Slashback: Norwegian, Nader, Handheld

Slashback below with a handful of updates on Walmart's OS-free PCs, another X-Scale PDA, Ralph Nader's plan to slip the Big Government carpet from beneath Microsoft, and how you can help save Norwegian history. Film88 gets slapped down by the copyright barons, but 802.11b gets a reprieve. Read on for the details.

Putting it all online. "As earlier reported on Slashdot, poor Ottar Grepstad has difficulties getting into his database. Now they're available for download! This is one geeky challenge you don't want to miss. :-) You'll find the story here (click on 'the password mystery'). 'use Xbase;', anyone? :-)"

The loyal opposition. Helmholtz Coil writes "Yahoo! is carrying a rebuttal to the letter James Love and Ralph Nader wrote to the OMB, from the fine folks at ZDNet. Some interesting points, very interesting tone to the whole piece. The question is, though-when can we expect a rebuttal to the rebuttal?"

They need a Free OS focus group :) Gecko writes "Remember the PCs without a pre-installed operating system, selling at Wal-Mart's? OSNews got their hands on one of these and they test Windows, Linux and BeOS. Apparently, the company behind these products had immediately replaced the on-board winmodem with a hardware PCI one, in order to be compatible with Linux, but their new AthlonXP/Duron PC models now come with a newer S3 Savage4 DDR integrated graphics card that is not supported by XFree86. One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale."

A new meaning for Pocket Rocket. Hot on the heels of XScale introductions and announcements from Toshiba and Fujitsu, Brian writes "Acer, Inc. today announces the Acer n20 series, eight months after announcing support for the Microsoft Pocket PC 2002 platform, the announcement also made Acer one of the few manufacturers to support both the Palm and Pocket PC platform. PDA LIVE.com again has the scoop and the photos :)"

I hope the pace picks up on the introduction of machines based on Intel's XScale processor.

Dog Star. DHR writes "An update to an earlier story shows that Sirius the satellite radio provider has finally come to their senses and withdrawn their petition to restrict the 2.4GHz band."

Intermission. bubblegoose writes "Yahoo has a story about Film88 being taken down by the MPA. They say it's because the servers were in the Netherlands, I think it more likely due to a good /.'ing."

Comments

First Pacman Post

[Anonymous Coward]

The anatomy of Pac-Man is very simple if one does not consider how Pac-Man moves, sees, hears, melts, etc.. The primary function of Pac-Man is, of course, eating.

Body - Pac-Man is exoskeletal. The "skin" is actually a thick yellow shell, which in addition to offering protection to predators, allows Pac-Man to hide unseen in a box of jawbreakers or Nuprin.
Mouth - This is Pac-Man's only visible external organ (unlike some of his clones and successors, who had the luxury of eyes.) Some believe that the opening and closing of the mouth, in addition to allowing Pac-Man to eat everything around him, also propels him forward.
Brain - Pac-Man's tiny brain helps him distinguish dots from ghost monsters, keeps his mouth moving, and does very little else.
Jaw Muscles - Pac-Man's only muscles are located in his impressive jaws. They are strong enough to move rapidly for long periods of time without any noticeable fatigue, and allow Pac-Man to injest blue monsters that are the same size as he is!
Appendix - Pac-Man's appendix doesn't do anything, but hasn't caused him any problems yet.
Stomach - This is Pac-Man's largest organ, taking up nearly 90% of his body, and is basically a storage space for dots, fruit, ghost monster flesh, keys, etc. until it can be digested. Pac-Man's digestive system, amazingly enough, actually utilizes EVERYTHING he eats. No waste is generated.

Re:First Pacman Post

[Anonymous Coward]

Pac-Man's digestive system, amazingly enough, actually utilizes EVERYTHING he eats. No waste is generated.

NO SHIT!

Re:First Pacman Post

[splunge2]

If we could harness thousands of them
and send them to Mars, we could free
the volumous expanses of ice beneath
the surface...

Re:First Pacman Post

[Anonymous Coward]

How does he turn?

Re:First Pacman Post

[Anonymous Coward]

that's the first off-topic post that is worth modding up, just a bit - it's just funny.

Re:First Pacman Post

[foodb4nk]

He truely has a cast IRON stomach, and one hell of a liver too to pop that many pills. mmmm perks and darvs and cyclobenziones..

Re:First Pacman Post

[Morphine007]

Pac-Man's digestive system, amazingly enough, actually utilizes EVERYTHING he eats. No waste is generated.

NO SHIT!

hehheheheeh if only I had mod points...

Re:First Pacman Post

[cetan]

No waste is generated.

This is completely wrong. The waste generated, aside from the pheromones it produces to attract the ghosts is, course, the ghosts' eyes, which we all know are completely indigestible.

Re:First Pacman Post

[tenman]

He uses little itty bitty machines as talked about Here

Re:First Pacman Post

[Zzorbo]

A 2D Creature couldn't have a digestive system. It would fall apart.

Re:First Pacman Post

[Alsee]

A 2D Creature couldn't have a digestive system. It would fall apart.

You need to re-evaluate your assumptions.

Your statement is only true if they have one like ours, the mouth-digestivetract-anus would cut the creature in half. What's the alternative? Use one opening as both the mouth and the anus. Swallow, digest, expell. It gives new meaning to the phrase "Speaking out of your asshole". :)

-

Re:First Pacman Post

[djcinsb]

Actually, since Pacman generates no waste, there is no need for an anus; hence no problem.

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

your not so smart

The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

> Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950.

"From the Earth to the Moon", Jules Verne, 1865
"Around the Moon", Jules Verne, 1869

...not to mention all the mentions of the moon in your fucking bible!

Now go crawl back into your fucking fundaMENTAList conspiracy theory troll hole!

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[bakes]

and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you

Are you sure they wouldn't keep it in Norway?

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[MaxVlast]

Do you have a first edition of either of those books? Do you have any evidence that the publication dates weren't backdated to suck in unsuspecting LIBERALS like you? Eh? Yea. I thought not.

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[anotherone]

I simply refuse to put up with limp, Satanic, fellow-travelling shit like this piece of sub-human garbage in your pewling, idiotic post:

"Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) "

Let's count the errors, shall we?

1. The Earth does not "rotate". If it did, we would all be blown around ten ways to Tuesday by the winds created.
2. If the Earth did rotate, then one would expect to see tornadoes in the area at the centre of rotation. This would imply that Kansas is the centre of the Earth, a thought pleasing to my personal sympathies, but contradicted by scripture. There has never been a tornado in Jerusalem
3. Joshua asked Our Lord to stop the Sun, you ignorant asshole, not the Earth. What possible good would it have done to stop the Earth from moving?
4. Your blasphemous statement that the Moon "reflects" light from the Sun directly contradicts Genesis 3:16, in which it is made perfectly clear that "he created the moon, that the slimy crawling things by night might see". Which part of "he created", don't you understand? Your pathetic advocacy of the fraudulent theory (and it IS a THEORY, not some bourgeois, East-Coast elitist idea of a "fact") is sickening

Your evil whinings are, quite frankly, tantamount to liberalism.

Yeah, I didn't write this, but you didn't write that.

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[orblee]

You crazy americans scare me ;-)

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[rjwilson01]

Surely the idea that we could know where "it" is is suspect.
Any indication of where it is, is obviously a red-herring planted by "them".

(Unless you can independantly verify the information yourself)

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[Lord_Byron]

...Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!

Daddy's roommate is God Almighty? Wow! And I thought my SO was cool!

Re:The Moon: A Liberal Myth

[Anonymous Coward]

You crazy americans scare me ;-) Don't be scared, America does not exist! Just because some people claim it does, it may not be so.

target of OSless PC

[Hollins]

One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale.

I don't think Linux users are the target buyer for these PCs. I suspect most of them are being sold to:

1. Folks with a PII/300 who want to upgrade and are planning on installing their OEM Win98SE
2. People who intend to install a pirated windows, most likely a copy from the office or a buddy

Both of these categories are in violation of MS EULA, but I would guess 80% of the machines end up with Windows on them. Most people who install an OEM copy of Windows will have no idea that they're breaking the law, which I believe is a large part of the reason click-wrap licensing gets away with so much.

I'm curious, how prominently are these PCs advertised as not having an OS? Is Wal-Mart getting many returns because nothing happened when the machine was turned on?

Re:target of OSless PC

[Qrlx]

Both of these categories are in violation of MS EULA

We really need a court or two to weigh in on this issue of reinstalling the OEM OS on a new PC. I can see how Microsoft wants to protect their revenue stream by selling you a new OS when you buy a new PC, but I'm not sure if that's solid enough legal ground to stand on.

What, aside from Microsoft's assertion, makes the OS and the PC inseperable? If this is legally possible, why don't we see it all the time? For example, it's well-known that a car that costs $15,000 has got $30,000 worth of parts in it. Yet the auto manufacturers make no claim that you can't take the fuel filter from your old Honda and put it in your new Honda, or sell it on the street, or make a funny hat out of it.

Additionally, what is meant by the term "computer?" Is it the CPU, or the HD, or the RAM, or the MB, or what? If you upgrade all those items, one at a time, are you then required to buy a new OS because it's essentially a new computer now?

I (and many others) don't think Microsoft's assertion that an OEM OS is only valid on the computer it was sold with is legally viable. But until a court addresses the issue, we'll just have to take their word for it. Or not, like the people buying OS-less PCs at WalMart. I'd love to see their faces when the U.S. Marshalls break down the door.

Maybe a highly ethical Wal-Mart employee out there will feel compelled to provide the BSA with the names and addresses (via credit card receipts) of all those who've purchased OS-less PCs, thereby ensuring that our economy doesn't lose untold more millions due to software piracy.

Re:target of OSless PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people who install an OEM copy of Windows will have no idea that they're breaking the law

And you and I have no idea that they're breaking the law, either. Unless someone has evidence that you agreed to the EULA, then the EULA is irrelevant. You bought the software, you installed it, and no laws were broken.

Re:target of OSless PC

[Erasmus Darwin]

"Both of these categories are in violation of MS EULA"

There's a third category of people installing retail copies of Windows that've been removed from the previous machine. That's 100% legitimate, as far as I know.

The question is whether or not there are many people like that out there. Retail boxes of Windows tend to get decent placement in computer stores, so theoretically there are people buying them. Also, for a novice user (which I suspect includes a lot of the Walmart PC customers), it's generally easier to buy a new PC rather than upgrade pieces. So it's not unreasonable for there to be a number of legitimate purchases of the system for Windows use.

