[S.u.S.E. Linux] SuSE and QT
Funny. I came across this today in my mail... I thought it was interesting sense Michael L's post re the RH comment. This is totally unrelated by I still thought it interesting.... Basically, I think it's an extension of Gnome/KDE war with a 'recomendation' at the end to not support SuSE just because it comes with QT ! If it was inappropriate for me to forward this from the kernel list let me know by mail and I'll not repeat...I just thought SuSE linux people might find it 'interesting'. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 16:30:53 -0600 From: Richard Stallman <rms@santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org To: konold@alpha.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de, kde@lists.netcentral.net, gnome-hackers@nuclecu.unam.mx, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu Subject: Re: Forward of posting from RMS Linus wrote: I also don't think that it can be argued that a library has to be on all distributions in order for it to be acceptable: historically many commercial UNIX vendors didn't (maybe still do not, but I no longer care since I haven't used one in quite some time) include the development environment in their standard distribution. They had the run-time parts, but not the link-time C library, for example. This is actually a simple and straightforward issue. The reason the GNU GPL permits linking with these libraries is explicit in the wording. Here are the words: the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, In all of these cases, that I have heard of, the C library for these proprietary systems is distributed either with the kernel or with the C compiler. Either way, these words explicitly permit linking with that library. In GPL version 1, this text said "with the operating system", and as a result, it did not handle the case where the compiler and the C library are distributed as a separate package from the kernel. Unix systems which did not come with C compilers began to appear around that time, so I changed these words in GPL version 2. Someone else wrote: I don't buy the "so in general it's not" weaseling, because that declares SuSE to somehow "not be a normal Linux distribution". Whether SuSE (or any other specific GNU/Linux distribution) is a normal one is not the question. The question is what is normal practice for distributing the kernel, the compiler, and other major components of the system--not directly about any particular system distribution. In other words, not "Is SuSE normal?" but rather, "Is including Qt with Linux normal? Is including Qt with GCC normal?" I do hope that SuSE's practice of including non-free software in a system distribution will not become normal. After working so hard to give people the chance to be free, I would be sad to see them throw it away for a little convenience. So I hope people will not use, install or recommend SuSE. But that is another issue. - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
If something is a quality application, I am going to use it whether or not the libs it uses are GPL'ed. Parts of kde are outstanding, and they are not made less so by using QT. Gnome is at least a year behind kde in functionality at this time. I am not going to spend the rest of my days living in a cave and using Lynx to browse the web. Now, don't misunderstand me, I like lynx, but if I'm in x, I'm using Netscape. There is something about linux users; the majority of us are above average intelligence with seemingly below average social skills and a real gift for turning against each other for the smallest of reasons. Have a great weekend everyone! :) -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Michael Lankton wrote:
If something is a quality application, I am going to use it whether or not the libs it uses are GPL'ed. Parts of kde are outstanding, and they are not made less so by using QT. Gnome is at least a year behind kde in functionality at this time. I am not going to spend the rest of my days living in a cave and using Lynx to browse the web. Now, don't misunderstand me, I like lynx, but if I'm in x, I'm using Netscape. There is something about linux users; the majority of us are above average intelligence with seemingly below average social skills and a real gift for turning against each other for the smallest of reasons. Have a great weekend everyone!
Average computer users are just that....users. Those of us who've been around quite awhile and make a living with 'puters are more "religeous" about hardware, software, and political issues, like being anti-MickySoft. 'Goes with the territory, I guess. Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I am not going to spend the rest of my days living in a cave and using Lynx to browse the web. Now, don't misunderstand me, I like lynx, but if I'm in x, I'm using Netscape.
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty. Netscape is superb in nearly every respect, but IMHO, it encourages developers to overload sites with graphics and multimedia apps that strain the bandwidth of the majority of users. Communicator is more suited to the Internet of the future, when we'll (hopefully) be browsing at superior speeds with cable modems or uplinks to broadband satellite services. Essentially, it's software ahead of its time, whose impact is negative overall. I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally. Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like. -- Glenn -- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I have a cable modem, and it's easy to forget that not everyone has bandwidth to spare. I hope all the java and graphics and embedded midi on my site doesn't make it impossible on a dial up connection. misc.word.corp wrote:
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty.
Netscape is superb in nearly every respect, but IMHO, it encourages developers to overload sites with graphics and multimedia apps that strain the bandwidth of the majority of users.
Communicator is more suited to the Internet of the future, when we'll (hopefully) be browsing at superior speeds with cable modems or uplinks to broadband satellite services. Essentially, it's software ahead of its time, whose impact is negative overall.
I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally.
Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like.
-- Glenn --
-- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, Michael Lankton wrote:
Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] SuSE and QT
I have a cable modem, and it's easy to forget that not everyone has bandwidth to spare. I hope all the java and graphics and embedded midi on my site doesn't make it impossible on a dial up connection.
