Linux-Advocacy Digest #753, Volume #27 Tue, 18 Jul 00 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Re: I just don't buy it
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Winmodems/ELSA Microlink 56k PCI
Re: Of Free OS's and M$ pricing a little side trip!
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Alan Coopersmith)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Bob Hauck)
Re: which OS is best? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (Craig Kelley)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Lee Hollaar)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Craig Kelley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:22:42 GMT
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 17:52:40 +0200, Davorin Mestric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have followed this ng for a while now. One very interesting fact I
>> picked up is the huge anti RAD (Rappid Application Development) fealing
>> of the Linux Programmers.
>
> that's because they don't have them. it is the same when you hate those
>people in expensive cars.
No, we're just the sorts of people who will take the code generated
by DevStudio and figure out how to twist it in strange ways to get
even more efficency out of the whole process.
Even VB manuals don't go so far as to imply that WinDOS RAD tools
will allow the developer to really avoid knowing what they're doing.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:24:50 GMT
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 17:10:40 +0200, Davorin Mestric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Ian Pulsford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There has been some discussion about M$ .NET. I just don't see the
>> advantages of it from a home user perspective or a business perspective.
>>
>> 1. Is a home user really going to want to store private documents on
>> some remote server?
>
> yes, if those 'private documents' are actually book orders or something.
>where would you store your amazon.com order?
That's hardly your private document. It's Amazon's.
[deletia]
OTOH, it would be reasonable to portray their demographics records
on you as your 'private document' and treat it accordingly including
a certain amount of apprehension regarding how Amazon will treat it.
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:24:06 -0400
Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >History has shown that there is no group consistently worse at this sort of
>> >thing than a government. Government may correctly provide some oversight to
>> >business, but when the government itself gets involved in business you can
>> >bet the bank on failure. Nobody does business worse than government.
>>
>> The list of failures from government is far smaller then the list of blunders
>> and failures from business -- and even then, the list of government failures
>> is often one of things the market place didn't do or couldn't do in the first
>> place.
>Even a cursory reading of history should convince you otherwise.
No. A cursory reading results in knee-jerk answers, as you have shown. A
thoughtful, reflective reading leads one to analysis and different answers.
-- Is government perfect? No. People aren't either and certainly not people
driven only by the profit motive -- which you are suggesting would do a better
job on everything if left alone.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:33:12 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >Allow me to refresh your memory:
>> >
>> >" But if you're hanging around just to collect a paycheck, dude, then
>> >I'd recommend suicide. We could use the space you're taking up, and
>> >someone who wants to act like a civilized person wants to use it."
>>
>> Touche. I had presumed you weren't actually hanging around the planet
>> just to collect a paycheck. Are you saying I was in error?
>
>I had my doubts about whether you assumed I was or not, and in the
>reply to that message I asked "are you talking about me?". You refused
>to answer.
Perhaps I didn't see the message, or merely chose not to answer. I
think "refused to answer" is just another insinuation based on an
argument from ignorance.
>If I called you a orangutan that copulates with dead chimpanzees, the
>fact of you not having red hair would not make it any less insulting.
I suppose that is self-evident, though I clearly have no idea why you
think it would be an issue. Your apparent insistence that making money
is some sort of higher purpose was the subject at issue, not my general
appearance or sexual preferences, neither of which have come up lately,
AFAIK.
I think maybe you need to consider that some statements are intended to
be taken literally, and some are not, and often they occur in a
staggering variety of combinations in human languages. If you took
offense at my suggestion of suicide as an optimal service to society if
you believe making money is an end in itself, you have obviously
mis-classified it. The category in which it rightfully belongs,
however, literal or rhetorical, I will leave for you to determine. So
you tell me, "Am I talking about you?"
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Winmodems/ELSA Microlink 56k PCI
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 08:46:13 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mitterfellner Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If anyone ever gets this modem to run under linux PLEASE tell me.
Keep an eye on http://www.linmodems.org/ for any developments.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Of Free OS's and M$ pricing a little side trip!
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:18:41 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8l19n2$d0h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8l11gd$ni3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In South Africa, your net saving on the above scenario will be in the
> region of R 510 000 - 00 !!!!!!!!!! (US$ = R/6.7 - approx.)
>
> MS Solution : R 800 000 - 00 (2 x W2K Server, 200 x W2K Pro, 200 x O2K
> Standard)
>
> Linux Solution : R 290 000 - 00 (1 x ??? distro, 200 x Corel O2K Pro)
>
> Of course, the StarOffice Path could see the net Linux solution shrink
> to less then R 100 - 00 (Net Saving : R 800 000 - 00 > for all
> practical purposes).