Re:target of OSless PC

[superpeach]

I agree that most people will probably just go and install their downloaded/friends version of windows, but I dont dont that is what is being pondered over here. The thing is, why bother to replace the winmodem with a slightly more expensive hardware modem so that it is compatible with Linux (read 'non-windows OSs') and then just go and stick in a graphics card which will probably work, but not properly supported?

Re:target of OSless PC

[jerryasher]

For example, it's well-known that a car that costs $15,000 has got $30,000 worth of parts in it.

Huh? How can that be? Can you cite some sources? I have to assume a $15,000 car has less than $15,000 worth of labor, parts, and marketing costs in it.

Re:target of OSless PC

[Cody Hatch]

Only if your an auto company. :-) What he means is, if you want to build a $15,000 car, you'd have to buy $30,000 worth of parts, and that's not even counting labor.

Similarly, a computer with an OS costs less than a computer and an OS (each sold seperatly), not even counting the labor required to install it.

Now, some companies think they have some "rights" to a package of parts they sell you, and have some say over what you can do with it, above and beyond any laws that might govern your use of it. With a car, you can do anything you like with the car OR the parts, as long as you don't break laws. But some computer companies are attemting to restrict what you can do with the bundled parts they give you, even when you aren't breaking any laws: i.e. installing an old OS on a new computer.

Common sense says this ain't going to fly. Unfortunatly, it may take a while before that becomes the case.

Re:target of OSless PC

[leongalt]

He means if you part it out. If you take all the parts off a new car and sell them, you should recover considerably more than you paid for it. The difficulty and reason more people don't try to do this for a living, is that you'd have to sell nearly every part of the car. It would be easy to sell the first 25% of the parts, but it would get progressively harder to finish it up. Not worth the effort for most people. The reason the parted out car is worth more in parts is due to the mark-up on replacement parts. The car company has quantities of scale working for them, after-market replacements do not enjoy that benefit. Hence, a replacment bumper might cost $300 to replace, when it only cost the factory $100 to make the original.

Re:target of OSless PC

[BeBoxer]

The spare parts cost more. If you take your car apart, and sold the parts, they would be worth more than the car. People don't do this because it's too labor intensive, and most folks don't like used parts all that much. So to turn it around, if you bought all the spare parts you would need to build a car, it would cost more for the part alone than the whole car.

Which is just like with a PC and Windows. The PC and Windows are worth more apart than together, due to the steep discounts on OEM versions of Windows. But auto manufacturers can't stop you from parting out your car. Why is M$ allowed to stop you from parting out your PC? I should be able to buy a Dell, put Linux on it, and sell the new copy of WinXP for whatever I can get. Just like I can buy a new Ford, put in an Alpine stereo, and sell the OEM stereo.

Re:target of OSless PC

[daniel_isaacs]

Huh? How can that be? Can you cite some sources? I have to assume a $15,000 car has less than $15,000 worth of labor, parts, and marketing costs in it.

I think this compares the wholesale costs of the manufacturer to the retail cost of the replacement parts. If you go to you local service dept. with a list of all the parts in your car, the cost would be far more than you paid for the car. Just b/c I had to pay $310 this week to replace my alternator, doesn't mean that part costs GM even half as much to make.

Re:target of OSless PC

[Anonymous Coward]

sorry I'd love to help recover all the lost money but the os-less pc's are only sold at the wal mart online store

Re:target of OSless PC

[gmhowell]

The car is a physical product that you purchased. The OS is a 'license to use'.

Re:target of OSless PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet the auto manufacturers make no claim that you can't take the fuel filter from your old Honda and put it in your new Honda, or sell it on the street, or make a funny hat out of it.

Actually, the "air" filter would make a funny hat ... the fuel filter might make a funny button on your new hat or something though.

Re:target of OSless PC

[ncc74656]

Just b/c I had to pay $310 this week to replace my alternator, doesn't mean that part costs GM even half as much to make.

Was it gold-plated or something? The last time I replaced an alternator, it couldn't have cost more than $40...it was probably a little less than that.

Re:target of OSless PC

[jerryasher]

Thanks all for the replies. I get it now -- ebay. Technically I gather the car is worth $30,000 retail minus the opportunity costs of your time in parting it out. But gosh, it sure is nice to operate in a world where your rights are respected.

I keep waiting for all the "true" libertarians and "true" conservatives to come out on the side of individual rights -- my mistake I guess.

Re:target of OSless PC

[H310iSe]

um, just buy a $25 pci video card and stop complaining. It's a great deal, and they're trying to work w/ the linux community; think about showing support rather than saying how fucked up they are. I mean, really...

Re:target of OSless PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people who install an OEM copy of Windows will have no idea that they're breaking the law

They are not braking the law, they are breaking the eula!

Re:target of OSless PC

[Gordonjcp]

Actually, if you buy the bits from a dismantled car, they will be cheaper. If you buy them from the factory dealer, they will probably total up to twice the value of the car.

I only ever buy safety-critical components new (brake parts, for example). Even at that, I try to buy them from third party sources (a set of Citroen brake pads in a box with a Lockheed sticker on them costs about #20, a box with a Citroen sticker costs about #60). Comparing a hydraulic pump for the suspension - #450 new (not including fitting - apparently 6 hours work), #25 from a scrapyard (fitted myself in about 30 minutes).

Re:target of OSless PC

[Jim Hall]

Additionally, what is meant by the term "computer?" Is it the CPU, or the HD, or the RAM, or the MB, or what? If you upgrade all those items, one at a time, are you then required to buy a new OS because it's essentially a new computer now?

My brother was put in the same position after upgrading his motherboard (keeping his hdd, floppy, cdrom, case, monitor) with a faster model to run Linux, and shipping me his old p-200 mb. I put the p-200 board in a new case with some spare parts I had, and it runs as a nice Linux-based backup server in my house for my two other Linux boxen (make tar file backup, scp the tar file to the backup server.)

When my brother again upgraded his computer (bought a new one), he decided to sell the other one. What to do with the OEM Win95 cdrom? Microsoft says this is tied to the original computer ... does that mean the motherboard (I have) or the computer case (he has)?

In the end, we decided that the license was probably tied to the motherboard that I have, and I authorized him to destroy the license and media since I didn't need it.

But the issue of how to tie an OS license to a computer will come up again and again. With systems shipped from OEMs that have the little license sticker on the case, this may be interpreted differently (he who has the license sticker holds the right-to-use on the license?)

Re:target of OSless PC

[GodInHell]

Or.. perhaps rather than blaming the PC manufacturer, for doing what PC manufacturers do (including the newest and greatest in PC hardware), blame the Video Card company for not releasing with Linux drivers. Isn't it about time that these folks woke up and smelled the coffee? (Oh sweet juice of Caffine, how we've missed you.)

Seriously, we have to recognize as a community that attacking folks who have shown an interest in helping us is worthless, polite but pointed discussion works much better. Why don't PC manufacturers sell blank and/or OEM linuxed boxes? Because they lose their margin. The highest profits come from NEW hardware, in the first month or two after it arives on the market, we can't expect them to be happy setting aside thier bussiness models to support an OS and a community that they suffer risks to support at all.

Leave the PC OEM folk alone, Kill the Hardware manufacturers that choose to continue to ignore Linux.. why.. because they know that with Linux, eventually, someone else will do the work.

Damn Leaches.

-GiH

Re:target of OSless PC

[daniel_isaacs]

It was for a 1999 Pontiac Grand Am with the 3.4L V6. I called around to 7 different places. The best price was 275 for a rebuilt one.

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

your not so smart

Ha! You incorrectly used "your" when you meant to use "You're". Go back to seventh grade english class!

Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[frovingslosh]

The winmodem issue was bad enough, but if there isn't Linux support for the video chipset that's awful! But it all brings up the question, why sell an OS free system rather than just including a free OS (Linux) on the drive? Certainly geeks who want a different flavor of Linux would have no problems with this. You might have to include a simple utility to kill the Linux partition for appliance users who will be instaling a flavor of Windows, but with Linux on the system already, maybe a few of them might decide it was less painful learing a stable system than installing Microsoft.

And Linux on the drive would certainly help address the issue of support for the shipped hardware!

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[Razzak]

Maybe you already bought a copy of windows (or were given one) and don't want to have to pay for it again?

It's funny, MS makes everyone sell comp's with MS tax, and now everyone's whining when Walmart is selling PC's without Windows installed.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[JordanH]

Good point! Why does MS sell full versions of their OPerating Systems and then complain about people who buy no-OS computers? It's a contradiction.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[bcrowell]

I had a similar issue with the BTC computer I'm posting on now. It actually came with Linux preinstalled, and a Winmodem! They apparently had a driver that worked, but the Linux they supplied was a very trimmed down, information appliance thing. Anyway, it was no big deal to install Mandrake, then buy an external modem for $30 on e-Bay.

I hope nobody has any illusions about what's really happening here. Linux's share of the desktop is 0.5%, and Windows' is 95%. I suspect the figures are about the same for people who buy no-OS computers. It was painfully obvious from the documentation that came with my BTC box that they expected most users to erase the mini-Linux and replace it with Windows.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[Afrosheen]

Linux's share of the desktop is 0.5%, and Windows' is 95%

And for my next trick, I'll pull more statistics AND a rabbit out of your ass. :p

Oh, and .5% of the desktop is probably 65% more than MacOS has. Then again we're talking Intel hardware aren't we...

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[whitegold]

Errr...

Your maths are iffy. Mac has about 4.5%-5.5% of the overall desktop market. Which (as far as I can work it out!) is more than 65% of 0.5%.

