Well, TFA says he sold $20 Mill worth of software. It doesn't mean he sold it for $20 mill. From what I've seen, pirates usually sell software for about 10% of what it's worth. If that's the case here he got $2 mill before hosting expenses, etc... and fined $5.4 mill + jail time. Now fudge the numbers all you want but I really doubt he's going to come out of this thrilled with his financial situation.
No, it means that people will use C# expecting it to be cross platform and find out otherwise. Just like the stuff Microsoft pulled with their JVM. It's the standard "embrace and extend" stuff all over again. "It's cross platform... but you can't do this unless it's on windows..."
Hey, I have no problem spreading FUD about Microsoft as long as it's factual which this is. Microsoft's track record grants them no credibility when it comes to standards even if it's out of their control. Put a standard in their control (like C#... ) and it's completely nieve to believe they'll be trustworthy with it.
The only open source example I know of is my senior project then, and I wrote it when I knew very little of OO, so while my code isn't that impressive, Qt's magic still shines with it. If you're bored you can get it at this location. In all the programming I've done with Qt, though, I've never had to change a single line for compatibility purposes.
I bet they're more busy trying to come up with a killer feature for it so marketting can hype it up and it won't matter how stable the competition is. Redmond learned a long time ago that they don't ever need to have a good product - just the most desirable image.
"OOTB you have a functional language with a bunch of libraries."
Because everyone knows that after 30 years of being the industry's top dog, C++ doesn't have any libraries yet...
"Personally I think most people that go on and on about how you need C++ for UI programs are either too comfy to learn a new (possibly better) language. Or they just repeat what other people say."
Or they actually understand its power. Heaven forbid. But that's neither here or there: I'm talking to a person that actually advocates the use of a Microsoft standard (C#). Like they'll never abuse that power to further backstab competition. I mean, let's look at their track record here... Yeah, I've stopped expecting people to look at the long run anymore. Whatever.
I've used both Qt and wxWidgets. wxWidgets is... minimal. That's for sure. If you want an example of something written in Qt that works on Windows, Mac, and Linux, try Skype, Google Earth, or the Perforce clients suite. A far less interesting example was my senior project in college: I used Qt because I spend most of my time in Linux but the project had to run natively in Windows. I can furnish the source if you want, but I really doubt it'd interest you that much:-)
C++ doesn't need Qt's help for that stuff, for the most part. The RTTI things are almost irrelevent anymore now that C++ has dynamic_cast, the use of std::auto_ptr eliminates the need for garbage collection if used correctly, and it's probably best not to use non-std containers. Those were probably part of Qt for historical reasons like poor implemetation of the standard containers in many compilers over previous years.
Qt has a lot of attractive features, but its attempt to morph C++ into Java really isn't what does it for me.
mostly modelled after Java and C# standard libraries Whoa... careful there. When did Qt come out? When did C# come out? Let's not attribute anything as being modelled after C#. C# might be nice but the last thing it is is innovative.
I've yet to see a better cross-platform solution than Qt. It can be used with great languages like Ruby, Python, C++, and more... and it's worth every penny. Runs beautifully on Windows, Mac, and Linux with no modification to source.
If you an truly cross-platform, go for a technology that is developed by a company that is actually committed to the idea. From everything Microsoft's done I have no reason to believe that they really want.net to ever be truly cross-platform.
Oh, and I think of it less as negativity and more as a completely provable, objective analysis of Microsoft's track record. Challenge that one, because I can back it up for ages and ages.
You're correct about licensing, first off. Honestly I think that's a good thing - if someone wants to make money off their app they should kick back money to those whose work on which they are capitalizing.
As far as C vs. C++: Qt is C++, yes. GTK is C, yes. But there's also GTKMM, the C++ bindings for GTK. So this makes Gnome more flexible because it has both C and C++ bindings. I'm not sure if this is a win for Gnome or not, because I don't think any GUI C app could be more maintainable, flexible, and stable than a GUI C++ app, so I find it best to discourage the use of C in a GUI app. I have no grounds to back that except experience, and I admit it.
I don't think it'd be wise to mess with it at all. If there's one thing Microsoft is good at it's treachery, not technology. Rather than attempting to beat them at their own game (treachery), it'd be best to overcome them with merit (technology).
In terms of ease-of-use and speed, C++ with STL and BOOSt, Ruby, or Python have C# whipped -- and they're totally free.
GREAT! Now The most popular OSS desktop is tying itsself to a Microsoft controlled standard! Sweet! Let's persue that further!
C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C# (let's see you do inline grammar parsing with C#!) - and it's not under the control of a corporation that's proven it can't be trusted.
