It does confirm to standards, just not very many of them: http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/ie9/

Of course this is a mozilla blog, but facts are checkable

The goal for both Meego and Android should be to get their kernel customisations back into mainline.

They benefit everyone then, provided they are not customisations that only benefit the android stack.

As for using Dalvik.. doubtful. QT is the strategy and it goes beyond Meego, and is native.

"Stealing" is an odd term to use for open source. Sharing it is the point.

We don't need to worry too much about Nokia's involvement in MeeGo either - you can take your hat off. It is an open source linux distribution, and the more people / businesses that get involved, the lesser is Nokia's influence. My hope that this goes the way of other distributions, where corporations contribute but the distribution has its own life. Once MeeGo has reached a usability milestone we'll see xda port it to everything they can get their hands on, then demand will increase for handset manufacturers will be pressured in to providing open source (or at least blobs) drivers for their hardware. Then the tables will be reversed, asking not what handset/OS shall I buy, but what handset shall I buy, and which OS shall I install on it.

And it will go the way of the PC

Android isn't anything like MeeGo or a linux distribution. It has its own stack - the commonality ends at the kernel (if they have even merged the custom kernel changes back in to mainline yet) The kernel is only a part of the equation - significant but a part.

If they want their CPU platform to only be thought of as useful for running Android java apps, then ok that is a possible decision. If I was AMD I would prefer something that has a bit more potential - which is what Meego provides. I am not surprised at their decision to want a proper gnu/linux stack, hence my post.

Yes, their upcoming "APU" series has low power variants.

MeeGo is a linux distribution optimised for low power mobile devices.

No one would be surprised if the title read "AMD Joins Mobile Linux OS efforts" which is what is going on. It is an open source project, and the only real contender for mobile at the moment.

Of course AMD want to play in the mobile space and to do this they need an OS. Their alternative is to roll their own or form another equivalent partnership like MeeGo that aims to achieve the exact same thing.

This is the only sensible move they could make.

Gentoo has a "java" use flag for openoffice - and presumably if this is turned off, openoffice will be built without java. And presumably libreoffice would be built without java if the same use flag was disabled. And presumably this removes any java, rather than what is already identified as optional.

So presumably java isn't a dependency unless you use a binary that has java enabled as one.

Presumably.

It is only a saving if there is no intention of doing FTTH ever. If there is, then just get on with it. It is far cheaper to do FTTH(now) than FTTN(now)+FTTH(later).

And in general, predictions of "10 years" means anything from 10 years to infinity years. Much like fusion power is 10 years away, and always will be.

Does hadopi specify which copyright holders can request IPs from ISPs?

Because it seems to me that most people in France would have some sort of copyright on something they have produced, so irrespective of media files being torrented or whatever, they could all put requests through hadopi?

What about international copyright holders - can they put requests through hadopi?

Don't forget 150000 IP addresses a day won't canvas the entire population in a year or so unless you assume static IPs for everyone.

Never wear a jetpack and a backpack at the same time.

I have been using KDE 4 from 4.1 and it has been decreasingly sucky and increasingly stable since 4.2. And a far better experience than 3.5 imo.

So, if you found that you didn't like 4.4, 4.5 isn't worth your time.

If your nation is so on the verge of rioting that some commentary on a website is all that is required as a trigger, further removal of civil liberties may not be the best course of action.

Er no. I'd say that the standard should define which image formats should be supported *at a minimum*.

And which fonts.

And which video formats.

The point here is to try and get to a point where you publish something to the web and have some sort of hope that people will see it as intended.

"The remainder of this message cannot be displayed because your browser doesn't support video format spliggle, please try another browser"

So, what do you make an artificial atom out of?

Because:

That
Goes
Without
Saying

The point of the process is to find solutions that overcome the limitations of tabs while NOT BREAKING THE FUNCTIONALITY provided by tabs.

I do appreciate that /. commentary is for people to exhibit change resistance as often as possible, but sometimes I just don't find it as interesting as other times.

But by all means carry on everyone. I am sure it is just a phase I am going through.