No. I'm on an ancient machine. I use Netscape to access your site and everything seems to work fine. -M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
It's not just Netscape that encourages these unwieldy, graphics burdened websites; Rush (the band, not the talk-show host) sang, "So much style without substance, so much stuff without style." <soapbox> A whole generation of Powerpoint heads who have figured out that a five minute presentation can become a twenty-five minute presentation if you use enough slides. Not to mention all the advertising people now involved who want the web to be a glossy-paper magazine ad (at a fraction of the cost of real printing) rather than a free-form research tool. Just try to get an Ad person interested in a slick, quick-loading lynx-friendly page; their eyes glaze over. We should start calling it the world-wide ad just so innocent children know what they're getting into. </soapbox> Way off-topic...sorry, as everyone knows advertising is essential to maintaining the American Way of Life and that I'd be a lot happier if I'd buy more crap; a lot more crap. phil misc.word.corp wrote:
I am not going to spend the rest of my days living in a cave and using Lynx to browse the web. Now, don't misunderstand me, I like lynx, but if I'm in x, I'm using Netscape.
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty.
Netscape is superb in nearly every respect, but IMHO, it encourages developers to overload sites with graphics and multimedia apps that strain the bandwidth of the majority of users.
<snip!>
I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally.
Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like.
-- Glenn -- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- [Nuclear war] ... may not be desirable. -- Edwin Meese III - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
phillip mannie wrote:
A whole generation of Powerpoint heads who have figured out that a five minute presentation can become a twenty-five minute presentation if you use enough slides. phil
I have spent the last two semesters trying to learn c++ from instructors that are better at Powerpoint than they are at teaching code. >:\ -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Tell me about it! I just took a systems analysis and design class where the prof. read to us from powerpoint slides and was unable to answer most questions that didn't pertain to the slides. Unbeleiveable! Mark --- Michael Lankton wrote:
I have spent the last two semesters trying to learn c++ from instructors that are better at Powerpoint than they are at teaching code. >:\
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I disagree. I think Netscape is suited to NOW. I think tech is bound to increase and we have to accept it. It waits for noone, but I _don't_ think we are getting outteched here. It's just one of those things about computers where software gets more demanding and one inevitably has to upgrade to appreciate the enhancements. If you look at Linux in general, IMHO, sys requirements have gone up across the board. The old days where you 386 with 8 megs of ram seem to be over, and I guess that's another case of the same...tech going up and hardware requirements to fully benefit going up with them as well. I don't think anyone should wait to add multimedia to their sites etc. I just accept that as the way it is. (I, too, am primarily a lynx user, btw). As an aside, for those of you trying the new E, esd only works with 16 bit stereo and 44.1khz sound according to RidDude, so if you want built in sound support then use rplay in FVWM or wmsound for WindowMaker. On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, misc.word.corp wrote:
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty.
Netscape is superb in nearly every respect, but IMHO, it encourages developers to overload sites with graphics and multimedia apps that strain the bandwidth of the majority of users.
Communicator is more suited to the Internet of the future, when we'll (hopefully) be browsing at superior speeds with cable modems or uplinks to broadband satellite services. Essentially, it's software ahead of its time, whose impact is negative overall.
I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally.
Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like.
-M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I didn't want to get into this, but I think I might have to get my hands on this, finally. I think someone mentioned what I'm going to say earlier, but I will mention it again. The question, in my opinion, should be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing. I do realize that many people will disagree with me on this, and I am certainly not looking for a flame war here. Just an educated discussion. The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real demonstration of parallel computing application, which I think is not common. To design a web site well, requirements analysis and all other software engineering techniques should be applied, either consciously or not. There is no doubt that technology changes everyday. Maybe even every second! And we do have to upgrade our hardware from time to time. But that is just human. Once we can solve a small problem, we want to be able to solve a big problem, then we want to tackle on even larger problems. That's what drives the advancement of many technologies, including computing technology. The older hardware can still do the task for which they are designed for. Or they can be ingeniously engineered to take on larger tasks. One such example would be to put together a pile of obsolete machines, for example the 486 machines, for parallel computing work, using them as just an NOW or run them as a Beowulf cluster. This is just my personal opinion, and I am really open to discussions. Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sun, 19 Jul 1998 hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
I disagree. I think Netscape is suited to NOW. I think tech is bound to increase and we have to accept it. It waits for noone, but I _don't_ think we are getting outteched here. It's just one of those things about computers where software gets more demanding and one inevitably has to upgrade to appreciate the enhancements. If you look at Linux in general, IMHO, sys requirements have gone up across the board. The old days where you 386 with 8 megs of ram seem to be over, and I guess that's another case of the same...tech going up and hardware requirements to fully benefit going up with them as well. I don't think anyone should wait to add multimedia to their sites etc. I just accept that as the way it is. (I, too, am primarily a lynx user, btw).
As an aside, for those of you trying the new E, esd only works with 16 bit stereo and 44.1khz sound according to RidDude, so if you want built in sound support then use rplay in FVWM or wmsound for WindowMaker.
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, misc.word.corp wrote:
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty.
Netscape is superb in nearly every respect, but IMHO, it encourages developers to overload sites with graphics and multimedia apps that strain the bandwidth of the majority of users.
Communicator is more suited to the Internet of the future, when we'll (hopefully) be browsing at superior speeds with cable modems or uplinks to broadband satellite services. Essentially, it's software ahead of its time, whose impact is negative overall.