AFAIK, Amarok gets its cover art from Amazon.com, but I could be totally on crack there. At any rate, yes, Amarok automatically fetches album cover art and displays it for songs in that album. On top of that if you click "artist" it will grab information about the artist of the song using wikipedia and others: something that I've yet to see in any player except Amarok.
Now I've never played around with podcasts, but there are a few posts in this thread from Amarok users saying they mess with Podcasts under Amarok, so perhaps there really is support, just no multimillion dollar budget advocating it.
I can't stand iTunes. Nobody I know uses it, and most of them have iPods. I would use Amarok whether or not I had an iPod (I don't, actually), but I know *nobody* that uses iTunes for any reason other than to work with their iPod. Amarok has strengths iTunes never will have, and that makes you, sir, very wrong.
The only functionality that you listed that Amarok is missing is buying music - a pretty nonvital and trivial to implement feature. I'd be ready to wake you up when it's implemented, but I think you enjoy your nap more than reality. Sweet dreams.
Yes, we do. People like you and I can still kick back with our kind in IRC channels and the type of place they'll never go, but without being a mainstream fixture on the desktop, Linux's growth will be very limited and Linux will always be doomed to playing catch-up.
Same old arguments, based entirely on your personal experience or who you've chosen to listen to. In Ubuntu a user has only to click "Install new Software" from their gnome menu, click a check box or two for the programs they want (which have informative descriptions right there beside them...) and hit "ok." Free/LinSpire and PC-BSD have similar facilities.
No terminal, no hitting "next next I Agree next next ok next yes yes next finish" like in Windows, no hunting for the web site from which you can download the installer like in Windows.
You're posting old information and leveraging negative linux user stereotypes to reinforce the "validity" of your post and undermine the validity of dissenting opinions. If I had mod points, I'd label you -1 troll. Heck, your first sentence was a sweeping generalization that is just plain not true (as in the examples of Ubuntu, Free/LinSpire, and PC-BSD).
You chose to ignore facts when posting this. You chose to leverage stereotypes to grant yourself added undeserved credibility. You chose to decieve.
Redirecting spending money from copyrighted content to independent artists releasing their work under the Creative Commons license is akin to becoming vegan/veggetarian: It requires willpower, it requires sometimes going for what is best when it's not what you want, and overall it's worth it. It's also doomed to failure in an instant gratification culture.
It has my support, though, for what that's worth. I wish the idea the best of luck, and I gladly participate.
but I think this is useful information. I wouldn't have thought that business skills/knowlege would be more attractive than technical prowess for an IT guy. It's especially useful to know that the higher the budget/larger the fish, the more so this is true.
Microsoft claims there's nothing wrong -- again. Just like in their antitrust suits, etc. Let the evidence speak, not the multibillion dollar machine with an agenda.
They lied through their teeth in court under oath, what makes anyone think this is trustworthy info? I think everyone here is smart enough not to believe it for a second until they see it.
I wish it was as easy as $ == good staff. The problem is that the head of the HR department really doesn't know what a Linux Guru is, the kid down the street thinks he's a linux Guru, and there aren't a whole lot of organizations, certs, etc that can really prove that someone knows as much as they say (and perhaps believe) they do.
In the case of Microsoft, the creator of the product (MS) can guarantee the knowlege level of their techs, so if your employee turns out to be a dud you can fall back on MS's techs.
Support is vital for any OS to be taken seriously where downtime is unacceptable. I know way too many IT guys who would love to run some form of *nix for their servers, but their CEO's wouldn't let them. The reason? If there's a problem they can't fix, they resort to googling, mailing lists, forums, etc: they're pretty boned.
If there's a Windows problem they can't fix they can fly someone in from Redmond to get the job done in a few hours. Unfortunately Red Hat can't compete with that (yet). If minutes of downtime = millions in losses, Official support that always gets the job done is a requirement that can't be ignored.
That's true - Adoption rate in the US is a strategic factor in an OS's success. Not knowing what Ubuntu means (or the fact that, around here (the US), it sounds more like a coffee than an OS) isn't necessarily such a bad thing, though. I don't know about you but the first time I saw the name Ubuntu I thought 2 things:
What a singly unattractive name.
I wonder what it means.
So I looked up what it meant, and then thought two things:
I was wrong about that name.
I should give this a shot - this sounds like something I should be a part of.
... and I'm not alone in that. I know very few people who use Ubuntu that don't know what the name means, and don't consider themselves actively part of that cause. Mandr(ake | iva)? Red Hat? Fedora? Mepis? FreeBSD? (Lin | Free)spire? Can't say the same. So it might be that the question the name "Ubuntu" begs is more beneficial than the initial attractiveness of other distro names.