But anyway... in this case it really is only "PC" hardware that's an issue.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[Afrosheen]

It was a joke and I was clowning bullshit statistics. Sorry you didn't get it. Scott Adams might have.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[kesuki]

The winmodem issue was Worse than this. the latest OS-less PCs have a chipset that isn't 'auto detected' by XSetup, yet clearly does work, (for 2-d) if you pick the right driver manually. I have no quible with them using newer GPUs on the mobo, even if it causes hicups with Xfree. anyone actually installing linux on this has read a few sites, and will turn to those to figure it out.
Microsoft has always tried to make the OEM versions of windows only run on the hardware the specific vendor supplied. They know that when the OS can be sold as a seperate component they'll loose aftermarket value. People will buy new PCs, then sell the legit copy to someone else, and maybe not delete the copy on the Pc they bought. And if they ever had problems with the system they'd call techsupport and demand a new CD because they 'lost' the old one. And remember, while reselling software you've installed is immoral, and illegal, it isn't a Criminal offense until you've traded $5,000 worth in goods over a 9 month period of time. That means they can't get any help from the government tracking you down. This is why they've got 1-800 anti piracy numbers, because anonymous tipsters is the only way they can go after 'every' software pirate. They then have to drag you through civil court without any means of gathering evedince against you, because as I've said, you haven't commited a criminal offence. Should they manage to come after you due to an anonymous tipster, and they 'lie' to the poliece to get warrents to search your house and computer, then you can take them to court in a counter suit, because they illegially inlisted the aid of the police to harrass you. you can even sue the police for wrongful search and seizure.
Without evidence they just can't win in civil court, and without partcipiting in a criminal act, the police can't help them obtain the evidence they need to sue you. So one the cat is out of the bag there is nothing in the world microsoft can do to stop people from buying a Dell PC and then reslling that OEM windows copy, as a 'mail-in rebate' kinda deal. while still using it. Obviously you should be able to resell used copies of windows, afterall I've converted many PCs to linux or FreeBSD. But once you make it legal to do that everyone who lacks an ounce of scruples will be selling the oem copy of windows on e-bay. That would make the oem copy worth about $3, and kill the market for $399 'retail box full version' $199 'upgrade' version market... because the OEM version Is a full version.
I guess I've gotten sidetracked enough for now. Micrsoft would loose some profitability if it became legal to resell OEM copies, and more OEMs would support linux if the licensing issues were finally resolved in a sane matter.
EULAs are really the bane of the modern era, they've gone from being disclaimers of no warrenty (the original intent) to becoming a binding contractual agreement between the end user and the software company. Since that was not the spirit of the law the supreme court needs to come down hard on the EULA and make them completly non-binding, and that breaking them simply ends your relationship with the software company. EG: you break the EULA and they don't have to provide tech support. that's it... it's meant to be a non-binding agreement in the first place.

Re:Why OS free rather than free OS computers?

[Anonymous Coward]

so people can copy windows from their other/previous pc to it.

You know grey piracy. (Why do they call it piracy anyway, do the warez kiddies rape and murder?? It's a mystery to me perhaps they have parrots, I'll probably never know)

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

your not so smart

OMB

[pyrrho]

The ZDnet article doesn't take into account that the OBM should decide what's in their best interest to demand, and demand it. Nader quoted sensible reasons besides "do what the DOJ is failing to do", such as security monocultures, and espc. the long term viability of public information stored in proprietary formats.

Savage unsupported?

[dadragon]

It seems that the Savage4 is supported. Is the Savage4 DDR not or something?

How long would it take XFree86 to add it?

Re:Savage unsupported?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello??? Read the article. The answer is there on all of your questions!

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

your not so smart

and don't call me ralphie.

Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[borgquite]

Hurdle number one in Database Password Retrieval:

The file you download is a zip file containing 3 floppy disk sized images. The file format? Microsoft Backup 1.0, which made it's debut way back in the MS-DOS 6 / Win 3.1 days.

Time to dig out the old disks, guys :)

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

I thought MS backup just split the files without compression. Surely you just copy /b them together.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

Anyway, they're not MS backup. The header on each file is NORTON Ver 2A.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[scotti]

I'm not sure but I belive that Microsoft licenced Norton Backup.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

My mistake, they were all made by Norton back then...

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

Indeed. You can download msback.exe from this page

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[borgquite]

The files are actually password protected in the Microsoft Backup format! Any ideas?

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[spludge]

Definitely some sort of microsoft backup format...

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=.ful+file&hl=e n& lr=&safe=off&selm=37934F48.66DFCC7%40homemail.com& rnum=2

The name of the file cc******.001 tells you the date that the backup was made on. I think that Norton 2A shows up in the header because Norton at one point made the microsoft backup software.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

The password is "ladepujd", but the msback.exe I linked to in another post says the version is wrong for a restore. It does do a catelogue though.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

Here's the error I'm getting;

Critical Error

Backup cannot read this backup set because it was created with the MS-DOS 6.0 or 6.2 version of Backup.

For more information, see the Backup section of the README.TXT file (located inhe directory that contains your MS-DOS files and on -DOS 6.22 setup Disk 1).

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

Hmm,

MS-DOS 6.22 Backup for MS-DOS (MSBACKUP.EXE) can restore earlier compressed backups only if one of the following conditions is true:

• DoubleSpace is installed (DBLSPACE.BIN is loaded in memory).
• The files DBLSPACE.BIN and DRVSPACE.MR1 are available. For more information on DRVSPACE.MR1, see section 7.28.

Both MSBACKUP.EXE and MWBACKUP.EXE can successfully restore MS-DOS version 6, 6.2 and 6.21 backups made without backup data compression If you unchecked the Compress Backup Data box in the Backup Options dialog before you backed up, you should have no problems restoring your data using the MS-DOS version 6.22 Backup programs.

The .bin is easy, but the MR1 could be tricky. Also, I bet I'll have problems with Win9x's Drivespace 3 v's the older versions DOS used.

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[jmarpet]

Slashdot RULES!!!

LEt's hear it for the Geeks!!

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[outlier]

The password is "ladepujd"

which is Reidar Djupedal (the guy who owned the collection)'s last name spelled backward.

Not quite "password" but not a particularly secure pw...

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[AVee]

Just curious, did you test, crack or guess? It is atleast not the most secure password i've ever seen ;-)

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Kris_J]

I downloaded a demo MSbackup cracker that gave me the first letter, then I found the word in the file, but reversed. I shouldn't have needed to look in the file, once I knew the first letter I really should have noticed it was the last letter of the guys last name and put 2 and 2 together...

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because all 3 disks are the same size I would expect it to be more than 3 disks (and that the zip-file does NOT contain a full backup)

Re:Database files in Microsoft Backup format?

[Mignon]

The password is "ladepujd"

I thought the password was "SwedishHistoriansAreWeenies" spelled backwords.

The "rebuttal" to Nader...

[alouts]

...was not total disagreement, and could hardly be called "the opposition". They were arguing only with half of what Nader was saying, but agreeing with the overall thrust of his actions.

Basically, they agree that the OMB could, and should, weild their budget power to ensure security is maximized and to lower prices, increase interoperability, etc. But where they differ from Nader, and the only real disagreement is whether there should be any mandate on forcing Microsoft to release source, sell source, etc. They're arguing that the OMB should absolutely try to sway Microsoft's behavior, but that it should do so only through well-reasoned business cases, not through pseudo-enforcement of anti-trust violations.

Re:The "rebuttal" to Nader...

[Malcontent]

"But where they differ from Nader, and the only real disagreement is whether there should be any mandate on forcing Microsoft to release source, sell source, etc. "

If this is what they were arguing against they were beating a straw man. Nader did not call for that. ALthough his letter was primarily about MS that particular section of his letter dealt with "office software" in general terms. He was suggesting that the govt might be able to buy the source of some "office software" cheaper then buying MS licenses year after year. Personally I think that makes a lot of sense. If let's say open office isn't good enough could the govt buy the source code for wordperfect office or smartsuite for less then what it costs to equip the entire govt with MS office? I bet it would. As a bonus the source code would become public domain. An all around good deal for everybody.

Re:The "rebuttal" to Nader...

[julesh]

Indeed. Where Nader's letter suggested the government should "buy the rights to an office productivity suite", the article *assumes* that this means MS Office, and states that it would be ridiculous because MS wouldn't sell the rights to Office for any reasonable sum of money.

D'Oh!

walmart pc's

[rapidweather]

Good for them, replacing the win modem with a hardware modem. Not only can you get on the internet with linux, if you have a dos partition, you can use Arachne 1.70 to quickly get on the web, and send and receive e-mail. You don't need windows at all, MS-DOS 6.21 will do fine, in as little as 30 MB for a dos partition for Arachne. I'm sure it won't be long before a linux distro comes out that will support that graphics card. On that subject, I wonder if Arachne can support it, usually it can get almost any card to work, but I would be interested in finding out from someone who has purchased one of these machines. Low priced machines have a tough time if they have to come with XP, which would account for say 20% of the price... Walmart sells good graphics cards in their stores, I'm sure one of those would do until the one supplied is fully supported in mainstream linux distributions. Most folks that are going to add an OS will partition, and also will make some hardware changes to these machines.
btw, I am making this post using iCab 2.8 on a Macintosh Quadra 660av, with an Accura 14.4 modem. Made a new start page that will look good in these 68k mac browsers: MSIE 4.01, Netscape 4.05 and iCab 2.8:

• http://www.geocities.com/rapidweather/mac.html

Re:walmart pc's

[rapidweather]

btw, the cheapest one at Walmart is $400.00. (without monitor). I for one, would want to shop around at say, baber.com for a barebones machine, if I had $400.00 to spend. Also, they have some information about Windows (not included or installed) that will give some of you a laugh. Anything I get with a 40 gb hdd is going to get partitioned, and I'll have both Windows and Linux on it.
P.S. If, and this is a big IF, I ever got one of those new emacs, I'd partition that with Mandrake first thing.

Re:walmart pc's

[jafuser]

P.S. If, and this is a big IF, I ever got one of those new emacs, I'd partition that with Mandrake first thing.

Mandrake comes with emacs, not the other way around :)

walmarts linked?

[Anonymous Coward]

imagine a cluster of walmarts...

Re:walmarts linked?

[Rick the Red]

A cluster of Walmarts -- whould that be a WartMall?

Re:walmarts linked?

[netsharc]

imagine a cluster of walmart doing distributed cracking of the dbase file!

Re:walmarts linked?

[Anonymous Coward]

A cluster of Walmarts -- whould that be a WartMall?

actually, you are talking about darths slightly cheaper, but equally evil little brother

Re:walmarts linked?

[Anonymous Coward]

But remember that Wart grows up to be King Arthur...

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

your not so smart

Hmmm.....

[OrangeHairMan]

From the news site:
The association sent a letter in the last day to Netherlands-based ISP TrueServer, and the site went dark some time Thursday, European time, Litvack said. TrueServer and Film88 could not be immediately reached for comment. But according to a note on Film88, the site is down because of technical problems.

And then from Slashdot:
Live from Iran, Film88
Posted by michael on Wednesday June 05, @04:51PM

Coincidence? ;)
Orange

Re:Hmmm.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod this guy up +5 Correct.
The first post I've seen that properly used "Hmmm" instead of the phlegm excoriating "Hrm". Way to go, dude!

Maintenance

[captain_craptacular]

If they installed a Linux on the drive they'd get a boatload of people calling their tech support lines asking how to use it. I don't care how big and obvious the sticker that says "we don't support the OS, just the hardware" is, people will still call, and those calls cost money. If they ship it blank, they sidestep the whole issue.

