Slashdot Mirror

Let's leave aside completely the question of what or who a 1.4 GHz Pfoo is currently useful for. The CPU race is engrossing enough as morbid entertainment, chronicled in all its awfulness by sites like Tom's Hardware and the Register. Instead Slashdot features this bland little piece from CNet. Funny there's no mention that the release schedule for this wonder has apparently already slipped. Funny how Intel's current woes with CPU supply, motherboard supply, the competition, and Rambus (oh, Rambus!) get um, let's say a soft touch. Now this could just be down to laziness. Or it could be another case of big-time tech journalism rolling over for powerful Intel. Could it even have something to do with the fact that Intel is a CNet shareholder? (I haven't had time to verify this from a more neutral souce yet.)

This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened here, is it? (Or indeed the first time it's involved a company partly owned by Intel.) You'd hardly believe Slashdot is also the platform for John Katz's increasingly overblown denunciations of big-corporate influence-peddling.

The release of their 815i chipset already pointed in this direction (Rambus didn't really like that move :)

Also, the 815i chipset seems to be faster then the 820i chipset (which uses expensive Rambus memory). Now, it looks like they're indeed going to drop it. Look at some of these articles:

• This article posted earlier today mentions that the new 1.4 Ghz Pentium IV will also support SDRAM, not only Rambus memory.
• This article at Tom's Hardware talks about the performance of 820 and 815 chipsets.

ReplayTV is a nice idea, however there is already competition from companies like TIVO, not to mention Videotron's Videoway which has been avaliable for years. (at least in Canada)
However, we are lucky enough to live in Capitalism where competition is vital to encourage companies for perfection in order to attract customers. Therefore the introduction of ReplayTV is not only necessary but vital to the industry in order to prevent monopolistic gorillas like Microsoft from appearing.

--
Kiro

Just to add a bit to this. One of the few artists who has spoken out against Napster, is not doing so as an artist, but as a label owner.

--

did you know that the old cyrix chips had the same architecture as the failed pentium pro?

'Failed'? JFC, last I checked, a PPro w/1M cache was still in the several-hundred-dollar bracket. For a long time it was the only way to get a 4-CPU server w/ Intel arch. Check out this page under "Intel" and then explain to me how an ancient "failed" chip still commands the same price as the latest silicon.

One of Napster's defense attorneys (the former microsoft antitrust prosecutor) mentioned it as a possible defense strategy. What timing ;-)

C-Net Article
MSNBC Article
CNN
NY Times Article

But then again, why believe in DNA when you can have Jerry Falwell tell you it doesn't exist?

From the other perspective, perhaps individual ISP's and companies should have to maintain their own lists... When people or companies converge, it often serves their interests prior to the public's interests. Things like oglipolies and price fixing result from companies cooperating too much...

The whole Harris case came up because, as far as I understand, 3 people out of 6.6 million complained. 3 people get's them barred from sending to the other 6.6 million...

WHy not give this article a read? And read this one, too, for some background.

If you don't take the time to read it, you'll see that Harris' list was an OPT-IN list. Everyone who was on it wanted to be on it. They asked to be on it. Yet with a simple flip of the switch, MAPS, which has no oversight, prevented them from reaching their customers.

Makes me think a government regulated internet might actually be better than the mismash we've got going on right now... At least then, people are actually accountable for things.

From the other perspective, perhaps individual ISP's and companies should have to maintain their own lists... When people or companies converge, it often serves their interests prior to the public's interests. Things like oglipolies and price fixing result from companies cooperating too much...

The whole Harris case came up because, as far as I understand, 3 people out of 6.6 million complained. 3 people get's them barred from sending to the other 6.6 million...

WHy not give this article a read? And read this one, too, for some background.

If you don't take the time to read it, you'll see that Harris' list was an OPT-IN list. Everyone who was on it wanted to be on it. They asked to be on it. Yet with a simple flip of the switch, MAPS, which has no oversight, prevented them from reaching their customers.

Makes me think a government regulated internet might actually be better than the mismash we've got going on right now... At least then, people are actually accountable for things.