Ubuntu is the perfect name for the product. Its meaning is a philosophical standard, and one that the project aims to develop as its defining characteristic. Just because the product doesn't have an english name doesn't make its name inferior. English won't be the primary language in most countries in which Ubuntu will be used, so why should this African distrobution adopt an english name?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, TFA says he sold $20 Mill worth of software. It doesn't mean he sold it for $20 mill. From what I've seen, pirates usually sell software for about 10% of what it's worth. If that's the case here he got $2 mill before hosting expenses, etc... and fined $5.4 mill + jail time. Now fudge the numbers all you want but I really doubt he's going to come out of this thrilled with his financial situation.
No, it means that people will use C# expecting it to be cross platform and find out otherwise. Just like the stuff Microsoft pulled with their JVM. It's the standard "embrace and extend" stuff all over again. "It's cross platform... but you can't do this unless it's on windows..."
Hey, I have no problem spreading FUD about Microsoft as long as it's factual which this is. Microsoft's track record grants them no credibility when it comes to standards even if it's out of their control. Put a standard in their control (like C#... ) and it's completely nieve to believe they'll be trustworthy with it.
The only open source example I know of is my senior project then, and I wrote it when I knew very little of OO, so while my code isn't that impressive, Qt's magic still shines with it. If you're bored you can get it at this location. In all the programming I've done with Qt, though, I've never had to change a single line for compatibility purposes.
I bet they're more busy trying to come up with a killer feature for it so marketting can hype it up and it won't matter how stable the competition is. Redmond learned a long time ago that they don't ever need to have a good product - just the most desirable image.
"OOTB you have a functional language with a bunch of libraries."
Because everyone knows that after 30 years of being the industry's top dog, C++ doesn't have any libraries yet...
"Personally I think most people that go on and on about how you need C++ for UI programs are either too comfy to learn a new (possibly better) language. Or they just repeat what other people say."
Or they actually understand its power. Heaven forbid. But that's neither here or there: I'm talking to a person that actually advocates the use of a Microsoft standard (C#). Like they'll never abuse that power to further backstab competition. I mean, let's look at their track record here... Yeah, I've stopped expecting people to look at the long run anymore. Whatever.
I've used both Qt and wxWidgets. wxWidgets is... minimal. That's for sure. If you want an example of something written in Qt that works on Windows, Mac, and Linux, try Skype, Google Earth, or the Perforce clients suite. A far less interesting example was my senior project in college: I used Qt because I spend most of my time in Linux but the project had to run natively in Windows. I can furnish the source if you want, but I really doubt it'd interest you that much :-)
C++ doesn't need Qt's help for that stuff, for the most part. The RTTI things are almost irrelevent anymore now that C++ has dynamic_cast, the use of std::auto_ptr eliminates the need for garbage collection if used correctly, and it's probably best not to use non-std containers. Those were probably part of Qt for historical reasons like poor implemetation of the standard containers in many compilers over previous years.
Qt has a lot of attractive features, but its attempt to morph C++ into Java really isn't what does it for me.
mostly modelled after Java and C# standard libraries
Whoa... careful there. When did Qt come out? When did C# come out? Let's not attribute anything as being modelled after C#. C# might be nice but the last thing it is is innovative.
Just like Java is a standard. The Microsoft JVM absolutely killed Java... all the while adhering to its standards.
I've yet to see a better cross-platform solution than Qt. It can be used with great languages like Ruby, Python, C++, and more... and it's worth every penny. Runs beautifully on Windows, Mac, and Linux with no modification to source.
.net to ever be truly cross-platform.
If you an truly cross-platform, go for a technology that is developed by a company that is actually committed to the idea. From everything Microsoft's done I have no reason to believe that they really want
Oh, and I think of it less as negativity and more as a completely provable, objective analysis of Microsoft's track record. Challenge that one, because I can back it up for ages and ages.
You're correct about licensing, first off. Honestly I think that's a good thing - if someone wants to make money off their app they should kick back money to those whose work on which they are capitalizing.
As far as C vs. C++: Qt is C++, yes. GTK is C, yes. But there's also GTKMM, the C++ bindings for GTK. So this makes Gnome more flexible because it has both C and C++ bindings. I'm not sure if this is a win for Gnome or not, because I don't think any GUI C app could be more maintainable, flexible, and stable than a GUI C++ app, so I find it best to discourage the use of C in a GUI app. I have no grounds to back that except experience, and I admit it.
I don't think it'd be wise to mess with it at all. If there's one thing Microsoft is good at it's treachery, not technology. Rather than attempting to beat them at their own game (treachery), it'd be best to overcome them with merit (technology). In terms of ease-of-use and speed, C++ with STL and BOOSt, Ruby, or Python have C# whipped -- and they're totally free.
