Essentially, the difference between Gnutella and OpenNap is that the clients are serving the search routing, as well as performing searches. Napster's OC-48 line isn't used to send people the actual song they want, just handle all the search requests of millions of users.
I am willing to bet that OpenNap's bandwidth-imposed user limit will be a good bit higher than Gnutella's, because the servers will likely be big boxes on dedicated pipes, not a warez d00d doing searches and downloads of his own while he serves GnutellaNet search requests.
OpenNap will (and is) be far more accessible to the modem user than Gnutella. Downloads may be slow, but at least they'll be able to find something in the first place.
dss.clip2.com has a bunch of fascinating stuff about how Gnutella works, and how to deal with its problems.
In almost ALL EULA's, somewhere near the bottom there is a clause stating that the terms of the agreement are subject to change at any time, at the company's whim. I'm sure Sony's does as well.
If you agree to let Sony change their EULA whenever and however they want, then you really can't do anything about it.
Java in general is not bad, but the Msc implementation is basically crap. You have to jump through big and complicated hurdles to run Java apps on a Mac. No Java 2, either.
No, all indictations are that it's for real this time. This rumor has been floating around on the net for longer than the Dreamcast has been around, but it appears to be true this time.
Yes, Sega did issue a press release reinstating their support of the Dreamcast. This doesn't change the fact that they will be supporting the system solely through software sales, and won't make anymore systems after some time this March.
On the bright side, Sega makes some very cool games (Shenmue, PSO, etc), and I would just love to see them on other console systems.
I have to wonder... In 50 years or so, when our computers are more biological-based than silicon-based, would "decoding" a signal with your ears or eyes count as a violation of the DMCA? Maybe only if they wanted to present content directly into your brain.
Actually, as far as I can tell, they aren't going to be using this computer for nuclear research/testing. It's being jointly developed by some biotech company, and there's a lot of marketing blather about how great genomics and biotech is.
>OSX PB is time limited, but you get to refund it's price vs. the OSX release price.
Really!? Cool. There goes my last reason *not* to get the preview release. Thanks for letting that be known.
>it is a shame they are using the Mach kernel.
Eh? What would you prefer? A BSD kernel?
Personally, I wish that OS X was more like NeXTStep, and less like OS 9. I can see why they would want to make the transition easy, but jesus, Mac OS has had so many ideas piled on top of each other for the past 16 years that I would like to see an almost pure NeXT desktop on my Mac. Pure, simple, and uncluttered NeXT-ness.
I like the Dock. It makes it far easier than the classic application switcher to quickly see what you're running (all you need is a quick glance), and is also better than the Windows task bar, as the Dock icons take up less space than the text names in Windows.
That's my rant. Mac OS X is something that Mac fans have been waiting for for the better part of 5 years.
True... If somebody cared to donate a 5,000 processsor supercomputer to Seti@Home then maybe we could take a more wholistic approach to looking for ET. Of course that'll never happen, but it should be noted that the popularity of Seti@Home far outstripped what the organizers expected. Plus, computers are going to keep getting faster for a good number of years, so maybe a few years down the road, a lot more indepth analysis of the signals could be done.
If you can play a fps game well on a trackpad, then I envy you. Most people just plug in an external mouse to play games.
Re:Nut - that would make too much sense
on
Macs In Space II
·
· Score: 1
Yes, using actual G4 Cubes is rather silly; there's a lot of hardware going to waste (the video card, for instance), and money, because Cubes are colossally overpriced. But for a lightweight space computer, the *concept* of a G4 and Cube makes a lot of sense.
We can assume they're writing some custom code for whatever the box is doing up there, which means they can use Altivec, which means some very impressive performance, if they need it. G4's in themselves are small and cool-running, and perform very well, if Altivec enhancemnent is being used.
It might have made more sense to use some custom designed G4 hardware boards, but it still makes a lot more sense than using a Pentium III, for god's sake.
Yes, but no one wants to see Pitfall on their 300 dollar playstation 2. That's why they still have the Atari.
The entire argument that gameplay is unequivocally more important than graphics is a) trendy these days and b) dumb. You need both to have a good game. Gamers these days look to a far higher standard than they did, say, 10 years ago.
