[Article] Open Source in Israel
Evening Sirs, Here's an article posted few days ago in some Australian Linux magazine about Open Source / Linux in Israel. I'd say they made it all look too good, but it's better than making it look too bad :) http://articles.linmagau.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=445&page=1 - Oren = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 15:17, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > > > I brought that example up. He was not impressed. Apparently, Clalit > went, succesfully, through a court proceeding to enforce such a > settelment without even having the actual source mentioned in a contract. > There are two issues: Writing Open Source like, or using it. Why does Gilon wonder if he should be developing open source code in-house? Why does he think he need to accept the "Social Reasons" behind it? I think the discussion is somewhat off track. As an organization, Klalit can rely on OSS to gain some advantages, mainly: commitment to Open Standards, Interoperability, Reliability, TCO and Security. If this are not good enough reasons, then he probably should stick with proprietary code. In respect to developing in-house, As far as having access to the code per se, what will he then do with the source code? And why this is better than actually developing OSS in house? I don't see the benefits. He got himself involved in an expensive court case to gain what? Is Gilon going to continue developing and maintaining it himself or ask someone else to do it? No matter what it'll be probably cheaper to buy and migrate to another solution. When "Open Source" the worst thing that can happen is that the original developer will give up and abandon the code. Thing is, if it was a popular code, or of interest to others, they can continue from that point. And still it is unlikely when we discuss mature and proven projects which Klalit might be interested in. But this is really beside the point as far as I can see, the true discussion is about the topics mentioned above (commitment to Open Standards, Interoperability, Reliability, TCO and Security). Source code availability is only interesting in the context of developers communities and part of a development model and it seldom relevant to the end user. BTW Talking of health services, we on whatsup, covered at least one case of an hospital that got involved with OSS development and seem to be very happy with the results and benfites. See here (Hebrew) what were thier impressions on adopting and getting involved with OSS devlopment, contributing back etc.: http://whatsup.org.il/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1405 a case study orignaly published by LinuxMedNews. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Hi, Thanks for summazing the discussion for the list - indeed an interesting subject. I'm probably issing the context of the discussion, but I really don't understand why Mr. Gilon feels that a commercial organization should even consider adopting Open Source software (or anything, for that matter), for "ideological" reasons. The decision to use any product/solution/technology must be based on cost/benefit/risk considerations, for any commercial entity. As others have pointed out, the Open Source model does *not* mean that every user must start recompiling the applications used by the company - what is the source of this misunderstanding? Rony > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Shachar Shemesh > Sent: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:48 > To: Linux-IL mailing list > Subject: Meeting with Gadi Gilon > > > Hi list, > > Just came back from a meeting with Gadi Gilon. For those who don't > remeber, he is the CIO of "Kupat Cholim Klalit". He stumbled upon the > last time his name was mentioned on this list (thread starting at > http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Linux/maillists/03/09/msg00296.html), > and wanted to talk. > > I'm BCCing him on this email, so he can choose to participate actively > in this discussion (or just correct me). > > The discussion stayed, almost exclusively, on the theoretical, > ideological, front. If I understood correctly, his main point is this: > "I can see ideological/social reasons for writing/using free software, > and I see financial ones. If I try to adopt the ideological reasons > within my organization, it will never work. I cannot let every user of a > machine in every hospital change their own software. I cannot expect to > have the social contract's benifits when aquiring the software, yet not > pass the same benifits onwards. I must therefor reject the social > reasons for adoping free software". > > Please don't start flame wars saying "but there are also financial > reasons for adopting open source". He is not rejecting this possibility. > It has not come up due to lack of time. > > Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > the past already". > > I tried to point out that this is actually means that he has forced the > vendors to turn their model, when dealing with him, into a free software > one. He acknoledged the possible truthfulness of this statement. I read > that as "the free software model is so much suprior, that I am actually > forcing closed source companies to adhere to it". I guess you may read > that to mean that the free software advantages are not as important to > him, representing a huge organization, as it is to SMBs. I guess had the > quotes in the paper said "I don't see the advantages of free software to > organizations of my caliber", things would have been understood > differently by us too. > > Like I said before - the financial aspects of free software were not > raised at all. > > One last point - he said he is willing to talk to us further. If he > doesn't wish to join this discussion (and even if he does), I was > thinking of dedicating a Telux meeting to that end. What do you think? > > Shachar > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sms solutions for corp. network alerts
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 05:45:45PM +0200, Nathan Fain wrote: > I'm trying to find a solution for sending SMS alerts which does not rely > on internet connectivity via my LAN. The objective being to send > BigBrother alerts and whatnot via the hardware solution. I've spoken > with Orange and they have some limited solutions and I'm curious what > others have experience with or would recommend I focus research on Once upon a time, an esteemed member of the list and myself developed a prototype of such a solution that did it using a cellular modem. You could buy the modem and use something like kannel (http://www.kannel.org/) or a homebrewed solution for the software side. Cheers, Muli -- Muli Ben-Yehuda http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/ "the nucleus of linux oscillates my world" - [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
MIS for linux
Hi, Anyone know of any corporate size linux solution for MIS ? Thanks = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sms hardware solutions
Nathan Fain wrote: > I'm trying to find a solution for sending SMS alerts which does not rely > on internet connectivity via my LAN. The objective being to send > BigBrother alerts and whatnot via the hardware solution. I've spoken > with Orange and they have some limited solutions and I'm curious what > others have experience with or would recommend I focus research on. There are many cellphones with SMS support via a computer interface. Serial cables for Nokia phones are easily available via the internet and there are packages that support them. I don't know if they do SMS though. IMHO a better alternative would be to get a Motorola USB phone if you can find the protocol for sending SMS messages. The C330 costs about 400 NIS from Orange (599 as a Big Talk). The USB cable is a standard miniUSB which is not available here, but can be ordered from the UK for 15 UKP, or with software (probably windows) for $25 from the U.S. If you have some time for experimentation, you could get the $25 package from the U.S. and monitor the USB transmissions to send a message. Once you have them, a PERL program would be able to send the messages. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 972-54-608-069 Icq/AIM Uin: 2661079 MSN IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Not for email) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sms solutions for corp. network alerts
On Tuesday 04 November 2003 17:45, Nathan Fain wrote: > I'm trying to find a solution for sending SMS alerts which does not rely > on internet connectivity via my LAN. The objective being to send > BigBrother alerts and whatnot via the hardware solution. I've spoken > with Orange and they have some limited solutions and I'm curious what > others have experience with or would recommend I focus research on > > thanks > > Nathan Buy a cheap nokia GSM phone, a suitable data cable and use gnokii to connect it to a Linux box as an "SMS server". Or pay me to do it for you - I actually wrote a system that uses it to search through a list of possible people to handle a problem via SMS, ICQ and Microsoft SMB sends... :-) http://gnokii.org/ btw, if you choose a Cellcom connected GSM phone, make sure to grab the CVS version and not stable, because my one liner patch to add their get their "new" GSM network supported just got in ;-)) BTW, Cheers, Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Codefidence. A name you can trust (tm) http://www.codefidence.com "Half of one of my eyes is already open. I'm going to make coffee now..." -- Kathi 16:08:04 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sms solutions for corp. network alerts