Re:Maintenance

[frovingslosh]

That's certainly one possibility, but how many people make the same call when they take the computer home, turn it on, and it doesn't boot up?

At least a nice GUI could display a helpful message, and confirm that the box you bought works before you shell out as much as $299 for a MS OS (yes, I know there are less expensive ways to legitimately buy XP Pro but many customers apparently do not).

Seems like a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't. I still think the manufacturer should consider pre-installing Linux. While I would like to see it be a full blown OS with lots of extras (certainly a browser and a full office suite at a minimum), maybe the best thing to avoid the "How do I use this calls" could be to ship a stripped down version with no useful applications - the GUI could inform the user that the system clearly works but that they will need to install their own OS to actually do anything with the computer.

Re:Maintenance

[oever]

You don't need a linux install for just displaying a message. With grub or lilo, you could supply a nice bootscreen with a message, but without boot options.

They are selling it without a os because...

[chronos2266]

it drives down the final price of the computer. Most people go to walmart expecting lower prices than the competition. In order to maintain that image, walmart decided to drop the windows license out of the cost of the computer, effectively lowering the price for the same hardware. People see the better deal at walmart and don't think twice about how they are going to get windows on there, illegally.

Re:They are selling it without a os because...

[evilpaul13]

When you talk to System Builders, you'll find out that Windows is THE most expensive component that goes into an average computer. As a percentage, it has risen dramatically over recent years as margins on systems have dropped. Things like CPUs, Memory, Motherboards, HDDs, etc have dropped in price:performance greatly as well.

Windows on the otherhand, has increased in price. Now Microsoft is going a step further than increasing prices, and making the cost of using/owning a Windows-based PC perpetual with its subscription services its planning.

So what if someone is going to install her OEM Win98SE to a new Celeron from Walmart!

Nader

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the #1 thing protecting Microsoft's monopoly is the US courts enforcement of patent laws, copyright laws, and trademark laws in favor of Microsoft. Why not pass a bill through congress that excludes Microsoft from this protection, in effect making "pirating" MS software legal? Since it's already legal to make copies of open source, this would give Microsoft and open source an even playing field, wouldn't it?

Re:Nader

[captain_craptacular]

Yeah, thats a great precedent. Lets violate someones rights because we don't like them. I really don't think you want to allow politicians access to the slippery slope of deciding who gets what rights.

Re:Nader

[cpt kangarooski]

I hate to break it to you, but Congress is explicitly empowered by the Constitution to decide whether there shall be copyrights and patents, and the extent of them. They've been restricted solely to Americans in the past; if they really wanted, they probably could do this.

Re:Nader

[Zeinfeld]

I hate to break it to you, but Congress is explicitly empowered by the Constitution to decide whether there shall be copyrights and patents, and the extent of them.

The US has also instigated numerous international treaties that establish the concept of copyright independent of the US Constitution. Furthermore the US Constitution also prohibits the Congress from passing a bill of atainder which any bill to nationalize Microsoft Office would amount to.

If Microsoft was attacked as Nader suggests any action the US government took would be limited to its own territory. Microsoft already has close links with the UK government and if the US was stupid enough to pass the Nader bill much of Microsoft's R&D would be the other side of the Atlantic.

The Nader scheme is ridiculous for many reasons, not least being that none of the Democrats on the Hill will let him into their office these days. Since Nader helped Bush win the election the Dems are not going to do anything to further Nader's schemes. He probably shouldn't count on help from the GOP either since (1) he isn't paying them anything and (2) the GOP is about the protection of corporate interests.

I can't even see Sun and Oracle cheering this scheme on since it would set a precedent under which the government can appropriate software property it happens to want. Given Oracle's recent fleecing of the state of California Larry E. is not going to be supporting condign measures for errant software cos.

The idea that the federal government could buy the source to Office and put it into the public domain is somewhat whacky. One reason that the US govt uses so much Microsoft software is that Microsoft is one of the few suppliers who implement the non-standard standards the US govt. demands. Look at your copy of Outlook 2002 and ask yourself why the label based security is there for email messaging... thats right it was written to meet a federal requirement. Lotus Notes does not support that mechanism, nor does Eudora. The federal government needs that label based stuff because of FOIA (amongst others) but FOIA only applies to USG. There is a whole rack of PKI technology in Windows XP that was written for the sole purpose of meeting federal requirements.

The US govt does use its leverage to force Microsoft to do certain things that it wants. However the leverage is somewhat less than total and frequently applied in contradictory ways.

The real problem for Nader however is that compared to most software suppliers to the USGovt Microsoft has delivered magnificently. If you listened to the FBI testimony this afternoon you would know that the FBI centralized criminal database is next to useless. They can't search for 'Aviation Schools', they only have one word search. The mandatory access controls are primative in the extreeme. Technologically the system is in the early 50s, however you can be sure that some prime contractor got many $100 million to write the thing and make it good enough for government work.

The real rip offs for enterprise software are not in the commodity desktop packages such as Microsoft sells. It the software sold by the Oracles, EDSs, SAPs etc. of the world that is rotten value for money and that is expensive because it is all bespoke one off affairs which are typoically deployed in a small number of locations so the bugs are never really worked out etc.

Re:Nader

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Nader helped Bush win the election the Dems are not going to do anything to further Nader's schemes.

Not even Democrats are that stupid. The rare politician that dissociates themselves with an obvious appeal to populism and budgetary security in a time of $515 billion deficits does so at their peril.

I can't even see Sun and Oracle cheering this scheme on since it would set a precedent under which the government can appropriate software property it happens to want. Given Oracle's recent fleecing of the state of California Larry E. is not going to be supporting condign measures for errant software cos.

That would make sense but for the fact that the Californian and American people can plainly see that the Microsoft tax is fleecing everyone to the tune of more than half of the MS income statement. Do the math. Neither the GAO, the CBO, nor the Treasury can escape this simple fact, and the few people that can are probably running video games, not Windows.

The idea that the federal government could buy the source to Office and put it into the public domain is somewhat whacky.

If by 'whacky,' you mean, 'legally congruent with most software antitrust cases since the 1960s,' then I agree.

The real problem for Nader however is that compared to most software suppliers to the USGovt Microsoft has delivered magnificently

If by 'magnificently' you mean 'sieves that lock everyone into the same hard- and software monoculture,' then again I agree.

Re:Nader

[benhaha]

That would be a Bill of Attainder, which would be explicitly illegal under the US constitution.

Re:Nader

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is choosing the best overal solution for yourself a punishment for the person who loses your business?

Re:i am so smart

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

No, you're not. "MPA" is not a misspelling, it is the actual organizationame "Motion Picture Association". The site was NOT shut down by the "MPAA", or "Motion Picture Association OF AMERICA".

Sorry.

OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[GoatPigSheep]

From my experience, most of the people who shop for pc's at retail stores such as walmart are not very experienced with how they work. Generally the more experienced users either build their own system from scratch or get one custom made for them. Most people I know who buy pre-assembled pc's have no clue how to install WINDOWS, let alone linux. And most linux users know enough about pc's that they would not buy a pre assembled one from wal-mart.

I am not certain who they intend to market these pc's to, as the type of people who buy them generally would want windows anyway. There is no point in forcing these people to go through the windows install, no matter how easy it is. And I doubt they would make much business with linux users, as most would not buy a system from a retail store.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Sloppy]

I am not certain who they intend to market these pc's to, as the type of people who buy them generally would want windows anyway.

I don't know who they're marketed to either, but I think it's a weird conclusion to jump to, to think they might want Windows. Unless they take their office work home with them, they probably have no preference at all. Maybe it's Aunt Cleo, who just wants a machine to surf te web and email her nephew. Windows has no advantage for that sort of thing.

Here's my guess about the target market: it's anyone who is ignorant enough to buy it. Mark buys the machine from Walmart because w/out Microsoft tax it is cheaper than what Target is selling then takes it home and "it doesn't work." Now they need to buy get an OS, and Walmart's advantage evaporates. But Walmart already has the money.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Art Tatum]

I don't know who they're marketed to either, but I think it's a weird conclusion to jump to, to think they might want Windows. Unless they take their office work home with them, they probably have no preference at all. Maybe it's Aunt Cleo, who just wants a machine to surf te web and email her nephew. Windows has no advantage for that sort of thing.

So what would Aunt Cleo want, exactly? BeOS, NeXTSTEP, Mac OS (on a PC)?

You may be right about the Microsoft tax. Although, that doesn't knock *that* much off the price, does it?

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Aunt Cleo wants a computer that runs without crashing and one that doesn't need virus protection. You figure out what she wants.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Com2Kid]

You may be right about the Microsoft tax. Although, that doesn't knock *that* much off the price, does it?

Depends on the OEM; for a small time dealer (and IIRC whoever is providing these to Walmart are small time dealers, compared to Dell that is) a hundred at least.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Fiver-rah]

Most people I know who buy pre-assembled pc's have no clue how to install WINDOWS, let alone linux.

Be fair. My *mom* could install RedHat. And she's going to, because I'm sick of trying to troubleshoot her stupid Windows problems over the phone.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Com2Kid]

Any old joe with 5 or more licenses can call up microsoft.com sign up for an "eOpen" licensing program. Under that license you can get Windows XP Home for less than $130 a copy.



Consumer, not OEM,not reseller.

I know the Enterprise licensees get Windows XP for around $90 a copy. And that I think requires only 500 licenses.

Repeat.

After that you start negotiatining. A fairly decent sized OEM in my area gets Windows XP Home for $80 a seat.



Notice, under MS licensing policy OEMs have to sell Windows and ONLY Windows on home PCs, or else they pay an inflated price (or was it not get the license at all. . . hmm, just an inflated price IIRC)

Obviously an OEM that concentrates in barely 'alternative' markets like this one would not want to get stuck in a licensing deal with MS.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[kesuki]

Walmart is not best buy, though. Walmart has the fastest distrobution system of ANY retail chain, and they sell more goods per shelf unit than any other retail chain too. I would agree that given a choice I'd always build a PC myself. Still, there is a market for these PCs, or else walmart wouldn't be selling them.
The way I see it these PCs are really for 'second time buyers' people who learned from the last PC they owned, and have a copy of OEM windows lying around. If they recyle the old box, or sell it with the drive wiped of all data, they're entitled to use that OEM copy of windows on the 'upgrade' PC they bought. Still, since it violates the EULA, that means they (should) get no tech support from redmond.
I guess wal-mart just sees things the obvious way, you can sell without gasoline, as long as they know that they have to buy/bring thier own. but if you have an old car, that still has gas in it, legally you could siphon the gas into your new car. there isn't anything stopping you from doing that, after all. except of course the dealer charging double the going rate might frown on you bringing your own gas can, and insisting on being sold a car without being sold gasoline. Still, they can't legally force you to buy gasoline when you buy a car.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Art Tatum]

Aunt Cleo wants a computer that runs without crashing and one that doesn't need virus protection.