Click here for a recent Cnet story on how the MPAA doesn't have any evidence of pirating.

http://new s.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2464013.html?tag=st.ne. 1002.thed.ni

Ramos: I begin by reference to your honor's analogy about the orphan asking for the mercy of the court. This is the orphan not only asking for the mercy of the court but asking the court for compensation for the loss of the parents the orphan killed.

CNET Article

Slashdot Article

Currently, IBM makes Transmeta's chips. This arrangement gives Transmeta access to cutting-edge technology and immunizes the company from legal action from Intel because of IBM's extensive cross-license with the chip giant. However, IBM charges more than the Taiwanese foundries, leading to more expensive chips.

"Transmeta wanted to work with IBM to make sure there were no questions about legal issues with Intel," said Linley Gwennap, principal analyst at The Linley Group. "Over time, I think they will look to other foundries."

basically it seems like a good idea that they work with IBM so that in case INTEL wanted to sue, they would have a hard time doing so.

but i just skimmed the article, so i can be wrong.

Human interface is also important. Cell phones are shrinking to the point that they barely reach between your ear and your mouth. Actually, if you're yuppy enough to have one of these bad boys then maybe it doesn't reach at all.

You find the same problem with PDAs and laptops. If you want a big screen, you have to be willing to carry a computer that resembles a cafeteria tray. The keyboard can only be shrunk so much before you have to use the back of a pencil to punch it.

There are a host of technological solutions that are able to overcome these difficulties, though:

• speech recognition, and
• some sort of wearable HUD (as mentioned below)

Processing power is probably stopping speech recognition from appearing in embedded systems immediately, but faster, more efficient chips are appearing all the time. Besides, embedded systems typically have a limited number of menu items, so they needn't be that accurate. Computers have plenty of processing power--I'm not really sure why speech recognition hasn't taken off for use in computers. (Why am I typing this? ;-) ) I suppose it's just that people aren't used to talking (not swearing) to their computers yet.

So, imagine this. The laptop of the future will be strapped to your belt, and the screen will be a visor. No keyboard, you just talk into the attached microphone. The cellphone will probably be something similar. If you don't wear the whole thing on your head, you'll have a wireless headset and a beeper-like black box on your belt.

A lot of stuff is already moving in this direction. Quack.com has stuff like weather, stock quotes, and movie showtimes on a toll-free number (1.800.73.QUACK). It did a pretty good job of recognizing my voice, but it kinda chokes if there's background noise. Why browse the web on your cell phone's tiny little screen when you can have it read to you?

Well, that's my fantasy at least.

All that it will take for opinion to turn against the free music crowd is for them to be seen as criminalistic freeloaders. Considering that a.) MP3.com has settled with most of the RIAA and will soon reopen it's My.mp3.com service (with paid options to offset the million$ in settlement options) b.) The major RIAA labels are all rushing to create flat rate music subscription services and c.) Napster will eventually need to make money to recoup all that VC funding and the according to Webnoize's survey over half of current Napster users would willingly pay $15 a month to use the service.

Eventually there will be several different ways to get music online and pay for it. Similar to the way that the MPAA fought VCRs and now there are many places we can rent videos. Currently people who watch movies for free (i.e. movie pirates, har har har) are considered freeloaders and criminals. It is not hard to conceive then that Gnutella users will become the w4rez d00ds of the music industry.

All that it will take for opinion to turn against the free music crowd is for them to be seen as criminalistic freeloaders. Considering that a.) MP3.com has settled with most of the RIAA and will soon reopen it's My.mp3.com service (with paid options to offset the million$ in settlement options) b.) The major RIAA labels are all rushing to create flat rate music subscription services and c.) Napster will eventually need to make money to recoup all that VC funding and the according to Webnoize's survey over half of current Napster users would willingly pay $15 a month to use the service.

Eventually there will be several different ways to get music online and pay for it. Similar to the way that the MPAA fought VCRs and now there are many places we can rent videos. Currently people who watch movies for free (i.e. movie pirates, har har har) are considered freeloaders and criminals. It is not hard to conceive then that Gnutella users will become the w4rez d00ds of the music industry.

It may well be that only federal legislation can resolve this problem. Washington State's anti-spam legislation was recently held unconstitutional on the ground that states may not regulate the flow of spam, in that doing so is unduly restrictive of interstate commerce in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

While another court may have a different view, there is precedent that seems indistinguishable in the present case.

