Yes it is, and Gateway has made EFI boxes in the past.
Oh, and every Intel mainboard with a 945 chipset apparently runs their Framework, but the only thing enabled is the CSM for bios compatibility.
And in any case the difference is almost irrelevant. If you provide OS X with some basic EFI structures and tables at boot time, it runs on x86 hardware. EFI is cool but it is still mostly filling the role of BIOS now, that is to say it is a bootloader for the real OS. Sure EFI does some fancy tricks but as for differentiating the hardware to the point of saying mac vs. PC, EFI doesn't cut it.
Intel x86 processor? Check. Intel chipsets? Check. DDR2 ram in SODIMM and DIMM format? Check. SATA hard drives using standard interfaces? Check.
Please explain to me where the fucking wiggle room is for these things to be considered anything other than Apple branded, x86 machines, using commodity parts, that happen to be running an OS other than Windows.
Apple has in fact severely limited bluetooth on the iPhone, and that includes even specific profiles for external devices. As far as i know the headset is the ONLY thing that works with it.
You just keep track of what people actually use. The prevailing reasons people pirate music are, because its free, or because they simply don't understand the difference between legal sources and p2p programs like limewire (Which in fact, has a store too, but its separate).
So what you do is, you simply remove the per song cost from legitimate services and people will use them instead of illegitimate ones, which will disappear. Then you just keep records of which artists get downloaded the most and pay them more.
By stacking the deck, i mean refusing to standardize certain things or keep certain interfaces stable, either intentionally or because repo software doesn't require these things to be stable. And because the repos only keep FOSS most of the time, everything else is excluded and therefor must play stupid games, like compiling drivers for every variation of a distro and releasing multiple packages (like truecrypt used to do with TC4.x).
The common answer when these problems come up is "well your stuff should be in a repo" and that's not acceptable, it should be possible to install a driver or program from anywhere, without having to worry about any of this stuff, on any distro. And there are a number of situations i have encountered where even GPL software isn't in the repos for a distro, so they aren't really helping.
Yea, it does in this case. Its the old 'if you're in the repos, you're fine' argument, and it falls flat on its face in a number of situations, some even involving open source software, but especially closed commercial software.
Making life intentionally difficult for commercial closed software vendors isn't going to help the cause of open source, nor will it help Linux as a platform. If anything it will cause large companies to avoid it because political crap takes precedence over everything else.
FOSS software should be beating proprietary software on its own merits. If you want open source stuff to succeed you make better software, and if the bazaar development method is better that should be easy.
However, stacking the deck against commercial interests in an attempt to make the entire platform GPL or even just open source (of any license) isn't going to help anyone.
"Each distribution can take whatever path it thinks is BEST and the results will speak for themselves.
If it succeeds, then others can copy the improvements made by it."
Yea, they've had some time to work this stuff out and it hasn't happened. You assume that the best solution will win, and in Linux that isn't the only deciding factor. People choose distros based on things ranging from "i hate novell" all the way to "it had blue wallpaper".
How about all these distros agree on something beforehand? This community spirit stuff is supposed to enable people to work together, not go in 50 different directions and hope something sticks to the wall eventually.
No we understand the GPL, but it has very little to do with the subject, namely that regardless of open vs closed, some distros remain incompatible with each other in small but significant ways.
If there is to be a stable platform to target with Linux, that crap has to stop. Simple being GPL software means very little toward that goal if distros continue to be arbitrarily different and the situation never really resolves itself.
I would agree FDE needs to protect itself, but every story about bitlocker raises alarms for me because its original name was secure startup and its original purpose had little to do with protecting users, that was an added bonus that made it easier to sell to users as a "feature".
So essentially the locks are no longer closed source, but most users won't care to screw with the tuner anyway and won't do so even though they could, right?
It's not a little code, if you knew anything about the OS you'd know that.
The windowing system is not from an external FOSS project, neither is a large amount of the kernel code, or the high level API libraries, or any of the GUI elements, or the init/cron/etc..etc systems, those are all launchd now.
They developed a significant part of the OS and based it on some FOSS projects and code. Rip out the Apple provided stuff and you don't have a unix or BSD system or even Darwin (lots of apple stuff there), you have a bunch of non functional code.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is, and Gateway has made EFI boxes in the past.
Oh, and every Intel mainboard with a 945 chipset apparently runs their Framework, but the only thing enabled is the CSM for bios compatibility.
And in any case the difference is almost irrelevant. If you provide OS X with some basic EFI structures and tables at boot time, it runs on x86 hardware. EFI is cool but it is still mostly filling the role of BIOS now, that is to say it is a bootloader for the real OS. Sure EFI does some fancy tricks but as for differentiating the hardware to the point of saying mac vs. PC, EFI doesn't cut it.
Hmmmm.
Intel x86 processor? Check.
Intel chipsets? Check.
DDR2 ram in SODIMM and DIMM format? Check.
SATA hard drives using standard interfaces? Check.
