Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Free Software Foundation Calls PDF Done

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243

    Default

    as far as im concerned saving filled forms is still missing completely. i have not been able to save a PDF file with some prefilled forms so far! which i would consider as a rather interesting feature to have.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    - Gnash needs work, and it would be nice if they would throw some backing behind Lightspark too.
    Flash seems like the next logical step in supporting common web formats, but does anyone really know where FOSS Flash support is going? Gnash and Lightspark represent both different general approaches to the problem and different sets of supported SWF features/versions (apparently with no solid plans for either to take over the "territory" of the other). It's reassuring to think that HTML5 will make it a non-issue, but that's as much a fantasy as thinking that OpenOffice and web apps will make Wine obsolete.

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo
    I'm disappointed that AMD isn't working more with the Coreboot team and OEM manufacturers so that loss of features and loss of other operating system support isn't lost by using Coreboot.
    AMD seems to be doing about as much as realistically can be done with the coreboot team (e.g. contributing AGESA and reference/eval board support to coreboot). I doubt that we can count on much (if any) effort from most board OEMs since they apparently can't even be bothered to ship/support/document a decent stock BIOS much of the time.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    I doubt that we can count on much (if any) effort from most board OEMs since they apparently can't even be bothered to ship/support/document a decent stock BIOS much of the time.
    That is why AMD has to get more involved with the OEM's. Otherwise Coreboot is a "go nowhere fast" project (which pretty evident from the dated hardware list that is compatible with Coreboot).

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smorg View Post
    "high-priority projects" - the most pointless initiative ever that's never accomplished anything. Crap stays on that list for years and nobody takes it seriously.


    LOL k gnutard. Sorry we'll call it freeware next time.
    Good lord. Get out. We don't want you here.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    The reverse doesn't really seem possible, though: I don't think there's any case where something is Free Software, but is not Open Source.
    Well, you're using "Free" with an upper-case 'F' to indicate free-as-in-freedom as according to the FSF's definition. Some people could just read that as (free-as-in-beer) freeware if they didn't know any better.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    Flash seems like the next logical step in supporting common web formats, but does anyone really know where FOSS Flash support is going? Gnash and Lightspark represent both different general approaches to the problem and different sets of supported SWF features/versions (apparently with no solid plans for either to take over the "territory" of the other).
    Lightspark recommends gnash (at least on Debian) because they solve different parts of the Flash problem. I like lightspark because it supports hardware accel and plugs in to pulseaudio.
    Gnash is a lost battle, the same as Lightspark. While they are technically quite interesting and such, Adobe can advance the standard a lot faster and it's happening now with those 3D support and game developers porting to Adobe Flash.
    I don't think FOSS Flash is a lost cause any more than Mesa/Gallium3d is a lost cause just because OpenGL is advancing rapidly. Yes, there are advanced features being added to Flash, but they can be tackled once the open-source version has tackled the basic functionality.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Lightspark recommends gnash (at least on Debian) because they solve different parts of the Flash problem. I like lightspark because it supports hardware accel and plugs in to pulseaudio.

    I don't think FOSS Flash is a lost cause any more than Mesa/Gallium3d is a lost cause just because OpenGL is advancing rapidly. Yes, there are advanced features being added to Flash, but they can be tackled once the open-source version has tackled the basic functionality.
    This can be a controversy opinion, but I think MESA is right now a lost batle.

    MESA needs to attract *A LOT MORE* developers, stablish a proper Foundation in the style of Xorg and Linux and becoming more independent from hardware manufacturers in terms of governance (contrary to Xorg, I look at you Keith Packard).

    It's a miracle FOSS is to the level is right now with the lack of developers and proper infraestructure, there are very talented people that make this to work but that's not enough as the Free/Open Software ecosystem get more complex due more complex hardware and software.

    Flash is a no go, it's losing the embedded platforms and those are being bigger in terms of users than desktop ones. HTML5 and NaCl are becoming the future standards.

    It's hilarious both FOSS Flash implementations choose different problems, then why not merge? Despite Open Source being better than propietary in those ways, we as humans have difficulties to work in teams. I lost all hopes on it, since it started in 2005 and still no functional enough.

    Individual projects tend to fail, projects without a strong infraestructure too. Look at SANE and MESA, they need a strong organization entity desesperately.
    Last edited by timofonic; 10-10-2011 at 06:56 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timofonic View Post
    This can be a controversy opinion, but I think MESA is right now a lost batle.
    Lost against what or in what way? It's the only choise for Intel and older AMD hardware and it's developing fast. It's not competing agaist anything but rather providing free and open source alternative for propietary binary blops. Even if Mesa could do better it's still all there is or at least I haven't heard of altrenative open source OpenGL implentation. I just cannot see what kind of relation do you see between current state of Mesa and a lost battle. Are you saying that all developement is futile because we don't have engouh developers or some magical foundation?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    Lost against what or in what way? It's the only choise for Intel and older AMD hardware and it's developing fast. It's not competing agaist anything but rather providing free and open source alternative for propietary binary blops. Even if Mesa could do better it's still all there is or at least I haven't heard of altrenative open source OpenGL implentation. I just cannot see what kind of relation do you see between current state of Mesa and a lost battle. Are you saying that all developement is futile because we don't have engouh developers or some magical foundation?
    Well, sorry for my inaccurate English. I think I explained my idea in a wrong way.

    I meant it's still a lost battle, in the way that itīs not matching to a level of being a real alternative against propietary drivers and the progress is still too slow progressing while binary blobs are progressing faster due to a big number of high skilled devoted engineers/developers on them.

    Of course AMD and Intel are doing nice steps on this because strategic reasons, but itīs not enough. MESA is still a projectnot taken enough seriously, thatīs because the project isn't serious in terms of organization structure compared to others. Unfortunately, there are other projects with this problem too.

    What MESA and other important FOSS projects need is a Foundation, their own developers and own governance collaboating with companies and their engineers/developers.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    AMD seems to be doing about as much as realistically can be done with the coreboot team (e.g. contributing AGESA and reference/eval board support to coreboot). I doubt that we can count on much (if any) effort from most board OEMs since they apparently can't even be bothered to ship/support/document a decent stock BIOS much of the time.
    No. What we need is Coreboot to be used as the stock BIOS and be as good as or better than what the propriatary alternative would have been, if they'd used it.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •