So they believe that MIT is more open while GPL is restrictive. I really feel they are feeding FUD and not clearly understand why GPL is actually open. I used to consider BSD license to be as good. But when I see PS4 and OS X, I realise why GPL is required. SONY and Apple make a lot of money by making creating products out of other people's work and they are not at all bound to open source their modifications; let alone pay back royalty. And we hardly see any communities and software ecosystems as rich and diverse around Orbis OS (PS4) or Mach (OS X). A simple reason why Linux grew so fast is because of the openness it mandated. GCC, Emacs, Grub, libc and everything developed in open and remained open. Even changes from Android find their way in Linux. And when technology moves through time, hardware changes, new requirements come, you would want those changes to be put back in upstream! They seem to want to get big companies to adopt their stuff and climb the hardware compatibility list sooner than Linux.

I feel same when using choose folder dialog. I simply copy paste the path there.

There is an addon which will fix these issues: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

Ubuntu phone is just using CyanogenMod as the base and running on top of it. It doesn't liberate or innovate, but just adds more dependencies. I have to upgrade Ubuntu phone then I need to upgrade the base Android too. Why not just run Qt/QML apps on Android and provide an Ubuntu launcher, Ubuntu Launchpad Store, Ubuntu One app etc. and we are done? Why fool the users? While Sailfish OS and Firefox OS they actually try to bring something new. Fragmentation? But thats the effect of "new", don't want it then stick to old platforms. BTW Sailfish id based on Qt (so is Ubuntu) and Firefox on HTML5.

It was Microsoft/Apple that popularized PC in homes. Apple brought touch technology to the market and then everyone started making touch OS and UI including free and proprietary software. Most hardware comes first for the proprietary platforms and free software then picks it up e.g. 3G dongles, game controllers, modems etc. How can we see that free software making up a trend which others follow. As an example Firefox browser pioneered the new browser wars for secure, speedy and extensible browsers and now users have a good choice for that.

Smart web applications and to maintain security it is required that these collect as much user information as possible while privacy requires just opposite. Where does one break even?

How does one find balance between the consumerism of technology and trying to live austerely?

If you are worried because of the name, I do not understand why?

This happens. And Its sad that university which should be a home for free flow of ideas just block the very channel for it. Even more frustrating is when access to IRC is blocked! I used tor but many IRC servers do not like that and they will now allow you on their network. IMHO blocking traffic where it prevents blocking of network is the one legitimate (e.g. torrent which just sucks up the whole bandwidth). I think when IT guys say that they want to prevent malware it shows they are too lazy to do their job of keeping the networks and computers safe.

Internet connection was an `option' which is not anymore these days. Also programs (OS and applications) are more seamless when you compare it with the '95 computers. Obviously in terms of CPU, RAM and storage its light years worth of leap.

But KWin will run without effects and that's fine for a "buggy" hardware/driver.

Apart from making browser and email client, Mozilla is contributing a lot to bring more functionality to web. The good thing is that they do it in a very open way. But they lack popular web services to push the features. e.g. Google brought these APIs to Chrome and Gmail implemented them. While how many websites actually honor do not track option is still not known. Mozilla should also try to find collaborations with major web services providers to make the features happen.

Even for developing apps for iPad you need a Mac. For people who use computers for work (accountants, developers, students, analysts) using a tablet is just not so possible because of the hardware and supposedly software limitations. PCs are endlessly configurable in hardware and software which made them so popular. Tablets are good for short texts, gaming, movies and reading. But not for the creating things where your involvement is more than the simple control on the touch screen. e.g. playing drum on tablet is cool but not remixing the music. I am not sure about the experience when you use a docking station with keyboard and mouse though.

Amarok 2.4 is great. They made mistakes with 2.0 realease, it was not a complete software. The three pane layout and the toolbar at the top are really easy to use. I should say that it displaying covers in music browsers is a great idea. However an stylish cover theme and projectM visualizations arn the features I want to see in future releases.

Hey even Chrome requires a big machine to compile, don't remember the exact specs.. I got this from a Google Tech Talk/