Slashdot Mirror

http://www.news.com/ News/Item/0,4,0-35646,00.html?st.ne.lh..ni

Main new features:

• 2.2 Kernel (obviously)
• RPM 3.0: Better macros, better compatibility checks
• IBM ViaVoice bundled
• Choice of $40 2xCD for experts or $80 3xCD for new users
• "Kickstart" installation scripts
• Comes with a set of precompiled kernels, installer chooses the best one for your processor (perhaps it'll detect if you're installing off a SCSI CDROM this time?)

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,353 21,00.html

The summary about eBay's response:

eBay acknowledged that the JavaScript exploit works, but minimized its importance.

"We know it's there, but you have to put it all in perspective," said eBay spokesman Kevin Pursglove. "We have a very open environment that lets individuals describe what they're selling, and JavaScript is there so people can make the best of their abilities to describe an item."

-- Bryan Feir

News.com has an article covering it. I agree with their analysis: NSI's going to have a de facto monopoly because of their past governance of the InterNIC, and the fact that, regardless of the new state of competition, NSI gets to skim off the others' fees (they still have to pay NSI to maintain the database).

-Virgil
--

I paid for a service. I had no choice in vendors, because NSI was given a governmentally approved monopoly. I can live with this; it was a necessary evil.

Now, however, according to the article at http://www.news.com/News/ Item/0,4,0-35228,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh you plan on selling this data that I provided to you with the expectation of privacy. I hereby serve notice that if you sell my information to anyone at anytime, I will file suit immediately.

To: help@networksolutions.com

Please read the first paragraph of this news article about NSI: http://www.news.com/ News/Item/0,4,0-35228,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh

I will be extremly upset if you begin selling my data (and my clients' data). When I divulge sensitive contact information, I expect it to be kept confidential. The whois interface has always been ONE WAY - query and response. That's very different from selling a list split out by demographic. The contact info I keep in your database is to be used in case of a NETWORK OUTAGE. The last thing I need is for yahoos (excuse the pun) start calling me at all hours on the "emergency line".

Not to mention the fact that your system bites. Yahoo could do a better job of organizing a database - and keeping it secure. When is the soonest I can take my business elsewhere?

I would like all DNS entries (host, domain, contact, everything!) connected to the host sam.julianhaight.com REMOVED from any lists you are selling.

-=Julian=-

I don't agree with your opinion -- it sounds as though you are repeating a variation of the old litany "Linux is for hackers, nerds, and [smart people], it couldn't and shouldn't be used by anybody else."

A lot of smart people (like the people I work with at my day job, doing VB programming) use Windows, but that's not to say they're not "smart people". Many of these developer-type people (sadly exposed only to proprietary systems like Windows) have just not heard of Linux. I would bet that if they did, a sizeable percentage of them would like it. (Like I did when I discovered Linux last summer.)

As for consumer-space, stuff like the new Caldera distribution can only help.

It will only take time, dedication, and an open mind on our part to give Linux it's fair shot at the OS market, server or otherwise.

Let's not be "tech snobs".

Just like the guy with the pornographic Palm V advertisement parodies should.

For a good example, find the "Meat of the Loom" legal debacle.

-Chris

Here's the article.

News.com is running a short story about this too. They mention slashdot and some of the comments that were made. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 4816,00.html

-Emilio

Check this out. Breaking story: http://www.news.com/ News/Item/0,4,34736,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.d

1. MSFT released macros for Office95 and Office 4.3 to display a warning dialog for suspicious documents. Not a patch, but another macro. This is significant becuase the macro kludge did not intercept in all instances. E.G. File -> Open would use the "protection", but double-clicking on an icon would not
2. Surprise, surprise, the protection is better integrated in Office97. I can get better protection for a mere $300 USD. They turned a problem into a sales pitch.
3. What MSFT has done is completely inadequate. E.G. most of these "viruses" hook into the "open document" event (forgive my lack of VBA jargon). Why can't you _completely_ disable that hook? Why hasn't MSFT borrowed the relatively rich and thoughtful security model of Internet Explorer with Zones and Levels?