Oh yeah, and graphics AND gameplay are both integral factors in "immersing" gamers. So if Tetris works fine for you, then play Tetris, but don't dis pretty looking games because they're pretty.
No, no, it's more like Douglas Adams; remember the clairyoiant elevators in Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy? (hmm, maybe it was book 2)
Or, of course, the annoyingly cheerful ship computer Eddy, or the drink machine that would always produce a substance that was almost, but not entirely, quite unlike tea, or Marvin the paraniod android, or...
I'd say that Adams predicted the de-evolution of technology pretty well.
Careful what you say; GNUStep is duplicating the OpenStep API's, NOT the OS X API's. A good deal has changed in the road to OS X, and the graphics are totally different. The only similar thing about Display Postscript and Quartz is that they are licensed from Adobe.
Any OpenStep library calls or code that coincidentally works in OS X does so only because it's something Apple didn't change.
And Apple is not going to open up any kind of Aqua/Quartz documentation like they did with OpenStep any time soon anyway (and that was technically NeXT that published the Openstep spec, not Apple).
Hmm, what I'd really like to see is to have it the other way around, with X fully incorporated into Aqua. It seems like all the implementations mentioned above only go part-way, ie the X apps are run their own fullscreen sized window. I suppose that works for some things, but wouldn't it be nice to have X apps inhabiting the OS X desktop, looking and acting just like Quartz windows and apps? I'm sure it could be done.
That would be kind of silly; Power4's are huge, power consuming beasts. Apple would almost certainly have to make a new case to fit them in. And besides, it would cost like $10,000 USD. Maybe if Apple re-entered the high-end server market, it would become a reality.
Slashdot Mirror
True, true, but there's also the old adage "if it aint't broke, don't fix it." Unix is hardly broken, it just needs some tweaking now and then.
D00d, that's like 30 years of computing down the drain. Will everybody have to start using PDP-11's again? ;)
I never have mod access when I want it... Someone mod this guy up, he's making an excellent point.
There's a PimpWars game on the net somewhere, it might be pimpwars.com, I don't know. The jist of it is, of course, well, that's obvious...
Essentially, the difference between Gnutella and OpenNap is that the clients are serving the search routing, as well as performing searches. Napster's OC-48 line isn't used to send people the actual song they want, just handle all the search requests of millions of users.
I am willing to bet that OpenNap's bandwidth-imposed user limit will be a good bit higher than Gnutella's, because the servers will likely be big boxes on dedicated pipes, not a warez d00d doing searches and downloads of his own while he serves GnutellaNet search requests.
OpenNap will (and is) be far more accessible to the modem user than Gnutella. Downloads may be slow, but at least they'll be able to find something in the first place.
dss.clip2.com has a bunch of fascinating stuff about how Gnutella works, and how to deal with its problems.
In almost ALL EULA's, somewhere near the bottom there is a clause stating that the terms of the agreement are subject to change at any time, at the company's whim. I'm sure Sony's does as well.
If you agree to let Sony change their EULA whenever and however they want, then you really can't do anything about it.
err, Mac. I should have previewed.
Java in general is not bad, but the Msc implementation is basically crap. You have to jump through big and complicated hurdles to run Java apps on a Mac. No Java 2, either.
No, all indictations are that it's for real this time. This rumor has been floating around on the net for longer than the Dreamcast has been around, but it appears to be true this time.
Yes, Sega did issue a press release reinstating their support of the Dreamcast. This doesn't change the fact that they will be supporting the system solely through software sales, and won't make anymore systems after some time this March.
On the bright side, Sega makes some very cool games (Shenmue, PSO, etc), and I would just love to see them on other console systems.
I have to wonder... In 50 years or so, when our computers are more biological-based than silicon-based, would "decoding" a signal with your ears or eyes count as a violation of the DMCA? Maybe only if they wanted to present content directly into your brain.
Hey, it's kinda like The Matrix. Creepy.
Actually, as far as I can tell, they aren't going to be using this computer for nuclear research/testing. It's being jointly developed by some biotech company, and there's a lot of marketing blather about how great genomics and biotech is.
Ummmm...
No, that's NERV.
>OSX PB is time limited, but you get to refund it's price vs. the OSX release price.
