Slashdot Mirror

Now how about contributing to KDE and or making a version for Linux?

Perhaps you missed the memo.

Maybe you missed this one too.

As for developing a version for Linux, why would Apple do that when KDE and Mozilla are already there and serving the needs of Linux users? I see no need for Apple to do more than contribute to KDE, which it is doing. There are no shortage of great browsers available for Linux users, and it would be a waste of money for Apple to devote resources to a small, already saturated market.

Safari has always been based on KDE's KHTML, and they do contribute back to the community via the WebKit project.

See also:

KDE adds Safari feel to desktop Linux - The KDE Project has released a significant update to its K Desktop Environment software that includes refinements to the Konqueror Web browser derived from collaboration with Apple's Safari browser team.

KDE's Konqueror Browser Reaps Safari Benefits - In a perfect example of how open source and proprietary software can benefit each other, Apple got a significant headstart by basing Safari on established technologies like KHTML & Konqueror. And in return, Apple's contributions back to the open source community have benefitted Konqueror.

According to several articles regarding this subject, the questionable utility of Turbo Memory is not the fault of MS alone:

TG Daily reports that Intel's showcasing of Turbo Memory included benchmarks that's anything but real-world applicable: "The benchmark appeared to slam several pictures at lightning speed into Photoshop, something that would play to the strengths of flash memory because the pictures would already be stored in flash for fast opening by Photoshop. Realistically though, we think the average user wouldn't capture dozens of pictures and then open them all in Photoshop in one fell swoop."

Which leads to an Anandtech article showing that in many cases, performance suffered as a result of Turbo Memory implementation - particularly with boot and hibernation times. Now these are cases where users are MOST likely to notice performance differences.

Finally, in the cases where Turbo Memory would seem useful, it appears that HP discovered that using far more versatile, ubitquitous flash solutions such as SD and USB drives (not to mention just adding regular system memory (what a concept!)) yielded similar and more economically sensible results: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6188522.html

Maybe if Vista didn't need such obscene amounts of memory, this wouldn't be an issue; but I digress.

- Able to deal with a reasonable subset of the features available today across the variety of word processors available.

Anyway, about compatibility:

This is a partial quote from section 1.5 of ODF v1.1 about conformance, not specifically compatibility; anyway I hope this helps:

Document Processing and Conformance Documents that conform to the OpenDocument specification may contain elements and attributes not specified within the OpenDocument schema. Such elements and attributes must not be part of a namespace that is defined within this specification and are called foreign elements and attributes.

(...)

Conforming applications that read and write documents may preserve foreign elements and attributes. In addition to this, (...)

Conforming applications shall read documents containing processing instructions and should preserve them. There are no rules regarding the elements and attributes that actually have to be supported by conforming applications, except that applications should not use foreign elements and attributes for features defined in the OpenDocument schema. See also appendix D.

A standard document format has to say something either like "spacing like they do in ISO standard xyz" or "spacing done with a multiplier parameter <spacing fact="1.01"> where fact = a multiplier factor for backward compatibility, use 1.01987 for wordperfect 6.0 and 1.00 for everything else" but NEVER "spacing like in the proprietary software product word perfect 6.0, go buy it and buy a computer that can still run it if you want to perform the experiments necessary to know how to implement this feature".

And ISTR Microsoft, as a MEMBER of OASIS, was invited and encouraged to help define the ODF? They declined the invitation. Otherwise, this special Microsoft spacing feature would have been in ODF already (if what you say is true -- I'm tired and can't be bothered to look up in the spec whether its functionality is already described anyway).

Finally, I think the point of most standards is

to be completely anal about supporting those with pixel-perfect representation as they originally appeared

Good grief.

Yes and no. A lot are pirated windows, and some patches are not available for them. Is not in the linked article, but in i.e. http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=266 you can see a bit more of info.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6188522.html

Apparently it's not all it's cracked up to be.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc .aspx?i=2985&p=4

Apparently just more marketing hype.

TiVo is not a GPL-based entity. Just because they use Linux as the base OS of their otherwise closed-source, proprietary, DRM-encumbered, locked-down product, it doesn't mean that they have a business model based on GPL. The next thing you'll say is that Microsoft is a GPL-based entity because they provide GPL code in Services for Unix.

found it -- Jobs and Gates in 1991 Fortune Interview

image here

Obviously they won't reach 70+% market share. That was also not the comparison I was making. I was merely pointing out that calling the iPhone "just a phone" because it doesn't do more than other cell phones was similar to calling the iPod "just an iPod" because when it came out, it didn't do more than other MP3 players.