I'm trying to find a solution for sending SMS alerts which does not rely on internet connectivity via my LAN. The objective being to send BigBrother alerts and whatnot via the hardware solution. I've spoken with Orange and they have some limited solutions and I'm curious what others have experience with or would recommend I focus research on thanks Nathan = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sms hardware solutions
I'm trying to find a solution for sending SMS alerts which does not rely on internet connectivity via my LAN. The objective being to send BigBrother alerts and whatnot via the hardware solution. I've spoken with Orange and they have some limited solutions and I'm curious what others have experience with or would recommend I focus research on. thanks Nathan = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: brief naps (aftermath)
If you don't set your process to SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR (only possible as root) and give it realtime priority, you can never be sure to wake up in time (see Gilad's message in the thread). >From my understanding, if you recompile the kernel with HZ value higher than 1000, you can use nanosleep or usleep, without all the fancy tricks. But if your kernel runs in 10 msec quanta, you will have to use cpu tight loops or other realtime solutions. In that case you are correct, and select cannot give you delay of less than 10 msec. Ami On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 15:18, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: > On Tuesday 04 November 2003 14:43, Ehud Karni wrote: > > > I tested the select call on various machines. > > 1. It is not accurate enough (2 ms deviations). > > Yes it does, you don't seem to use sched_setscheduler in your test program to > give your proccess real time priority. setpriority only changes the nice > level of the proccess. If you want real time guantees (which you do here) you > need to ask the kernel to subject your proccess to real time scheduling. > > > 2. It can not be used for delays < 10 ms. > > Unless you recompile the kernel, you are correct. > > > > > Here is my solution (my_usleep) embedded in a test program. > > This function has an accuracy of about 1 micro second. > > No it doesn't. Without real time priority the select is not guranteed to wake > up on time. You can easily miss your mark and over sleep. > > Gilad = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
Shoshannah Forbes wrote: It can be done. off the top of my head: http://www.espn.com http://www.csszengarden.com/ http://www.wired.com/ Those are not flashy. Those are just "formed". I think they are talking about DOM things popping up and down on screen sortof thing. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Tzafrir Cohen wrote: One note: On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:47:43AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in the past already". http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/10/18/1814211.shtml?tid=132&tid=82&tid=89 "What happens when a proprietary software company dies?" In short, that article ddemostrates that when a company goes under, nothing is safe. The source code is considered one of the late company's assets, and as such, "giving it away" as guaranteed may not be easy. I brought that example up. He was not impressed. Apparently, Clalit went, succesfully, through a court proceeding to enforce such a settelment without even having the actual source mentioned in a contract. I guess the bottom line is this. Given enough buying power and money for getting your way, the advantages of free software are brought over to the proprietary world. I'm hoping he will read this thread through, but I somehow doubt that any point raised here will change his mind much - it sounds like more of the same stuff (with only the price varying between the cases). Even if he is 100% right, I still think that the free software revolution, bringing this advantage to EVERYONE, is a wonderous thing. Still, I'm trying to understand whether free software really doesn't offer any advantages in that respect. -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Oleg Goldshmidt wrote: And no, Didi, I don't think even Clalit have source code access to Windows, but I am sure they have a support contract with redmond and a few MSCEs on staff. Whatever they have with Clalit makes them comfertable enough. I agree that this, under no stretch of imagination, can be called "competition over support". Still, I couldn't get that point across. Also of note was that Gadi did not seem to think that Microsoft is forever. His approximate words were: "Open systems can last forever, close systems cannot". Either he is not worried about MS, or he does have such an agreement (shared source, anyone?) Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Yedidyah Bar-David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > > the past already". > > That's simply amazing. Does this include also off-the-shelf software > (Windows? With what NDA?), or only software written for them? No, it is not amazing or surprising, it is very standard. I encountered that while working for (and renning one) startup(s). A typical contract where software is involved includes the following two important points: the level of support the vendor provides, and an escrow arrangement for all the IP, including the source code, in case the vendor goes under or fails to provide the support as specified by the contract for any other reason. Basically, the customer demands the right to examing the product, including the source code, under an NDA, and its in-house or outside experts give an OK to the deal saying, if Fubar Software Ltd. goes under we will be able to maintain the product given the source code. The source code is put under escrow and the customer gets it only if the vendor fails to fulfill its contractual obligations. This stuff is common enough that it is taught in the MBA program at TAU (a friend even showed me some course material on it). Needless to say, it is applicable mostly in the cases where the ability of the vendor to survive causes reasonable doubt (startups etc). I don't see how it relates to "competition over support" - as long as the vendor is OK no one else can fix bugs in closed code. It is different with open source - there you can make IBM and HP and CA to compete for providing support. And no, Didi, I don't think even Clalit have source code access to Windows, but I am sure they have a support contract with redmond and a few MSCEs on staff. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: brief naps (aftermath)
On Tuesday 04 November 2003 14:43, Ehud Karni wrote: > I tested the select call on various machines. > 1. It is not accurate enough (2 ms deviations). Yes it does, you don't seem to use sched_setscheduler in your test program to give your proccess real time priority. setpriority only changes the nice level of the proccess. If you want real time guantees (which you do here) you need to ask the kernel to subject your proccess to real time scheduling. > 2. It can not be used for delays < 10 ms. Unless you recompile the kernel, you are correct. > > Here is my solution (my_usleep) embedded in a test program. > This function has an accuracy of about 1 micro second. No it doesn't. Without real time priority the select is not guranteed to wake up on time. You can easily miss your mark and over sleep. Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Codefidence. A name you can trust (tm) http://www.codefidence.com "Half of one of my eyes is already open. I'm going to make coffee now..." -- Kathi 16:08:04 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
On Tuesday, Nov 4, 2003, at 11:12 Asia/Jerusalem, Shachar Shemesh wrote: W3C has standards, but IE doesn't support them It *does* support most of them. It is just that mozilla supports more. But as the things that IE doesn't support are not done in IE *at all*, why would that make any difference? Let's face it, if it were possible to design sites that worked on IE, be flashy, AND were standard complient It can be done. off the top of my head: http://www.espn.com http://www.csszengarden.com/ http://www.wired.com/ ֱֳ To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: brief naps (aftermath)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 12:30:15 +0200, Ami Chayun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A couple of results:
> 1) The rdtscll Pentium instruction (Eran's answer) is very useful. It's
> super accurate and right now I decided to use it mostly to benchmark
> other solutions, and to estimate the CPU frequency with a fancy version
> of -
>
> rdtscll(time1);
> sleep(1);
> rdtscll(time2);
> frequency = time2 - time1;
>
> The use of rdtscll as a long sleep function (above 1 msec) is not very
> recommended, since even with the nops, it hogs most of the CPU.
