Standard platform? And Palm doesn't? Palm provides programming information, development kits, ROMs, and lots of other stuff for developing software for the Palm platform - and not JUST for Windows, either. (And uCLinux has been ported to the Palm platform - so it's not like you can't develop alternative OSes for Palm, too...)
I think people's biggest gripe with WinCE/Pocket PC is that they're trying to cram EVERYTHING that you'd do on a regular desktop PC into a palmtop device, with no hard drive (can its OS be upgraded?), a small screen, no keyboard, and handwriting recognition that (from what I've been hearing) is highly inaccurate, at best.
I have (just this week) bought a Palm Vx. I couldn't be happier. It is simple, and fulfills all my needs. It's an electronic organizer - it's not trying to be a complete replacement for a regular computer. (Oh yeah - and it works with Linux, and Macs. Let's see you do THAT with a palmtop running WinCE...)
The reason, as I've noted in other posts, why Sigma will not support the H+ on Linux, is that CSS is all done in software. (Also, it looks like MPEG-Audio work may be done all in software too - how lame.) Of course, they don't want to just release specs to tell the H+ just how to play back MPEG framestreams, either. They believe that the MPAA and DVD CCA will see that as inviting the community to use software which they (the MPAA and DVD CCA) don't approve of, then they'd get their CSS license revoked... you know, it'd be ugly.
In other words, Sigma's covering their own asses. Oh well, that's business, eh?
Oh, and the fancy new chipset you're referring to is in the $200 NetStream2000 board - which is what Sigma is recommending as a purchase for Linux users who want hardware DVD. Also, Sigma has voiced their intent to provide Linux drivers for the board. (We'll see if they ever materialize to anyone outside the walls of Sigma Designs. Last I heard, they were still at least a month away.)
CSS itself is a pretty simple procedure, involving relatively weak encryption... but the break was when Xing's Windows-based software-DVD decoding package was found to contain an unencrypted CSS player-key.
Also, you're right, if they want their security to work, cheap hardware implementing CSS in software is NOT the answer - but for Windows platforms, where everything's closed-source, Sigma decided they could squeeze by with it. And, well, it's worked, so far. But it won't last forever. Also, CSS is doomed to failure, with static encrypted data and weak encryption technology (it was all that was exportable when DVD standards were being penned)...
Their response to requests to JUST provide info on how to play back MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 framestreams has been basically that the MPAA and DVD CCA would see that as tempting us to use reverse-engineering techniques to get CSS and menus and all the other goodies that make up a DVD player. The MPAA and DVD CCA want to control the market for players, remember. So, Sigma has refused to provide ANY support for Linux with the H+ card.
Like I said, it's certainly not for lack of trying - many people have tried different stances in regards to this topic, and Sigma has turned everyone down flat.
Well, the CSS debacle is the main problem. The chipset for the H+/Dxr3 doesn't do CSS in hardware, so you have to do CSS in software. Sigma knows the kernel can be hacked to expose the internals of a driver, and they also know what a fit the MPAA and DVD CCA would have if THAT were to happen. People have offered to assist them in developing drivers - even for free, I'd bet, so cost is probably less of an issue than you seem to expect.
Well, the H+/Dxr3 doesn't do CSS in hardware - that's one major reason why Sigma doesn't want to provide support for the card on Linux. So we hafta use the LiViD CSS-auth code to do the dirty work. So that still leaves us in a problematic position... but I'll still support it, MPAA or no.
People have tried. I've volunteered. I've even volunteered to assist with closed-source drivers. Sigma Designs (makers of the chipset for the H+/Dxr3) have SPECIFICALLY stated they will NEVER, EVER provide Linux drivers for the card. Why, you ask? No CSS in hardware, that's why! They know that the Linux kernel, libc, etc. can be modified to (effectively) expose driver- and program-internal activity, and they of course fear the MPAA and DVD CCA, so they don't want us to be able to exploit their drivers as an alternate source for extracting pure MPEG-2 framestreams.
Lamelamelame. So now they want you to buy their $200+ NetStream2000 card, which is SUPPOSED to have Linux support sometime in the near future (not yet, mind you, and it won't be available for a month, at least, last I heard). After you've already bought their hardware. And they have little, if any, interest in any kind of upgrade program. So you'd have to sell your current card and buy a new card, with features you DON'T need, for $200 or more, to get what you already paid for? I'll do what I can to help the effort for developing our OWN drivers for the H+/Dxr3.