>
> Repeat this with an upgrade cycle every 5 years, and where will you be
> in a decade???
>
> Some people just won't get it - no matter how hard we try...
>
>From your measure the ratio of the cost of a Microsoft solution ot a Linux
solution is approx 1.76:1. But I think that the ratio would be even more
slanted in favor of Linux.
Perhaps I sould restate my original scenerio to better focus it on what I
was thinking.
What would be the cost for a Windows 2000 package deal to could replace all
the software that comes with a freely redistributable full distribution of
Redhat? All software in the Windows solution would have to permit unlimited
users or connections. If for some piece of software, for the Windows
solution unlimited users is not an option, then the version the permits the
greatest number would suffice. The software can come from Microsoft or a
third party.
Since Redhat Linux can be aquired from many sources for various prices
ranging from free to about $150.00. Lets settle on median price of $75.00
for that distribution This avoids the nasty problem of a dividing by zero
to compute the ratio.
Since the full version of Windows 2000 is $2000.00 and we are using $75.00
for the Linux solution the ratio for the OS alone is already approx 26.67:1!
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: 18 Jul 2000 16:40:32 GMT
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> BTW Quite a few typos result not from poor grammer/spelling skills, but
:> poor typing skills.
: Some, maybe. But how can the following examples from my collection of 100+
: posts in COLA be attributed to typing skill?
: They're - There - Their. Horrendously misused by so called "programmers"
: and "sys-admins". There is really no excuse for their grammar to be so
: horrific. They're suspect at best.
: Lose - loose. What's up with this? If I see "I loose my connection" one
: more time I'm going to "loose" my mind.
: Payed - paid. I don't get it. Is inventing words a way around grammar
: issues?
: Chilling.
: Contractions. Oh momma. Did these programmers take English?
All of these annoy me to no end, but for the sake of politeness, I
don't mention them. Fighting for the sake of english grammar on
the internet is like battling the tides - and about as useful.
: How can you program and not posses basic English skills such as how to use a
: contraction?
: And the guy is bitching about "goto" in C code? Yikes.
Obviously, mastering the language of C and the language of english
are two very different things. Whereas a computer will complain
bitterly (at compile time or otherwise) if a programmer's meaning
hasn't been made clear by the program, people tend to be much more
fault-tolerant. For example, if someone writes: "their going to
fix that in the next release", human readers will be able to decipher
the meaning from the context despite the flaw.
When it comes to documentation, politely sending corrections to
the author would be helpful (preferably as a patch to the doc source).
But in online forums, such correction only adds to the noise level
since the original poster will be annoyed and everyone else will
already have figured out what was meant without the unwelcome help.
It would be nice if everyone on the internet wrote perfectly,
but getting worked-up over it isn't helpful to anybody.
------------------------------
From: Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 18 Jul 2000 16:41:13 GMT
"KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes in comp.sys.sun.misc:
|If Unix is an open technology, then how come we must call GNU/Linux a
|Unix-like OS rather than an actual version of Unix?
Because no one has done the work to make a Linux distribution conform
completely to the Unix specifications & arranged for it to be tested and
certified. (Since the Unix specifications cover more than the kernel,
each distribution would have to certified seperately I believe.)
See http://www.unix-systems.org/ for details on just what it takes to
become "UNIX (R)".
--
________________________________________________________________________
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://soar.Berkeley.EDU/~alanc/ aka: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:42:34 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Isaac in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:51:56 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>I won't refute it, I have no need to. You merely expressed incredulity
>>at your program now being considered derivative of a library which
>>didn't exist at the time you wrote the library, but was only available
>>afterwards. I agree that it was derivative, and understand why you are
>>incredulous. Nevertheless, the case still stands. You aren't ignorant,
>>precisely, you're merely missing some points about what it means to have
>>one piece of software be considered a derivative work of another. It is
>>not surprising, as software IP is a tenuous concept, and the term
>>'software' applies to both abstract and corporeal things.
>>
>
>In other words, you would have no problem with a situation where it was
>initially legal to distribute a program, but the distribution became
>illegal once a gpl'd library was written? I suppose this would be an
>acceptable consequence of releasing an incomplete program?
Yes. Because it is not the writing of the library, but the formulation
of the intellectual property, which is at issue. My suggestion would be
that you don't release an incomplete program.