Of course I also think some of the blame belongs to those who purchased Word+Outlook for their companies, and those responsible for training employees. But the company that could have done the most to stop this, and the only one that has the right and the resources to do so, pretends there's no issue here.

On a larer scale this incident points out the vulnerabilities inherent in a monoculture. Thank goodness we have diversity of applications, OS'es, and hardware platforms to limit exposure.

The reference is to Peacekeeper missiles and is an example of doublespeak. The point is that MS likes to assert that it must have competition or else it wouldn't have to use hard line tactics.

As a case in point, see the article on CNET in which a MS lawyer uses the following convoluted logic: "Gates's email [which looked for ways to protect he MS-DOS gold-mine against DR-DOS], for instance, directly contradicts Caldera's assertion that Microsoft monopolized the market for computer operating systems." See the slashdot article and the Caldera news release.

"They've both done really excellent work in getting Mozilla where it is now. But Mozilla is bigger than Netscape, and it's certainly bigger than two or three people. Obviously it's a negative thing for us to have these two leave, but it's not fatal for us at all."

BTW: The source code for EXACTLY the same glibc version which is needed for oracle db is NOT available from RH!

Even hardware vendors start to see the problem. (see: Compaq) What do you think why SuSE now started to develop an ALPHA port of SuSE-6.1?

Well the point is simply that Oracle told the suits from SAP that Oracle will currently only support Redhat due to incompatiblilies with other linux distributions. SAP therefor currently only supports Oracle based R/3 solutions for Linux. Support in this context means "Support contract". These contracts are signed by suits NOT programmers. It is about liability and such.

On the other hand SAP ist not much interested in diversity anyway and B.Y. managed to convince that Linux==Redhat. He even claimed that all other distributions are simple rip-offs of the RH ftp version

On the other hand simply look at Compaq versus RH in order to look how Microsoftlike behaviour is obvious. (Didn't ask M$ for millions of dollars for a PowerPC NT port? didnt M$ threaden their customers in case they also deal with competitors)

"Wait for them to get back into the power ring, we shall see how benevolent apple really is."
Are you kidding? Apple spent _millions_ on an internet suite that was bundled with the OS. It was revolutionary, perhaps too revolutionary. It was called Cyberdog. I used it for over a year... you know what? They never did a fscking thing to push it over the other web browsers/Email programs/ftp etc etc etc vendors. They spent all that money and then just put the result out there and left it to twist in the wind...
If you think for one second that Apple embraces and exterminates like MS does, you are just plain out of your fscking mind and, on top of that, have never even _asked_ anybody what the real truth of it is.
Apple's sin is lack of promotion- for years they just ran around making 'cool stuf' (Cocoa? Colorsync? Applescript? OpenDoc? Cyberdog? Project X/HotSauce/MCF?) and did nothing to try and promote it. Meanwhile MS was ripping off companies and ramming their choices down everyone's throats (read Crushed By Microsoft: What I Learned for an example). Who do you think ended up winning? Now, who do you think really deserves your nasty fit of attitude?
You are incredibly wrong and the record shows how wrong you are- if Apple was as you think they are, they would not have been whipped so bad in '97 and '98. It's anybody's guess as to whether they will get fully into your 'power ring' but it's well to remember that Apple's culture is one hell of a lot more like the Linux culture than MS's is. It was an internal gift economy- a playground for Apple programmers to play with nifty ideas while the marketshare collapsed and Rome burned around them. Jobs put in some backbone and some ruthlessness, but man, have some sense of proportion! Do you want a detailed account of all the different ways Apple completely didn't even bother to ruthlessly crush their competitors? God! I don't know whether to laugh or cry- you should talk to some of the OpenDoc guys who got caught holding the bag when _that_ 'cool stuff' ended up unpromoted, un-whipped-on-customers, un-forced-down-everyone's-throat... geez... talk to some people who know the truth, will you?

