My point was, it depends on your definition of "work". Obviously, some avoidable hardware-caused instability is acceptable to you. It's not to some of us.
Guess what? You can't guarantee they'll work - people on LKML have refused to help users who have done this, as it simply makes it impossible to determine whether problems are the fault of the kernel or of the CPU itself.
This is one for the overclockers who couldn't care less about stability, methinks...
Please note that the definition of UNIX(tm) (whether POSIX, UNIX98 or whatever other standard is in current usage) makes no particular claims about the internal workings of the kernel - only the API that the kernel exposes. Thus, you can have whatever damn scheduler you like and still be UNIX(tm)-compliant.
Well, no... the Ultra is more like the fully tricked-out ricebox of the range - inverted spoiler, fake vent in the bonnet, ground-effect kit that scrapes the pavement every time you hit a bump...
Remember when you were on dialup? (Maybe you never were.) The longer you spent online, the more money it cost you. If you have to sit there downloading 50 spam emails for every legitimate one, that's costing you money.
In some countries, you have to pay for data transfer by volume - so the more spam you have to download, the more you end up paying.
Not to mention the cost to the ISP of employing people who spend large amounts of their time handling problems caused by spam.
Oh, by the way, wasting my time is the *last* thing I want to happen - money I can make more of, but I can't get back the time I have to spend deleting spam.
You missed my point - the DVD output itself will be encrypted, and thus only displayable on "certified" devices - and you can be sure that no capture cards will be certified.
No, what they're trying to do is this: provide a cryptographically-guaranteed path for data to the graphics card, that cannot be intercepted.
What this allows is secure playback of DRM-protected material, in such a way that it is impossible for the user to grab the data.
Once manufacturers jump on the bandwagon, you'll end up with a PC with "Palladium-enhanced" components, such as the DVD drive, hard drive, video card and sound card, where you are unable to do anything at all with data streams from sources (the HDD or DVD drive) to sinks (the video or sound card) that's not permitted by the supplier of that data. In other words, forget ripping your DVDs or CDs.
Of those posts recommending the replacement of X, approximately one-half will mention the Windowing System Formerly Known as Berlin, one-quarter will babble aimlessly about the Linux framebuffer, and the remainder will offer no alternative, but merely observe that network transparency is unnecessary, giving their lack of need for this feature as the reason (e.g. "ive never neieded 2 use xwindows over the network, y would any1 ellse!!??").
Hate to tell you, but that 'legacy' CMYK technology is currently installed in just about every printer (think 'big book factory' rather than 'laser/inkjet/etc.') in the world. Not being able to submit graphic data in CMYK is a big limitation.
Actually, no, not anymore. Certainly trading terminals still exist, but a lot of companies have systems in between the market and their traders that are a lot more than a text terminal.
No, he's right - GT came out with the PS. I remember when the PS was released in Japan, and GT was one of the 'big' titles at the time. Perhaps you're thinking of one of the sequels?
Yes indeed. A couple of months ago, I bought a router/firewall product made by Fujitsu secondhand. When I asked for the source, they sent me a CD-ROM with the kernel + utilities they'd used to build it. Arrived in only a week or two as well.
If it wasn't necessary, would they do that? Of course not - ergo, they're required to do it.
Has anyone else seen the comments McBride has been making lately? Here's some choice quotes from news.com.com.com.com's unbiased and uninflammatory article, "Code Red for open source?":
"We're finding...cases where there is line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that is matching up to our UnixWare code," McBride said in an interview.
Please note that he has refused to release examples of this.
In addition, he said, "We're finding code that looks likes it's been obfuscated to make it look like it wasn't UnixWare code--but it was."
Please note that he has also refused to release examples of this, too.
"The Linux community would have me publish it now, (so they can have it) laundered by the time we can get to a court hearing. That's not the way we're going to go."
Yeah, that's a great excuse to not actually give any evidence of the accusations you're making - tell people that 'the Linux community' will try and sanitize every existing copy of the source code to all the versions of the kernel containing this supposed SCO source - which, he says, has been in the kernel for 'several years'! Perhaps he missed the bit where his lawyers briefed him on the GPL and how it lets anybody have a copy of the source code - including SCO itself! Is he really suggesting that SCO lacks the ability to keep a copy of all currently extant versions of the Linux kernel to use as evidence? F'chrissakes, the md5 checksums of Linus's kernels are public knowledge - if anybody tried to 'sanitize' a particular version, it'd be ridiculously easy to prove that it'd been changed since its original release.
"This is not about 10 lines of code, it's about 20 years of extremely valuable intellectual property we're trying to protect...Am I supposed to lie down and not say anything about it?" McBride said. "There's a certain point here where you stand up for what's right and let the chips fall where they will."
Gotta love that last line... McBride wouldn't know "what's right" if it came up and bit his ass.
I can't even begin to express my disgust for a company that insults, intimidates and sues the very people who have made it possible for SCO to distribute their own version of Linux. Crawl away and disappear, McBride - you're a liar and you know it.
Slashdot Mirror
My point was, it depends on your definition of "work". Obviously, some avoidable hardware-caused instability is acceptable to you. It's not to some of us.
Yeah, great - mod your XPs to act like MPs.
Guess what? You can't guarantee they'll work - people on LKML have refused to help users who have done this, as it simply makes it impossible to determine whether problems are the fault of the kernel or of the CPU itself.
This is one for the overclockers who couldn't care less about stability, methinks...
Please note that the definition of UNIX(tm) (whether POSIX, UNIX98 or whatever other standard is in current usage) makes no particular claims about the internal workings of the kernel - only the API that the kernel exposes. Thus, you can have whatever damn scheduler you like and still be UNIX(tm)-compliant.