Really!? Cool. There goes my last reason *not* to get the preview release. Thanks for letting that be known.
>it is a shame they are using the Mach kernel.
Eh? What would you prefer? A BSD kernel?
Personally, I wish that OS X was more like NeXTStep, and less like OS 9. I can see why they would want to make the transition easy, but jesus, Mac OS has had so many ideas piled on top of each other for the past 16 years that I would like to see an almost pure NeXT desktop on my Mac. Pure, simple, and uncluttered NeXT-ness.
I like the Dock. It makes it far easier than the classic application switcher to quickly see what you're running (all you need is a quick glance), and is also better than the Windows task bar, as the Dock icons take up less space than the text names in Windows.
That's my rant. Mac OS X is something that Mac fans have been waiting for for the better part of 5 years.
True... If somebody cared to donate a 5,000 processsor supercomputer to Seti@Home then maybe we could take a more wholistic approach to looking for ET. Of course that'll never happen, but it should be noted that the popularity of Seti@Home far outstripped what the organizers expected. Plus, computers are going to keep getting faster for a good number of years, so maybe a few years down the road, a lot more indepth analysis of the signals could be done.
a quote from one of their pages:
"we are strong advocates of the Linux OS and will provide tools specifically for Linux games."
They're talking about some kind of game development tools, but from the sound of that, linux clients might not be far off.
Most custom map servers play shitty maps. It's a shame, because there are amazing custom maps out there for any game.
There is a beta of a Mac version of Windows Media Player, too.
Thank god someone stopped the insanity and called the new version 3ivx, or whatever.
If you can play a fps game well on a trackpad, then I envy you. Most people just plug in an external mouse to play games.
Yes, using actual G4 Cubes is rather silly; there's a lot of hardware going to waste (the video card, for instance), and money, because Cubes are colossally overpriced. But for a lightweight space computer, the *concept* of a G4 and Cube makes a lot of sense.
We can assume they're writing some custom code for whatever the box is doing up there, which means they can use Altivec, which means some very impressive performance, if they need it. G4's in themselves are small and cool-running, and perform very well, if Altivec enhancemnent is being used.
It might have made more sense to use some custom designed G4 hardware boards, but it still makes a lot more sense than using a Pentium III, for god's sake.
Yes, but no one wants to see Pitfall on their 300 dollar playstation 2. That's why they still have the Atari.
The entire argument that gameplay is unequivocally more important than graphics is a) trendy these days and b) dumb. You need both to have a good game. Gamers these days look to a far higher standard than they did, say, 10 years ago.
Oh yeah, and graphics AND gameplay are both integral factors in "immersing" gamers. So if Tetris works fine for you, then play Tetris, but don't dis pretty looking games because they're pretty.
No, no, it's more like Douglas Adams; remember the clairyoiant elevators in Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy? (hmm, maybe it was book 2)
Or, of course, the annoyingly cheerful ship computer Eddy, or the drink machine that would always produce a substance that was almost, but not entirely, quite unlike tea, or Marvin the paraniod android, or...
I'd say that Adams predicted the de-evolution of technology pretty well.
Careful what you say; GNUStep is duplicating the OpenStep API's, NOT the OS X API's. A good deal has changed in the road to OS X, and the graphics are totally different. The only similar thing about Display Postscript and Quartz is that they are licensed from Adobe.
Any OpenStep library calls or code that coincidentally works in OS X does so only because it's something Apple didn't change.
And Apple is not going to open up any kind of Aqua/Quartz documentation like they did with OpenStep any time soon anyway (and that was technically NeXT that published the Openstep spec, not Apple).
Hmm, what I'd really like to see is to have it the other way around, with X fully incorporated into Aqua. It seems like all the implementations mentioned above only go part-way, ie the X apps are run their own fullscreen sized window. I suppose that works for some things, but wouldn't it be nice to have X apps inhabiting the OS X desktop, looking and acting just like Quartz windows and apps? I'm sure it could be done.
That would be kind of silly; Power4's are huge, power consuming beasts. Apple would almost certainly have to make a new case to fit them in. And besides, it would cost like $10,000 USD. Maybe if Apple re-entered the high-end server market, it would become a reality.