You're only like the hojillionth person who has thought of this. It even got implemented on a fairly large scale by Sun. The SBUS cards from Sun used a general purpose driver written in "FCode" until the OS booted and the real driver could be loaded. One benefit of FCode is that the card can be used before the OS boots (useful for Ethernet and SCSI cards). The other great benefit is that FCode is CPU and architecture independent: it's an interpreted language!
I'll bet money that Sun wasn't the first company to implement the idea, and almost certainly not the first people to think of this idea. You're probably 30 years too late for that.
Slashdot is definitely becoming less and less interesting, more and more of the articles found here are either duplicates or stupid MS bashing, and that's really sad, this site could be so much more than a message board for MS haters.
So why don't you talk about the story instead of launching into yet another tiresome soapbox rant about Microsoft vs Slashdot. You're as much to blame for the "decline of Slashdot" as are all the knee-jerk Microsoft haters.
You're missing the point. There's nothing wrong with Nintendo charging different prices in different countries. Nintendo is in trouble because they were preventing their distributors from selling between countries. Third parties should be allowed to buy in Spain, import to Britain, and make a profit. Nintendo was doing illegal things to prevent this free trade.
Now, if I want to sell that game to someone in Britain for $50, and someone in Germany for $100, is there something wrong with that?
Nope. Perfectly Ok.
After all, can't the German customer just call up someone in Britain and have them buy it for him and ship it to Germany, and pay him the $50 plus a bit for his troubles?
This is the problem. Nintendo was strong-arming their distributors to prevent them from doing this. That's an impediment to free trade and very illegal.
Downloading movies in any decent quality over the internet, simply for viewing it, is a joke.
You're being short-sighted. 30 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your expensive long-haul serial links on e-mail. 20 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your precious BBS caps on images. 10 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your 14.4kB Internet connection on music files.
Today I have no concern with downloading email, colour images, music files, etc. Movies are still too big for me but I've no doubt that in 10 years it'll be par for the course: just like music files are commonplace today. The companies are going to use the bleeding edge crowd - the people who can afford a phat pipe - to develop and test software interfaces and licensing.
This is the frontier. These people are the pioneers. You're the luddite proclaiming "there's no immediate benefit so there's no point in even trying". Pooh to you.
...in general 10db is considered to sound like "a doubling in volume"...
The parent poster wasn't talking about power. Volume, or how loud something appears to the senses, is measured in sones. 1 sone approximately equals 10 dB though that varies with the frequency and magnitude of the sound.
Volume and loudness are not the same thing. Sones are a measure of loudness and is dependent on the frequency components. Volume is a measurement of intensity and it is typically measured in watts per square meter. A frequency at 3kHz will sound louder than a frequency at 5kHz even if they are played at the same volume because the human ear is more sensitive to the "voice" range. So 3dB is a doubling in volume no matter what the frequency, while 10dB is a doubling in loudness for a given frequency. Thus my comment that the parent poster typoed: he meant loudness where he wrote volume. It looks like 4 of you made the same mistake when you "corrected" me:-)
But don't take my word for it. Good essay on sones and phons here
This might seem like they are understating the case, but in general 10db is considered to sound like "a doubling in volume" so a difference of 40db is roughly 2 to the 4th or 16x.
No. 3dB is a doubling in volume. The relevant formula is dB = 10 log(P/P0). You got the 10x and 20x right so I'm guessing you just typoed.
*MOST PEOPLE* don't have a study, or multiple computers in one house.
I do, and I'm looking forward to the day when I can migrate XChat from my study desktop to my laptop in the living room, move my KGhostview e-book off my laptop onto my PDA in my bedroom, or chuck the MPEG I just downloaded off the study desktop onto the big TV screen in my lounge.
But you're going to have a hard time convincing me that sliminess alone made the what they are today.
And you'll have a long time waiting for me to do this, because I never claimed it, and I never will. You're not the only person that understands that there is never a single reason for anything. I even spelt this out in a previous post I wrote in this thread. But this is irrelevant because I only argued against this specific claim of yours:
... Microsoft didn't get powerful by bullying.