I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally.
Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like.
-M
One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin.
mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing.
Why can't it be both? Why can't I enjoy the web for being the world's largest library/code repository as well as the world's largest bazaar? I actually do a lot of online purchasing. Someone has to pay for all this. You can't have one without the other, and I'm willing to bet that porn generates more revenue than free software sites ;)
The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for >something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real >demonstration
Gratuitous multimedia should be reserved for entertainment sites. However, when relevant, multimedia does enhance the web experience. Final Fantasy game music midi is appropriate on a site devoted to Final Fantasy video games. There is no excuse for Shockwave. -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, you wrote:
I didn't want to get into this, but I think I might have to get my hands on this, finally. I think someone mentioned what I'm going to say earlier, but I will mention it again. The question, in my opinion, should be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing. I do realize that many people will disagree with me on this, and I am certainly not looking for a flame war here. Just an educated discussion. The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real demonstration of parallel computing application, which I think is not common. To design a web site well, requirements analysis and all other software engineering techniques should be applied, either consciously or not.
There is no doubt that technology changes everyday. Maybe even every second! And we do have to upgrade our hardware from time to time. But that is just human. Once we can solve a small problem, we want to be able to solve a big problem, then we want to tackle on even larger problems. That's what drives the advancement of many technologies, including computing technology. The older hardware can still do the task for which they are designed for. Or they can be ingeniously engineered to take on larger tasks. One such example would be to put together a pile of obsolete machines, for example the 486 machines, for parallel computing work, using them as just an NOW or run them as a Beowulf cluster.
This is just my personal opinion, and I am really open to discussions.
Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980
"An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting exchange, no doubt about the web and its influence throughout technology, science, art, studies, etc. In many different avenues, evolution has proceeded not in just one direction but in many. An anthropologist friend of mine has noted, "that there is nothing so constant as change". This was about studying the effects of dietary change on arid prehistoric cultures or perhaps cultural change at the macro level in europe at some prehistoric point. I think that the web does not offer an "either-or" swap of techology or mass media or information management. The exchange of information and exchange of energy has always been important to understanding the dynamics of change. I mention this because the web is changing, evolving, adapting. Perhaps down the road 10 years it will not be anything like it is now and perhaps we are at that point of punctuated equilibrium where the web suddenly manifests itself in several distinct directions. I think that the internet itself will adjust to demands of culture, science, art, and ideology. What we perhaps will see are different "webs" for different lifestyle offerings. Perhaps inteliigent agents will soon take the place of content browsing and engineers will concentrate on producing robots that deliver a certain type of data in a certain format at a certain time. My belief is that almost at any moment technology, cultural, social dynamics are at some critical mass. Perhaps this socio-cultural theory extended to the web would demonstrate a web which would attach itself to belief and ideological systems, give a certain data structure... Then another scientific or artistic or technological group would need a web derivative. These are just my slightly anarchistic viewpoints. -- Michael E. Perry mperry@basin.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Mike, I like your idea very much. Actually, I can say that I fully agree with you. Your thought made me think that our actions, whether we realize it or not, may actually cause some changes, be it major or minor, in the whole constantly evolving changing process. Hey, I really really like your ideas! Cheers, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, Michael Perry wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, you wrote:
I didn't want to get into this, but I think I might have to get my hands on this, finally. I think someone mentioned what I'm going to say earlier, but I will mention it again. The question, in my opinion, should be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing. I do realize that many people will disagree with me on this, and I am certainly not looking for a flame war here. Just an educated discussion. The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real demonstration of parallel computing application, which I think is not common. To design a web site well, requirements analysis and all other software engineering techniques should be applied, either consciously or not.
There is no doubt that technology changes everyday. Maybe even every second! And we do have to upgrade our hardware from time to time. But that is just human. Once we can solve a small problem, we want to be able to solve a big problem, then we want to tackle on even larger problems. That's what drives the advancement of many technologies, including computing technology. The older hardware can still do the task for which they are designed for. Or they can be ingeniously engineered to take on larger tasks. One such example would be to put together a pile of obsolete machines, for example the 486 machines, for parallel computing work, using them as just an NOW or run them as a Beowulf cluster.
This is just my personal opinion, and I am really open to discussions.
Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980
"An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting exchange, no doubt about the web and its influence throughout technology, science, art, studies, etc. In many different avenues, evolution has proceeded not in just one direction but in many. An anthropologist friend of mine has noted, "that there is nothing so constant as change". This was about studying the effects of dietary change on arid prehistoric cultures or perhaps cultural change at the macro level in europe at some prehistoric point.
I think that the web does not offer an "either-or" swap of techology or mass media or information management. The exchange of information and exchange of energy has always been important to understanding the dynamics of change. I mention this because the web is changing, evolving, adapting. Perhaps down the road 10 years it will not be anything like it is now and perhaps we are at that point of punctuated equilibrium where the web suddenly manifests itself in several distinct directions.