I don't understand why you need to know the CPU speed (see my tight
loop below). The sleep call is exact to 10 milli seconds at most.
> 2) The select method is very CPU friendly. It is also the way
> microsecond sleep is implemented in xmms and alsa (xmms_usleep, and
> doSleep in alsa)
> XMMS's code:
>
> unsigned long usec...
>
> struct timeval tv;
>
> tv.tv_sec = usec / 100;
> usec -= tv.tv_sec * 100;
> tv.tv_usec = usec;
> select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, &tv);
>
>
> It's pretty stable for time periods of ~1 msec and above.
I tested the select call on various machines.
1. It is not accurate enough (2 ms deviations).
2. It can not be used for delays < 10 ms.
This is the program used to test the select call:
#include
#include
#include
#include /* for gettimeofday */
#include /* for setpriority */
void my_usleep ( int u_sec ) ;
int main ( int argc, char *argv[] )
{
int usec = 1 , cnt = 0 , elapsed , loop = 1000 ;
struct timeval bfr, aftr ; /* computer time before / after */
setpriority ( PRIO_PROCESS , 0 , atoi ( argv [ 2 ] ) ) ;/* setpriority (no
check) */
fprintf ( stderr , "Run at %d priority" ,
getpriority ( PRIO_PROCESS , 0 ) ) ; /* get process priority */
usec = atoi ( argv [ 1 ] ) ;/* time to sleep (Milli seconds) */
gettimeofday ( & bfr , NULL ) ; /* computer time - before */
while ( cnt < loop )
{
my_usleep ( usec ) ;/* sleep usec micro seconds (mine)
*/
cnt++ ;
}
gettimeofday ( & aftr , NULL ) ;/* computer time - after */
elapsed = ( aftr.tv_sec - bfr.tv_sec ) * 1000
+ ( aftr.tv_usec - bfr.tv_usec ) / 1000 ;
fprintf ( stderr , "sleeped %d usec * %d times, Elapsed %d msecs\n" ,
usec , cnt , elapsed ) ;
return ( 0 ) ;
}
/*=*/
void my_usleep ( int u_sec )
{
struct timeval wt ;
wt.tv_sec = u_sec / 100 ;
wt.tv_usec = u_sec % 100 ; /* for select */
if ( u_sec > 0 )
select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, &wt); /* sleep (release cpu) */
}
/*=*/
> In the end I think we'll implement some sort of combination of all the 3
> solutions including the kernel HZ value (thanks Gilad, the link was
> great!). Since the delay doesn't change often, we have the freedom to
> decide which of the 3 functions is best during runtime, and select it.
Here is my solution (my_usleep) embedded in a test program.
This function has an accuracy of about 1 micro second.
/* Sleep for arg1 micro seconds 10**N times, and print statistics
arg2 is priority (-20 .. 19)
If arg3 is given, call system usleep.
*/
#include
#include
#include
#include /* for gettimeofday */
#include /* for setpriority */
void my_usleep ( int u_sec ) ; /* my usleep */
int main ( int argc, char *argv[] )
{
int usec , cnt = 0 , elapsed , loop = 1 ;
struct timeval bfr, aftr ; /* computer time before / after */
setpriority ( PRIO_PROCESS , 0 , atoi ( argv [ 2 ] ) ) ;/* setpriority (no
check) */
fprintf ( stderr , "Run at %d priority" ,
getpriority ( PRIO_PROCESS , 0 ) ) ; /* get process priority */
usec = atoi ( argv [ 1 ] ) ;/* time to sleep (milli seconds) */
if ( usec > 20 )
loop = 1 ;
else
while ( ( usec * loop ) > 200 ) /* total time > 2 seconds */
loop /= 10 ;
gettimeofday ( & bfr , NULL ) ; /* computer time - before */
while ( cnt < loop )
{
if ( argc < 4 )
my_usleep ( usec ) ;/* sleep usec micro seconds (mine)
*/
else
usleep ( usec ) ; /* sleep usec micro seconds
(standard) */
cnt ++ ;
}
gettimeofday ( & aftr , NULL ) ;/* computer time - after */
elapsed = ( aftr.tv_sec - bfr.tv_sec ) * 1000
+ ( aftr.tv_usec - bfr.tv_usec ) / 1000 ;
fprintf ( stderr , "sleeped %d usec * %d times, Elapsed %d msecs\n" ,
usec , cn
RE: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Shachar Tal Verint Systems -Original Message- From: Tzafrir Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 2:25 PM To: Linux-IL mailing list Subject: Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon > http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/10/18/1814211.shtml?tid=132&tid=82&tid= 89 > > "What happens when a proprietary software company dies?" > > In short, that article ddemostrates that when a company goes under, > nothing is safe. The source code is considered one of the late company's > assets, and as such, "giving it away" as guaranteed may not be easy. Not exactly. When a company goes under, if it has any prior liabilities (such as contracts to supply source code in case of bankrupcy), those take precedence over any "dismantlement" actions by authorities-nominated lawyer. In fact, the court cannot overrule such contracts. Shachar. This electronic message contains information from Verint Systems, which may be privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by replying to this email. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
One note: On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:47:43AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > the past already". http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/10/18/1814211.shtml?tid=132&tid=82&tid=89 "What happens when a proprietary software company dies?" In short, that article ddemostrates that when a company goes under, nothing is safe. The source code is considered one of the late company's assets, and as such, "giving it away" as guaranteed may not be easy. -- Tzafrir Cohen +---+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > > > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > > > downsides of each approach. > > > > > > > > gtk: > > > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > > > > > qt: > > > > * not free in win32 > > > Actually it is now. > > > > > > > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? > > Isn't it dual licensed as GPL/QPL?Doesn't GPL mean free as in > speech? > Qt for UNIX/X is dually licensed as GPL/QPL and as such is free software. However, from last I heard, this was not the case for the version of Qt for Win32. I believe the latter is distributed as a binary that is intended only for the development of open source software. (unless of course you buy it) Regards, Shlomi Fish > > Regards, > > > > Shlomi Fish > > > > > > > Ely > > behdad > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