I pointed out that the courts disagreed with you. You took 3 posts to complain about how I'm completely wrong and unfair but you still can't see the blindingly obvious. You even say
I never denied) that MS did shitty stuff.
You wax on about other positive benefits of Microsoft software - most of them benefits from monopoly power - but you can't seem to make the connection that their "shitty stuff" and their success are entwined. I couldn't care less about the benefits that you perceive - those are just your opinions and not everybody will share your views - but it's a fact, established by the judiciary, that Microsoft's success is due to "bullying". I don't understand why you continue to deny it.
Btw, if you've read this far, I really appreciate it. I may disagree with you but at least you listened. And for that, I say thank you, and I respect you for that.
I did read it all but I don't agree with it. Microsoft didn't play fair so there's no way of knowing if their products won because people wanted them. Nobody had the choice. There was never a chance to find out.
What we do know is that Microsoft killed competitors with dirty tricks and illegal behaviour. That's not conjecture. It's not hypothesis. It's established fact!
You might claim that I'm speaking "crap" and being a "childish brat" and spreading "FUD". But I've just got to point at the court records to justify my opinion. What do you have to justify yours? That you think Windows 2000 is the "best choice"? Colour me unimpressed. It's easy to be the best when you've killed all your competition.
"Oversimplify, oversimplify, oversimplify, end of story."
My point was best made concisely but it was difficult to reduce the history of Microsoft into less than 50 words, so I didn't bother. If you're still unconvinced then here's the long version.
Microsoft has played dirty with all of the competition I listed. For example:
BeOS: vendors pressured into not selling BeOS in competition with Windows.
DRDOS: Microsoft applications rewritten to detect DRDOS and give false error messages.
OS/2: Microsoft lied to IBM over the purpose of Windows and reneged on agreements.
Those are just the confirmed and indisputable nasties. There are plenty of vicious rumors about other nasties they've pulled.
Now you could argue that there were multiple contributing reasons why each OS failed. I would not disagree. That doesn't invalidate my point which is that Microsoft got where they are with illegal and dishonest behaviour. The judges came to the same conclusion. However the judges had to write over 170 pages of text to say that without "oversimplifying". It's silly for you to expect the same level of detail from a throwaway comment on slashdot. My best guess it that you just want to discount anybody who disagrees with you, and you'll use any excuse to do it.
MS didn't get big by bullying people around, it got big because it made computers into something average people can make really good use of.
You might not have noticed this recent court case where some smart judges decided that you're wrong. Microsoft got big by bullying people around. It's no secret.
That is why people are buying Windows machines, it's not because they're unaware of Linux's existence. Today, it is not ready.
I agree Linux isn't ready, but GEOS and OS/2 and DRDOS and MacOS and BeOS were ready and they still didn't survive. They aren't around anymore because Microsoft played dirty. End of story.
You should have said "imagine a Microsoft EULA that says: if you don't contribute to Linux you can use Windows for free". Not such an issue anymore, is it?
You're right. That's even worse. I can't imagine anything more disgusting.
If you leave your front door wide open and a neighbor comes over and uses your bathroom, then leaves is it a crime ?
Yes.
If you use resources without the owner's permission, it's a crime. It doesn't make any difference if the resources were improperly secured. If you get caught doing it, then the magistrate is going to throw the book at you.
Many years before this happened Richard pointed out the flaws of relying on non free software. Will any of the slashdot posters who called him crazy then apologize now?
No, they won't.
Hating RMS is a religion. Facts don't faze the fanatics.
I first tried out GIMP... Photoshop... Photoshop... Photoshop...
I then installed OpenOffice... Microsoft Office... Microsoft Word... PowerPoint
So what you really wanted was Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop. But instead of buying these products you thought you could buy cheaper (free) "equivalents". Then you complain that they're not exactly the same as the more expensive products.
The free software people aren't claiming that these products are exactly the same. If you want Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop then open your wallet and buy them. Your expectation was that you could download a free product and get Microsoft Word. That's your mistake.
Slashdot Mirror
... the radio waves are noisy in joisey?