And yes, the iPhone is already a game changer. No high-end phone manufacturer can afford to ignore the iPhone or "keep going as it always has." If they do, the iPhone may very well soon break the 1% market share Apple is aiming for. And, in fact, the other manufacturers aren't ignoring the iPhone: LG, Palm; and Palm again.

So far, cell phones were about hardware design and lifestyle ads. Apple is changing the game, and we'll all benefit.

Palm just announced that they hired Jon Rubenstein and sold a chunk of the company to raise cash for CPR. If their next step is to fire their entire managment team, they might have a chance.

Did he steal your girlfriend or something?

OEMs started shipping Java around the time that Microsoft stopped:

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-1015723.html

So it does show up on a lot of PCs.

Mac OS X also has Java bundled into the OS, and the Opera download provided an option to include Java until recently. So Sun still has fairly good market penetration. Adobe has a nice chart showing both Flash and Java penetration here: http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashp layer/

Here is another article that has some more technical details:

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-6020423.html?ta g=nl

It looks like they are upgrading their internal network to fiber optic to handle the increased bandwidth. However, they are relying on copper wire to deliver the service into the home. That would suggest that this might be a bottleneck, although that is just conjecture on my part.

In my area, Verizon is offering their FiOS TV/Internet/phone service. If you subscribe, they upgrade all of the phone wiring in your home to fiber optic cable. Because the network is 100% fiber, I would imagine that FiOS would have more bandwidth available for all of these services.

Verizon is really pushing FiOS here. Just last week I had a Verizon rep ring my door to tell me that they are in the area, and if I would like to upgrade. I am a happy DirecTV customer, so I really have no desire to switch to them for TV. However, the Internet service is supposed to blow anything else out of the water in terms of speed, so I MIGHT consider it in the future, if I find that I am outgrowing my DSL service.

Yes, but will it tell you about Bullfights?

Not $0, $30. I could be completely wrong. I guess no one really knows the true cost of Windows on PCs. I was just trying to point out that the revenue of the adware/trial software that comes preinstalled on a Windows machine could either completely, or partially offset the cost of the Windows license itself. I looked around and I did find a $104 ($89 + tax) number for a refund of Windows XP home to a British customer here. I also found this article which speculates that the cost of XP home is $30.

I also found this story in which a person got a 42 Euro refund for Vista Home Basic. This seems to make the refunds vary wildly, but since you can get XP Home OEM for $89 plus tax here at NewEgg, I kind of doubt that Dell pays what you or I would pay if we were building a computer. My guess is that the guy that got the $89 refund did so because Dell isn't allowed to disclose the price they pay for Windows and the Dell CSR went of a public OEM price from a local vendor. In most of the refund cases I have read about, especially the ones that go to small claims court, seem to usually end with Dell stating that they cannot disclose the price they pay and refunding the cost at a local vendor. Anyway, this seems to point to my price of $30-$40 for XP Home or Vista Basic.

Next, from this article, you get the $60 price of the adware/trial software that comes pre-bundled on Dell machines. Once again, we don't know the exact number, but that link seems to point towards a price in the $60 ballpark.

So to sum up:

* Dell pays Microsoft more that $0, but it is most likely much, much less than you or I would pay if we were building our own computer due to the volume of sales Dell has. I estimate this at around $30-$40.
* Dell makes money from putting trial software on their PCs. This has been estimated at around $60.
* Estimates seem to indicate that base versions of Windows (the kind most home users get) seem to have a negative net cost for Dell (by that I mean to say they make money).
* Ubuntu (hopefully) will not include adware or trial software, so therefore, it costs the same or possibly more than Windows does.

I love Linux. I am typing this from a computer with Edgy installed. I have installed Ubuntu on most of the servers at the company I work for. I love Ubuntu and I hope it continues and is successful. I also still do not see a market for these machines. I fear that Dell will not have many sales, and will discontinue them. I most likely would not buy one because I still need Windows for a few things. Why pay the same or more for a computer with just Ubuntu, when I could get a computer with Ubuntu and Windows myself? Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Sorry, beat you to it Slashdotters: http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-10537-0.html?forumI D=1&threadID=34083&messageID=627017&start=-1 Day late, dollar short.

Mickey: Hi kids do you know what copyright is? Kids: Is that when you sued my dead grandmother Mickey? Mickey: That's right kids...