-Original Message- From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:46 PM To: Shachar Shemesh Cc: Linux-IL mailing list Subject: Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon > I'm fine with it. Albeit, it could turn into a one against many flame-war. Then we'll just have to use our patience :) I'm for it. Shachar. This electronic message contains information from Verint Systems, which may be privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by replying to this email. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > On Monday, Nov 3, 2003, at 22:35 Asia/Jerusalem, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > >> I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our > >> website in > >> the near future. We have developed an amazing website, > > > > "amazing"? By this do you mean full of non-portable bells and whistles, > > and other idiosyncracies? Sorry, but that's not an amazing web-site > > according to my book. > > A good web-site is either simple and clean, or includes > > standard-compliant, portable embelishments. (which are usually not > > necessary). > > > Actually, a site doesn't have to be clean, and can have all the bells > and whistles you want and still work with mozilla. Hell, you can even > make a site which is full of bells and whistles and is still > accessible, if you know what you are dong. IMO, telling web-masters > that their site must be simple in order to work with mozilla is > shooting ourselves in the foot- you will get the same response that you > got here "then why bother?". They think that Mozilla is limited and > won't even try, although in fact mozilla has a few tricks up it's > sleeves that IE can't handle to save it's life. > My point was two-fold: 1. If you want to make a web-site with a lot of bells and whistles, do it right, by following standards. 2. Else, you can make it clean and standards compliant. Now option #1 will cost you a lot of time, effort and money to maintain, and was shown to actually reject surfers. Option #2 OTOH requires relatively little maintenance and web-surfers like it. I always go with option #2, unless there is a specific reason why I need to embellish my site. And even then, it is isolated and not necessary for the site to be usable. What he claimed was that they had an amazing site and that it costed them a lot of money to maintain. Now their site has lots of bells and whistles and they don't make sure it is standards-compliant. So if their site was kept clean and simple (mostly static HTML, no JavaScript, no Flash, etc.) it would be accessible by all browsers while still being easy to maintain. That was my point in this context. Sites that contain a lot of embellishments are hard and costy to maintain. This is why I dislike them, and it was shown that more surfers are attracted to sites without them, too. > IMO, a better approach should be: > > * the W3C wrote web standards. sites built to standards work in all > browsers (present and *future*) with minimal adjustments. Not necessarily. I recently discovered that MSIE 6.0 (normal and SP1) does not support the child selector (html > body). It has many other incompatibility bugs. I read somewhere that MSIE is the new NN4. But it is still possible to build standards compliant sites that will look and function well on all browsers. It's just that you have to test it everywhere. > * not building the site for standards, and instead building it to a > specific browser only, limits your teachability and market share. > * many of those people you are missing on just happen to have > demographics that advertisers love... (educated, high income, people > who will try things (=gadgets) before everyone else). > Right. But I still think that using unnecessary embellishments for a site is considered harmful. Regards, Shlomi Fish > > > ?? > > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please Modify your Web site to conform to W3C standards not only for Linux but also due to other reasons...
I am one of the developers of the Hebrew support for Nokia 9110, Nokia
9210/9210i and other Symbian based smartphones.
I am also a customer of Orange.
Some of those smartphones have the Opera Web browser built in or available
as an installable application.
This Web browser was designed to be W3C standards compliant rather than
Microsoft IE compliant.
If the Orange Web site does not comply with W3C standards, then people
who would like to access it from their smartphones (and pay Orange for
the privilege of using data calls) - won't be able to enjoy the full
experience you worked so hard to design for them.
In other words, you'll be shooting Orange's feet. And don't tell me they
can use WAP to access your Web site. WAP does not provide all those bells
and whistles you worked so hard to develop.
Note that it is possible to have a lot of bells and whistles in Orange's
Web site, if you believe in this approach, while maintaining full
compatibility with W3C standards.
--- Omer Zak
My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone.
They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which
I may be affiliated in any way.
In particular, this message does not represent the official policy of
Ozicom Communications Ltd.
WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 12:49:20 +0200
From: Amichai Rotman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Linux-IL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable
in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
I have recently upgraded my cell phone to a Motorola C350, a GPRS based phone,
which rose the need to use the Orange Web Site. Up until now I used the nifty
SendSMS script (By Nadav and others) and saw no need to access a
Mirosoftia-only based Web site. Nothing for me over there.
Now I disover the have a portal for the GPRS handsets and I cannot access it
from my Linux box.
I called the service (both regular and data) and all I got was the same shlomi
did - "We don't care! Screw you!". Whatsmore - on most of the calls I make to
the service (*054) I get reffered to their Web site. When I tell them I can't
access it because I don't have Windows (such an option does not register)
they tell me to go to a friend's house and use his computer !!!
I think these e-mails aren't what we need, we have to go public. Some article
on YNet or Captain Internet might stir the put a bit...
Any of you with the right connections?
Thanks,
Amichai Rotman.
On Monday 03 November 2003 22:35, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Attached is a discussion I had with the webmaster of the site of Orange,
> of which I recently became a customer of. Notice what I claim to be some
> inconsistencies in his approach. The final E-mail he sent me (after which
> I said that I'll just agree to disagree) is:
>
> <<<
> Dear Mr. Fish.
>
> I would like to end this discution with this note.
> Even though I am a user of Linux and a fan of all things open source I
> still do
> not agree that all websites should support all browsers. orange's website
> was
> designed to be out of the ordinary, not standard and clean but to align
> itself
> with our Logo and unique line of advertising.. We chose to write it this
> way
> and we have no regrets.
