that my employer's flagship product supports, so I guess I'll keep it around. But the only things I run on that box anymore are Apache, PHP, MySQL, ActivePython, ActivePerl, and a good text editor.
OS X looks pretty cool from what I've seen of it, One of these days I'll probably get a Mac to add to the stable, since the company supports it as well.
> The average buyer doesn't want a distribution, > they want a complete operating system.
The average buyer can't tell the difference, so long as the bloody thing WORKS. Which most Linux (and even some BSD) distros do OOTB these days.
>...so why should they have to know what X.Org is > and why they need to care about it?
Gee. I run Linux and FreeBSD and I don't really care about X.org when using either.
> KDE + X.Org + Linux is a cobbled together setup, > Windows, MacOS X, Syllable, BeOS, etc. were and > are not.
Windows sold zillions of copies back in the 9X days and its being a GUI shell on top of DOS didn't stop that from happening. MacOSX is -- guess what? -- a GUI shell running on top of BSD (Darwin). It seems to be selling pretty well these days. As for Be, I have nothing against it, but it looks kinda dead to me.
> If you want desktop Linux to work well, and be a > true replacement for Windows...
But I don't want it to be a "true replacement for Windows"; I quit using Windows because I came to realise that Windows fundamentally sucks and I hate it. I wanted something better than Windows. This is why I switched to desktop *nix. Which -- unlike Windows -- works well.
> then it may mean that the KDE and/or GNOME guys > have to go Linux only or that another project > has to be started that creates a complete and > pure Linux operating system that is a "total > experience and environment" rather than a > collection of packages.
Huh? Just how much of that MS Kool-Aid have you been drinking there, matey? This is simply absurd -- as if you don't have to install apps on Windows? And sometimes have to download DLLs so they'll work? And sometimes have them overwrite other DLLs and break stuff?
>...one vision, one plan and a goal of one end > result.
How is this different from Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer? Sorry - trick question. It isn't any different. It's unthinking dogma.
Feel free to stay out of my way whilst I use stuff that works fine for me and do not discourage the folks who are nice enough to develop it for me because they fail to pass some cockeyed ideological purity test.
And the fact that there are people who would suggest that such a test is required for FOSS to enjoy success quite frankly scares me.
> I like to think of OSS/GPL stuff as a 'gateway > drug' - to use an analogy. Using it may not > automatically make people go to Linux, but it > certainly makes it an increasing possibility.
It worked for me. I used to be a Windows user. Then I fot started with Mozilla. Then switching from ASP to PHP. Then MySQL. Then it was Gaim. Then OO.org. Then Apache. Then Cygwin. Then... Finally, it got to the point where I was asking myself, "WTF am I doing running this stuff on Windows, anyway?"
Now I use Linux most of the time, tinker with FreeBSD, and am trying to decide whether or not I need that token Windows machine anymore.
Re TFA: I think the author has a point, but he doesn't state it very well, and he's (obviously) not thinking about some things.
Slashdot Mirror
> When is Open Office 2 going to be released?
I could care less when there's an "Official Release". I've been using the 2.0 betas for about 6 months, and the last 2 have rocked.
With OO.org 1.9.109, I am writing a book, creating presentations, preparing invoices, and all those other things which one expects to do with a functional office suite. If it stays in beta until 2010, that's fine with me - let it.
Derek, you persist in lying through omission.
He stated that he believed the company to be engaged in illegal behaviour, and provided evidence of same. He said if the company didn't take steps to correct the problem, he'd go to the authorities.
What you're conveniently omitting is this, Derek: Under the law, if you witness the commission of a crime and you fail to report it, you can be charged as an accomplice.
He was giving the company an opportunity to cease behaving illegally, and covering his ass in the meantime.
The company responded by kicking him in the nutbag.
> Like if I say "schema" when I mean "database"
:)
> (mixing Oracle terms and MySQL terms, but we all
> know what I mean in context).
At the risk of being pedantic... MySQL accepts "schema", as of version 5.0.2.
> By that logic no one could ever mod anything
...I'd hardly call it 'unreasonable beyond any
;)
> off-topic.