Hmm, I was going to say that you're right, because I recall having heard a news story where regulators stepped in severals ago and basically claimed that PayPal was too bank-like to get away with not calling itself a bank (and therefore not having to follow the rules that banks do).

Then I just googled some, and it turns out that you're right.

That's probably smarter than it appears at first. If he knows little about computers, someone probably foisted MS Windows on him. If it's got MS Windows, is powered on and connected to the net, then it's cracked. (Physical access works, too.)

• Average time to Total 0wn3rsh1p in 2007 : < 20 minutes
• Average time to Total 0wn3rsh1p in 2004 : < 16 minutes
• etc.

If it's cracked and if there is a microphone, discussions in his chambers can be easily followed.

This is exactly the scenario that was used in EU-level negotiations in recent years, so it's not just a hypothetical situation.

Update: As Endpoint Technologies Associates analyst Roger Kay notes, the 40 million is the number of copies Microsoft sold to the channel, not the number of copies sold by the channel and directly to customers. http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=438

The Inquirer has an article about this.

Is it a commercial success? We shall see. The ME II tag looks like it's beginning to stick. Another new client OS in 2009 makes the comparison even more pointed. Testimonials like these can't help vista.

I read it on the internets, of course ... on some site that rhymes with froogle.

"I have encountered many people who had strong, emotional reactions against patents and copyrights. Remarkably, though, few of them had ever been sued in court. And fewer still had ever written a book or cut an album. In short, they hadn't been hurt by so-called trolls, and they didn't own much worth pirating"

Why is dvd playback such a selling point? Does anyone NOT have a dvd player that will buy a wii? A dvd player is 30 dollars!

As of the end of 2006, over 80% of households have dvd players http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=12220 . Do you think the other 20 percent are choosing between a console or dvd player? 3.5 percent of households are below the poverty line http://www.soundvision.com/Info/poor/statistics.as p . So now we're around 85 percent; factor in old people and I'm sure we're just left with luddites and the margin of error.

What are they going on about?

According to a knowledge base article (#936824) posted yesterday on Microsoft's Help and Support Web site, Vista's Eject command doesn't work with properly with a connected iPod and can cause data corruption (see Techmeme discussion):

That FA sucks. Try here:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=306

"JavaFX will be open sourced under the same GPLv2 license used by Java SE (standard edition) and Java ME (mobile edition)."

Not to mention JavaFX. It is even to convert Flash files to it.

Why did you ask a question for which you provided the answer? Sure there were plenty of alternatives to Hotmail, but none of those alternatives was really an option for the average user wanting an email address. The pressure grew when other viable options grew, but until gmail, Hotmail continued to lead the pack. And as noted by a previous commenter, Hotmail and Yahoo mail still lead the pack.

Check out the bar graph at ZDNET. Yahoo and Hotmail are virtually tied with Gmail significantly behind.

At least, I don't know if I've ever heard anyone seriously using it. Most of the times I've heard it mentioned was people making fun of others for using the term.

Microsoft tried to get on this bus with their Windows Live Mail but they had to roll back to Web 1.0 because of the design flaws inherent in the way this whole "Web 2.0" paradigm is supposed to work. The idea is basically this- you get rid of the desktop application, and use a browser to implement functionality. That involves downloading lots of JavaScript code. People on dialup accounts simply did not have enough bandwidth to download a JavaScript version of Outlook into their browser on an HTTP request. This DHTML/CSS/JavaScript crap they set up in the 90s is really creaking under the load of the infrastructure being built on top of it with these Web 2.0 applications. I wonder how long it will be before something like Flash totally takes over everything.

It's a freaking myspace page. Of his 160,000 "friends," how many are over 18? Perhaps 25%? Of those 40,000, how many are registered? Even a quarter of those? I doubt it. Maybe an eighth. So of those 5,000, how many actually care enough to vote? Probably half.

It's a freaking myspace page. Of his 160,000 "friends," how many are over 18? Perhaps 25%? Of those 40,000, how many are registered? Even a quarter of those? I doubt it. Maybe an eighth. So of those 5,000, how many actually care enough to vote? Probably half.

Woah there cowboy. Word on the street is that ITMS now makes money.

Your facts are wrong.

Funding:

http://www.debates.org/pages/natspons.html
http://www.fec.gov/info/checkoff.htm#anchor1394115

Broadcast rights:

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6179153.html

Bill's up to his usual tricks.