>Yes it's true that the program initially written couldn't be run before the
>library is released, but so what?
So the program is based on the intellectual property of the library, and
therefore is a derivative work. Perhaps the idea of literary property
will illustrate the point sufficiently. Consider Star Wars, the
original movie. It was, in fact, the fourth story in a series which at
that time existed only in someone's imagination. Does that mean that
George Lucas has no copyright on it, if he should hire someone to write
Episode III for him? The distinction between an idea and a literary
work is rife with confusion and problems; ask any screenwriter who wants
to get paid by a producer who when he claims "you stole my idea". You
can't, in fact, steal an idea. The writer is actually complaining that
the producer stole his intellectual work. And the law does sometimes
fall on his side, if he can adequately illustrate that the intellectual
property existed, even if he didn't write the same story or script as
what ended up in the movie.
>There was an excellent post earlier in this thread about what kinds of works
>are derivative under copyright law. I think it's pretty clear that programs
>which use the API of a library probably wouldn't be considered derivative
>works with respect to the library.
>
>Isaac
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:36:53 GMT
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:51:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A friend of mine showed me a kernal-code sample sent to a friend of
>his (by a microsoft programmer)
>Freaking GOTO statements all over the place.... in C CODE!!!!!
I wouldn't be throwing stones...
[hauck@lab linux]$ cd /usr/src/linux
[hauck@lab linux]$ find -name \*\.c -exec grep -w goto {} \;|wc
6781 15167 123774
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:47:17 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthias Warkus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:19:15 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>It was the Mon, 17 Jul 2000 09:38:17 +0200...
>...and Tore Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> However, there is something called touch typing, that really requires an
>> easily available Caps Lock key.
>
>The only things that really require a Caps Lock key nearly all suck.
>- COBOL
>- FORTRAN
>- JCL
>- ...
>
>Exception: SQL
I thought SQL didn't require upper case stuff? (Our Oracle interface
might be doing something magical to convert the keywords, but certainly
one can type in lower case SQL stuff and it works.)
I'm also pretty sure Fortran is similar. Older Fortrans may have
their own ideas, of course -- I remember an old IBM variant having no
stack at all, for example. (I don't remember whether it wanted
all upper case keywords.)
Ditto COBOL.
As for JCL -- um -- let's just say I know // DD and that's about it. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- isn't the Carpal Tunnel the one in NY City
specifically for multi-passenger vehicles? :-)
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:46:46 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8l1jqh$3uo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> That is true - VB will never have the appeal on Linux that it does on
> Windows.
It is not a question of appeal. Is the copyright owner (who I shall leave
nameless) is willing to port it--That is the question!
if and when it is available we can see if it can compete with the tools that
are already freely available for Linux in particular and unix in general.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:55:23 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:39748271$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> >History has shown that there is no group consistently worse at this
sort of
> >> >thing than a government. Government may correctly provide some
oversight to
> >> >business, but when the government itself gets involved in business you
can
> >> >bet the bank on failure. Nobody does business worse than government.
> >>
> >> The list of failures from government is far smaller then the list of
blunders
> >> and failures from business -- and even then, the list of government
failures
> >> is often one of things the market place didn't do or couldn't do in the
first
> >> place.
>
> >Even a cursory reading of history should convince you otherwise.
>
> No. A cursory reading results in knee-jerk answers, as you have shown. A
> thoughtful, reflective reading leads one to analysis and different
answers.
> -- Is government perfect? No. People aren't either and certainly not
people
> driven only by the profit motive -- which you are suggesting would do a
better
> job on everything if left alone.
Letting the market create winners and losers isn't "perfect" but it's the
best thing man has come up with so far. Insert the government into the
equation, who's sole misguided solution is to strip the OS of any extra
applications and give the consumer "less" for the same or more money isn't a
logical answer.
Microsoft won't lose anything in the deal, as a matter of fact they will
probably increase their revenue because of it.
Where in history has the government been successful at running a business?
Now they want to help the poor stupid ignorant consumer get the most for his
buck in computer software. People just weren't making the correct choices on
their own.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 18 Jul 2000 10:55:54 -0600
"Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> NT4 Server with latest Service Packs is very stable. I worked at
> .COM site; now dead (but reasons are purely economical rather than
> technical) where most servers were NT4 (with exception of Oracle on
> Sun and a couple of DEC systems). There were > 100 NT4 servers in
> NOC. There used to be NT crashes ~2 years ago or so, but eventually
> they virtually eliminated them. And they didn't reboot NT
> either. They did restart speech-processing apps every night because
> of memory/resource leaks, but it had nothing to do with NT. NT4 was
> buggy when first released ~ 4 years ago. But it's fine now.