Losing the cloners was too bad, but I'd rather have no clones than a dying Apple. Many people, myself included, consider the new (blue & white) G3s to be an excellent value, probably Apple's best price/performance ratio ever. And, while it would be nice to have more choice of Mac hardware, Apple's prices haven't really risen any since cloning died. If anything, they've come down quite a bit (on their high end machines) and a whole hell of a lot on their consumer offering (iMac).

Again with the BeOS comments...I keep seeing this BeOS bullshit pop up after every Apple story. When will people give this one up? It's pretty obvious that Apple doesn't want Be on their hardware and Be doesn't want to waste their time maintaining the PowerPC version of BeOS when Intel is such a bigger opportunity for them.

And, don't forget, FireWire was chosen as an industry standard by the IEEE, which by the way doesn't prevent companies from profitting from these standards. Apple has been charging licensing fees for FireWire all along. The latecomers were asked to pay more, but after they made a stink Apple joined a few other companies in an effort to promote use of FireWire in the industry by creating a licensing program that they all approve of. Check here for more info on that one:

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 2501,00.html

- StrangeDaze

Lastly, on the monitor debate, I'd say that the salesperson who moves this product had better inform the buyer that it doesn't come with a monitor, else s/he's going to have to do a refund in a few days, and no salesperson wants to do that.

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33781,00.html?st .ne.lh..ni

'Many observers say that Linux has captured the efforts of the "alternative" developer set, drawing their talents away from Mac OS and other alternatives to Microsoft Windows. OS X Server does have something of an open source core, but it also has lots of proprietary Apple software on top.

"They're trying to hit Linux right between the eyes," said one source.'
---
Wha? TV & Movie Theme Songs? Oh yeah....

Firm cranks up MP3 player for the car
By Stephanie Miles
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
March 11, 1999, 4:25 p.m. PT

Hoping to follow in the footsteps of the popular Rio portable MP3 player, a British company is about to launch what it says is the first digital music player for the car.

a href="http://www.cnet.com/Resources/Info/Glossary/ Terms/mpeg.html">MP3 (MPEG-3) is a digital audio format which allows consumers to download near-CD quality music from their PCs. Users can pick from an almost unlimited supply of legitimate and pirated music titles. Rio, manufactured by Diamond Multimedia, is a portable and relatively inexpensive MP3 player.

Diamond said recently it has already shipped over 100,000 units, since its launch late last year, despite a messy legal battle with the recording industry, which was seeking an injunction against Rio's distribution until better safeguards against piracy were in place.

Do you want to know more?

Read related news View story in The Big Picture Go to Message Boards Search News.com

Empeg has started production on Empeg Car, according to the company's Web site. Empeg Car, which runs on the Linux operating system, is powered by a 200-MHz StrongARM processor.

The removable stereo unit includes an FM radio receiver, and 2.1GB capacity to store up to 35 hours of music. Users download MP3 files from the PC to the stereo unit via the USB or serial port.

Empeg will begin shipping in late March. The Empeg Car Player with display, car mount, remote control, cables, and Windows-based software to download music titles will start at $999 for the 2.1GB version. The company is offering larger capacity models and other display colors.

"The initial design is to go in your car, but you can use it at home, on a boat...almost anywhere," according to the Empeg Web site.

Firm cranks up MP3 player for the car
By Stephanie Miles
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
March 11, 1999, 4:25 p.m. PT

Hoping to follow in the footsteps of the popular Rio portable MP3 player, a British company is about to launch what it says is the first digital music player for the car.

a href="http://www.cnet.com/Resources/Info/Glossary/ Terms/mpeg.html">MP3 (MPEG-3) is a digital audio format which allows consumers to download near-CD quality music from their PCs. Users can pick from an almost unlimited supply of legitimate and pirated music titles. Rio, manufactured by Diamond Multimedia, is a portable and relatively inexpensive MP3 player.