I think that the internet itself will adjust to demands of culture, science, art, and ideology. What we perhaps will see are different "webs" for different lifestyle offerings. Perhaps inteliigent agents will soon take the place of content browsing and engineers will concentrate on producing robots that deliver a certain type of data in a certain format at a certain time.
My belief is that almost at any moment technology, cultural, social dynamics are at some critical mass. Perhaps this socio-cultural theory extended to the web would demonstrate a web which would attach itself to belief and ideological systems, give a certain data structure... Then another scientific or artistic or technological group would need a web derivative.
These are just my slightly anarchistic viewpoints.
--
Michael E. Perry mperry@basin.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Try not to repost everything and snip that which is relevant to your reply...I've been told some people find it annoying. Don't take this statement meanly cause that's not my intent. Just trying to spare a possible flame at some future date. :-) I do think it's nice when sites support hardware that can't neccesarily benefit from all the latest enhancements. The Web is like television now, and is a tool for information gathering, communication, realtime and otherwise, exchanging files and programs, or even with real video/audio to watch movies and stuff...it's a fast moving change, so might as well accept it. It's only going to get bigger. On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
I didn't want to get into this, but I think I might have to get my hands on this, finally. I think someone mentioned what I'm going to say earlier, but I will mention it again. The question, in my opinion, should be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing. I do realize that many people will disagree with me on this, and I am certainly not looking for a flame war here. Just an educated discussion. The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real demonstration of parallel computing application, which I think is not common. To design a web site well, requirements analysis and all other software engineering techniques should be applied, either consciously or not.
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I do agree with you that the Web is like a TV right now. A few years from now, to may change to something that we may not even anticipate today. Did the creator of the Web predicted it to be what it is today? I don't think so. As a firm believer of good engineering designs, I think a web site should be designed for its purpose. Regards, Kenneth Tan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ C. J. Kenneth Tan E-mail: cjtan@acm.org Telephone: 1-403-220-8038 cjtan@ieee.org 1-403-606-4257 URL: <A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc"><A HREF="http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A">http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~tanc</A</A>> Facsimile: 1-403-284-1980 "An engineer made programmer is one who attempts to solve a problem, A programmer made engineer is one who knows how to solve a problem." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sun, 19 Jul 1998 hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Try not to repost everything and snip that which is relevant to your reply...I've been told some people find it annoying. Don't take this statement meanly cause that's not my intent. Just trying to spare a possible flame at some future date. :-)
I do think it's nice when sites support hardware that can't neccesarily benefit from all the latest enhancements. The Web is like television now, and is a tool for information gathering, communication, realtime and otherwise, exchanging files and programs, or even with real video/audio to watch movies and stuff...it's a fast moving change, so might as well accept it. It's only going to get bigger.
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, C. J. Kenneth Tan wrote:
I didn't want to get into this, but I think I might have to get my hands on this, finally. I think someone mentioned what I'm going to say earlier, but I will mention it again. The question, in my opinion, should be "Is the Web a medium for advertising, cheap graphics-filled magazine, or is it for information distribution/sharing?" My answer for that question is the latter -- for information sharing. I do realize that many people will disagree with me on this, and I am certainly not looking for a flame war here. Just an educated discussion. The site must be designed for its purpose. One just can't simply add audio to a site for something like parallel computing theory unless the audio is a real demonstration of parallel computing application, which I think is not common. To design a web site well, requirements analysis and all other software engineering techniques should be applied, either consciously or not.
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 19-Jul-98 misc.word.corp wrote:
I am not going to spend the rest of my days living in a cave and using Lynx to browse the web. Now, don't misunderstand me, I like lynx, but if I'm in x, I'm using Netscape.
I also like Lynx, but far too few Web sites are Lynx-friendly these days, and the constant scrolling through layout-related html drives me batty.
There's no reason for that, either, that's what bugs me. I tried to walk the line on my site, and I think I put some *slightly* advanced features in (tables, images, background and text colors) yet I think it came across well in Lynx. You're welcome to disagree! :) Really, how hard is it to put in ALT= text? Or ignore frames (or make a <NOFRAMES> page??)? How about a text equivalent to an image map? That would repair 950f all Lynx-hostile pages.
I'm no Luddite, but I wish that the Web had prolonged its move into graphics until bandwidth issues had been resolved. At current modem speeds, we'd all be better off with text-based Web browsing -- using Lynx, naturally.
Just a few ideas, go ahead and flame if you like.
I'll be balanced. I don't think images are the problem. Lynx isn't slowed down by them! They are an important part of the Web. People need to remember what HTML is all about and code it so the browser does the work. (parting shot) ...And I hate the narrow 2.5" column people make me read their pages in when I have 1280x1024 to play with! --- jonathan@aracnet.net <A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich"><A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A">http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich</A</A>> HOW YOU CAN TELL THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A ROTTEN DAY: #1040 Your income tax refund cheque bounces. - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I'll be balanced. I don't think images are the problem. Lynx isn't slowed down by them!