As much as I would like to think highly of Anut Cleo, I really don't think she gives a damn. She probably doesn't want a computer at all but the youngsters insisted on it.

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Sloppy]

A fairly decent sized OEM in my area gets Windows XP Home for $80 a seat.

If you sell in the 10's of thousands a year I'd bet you can get it for even less than that. Dell, by way of example, is getting Windows XP Home in the range of $40 a seat.

$40 to $80, then? Ok. Well, I think that if Aunt Cleo sees two computers priced that far apart and she doesn't know the reason for the price difference, she's going to buy the cheaper one.

Hey, $40 buys a lot of ... uh, what the hell does Aunt Cleo do with the rest of her time anyway? Oh well, $40 buys a lot of something. Romance novels, I guess. (And Sloppy's preconceptions and tendency to assign Aunt Cleo to a stereotypical group is revealed! Oops.) Um, $40 buys a lot of important, useful things for a Rennaissance Woman in today's challenging world. (There, that's better.)

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Art Tatum]

$40 to $80, then? Ok. Well, I think that if Aunt Cleo sees two computers priced that far apart and she doesn't know the reason for the price difference, she's going to buy the cheaper one.

Possibly. But only because she's a woman. A man would say that driving all the way back over to Wal-Mart wasn't *worth* 40 bucks and would just get the more expensive one. Then he'd go to McDonalds and get a couple of Big Macs to eat on the way home.

<patriotic voice>And *that* is what makes this country great, folks.</patriotic voice>

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Com2Kid]

The point was that cutting the MS "tax" out of the machine price usually doesn't save much, because the big players like Hp-Compaq and Dell pay very little for Windows.

No, they just charge you hand over fist for marketing, adverts, radio ads, magazine ads, product placements, promotional material, website, website designers, graphical designers, directors for TV commericals, the catering service for those TV commericals (by union rules, all commerical actors get catering on the set, at least in my state they do. ^_^ ), the makeup artist for the actors for the TV commericals;

the sound mixing guy for the TV commericals, the sound mixing guy for the radio commericals, the fee to put up the roadside billboards, the painter for the billboards, the design team for the billboards the marketing research study performed prior to designing the bill boards, the secretary to the manager in charge of the research study group that is formed prior to the design of the bilboard;

err, and lots lots more.

That is what you are paying for when you buy a major brand name PC.

Enjoy

Re:OS free pc's at walmart? For who?

[Sloppy]

I dont know many people, who when buying a $600-2000 piece of equipment will hestitate to spend another $40-80 for any reason.

We were discussing people who would buy a computer at Walmart.

Re:target of OSless PC - It is a trap

[Anonymous Coward]

Look out it is a trap!
MS is waiting for everybody to install their illegal copies of Windows and then they will pounce. Every machine periodically reports back to base, and when the time is right the Nitendo Police (on contract to MS) will send Ma and Pa kettle of to jail. Making the streets safe again for everybody.

re: Intermission.

[Knoxvill3]

What I find curious is that the article makes movie88.com and film88.com appear to be 2 completely different animals that host the same content, yet I thought that the owners of movie88.com moved to film88.com (as well as to a different country.)

Nader: right ends, wrong means

[Fastball]

Dan Farber is right. We deserve choices, but Nader's proposed increase of government regulation will not accomplish that. Don't get me wrong. Capitalism in its most efficient form depends on competition and consumer choices, and sometimes government regulation is needed to stop monopolies from squelching such competition. But dictating what can and cannot be purchased hardly works toward that end.

I would like to see someone with some clout put together a proposal on just how much $ can be saved with alternatives to Microsoft. Then go to the media with it. Everywhere. Make the case and illustrate just how much of our tax $ is being squandered on a company with already $40 billion plus in cash reserves.

Re:Nader: right ends, wrong means

[jhoger]

People who worry about "government regulation" are usually worried about regulations that directly affect private citizens or the private economy. Nader's argument go to the point of government regulating itself, by examining its own practices (or lack thereof) and deciding if the effect of those practices implies changes in their own requirements... security, cost, etc. with some introspection by the government would result in them choosing open source more often than they do now. Simple enlightened self interest.
I did get the thrust of Nader's argument that this should also be done to reign in Microsoft. That was probably a mistake on his part... OMB doesn't have any interest in controlling the private economy, and in fact, and in particular with a republican administration, they would avoid any appearance of trying to do so. But aside from that I think he was right on target. Just encourage enlightened self interest in how the gov mandates procurement for itself...

Re:Nader: right ends, wrong means

[Malcontent]

Except that Nader did not call for regulation (please read his article). He simply asked to govt to be a better shopper and to make sure the choices the govt makes when buying software benefits the citizenry as a whole. Nader should not have to remind the govt to look out for the interest of the public but unfortunately he does.

Re:Nader: right ends, wrong means

[Anonymous Coward]

mod this one up, nodding mods!

Norwegian password: Norton

[aleph]

Looks like the three files for the database were created by Norton ... backup? I just downloaded the freeware version of Backup Key key recovery program which claims to have found a Norton backup password in the file. Of course it won't tell you what the password actually is unless you pay for the program.

Re:Norwegian password: Norton

[spludge]

I think the password is 'ladepujd'. Anyone have norton backup to try it out?

Re:Norwegian password: Norton

[BitHive]

I just got the same result and was feeling real pleased with myself, that is until I read your post ;-). I tried to restore the backup set but MS backup (yup, written by Symantec) complained that it could not find/rebuild the catalog file. So much for that. It's also possible that they are distributing the database in this format as an oversight, and that the real barrier to entry is further encryption of the data by whatever software reads it.

Re:Norwegian password: Norton

[aleph]

So, what's the story? How did you figure out that that's the password?

Re:Norwegian password: Norton

[Funnyfant]

Yes, The Software to use IS MsBackup.
Yes, it IS made by Norton/Symantec (as many other MS-DOS tools)
Yes, you can restore the catalog (This is what you need the password for)
Yes, MS Backup IS an old, buggy software.

1) Do not use: "rebuild the catalog from a floppy".
2) Use: "from MS-DOS drive and path"
3) Use A:\ as the path
4) insert last floppy of the set, then the first one
5) enter the password
6) rebuild catalog
7) learn the norwegian language

Btw: This password might become quite popular. From now on, I will try it first whenever the same problem comes up anywhere in the world.

Re:Windows cost's less Pre Installed .. Do the mat

[TheAwfulTruth]

Heh, that's pretty much true. The OMD version of XP PRO sells for $120 if bought with a machine and $299 if bought over the counter. Lots of profit for all that way! Home is something like $80 OEM and $199 retail. (All FULL versions, not upgrades)

There is XFree86 support for the ProSavage DDR...

[marm]

although not in the main XFree86 4.2.0 release.

Download the driver here.

Note that, according to the author of the Savage driver, he has no ProSavage DDR hardware to test on, so don't bet on it, but hopefully it should work (as with most drivers, it's just a matter of adding a hardware ID to make it work, assuming the hardware vendor hasn't messed around too much since the previous version, which is unlikely in this case)...

Hope this helps some people...

Film88 & Movie88

[slakdrgn]

"Film88 is at least the second Internet video-on-demand site to spring up in recent months. The MPA in February worked with the Taiwanese authorities and its hosted ISP to get rid of Movie88.com, which also streamed feature films to consumer desktops for $1 each. This year the association, which represents seven major Hollywood studios, has sent 40,000 letters to ISPs hosting what it deems rogue operators, compared with 50,000 letters for all of last year."

just something I found amusing, isn't film88 owned by the same people that ran movie88 the first time? do they even double check their stories?

~slak

I really should read the whole article first

[marm]

Oh well... byebye karma

Walmart?

[vectus]

Walmart uses sweatshops.. I'd rather not support the modern incarnation of slavery than support a vendor targetting the Linux market

(Yeah, that sounds very "holier-than-thou".. sorry.. I don't know how else to word it)

Re:Walmart?

[Cody Hatch]

Please tell me your kidding. Comparing sweatshops to slavery is ludicrous (and to think I've seen people complaing that calling copyright violation "piracy" was bad...).

People in sweatshops are there by choice (unless they are actually slaves, which does happen (rarely) but then the problem is the slavery, not the sweatshops). The reason people choose to work in sweatshops is because the alternatives are WORSE. Is it a awful thing for a 13 year old kid to be working 12 hours a day for a few cents? Yeah. Would it be better if he was starving on the street instead? Not really.

Also, don't make the mistake of judging wages in terms of the price of a cup of Starbucks Super Mocha Java. In China, it's common for young women from the interior to go work in sweatshops on the coast for a few months, then go back home to the village, where they're now quite well off (yes, even at sweatshop wages), and can easily find a husband.

What is your boycot going to do? Well, actually, you'll probably just get ignored, but if you do have an impact, it'll probably be that Walmart's suppliers shift production to automated factories in Mexico. Yeah, that'll sure help the starving kids in Myanmar...

If you want to have an impact, calculate the difference in price between everything you buy that was made in a sweatshop, and it's factory-made equivalent, then donate that money to a charity. You'll do far more good.

Re:Walmart?

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, given the ultimatum between working and starving, people tend to choose working. That is the reality that most people 'employed' by sweat shops face, and I don't consider that enough of a choice to say that it is not slavery. Also, wage is not the only issue. Working conditions in sweat shops are appalling, which results in many worker fatalities. When I choose not to shop at Walmart, or similar retailers, I know that my personal boycott will mean very little. However, if others choose to do the same (as all of my close friends do, and most of my acquaintances) it adds up and can make a large difference. I assume you consider voting to be pointless, because an individuals vote doesn't make a large difference, either.

Reebok used to rely heavily on sweatshops. Advocacy groups and consumers boycotted their products, and they simply paid their workers more money (still not at an acceptable level, but the amount given to them did rise). The x thousand dollars a year more it will cost to pay those workers is still cheaper than moving production, and it is still cheaper than dealing with a boycott/protesters.

I already donate money to advocacy groups, as well as two charities, IN ADDITION to my personal boycott of Walmart.

Re:Walmart?

[NanoGator]

Yeah!! Boycott Walmart so that the starving people that work in sweatshops lose their jobs!

Re:Walmart?