Sotec... a "good Japanese brand"?! HAHAHAHAHA.
Really, Sotec have the worst reputation possible in Japan. Go to one of the large Japanese web BBS sites, and look at the posts there about it.
If you believe the reports, among other things they quite happily ship refurbished machines as 'brand new' ones.
Well, no... the Ultra is more like the fully tricked-out ricebox of the range - inverted spoiler, fake vent in the bonnet, ground-effect kit that scrapes the pavement every time you hit a bump...
First rule of spam: Spammers lie.
They'd never tell you who was really behind it.
What part of the word 'calculated' are you having trouble with?
If Spamhaus had never heard of this outfit, it's a bit difficult for them to have deliberately attempted to disrupt their business, isn't it?
Hello? Where were you when God handed out brains?
Remember when you were on dialup? (Maybe you never were.) The longer you spent online, the more money it cost you. If you have to sit there downloading 50 spam emails for every legitimate one, that's costing you money.
In some countries, you have to pay for data transfer by volume - so the more spam you have to download, the more you end up paying.
Not to mention the cost to the ISP of employing people who spend large amounts of their time handling problems caused by spam.
Oh, by the way, wasting my time is the *last* thing I want to happen - money I can make more of, but I can't get back the time I have to spend deleting spam.
Ctrl-l (that's an "L", not a "one").
You don't have to pay $34 for anything. Get ALSA and be happy.
You missed my point - the DVD output itself will be encrypted, and thus only displayable on "certified" devices - and you can be sure that no capture cards will be certified.
Great, so ripping DVDs requires that you point a video camera at the screen and set up a microphone in front of your speakers.
What, you thought that they'd leave the monitor and speakers alone? Tey'll be "Palladiumified" as well.
Yeah, I've still got this series - I still reread it every few years.
No, what they're trying to do is this: provide a cryptographically-guaranteed path for data to the graphics card, that cannot be intercepted.
What this allows is secure playback of DRM-protected material, in such a way that it is impossible for the user to grab the data.
Once manufacturers jump on the bandwagon, you'll end up with a PC with "Palladium-enhanced" components, such as the DVD drive, hard drive, video card and sound card, where you are unable to do anything at all with data streams from sources (the HDD or DVD drive) to sinks (the video or sound card) that's not permitted by the supplier of that data. In other words, forget ripping your DVDs or CDs.
Of those posts recommending the replacement of X, approximately one-half will mention the Windowing System Formerly Known as Berlin, one-quarter will babble aimlessly about the Linux framebuffer, and the remainder will offer no alternative, but merely observe that network transparency is unnecessary, giving their lack of need for this feature as the reason (e.g. "ive never neieded 2 use xwindows over the network, y would any1 ellse!!??").
But these problems have nothing to do with RGB being additive and CMY(K) being subtractive.
Er... who said they did?
iBugger off:wq
Wow, good solution. I pity any of your users who have acquaintances in ROK.
Hate to tell you, but that 'legacy' CMYK technology is currently installed in just about every printer (think 'big book factory' rather than 'laser/inkjet/etc.') in the world. Not being able to submit graphic data in CMYK is a big limitation.
Actually, no, not anymore. Certainly trading terminals still exist, but a lot of companies have systems in between the market and their traders that are a lot more than a text terminal.
No, he's right - GT came out with the PS. I remember when the PS was released in Japan, and GT was one of the 'big' titles at the time. Perhaps you're thinking of one of the sequels?
Minesweeper weenies. Can't avoid 'em, can't kill 'em.
Yes indeed. A couple of months ago, I bought a router/firewall product made by Fujitsu secondhand. When I asked for the source, they sent me a CD-ROM with the kernel + utilities they'd used to build it. Arrived in only a week or two as well.
If it wasn't necessary, would they do that? Of course not - ergo, they're required to do it.
Has anyone else seen the comments McBride has been making lately? Here's some choice quotes from news.com.com.com.com's unbiased and uninflammatory article, "Code Red for open source?":
"We're finding...cases where there is line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that is matching up to our UnixWare code," McBride said in an interview.
Please note that he has refused to release examples of this.
In addition, he said, "We're finding code that looks likes it's been obfuscated to make it look like it wasn't UnixWare code--but it was."
Please note that he has also refused to release examples of this, too.
"The Linux community would have me publish it now, (so they can have it) laundered by the time we can get to a court hearing. That's not the way we're going to go."
Yeah, that's a great excuse to not actually give any evidence of the accusations you're making - tell people that 'the Linux community' will try and sanitize every existing copy of the source code to all the versions of the kernel containing this supposed SCO source - which, he says, has been in the kernel for 'several years'! Perhaps he missed the bit where his lawyers briefed him on the GPL and how it lets anybody have a copy of the source code - including SCO itself! Is he really suggesting that SCO lacks the ability to keep a copy of all currently extant versions of the Linux kernel to use as evidence? F'chrissakes, the md5 checksums of Linus's kernels are public knowledge - if anybody tried to 'sanitize' a particular version, it'd be ridiculously easy to prove that it'd been changed since its original release.
"This is not about 10 lines of code, it's about 20 years of extremely valuable intellectual property we're trying to protect...Am I supposed to lie down and not say anything about it?" McBride said. "There's a certain point here where you stand up for what's right and let the chips fall where they will."
Gotta love that last line... McBride wouldn't know "what's right" if it came up and bit his ass.
I can't even begin to express my disgust for a company that insults, intimidates and sues the very people who have made it possible for SCO to distribute their own version of Linux. Crawl away and disappear, McBride - you're a liar and you know it.
Hmmm... I seem to recall that I saw this exact same post after the Opteron article.
Can you say A S T R O T U R F E R ? I knew you could!