Not quite... it's good to know the limitations of the technology, sure, but the problem is that every so often, the doomsayers come out and say "This technology is going to die soon! It's reached its limit, it can't go any further!"... Yet, interestingly enough, someone always manages to figure out some way to extend its life, improve it, even though its death has been predicted. It's just stupid that a supposedly professional, respectable publication like SciAm would manage to consistently predict the death of many different technologies, while there's still life in them.
Yea, they have a new product (the NetStream 2000) that is supposedly going to have Linux drivers at some point (yah, we'll see) - but not yet. Mind you, this is a $200 board, not a $50-$60 board like the H+ (aka Dxr3). I am NOT impressed, Sigma. I'm not going to spend 200 clams on a new board, only to wait (yet again) for Linux support.
They need to put up or shut up - they've been doing too much talking about Linux support, and (at least from my POV) not actually DOING enough about it. Too much talking makes me think "smokescreen", kids.
Oh, they didn't _directly_ come right out and directly ignore their previous settlement, they just paid some lawyer to find some stupid little loophole in the language of it that they could exploit for their own purposes. Typical tactics from that company out of Redmond...
Why does Sorenson claim that they are under an agreement with Apple that disallows them from licensing the(ir OWN) codec to anyone else, no matter the terms - they just aren't supposed to provide source access to anyone outside of their own company or Apple. Yet Apple (and you) claim that "it's not theirs, they can't control anything about it". Maybe it's just me, but I'm tending to think that Apple is the one who doesn't want to release the Sorenson codec, because they want an advantage.
Linux people don't care about advantage - we just wanna watch QT videos that are encoded with the Sorenson codec... is that so much to ask?
Well, considering it wouldn't be X 5, but XFree86 5 (XFree86 is just an implementation of the X Window System), I really don't see that as being a big problem...
Well, FBSD 3.x and 4.x are apparently the only platforms that they've built bins for yet. And of course the "Common" subdir doesn't have all the binary packages - that's where the "common" (i.e., platform-independent) packages go.
Yes, it's too good to be true. First of all, I've yet to see a Windows app that puts common DLLs in its own directory instead of the Windows directory tree. Second, it wouldn't matter, because of Windows' braindead DLL loader. Third, each app may have a different version of the DLL - so even if the above two conditions weren't true, automated combination wouldn't occur, because they wouldn't be the same files.
But back to my point - the majority of TV shows, if you watch the plots, play on some sort of well-known stereotype. It's just the way Hollywood works. Is it so bad to acknowledge that? (There are the rare few shows and movies that reach beyond stereotypes - but they are all too rare.)
Okay, you have this huge icky computer killing people. Do you A) turn off the computer or B) send in more people to get killed? Of course, they pick B. Oh yes, there's some lame excuse about how it will ruin the game -- but please, didn't these people ever hear of backup????
Well, this just follows my theory about TV shows and movies like this - the whole plot (in this case, pretty thin, but I did get some good laughs) depends on some EXTREME act of human stupidity. This is standard-issue for TV and movies. The longer the chain of really stupid actions, the longer they can stretch out their paper-thin plot.
Of course, there was a lot of ridiculous stuff in this episode - but we're talking about TV here, and we all know TV plays on stereotypes. (Right?)
Re:"Darryl Musashi" plus rant on sexism in pl
on
X-Files FPS Episode
·
· Score: 1
Maybe a mixture of Thresh and John Romero (the character that played "Darryl Musashi" just reminded me of Romero, don't ask me why)? I was immediately like, "Sounds like Romero"...
You certainly have a strong point there - ActiveX isn't the only way of doing it, it just makes it too damned easy - and THAT, my friend, is the main problem with it. It helps to make it too easy for stuff like this to happen. That's why it's a bad idea.
Abuse is bad enough - but someone making it easier for others to abuse you (or your system) is even worse, don't you think?
Is there anyone who got some spares at LWCE @ Javits? If so, I for one want one of these new bootable recovery discs. I have one of the previous ones (the one that LinuxCare gave out in San Jose in August), but this looks much better. Please let me know - I'd definitely like to get me one of these.
No, a round 3" can contain somewhere around 200 MB or so. 140 MB is about right for the size of disc shown in the photo that was linked in the story - I have one of the LinuxCare bootable business-card CDs from the Summer '99 LinuxWorld expo, and it contains somewhere about 50 MB of data, but it's cut a LOT smaller too.