[Anonymous Coward]

Right On!

Fuck the child labor laws that we established in the US, and internationally!

Just as long as some wet back or a slant eye is doing our piss work - and they don't live near me, negro boys excepted, it shouldn't matter that some kid is going to die at 20 from the caustic chemicals after gluing together your jordan's, right? They were going to die at 19, so they are lucky!!

bet you voted for bush...

Re:Walmart?

[joss]

You probably overestimate the difference between being a slave and working in a sweat shop. An economic position where one must work hard for 18 hours purely to survive is pretty close to slavery. I suspect that the workers would be better off if they really were slaves - the owners would then have more incentive to invest in training and would be inclined to take better care of actual property.

You're right up to a point. It is worse for those working in sweatshops for you to simply boycott sweatshops' products.

People used to argue that it would be wrong to boycott slave manafactured products because unless the slaves were productive and profitable they would probably be executed. Again, it's a reasonable argument, but it misses the point slightly.

Re:Walmart?

[Anonymous Coward]

Boycotting walmart will just put white trash back on welfare and crusty old grandmas back home making cookies WHERE THEY BELONG ANYWAY.

Re:Walmart?

[Anonymous Coward]

Er. Imagine, if you will, that a slave is treated like a dog.

But while it's relatively difficult to get a well-treated dog to be resentful, being the simple creatures that they are, when a human being is treated the same way they understandably get resentful and bitter. For they are not simple, they are human, just like their master, and to be human is to be complex.

Similarly, if your dog rose up and bit you for what seemed to be no good reason (after all, he's been treated well) only the most inane pacifist would not take the necessary action(s) to reminds it of the master/pet relationship.

And so slavery leads to a vicious circle.

Slavery is much worse than sweatshop labor.

Re:Walmart?

[Cody Hatch]

Perhaps I overestimate the difference, but there is a large difference nonetheless. You say that people forced by hunger to work in a sweatshop might as well be slaves, but if they truly were slaves, they and their decendents would never have any other choice. That's completly different than with sweatshops, because when choices do become available, people stop working at sweatshops, and get real jobs. The sweatshops move on to the next country full of starving peasents, and our supply of cheap soccer balls (or whatever) continues.

The thing to keep in mind is that there is a constant improvement in conditions. The sweatshops keep moving (it wasn't long ago you could find them in New York). Eventually they'll run out of a soure of cheap labor (GDP per capita is increasing, food per capita is increasing, polulation growth is decreasing, poverty as both an absolute and a percentage is decreasing, and these trends look certain to continue).

In the meantime, they very sweatashops you decry are contributing greatly to their own eventual end. Unlike slavery, they are actually paying wages (20-40 cents an hour, usually) and in the countries they operate in, that can be a lot. GDP/per head/per day in Pakistan is $1.20 (compared to the $0.26 an hour they get paid), meaning they're making more than the average Pakistani after 5 hours of work.

The biggest difference between slavery and sweatshops is that slavery did not seem ready to go away on it's own, because people could and would use violence to force people to remain slaves. The quickest and easiest way to get rid of sweatshops is simply to increase the prosperity of the country they reside in.

In the meantime, the louder people call sweatshops "slavery", and demand a boycot, the less attention will be focused on actually improving conditions for the workers, eliminating *real* slavery, and ultimatly...getting rid of the sweatshops. As always, the real world does not lend itself to simple distinctions and easy answers.

Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

"One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale."

Well duh, they're not selling them to cater to Linux, they're selling them to cater to people who've already pirated the OS (ie - WINDOWS).

"See, you can save fifty bucks, my buddy's got a scab of that there 'windows ex-bees' I can git"

Otherwise these scab pirates will just buy from some shit podunk little computer store run by fuckers who don't pay the oem fees either. Wal-mart see money for what it is, money.

ZDnet's editor

[DustMagnet]

But technology doesn't mix well with government regulations that dictate how to build and distribute technology products.

He clearly missed the whole point of Nader's argument. Nader didn't ask the government to regulate anything, except it's own purchases. Nader himself said it was better than government regulations.

Solution to database problem - credit card req.

[borgquite]

I'm almost certain that the following software will get the password they're looking for:

http://www.lostpassword.com/backup.htm

Trouble is, I don't have a credit card handy, so I can't buy it. Can someone buy it and find out the password? Mail it to me, after you've mailed it to them if you like.

re: walmart pcs

[onShore_Jake]

One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale.

Ummm. so the average buyer need not purchase an OS they already pirated^H^H^H^H^H^H^H bought.

Norwegian Nader Handheld, I want one!

[Raskolnk]

Norwegian, Nader, Handheld

Where do I get one of those? Sounds like an intelligent, consumer friend Volvo that fits in the palm of your hand.

Re:Norwegian Nader Handheld, I want one!

[Anonymous Coward]

They're probably referring to clogs.

Re:Norwegian Nader Handheld, I want one!

[Anonymous Coward]

neither clogs nor volvos has anything to do with norway.
It`s probably a little fish.

Re:Norwegian Nader Handheld, I want one!

[AndroidCat]

Norwegian Nader Handhelds are made of lutefisk! They're made of lutefisk!

Lutefisk!

Re:Norwegian Nader Handheld, I want one!

[Anonymous Coward]

Since I'm a hoser Volvo zealot, I'll go ahead and call you an ignorant fuck and tell you that they're Swedish, not Norwegian.
No hard feelings. You're just dumb.

OS Free or not?

[Sabalon]

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product_listing.gsp ?path=0%3A3944%3A3951%3A41937%3A86796%3A86798&dept =3944&cat=86798&sb=61&bti=0 is the
Microtel PCs Without Windows category and the first PC there boasts Windows XP Home Edition.

Re:OS Free or not?

[qwerpoiu]

On that page:
These computers are completely assembled but do not have an operating system or any other software loaded on the hard drive. They are a perfect solution if you want a new PC and have already purchased a full version of Windows that has never been installed, or if you have an alternative operating system, such as Linux.

Re:OS Free or not?

[Com2Kid]

[walmart.com] is the
Microtel PCs Without Windows category and the first PC there boasts Windows XP Home Edition.

Click on more info, notice it says under more info that Windows is not included.

Some lackey made a typo on the main listings page.

Bleh.

Notice this 'higher end' model also has an LCD shown in its preview photo even though no monitor is included at all? The assumption being of course that with a high end PC of course an LCD would be what is used. . . . Heh.

Hmm, actualy that ain't a half bad comp, heh, HDs small, but. . . .

beh

Annnyways.

Oh wait thats it.

Re:OS Free or not?

[oldstrat]

Simple mistake - click on More Info under the listing, and you would find that it says not once, but twice - Windows not included -and- Operating System - NOT INCLUDED (caps are from the walmart site).
Here's a BIG question I have though... Why don't they include a Linux Distro (support extra) with the system by default, it would be the users choice to install it or not.

Re:OS Free or not?

[Sabalon]

Bad marketting - should make what is on the page correct - not having to click for details :)

As for throwing in a Linux CD - well, that is an extra cost (albiet minimal) and some documentation would need to accompany it, otherwise it may as well be trash thrown in there.

I don't know that much about what the various distrubtutions offer anymore - but what seems to be needed is one that can be mass pre-installed via Ghost and then the first time the consumer boots it up, starts asking them questions:
- what do you want your machine named
- lets create a user
- blah blah blah

Something well written like that could be cheaply added on, with a lot of online documentation, and make the machine a Linux box that joe consumer could easily get up on their broadband connection (or dialup) in no time.

Re:OS Free or not?

[spudnic]

Getting Linux into people's hands this way sounds like a good idea, until he tries to install the other software he bought along with the computer. We don't want to force Linux on anyone. People need to make an educated decision to try it out. They need to be aware of not only the advantages, but some of the caveats. Otherwise, they will get a really bad first impression of Linux that may last a long time.

"Yeah, my machine had that linux thing on it when I bought it and it wouldn't even install Quicken. Fortunately my neighbor's kid was able to come right over and install Windows from his CD."

Re:OS Free or not?

[Sabalon]

True...but the same people would probably buy it without the OS and try to install Quicken on it as well - and get the neighboors kid to come over.

I loved the sig - hilarious

Success!

[borgquite]

Files successfully extracted and emailed, using my old copy of MS-DOS 6.2 Backup, with the compliments of Slashdot :)

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Really?

Re:Success!

[iplayfast]

Who says that many eyes doesn't work!

Re:Success!

[outlier]

nice job.

I was in the process of sneakernetting the files over to my old non-networked 386 for the extraction process...

Did you take a look at the data files?

Re:Success!

[Kris_J]

Did you test the database with an old copy of Dbase for Windows? There could be more passwords...

Re:Success!

[borgquite]

Access 2000 seemed to open the database fine, I took a peek at some of the tables just to make sure. Here's a non-protected copy for those that are interested:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/minkus/DBASEWIN.zip

Re:Success!

[spludge]

I tried access 2002 on the bok.dbf file (I had just got the dos 6.2 version of msbackup, you were ahead of me there :) and it works fine.

Here is an example:

TITTEL UNTITTEL FORFATT MEDFORF1 MEDFORF2 MEDFORF3 BIND SERIE UTGSTED AAR FORLAG ISBN DEWEY LITTYPE UNDERTYPE EMNE1 EMNE2 EMNE3 SAMNR ANTALL KOMMENTAR
Doktor På Væry og Rst Fugelli Per Oslo 1977 Gyldendal Norsk Forlag 82-05-10421-4 Skjnnlitteratur Roman Historie Medisin Nord-Noreg 9 1

Re:Success!

[willpost]

Congrats!

I was still stumped on it..
I tried the 6.22 command "Restore a: b:\cc60724a.001" but it didn't find any backup files.

Re:Success!

[BRTB]

Gah, I just did the same thing, and pretty close to the time you sent it too.

<HUMOR VAL="on">
But I get extra geek-points for having to create the virtual DOS box to do it on, with VMWARE, DOS 6.2 and SMB network drivers from bootdisk.com and msbackup 6.2 from here. ;)
</HUMOR>

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

That sample must be real. Nobody could fake those squiggly little characters. :)

Re:Success!

[borgquite]

I had to rebuild the backup catalogue before it would work, so that's probably why. (I used the Windows version of the backup software)

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, looks great.. Makes sense to a swede at least!

