Slashdot Mirror

From TFA:

The marriage of a security company and a storage company is a move that tells both industries that systems management and security should be managed as one, Sidders said, noting that if the Symantec-Veritas merger is successful, it may lead to other similar deals.

And here is an example of the court applying exactly that pressure.

You really need to be more careful about throwing words around recklessly like that. Just because someone does not agree with you, or they have done more research than you on a given subject does not make them foolish.

You said

"they certainly don't track you across sites"

They've been investigated by the Attorney General and the FTC over it.

According to DoubleClick's own web site (the source):

"DoubleClick does not use your name, address, email address, or phone number to deliver Internet ads. DoubleClick does use information about your browser and Web surfing to determine which ads to show your browser. "

Therein lies the problem with DoubleClick, and the level of community anger towards them. They do track people, they have been doing it for years, and the scope has been increasing gradually. While I'll concede that I haven't heard of them installing spyware, I can't say I would put it past them.

You also said:

"Take a look at Doubleclick's SEC filings and their 300M or so in revenue."

Aside from the fact that you're off on the numbers, why would I? They're a private company?

Oh, and last one:

" They do not throw pop-ups in your face"

Not only do they throw pop ups in your face, they help people get around your popup blockers. Great guys you're defending here.

I think it's important to point out that your defending DoubleClick as though they were the only option. They're not. There are other companies out there that behave ethically and haven't even been investigated once by the FTC or the Attorney General. There are at least three I can think of off the top of my head that are not compiling illegal databases designed to profile the spending habits of every man woman and child on earth. You can choose to work with a company that will be honest, and adhere to their privacy policies, and not exploit you or your visitors without consent. There are lots of companies out there that do will pay you as much or more than DoubleClick does for your space. Or you could do what I do with Microsoft. Nothing. If it works, why would you care how they behave or what they do? Who cares about business practices.. right? C'mon, apathy is actually a nice place to be, but it doesn't give you the right to be an idiot.

You really need to be more careful about throwing words around recklessly like that. Just because someone does not agree with you, or they have done more research than you on a given subject does not make them foolish.

You said

"they certainly don't track you across sites"

They've been investigated by the Attorney General and the FTC over it.

According to DoubleClick's own web site (the source):

"DoubleClick does not use your name, address, email address, or phone number to deliver Internet ads. DoubleClick does use information about your browser and Web surfing to determine which ads to show your browser. "

Therein lies the problem with DoubleClick, and the level of community anger towards them. They do track people, they have been doing it for years, and the scope has been increasing gradually. While I'll concede that I haven't heard of them installing spyware, I can't say I would put it past them.

You also said:

"Take a look at Doubleclick's SEC filings and their 300M or so in revenue."

Aside from the fact that you're off on the numbers, why would I? They're a private company?

Oh, and last one:

" They do not throw pop-ups in your face"

Not only do they throw pop ups in your face, they help people get around your popup blockers. Great guys you're defending here.

I think it's important to point out that your defending DoubleClick as though they were the only option. They're not. There are other companies out there that behave ethically and haven't even been investigated once by the FTC or the Attorney General. There are at least three I can think of off the top of my head that are not compiling illegal databases designed to profile the spending habits of every man woman and child on earth. You can choose to work with a company that will be honest, and adhere to their privacy policies, and not exploit you or your visitors without consent. There are lots of companies out there that do will pay you as much or more than DoubleClick does for your space. Or you could do what I do with Microsoft. Nothing. If it works, why would you care how they behave or what they do? Who cares about business practices.. right? C'mon, apathy is actually a nice place to be, but it doesn't give you the right to be an idiot.

from the article:
"The company reported a loss of
$6.5 million, or 37 cents per share, for the
quarter ended Oct. 31, compared with a
year-earlier loss of $1.6 million or 12 cents
bper share. The Lindon, Utah, company's
revenue dropped from $24.3 million to $10.1
million over the same period."
article:
http://news.com.com/SCO+reports+deeper+loss%2C+shr inking+revenue/2100-1014_3-5500285.html?tag=nl

(PS: I hate windows sticky keys!)