> Even with all this in mind, your comments about compatibility will be
> taken
> into consideration.
>
>
> If you are an Orange customer please voice your complaint as well or
> mention that you support my opinions. (to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
> Regards,
>
> Shlomi Fish
>
>
> --
> Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
>
> Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than
> getting its license changed.
>
> Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:54:55 +0200 (IST)
> From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable
> in Mozill a{ID:36786727} (fwd)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
>
> An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
> doctors away.
>
> Falk Fish
> -- Forwarded message --
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:39:45 +0200 (IST)
> From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable
> in Mozill a{ID:36786727}
>
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Dear Mr. Fish,
> > I thank you again for your mail.
> >
> > I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our website
> > in the near future. We have
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
I have recently upgraded my cell phone to a Motorola C350, a GPRS based phone,
which rose the need to use the Orange Web Site. Up until now I used the nifty
SendSMS script (By Nadav and others) and saw no need to access a
Mirosoftia-only based Web site. Nothing for me over there.
Now I disover the have a portal for the GPRS handsets and I cannot access it
from my Linux box.
I called the service (both regular and data) and all I got was the same shlomi
did - "We don't care! Screw you!". Whatsmore - on most of the calls I make to
the service (*054) I get reffered to their Web site. When I tell them I can't
access it because I don't have Windows (such an option does not register)
they tell me to go to a friend's house and use his computer !!!
I think these e-mails aren't what we need, we have to go public. Some article
on YNet or Captain Internet might stir the put a bit...
Any of you with the right connections?
Thanks,
Amichai Rotman.
On Monday 03 November 2003 22:35, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Attached is a discussion I had with the webmaster of the site of Orange,
> of which I recently became a customer of. Notice what I claim to be some
> inconsistencies in his approach. The final E-mail he sent me (after which
> I said that I'll just agree to disagree) is:
>
> <<<
> Dear Mr. Fish.
>
> I would like to end this discution with this note.
> Even though I am a user of Linux and a fan of all things open source I
> still do
> not agree that all websites should support all browsers. orange's website
> was
> designed to be out of the ordinary, not standard and clean but to align
> itself
> with our Logo and unique line of advertising.. We chose to write it this
> way
> and we have no regrets.
> Even with all this in mind, your comments about compatibility will be
> taken
> into consideration.
>
>
> If you are an Orange customer please voice your complaint as well or
> mention that you support my opinions. (to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
> Regards,
>
> Shlomi Fish
>
>
> --
> Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
>
> Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than
> getting its license changed.
>
> Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:54:55 +0200 (IST)
> From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable
> in Mozill a{ID:36786727} (fwd)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
>
> An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
> doctors away.
>
> Falk Fish
> -- Forwarded message --
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:39:45 +0200 (IST)
> From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable
> in Mozill a{ID:36786727}
>
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Dear Mr. Fish,
> > I thank you again for your mail.
> >
> > I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our website
> > in the near future. We have developed an amazing website,
>
> "amazing"? By this do you mean full of non-portable bells and whistles,
> and other idiosyncracies? Sorry, but that's not an amazing web-site
> according to my book.
>
> A good web-site is either simple and clean, or includes
> standard-compliant, portable embelishments. (which are usually not
> necessary).
>
> Usability, low bandwidth, etc. is much more important than "amazingness"
> and I bet it's not very usable in MSIE either.
>
> > that costs us a
> > lot of money to develop and maintain,
>
> Why does it? Why should it? I maintain a few web-sites in my free time and
> I'm not getting paid to do so. If you keep your web-site clean and simple,
> it will cost less money to maintain and will also attract more visitors.
>
> > and it is currently built exactly
> > according to our business needs.
>
> I seriously doubt it is built according to anyone's business needs. Why do
> you need JavaScript to display the catalog of images? Why not simply
> include them in the HTML? If you look at popular international sites,
> you'll see that most of them are built with simple and clean HTML
> (sometimes without any trace of JavaScript).
>
> > I can also say that although
> > technologically it might be possible to develop a version for Mozilla or
> > other browsers,
>
> 1. It is possible.
>
> 2. I'm not talking about a separate version for other browsers. I'm
> talking about one version for _all_ browsers.
>
> > orange, and many other content providers, are investing
> > in the most common browser, it is currently not cost efficient to
> > develop versions for other browsers.
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Hi list, > > Just came back from a meeting with Gadi Gilon. For those who don't > remeber, he is the CIO of "Kupat Cholim Klalit". He stumbled upon the > last time his name was mentioned on this list (thread starting at > http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Linux/maillists/03/09/msg00296.html), > and wanted to talk. > > I'm BCCing him on this email, so he can choose to participate actively > in this discussion (or just correct me). > > The discussion stayed, almost exclusively, on the theoretical, > ideological, front. If I understood correctly, his main point is this: > "I can see ideological/social reasons for writing/using free software, > and I see financial ones. If I try to adopt the ideological reasons > within my organization, it will never work. I cannot let every user of a > machine in every hospital change their own software. I cannot expect to > have the social contract's benifits when aquiring the software, yet not > pass the same benifits onwards. I must therefor reject the social > reasons for adoping free software". > That's entirely not true. An organization can rule that every user in the organization must use a version of the software that is kept unmodified in some respects. That's not against the open-source ideology. Besides, what's the worst thing that can happen if people modify their software? That new bugs appear? If they jeopordize the security of the entire system, then it's a bug in the system, not in themselves. In most cases in which I used an open source software as an end user, I rarely had to hack on it myself to fix bugs, much less to add new features. People who are members of a large organization, would think twice before trying to do so, because all the organization works in a particular way. > Please don't start flame wars saying "but there are also financial > reasons for adopting open source". He is not rejecting this possibility. > It has not come up due to lack of time. > > Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > the past already". > Great, but where is the source code now? In open source software, the source code is available at present for anyone to hack on, modify, inspect, add new features to, comment, etc. And this means the entire body of open source users and/or developers. That's much better than being at the mercy of the one company who developed the source code. (and even if it goes under, the source code may still be restricted). Had he used open source software, he could have modified the source code himself or hire someone to modify it for him. He would not need such contracts. > I tried to point out that this is actually means that he has forced the > vendors to turn their model, when dealing with him, into a free software > one. He acknoledged the possible truthfulness of this statement. I read > that as "the free software model is so much suprior, that I am actually > forcing closed source companies to adhere to it". I guess you may read > that to mean that the free software advantages arenot as important to > him, representing a huge organization, as it is to SMBs. I guess had the > quotes in the paper said "I don't see the advantages of free software to > organizations of my caliber", things would have been understood > differently by us too. > I'm not sure this model is the same as the free software one. For instance, he cannot distribute the software (much less its source code) further and gain more users and eyes that will comment, inspect and correct it. The Bazaar model cannot work in such conditions, either. > Like I said before - the financial aspects of free software were not > raised at all. > > One last point - he said he is willing to talk to us further. If he > doesn't wish to join this discussion (and even if he does), I was > thinking of dedicating a Telux meeting to that end. What do you think? > I'm fine with it. Albeit, it could turn into a one against many flame-war. Regards, Shlomi Fish >Shachar > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #