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

"those squiggly little characters" are in
fact one of three norwegian special chars,
all vovels: uppercase Æ Ø Å. And lower æ ø å.
Their sound is:
Æ like the A in aggressive
Ø like the U in public
Å like the O in other
(O in norwegian is not the same sound
as O in english, althou similar)

The culture centre that owns these files are the
Ivar Aasen Centre. Ivar Aasen are an interesting
figure in norwegian history. He was the inventor
of the vovel Å. Strangely enough he didn't used
the Å in his name Aasen, but keept the Aa, which
is another and older way of writing the Å sound.

After Norway's liberation from Denmark in 1814
Ivar Aasen felt that Norway should get a new
written language instead of writing danish-like
or norwegian-danish. A new language more in
tune with the way people speaks. He spent
years walking around the country collecting
dialect words from the population. And then
created the written language New Norwegian.

Although he collected word from many places
he mostly used word from around where he came
from. The west part of the country. Many city-
poeple felt the "brave new language" was too
strange, because their dialict was more like
danish, even if New Norwegian is sufficient
understandable to anyone who use the inherited
written language from the danish. And to this
day norwegians have two official written
languages in Norway "competing" with each other.
And sometime we have heated debates on the subject.

It's the law that the government should make
publications in both languages, and television
have to use a minimum percentage of New Norwegian.
School children is thaught to write both. And so on.
This of course costs millions each year, and
frustrates many people. Only ten percent of the
population prefers New Norwegian to "Bokmål"
(book-tounge), but the Ivar Aasen people have
been influential and are dedicated crusaiders
for New Norwegian. One of them where the late
mr Djupedal who created this hacked database
in his research.

Altough i use "Bokmål" in a day to day basis
myself, I find New Norwegian more "poetic",
and many people prefer it in theatres. Me too.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

thanks for the information. don't know why you bothered to write it all out, but it's interesting....

Re:Success!

[robtm]

Haha, you must be Norwegian?
Because all Norwegians pronounce the english u like ø,(pøblic) and that sounds really stupid. :P

Ø is more like the e sound in 'nerd'.

Installing OEM software on a new PC is not illegal

[zenyu]

Most people who install an OEM copy of Windows will have no idea that they're breaking the law, which I believe is a large part of the reason click-wrap licensing gets away with so much.

This isn't illegal almost anywhere. Copyright doesn't prohibit you from wiping the old PC and installing the software on a new computer. The EULA's are not contracts except for a few regressive southern states(USA). So you aren't even violating any contract. You won't get support for OEM software on new hardware, but that is probably long expired anyway if you're retiring an old PC.

I, Raskoknk solemly vow...

[Anonymous Coward]

to be a marketing slave for the rest of my life. I will forgoe the use of logic and bastardize the lexicon in order to market people and ideas I emotionally want to suceed. I will ignore the lessons history teaches us all and instead focus on tyranical approaches to freedom... whatever that means.

Mandrake installed, works without SIS 650 driver

[Anonymous Coward]

I installed Mandrake on my new Walmart PC.
It thought the video was a "Trident CyberBlade (generic)"
but it works just fine.

I was disappointed that the SIS 650 wasn't supported,
but I've got video that works up to 1600x1200.

Mod parent up, we have a winner!

[alienmole]

The proof is in this message.

Well done to borgquite for saving Norwegian history! :)

walmart PC works with Linux

[BWS]

look! you have to be careful when you say runs Linux....

to be exact, if it runs the kernel I can say it runs Linux... in fact the Wal-Mart PCs run Linux Properly...

they just don't run XF86... but XF86 is not part of Linux

YOU CAN RUN LINUX WITHOUT XF86

Re:walmart PC works with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

well duh.
then you don't need a hard drive either, can boot off of floppy.
or a monitor
or sound card
or mouse
or keyboard

I like my PCs reasonably enjoyable to use. X is just as important as the modem bit.
All the parts they are selling should work with Linux, or one might as well build a machine one's self. (which is my usual solution)

Re:walmart PC works with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

X modern? do pigs floss? are you aware that X is 15+ yrs old?

we do need a new WS.

Yeah...

[Anonymous Coward]

This situation would open up a big opportunity for the open source movement led by Linux distributors to take over the United States, and create its own monopoly...or duopoly with Apple and Steve Jobs (news - web sites) getting a fair share as determined by the government.

Because Apple, Steve Jobs and Linux Distrubuters are all one and the same.

Actually, the article is fairly well written overall and does make a few good points.

Today, government technology officials and the private sector are trying to figure out how to deal with security holes in Microsoft products. Debates are raging about whether open source software is more or less secure that Microsoft's code. Could various branches and departments of government use their clout as a huge Microsoft customer to exert some leverage? For sure. Just stop buying the products because they don't meet the requirements for the job or adequate return on investment. Start using OpenOffice.org or StarOffice instead of Microsoft Office, for example.>

The article isn't even against free software as much as it is against Nader's proposal that the OMB overstep its bounds and try to do the DOJs job rather than its own.

Furthermore, some of Naders ideas are a little stupid. One such stupid idea would be to buy the source of MS Office from MS and put it in the public domain. There is no way that the goverment could buy the source from MS at a price that would save the US goverment one damn cent.

To be honest I don't forsee a rebutall to the rebutall because I don't forsee that anyone could write one that could make a strong enough argument to be worth writing.

-Greg

Re:Windows cost's less Pre Installed .. Do the mat

[Anonymous Coward]

In Australia, XP Pro retail costs $USD 342, or 599 local units over the counter. Office is $USD 200 for one year. Given the vast difference in price for an identical product Vs OEM- looks like market abuse to me. Win98SE is US$245.
International arbritrators.. com on down.

My Walmart doesn't have them

[Thing 1]

I went shopping at my local Walmart (Margate, FL for those Walmart employees listening who want to fix the situation), and checked in the Electronics section. They have a bunch of brand-names (Compaq, HP), but the salespeople looked at me funny when I mentioned what I had read here.

What percentage of Walmarts actually carry this PC? Any sightings?

Re:My Walmart doesn't have them

[Jason Earl]

They are apparently only available online. This is probably nothing more than a trial balloon to see if selling OS-less PCs is worth the effort. Wal-Mart doesn't seriously get into a business unless they can undersell the competition, and the only way to underprice Dell is to sell computers without an operating system.

If they get enough support, then we will probably see Wal-Mart push these machines more aggresively. After all, Wal-Mart has nothing to lose. They can afford to piss Microsoft off because they don't make a living selling PCs.

Ever have your car stolen?

[Sleepy]

Buy an Accura, and find out how much your car is worth -- disassembled -- to the 'leet-rice-boy Honda crowd.

Re:First Slashback First Post

[Anonymous Coward]

Faah-king Geen-ious

Re: car parts

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a court case pending in Hungary for a guy who's Mercedes sedan has been stolen and found disassembled, repackaged to be resold as spare parts. The guy is fighting his insurance company as they did not cover his reassembly costs, arguing that the car has eventually been found, it just had to be reassembled. Which, at Mercedes-Benz hourly rates, would be comparable to buying one of the cheaper Mercedes models.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

why won't it GO AWAY and DIE?!

[Anonymous Coward]

please Xfree, will you die?! You cough and gasp and make a lot of painful noises but won't give it up! You are terrible to behold, impossible to use, and it is very rare you work with others.

Why havn't you been put into the ground in favor of a better design... a completely new architecture? Why do you leech off expertese that makes developers more like mice in wheels instead of mighty hawks destroying inferiority and kludginess? WHY?!

Re:why won't it GO AWAY and DIE?!

[hazyshadeofwinter]

It's spelled XP, not Xfree.

My letter to CNET/Farber

[ctar]

techupdates@cnet.com
dfarber@cnet.com

I write in response to your recent article 'Why Nader's Microsoft plan is flawed'. I think its unfortunate that the twist of the article is that Nader's plan is flawed, when Mr. Farber makes many points which agree almost exactly with what Nader and James Love are saying.

Your conclusion is right on: "If the courts don't provide sufficient protection for consumers, then start voting with your checkbook." Thats precisely what Mr. Nader is asking the OMB, as a representative of the American people's government, to do. While I agree that punishing Microsoft through changes in purchasing is a flawed argument, the main points of Nader/Love's letter are to examine the current status of technology spending and make sure other viable and possibly cheaper alternatives are not being overlooked.

In addition to this, they ask that some of the specs of proprietary "file formats of its office productivity and multimedia programs" be released in order to allow for competing products to not be ruled out by incompatibility. They do not ask, as you suggest, for Microsoft to "give up or sell its intellectual property" or place any limits on purchasing or spending. Nader and Love understand the extreme importance that file (specifically word processing file) format interopability has on the potential for competition in the software and desktop market. When they do mention purchasing source code, they do not specifically say Microsoft Office's source code, they suggest purchasing the code to a "high quality office productivity package".

Again, while I understand the difference between the charges of the OMB and the DOJ, you can't help but agree that some coordination between the two is at least a creative idea. With the antitrust case against Microsoft going on several years now, (and the possibility of retribution for the known, and countless unknown companies who were forced out of the marketplace by anti-competitive behavior being zero) it may not be entirely unrealistic for some creative and forward thinking regarding a strategy or solution to resolve the true reason to break up a monopoly; to make sure innovation and healthy economic growth continue.

Aside from these main points, I find your editorial or article or whatever you think it is, as particularly schizophrenic. You say government regulations shouldn't "dictate how to build and distribute technology products". But, you also say that various branches and departments could "use their clout as a huge Microsoft customer to exert some leverage" by using Openoffice or StarOffice instead of Microsoft Office. How does this differ from Nader and Love's suggestions? You also go on to cite recent news items about other countries saving millions of dollars in licensing fees. Again, this is one of the main points of the letter to the OMB. I won't even try to decipher your Krispy Kreme analogy...

As you say, "Nader has the right idea. Consumers of technology should have choice." So, then why do you try to discredit him? He is one of the few that actively and successfully petitions the government for the rights of consumers and the potentials of technology.

-Chris Tar

what goverment should do

[Anonymous Coward]

instead of regulating they should educate and advertise. This of course also includes organization as well. Let private orgs serve as watchdogs, form trade associations and the like... but by setting up a regulatory agency or expanding the ones that exist you in essence create a stagnant pool that is easily corrupted and abused (worsens the problem) while draining the very money and drive from the economy that you (the agency) claim to cherish.

Warning for the champ...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you go to Norway to collect your free flight to Ørsta, be careful during your overnight stay at the Nynorsk Festival. Most of the books in the database are classified as "Faglitteratur." Not that there's anything wrong with that!

I want to do this and email it to piracy@ms

[systemaster]

I'll buy the OS less PC and use my same monitor and keyboard, To me it looks like the same computer(tower is under desk) I just replaced a worn out part of it(the tower) So I'll call it the same computer, so I'm not breaking the license, just reinstalling it on the same computer after a rebuild. Hell I'm a dumb consumer, monitor = computer, tower = CPU, I just bought a new CPU the computer is the same. How can that be illegal.

