Slashdot Mirror

The LG Prada was apparently shown off earlier as reportedly it won a prize for its design in September 2006.

No it didn't. It won that price in March 2007. In September 2006 LG send in a non-working model to enter the competition. A closed competition, where nobody but the judges could see it.

The LG Prada was apparently shown off earlier as reportedly it won a prize for its design in September 2006.

Your response seems to be to a strange bunch of things I didn't say. I shall pick some random points that I can understand enough to make a useful reply to.

and if they do release their code, their competitors can use it, so their lawyers advise them against.

This is complete nonsense. Prefer the GPL? Okay, release your modifications under the GPL. Its been done over and over again. You think every utility in a linux distro was written from scratch when bsd versions were out there? of course not.

I just didn't say any of the things you seem to be answering here. Maybe I wasn't clear?

After a few years they either get so wildly successful (JunOS / OSX / Microsoft TCP/IP stack) that they keep their own completely proprietary branch and never help anyone else or they get abandoned (IPSO / AlchemOS / BSDi / SunOS / etc. etc.)

And what's with the Sun hate?

This is one of the most bizzare questions I have ever been asked. I thought Sun was great. I loved SunOS. I even came to accept Solaris. What are you even replying to? I mentioned SunOS as abandoned, but the reason for that was not Sun's fault. However, if BSD had been GPL licensed then SunOS likely would have too and could have continued till today; probably as part of the standard BSD system.

SunOS may have died, but a few people might still be using a little thing called NFS. Sun contributed TONS back to the open source community, and naming a project here and there that they kept closed won't change that.

A bunch of things where the fact they were released under the BSD license ended up benefitting Microsoft and killing Sun. In the end with Java they ended up with a mad bureaucracy in the JCP. Had they just been consistently GPL from the beginning I think they would have had fewer problems.

This has become much more visible recently with Android and other successes

If I didn't realize people would take you seriously, it would be absolutely HILARIOUS that you've singled out Android as the great FOSS success, and yet complain about Darwin being proprietary in the same breath.

I can show you several examples of Android based independent OS releases. I believe that OpenDarwin "died a lonely death". (please feel free to correct me if there is someone else who has released a consumer ready Darwin based OS). What this means is that in practice normal people can have homebrew versions of android and can develop on them and cannot do the same with Darwin.

Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in regards to press of BSD vs GPL/Linux... When iPhone took over the world, we weren't hearing what a vindication it was of BSD. But when anything Linux-based gets slightly popular, even trivial nonsense like basic WiFi routers, roll out the screaming fanbois...

I think the difference is that normally the Linux devices mean there's a chance for further interesting hacking (see Linksys L series routers for example) whilst the BSD based systems basically just end up as embedded, unalterable systems where the best hope is to jailbreak. Who cares what's inside if you can't touch it? I think this is, to be honest the biggest problem with Linux being stuck with GPLv2. There's a definite space for someone to launch a hardcore AGPLv3 OS on which web/cloud based solutions could be safely released.

Will cost me about 1085 Pounds as a student (incl. wireless mouse/keyboard), but for this money I get a computer which provides me with excellent value for the price

Mac apparently keep resale value better, too: 1, 2, 3, 4

EVERYTIME, which is way to frequent, that my mac book Pro crashes, running the monolithic microkernel MacOSX (10.4 - 10.5.1), the Mac asks if I want to report it to Apple. I always say yes and berate them for having IO Drivers in the Kernel (since that's been the reason for the crashes - every time. I encourage them to remove the drivers from the their monolithic microkernel and put them into their own protected space.

Someone has to tell Apple that their Kernel design implementation sucks big time - simply because it crashes WAY TOO OFTEN. MacOSX 10.4 through the current up to date Mac OSX 10.5.1 Leopard (System Version: Mac OS X 10.5.1 (9B18), Kernel Version: Darwin 9.1.0) crashes very frequently week with IO problems (see the actual crash logs at the end of this posting). Usually these problems are with device drivers such as EyeTV or Parallels. If this was a true microkernel design like Minix or QNX the entire machine would not have to be rebooted, just the EyeTV or Parallels apps would need to be rebooted. Why the heck should a problem with the USB driver bring down the entire OS? How on earth can that be justified Apple? It can't so improve the quality by removing ALL drivers from the Kernel and put them in their own processes. Thank you very much in advance.