Re: GUI language for beginners
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 04:03:02AM -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > > > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > > > downsides of each approach. > > > > > > > > gtk: > > > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > > > > > qt: > > > > * not free in win32 > > > Actually it is now. > > > > > > > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? > > Isn't it dual licensed as GPL/QPL? Doesn't GPL mean free as in > speech? Only the X11 version, as far as I could find. -- Didi > > > Regards, > > > > Shlomi Fish > > > > > > > Ely > > behdad > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners (fwd)
Mail mishaps. -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:22:50 +0200 (IST) From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Oded Arbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: GUI language for beginners Hi! Did you mean to send this E-mail to the list? On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Oded Arbel wrote: > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > >> Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > >> downsides of each approach. > >> > >> gtk: > >> * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop > >> language) > > > > I beg your pardon? Gtk+ is Object-Oriented. And you can do OOP in C well > > enough. > > Most people who've ever used an OO (oriented) languages such as > C++/Java/Python/Perl (strike what's not PC) would disagree with you here. I've used such languages. Even extensively. > passing a structure on every call to a procedure with a guessable prefix > is not what I would consider object-oriented. it may be about "objects" > but its not oriented towards anything. > Object Oriented is a methodology of programming with objects. The syntax is not relevant. For example, in C++ and in Java the object is passed to its methods implictly. In Perl the object is passed explictly and some people dislike this fact. (while I do). Object Oriented languages come in all shapes and sizes. For the record, I once got a spec from a co-worker who just learned about OOP, and instructed me to write the C++ methods with their class name. (like in Gtk+), I told him it was a bad idea. > That being said, GTK+ is very usable, powerful and flexiable. its just not > very easy to work with (especially in an real OO capable language) > compared to the alternatives. > Well, I worked with it in Perl a little, and it was OK. Probably not as convenient as Perl/Tk or as Qt in C++, but still pretty much OK. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
> Well it's a bit weird, > for once I remember it was fully GPLed few month ago > now they seem to change it so although there is GPLed > version of QT for windows only academic people can download it > but since it's fully GPLed I don't see how they how they can stop > anyone who isn't academic from copying it and using it even > if you can't download it from their site. >> > > qt: >> > > * not free in win32 >> > Actually it is now. >> > >> >> Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? The KDE on Cygwin project has a GPLed version of QT3 ported to Win32 (I think its not a cygwin port but a native one, but I'm not sure) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 07:07:05PM -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: >> >> Was waiting for someone else to mention that, but no one did. >> Perhaps PyGTK (Python + GTK bindings) is the best to go these >> days. There are thousands of small and large examples out there >> to copy from ;-). Ruby + GTK seems good too, but Ruby is not a >> language I bother myself learning, when I can learn Python (and >> did) instead. >> >> BTW, something that you shell scripters may like, in GNOME 2.4, >> have a look at 'zenity'. It displays GTK+ dialogs from command >> line. > > I did not really look at zenity, but did look at other similar > stuff, and the best I found is called kaptain. Less than a real > language, no fancy "designer", but much stronger than e.g. gdialog. There's also KDialog which I've used a couple of time. nothing close to a real GUI tool, but if all you need is to pop a dialog box here and there then its a good choice (assuming you live peacefully with KDE that is). Another option for KDE people is Kommander which is used to design a GUI (has fancy designer) around a command line utility. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
btw if you want to even get more confuzed http://www.trolltech.com/download/index.html notice the educational version is under the GPL section if you look on the licence part of the page it would tell you it's under educational license so I guess their webpage is a bit not updated to one side (either it's suppose to be GPL now or they changed it to educational now) Ely Levy System group Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > > downsides of each approach. > > > > > > gtk: > > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > > > qt: > > > * not free in win32 > > Actually it is now. > > > > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? > > Regards, > > Shlomi Fish > > > > Ely > > > > = > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ > > Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting > its license changed. > > Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
> On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > >> Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the >> downsides of each approach. >> >> gtk: >> * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop >> language) > > I beg your pardon? Gtk+ is Object-Oriented. And you can do OOP in C well > enough. Most people who've ever used an OO (oriented) languages such as C++/Java/Python/Perl (strike what's not PC) would disagree with you here. passing a structure on every call to a procedure with a guessable prefix is not what I would consider object-oriented. it may be about "objects" but its not oriented towards anything. That being said, GTK+ is very usable, powerful and flexiable. its just not very easy to work with (especially in an real OO capable language) compared to the alternatives. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
Well it's a bit weird, for once I remember it was fully GPLed few month ago now they seem to change it so although there is GPLed version of QT for windows only academic people can download it but since it's fully GPLed I don't see how they how they can stop anyone who isn't academic from copying it and using it even if you can't download it from their site. Ely Levy System group Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > > downsides of each approach. > > > > > > gtk: > > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > > > qt: > > > * not free in win32 > > Actually it is now. > > > > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? > > Regards, > > Shlomi Fish > > > > Ely > > > > = > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ > > Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting > its license changed. > > Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. > > = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Hi, First, I want to say that this is one of the most interesting emails I read recently. On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:47:43AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Hi list, > > Just came back from a meeting with Gadi Gilon. For those who don't > remeber, he is the CIO of "Kupat Cholim Klalit". He stumbled upon the > last time his name was mentioned on this list (thread starting at > http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Linux/maillists/03/09/msg00296.html), > and wanted to talk. > > I'm BCCing him on