GREAT! Now The most popular OSS desktop is tying itsself to a Microsoft controlled standard! Sweet! Let's persue that further!
C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C# (let's see you do inline grammar parsing with C#!) - and it's not under the control of a corporation that's proven it can't be trusted.
AFAIK, Amarok gets its cover art from Amazon.com, but I could be totally on crack there. At any rate, yes, Amarok automatically fetches album cover art and displays it for songs in that album. On top of that if you click "artist" it will grab information about the artist of the song using wikipedia and others: something that I've yet to see in any player except Amarok.
Now I've never played around with podcasts, but there are a few posts in this thread from Amarok users saying they mess with Podcasts under Amarok, so perhaps there really is support, just no multimillion dollar budget advocating it.
I can't stand iTunes. Nobody I know uses it, and most of them have iPods. I would use Amarok whether or not I had an iPod (I don't, actually), but I know *nobody* that uses iTunes for any reason other than to work with their iPod. Amarok has strengths iTunes never will have, and that makes you, sir, very wrong.
The only functionality that you listed that Amarok is missing is buying music - a pretty nonvital and trivial to implement feature. I'd be ready to wake you up when it's implemented, but I think you enjoy your nap more than reality. Sweet dreams.
Yes, we do. People like you and I can still kick back with our kind in IRC channels and the type of place they'll never go, but without being a mainstream fixture on the desktop, Linux's growth will be very limited and Linux will always be doomed to playing catch-up.
Same old arguments, based entirely on your personal experience or who you've chosen to listen to. In Ubuntu a user has only to click "Install new Software" from their gnome menu, click a check box or two for the programs they want (which have informative descriptions right there beside them...) and hit "ok." Free/LinSpire and PC-BSD have similar facilities.
No terminal, no hitting "next next I Agree next next ok next yes yes next finish" like in Windows, no hunting for the web site from which you can download the installer like in Windows.
You're posting old information and leveraging negative linux user stereotypes to reinforce the "validity" of your post and undermine the validity of dissenting opinions. If I had mod points, I'd label you -1 troll. Heck, your first sentence was a sweeping generalization that is just plain not true (as in the examples of Ubuntu, Free/LinSpire, and PC-BSD).
You chose to ignore facts when posting this. You chose to leverage stereotypes to grant yourself added undeserved credibility. You chose to decieve.
Redirecting spending money from copyrighted content to independent artists releasing their work under the Creative Commons license is akin to becoming vegan/veggetarian: It requires willpower, it requires sometimes going for what is best when it's not what you want, and overall it's worth it. It's also doomed to failure in an instant gratification culture.
It has my support, though, for what that's worth. I wish the idea the best of luck, and I gladly participate.
but I think this is useful information. I wouldn't have thought that business skills/knowlege would be more attractive than technical prowess for an IT guy. It's especially useful to know that the higher the budget/larger the fish, the more so this is true.
Microsoft claims there's nothing wrong -- again. Just like in their antitrust suits, etc. Let the evidence speak, not the multibillion dollar machine with an agenda.
They lied through their teeth in court under oath, what makes anyone think this is trustworthy info? I think everyone here is smart enough not to believe it for a second until they see it.
I wish it was as easy as $ == good staff. The problem is that the head of the HR department really doesn't know what a Linux Guru is, the kid down the street thinks he's a linux Guru, and there aren't a whole lot of organizations, certs, etc that can really prove that someone knows as much as they say (and perhaps believe) they do.
In the case of Microsoft, the creator of the product (MS) can guarantee the knowlege level of their techs, so if your employee turns out to be a dud you can fall back on MS's techs.
Sweet! That's really good news. Keep it up RHEL!
Support is vital for any OS to be taken seriously where downtime is unacceptable. I know way too many IT guys who would love to run some form of *nix for their servers, but their CEO's wouldn't let them. The reason? If there's a problem they can't fix, they resort to googling, mailing lists, forums, etc: they're pretty boned.
If there's a Windows problem they can't fix they can fly someone in from Redmond to get the job done in a few hours. Unfortunately Red Hat can't compete with that (yet). If minutes of downtime = millions in losses, Official support that always gets the job done is a requirement that can't be ignored.
So I looked up what it meant, and then thought two things:
Ubuntu is the perfect name for the product. Its meaning is a philosophical standard, and one that the project aims to develop as its defining characteristic. Just because the product doesn't have an english name doesn't make its name inferior. English won't be the primary language in most countries in which Ubuntu will be used, so why should this African distrobution adopt an english name?
What? Now they're pulling bread slicing too? That was the only reason I wanted Vista!