They point out how almost everywhere, the claimant needs to claim in person... to have too many false faces is to share to wealth too widely, so why aren't they picked up by the staff working in the unemployment offices themselves?

Or is the fraud itself being exaggerated? Perhaps if there is a fraud, it's an internal one.

Firefox has been working on it and Opera fixed it. Microsoft says they aren't going to fix it since it is a "feature". Even better, Microsoft's answer is for users to install XP SP2 and make sure the firewall is enabled. Beautiful...

...and they're not going to release a patch for it.

And you *know* that if Microsoft says it's not a flaw, well, then, it mustn't be a flaw. ;)

http://appleintelfaq.com/

What did Apple announce at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 6, 2005?

Apple announced that it is transitioning from PowerPC processors provided by IBM and Freescale (formerly Motorola) to x86 architecture processors from Intel. The first Intel-based Macs will ship before mid-2006, and the transition will be complete by the end of 2007.

Where can I find out more official information about this announcement?

Apple press release

Intel press release

WWDC keynote address (Transcript)

Why did Apple make this change?

The following scenario likely contributed to this decision:

IBM has been unable to meet its performance commitments for the PowerPC 970 family (G5) processors. In mid-2003, IBM promised 3 GHz G5s to Apple by mid-2004. As of mid-2005, 3 GHz G5s are still not available, over two years after the initial announcement, and over one year after the promised delivery.[1]

Meanwhile, Microsoft has announced that IBM will make 3.2 GHz triple-core G5 derivatives available to Microsoft for Xbox 360.[2] IBM is also concentrating efforts on chips for Nintendo Revolution and Sony PlayStation 3.[3, 3.1] With IBM concentrating on expensive high-end server class processors and the console and embedded markets, and with Apple at less than 2%[4] of IBM's PowerPC business, it was clear IBM's priorities were focused elsewhere.

Apple is also less than 3%[4] of Freescale's PowerPC business, with Freescale focusing on embedded, communications, and automotive markets. The priorities of IBM and Freescale do not coincide with performance and other needs of the traditional desktop and portable computing marketplace.

What has Apple done to prepare for this transition?

Apple has been publicly maintaining the core OS of Mac OS X, Darwin, for both PowerPC and x86 platforms since the release of Mac OS X. Internally, Apple has been secretly maintaining Mac OS X in its entirety and all Apple applications for both PowerPC and x86 for over 5 years, since before Mac OS X's public release.[5] Mac OS X's predecessors also ran on x86.

Apple has made available Xcode 2.1, which adds the capability of creating PowerPC/x86 universal binaries. Xcode 2.1 can be used on either PowerPC or x86 systems to create universal binaries. Application developers already using Xcode in most cases need only recompile their application with an additional checkbox adding x86 architecture support.

Apple has also licensed[6] QuickTransit from Transitive Corporation for Rosetta, a realtime binary translation system to support PowerPC binaries seamlessly on x86 hardware. The current performance of Rosetta

http://appleintelfaq.com/

What did Apple announce at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 6, 2005?

Apple announced that it is transitioning from PowerPC processors provided by IBM and Freescale (formerly Motorola) to x86 architecture processors from Intel. The first Intel-based Macs will ship before mid-2006, and the transition will be complete by the end of 2007.

Where can I find out more official information about this announcement?

Apple press release

Intel press release

WWDC keynote address (Transcript)

Why did Apple make this change?