this email, so he can choose to participate actively > in this discussion (or just correct me). > > The discussion stayed, almost exclusively, on the theoretical, > ideological, front. If I understood correctly, his main point is this: > "I can see ideological/social reasons for writing/using free software, > and I see financial ones. If I try to adopt the ideological reasons > within my organization, it will never work. I cannot let every user of a > machine in every hospital change their own software. I cannot expect to Adopting the ideological reasons doesn't mean you should let users change their own software on their own machines. There is a difference between giving users the source for the programs they use and giving them the root password. It wasn't clear whether they also look at the sources they get and have a team of programmers to change/fix them, or only take the sources to external support companies. If they do have such a team, I don't see a reason why every user in every hospital can't have an account on a development machine, try his fixes, and send patches to such a team. If they are good, they will be accepted just as are patches written by the "official" programmers - properly tested, etc. > have the social contract's benifits when aquiring the software, yet not > pass the same benifits onwards. I must therefor reject the social > reasons for adoping free software". > > Please don't start flame wars saying "but there are also financial > reasons for adopting open source". He is not rejecting this possibility. > It has not come up due to lack of time. > > Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > the past already". That's simply amazing. Does this include also off-the-shelf software (Windows? With what NDA?), or only software written for them? When I was in the army, we also had a project which was mostly written by a company, and we also had all the sources. We even put the sources on the users' machines, although the only implication was that we could fix bugs on the spot (we didn't have communication to them from the development site). We never had a user who was a programmer and wanted to look at the sources. > > I tried to point out that this is actually means that he has forced the > vendors to turn their model, when dealing with him, into a free software > one. He acknoledged the possible truthfulness of this statement. I read > that as "the free software model is so much suprior, that I am actually > forcing closed source companies to adhere to it". I guess you may read > that to mean that the free software advantages are not as important to > him, representing a huge organization, as it is to SMBs. I guess had the > quotes in the paper said "I don't see the advantages of free software to > organizations of my caliber", things would have been understood > differently by us too. Also, this means that a big-enough group of home users can also put large enough pressure on vendors. > > Like I said before - the financial aspects of free software were not > raised at all. > > One last point - he said he is willing to talk to us further. If he > doesn't wish to join this discussion (and even if he does), I was > thinking of dedicating a Telux meeting to that end. What do you think? Sounds interesting to me. -- Didi > > Shachar > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting with Gadi Gilon
My donation: Of course not every user can change software on machines in every hospital. Users can't do a thing. One of the highlights of a Unix (and of course, a Linux) management, is that it can be managed from one sigle center point, and easilly. Assuming, for the matter, that there are zero hardware failures (we'll get there soon), all you need to do is implement the system once, and manage it using minimal number of people - You could scale up (as I see it) to having a very small amount of experts, each in his field, regarding parts of the whole system - You could have a DB expert, a scripting expert, a testing expert (working with the rest towards new concepts, updates, changes, etc) and half a dozen Sysdamins for the whole system, all in all. After sufficient testing, one could hardly argue the stability of an open-source (free?) software based systems. I don't remember a link, and many details, but there was a whole city in the US, if I remember correctly, which was managed (police, offices, etc.) by 3 people, including the boss, with lots of time on their hands. The only drawback of not using a mainframe (and there's nothing we can do about it) is hardware problems. That implies that every hospital should have one, two, even three technicians. Since management can be done remotelly, and central based, you only need to keep these techies on the spot to: - maintain and fix hardware problems - "feel" the existing system - They will probably know first if there's any new problem - support individuals. Using central maintanace, personal usage profiles would be very stable, and could always be reset if the need arises (which should be quite rare). For example - assume usage of one LDAP server in every hospital, containing data about net-home-dir, managed from one central point, and updated from this central point, as well as any and every other LDAP servers the Clalit has. What you get, after building the right scripts (it's being called "deploying") the system, is that your "users administrator" inserts a single user into LDAP, all LDAP servers update, a homedir, preferences preconfigured, is being openned on the correct "area" storage server, mail is being configured, and vualla! A computer is added into the hospital - a Network KS is being deployed (pre-existing), configuring the computer to be part of the area, activating a "register" request for the "Users admin", or net-admin, gets preconfigured according the the legitimate std. configuration in the area, during the install, and is waiting for the users to use, in no time (a proccess like that takes around an hour. If you use very long and complicated scripts, that is, else it can be less then 20 minutes). The only actual job was to connect the computer to the net, and boot it up using floppy, cd, or net card. The system knows what to do next. Cheapper on deployment, cheapper on management, cheapper to use. Deployment, of course, takes time. One should be capable enough to plan a good layout - extensible, scalable, and easy to maintain, to allow easy maintanace, and easy configuration. Oh, and you don't need to have your FSMOs. Etzion Bar-Noy Aka, Ez. On Tuesday 04 November 2003 10:47, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Hi list, > > Just came back from a meeting with Gadi Gilon. For those who don't > remeber, he is the CIO of "Kupat Cholim Klalit". He stumbled upon the > last time his name was mentioned on this list (thread starting at > http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Linux/maillists/03/09/msg00296.html), > and wanted to talk. > > I'm BCCing him on this email, so he can choose to participate actively > in this discussion (or just correct me). > > The discussion stayed, almost exclusively, on the theoretical, > ideological, front. If I understood correctly, his main point is this: > "I can see ideological/social reasons for writing/using free software, > and I see financial ones. If I try to adopt the ideological reasons > within my organization, it will never work. I cannot let every user of a > machine in every hospital change their own software. I cannot expect to > have the social contract's benifits when aquiring the software, yet not > pass the same benifits onwards. I must therefor reject the social > reasons for adoping free software". > > Please don't start flame wars saying "but there are also financial > reasons for adopting open source". He is not rejecting this possibility. > It has not come up due to lack of time. > > Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, > and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with > all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source > code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get > competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in > the past already". > > I tried to point out that this is actually means that he has forced the > vendors to turn their model, when
Re: GUI language for beginners
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > > downsides of each approach. > > > > > > gtk: > > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > > > qt: > > > * not free in win32 > > Actually it is now. > > > > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? Isn't it dual licensed as GPL/QPL? Doesn't GPL mean free as in speech? > Regards, > > Shlomi Fish > > > > Ely behdad = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