And even if federal legislation is passed, there remains the outstanding First Amendment questions. Soon to be seen at an appellate court near you . . .

I'm unclear about Microsoft is handling one issue, client access licenses.

GartnerGroup has energetically represented companies against Microsoft pricing practices. Last February they revealed a similar sneaky MS tactic, to charge for a client access license with Windows 2000, even though one already had bought the OS for the server and client. See the CNET.com article on that issue.

So again there is confusion about what Microsoft is doing. If you buy a preinstalled Windows2000 PC and you remove the OS and install the Select version, do you need to pay a second time for the client access license?

I believe you do, because the client access license varies depending on volume, and would not be for the same version of the server OS.

But I may be wrong. I'd appreciate it if GartnerGroup could clarify this issue too.

It's likely we have not seen the end of these strange practices by the monopolist. I hope the Supreme Court takes the DOJ case soon and we can move to a stable situation for businesses.

But again Microsoft is its own worst enemy. I hope they convince many companies now is the time to move to Linux. Why move to ME when Whistler will quickly replace it? What will Microsoft do when DOS is finally gone from the OS, tell people to use WINE?

Not mentioning third parties who have access to data in privacy policies is old hat. As this CNET Article notes, this is not uncommon. According to the article of August 1999, privacy policies of major sites often fail to mention third party cookies and that this data is available to third parties.

Try MacAddict and this News.com article.

It appears that Apple is only suing so it can force the various leaks to rat on their links. I guess they want to try to kill the entire food chain. Oh well.

Didn't see this mentioned in the press release, but this was reported by C|Net yesterday. It's a "Screen Phone" that will run RedHat and uses Bluetooth to communicate with its basestation, has a speakerphone, touch screen, web browser with Java support, and email client. In other words, a web pad with telephone features. Another picture on Ericsson's site. Pretty cool looking, no pricing mentioned and is supposed to hit the market later this year.

I _hate_ to be a karma whore, but I saw this post just as I was checking out Ericssons stock (ERICY) on yahoo quotes.

CBS MarketWatch
C|net News.com

This doesnt make me a karma whore, does it? :(
After all, there are _no_ links to media coverage in the article. o well..
Enjoy the links...
/nutt

Per this c|net story, pretty much all of the major distro's are gearing up for beta releases of new versions so they will be ready when the 2.4 kernel goes final.

Caldera will even be selling their beta as a $20 'Linux 2.4 Technology Developer Release Preview'. If find this humorous, in that not only would you be paying to run beta software, you'd be paying to run beta open source software. But they will rebate the purchase price back to you, so your really just paying shipping. (or you can just download it).


Help

Are you implying that it is okay for Apple to "leech" off the Qube trademark because Cobalt is not spending enough on marketing?

2) Cobalt is a virtually unknown company who probably spent less money on marketing their cube since it started selling than Apple spent attending Macworld to annouce their cube.

According to the article on cnet.com, Cobalt paid $4.1 million dollars to Cube Computer to use the Qube name! Apple didn't even misspell "Cube"...

3) Cobalt is making a publicity stunt to leech of the already bigger mindshare of the G4 Cube.

This makes it okay for Apple to dilute Cobalt's trademark?

4) Apple Entreprise (NeXT), made the NeXT Cube in 1989.

And the Qube is a current, shipping product with a current trademark.

What goes around, comes around, indeed. Apple is either going to need to pay up, as Cobalt did, or change the name to "The G4 Right Rectangular Prism" or something.

steveha

Appeals court grants Napster reprieve
Federal Judge Allows Napster To Continue Music Trading
Court grants stay of Napster injunction
--

Napster has urged its fans to run a "buy-cott" this weekend. Oh, Napster! Why have you turned your backs on your fans like this! This is a classic example of an ends-justify-the-means tactic; even when the means contradict the ends you are trying to reach. They can't ask us to support the institution that is trying to destroy them!

Napster changed the face of music distribution. No longer are fans forced to buy a $15+ dollar Britney Spears CD in order to listen to one or two "decent" songs. The digital music revolution gives fans the choice to download and play the exact songs that they want. And yes, under current laws, it's probably illegal. But, the problem is that it's entirely unstoppable. Laws will have to adapt to the digital landscape. Everyone knows the obvious conclusion.