The following scenario likely contributed to this decision:

IBM has been unable to meet its performance commitments for the PowerPC 970 family (G5) processors. In mid-2003, IBM promised 3 GHz G5s to Apple by mid-2004. As of mid-2005, 3 GHz G5s are still not available, over two years after the initial announcement, and over one year after the promised delivery.[1]

Meanwhile, Microsoft has announced that IBM will make 3.2 GHz triple-core G5 derivatives available to Microsoft for Xbox 360.[2] IBM is also concentrating efforts on chips for Nintendo Revolution and Sony PlayStation 3.[3, 3.1] With IBM concentrating on expensive high-end server class processors and the console and embedded markets, and with Apple at less than 2%[4] of IBM's PowerPC business, it was clear IBM's priorities were focused elsewhere.

Apple is also less than 3%[4] of Freescale's PowerPC business, with Freescale focusing on embedded, communications, and automotive markets. The priorities of IBM and Freescale do not coincide with performance and other needs of the traditional desktop and portable computing marketplace.

What has Apple done to prepare for this transition?

Apple has been publicly maintaining the core OS of Mac OS X, Darwin, for both PowerPC and x86 platforms since the release of Mac OS X. Internally, Apple has been secretly maintaining Mac OS X in its entirety and all Apple applications for both PowerPC and x86 for over 5 years, since before Mac OS X's public release.[5] Mac OS X's predecessors also ran on x86.

Apple has made available Xcode 2.1, which adds the capability of creating PowerPC/x86 universal binaries. Xcode 2.1 can be used on either PowerPC or x86 systems to create universal binaries. Application developers already using Xcode in most cases need only recompile their application with an additional checkbox adding x86 architecture support.

Apple has also licensed[6] QuickTransit from Transitive Corporation for Rosetta, a realtime binary translation system to support PowerPC binaries seamlessly on x86 hardware. The current performance of Rosetta

http://appleintelfaq.com/

What did Apple announce at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 6, 2005?

Apple announced that it is transitioning from PowerPC processors provided by IBM and Freescale (formerly Motorola) to x86 architecture processors from Intel. The first Intel-based Macs will ship before mid-2006, and the transition will be complete by the end of 2007.

Where can I find out more official information about this announcement?

Apple press release

Intel press release

WWDC keynote address (Transcript)

Why did Apple make this change?

The following scenario likely contributed to this decision:

IBM has been unable to meet its performance commitments for the PowerPC 970 family (G5) processors. In mid-2003, IBM promised 3 GHz G5s to Apple by mid-2004. As of mid-2005, 3 GHz G5s are still not available, over two years after the initial announcement, and over one year after the promised delivery.[1]

Meanwhile, Microsoft has announced that IBM will make 3.2 GHz triple-core G5 derivatives available to Microsoft for Xbox 360.[2] IBM is also concentrating efforts on chips for Nintendo Revolution and Sony PlayStation 3.[3, 3.1] With IBM concentrating on expensive high-end server class processors and the console and embedded markets, and with Apple at less than 2%[4] of IBM's PowerPC business, it was clear IBM's priorities were focused elsewhere.

Apple is also less than 3%[4] of Freescale's PowerPC business, with Freescale focusing on embedded, communications, and automotive markets. The priorities of IBM and Freescale do not coincide with performance and other needs of the traditional desktop and portable computing marketplace.

What has Apple done to prepare for this transition?

Apple has been publicly maintaining the core OS of Mac OS X, Darwin, for both PowerPC and x86 platforms since the release of Mac OS X. Internally, Apple has been secretly maintaining Mac OS X in its entirety and all Apple applications for both PowerPC and x86 for over 5 years, since before Mac OS X's public release.[5] Mac OS X's predecessors also ran on x86.

Apple has made available Xcode 2.1, which adds the capability of creating PowerPC/x86 universal binaries. Xcode 2.1 can be used on either PowerPC or x86 systems to create universal binaries. Application developers already using Xcode in most cases need only recompile their application with an additional checkbox adding x86 architecture support.

Apple has also licensed[6] QuickTransit from Transitive Corporation for Rosetta, a realtime binary translation system to support PowerPC binaries seamlessly on x86 hardware. The current performance of Rosetta

Apple Files for Mactel Trademark but the public seems to prefer Macintel.