Diamond said recently it has already shipped over 100,000 units, since its launch late last year, despite a messy legal battle with the recording industry, which was seeking an injunction against Rio's distribution until better safeguards against piracy were in place.

Do you want to know more?

Read related news View story in The Big Picture Go to Message Boards Search News.com

Empeg has started production on Empeg Car, according to the company's Web site. Empeg Car, which runs on the Linux operating system, is powered by a 200-MHz StrongARM processor.

The removable stereo unit includes an FM radio receiver, and 2.1GB capacity to store up to 35 hours of music. Users download MP3 files from the PC to the stereo unit via the USB or serial port.

Empeg will begin shipping in late March. The Empeg Car Player with display, car mount, remote control, cables, and Windows-based software to download music titles will start at $999 for the 2.1GB version. The company is offering larger capacity models and other display colors.

"The initial design is to go in your car, but you can use it at home, on a boat...almost anywhere," according to the Empeg Web site.

Cnet has an article about this leaked memo.

Posted by jguest:

From C/NET (via www.x86.org) I found this:

"Processor serial number prototypes were included on the 333-MHz and 366-MHz mobile
Pentium II processors with 256KB of integrated, secondary cache and the 266-MHz and
300-MHz mobile Celeron processors, according to an Intel spokesman. These chips
were all released January 25."

Looks like they hit a number of fab lines with this!

A news.com article about yet another hack to get the PIII ID even when it's disabled. This one uses an ActiveX control to crash your system, then grabs it on reboot (is it just me or does anyone else think that ActiveX controls are getting out of hand).

News.com's top story is here, although they say Oracle rather than Novell.

From the article at www.news.com
Microsoft admits privacy problem,
plans fix

"Bennett promised that Microsoft also will wipe
any of those numbers from its internal
databases that the company can determine may have
been inadvertently collected. "

Come on people, data just happens to come
streaming into your database an it is INADVERENT?

I think I know a good use for some of those old
outdated NUKEs the gov has stockpiled.... ;)

Go Linux! Wither Windoz!

Locutus

- Sam Trenholme

i'd have to look up the url... here's the link

I'd never thought of BeOS as "free" or "open source" either, but I just noticed an article on News.com reporting that BeOS will now be given away free to computer makers in an attempt to break the vicious self-perpetuating cycle of M$ dominance.

If you think that Rosen had a bad time yesterday, think again. He was accused of making things up in today's cross examination.

I just can't believe that these latest gaffes are all coming from witnesses called by Microsoft. So far Boies has destroyed their credibility on the witness stand thereby making their written testimony also suspect.

In my opinion, if trademarks belong in the DNS at all, it's within the domains of those government agencies registering them in the first place. Thus, the U.S. PTO could set up TM.USPTO.GOV as a placeholder for all trademarks registered there, and it would be up to them to devise a naming scheme that would allow every registered trademark to map to a valid and unique subdomain name. I wish them good luck with pictorial trademarks.

As for non-registered trademarks, establishing a registry in the form of a domain name (whether TLD or any other domain) kind of contradicts the idea of allowing non-registered trademarks in the first place.

We don't have to wait for the WIPO or any court to rule that the DNS should accomodate their view on trademarks before we set up a new system. In fact, we are well-advised to make preparations in advance, setting up an organization, devising new rules, and decide how to make an emergency transition in case a legal warhead happens to hit the present InterNIC. I suppose you don't need government authorization to join others in building a bomb shelter or stockpiling canned food?

Don't repeat AlterNIC's mistake however, that of polluting the existing namespace in order to seize control of InterNIC's web address (according to what I've heard, the guy behind AlterNIC ended up in jail for that, thanks to the InterNIC having high-ranking friends not wanting to see the integrity of .MIL being corrupted in that or any other way).