APPLE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE REMOVE ALL DRIVERS FROM THE MACH XNU MICROKERNEL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THANKS. AT LEAST GIVE ME THE CHOICE OF HAVING THEM SEPARATED - THE EXTRA CPU % COST IS A PRICE THAT I AS A USER WOULD MAKE TO GAIN THE FAULT TOLERANCE AND RELIABILITY. Below you'll see my actual kernel crash logs for six months - as you can see the number of crashes are intolerable and just amazing to behold when a true microkernel that separates out drivers would have prevented reboots in all these cases.

I HEREBY Challenage ALL Mac OSX users to publish their Kernel Crash Logs for ALL the world to see. Maybe this way APPLE will take microkernels seriously.

Links to the issue of the flawed XNU kernel. (Gee, XNU, almost sounds like the XeNU character out of the Scientology creation mythology. XeNU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu. ;--).

The culprit: bad monolithic design of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU#I.2FO_Kit and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_kernel

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6105
http://www.maconintel.com/news.php?article=177
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/architecture/index.html
http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/how-long-will-apple-keep-the-mach-microkernel/

"Frankly, I think it's a piece of crap," Torvalds says of Mach [XeNU], the microkernel on which Apple's new operating system is based. "It contains all the design mistakes you can make, and manages to even make up a few of its own." - Linus Torvalds, http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,2085525,00.htm

I only quote Linus because he's right regarding MACh XeNU. However, he's wrong about microkernels in general as the frequent crashing of Linux reveals.

---- ACTUAL MacBook Pro Monolithic XNU Kernel Crash Logs ----- REAL WORLD CRASHES REVEALED -----

Sat Mar 24 07:38:10 2007
panic(cpu 0 caller 0x0035AE53): freeing free mbuf
Backtrace, Format - Frame : Return Address (4 potential args on stack)
0x36563ca8 : 0x128d08 (0x3c9ac4 0x36563ccc 0x131de5 0x0)
0x36563ce8 : 0x35ae53 (0x3ea228 0x9cfc 0x36563d28 0x2)
0x36563d08 : 0x35b1f3 (0x4835b800 0x804c 0x36563d28 0x800)
0x36563d28 : 0xa3d6ad (0x4835b800 0x36563dec 0x6 0x6007c0e0)

But the question is more of 'Why does the DMCA have an exemption for the unlocking of cell phones?' Personally, I like to think that these DMCA exemptions are made with a purpose or reason behind them and not just chosen randomly out of a hat. Otherwise the DMCA might have not had an unlocking exemption and instead had an exemption on allowing for the free distribution of bunnies or whatever other soft, cuddly animal one pulls out of a hat these days.

So what was the purpose/reason behind the cell phone unlocking exemption? It might've been to given consumers more freedom in choosing a wireless provider and prevent economic abuse of a provider/manufacturer variety. Even if you legally pay out your AT&T contract and want to switch to T-Mobile, you can't while maintaining an up-to-date iPhone.

This case will be interesting if they approach it from the DMCA exemption purpose angle. It's definitely the first case of its kind in relation to this unlocking exemption (that I'm aware of). Alternatively, we can wait 6-12 month and have better 'iPhone' clones that are unlocked like the Meizu M8 (which I hope isn't vaporware) :)

What good points? It has a resource intensive "shiny" interface. It has levels of DRM heretofore unseen in an operating system. It is claimed that it is secure, yet still has gaping security holes. It is claimed that it is safe, yet has to be made un-safe for users to be able to do anything with it. It is expensive, clunky, space consuming, privacy invading, insecure, unsafe, and is more interested in protecting the interests of major Hollywood distributors than its users.