The "United States of America", not the Federal Assemblage of America. I agree, it goes all the way back to the Articles of Confederation. There were points after that and between the Civil War that would be worth learning more about as well. Such as the formation of our Navy, the War of 1812, and I'm sure many others that we never really learn about in school. There are also later things, such as the current practice of with holding federal moneys when a state fails to enact a recommendation of the federal government. (Such as Main resisting the new 'Real ID Act') If anyone reading this knows of books or websites that detail the erosion of state's rights in the USA please reply.

from all those cash infusions* from microsoft, Baystar, and Royal Bank of Canada.
I expect the 60 million got invested into the pump-n-dump also, so there should be
plenty to stick in MySQL's G-string.

[*]
http://uk.builder.com/0,39026540,39338281,00.htm
http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/news/article_ 948.html
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/19/105522 3
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5057033.html

Employment is still low

Oh yeah, and we're still entrenched in a losing battle with terrorism.

AMD's HyperTransport: Souping up chip speed from the inside
By John Spooner, ZDNet News
Published on ZDNet News: February 14, 2001, 4:00 PM PT

"A chipset that both AMD and Intel could use," artificially limits what I think the reason for opening their FSB is. As has been said elsewhere, AMD opened HyperTransport (royalty-free) in 2001 and has gotten interest from companies like Cisco, Sun, etc. Having other people use your stuff with a zero entry cost is definitely good. You collaborate with them on the technology when they have implementation problems (goodwill is good for Bus2Bus) and they're also going to have more reason to choose your other chipsets and processors which use that same bus. See: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-528221.html

I don't think AMD would ever move to not having their own FSB. It's too ripe for abuse. I think they're doing this in response to AMD opening HyperTransport royalty-free and getting interest from companies like Cisco, who have an interest in high-power buses. That was in 2001. I've got a hunch that Intel is itching for some of that action. If you get someone else using your transport, you're more likely to (A) sell them processors and other patented technology (chipsets) and to (B) have a collaboration with these partners about the technology and implementation which would benefit both AMD and their partner. AMD was quite smart with that move, and I suspect it had a lot to do with Intel's recent announcement.

AMD opened their HyperTransport bus, royalty free, in 2001. They've signed people like Sun and Cisco, who have a big interest in moving a lot of data on buses. And if you get people using your bus, you can easily talk them into using your processors in their embedded devices.

That was a while ago, but I suspect it's coming to fruition or perhaps gaining more traction, if only now Intel is saying "me too."

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-528221.html

This isn't the first time socket sharing has occured

IIRC, the socket-7 issue was not that Intel *wanted* others to use the technology, but rather that their license agreements with various other manufacturers allowed the rest of the industry to use it.

The only reason that Intel is opening up their FSB this time around is because they will be forced to use HyperTransport if they *don't* open it up (a royalty-free deal, to boot).

Their already using AMD64 and with AMD's new processors showing promise, Intel are really scratching and clawing here. I don't have the knowledge to pick a bus based on merit but, from what I've read, Hypertransport is better. Can anyone with experience here chime in?

Do we want Hypertransport or Intel's bus? What about licensing?

And, how would that be pronounced in Russian? Where Vista infects you.. er, I mean where you infect Vista.. er..
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=422

Actually, they are obligated to act in the interests of the shareholders. Larry, Sergey, and Eric own a controlling interest, giving them broad leeway in deciding what the interests of the shareholders are( http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6071494.html ). Given that the share structure was public knowledge at the time of the ipo, no one can claim that they bought shares that are now not being properly represented or whatever.

As explained in this more detailed article about the issue, is that someone could harrass someone else by transmitting illegal material from an open WAP. It certainly has happened before. It's a lot harder to get away with a phony trail of blood leading to someone's door.

Sounds exactly like the CueCat.

Which, of course, sucked. One article about it from several years ago said something like:

"It fails to solve a problem that doesn't exist."

(I said honest efforts. That guy who claimed the AirPort hack is still a raging tool.)

No he wasn't. He was the subject of a major Apple lead smear campaign which misrepresented his claims. The bug he found was actually fixed by Apple a few months later, but the usual bunch of apologists, even at the time Apple was fixing the bug, went out of their way to lie about what both Apple and the bug finders had done.

This basically explains what happened. Anyone who reads it and continues to claim anything from "the Airport hack didn't exist" to "Maynor and Ellch faked the demo" is, frankly,to use your language, a raging tool.

I don't really know how many data centres RIM has. Two doesn't really sound right to me, but that's what has been frequently quoted in the media lately. Maybe people, including myself, are mixing up data centres and NOCs in the RIM world.

E.g. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-6177829.html