FYI My WRT54GS (version 2) couldn't handle IPv6 over my 20Mbps ADSL2+... just locked up. The teeny CPU just couldn't cope.....
Switched out to a Netgear WNDR3700v2 and my he.net tunnel works a treat (openwrt).
Remember they've already spent around $300,000 of their own money so far and have been working on this in the background in their spare time as a 'skunkworks project' to this point over the past couple of years....
The funds from kickstarter is for providing full time devs now that they have got their engine in a decent state so they can give a big push to get it out by the end of this year all polished up and QA's etc as opposed to late next year dependent on how much time they could have spared....
PayPal is about to be activated for those that missed the kickstarter and later this summer Carmageddon 1 is being released on Android and iPhone/iPad in a shiney new edition... plus a funny 'pratcam' app which will all go into extra funds to make C:R....
ISP doesn't give an IP address... they give a network prefix... your systems will autogenerate an address with that network prefix - and with the privacy extensions that means a new address every 24hours be default.
Well Stainless Games will be using Steam for Carmageddon: Reincarnation... I'd prefer completely DRM free... but if they're going to use a DRM based distribution network Steam right now is the best there is - especially since they'll be using SteamPlay (for PC&Mac from one sale), SteamWorks (for multiplayer) and Steam Achievements....
Just hit $270k of the $400k goal.... so if you loved the old Carmageddon games (well 1 and 2 anyway) check out their kickstarter page.....
One point though which is really messed up....
Chrome works for rich behaviour on Mac and Windows - but last time I tried on Linux (Fedora 16) you could only get the light mode - Firefox worked for rich mode though...
We're on the most recent OWA as far as I know too....
They have more income than just advertising.... admittedly it is a large amount of their revenue but there is more than just that.
For example here in the UK the ISP Sky Broadband uses Google Apps for its customer email. I think the last financial update was 11-12 million customers or so... Each of those has a Sky email account with Google.... and those dont' come that cheap at that bulk...
I'm sure other ISPs do the same - and that's before looking at businesses or educational institutions using it and the relevant income form there.
And then after that there's Google Search Appliances for customer networks, income from providing search services (search.sky.com for instance you can see uses Google and they have to pay per query or something like that) and so on....
Just saying they are an ad company does them a great injustice.
And please don't forget that not all were of the 'lower class'... there was a millionaire's daughter and a primary school teacher's aide for example...
In addition if you read the release notes the RHEL6.1 security updates will be 'backported' to C6.0 until 6.1 is out in a few weeks... now they have the build environment sorted it will be much quicker to build stuff...
Indeed in the C6/updates/ repo there are already backported packages from rhel6.1.... look for the 0.5 dist tag... it's 0.5 so that when 6.1 gets released the formal 6.1 package will replace it....
So there isn't a security issue to using C6.0 right now really... and the 6.1 update will be more a feature event (like snapshotted lvm mirrors, the IPA tech preview etc).
Why would the browser need specific format support? Shouldn't it just query the OS for image decoders and automatically decode them using standard libraries? Seems like a far better solution than hard coding the image libraries in to the browser.
Specifically to standardise the browser platform - the same argument has been made for video (see the HTML5 video element wars).
Mozilla want to be able to say Firefox X.Y supports these formats to use: blah blah blah and not Firefox for on Win7 does X but on WinXP does Y whereas on Linux does Z if so and so library is installed and watch out for MacOSX since there it is Q....
At that point trying to work out the support matrix of what works where is a nightmare... plus they can know the level of expectation for performance, security etc this way as well rather than the chaos that would result.
It is also only a workaround within a given organisation (yes I do this to for my sites)...
For a hosting company (rackspace, 1&1, etc) it is not viable to do this realistically.
For http connections they can virtualhost any number of sites through a single IP... for https connections unless the various clients agree to share a certificate with another client the IPs will need to be different.
Would you really want to be a SAN on another person's cert so that the IP can be shared but that other server can then impersonate your encrypted connection?
Meh at my workplace we've been seriously considering one of the cloud services for certain bits... and possibly as a DR solution should our main production external facing sites go down.
Even *if* that were true (hint it isn't since the Android platform does not 'run Java' that would leave Google up #### creek in a major way. Check the Java conformity patent pledge - it only refers to desktop implementations. Mobile Java is not in any way pledged or even FOSS. Google would have been attacked then for using an unlicensed J2ME implementation (if they put that in place) or for violating Java patents on a platform that was not pledged to (pretty much status quo to now... just with less defences and a stronger position for Sun/Oracle).