Images, per se, aren't a problem. *Navigational* images are. You know what I mean -- pint-sized graphics that say "NEWS" or "SCREENSHOTS" that are necessary to navigate a site. When I encounter one of these in Lynx or my graphics-disabled Communicator, it taxes my patience (unless the graphics are appropriately marked with text for the bandwidth-challenged). Graphics like these contain absolutely no useful information, and are simply a pain in the tush. Get them off the Web! (That is, until we all have decent bandwidth. Then go for it.) As for Lynx, wouldn't it be cool to have many of Lynx's features (such as keyboard controls resembling vi or emacs) in an image-savvy browser? That'd be heaven. (Actually, such a keyboard-navigatable browser *does* exist. It's called Opera, and the developers have commissioned a Linux port. Unlikely to be GPL'd, though.) -- Glenn -- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
I've used Opera (on M$)...it's a great browser, fast and small (the install files fit on a 1.44Mb diskette). It didn't cope very gracefully with tables, but they may have fixed that. phil misc.word.corp wrote: <snip!> > (Actually, such a keyboard-navigatable browser *does* exist. It's called > Opera, and the developers have commissioned a Linux port. Unlikely to be > GPL'd, though.) > > -- Glenn -- > - > To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with > this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Funny. I came across this today in my mail... I thought it was interesting sense Michael L's post re the RH comment. This is totally unrelated by I still thought it interesting....
Basically, I think it's an extension of Gnome/KDE war with a 'recomendation' at the end to not support SuSE just because it comes with QT !
If it was inappropriate for me to forward this from the kernel list let me know by mail and I'll not repeat...I just thought SuSE linux people might find it 'interesting'.
I'm glad you did.....Stallman's being a jerk.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 16:30:53 -0600 From: Richard Stallman <rms@santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org To: konold@alpha.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de, kde@lists.netcentral.net, gnome-hackers@nuclecu.unam.mx, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu Subject: Re: Forward of posting from RMS
[snip] I hope that Stallman's remark is not indicative of the feelings of that whole group. If I see much more of this crap from him or anyone else, I'll simply not consider any other distribution but SuSE in any conversation I have with anyone verbally or in any media. And, as long as SuSE continues to provide the best available, they'll have my 100% support. Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Doesn't Redhat's official version ship with some commercial products? BRU backup and MetroX were some that came with my RH 5.0 back in 1997. Heck, Redhat's site is littered with commercial offerings. Was it okay for them to support the Gnome project? The way I look at it is S.u.S.E is doing the linux user a favor by providing QT and KDE and saving those of us with slower internet connections up to an hour for the ftp. I ftp the gzipped tarballs anyway so that really doesn't apply to me. I'm with Michael: I'm going to use something because it works, not because I do/don't have to pay for it. Regards, Mark --- hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Funny. I came across this today in my mail... I thought it was interesting sense Michael L's post re the RH comment. This is totally unrelated by I still thought it interesting....
Basically, I think it's an extension of Gnome/KDE war with a 'recomendation' at the end to not support SuSE just because it comes with QT !
If it was inappropriate for me to forward this from the kernel list let me know by mail and I'll not repeat...I just thought SuSE linux people might find it 'interesting'.
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Your point is well taken. Lemme give it a subtext. QT is controversial. Many people HATE QT and the GNOME versus KDE thing was really a philosophical argument over the whole meaning behind 'open source'. I think MetroX and BRU are commercial...but I think it's the libraries...the base code systems that apps are built on not the actual programs that they are bitching about... I think this is also why many side with GNOME over KDE in the argument (which seems to get quite heated) because it is built on something other than QT). Some feel that QT should be disregarded because of some of the stipulations of the QT license. Right now I think people want a free alternative..and are looking at things like the Harmony project as they don't want to be left at teh behest of QT which some don't feel is in the right 'spirit' of linux. As far as commercial apps coming with dists, you can probably add Caldera to the list as well as SuSE and RH in terms of providing commercial as well as free software in their distributions. I don't know about Stampede adn haven't used Debian. On Sat, 18 Jul 1998, Mark Wagnon wrote:
Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] SuSE and QT
Doesn't Redhat's official version ship with some commercial products? BRU backup and MetroX were some that came with my RH 5.0 back in 1997. Heck, Redhat's site is littered with commercial offerings. Was it okay for them to support the Gnome project?
The way I look at it is S.u.S.E is doing the linux user a favor by providing QT and KDE and saving those of us with slower internet connections up to an hour for the ftp. I ftp the gzipped tarballs anyway so that really doesn't apply to me. I'm with Michael: I'm going to use something because it works, not because I do/don't have to pay for it.
Regards,
Mark
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Your point is well taken. Lemme give it a subtext. QT is controversial. Many people HATE QT and the GNOME versus KDE thing was really a philosophical argument over the whole meaning behind 'open source'. I think MetroX and BRU are commercial...but I think it's the libraries...the base code systems that apps are built on not the actual programs that they are bitching about... I think this is also why many side with GNOME over KDE in the argument (which seems to get quite heated) because it is built on something other than QT). Some feel that QT should be disregarded because of some of the stipulations of the QT license. Right now I think people want a free alternative..and are looking at things like the Harmony project as they don't want to be left at teh behest of QT which some don't feel is in the right 'spirit' of linux.