Must be a slow news day. This story was reported a month ago on May 23, 2005. At cnet, no less; not exactly an obscure news source.
http://news.com.com/Bypass+found+for+Windows+pirac y+check/2100-1002_3-5717127.html

And it was picked up by others, for example:
http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1009_11-5717127.h tml

Why is this story making the rounds again?

Must be a slow news day. This story was reported a month ago on May 23, 2005. At cnet, no less; not exactly an obscure news source.
http://news.com.com/Bypass+found+for+Windows+pirac y+check/2100-1002_3-5717127.html

And it was picked up by others, for example:
http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1009_11-5717127.h tml

Why is this story making the rounds again?

This is from back in May... http://netscape.com.com/Bypass+found+for+Windows+p iracy+check/2100-1002_3-5717127.html/

on c|net...

"I was merely trying to tell, that a commercial company bashes its competitor is not something to be treated seriously."

Interesting that you should mention people that are whining... Maybe you should take a look at your precious Mozilla's behavior some time?

The very same issue was raised in this article over a month ago.

Microsoft sent Opera a version of the MSN web page that made it look broken, and it was proven that this was to discredit Opera: some links about it.

However, this was a long time ago, and newer versions will identify as Opera (I think)

Yuck. Who wants to see that on their Mac every day?

And, what ever happened to the fully native Aqua interface that Sun promised for Open Office three full years ago:

"I think you can see Open Office running solid on OS X by the end of this calendar year," said Tony Siress, Sun's senior director of desktop marketing solutions. ... The current release of Open Office for Mac OS X requires x11," Siress said. "I've got my Hamburg (Germany) team working on eliminating that requirement right now and using Java. Full text

Three years after Sun promises Mac OS X support another team of developers finally ship something for Mac OS X that has no Aqua interface at all... except for the MENUBAR.

My analysis of this sad state of affairs is Java has failed on the desktop.

but there is good news too!
http://news.com.com/Korea+brings+homegrown+open+so urce+to+schools/2100-7344_3-5755892.html

The South Korean government is rolling out a homegrown open-source platform to 10,000 schools in the country.

"The project, called the New Education Information System, is built on a Korean-developed version of Linux that already services 190 schools in the heart of capital city Seoul....

But starting next year we will begin introducing Macs with Intel processors in them and over time these transitions will again occur. So when we meet here again this next time next year, our plan is to be shipping Macs with Intel processors by then, and when we meet here again two years from now, our plan is that transition will be mostly complete. And we think it will be complete by the end of 2007. So this is a two-year transition.

http://news.com.com/Broadcast+flag+debate+shifts+t o+Capitol+Hill/2100-1028_3-5755804.html

"Even if the Senate votes to adopt the broadcast flag, its final passage in Congress is uncertain. The appropriations bill already approved by the House of Representatives includes no such requirement; key House members such as Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, have been skeptical; and a Congressional Research Service report worries about the broadcast flag's impact on "fair use" rights"

Reeling from Carly? Ha! What do you think of this story
http://news.com.com/Analysts+expect+massive+HP+lay offs/2100-7341_3-5715548.html about massive layoffs at HP? Seems Carly only sharpened the knives; Hurd intends to use.

How nice. Old news. This was reported by macrumors back on June 15th

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/06/20050615105 533.shtml when they dropped the single 1.8 from their store.
Here's the link to the news.com story http://news.com.com/Bye-bye%2C+single-chip+Power+M ac/2100-1042_3-5754622.html

Look at this:

MS predicts 5 million for sales in first fiscal year.

The result?

Sales were 3.9 million.

Not too bad, but not perfect. 20% off. Still, it's better to underpromise and over-deliver than the other way around.

Taco is a tool. I posted this, then they made the story 'sub only' and it ate my post so I had to re-type it. Lesson? Type first in notepad, then paste.

Look at this:

MS predicts 5 million for sales in first fiscal year.