Maybe you could've saved some money by using free software instead of
"> 100 NT4 servers". ;)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 17:02:00 GMT
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:55:23 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:39748271$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >>
>> >> >History has shown that there is no group consistently worse at this
>sort of
>> >> >thing than a government. Government may correctly provide some
>oversight to
>> >> >business, but when the government itself gets involved in business you
>can
>> >> >bet the bank on failure. Nobody does business worse than government.
>> >>
>> >> The list of failures from government is far smaller then the list of
>blunders
>> >> and failures from business -- and even then, the list of government
>failures
>> >> is often one of things the market place didn't do or couldn't do in the
>first
>> >> place.
>>
>> >Even a cursory reading of history should convince you otherwise.
>>
>> No. A cursory reading results in knee-jerk answers, as you have shown. A
>> thoughtful, reflective reading leads one to analysis and different
>answers.
>> -- Is government perfect? No. People aren't either and certainly not
>people
>> driven only by the profit motive -- which you are suggesting would do a
>better
>> job on everything if left alone.
>
>Letting the market create winners and losers isn't "perfect" but it's the
>best thing man has come up with so far. Insert the government into the
>equation, who's sole misguided solution is to strip the OS of any extra
...and you end up with Microsoft actually.
[deletia]
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Hollaar)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 18 Jul 2000 17:07:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>So the program is based on the intellectual property of the library, and
>therefore is a derivative work.
Again, maybe in your special world derivative works can be based on things
that have not yet been written, but not under United States copyright law.
> Perhaps the idea of literary property
>will illustrate the point sufficiently. Consider Star Wars, the
>original movie. It was, in fact, the fourth story in a series which at
>that time existed only in someone's imagination. Does that mean that
>George Lucas has no copyright on it, if he should hire someone to write
>Episode III for him?
Is this a trick question, or are you just clueless?
Assuming this is not a trick question, based somehow on you referring
to common-law copyright on a work before 1978, the answer is quite
simple -- George Lucas had no Federal copyright on a story that was
only in his imagination, either under the 1909 or 1976 Copyright Acts.
Under the 1909 Copyright Act, effective until the end of 1977, you had
to publish the work with notice and register the work for Federal copyright.
If it's just in your imagination, it's not published.
Under the 1976 Act, you had to fix the work in a tangible medium of
expression for Federal copyright to subsist (17 USC 102(a)). Again,
in one's imagination is not fixation in a tangible medium of expression.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 18 Jul 2000 11:05:56 -0600
"Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> VB is becoming MS-recommended language for Web, COM+
> development. It's much "safer" than C++ and allows for faster
> development process. MS claims that speed advantage of C++ is not
> more than 10-15%; VB6 (latest version of VB) compiles into machine
> commands. With .NET picture will change: C++, C#, VB - will all be
> compiled into intermediate format and run under special run-time
> environment (similar to Java VM). It will still be possible to have
> C++ code compile into machine commands; but that option will be used
> not for Web development, but rather for standalone apps. C# will
> allow "in-line" C++, similar to how current Visual C++ allows
> "in-line" assembly. "Safe" mode of C++ will include garbage
> collection and prohibit pointer arithmetic. MS has outstanding
> people in compiler/tools development. Visual C++ and VB are some of
> the best development tools available. Visual J++ was the best Java
> environment until Sun started litigation process and court
> prohibited MS to sell Java. I'm sure that MS will get .NET
> development tools right very fast.
I'm curious.
What are your (Windows advocate) reactions to this whole .NET software
leasing idea?
According to Balmer, in the future you'll only be able to lease
software over the internet from Microsoft -- thus, you'll have to pay
every year (or month) for every piece of software you own, otherwise
it will stop functioning. Even without UCITA, they're planning on
doing this with a sort of portal-on-drugs plan where some near-future
version of Outlook is only available from Microsoft's .NET servers.
He specifically mentioned office.net, which is where the next
"version" of Office will live. They want to sprinkle .NET servers all
over the web (geographically) and cut deals with ISPs to get people to
subscribe to Microsoft software through them. I assume that Windows
will eventually go this way?
For those that don't know: Just replace .NET with DCOM/ActiveX plus
MS-XML.
Is this a good thing?
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