Actually, those extra 8 bits are for alpha (transparency)... but they are rarely used. So it's not like they're JUST there for padding the pixel data out, but that ends up being their general purpose anyway.
Simply, no. XFree doesn't know (or care) about Voodoo/Voodoo2 boards. That's strictly an issue of Glide 2.x working properly with the card... Make sure you have the right version of the Glide library.
How is it an "impassible" barrier? I certainly managed to get beyond it - it's called DOCUMENTATION. There are HOWTOs, man pages, and other online documentation, including assorted Web pages. There is also a wealth of information in books (O'Reilly books, for example, have been a MAJOR source of useful info for me).
There's not an "impassible" barrier to entry of the Linux world - the only thing holding anyone back is lack of desire. It doesn't have to cost anything, the docs aren't that hard to find... So, where's the problem?
I don't believe that anyone in the Linux community says that only WE are allowed "freedom", but freedom has a price. That price is responsibility. The biggest problem is that the average person wants all the freedom, with none of the responsibility that goes with it. The responsibility that (so far) is engendered in using Linux is that you must be willing to spend some time to learn it. However, you get a stable, powerful OS with a growing application base.
The typical user, as many have noted, doesn't care about stability or power - if they can browse their Web portals, Web shopping sites, and watch their movie trailers, send a little e-mail, do some minor word processing tasks, and a few other minor things, they're HAPPY. That's all they want, and that's all they really care about. So what if it crashes? As long as it comes back to something recognizable, they'll survive.
For me, that's not enough. For most Linux users, that's not enough. Most Linux users do more with their systems than that, and they are willing to learn what they need to so they can have the power they need/desire.
Also, as far as helping newbies goes, there's documentation out there. Most of them don't READ it - that's why they're still newbies, because they don't want to read, and they don't want to learn, they just want to have all the answers spoonfed to them. That, as I've been saying, is the difference between users of OSes like Linux (the *BSDs certainly fall under the same category) and "normal" people.
(I know many people won't agree with my assessment - but it's mine, and if you don't like it, then that's just too bad...)
Slashdot Mirror
Standard platform? And Palm doesn't? Palm provides programming information, development kits, ROMs, and lots of other stuff for developing software for the Palm platform - and not JUST for Windows, either. (And uCLinux has been ported to the Palm platform - so it's not like you can't develop alternative OSes for Palm, too...)
I think people's biggest gripe with WinCE/Pocket PC is that they're trying to cram EVERYTHING that you'd do on a regular desktop PC into a palmtop device, with no hard drive (can its OS be upgraded?), a small screen, no keyboard, and handwriting recognition that (from what I've been hearing) is highly inaccurate, at best.
I have (just this week) bought a Palm Vx. I couldn't be happier. It is simple, and fulfills all my needs. It's an electronic organizer - it's not trying to be a complete replacement for a regular computer. (Oh yeah - and it works with Linux, and Macs. Let's see you do THAT with a palmtop running WinCE...)
The reason, as I've noted in other posts, why Sigma will not support the H+ on Linux, is that CSS is all done in software. (Also, it looks like MPEG-Audio work may be done all in software too - how lame.) Of course, they don't want to just release specs to tell the H+ just how to play back MPEG framestreams, either. They believe that the MPAA and DVD CCA will see that as inviting the community to use software which they (the MPAA and DVD CCA) don't approve of, then they'd get their CSS license revoked... you know, it'd be ugly.
In other words, Sigma's covering their own asses. Oh well, that's business, eh?
Oh, and the fancy new chipset you're referring to is in the $200 NetStream2000 board - which is what Sigma is recommending as a purchase for Linux users who want hardware DVD. Also, Sigma has voiced their intent to provide Linux drivers for the board. (We'll see if they ever materialize to anyone outside the walls of Sigma Designs. Last I heard, they were still at least a month away.)
CSS itself is a pretty simple procedure, involving relatively weak encryption... but the break was when Xing's Windows-based software-DVD decoding package was found to contain an unencrypted CSS player-key.
Also, you're right, if they want their security to work, cheap hardware implementing CSS in software is NOT the answer - but for Windows platforms, where everything's closed-source, Sigma decided they could squeeze by with it. And, well, it's worked, so far. But it won't last forever. Also, CSS is doomed to failure, with static encrypted data and weak encryption technology (it was all that was exportable when DVD standards were being penned)...