Shoshannah Forbes wrote: On Monday, Nov 3, 2003, at 22:35 Asia/Jerusalem, Shlomi Fish wrote: I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our website in the near future. We have developed an amazing website, "amazing"? By this do you mean full of non-portable bells and whistles, and other idiosyncracies? Sorry, but that's not an amazing web-site according to my book. A good web-site is either simple and clean, or includes standard-compliant, portable embelishments. (which are usually not necessary). Actually, a site doesn't have to be clean, and can have all the bells and whistles you want and still work with mozilla. Hell, you can even make a site which is full of bells and whistles and is still accessible, if you know what you are dong. IMO, telling web-masters that their site must be simple in order to work with mozilla is shooting ourselves in the foot- you will get the same response that you got here "then why bother?". They think that Mozilla is limited and won't even try, although in fact mozilla has a few tricks up it's sleeves that IE can't handle to save it's life. That's part of the problem. Like Leumi said: W3C has standards, but IE doesn't support them. As such, it makes no sense, and justly so, to use them. Let's face it, if it were possible to design sites that worked on IE, be flashy, AND were standard complient, we would have a strong case. Is it possible? Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Ely Levy wrote: > > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > > > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > > downsides of each approach. > > > > gtk: > > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > > * looks funkey on win32 > > > > qt: > > * not free in win32 > Actually it is now. > Free as in speech? I don't think so. Care to enlighten us? Regards, Shlomi Fish > Ely > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Direction of ruler in OpenOffice.org
Hi. I am probably in the wrong place. Please direct me to the right place. I have the regular version of OpenOffice.org, because I want the menus in English. If I can get English menus in the Hebrew version, please inform me. In any case, I can type in Hebrew in the regular version, and reverse the direction of the text. How do you reverse the direction of the ruler, like you can in that other word processor? Is there a guideline for using Hebrew in regular version of OpenOffice.org? Yehuda = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Meeting with Gadi Gilon
Hi list, Just came back from a meeting with Gadi Gilon. For those who don't remeber, he is the CIO of "Kupat Cholim Klalit". He stumbled upon the last time his name was mentioned on this list (thread starting at http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Linux/maillists/03/09/msg00296.html), and wanted to talk. I'm BCCing him on this email, so he can choose to participate actively in this discussion (or just correct me). The discussion stayed, almost exclusively, on the theoretical, ideological, front. If I understood correctly, his main point is this: "I can see ideological/social reasons for writing/using free software, and I see financial ones. If I try to adopt the ideological reasons within my organization, it will never work. I cannot let every user of a machine in every hospital change their own software. I cannot expect to have the social contract's benifits when aquiring the software, yet not pass the same benifits onwards. I must therefor reject the social reasons for adoping free software". Please don't start flame wars saying "but there are also financial reasons for adopting open source". He is not rejecting this possibility. It has not come up due to lack of time. Now, I tried to point the practical reasons behind the social contract, and his response rather suprised me. Basically, he has contracts with all of his software vendors that gives him full access to the source code in case the company goes under. His basic premesis was "I can get competition over support in proprietary software too - Clalit did it in the past already". I tried to point out that this is actually means that he has forced the vendors to turn their model, when dealing with him, into a free software one. He acknoledged the possible truthfulness of this statement. I read that as "the free software model is so much suprior, that I am actually forcing closed source companies to adhere to it". I guess you may read that to mean that the free software advantages are not as important to him, representing a huge organization, as it is to SMBs. I guess had the quotes in the paper said "I don't see the advantages of free software to organizations of my caliber", things would have been understood differently by us too. Like I said before - the financial aspects of free software were not raised at all. One last point - he said he is willing to talk to us further. If he doesn't wish to join this discussion (and even if he does), I was thinking of dedicating a Telux meeting to that end. What do you think? Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GUI language for beginners
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > Here is my opinion: any one of this 3 sounds cool. I put here only the > downsides of each approach. > > gtk: > * not object oriented (looks un-natural to build gui's in no oop language) > * looks funkey on win32 > > qt: > * not free in win32 Actually it is now. Ely = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
On Monday, Nov 3, 2003, at 22:35 Asia/Jerusalem, Shlomi Fish wrote: I regret being so blunt but, no, we are not going to change our website in the near future. We have developed an amazing website, "amazing"? By this do you mean full of non-portable bells and whistles, and other idiosyncracies? Sorry, but that's not an amazing web-site according to my book. A good web-site is either simple and clean, or includes standard-compliant, portable embelishments. (which are usually not necessary). Actually, a site doesn't have to be clean, and can have all the bells and whistles you want and still work with mozilla. Hell, you can even make a site which is full of bells and whistles and is still accessible, if you know what you are dong. IMO, telling web-masters that their site must be simple in order to work with mozilla is shooting ourselves in the foot- you will get the same response that you got here "then why bother?". They think that Mozilla is limited and won't even try, although in fact mozilla has a few tricks up it's sleeves that IE can't handle to save it's life. IMO, a better approach should be: * the W3C wrote web standards. sites built to standards work in all browsers (present and *future*) with minimal adjustments. * not building the site for standards, and instead building it to a specific browser only, limits your teachability and market share. * many of those people you are missing on just happen to have demographics that advertisers love... (educated, high income, people who will try things (=gadgets) before everyone else). ֱֳ To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > I wonder > would they, say, sell mobile phones that operate only in Hungarian and say > to the customers - "we think Hungarian is a magnificent language and we > spent a lot of money to get such phones". Well, I probably would buy that phone :-) Seriously though, if that was in Hungary that would be probably a reasonable behavior. As *they* see it looking at the statistics or otherwise they are in Microsoftia. So developing for Microsoftia is a reasonable behavior. The majority takes it all. Is it good business practice ? I don't know. I never managed a company of that size. Gabor Hungarian Perl Mongers http://www.perl.org.hu/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ???: Re: ???: http://www.orange.co.il/catalog/ is unviewable in Mozilla {ID:36786727} (fwd)
GF>> The orange site is payed for by your money (as a client) and as part of GF>> the service you are entitled to. What also surprises me is that "in your face" attitude of the webmaster. Like: "we like our site and if you don't, screw you". Though, most isrraely companies did not grow out of the stage where they think of a corporate webside as a cool toy and not as customer service tool. I wonder would they, say, sell mobile phones that operate only in Hungarian and say to the customers - "we think Hungarian is a magnificent language and we spent a lot of money to get such phones". I think somehow this line of behaviour would not fit them. But for websites that's not only acceptable, that's actually the code of behaviour for Israeli corporate web presense. So sad. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells phone +972-66-524945/\ JRRT LotR. whois:!SM8333 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