But, the Napster case isn't about Napster proving to the industry that they'll drive more sales into a sinking institution or that digital music will give Hilary Rosen new sales channels. It's about a new paradigm in music distribution. It's about the collapse of the music industry as we know it.

Napster has an arsenal of arguments at its disposal, probably the most effective is that they're just hosting a platform and can't be held responsible for what is traded. But, the underlying theme is that the control of information has changed in the digital world. Without an effective way to control distribution, information is becoming virtually free. Music is just the first controlled digital substance to be unleashed.

It saddens me that Napster won't stand up for this inevitable stance. They have to resort to begging their users to give more money to Hilary Rosen so she can fight Napster with even more lawyers. Is Napster crazy?

Napster has failed: and they have proven that they are not strong enough to stand up to the challenge. But we know that the revolution isn't dead. Use Napster for all it's worth until its shut down. But when it is, don't go out and buy CDs. Download Gnutella and continue as your were.

He invented the mouse and GUI. In Triumph of the Nerds, mention is made of xerox parc, but Engelbart doesn't get credited for singlehandedly inventing much of what we use today - the mouse, hypertext help and linking, groupware, video conferencing, display editing, etc.

Cringely's documentary is considered such a classic (I taped it and told people to watch the show every time it was broadcast), and could have for once given Engelbart credit for changing computer technology.

Scroll thru and check out his inventions. Today, he lives in silicon valley and is unreconized by the millionaires who live off his achievements. Logitech has granted him some research space for inventing the mouse (yes, that thing). But nobody else seems to know of him.

Even though the documentary delved in such depth, why did it fail to include the man who made it all possible?

Even today, few people have heard of him, and it's such a tragedy.

w/m

Zoyd wrote:
But best of all, it exists.

...and had a hyperlink to a price-comparison for Canon S10s in stead of S100s.

PHr0D wrote:
Thats cool but...I think I'd prefer a higher resolution

The just-released Canon S100 does 1,600 x 1,200 and is the size of a deck of playing cards. Additionally, it takes high-quality pictures (although green gets somewhat under-exposed [which can be fixed in photoshop]).

You can sort-of video capture with it too with a continuous mode that does two frames-per-second. It also has a USB interface and direct video out.

But best of all, it exists.

Let's say someone set up juliaroberts.com, and it was a fan site, and they registered it in good faith. Should she be able to take it away? I'd say not. Obviously the microsof.com guy was abusing microsofts trademark on their name, because he was posting a page related to the software industry. But this has come up before, for example, when the people who produce Archie Comics went and sued a parent who registered veronica.org (which is a dead site now), after his daughter Veronica was born.

Incidentally, you can find a nice collection of these blurbs here.

All in all, its most people with money for lawyers trampling on people without, and it is generally just disgusting abuse of IP law. The guy who once owned tatooine.com doesn't have it any more. And there's not even a web page there.

One obvious indication of squatting is people mass-registering domain names. But I'd say unless squatting is clear, first come, first serve. And even with a squatter, they should be reimbursed for all domain fees paid.

I'm just thankful we have 2600 to push some buttons and stand up for people.

Let's say someone set up juliaroberts.com, and it was a fan site, and they registered it in good faith. Should she be able to take it away? I'd say not. Obviously the microsof.com guy was abusing microsofts trademark on their name, because he was posting a page related to the software industry. But this has come up before, for example, when the people who produce Archie Comics went and sued a parent who registered veronica.org (which is a dead site now), after his daughter Veronica was born.

Incidentally, you can find a nice collection of these blurbs here.

All in all, its most people with money for lawyers trampling on people without, and it is generally just disgusting abuse of IP law. The guy who once owned tatooine.com doesn't have it any more. And there's not even a web page there.

One obvious indication of squatting is people mass-registering domain names. But I'd say unless squatting is clear, first come, first serve. And even with a squatter, they should be reimbursed for all domain fees paid.

I'm just thankful we have 2600 to push some buttons and stand up for people.

This is my very first chain letter. Please send it to every one you know, who uses Napster.