Eh? Dalvik Java compatible?... anything but... register Vs stack based for a start, different byte code, no main function in dalvik... the list goes on for why dalvik is not java and vice versa... and the two runtimes certainly are not 'compatible' with each other!
I wouldn't exactly say it'll be that appealing a target given this:
We have not yet announced the pricing for MonoDroid, but you should anticipate that the price will be in the same range as MonoTouch ($400 USD for individual users, and $1,000 for enterprise users).
So not only are you targeting something that is likely to make your phone run slower you are also targeting an audience where someone has to pay as much as their phone outright (and they may have it free on contract...) again just to run a.Net App... based on that I put it to you that the pool will be minuscule - especially compared to using the proper SDK/NDK and distribution via the Market etc.
Let's ignore the DR-DOS bit for a moment (there is a reason they lost the court case over that) and also ignore that MS-DOS was ripped form Q-DOS...
You have the facts wrong on Internet Explorer. They licensed technology from Spyglass Inc for a small base fee plus a percentage of the royalties that would come from the revenue stream from IE. Then they gave IE away for free bundling it with the OS so that Spyglass got sweet F all compared to what was expected to be passed to them. There is a good reason Microsoft ended up settling with them later on when they were called on it... but not soon enough for Spyglass to survive as a company.
Wordperfect and Lotus were both under fire from MS in the DOS days with the intention of hurting the competitor's product. You can read more details about these in the USA Vs Microsoft case and the Comes Vs Microsoft documents.
the Sun Vs Microsoft case wasn't patent war but rather a contract and trademark dispute.
Because Microsoft had a contract with Sun to create a certified VM and they broke the conditions plus they called it Java when it wasn't they got hit with the judicial hammer...
Slashdot Mirror
FYI My WRT54GS (version 2) couldn't handle IPv6 over my 20Mbps ADSL2+ ... just locked up. The teeny CPU just couldn't cope.....
Switched out to a Netgear WNDR3700v2 and my he.net tunnel works a treat (openwrt).
Remember they've already spent around $300,000 of their own money so far and have been working on this in the background in their spare time as a 'skunkworks project' to this point over the past couple of years....
The funds from kickstarter is for providing full time devs now that they have got their engine in a decent state so they can give a big push to get it out by the end of this year all polished up and QA's etc as opposed to late next year dependent on how much time they could have spared....
PayPal is about to be activated for those that missed the kickstarter and later this summer Carmageddon 1 is being released on Android and iPhone/iPad in a shiney new edition... plus a funny 'pratcam' app which will all go into extra funds to make C:R ....
ISP doesn't give an IP address... they give a network prefix... your systems will autogenerate an address with that network prefix - and with the privacy extensions that means a new address every 24hours be default.
Well Stainless Games will be using Steam for Carmageddon: Reincarnation ... I'd prefer completely DRM free... but if they're going to use a DRM based distribution network Steam right now is the best there is - especially since they'll be using SteamPlay (for PC&Mac from one sale), SteamWorks (for multiplayer) and Steam Achievements....
Just hit $270k of the $400k goal.... so if you loved the old Carmageddon games (well 1 and 2 anyway) check out their kickstarter page.....
The reward tiers are pretty generous too ;)
One point though which is really messed up.... Chrome works for rich behaviour on Mac and Windows - but last time I tried on Linux (Fedora 16) you could only get the light mode - Firefox worked for rich mode though... We're on the most recent OWA as far as I know too....
The code in question (TimSort) was donated to OpenJDK7 by the Google engineer.... ;)
Makes their focus on this even sillier.....
They have more income than just advertising.... admittedly it is a large amount of their revenue but there is more than just that.
For example here in the UK the ISP Sky Broadband uses Google Apps for its customer email. I think the last financial update was 11-12 million customers or so... Each of those has a Sky email account with Google.... and those dont' come that cheap at that bulk...
I'm sure other ISPs do the same - and that's before looking at businesses or educational institutions using it and the relevant income form there.
And then after that there's Google Search Appliances for customer networks, income from providing search services (search.sky.com for instance you can see uses Google and they have to pay per query or something like that) and so on....
Just saying they are an ad company does them a great injustice.
3.5 is EOL with known security issues... at least be on the 'old stable' of 3.6.X (3.6.20 security update due soon)...