Ok let me get a bit more basic. I am more of an integrator than a hacker, so help me here, if you would. What does QT actually do for the KDE? I guess it supplies libraries for something. Can you give some examples? I have always thought of libraries as pre-canned code to be used for compilers to save the programmer having to reinvent the wheel. Then there are DLL type libraries. Where does QT fall? This non-GPL status is actually an interesting issue. As I understand it, I can use QT for free as a home user. Can I use productls like KDE in a business setting without forking over revenue to the Troll folks? If I understand I needed to pay to run the KDE on Solaris. Steve -- [<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>> Registered User #79059] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man. - Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_ [L]et [the charter] be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which; the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. - Thomas Paine, *Common Sense*, February 14th, 1776 - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
What does QT actually do for the KDE? I guess it supplies libraries for something. Can you give some examples?
Titlebars, scrollbars, buttons (all the widgets)...if I want my kde program to have a pop out menu, that uses QT...all the classes that a coder can call upon to lessen the amount of code it takes to write an app, and eliminate the need to code functions that are handled by the objects in QT (That is what any graphics library does, whether it's QT or gtk or whatever)
can use QT for free as a home user. Can I use productls like KDE in a business setting without forking over revenue to the Troll folks?
Qt can be used freely, but a license must be paid to trolltech if you want to charge for your QT app -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
So if you write an application and give it away without charge (and make the source code available), then anyone can use it and make changes to it and turn around and make the new app freely available, right? Sounds kind of like what I've read in the GPL. I don't get Richard Stallman's complaint. If Trolltech wants to charge for commercial use of their libraries, what's wrong with that? Heck everybody needs to make a buck. Even the Free Software Foundation charges for their software if you want them to send (and compile it, that has a $5000 price tag) it to you. Well I'm off to look up some opensource info, before I get flamed. Regards, Mark --- Michael Lankton wrote:
Qt can be used freely, but a license must be paid to trolltech if you want to charge for your QT app
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Your are right. Don't worry about being flamed. Too many people in the Linux community believe any software that is not GPL is trash. That's fine. But what really bugs me is these people slamming my choice to use non GPL code. GPL people get a life! Some people do have to work to support their families. Mark Wagnon wrote:
So if you write an application and give it away without charge (and make the source code available), then anyone can use it and make changes to it and turn around and make the new app freely available, right? Sounds kind of like what I've read in the GPL. I don't get Richard Stallman's complaint. If Trolltech wants to charge for commercial use of their libraries, what's wrong with that? Heck everybody needs to make a buck. Even the Free Software Foundation charges for their software if you want them to send (and compile it, that has a $5000 price tag) it to you.
Well I'm off to look up some opensource info, before I get flamed.
Regards,
Mark
---
Michael Lankton wrote:
Qt can be used freely, but a license must be paid to trolltech if you want to charge for your QT app
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- Robert Williams rwilliams@jrcmaui.com Jarob Consulting rwilliams@kde.org Maui, Hawaii - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Go read this: <A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml"><A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A">http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A</A>> Mark Wagnon wrote:
So if you write an application and give it away without charge (and make the source code available), then anyone can use it and make changes to it and turn around and make the new app freely available, right? Sounds kind of like what I've read in the GPL. I don't get Richard Stallman's
-- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Interesting article and responses. I must be dense, but I don't get the need for a _standardized_ desktop for linux. That seems to be the main argument: should the standard be opensource or not? I don't know and I probably don't care. As far as I'm concerned, the only standardization needed in Linux is in the kernel and what is considered the base system. Everything else is just icing on the cake and seems to be what differentiates one distribution from another. I use KDE right now, but I am eagerly waiting for S.u.S.E. to go glibc so that I can try out GNOME. Heck I switch window managers monthly. I like to try something different every once in a while. Later, Mark --- Michael Lankton wrote:
Go read this: <A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml"><A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A">http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A</A>>
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 20-Jul-98 Mark Wagnon wrote:
Interesting article and responses. I must be dense, but I don't get the need for a _standardized_ desktop for linux. That seems to be the main
There is an idea that Linux won't hit the main stream and replace, say, windows unless there is a standardize GUI for it. The argument goes, that the standard desktop of windows makes it easier to train employees... all the programs look real close and many of the basic functions are done the same no matter what program it is your're running. ---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html</A</A>> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Okay. I never thought about that. It's just that most of the staff at the school I work at have remained completely computer illiterate, despite numerous trainings over the years as our district has moved from msdos to win 3.1 to win 95. I find myself answering the same questions over and over again: how do you make a table? how do you save this file to a floppy? etc.. To me standard is a relative term once you get past the necessities. If a company wants to deploy linux and make windowmaker its "standard" window manager, then do it. No need for an official standard in my eyes. Heck if you just put the programs that the deskjockies are used to using into a panel or whatever, then that should do the trick. They're just used to pointing and clicking anyway. Oh well. I guess I should just live with the fact that most users of computers just want to do that: use their computers. They're not interested is learning about them. If an official standard helps linux into the mainstream desktop, then I fully support it, but it doesn't mean _I_ have to use because to me Linux is about freedom of choice. Regards, Mark --- The Gecko wrote:
On 20-Jul-98 Mark Wagnon wrote:
Interesting article and responses. I must be dense, but I don't get the need for a _standardized_ desktop for linux. That seems to be the main
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Mark Wagnon wrote:
If an official standard helps linux into the mainstream desktop, then I fully support it, but it doesn't mean _I_ have to use because to me Linux is about freedom of choice.