Their response to requests to JUST provide info on how to play back MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 framestreams has been basically that the MPAA and DVD CCA would see that as tempting us to use reverse-engineering techniques to get CSS and menus and all the other goodies that make up a DVD player. The MPAA and DVD CCA want to control the market for players, remember. So, Sigma has refused to provide ANY support for Linux with the H+ card.
Like I said, it's certainly not for lack of trying - many people have tried different stances in regards to this topic, and Sigma has turned everyone down flat.
Well, the CSS debacle is the main problem. The chipset for the H+/Dxr3 doesn't do CSS in hardware, so you have to do CSS in software. Sigma knows the kernel can be hacked to expose the internals of a driver, and they also know what a fit the MPAA and DVD CCA would have if THAT were to happen. People have offered to assist them in developing drivers - even for free, I'd bet, so cost is probably less of an issue than you seem to expect.
Well, the H+/Dxr3 doesn't do CSS in hardware - that's one major reason why Sigma doesn't want to provide support for the card on Linux. So we hafta use the LiViD CSS-auth code to do the dirty work. So that still leaves us in a problematic position... but I'll still support it, MPAA or no.
People have tried. I've volunteered. I've even volunteered to assist with closed-source drivers. Sigma Designs (makers of the chipset for the H+/Dxr3) have SPECIFICALLY stated they will NEVER, EVER provide Linux drivers for the card. Why, you ask? No CSS in hardware, that's why! They know that the Linux kernel, libc, etc. can be modified to (effectively) expose driver- and program-internal activity, and they of course fear the MPAA and DVD CCA, so they don't want us to be able to exploit their drivers as an alternate source for extracting pure MPEG-2 framestreams.
Lamelamelame. So now they want you to buy their $200+ NetStream2000 card, which is SUPPOSED to have Linux support sometime in the near future (not yet, mind you, and it won't be available for a month, at least, last I heard). After you've already bought their hardware. And they have little, if any, interest in any kind of upgrade program. So you'd have to sell your current card and buy a new card, with features you DON'T need, for $200 or more, to get what you already paid for? I'll do what I can to help the effort for developing our OWN drivers for the H+/Dxr3.
Not quite... it's good to know the limitations of the technology, sure, but the problem is that every so often, the doomsayers come out and say "This technology is going to die soon! It's reached its limit, it can't go any further!"... Yet, interestingly enough, someone always manages to figure out some way to extend its life, improve it, even though its death has been predicted. It's just stupid that a supposedly professional, respectable publication like SciAm would manage to consistently predict the death of many different technologies, while there's still life in them.
Yea, they have a new product (the NetStream 2000) that is supposedly going to have Linux drivers at some point (yah, we'll see) - but not yet. Mind you, this is a $200 board, not a $50-$60 board like the H+ (aka Dxr3). I am NOT impressed, Sigma. I'm not going to spend 200 clams on a new board, only to wait (yet again) for Linux support.
They need to put up or shut up - they've been doing too much talking about Linux support, and (at least from my POV) not actually DOING enough about it. Too much talking makes me think "smokescreen", kids.
Oh, they didn't _directly_ come right out and directly ignore their previous settlement, they just paid some lawyer to find some stupid little loophole in the language of it that they could exploit for their own purposes. Typical tactics from that company out of Redmond...
Riddle me this then:
Why does Sorenson claim that they are under an agreement with Apple that disallows them from licensing the(ir OWN) codec to anyone else, no matter the terms - they just aren't supposed to provide source access to anyone outside of their own company or Apple. Yet Apple (and you) claim that "it's not theirs, they can't control anything about it". Maybe it's just me, but I'm tending to think that Apple is the one who doesn't want to release the Sorenson codec, because they want an advantage.
Linux people don't care about advantage - we just wanna watch QT videos that are encoded with the Sorenson codec... is that so much to ask?
Well, considering it wouldn't be X 5, but XFree86 5 (XFree86 is just an implementation of the X Window System), I really don't see that as being a big problem...
Well, FBSD 3.x and 4.x are apparently the only platforms that they've built bins for yet. And of course the "Common" subdir doesn't have all the binary packages - that's where the "common" (i.e., platform-independent) packages go.