The music industry organization, RIAA, is suing Napster.

RIAA has been awarded a preliminary injunction forcing the Napster network to be shut down, friday, July 28th, at midnight - for the duration of the trial, if not permanently.

Many accounts have indicated music purchasing has increased because of Napster, possibly because it has generally spurred interest in music.

If you want to show RIAA your disapproval of their heavy handed legal tactics...

Do not purchase any of their members' products for the duration of the trial. The dominant members of RIAA areSony Music, EMI Recorded Music, Bertelsmann's BMG Entertainment, Time Warner's Warner Music and Seagram's Universal Music Group - which pretty much includes all music CDs, except those from obscure independent labels.

Don't accept RIAA's (or Metallica's) labeling you as a 'criminal' for sharing or downloading MP3s. Napster's attorney cited a recent federal court case that decided some noncommercial copying of music is protected by law. That extends even to making a song available for thousands of random Net users to download.

You're not doing anything wrong.

Nothing gets a large corporation's attention faster than a sharp drop in sales.

This is my very first chain letter. Please send it to every one you know, who uses Napster.

The music industry organization, RIAA, is suing Napster.

RIAA has been awarded a preliminary injunction forcing the Napster network to be shut down, friday, July 28th, at midnight - for the duration of the trial, if not permanently.

Many accounts have indicated music purchasing has increased because of Napster, possibly because it has generally spurred interest in music.

If you want to show RIAA your disapproval of their heavy handed legal tactics...

Do not purchase any of their members' products for the duration of the trial. The dominant members of RIAA areSony Music, EMI Recorded Music, Bertelsmann's BMG Entertainment, Time Warner's Warner Music and Seagram's Universal Music Group - which pretty much includes all music CDs, except those from obscure independent labels.

Don't accept RIAA's (or Metallica's) labeling you as a 'criminal' for sharing or downloading MP3s. Napster's attorney cited a recent federal court case that decided some noncommercial copying of music is protected by law. That extends even to making a song available for thousands of random Net users to download.

You're not doing anything wrong.

Nothing gets a large corporation's attention faster than a sharp drop in sales.

This is my very first chain letter. Please send it to every one you know, who uses Napster.

The music industry organization, RIAA, is suing Napster.

RIAA has been awarded a preliminary injunction forcing the Napster network to be shut down, friday, July 28th, at midnight - for the duration of the trial, if not permanently.

Many accounts have indicated music purchasing has increased because of Napster, possibly because it has generally spurred interest in music.

If you want to show RIAA your disapproval of their heavy handed legal tactics...

Do not purchase any of their members' products for the duration of the trial. The dominant members of RIAA areSony Music, EMI Recorded Music, Bertelsmann's BMG Entertainment, Time Warner's Warner Music and Seagram's Universal Music Group - which pretty much includes all music CDs, except those from obscure independent labels.

Don't accept RIAA's (or Metallica's) labeling you as a 'criminal' for sharing or downloading MP3s. Napster's attorney cited a recent federal court case that decided some noncommercial copying of music is protected by law. That extends even to making a song available for thousands of random Net users to download.

You're not doing anything wrong.

Nothing gets a large corporation's attention faster than a sharp drop in sales.

IIRC, the study said that there was a drop in sales at 64 SELECTED record stores near colleges and universities where Napster was banned...

Previous Slashdot story

Here's the C-Net story

and a quote from the article: The drop in college music store sales was more pronounced in 1998 than in 1999--a year before Napster was written, released and began spreading quickly across college campuses.

I have another theory as to why sales drop... according to RIAA's own statistics, the average value of a CD has increased since 1998-1999. Since college students are less well-off than other demographics, an increase in price has led to a decrease in demand.

She found, for example, that computers and hard drives are not audio home recording devices.

This betrays either a woeful lack of understanding, a blatant bias, or a harmfully-narrow reading of the statute.

from new.com:
"She also ordered the RIAA to post a $5 million bond to compensate Napster for lost business should Napster eventually prevail in the case. "

IANAL; hell even if I was a lawyer, I wouldn't tell anybody.

from new.com:
"She also ordered the RIAA to post a $5 million bond to compensate Napster for lost business should Napster eventually prevail in the case. "

IANAL; hell even if I was a lawyer, I wouldn't tell anybody.