Mark, Guess I'll jump in and offer my 2 cents worth. As I understand things, the perceived problem is that QT cannot be modified and freely distributed by anybody but Troll Tech, thus it is not likely to evolve as quickly and be as flexible as some other set of window primitives. (please forgive me if this is not the correct terminology.) Since the KDE depends on QT, its future development is restricted by the alleged inflexibility of QT. Of course this argument would mean that as long as other developments are not completely forsaken due to the overwhelming acceptance of the KDE, eventually the product based on the "superior" GPL model would win out over the atrophied KDE built on the QT free license model. So even if KDE becomes a defacto standard, eventually something (gnome?) will become so superior that the KDE will be replaced by it. I don't expect all efforts to build other windows/desktop managers will die so long as Michael Lankton and the like are alive. :-) The fear that a bad decision during the inception of new product will remain a troublesome feature of all future versions of the product is justified. If the KDE and oodles of other software is developed on QT, and QT becomes a millstone to future development, this could certainly hinder the long term future of much Linux advancement. I don't see that it could ever destroy Linux. It would just slow it down a bit, until it freed itself from QT. There is another issue relevant to building software based on QT and having that software become a defacto Linux standard. Linux, in the inclusive sense, will change its character. It will no longer be as free, in the political sense, as it has been. It will be subject to the whims of controlling entities such as Troll Tech. I have doubts about the long term wisdom of allowing this to happen. Perhaps some one else can cast a ray of light on my gloom and doom. As it is, I like the KDE, and I will continue to use it. I offer my opinions for free, and I am sure they are worth all you have paid for. Steve -- [<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>> Registered User #79059] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man. - Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_ [L]et [the charter] be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which; the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. - Thomas Paine, *Common Sense*, February 14th, 1776 - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
A post which I hope everyone read.
Right on, Steve! I wish there was more commercial software for linux. The more the merrier, and I wish financial success to anyone trying to make linux their livelihood. This serves to improve linux for everyone. However, non-GPL'd software _MUST_NOT_BE_ALLOWED_ to be used in any part of the operating system that is indispensable to the functionality of linux. There is no standard linux xdesktop, yet. But if there is one, and I believe it is inevitable that there eventually will be, that desktop environment would qualify as an indispensable part of linux. -- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Guess I'll jump in and offer my 2 cents worth. As I understand things, the perceived problem is that QT cannot be modified and freely distributed by anybody but Troll Tech, thus it is not likely to evolve as quickly and be as flexible as some other set of window primitives. (please forgive me if this There is more than one reason. Many people object to the use of Qt because it's not "free". There are purists who don't believe anything run on a linux box should cost and the source should be freely availabe. There are others who fear(?) legal consequences. By the most common interpretation of the GNU
On 21-Jul-98 Steven T. Hatton wrote: license, KDE is in error by even distributing under it. And since KDE is NOT GNU software, there is no explicit license to distribute it, change it, do anything with it.
replaced by it. I don't expect all efforts to build other windows/desktop managers will die so long as Michael Lankton and the like are alive. :-) Best include me, too. I'm a dinosaur :) I still shell a DOS box when I have to use Widows95
future of much Linux advancement. I don't see that it could ever destroy Linux. It would just slow it down a bit, until it freed itself from QT. It can cause the Linux community to split. As an example, RMS has already publicly disagreed with Linus over this very issue. Two big names taking sides...
Perhaps some one else can cast a ray of light on my gloom and doom. As it is, I like the KDE, and I will continue to use it. I have been using KDE and I like what I see... however, I will campaign against IT being the standard... I think...
---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html</A</A>> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Mark Wagnon wrote:
Interesting article and responses. I must be dense, but I don't get the need for a _standardized_ desktop for linux. That seems to be the main argument: should the standard be opensource or not? I don't know and I probably don't care. As far as I'm concerned, the only standardization needed in Linux is in the kernel and what is considered the base system. Everything else is just icing on the cake and seems to be what differentiates one distribution from another. I use KDE right now, but I am eagerly waiting for S.u.S.E. to go glibc so that I can try out GNOME. Heck I switch window managers monthly. I like to try something different every once in a while.
I know what you mean Mark. I thought that one of the best features of Linux was that I don't have to use _one_set_window manager. With Microsoft, you can have DOS, or windows, period. With Linux, you have many choices. I understand both sides of the issue. I, too believe software should be free. On the other hand, we all have to make a living. I guess since it doesn't directly impact on my life, I'm rather ambivalent about the whole thing. I use KDE now. Before that, I used AfterStep. I like them both. <shrug> I still think it's up to the individual user to decide. Marie - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Marie Bennington wrote:
I know what you mean Mark. I thought that one of the best features of Linux was that I don't have to use _one_set_window manager. I guess since it doesn't directly impact on my life, I'm rather ambivalent about the whole thing. <shrug> I still think it's up to the individual user to decide.