The result?

Sales were 3.9 million.

Not too bad, but not perfect. 20% off. Still, it's better to underpromise and over-deliver than the other way around.

Taco is a tool. I posted this, then they made the story 'sub only' and it ate my post so I had to re-type it. Lesson? Type first in notepad, then paste.

No, you are wrong. What we are seeing are bad patents that are neither unique nor novel and companies abusing the patent system here in the US.

So we end up with patents like Amazon's assinine "one-click" patent, to Kodak pulling out their Wang patents against Java.

I could post links to bad software patents all day long that pretty much 'eclipse' your idea of "really good arguments".

Personally, I take a more balanced view

But the problem is that the system is so abused that it is dishonest, if not immoral. You would think that EU representatives/legal committees would recognize this, hence my parent post.

Also, I find your comment about little software companies really offensive, as many of us work for such companies and it's how we put food on the table.

From this story:
http://news.com.com/Lost+credit+data+improperly+ke pt%2C+company+admits/2100-1029_3-5753557.html?tag= nefd.top

"The security breach was first reported Friday, when MasterCard International said a lapse at CardSystems had allowed the installation of a rogue computer program that could extract data from the system, potentially compromising 40 million accounts of various credit cards."

They put this information on a laptop running Windows, connected to the internet, and it got Spyware... wow, what a surprise...

LoB

i call bullshit:

The Vatican has anointed Sun Microsystems with Special Prelate status, namely, the ability to handle e-mail correspondence from the outside. Perhaps you should visit the Vatican website and read up on canonical law.

Microsoft has also managed to upset women and entire countries. A Spanish-language version of Windows XP, destined for Latin American markets, asked users to select their gender between "not specified," "male" or "bitch," because of an unfortunate error in translation.

See here. Even libraries can't give you audio books because Apple is the only one that can make DRM files for iPod. Apple's obsession with controlling every aspect of a product will relegate iPod to a niche market one day when real competitors decide to get into the market.

Not anymore. With Longhorn, they're changing to red. At least we'll get fewer BSOD's.

The House of Representatives is currently working on a bill to abolish a 3% telephone tax that was originally imposed in 1898 to help finance the Spanish American War. This "temporary" tax has been in effect for more than a century. Various attempts to repeal it in recent years have met with failure in Congress or Presidential veto. The current attempt (HR1898, coincidentally?) is in committee, but counter-efforts are also underway to expand the tax to cover more modern forms of communication.

Okay, let's use that metaphor. The postman has 50 lbs of mail for you every day. 45 lbs are fraudulent or advertising some sort of snake oil/porn site. Your mailbox holds 7 lbs of mail. The postmaster has a list of people who send mail to every email address on the face of the earth and a good number of addresses that don't exist. The postman takes those sending addresses and uses them to weed out roughly 40 lbs of mail, so your mailbox is only half full of crap instead of 90%. Unfortunately, you just lost 30% of your mail because it wouldn't fit.

Then deliver 7 pounds of mail per day over a 7 (and some fraction) day period. This is totally irrelevant though, because if something won't fit in your mailbox, the postman will come to your door and tell you about the package or packages and require you to sign for them because they couldn't be transmitted to their legal receptacle (the mailbox).

Irrelevant. Nobody expects that email is a reliable transport, and sending mail is no proof of receipt. The legal status of email is largely irrelevant to the question.

Um, what?

I did a google search on e-mail site:.gov and came up with tons of results. Here's one:
http://www.doiu.nbc.gov/orientation/email.html
This page describes the Department of the Interior's email policy.
They say: e-mail systems are highly reliable for transmitting messages.
They also say: Q4. If my outgoing message is a record, should I ask for a return receipt to make sure that the person I sent it to got it?

A4. It is not necessary to ask for a return receipt or read receipt in e-mail any more than it is necessary in hard copy. We don't send all letters certified mail. If it is important to document for the record the time that a message was opened, then that receipt must be retained along with the message for as long as the message is retained. You also need to have some means of linking the receipt to the message so it is clear what outgoing message the receipt documents.