Please explain to me where the fucking wiggle room is for these things to be considered anything other than Apple branded, x86 machines, using commodity parts, that happen to be running an OS other than Windows.
Apple has in fact severely limited bluetooth on the iPhone, and that includes even specific profiles for external devices. As far as i know the headset is the ONLY thing that works with it.
Don't you speak of Captain Copyright like that! Kids look up to him!
The full length movie will be coming out any day now, and then how will you feel?
You just keep track of what people actually use. The prevailing reasons people pirate music are, because its free, or because they simply don't understand the difference between legal sources and p2p programs like limewire (Which in fact, has a store too, but its separate).
So what you do is, you simply remove the per song cost from legitimate services and people will use them instead of illegitimate ones, which will disappear. Then you just keep records of which artists get downloaded the most and pay them more.
Well, once they perfect digital eyelash rendering, I'll be sold.
Because they it makes it harder for them to claim they still own the card.
Subscription pricing makes it clear it isn't yours.
That was my fourth thought, the first 3 correspond to the 3 years in between now and then.
Holy crap! Where did you find this fwoosh you're using? I've been using woosh all this time!
That f- really makes all the difference in the world
By stacking the deck, i mean refusing to standardize certain things or keep certain interfaces stable, either intentionally or because repo software doesn't require these things to be stable. And because the repos only keep FOSS most of the time, everything else is excluded and therefor must play stupid games, like compiling drivers for every variation of a distro and releasing multiple packages (like truecrypt used to do with TC4.x).
The common answer when these problems come up is "well your stuff should be in a repo" and that's not acceptable, it should be possible to install a driver or program from anywhere, without having to worry about any of this stuff, on any distro. And there are a number of situations i have encountered where even GPL software isn't in the repos for a distro, so they aren't really helping.
Yea, it does in this case. Its the old 'if you're in the repos, you're fine' argument, and it falls flat on its face in a number of situations, some even involving open source software, but especially closed commercial software.
Making life intentionally difficult for commercial closed software vendors isn't going to help the cause of open source, nor will it help Linux as a platform. If anything it will cause large companies to avoid it because political crap takes precedence over everything else.
FOSS software should be beating proprietary software on its own merits. If you want open source stuff to succeed you make better software, and if the bazaar development method is better that should be easy.
However, stacking the deck against commercial interests in an attempt to make the entire platform GPL or even just open source (of any license) isn't going to help anyone.
Do they rely on any modern dynamic system libraries? If they do, chances are they don't work.
Static stuff works sure, those interfaces for running stuff are stable, libraries aren't between distros.
"Each distribution can take whatever path it thinks is BEST and the results will speak for themselves.
If it succeeds, then others can copy the improvements made by it."
Yea, they've had some time to work this stuff out and it hasn't happened. You assume that the best solution will win, and in Linux that isn't the only deciding factor. People choose distros based on things ranging from "i hate novell" all the way to "it had blue wallpaper".
How about all these distros agree on something beforehand? This community spirit stuff is supposed to enable people to work together, not go in 50 different directions and hope something sticks to the wall eventually.
Classic zealot response. Pretend the entire world is moving to GPL-only software and neglect to address the concerns of anyone who disagrees.
Yea, even within one architecture there is no binary compatibility, which was the GPs point you either ignored or didn't get.
No we understand the GPL, but it has very little to do with the subject, namely that regardless of open vs closed, some distros remain incompatible with each other in small but significant ways.
If there is to be a stable platform to target with Linux, that crap has to stop. Simple being GPL software means very little toward that goal if distros continue to be arbitrarily different and the situation never really resolves itself.
Logic board at least makes sense. Motherboard sounds ridiculous.
I would agree FDE needs to protect itself, but every story about bitlocker raises alarms for me because its original name was secure startup and its original purpose had little to do with protecting users, that was an added bonus that made it easier to sell to users as a "feature".
Simply using torrents doesn't imply one uses the line all the time, torrents can be used for single downloads to lessen the load on company servers.
People downloading ISOs of various things don't use 50gb in a week, esp not stuff like Ubuntu. Same goes for high def podcasts.
You got all the karma you can get, now it's time to just start being a whore.
So essentially the locks are no longer closed source, but most users won't care to screw with the tuner anyway and won't do so even though they could, right?
Good move if thats what you mean
it was until it stole my girlfriend and put those photos we took up on Google Images..oh man i shoulda seen that coming
That's completely ridiculous, the EULA demands are getting unreasonable
It's not a little code, if you knew anything about the OS you'd know that.
The windowing system is not from an external FOSS project, neither is a large amount of the kernel code, or the high level API libraries, or any of the GUI elements, or the init/cron/etc..etc systems, those are all launchd now.
They developed a significant part of the OS and based it on some FOSS projects and code. Rip out the Apple provided stuff and you don't have a unix or BSD system or even Darwin (lots of apple stuff there), you have a bunch of non functional code.
Yea, i mean its just plastic, in fact any old CD will do just fine. What's on it doesn't matter at all.