I don't know about *that*... There are times when it's obvious someone doesn't understand an article, and is addressing the wrong issue.
>
> stretch of the imagination'...
Well... it was quite late in my TZ... perhaps I could be excused the borderline bombast.
In any case, the point I was trying to get across is that there is a difference between "I don't know that this applies" and "I know that this doesn't apply" and someone stepped on the wrong side of it.
Note for moderators: "I don't get it" == "Off-Topic" evaluates as false.
Parent is quoting the lyrics to the theme song from the movie of the same name. The movie's title character is... wait for it... a rat.
The reference is made even more timely given that the song was performed by Michael Jackson, who's been in the news quite a bit lately.
Parent might or might not be be indulging in copyright infringement rather than "fair use", and might or might not be sufficiently entertaining to deserve a +1 Funny mod, but does not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination merit -1 Off-Topic.
That's the most cogent thing I've seen posted on this site in ages.
No government of which I'm aware has a law saying that Fords aren't allowed to be driven on the highway while Chevies are.
However, plenty of them have laws saying that any motor vehicle you plan to operate on public roads must be equipped with working brakes, headlights, etc.
Don't confuse enforcement of a standard with mandating a specific implementation of a standard.
I don't know what you think I was saying, but that was exactly my point.
Or, sometimes, when the US doesn't move quite fast enough, the country in question handles the removal for them, and the successor regime screws them over instead.
(Think Iran.)
Please stop linking to sites that run ads from text.burstnet.com. Or at least warn us in the article.
These ads are deceptive (e.g. Link with the text "Linux" that points to getthefacts.com), annoying (I expect a text link in the body of an article to point to something related to the article, don't you?), and an incredible waste of bandwidth and CPU power. (I have broadband, a 2.4 GHz processor, and 1 GB of RAM, and I can notice the slowdown. I shudder to think what these must do to someone running, say, an 800 Mhz with 256 MB on a dialup. Yow.)
Anybody got a pointer to a Mozilla or Firefox extension that kills these things? Or any advice on how to block them? I don't want to be responsible for BurstNet getting any hits from my surfing whatsoever. Banners I can accept as a necessary evil. Flash banners are incredibly annoying. These text-link-ad-horror-things, however, are simply evil and must be crushed.
Thank you.
I was trying to be funny and at the same time to to address what I see as a problem in Slashdot's recent decline in newworthiness and timeliness. It seems all too easy lately to get any old thing posted as front-page news on this site. Apparently nobody else got the joke, either.
I did look at your site. There's nothing wrong with it, but it is IMO fairly ordinary as such things go, and I have at least a dozen similar listings in my bookmarks.
Nothing personal, but I certainly don't think that it ranks up there with opening the source to an operating system, releasing a new version of a popular programming language, etc. It's just Not News, and the fact that the editors would consider it such is what's lame. That this topic only got about 20 posts should speak to that fairly handily. Sorry -- and call me petty if you will -- but that's what I honestly think.
Hell, I'm running Solaris 10 on an old 433 MHz Pentium 2 and it does just great, Rock-solid and surprisingly fast, given the hardware.
1. Post a link to my own blog as a Slashdot article.
3. Profit!!!
Ye gods, this is lame.
> ... why IE on the Mac didn't suck.
Excuse me? Have you ever actually used IE on the Mac?
Didn't think so.
> Or against Inkscape, which is open-source, and is
> getting to be a reasonably stable, full-featured
> piece of software. It runs on Windows and Linux.
I started using Inkscape recently. It's still a bit rough around the edges, but the latest version is quite stable on Linux, and it gets the job done. And because it uses SVG, it (a) lends itself to tweaking with a text editor (and even includes a basic textual interface of its own), and (b) interoperates easily with any other app that does likewise, including Dia and OpenOffice.org.
As for Acrylic... oh, XP only, too bad. guess I won't be using it since I won't run any version of Windows other than 2000. I did snag the Creature Effects download and might try that out at some point, though.
Welcome to the new Enclosure Edicts.