So they acknowledge openly that the mail could be intercepted in transit, just as postal mail could, but they still consider it to be highly reliable.

From a state government website (Kentucky):
http://www.kdla.ky.gov/recmanagement/tutorial/emai l.htm
Electronic Mail (e-mail) is an important communication tool for conducting government business in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Increasingly, government agencies use e-mail systems to distribute memos, circulate drafts, disseminate directives, transfer official documents, send external correspondence, and support various aspects of government operations.

Disseminate directives? Transfer OFFICIAL documents?

The office of the attorney general in New York began accepting document service by email in 2003:
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/serviceag/serviceag.htm l
Except as set forth in paragraph 2, below, beginning January 1, 2003, the Attorney General's Office will participate in the Court of Claims' Filing by Electronic Means (FBEM) pilot project and will accept service by e-mail of the following documents

Digging back into the internet stone age, is this article from the year 2000, Judge allows subpoenas delivered via email. If Y2K wasn't your bag though, 2002 saw a different judge uphold the validity of process serving by e-mail.

Do I need to keep going to illustrate how totally wrong you are not only about the reliability of email, but of the perceived reliability of email? (I shouldn't have to, but this is slashdot, after all)

As to the l

Well, I was involved with this on a number of levels and can say there was no announcement. What happened was a slip up and spin control. The original article contained quotes that were taken from the end of an interview with Tony Siress on a completely different topic. He was mostly talking about OpenOffice.org on Mac OS X. Note the quote that was interpreted as being the "announcement" of a cooperation:

"I don't want to sell StarOffice for OS X," Siress said. "I want Apple to bundle it. I'll give them the code. I'd love it if I could get the team at Apple to do joint development and they distribute it at no cost--that it's their product. Nobody makes a product more beautiful on Apple than Apple."

Does that sound like a product and bundling announcement? Hell no. It was Tony going off on what he'd "like" to happen, that he'd "like" to have a partnership with Apple and a bundling deal. It never existed. The StarOffice team that he was talking about was the one that existed under Patrick Luby back in 2000 prior to when Sun open sourced the failed remnants of the Mac port.

It also turns out that by this time Patrick had already been working on NeoOffice/J and, being a former Sun employee and manager of the Mac port, he was beginning to show early versions of his application to people within Sun. This is one of the projects that was mentioned by Sun managers as the Java port, even though it wasn't even a Sun project. Tony himself referenced NeoOffice/J's ancestor in his interview.

Tony later explained the mixup to the OOo community, which was later picked up by the press. He was talking out his ass and made my life hell for a whole week.

CNet was embarassed, of course, since they essentially now looked like fools by "breaking" completly false information. So they ran a counter-argument story that had longer quotes from the interview. The Quartz version that he's referring to was the Quartz porting work I had been doing in OpenOffice.org. The Java version he's referring to was the early work by Patrick. It even had some quotes from a Sun PR person confirming that Tony said what he had said. Sun PR sacrificed Tony to maintain a working relationship with CNet (apparently there had been a Sun PR person involved with the original interview but they hadn't stopped Tony from making off-topic comments).

The key point you'll see in that "refutation" article that makes it known he's full of it is the quote on laptops at the bottom. He mentions Apple wanting to sell Sun PowerBooks. His "contact" at Apple was a sales rep who was trying to sell laptops, not an engineer!

After that fun blunder, Tony never really was allowed to speak to the press again, particularly on StarOffice related issues.

Conspiracy theorists love making a big deal out of this up until this day (witness the parent), but in the end it was all a bunch of bull caused by an eager manager and an overexuberant reporter "breaking" a supposed story without doing any fact checking to confirm the horseshit coming out of the manager's mouth.