Yes, it's too good to be true. First of all, I've yet to see a Windows app that puts common DLLs in its own directory instead of the Windows directory tree. Second, it wouldn't matter, because of Windows' braindead DLL loader. Third, each app may have a different version of the DLL - so even if the above two conditions weren't true, automated combination wouldn't occur, because they wouldn't be the same files.
A stereotype about stereotypes? How about that...
But back to my point - the majority of TV shows, if you watch the plots, play on some sort of well-known stereotype. It's just the way Hollywood works. Is it so bad to acknowledge that? (There are the rare few shows and movies that reach beyond stereotypes - but they are all too rare.)
Okay, you have this huge icky computer killing people. Do you A) turn off the computer or B) send in more people to get killed? Of course, they pick B. Oh yes, there's some lame excuse about how it will ruin the game -- but please, didn't these people ever hear of backup????
Well, this just follows my theory about TV shows and movies like this - the whole plot (in this case, pretty thin, but I did get some good laughs) depends on some EXTREME act of human stupidity. This is standard-issue for TV and movies. The longer the chain of really stupid actions, the longer they can stretch out their paper-thin plot.
Of course, there was a lot of ridiculous stuff in this episode - but we're talking about TV here, and we all know TV plays on stereotypes. (Right?)
Maybe a mixture of Thresh and John Romero (the character that played "Darryl Musashi" just reminded me of Romero, don't ask me why)? I was immediately like, "Sounds like Romero"...
You certainly have a strong point there - ActiveX isn't the only way of doing it, it just makes it too damned easy - and THAT, my friend, is the main problem with it. It helps to make it too easy for stuff like this to happen. That's why it's a bad idea.
Abuse is bad enough - but someone making it easier for others to abuse you (or your system) is even worse, don't you think?
Is there anyone who got some spares at LWCE @ Javits? If so, I for one want one of these new bootable recovery discs. I have one of the previous ones (the one that LinuxCare gave out in San Jose in August), but this looks much better. Please let me know - I'd definitely like to get me one of these.
No, a round 3" can contain somewhere around 200 MB or so. 140 MB is about right for the size of disc shown in the photo that was linked in the story - I have one of the LinuxCare bootable business-card CDs from the Summer '99 LinuxWorld expo, and it contains somewhere about 50 MB of data, but it's cut a LOT smaller too.
Actually, those extra 8 bits are for alpha (transparency)... but they are rarely used. So it's not like they're JUST there for padding the pixel data out, but that ends up being their general purpose anyway.
I'd love to see Apple step up with QuickTime support for Linux as well.
Well, I'd love to see them support QuickTime on Linux AT ALL.
Simply, no. XFree doesn't know (or care) about Voodoo/Voodoo2 boards. That's strictly an issue of Glide 2.x working properly with the card... Make sure you have the right version of the Glide library.
How is it an "impassible" barrier? I certainly managed to get beyond it - it's called DOCUMENTATION. There are HOWTOs, man pages, and other online documentation, including assorted Web pages. There is also a wealth of information in books (O'Reilly books, for example, have been a MAJOR source of useful info for me).
There's not an "impassible" barrier to entry of the Linux world - the only thing holding anyone back is lack of desire. It doesn't have to cost anything, the docs aren't that hard to find... So, where's the problem?
I don't believe that anyone in the Linux community says that only WE are allowed "freedom", but freedom has a price. That price is responsibility. The biggest problem is that the average person wants all the freedom, with none of the responsibility that goes with it. The responsibility that (so far) is engendered in using Linux is that you must be willing to spend some time to learn it. However, you get a stable, powerful OS with a growing application base.
The typical user, as many have noted, doesn't care about stability or power - if they can browse their Web portals, Web shopping sites, and watch their movie trailers, send a little e-mail, do some minor word processing tasks, and a few other minor things, they're HAPPY. That's all they want, and that's all they really care about. So what if it crashes? As long as it comes back to something recognizable, they'll survive.
For me, that's not enough. For most Linux users, that's not enough. Most Linux users do more with their systems than that, and they are willing to learn what they need to so they can have the power they need/desire.
Also, as far as helping newbies goes, there's documentation out there. Most of them don't READ it - that's why they're still newbies, because they don't want to read, and they don't want to learn, they just want to have all the answers spoonfed to them. That, as I've been saying, is the difference between users of OSes like Linux (the *BSDs certainly fall under the same category) and "normal" people.
(I know many people won't agree with my assessment - but it's mine, and if you don't like it, then that's just too bad...)