The issue is that GPL'd software insures your continued ability to make that choice. Also, if Gnome becomes the standard linux desktop you will still have that freedom of choice, to use any windowmanager you wanted, whereas you would not if kde became the standard. Use and enjoy commercial software, I do. Just keep it out of the parts of the os that are indispensable. ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Your point is well taken. Lemme give it a subtext. QT is controversial. Many people HATE QT and the GNOME versus KDE thing was really a philosophical argument over the whole meaning behind 'open source'. I think MetroX and BRU are commercial...but I think it's the libraries...the base code systems that apps are built on not the actual programs that they are bitching about... I think this is also why many side with GNOME over KDE in the argument (which seems to get quite heated) because it is built on something other than QT). Some feel that QT should be disregarded because of some of the stipulations of the QT license. Right now I think people want a free alternative..and are looking at things like the Harmony project as they don't want to be left at teh behest of QT which some don't feel is in the right 'spirit' of linux.
Ok let me get a bit more basic. I am more of an integrator than a hacker, so help me here, if you would. What does QT actually do for the KDE? I guess it supplies libraries for something. Can you give some examples?
I have always thought of libraries as pre-canned code to be used for compilers to save the programmer having to reinvent the wheel. Then there are DLL type libraries. Where does QT fall?
This non-GPL status is actually an interesting issue. As I understand it, I can use QT for free as a home user. Can I use productls like KDE in a business setting without forking over revenue to the Troll folks? If I
You can use KDE in any enviroment you wish. You only have to pay Troll Tech if you make commercial apps and do not release the source code.
understand I needed to pay to run the KDE on Solaris.
You do not have to pay to use KDE on Solaris. I am curious: where did you hear this? Sounds like a lot of FUD is going on here.
Steve
--
[<A HREF="http://counter.li.org"><A HREF="http://counter.li.org</A">http://counter.li.org</A</A>> Registered User #79059] S.u.S.E. Linux, www.suse.com
THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man. - Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_
[L]et [the charter] be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which; the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. - Thomas Paine, *Common Sense*, February 14th, 1776
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- Robert Williams rwilliams@jrcmaui.com Jarob Consulting rwilliams@kde.org Maui, Hawaii - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, Robert Williams wrote:
understand I needed to pay to run the KDE on Solaris.
You do not have to pay to use KDE on Solaris. I am curious: where did you hear this? Sounds like a lot of FUD is going on here.
Steve
Understand, the KDE thing is not really so much about KDE as it is about QT. Read up. -M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 20-Jul-98 hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
Understand, the KDE thing is not really so much about KDE as it is about QT. Read up.
It's even more basic than Qt.. it's the "Free Software Only" crowd against "Commercial is 'ok', too" people. ---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html</A</A>> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Commercial _IS_ ok, you guys are all missing the point. Just go read <A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml"><A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A">http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A</A>> then feel free to either agree or disagree. The Gecko wrote:
It's even more basic than Qt.. it's the "Free Software Only" crowd against "Commercial is 'ok', too" people.
-- ==================================================================== Michael Lankton <A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org"><A HREF="http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A">http://tasteslikechicken.ml.org</A</A>> ==================================================================== - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Michael Lankton wrote:
Commercial _IS_ ok, you guys are all missing the point. Just go read <A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml"><A HREF="http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A">http://slashdot.org/features/9807150935248.shtml</A</A>> then feel free to either agree or disagree.
I think if it was some other thing besides KDE no one would complain. Other apps have been written using QT and no one complained. But the article is right. It's the fact that KDE wants to be a STANDARD and that it uses QT that causes the controversy. P.S., Michael, I never _said_ commercial was _bad_ in the first place, or in fact, stated any opinion at all ...I merely tried ( perhaps poorly) to throw some of what was being said on the table... I agree with everything in the article. And no, (not to be argumentative ) I did NOT miss the point. I think I suffer from a lack of verbal eloquence, though, at times. -M One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin. mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Read what? I have been reading all the nasties said about QT. Believe me. hekate@intergate.bc.ca wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 1998, Robert Williams wrote:
understand I needed to pay to run the KDE on Solaris.
You do not have to pay to use KDE on Solaris. I am curious: where did you hear this? Sounds like a lot of FUD is going on here.
Steve
Understand, the KDE thing is not really so much about KDE as it is about QT. Read up.
-M
One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin.
mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com
- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- Robert Williams rwilliams@jrcmaui.com Jarob Consulting rwilliams@kde.org Maui, Hawaii - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
participants (14)
-
calamity＠wayward.net -
cjtan＠acm.org -
fmiller＠lightlink.com -
gecko＠benham.net -
hattons＠CPKWEBSER5.ncr.disa.mil -
hekate＠intergate.bc.ca -
jonathan＠aracnet.net -
misc.word.corp＠pobox.com -
mperry＠basin.com -
mwagnon＠ixpres.com -
phil＠ktuu.com -
phil＠servcom.com -
rwilliams＠jrcmaui.com -
satan3＠home.com