The good thing was that it pissed me and Dan off so much we created the NeoOffice project (NeoOffice/C) to prove it could be done. Eventually Patrick was convinced to open source the code Tony referred to and thus NeoOffice/J was born. Bad thing is it wrecked any chance of Sun or Apple actually providing OpenOffice.org engineering support since the PR n

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/news/06/ 15/eqdod_screen001.jpg

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/news/06/ 15/eqdod_screen001.jpg

Apple filed a trademark for the word Mactel.

http://news.com.com/2061-10793_3-5746741.html

This is the guy that wants to trade the broadcast flag for our fair use rights. Our representatives shouldn't be trading one set of our rights in order to keep a right we already have. Fair use means nothing if everything is controlled with a broadcast flag and there is nothing for us to share.

CNET

Second paragraph from bottom.

...The best story I know of personally is with a notebook demanding reactivation for hardware changes during an XP trial while the user was on the road in a remote location with no way to activate...

Is it David Coursey that you're referring to?

Some useful ones:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/hmd/hmd-no.html/104- 0929706-0979137?nodeId=518316
http://www.onecause.com/shop/amazon.asp
http://news.com.com/How+Linux+saved+Amazon+million s/2100-1001_3-275155.html
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/10/22/0959240.shtm l

You sir hit the nail on the head. Yahoo has just bit the bullet even though they have a close relationship with SBC.

Yahoo

I used to work in the DOCSIS cable modem industry, so I'm reasonably familiar with the Broadcom 335x/334x CPU family. The best I ever saw was the datasheet for the 3416 chip (tuner chip).

For those of you who aren't aware, or don't remember, Broadcom was slapped with a lawsuit by Microtune, alleging patent violations http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5064586.html, (one of many articles available on this subject).

So, I was tasked with providing software support for the 3416 tuner chip (the replacement for the 3415 "problem" chip) in our cable modem product, as the 3415 couldn't legally be sold in the U.S. anymore. Well, I figured it would be easy, since the datasheets for the two chips were exactly the same, except that "3415" was changed to "3416". (And, I mean exactly the same, to the word - it was only a 15 page datasheet, so I compared them).

Nope, good old Broadcom documentation does it again... I managed to study the source code for one of the newer cable modem CPUs and find the changes between the chips. The real stupid thing though: Even though there's a version register (which tells which version the chip is), they didn't update it to indicate a 3415/3416, even though they had the bits available. So, 3416 chips would show up as 3415 chips if you try to read the version number (that made things difficult).

Incidentally, Broadcom does make Linux drivers for most of it's newer hardware, they're just meant for their customers (the OEMs making the hardware, not the end-users). The general rule with Broadcom is, if you pay them a lot of money, you get excellent support. (At the previous company I worked for, I had an engineer that would get back to me within 24 hours on any issue related to the product, because we bought so many cable modem chips. When I currently work, they won't even give us the time of day, we just don't purchase enough.)

I feel your pain, I really do.

-- Joe

• Marc Andreessen made 100s of millions of dollars shortly after graduating from UIUC. Today's graduates of the same university face moving back in with their parents. "Fuck that, I got mine!"
• Brian Behlendorf decided he'd rather go to India to recruit software engineers than help out the graduating classes of 2001-2004 here in the US.
• Robert Malda stood idly by and said NOTHING while his company offshored its flagship product.
• Linux Lab set up shop in Bangalore!
• Daniel Robbins decided to sell out his open source compatriots by taking a job with Microsoft in Redmond, Washington!

Miguel de Icaza, Bruce Perens, Eric Raymond, and Linus Torvalds all got rich off the Open Source Movement. What do you have to look forward to?

actually, the Boy Scouts of Hong Kong are now being encouraged to become anti-pirates:

Jobs said nothing of the sort.

It was Apple VP Phil Schiller, and "not letting OS X run on non-Apple hardware" doesn't mean it HAS to be stopped via technological means.

So again, this is speculation, at best.

• After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
  
  

  However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.