And please don't forget that not all were of the 'lower class'... there was a millionaire's daughter and a primary school teacher's aide for example...
In addition if you read the release notes the RHEL6.1 security updates will be 'backported' to C6.0 until 6.1 is out in a few weeks... now they have the build environment sorted it will be much quicker to build stuff...
Indeed in the C6 /updates/ repo there are already backported packages from rhel6.1 .... look for the 0.5 dist tag ... it's 0.5 so that when 6.1 gets released the formal 6.1 package will replace it....
So there isn't a security issue to using C6.0 right now really... and the 6.1 update will be more a feature event (like snapshotted lvm mirrors, the IPA tech preview etc).
Specifically to standardise the browser platform - the same argument has been made for video (see the HTML5 video element wars).
Mozilla want to be able to say Firefox X.Y supports these formats to use: blah blah blah and not Firefox for on Win7 does X but on WinXP does Y whereas on Linux does Z if so and so library is installed and watch out for MacOSX since there it is Q....
At that point trying to work out the support matrix of what works where is a nightmare... plus they can know the level of expectation for performance, security etc this way as well rather than the chaos that would result.
Many mobile providers are using NAT already... just as most ISPs will for the next year at least...
My Android mobile phone on Orange UK gets a 10.0.0.0/8 address.... I imagien other mobile carriers are doing similar.
It is also only a workaround within a given organisation (yes I do this to for my sites)... For a hosting company (rackspace, 1&1, etc) it is not viable to do this realistically. For http connections they can virtualhost any number of sites through a single IP... for https connections unless the various clients agree to share a certificate with another client the IPs will need to be different. Would you really want to be a SAN on another person's cert so that the IP can be shared but that other server can then impersonate your encrypted connection?
Meh at my workplace we've been seriously considering one of the cloud services for certain bits... and possibly as a DR solution should our main production external facing sites go down.
Even *if* that were true (hint it isn't since the Android platform does not 'run Java' that would leave Google up #### creek in a major way. Check the Java conformity patent pledge - it only refers to desktop implementations. Mobile Java is not in any way pledged or even FOSS. Google would have been attacked then for using an unlicensed J2ME implementation (if they put that in place) or for violating Java patents on a platform that was not pledged to (pretty much status quo to now... just with less defences and a stronger position for Sun/Oracle).
Eh? Dalvik Java compatible?... anything but... register Vs stack based for a start, different byte code, no main function in dalvik... the list goes on for why dalvik is not java and vice versa... and the two runtimes certainly are not 'compatible' with each other!
I've had plenty of practice ;)
http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/evil_genius
Mod parent up for some useful info!
Microsoft could have settled with him and then he could have used that as an example to go after others... ;)
Ah my mistake - I was under the impression that they would have been forced into doing what the contract said...
But then I don't exactly blame Sun for telling MS to sod off at that point!
I wouldn't exactly say it'll be that appealing a target given this:
We have not yet announced the pricing for MonoDroid, but you should anticipate that the price will be in the same range as MonoTouch ($400 USD for individual users, and $1,000 for enterprise users).
So not only are you targeting something that is likely to make your phone run slower you are also targeting an audience where someone has to pay as much as their phone outright (and they may have it free on contract...) again just to run a .Net App... based on that I put it to you that the pool will be minuscule - especially compared to using the proper SDK/NDK and distribution via the Market etc.
Nice to see you refuted so thoroughly at the link you so kindly provided - thanks!
Let's ignore the DR-DOS bit for a moment (there is a reason they lost the court case over that) and also ignore that MS-DOS was ripped form Q-DOS...
You have the facts wrong on Internet Explorer. They licensed technology from Spyglass Inc for a small base fee plus a percentage of the royalties that would come from the revenue stream from IE. Then they gave IE away for free bundling it with the OS so that Spyglass got sweet F all compared to what was expected to be passed to them. There is a good reason Microsoft ended up settling with them later on when they were called on it... but not soon enough for Spyglass to survive as a company.
Wordperfect and Lotus were both under fire from MS in the DOS days with the intention of hurting the competitor's product. You can read more details about these in the USA Vs Microsoft case and the Comes Vs Microsoft documents.
Not quite correct...
the Sun Vs Microsoft case wasn't patent war but rather a contract and trademark dispute.
Because Microsoft had a contract with Sun to create a certified VM and they broke the conditions plus they called it Java when it wasn't they got hit with the judicial hammer...