"Napster is enjoined from copying or assisting or enabling or contributing to the copy or duplication of all copyrighted songs and musical compostions of which the plaintiffs hold rights," U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ordered in a surprise ruling at a hearing in San Francisco federal court.

However one feels about Napster, there may be a silver lining for Open Source: two of three mostly likely successors (Gnutela and freenet) are both Open Souce, so we may have another high profile success on our hands.
The third runner-up, Scour, is closed -- but it is already having legal problems.

According to ICQ's homepage they currently have over 72 million users. Last month C| Net claimed thatt AIM has 91 million users which may have changed since ICQ had 62 million at the time. All AOL has to do is make ICQ and AIM interoperate and any move by the remaining companies whose combined userbase dwarfs AIM's or ICQ's will be a waste of time.

Frankly I don't understand why people still hassle AOL, didn't they submit their Open IM Architecture Design to the IETF?

Well, Sun, for example, sold 500 $1 million-plus refrigerator-sized E10000's last quarter alone. There are probably more people out there who want this kind of stuff than you might think...

This has both good and bad.

The good -- more information can get out.

The bad -- more information can get out.

Since there is a very low barrier to entry, almost anyone can be a publisher. So, any writer the good, bad, or ugly can "publish" what they want. There are no copy editors, fact checkers, etc.

This has opened up a myriad of legal issues, libel or just plain bitching.

It also scares the likes of RIAA and MPAA where they are losing their control over publishing. Now the small guy for little money, can get their music or short movies out on the net.

Think of what RedHat, Caldera, or whoever could do with a single package now. RedHat 7.0, webserver addition: includes your end to end large scale site solution, web services by Apache, Content Management by GO.com. With a good ecommerce suite, that could be one hell of a package if it all came preconfigured.

The go.com stuff provides you with the tools to build a website - it'll never be an out of the box solution.

CMP released their perl-based CMS a while back - Mason. It looks very nice, it's used on some high-volume sites, and has a feature site suprisingly similar to Vignette's StoryServer (which is TCL-based, and grew out of C|Net).

None of which will do anything magical out of the box.

Inside.com recently had a decent article about CMS pros and cons, but I can't find it. Anyone got the URL?

...j

I have used Napster and Macster and the music I have downloaded has gotten me to buy the cd. You may thonk that I am only one out of many users but take a look at this article
from cnet.com. It looks as though there is proof that the use of these online music sources does indeed lead to people buying the music.

Well then, be a good son and buy your mom a tw o button scroll mouse.

I submitted this story yesterday. It was extremely critical of M$ (...well for a cnet story). Here is an article by SANS regarding the problem and a $500 reward for the first person to come up with an automated fix in the form of a virus to innoculate against the security problem. It seems like a novel approach to the problem I wonder if anyone actually figures out how to do this.

Msft reports better than expected earnings, public brand name recognition that rivals Coca-cola - it's starting to look like the bazaar dwellers are storming the Cathedral with sticks and stones, while the guards look over the ramparts, chuckle at the rabble's feeble attemtps at penetration, then turn back to their latte's. Revolution? Certainly, but it'll probably take half a generation to manifest itself, like the hippy youth rebellion of the 60's had to wait 'till the 90's before they came to any real power to change things. The 'middle aged managers' and power brokers of today grew up with WinTel, that's what they know and can't conceive of anything else replacing it, but they'll grow old and retire and the young Linux enthusiasts/advocates will take their place. It's a slow train a'coming.

Msft reports better than expected earnings, public brand name recognition that rivals Coca-cola - it's starting to look like the bazaar dwellers are storming the Cathedral with sticks and stones, while the guards look over the ramparts, chuckle at the rabble's feeble attemtps at penetration, then turn back to their latte's. Revolution? Certainly, but it'll probably take half a generation to manifest itself, like the hippy youth rebellion of the 60's had to wait 'till the 90's before they came to any real power to change things. The 'middle aged managers' and power brokers of today grew up with WinTel, that's what they know and can't conceive of anything else replacing it, but they'll grow old and retire and the young Linux enthusiasts/advocates will take their place. It's a slow train a'coming.