If anybody wants to test an alternate domain hierarchy, keep it well away from the current one. That goes for intellectual property lawyers too.

If Intel gets its way:

http://www.news.com/ News/Item/0,4,32406,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.d

This is the problem when looking at growth rates: you have to keep track of what it is that's growing (and what the percentage basis is).

http://slashdot.org/www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,323 61,00.html

should be http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 2361,00.html

But some of the software is not. This CNet Article says that.

"...if improperly used by an application, would result in improper date readings."

"Apple's Web site says Macintosh computers can handle internally generated dates correctly all the way to the year 29,940 as long as the software running on them manages dates correctly as well."

So as long as programmers don't get stupid, and know what they should know...then, there would not and will not be a problem. So any problems encountered on a Mac are due to incompetent developers, or unaware developers (no blame can be laid on the unaware though), and MicroSoft (hehheh). So my question is, is it really a problem at all? I mean, which programs were done incorrectly and will have a problem, and does anyone use them? If they are used...well, I guess their competition could have a leg up.
I wonder how many MS Mac programs are not Y2K compliant.

Question 2: What about Winhoes and other OSes? How y2k comp. are they and are their apps y2k comp. too? Has anyone seen a study or some work looking at all the OSes out there and their compatability with a new millenium (or the end of this one actually)?
And is the report WinCentric or OS-nuetral (and actually objective)?
How does Linux and *BSD stand? Or will they fall victim?

• "The structural remedies that people are talking about--separating applications from operating systems--is like one of those horror movies where you cut the monster in half, and now you have two monsters."

It's hard to say what would happen. Much would depend on the implimentation.

Personally, I'd say that if MS was forced to make ALL its APIs for all versions of Windows (inc W2K) publicly available and free to use for any purpose would be the best thing to go for from the DoJ's point of view. It's very hard to argue against it, and would also be very effective in giving MS some competition. Basically, anyone could then do a complete 'Wine' and make a system where you can run Windows apps without Windows.

The other thing to do would be to prevent all the software tying that makes it so hard for OEMs to build PCs without Windows pre-installed. MS also ties lots of its software together in certain ways, which rather forces people to run 'pure MS'.

I'm not saying that splitting MS could have it's uses, but at the moment, I would recommend the DoJ to do the above. When, one way or another, the case gets to the Supreme Court, then go for splitting.

It'll be another 1-3 months before the trial ends, and the judge'll probably take 1-2 months making a descision. So I guess we'll see something by mid-year. (about the same time the K7 comes out)

That's because Dell previously considered pre-installing Linux onto their machines a "custom order"; they'd only install Linux (or HP-UX) onto their boxes for big/good customers & only then if it was specifically requested.

According to a News.com story from yesterday, that is changing (see other related /. article as well)

=moJ
- - - - - -
Member in Good Standing,

See this news.com article.
Microsoft's Windows NT finished dead last overall in a comparison with five different versions of the Unix operating system, concluded a market research firm that assessed the latest versions of these operating systems.

Sony, Philips, IBM, and Texas Instruments all maintain licences to the technology in which they paid a flat fee for and will not be paying the $1 per/port fee. Apple is the first to announce and bring the technology into the consumer view and made it truley noticable, and they've called it FireWire. If the demand comes and I beleave it will people will want FireWire on their computers and in their consumer devices. Fact is this stuff is just to cool to let die and I beleave that's far from what it's going to do. Companies might not like the fact they have to pay $1 for every port they put into their products but I doubt it will keep them from doing it. Here's a great artical on the whole thing: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 0995,00.html

The above URL has a quote in it. Try news.com

Damnit jim, he added "'s on the URL and broke it :)

Here Is the Correct Link

regarding the article, I find the idea of a class-action suit against MS (mentioned at the end of the article) very interesting. That would definitely be one way to punish MS, if the Judge doesn't want to break them up into baby Bills.

Linux pushes into Macintosh community