Care to highlight why I'd want to use Vista?

Third, due to the traditionally nonintimidating nature of the nerd, what pirate who sees the image will think and stop what they are doing?

Ah yes, way back in 1983. Although they had a phone call after Microsoft put some cash into Apple in 1997. I bet they go to the pub when they're both in the same town too.

http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comm ents/the-ipod-virus-apple-arrogance/

I read an interesting article about the operating system being dead and it contained the choice between a machine with your favorite operating system or a machine with your most hated current OS but with access to the internet.

And, you know what? I must admit that I would take the machine that had the connection to the internet regardless of what current OS it had on it.

So, not only is Windows no longer relevant, but the functionality of the operating system itself may have been trumped by our ability to communicate with other people. This doesn't invalidate operating system arguments but it does cause one to wonder about what is really important when you're getting a machine to work & play on.

Let's talk about rumored features. Like VoIP or Maps. It would be interesting to say the least to have maps upload to my ipod. If they finally get to an ipod with VoIP capability then perhaps gps or something similar to verizons mimo mapping deal would make my ipod gain a whole new niche in my life. More rumors include Bit Torrent, Virtualization, Windows API support, Not Called Leopard, Living Elements, A New Finder, Improved Dashboard, and Collaborative Documents. Way out rumors go as far as IE7, hooks with windows to encourage gaming and having .mac do word processing/iwork stuff online. Either way they are beating Windows to the punch and always look better doing it. When Vista is finally launched Apple will be readying Lion. I honestly hope the competition with Microsoft pushes apple to start introducing a smart way to interface with my media center ;) HD shows that I can keep, watch on multiple devices, ect - I will pay as much as I pay my frikin cable company to subscribe to 10 shows per month. C'mon and see the holy grail - hook a macmini to my tv and let me kill my cable box.

And when you see articles like this ... no, looks like Apple will get to it before you will get a chance to.

From the atricle:

"Don't worry if you found the introduction of the iPod Hi-Fi a little disappointing, Apple had other stuff for you to buy err, love. The new iPod case may be the most overlooked part of the media fest. iPod lovers everywhere can now cradle their smallish digital audio player in a sleeve of "fine Italian leather." Perhaps the leather isn't as supple as the rich Corinthian leather used in Chryslers or perhaps it is a little more tactilely enchanting. It doesn't matter, as long as it is a step above the course rawhide leather used by summer camps across the country everyone should be satisfied. And let's be honest at this point: Where else are you going to get a more functional case than the one Apple just introduced? It isn't as if other case makers have come up with way to actually control your iPod while it stays in the case. That would be impossible. Kudos Apple, you'll beat that reputation of making overpriced, style before function, products in no time with the introduction of an iPod sleeve with a ribbon. Pure Brilliance!"

Pretty scathing review of the event if you ask me.

Now you're going off on exactly why the lawsuit was put on in the first place. Why should I have to burn a cd just so that I can rip that same cd into mp3 format? Why do I have to go through those steps when apple can simply license their drm to other mp3 players out there so that their drm'd tracks can play off of other mp3 players out there without having to convert it? 2 reasons. They have publicly stated that their itunes music store is being used to sell ipods. They have also publicly stated that they break even with the itunes music store. Therefore unless they start to make a profit on the itunes music store, they insist they need to sell ipods to make up for that. See here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/07/your_99c_b elong/
http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comm ents/want_to_marginalize_the_ipod_ask_steve_jobs_h ow/

http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comm ents/intel_inside_of_your_mac/

http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comm ents/538/

Wonderful pioneering effort! Kudos! We've all been wondering how this "Man Who Fell To Earth" artifact could be opened! Hope you will post a basic greenboard component list: battery size and any part numbers or markings especially, processor and memory next of course. Thanks a million (well $99 actually) for your sacrifice to the iPod community!

I reread the article. They just ripped the rubber membrane but it could be easily glued back in place. However, this photo is far more telling as to the fact that they damaged the thing irreparably. So you're right. Sad really.