Re:I want to do this and email it to piracy@ms

[Qrlx]

Well said systemaster. Except, anything that isn't the keyboard, mouse, or monitor is the "hard drive."

I see the situation as pretty analogous to some leases I've signed over the years. They have clauses saying that if I don't pay the rent, the landlord can take posession of the property and all my belongings, and so on. Well, it may say that in the lease but the landlord-tenant laws will override the parts of our agreement that are illegal.

The thing is, we're sailing into uncharted waters with all this IP legislation stuff. We've already seen the corporate power grab embodied in the Sony Bono Copyrights Forever Act, which if I'm not mistaken will be before some high court any day now. We have laughable patents on ridiculous "business processes" and there's patent pending on the pop-under ad, which according to the story here on slashdot is all of two lines of javascript.

Hey, look, a soapbox called History... People, we are living through a revolution akin to Gutenberg's invention of movable type, and Martin Luther's reformation of the Catholic Church. What am I talking about? Prior to Gutenberg, it was prohibitively expensive to create printed matter; teams of monks dedicated their *lives* to copying important texts. Concomitant with the scarcity of literature was a vast illiterate population, who had to be told what the bible meant by their local clergy.

Gutenberg stood the status quo on its ear. Now, anyone with some molten lead and a few hard workers could turn out in days the same "content" that used to take YEARS to produce. People could now be taught to read the bible for themselves, and didn't have to rely on the interpretation spoon-fed to them by the Church. In short, people gained an incredible freedom, the freedom to THINK FOR THEMSELVES, and the all-powerful Catholic Church (you know, the guys who changed the calendar in October 1582) (look at your unix calendar, it's there) was dealt a blow from which it has never recovered.

How exactly does all this relate to IP law and the RIAA/MPAA DMCA Gabba Gabba Hey? I'm not quite sure, but you bet your pinhead they're related. The Church didn't need IP lawyers and patents, they would simply Darn You To Heck! if you got uppity. They had a copyright, if you will, on the freakin' alphabet! To us that sounds ridiculous, but a copyright and a horde of rapacious IP lawyers provides the same "Game Over" result today that Excommunication did five hundred years ago.

Revolutions of this sort play out over decades, and we are riding the first waves of this one. Meanwhile, I'm stepping down off the soapbox before JonKatz starts pelting me with AOL Platinum 7.0 CDs.

Re:I want to do this and email it to piracy@ms

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand. I ran cal 9 1582, cal 10 1582, and cal 11 1582, and it looks OK to me. What did they do?

Re:I want to do this and email it to piracy@ms

[Qrlx]

Here's the scoop: http://www.timechange.com/3m/

1. Changes have happened since Pope Gregory XIII adjusted the calendar in 1582 AD, who eliminated the accumulated error caused by a faulty calculation of the length of a year and avoided its recurrence by restricting century leap years to those divisible by 400. (Yes, 2000 is a leap year). This was introduced in Roman Catholic countries and other states only gradually changed from Old Style to New Style; Britain and its colonies didn't adopt the Gregorian calendar for almost two centuries in 1752 AD, when the error amounted to 11 days. The 3 September 1752 AD became 14 September 1752 AD. Up until then England had celebrated beginning of the year on 25 March; after 1752 it was moved to 1 January

So, you need to cal 9 1752 and you will see it!

heh

[AnimeFreak]

The reason why Wal-Mart doesn't include an OS on the PCs in the first place is the fact that Wal-mart tries to make them as cheap as humanly possible. This is how Wal-Mart has taken down the competition (ala K-Mart) by cutting corners wherever they can.

If Wal-Mart didn't have this strategy, they'd be including Windows XP on these systems.

Re:heh

[awfar]

In fact, most stores are simply "fronts" for the manufacturers; they simply lease them a warm, bright space to display their goods; not to bring you value or a good price. Walmart unbundles their products, which is why Walmart can undercut slightly.

Film88 should use HavenCo

[pkaminsk]

Why doesn't Film88 locate their servers with HavenCo? To quote from their acceptable use agreement: "Sealand currently has no regulations regarding copyright"... It doesn't look like they'd just roll over to the MPAA.

My only guess is that they must charge too much for the service.

Re:Film88 should use HavenCo

[Rakarra]

If Sealand ever actually showed up as even a blip on the radar of the RIAA and MPAA, you'd better believe they'd go down quickly. I don't think it would be too hard to convince the US government (and many others most likely) for an trade embargo with Sealand. It's known for lack of copyrights, anything else? Didn't think so.

Re: car parts

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. Personally, I'd look at it along the lines of "Well, looks like I just got myself a hobby that will keep me occupied every weekend for the next year or two".

I would be a little annoyed if the insurance company insisted that the completely disassembled car constituted a recovered vehicle, and at least didn't give me SOMETHING to use as a deposit on a driveable vehicle for the interim.

But, then again, I don't buy M-Bs.

Re:walmart PC works with Linux [OT]

[Voidhobo]

are you aware that X is 15+ yrs old? X11R1 was released Sept 1987. Not even 15 years! (-: The day X12R1-pre-alpha is announced on Slashdot, the Internet will break down.

Re:i am so smart

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you're not so smart, but what am I?

Courts?

[mahmud]

IANAL,
MS is free to compell the user to do whatever is written in EULA, as long as those deeds are not illegal as such.

Courts help enforcing the EULA, they can't chalenge it's fairness nor allow users to do stuff forbidden in the user-licence agreement.

If you don't like the licence, don't use the software.

Of course some customer-rights activists may seek to enforce the change of the EULA, but I am yet to notice something like that taking place, feel free to enlighten me on the subject, though...

Password is the familyname backwards!

[Anonymous Coward]

ladepudj is djupedal, the name of the man who donated the collection of book.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

pricing!

[emotioncafecom]

http://www.havenco.com/products_and_services/rates . tml here is the pricing

www.emotioncafe.com

link to rates

[emotioncafecom]

http://www.havenco.com/products_and_services/rates . tml

OK I got the password

[Anonymous Coward]

It's 'ladepujd'
Now what ?
It's Norton Backup V2.0
russell at virtuadollar dot com

Re:OK I got the password

[kilogram]

Information: The guy who wrote the database, was a person named Reidar Djupedal. Surprised of the password now?

But now you are too late, like the rest of us. The password has already been cracked, and so there is no "reward" anymore.

Now on the film88 site

[karlowfwb]

Dear Valuable Users,

Our site is READY now,
but we got to
wait for few hours
for our new lines
to take place.

However, you can enter from HERE.

Please take note that
the lines are extremely SLOW.

We feel sorry for
our contractor whose
proxy/caching was blocked
because of somebody's
reaction. (Without Court Order AGAIN!!)

Seems like the Terrorist is identified!!

Regards,
Film88

Wow, I think they hit the nail on the head.... :)

Nonsense.

[DoctorNathaniel]

Did you READ the letter? Nader didn't propose any kind of government regulation.

He proposed that the US govt simply change their buying policies: i.e. buying non-MS products more often, asking to buy the MS code, etc, etc.

Existing Precedents...

[Royster]

indicate that these types of restrictions will be unenforcable. The recent Adobe case indicates that, on its face, the true nature of a transaction involving the purchase of software is that of the purchase of a copy of a copyrighted work. Cases reaching back as far as Scribner v. Straus (1908) indicate that attempting to case a sale as a license will not get around the first sale doctrine.

Under Federal Law, when you purchase a copy of software, you already have the right to install it and use it in the way it was designed to be used. You may remove the software from PC A and install it on PC B. A contract of adhesion which purports to abrogate this right is unlikely to be found enforcable.

Now, I don't agree with those who think that all EULAs are unenforcable. Terms such as limitation of liability and perhaps even forum selection terms require very little notice. Small print on the back of a cruse ship ticket was found to be sufficient notice for a limitation of liability. But the majority of unconscionable terms will never be raised in an actual court case becuase the companies know that they are out on a limb here and will never get them enforced.

Dan Farber's article on procurement

[jplove]

This is what I posted to one of the ZDNet forums. Jamie

Who said the government should buy MS Office outright? Ralph and I didn't. Maybe the author of the commentary should read the letter again. There is difference between buying "the code for Microsoft Office outright," and asking OMB to consider "Buying outright the code for office productivity products." I think Dan Farber should have understood that the likely source for such a purchase would not be Microsoft, a company that makes billions off its MS Office platform, but more likely other products, such as those offered by Lotus or Corel, which are pretty good, and not that profitable. In any event, that was only one of a pretty large menu of things the US could look at, including much more incremental steps such as requiring disclosure of file format information (an option he ignored), a relatively modest step that would be quite feasible, and would make competitor's products more interoperable, a major barrier for non-MS products now.

On the issue of putting caps on the number of units purchased by a single company, this is not really an innovation in terms of federal procurement policy or law. FAR 6.202 is designed to promote alternative sources of supply, so as to keep the government from dealing with a monopolistic supplier.

6.202 Establishing or maintaining alternative sources.
(a) Agencies may exclude a particular source from a contract action in order to establish or maintain an alternative source or sources for the supplies or services being acquired if the agency head determines that to do so would-
(1) Increase or maintain competition and likely result in reduced overall costs for the acquisition, or for any anticipated acquisition;

OSless PC - Linux NOT the only alternative to Win

[Geezle2]

"One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows"

Well, no. . .one does not keep wondering. Certainly, this would confuse you if you were the type who when ask to name OSes for x86 machines could only come up with various flavors of Windows and Linux. It is a bigger world than that however. I can name a number of modern OSes for x86 without invoking the Beast of Redmond or refering to a Linux distro.

The truth is, the Wal-Mart OSless PCs that I have tested work fine with eComStation and OS/2. Of course, hand building your machines is the best bet for compatibility but as long as they work, the prices for the Wal-Mart machines are hard to beat.

Perhaps the manufacturer did not consider support for X to be the same as support for Linux? Perhaps they were tested by the manufacturer but with OSes other than Linux? After all, they do work real well with eComStation and I know of some that were bought for just that reason.

Try to remember that there are other good OSes available aside from Linux

OSless PC supports Microsoft's monopoly?

[Foresto]

My paranoid side can't help wondering if these computers were deliberately built to be useless in linux, to "prove" that there's no market for OSless computers. If OEMs build these things, and they don't sell, might they believe that installing Microsoft operating systems is the only way to make money?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course in this case 'fag' means a trade skill :)