> ok dumb question here; how does the arctic melting
> cause flooding?
> It's a giant chunk of ice floating in water.
Ever hear of Greenland? Its icecap is not floating on water.
(The "green" part may be old Viking propaganda, but the "land" part is true enough.)
Parent is talking about an ActiveX control that allows MSIE to use the Gecko (Mozilla) rendering engine, and not a plugin that enables ActiveX in Mozilla.
> Am I the only one who actually tried to
> base64-decode the parent posting's data?
I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that it might...
Oh, the hell with it. Yeah.
It must really suck to be you, what with having nothing better to do with your time than copying and pasting old trolls like that.
Haven't you a hobby, like tennis, or philately?
Well, I use SuSE on my desktop/work machine, so I've had to do very little tinkering. FreeBSD and Solaris are another story, those are mostly hobby boxes for now, but I learn a little something every time I use them. ;)
I'm not a gamer... OTOH, Windows is one of the (many) platforms that my employer's flagship product supports, so I guess I'll keep it around. But the only things I run on that box anymore are Apache, PHP, MySQL, ActivePython, ActivePerl, and a good text editor.
OS X looks pretty cool from what I've seen of it, One of these days I'll probably get a Mac to add to the stable, since the company supports it as well.
> The average buyer doesn't want a distribution,
...so why should they have to know what X.Org is
...one vision, one plan and a goal of one end
> they want a complete operating system.
The average buyer can't tell the difference, so long as the bloody thing WORKS. Which most Linux (and even some BSD) distros do OOTB these days.
>
> and why they need to care about it?
Gee. I run Linux and FreeBSD and I don't really care about X.org when using either.
> KDE + X.Org + Linux is a cobbled together setup,
> Windows, MacOS X, Syllable, BeOS, etc. were and
> are not.
Windows sold zillions of copies back in the 9X days and its being a GUI shell on top of DOS didn't stop that from happening. MacOSX is -- guess what? -- a GUI shell running on top of BSD (Darwin). It seems to be selling pretty well these days. As for Be, I have nothing against it, but it looks kinda dead to me.
> If you want desktop Linux to work well, and be a
> true replacement for Windows...
But I don't want it to be a "true replacement for Windows"; I quit using Windows because I came to realise that Windows fundamentally sucks and I hate it. I wanted something better than Windows. This is why I switched to desktop *nix. Which -- unlike Windows -- works well.
> then it may mean that the KDE and/or GNOME guys
> have to go Linux only or that another project
> has to be started that creates a complete and
> pure Linux operating system that is a "total
> experience and environment" rather than a
> collection of packages.
Huh? Just how much of that MS Kool-Aid have you been drinking there, matey? This is simply absurd -- as if you don't have to install apps on Windows? And sometimes have to download DLLs so they'll work? And sometimes have them overwrite other DLLs and break stuff?
>
> result.
How is this different from Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer? Sorry - trick question. It isn't any different. It's unthinking dogma.
Feel free to stay out of my way whilst I use stuff that works fine for me and do not discourage the folks who are nice enough to develop it for me because they fail to pass some cockeyed ideological purity test.
And the fact that there are people who would suggest that such a test is required for FOSS to enjoy success quite frankly scares me.
Thank you.
> I like to think of OSS/GPL stuff as a 'gateway
> drug' - to use an analogy. Using it may not
> automatically make people go to Linux, but it
> certainly makes it an increasing possibility.
It worked for me. I used to be a Windows user. Then I fot started with Mozilla. Then switching from ASP to PHP. Then MySQL. Then it was Gaim. Then OO.org. Then Apache. Then Cygwin. Then... Finally, it got to the point where I was asking myself, "WTF am I doing running this stuff on Windows, anyway?"
Now I use Linux most of the time, tinker with FreeBSD, and am trying to decide whether or not I need that token Windows machine anymore.
Re TFA: I think the author has a point, but he doesn't state it very well, and he's (obviously) not thinking about some things.
> Linux. Solaris. MacOS.
:)
> Firefox runs on all of them.
You forgot BSD.