You're only like the hojillionth person who has thought of this. It even got implemented on a fairly large scale by Sun. The SBUS cards from Sun used a general purpose driver written in "FCode" until the OS booted and the real driver could be loaded. One benefit of FCode is that the card can be used before the OS boots (useful for Ethernet and SCSI cards). The other great benefit is that FCode is CPU and architecture independent: it's an interpreted language!
I'll bet money that Sun wasn't the first company to implement the idea, and almost certainly not the first people to think of this idea. You're probably 30 years too late for that.
So why don't you talk about the story instead of launching into yet another tiresome soapbox rant about Microsoft vs Slashdot. You're as much to blame for the "decline of Slashdot" as are all the knee-jerk Microsoft haters.
Ford Mondeo.
The end effect is that the price was fixed (by Nintendo) and free market forces weren't able to lower it (because of Nintendo).
DVD region codes are also an example of price-fixing and the MPAA is going to get slapped for it one day.
You're missing the point. There's nothing wrong with Nintendo charging different prices in different countries. Nintendo is in trouble because they were preventing their distributors from selling between countries. Third parties should be allowed to buy in Spain, import to Britain, and make a profit. Nintendo was doing illegal things to prevent this free trade.
Nope. Perfectly Ok.
This is the problem. Nintendo was strong-arming their distributors to prevent them from doing this. That's an impediment to free trade and very illegal.
You're being short-sighted. 30 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your expensive long-haul serial links on e-mail. 20 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your precious BBS caps on images. 10 years ago it was "a joke" to waste your 14.4kB Internet connection on music files.
Today I have no concern with downloading email, colour images, music files, etc. Movies are still too big for me but I've no doubt that in 10 years it'll be par for the course: just like music files are commonplace today. The companies are going to use the bleeding edge crowd - the people who can afford a phat pipe - to develop and test software interfaces and licensing.
This is the frontier. These people are the pioneers. You're the luddite proclaiming "there's no immediate benefit so there's no point in even trying". Pooh to you.
Volume and loudness are not the same thing. Sones are a measure of loudness and is dependent on the frequency components. Volume is a measurement of intensity and it is typically measured in watts per square meter. A frequency at 3kHz will sound louder than a frequency at 5kHz even if they are played at the same volume because the human ear is more sensitive to the "voice" range. So 3dB is a doubling in volume no matter what the frequency, while 10dB is a doubling in loudness for a given frequency. Thus my comment that the parent poster typoed: he meant loudness where he wrote volume. It looks like 4 of you made the same mistake when you "corrected" me :-)
But don't take my word for it. Good essay on sones and phons here
And a description of volume here.
NOFX is brilliant. Punk in drublic sets the standard for modern punk. Don't be put-off by the lyrics. Listen to the music.
Yes.
Yes.
No. 3dB is a doubling in volume. The relevant formula is dB = 10 log(P/P0). You got the 10x and 20x right so I'm guessing you just typoed.
I think considerably more than 10. I'm not a fan of house (though I have a soft spot for KLF) but even I understood what you said.
I do, and I'm looking forward to the day when I can migrate XChat from my study desktop to my laptop in the living room, move my KGhostview e-book off my laptop onto my PDA in my bedroom, or chuck the MPEG I just downloaded off the study desktop onto the big TV screen in my lounge.
And you'll have a long time waiting for me to do this, because I never claimed it, and I never will. You're not the only person that understands that there is never a single reason for anything. I even spelt this out in a previous post I wrote in this thread. But this is irrelevant because I only argued against this specific claim of yours:
I pointed out that the courts disagreed with you. You took 3 posts to complain about how I'm completely wrong and unfair but you still can't see the blindingly obvious. You even say
You wax on about other positive benefits of Microsoft software - most of them benefits from monopoly power - but you can't seem to make the connection that their "shitty stuff" and their success are entwined. I couldn't care less about the benefits that you perceive - those are just your opinions and not everybody will share your views - but it's a fact, established by the judiciary, that Microsoft's success is due to "bullying". I don't understand why you continue to deny it.
I did read it all but I don't agree with it. Microsoft didn't play fair so there's no way of knowing if their products won because people wanted them. Nobody had the choice. There was never a chance to find out.
What we do know is that Microsoft killed competitors with dirty tricks and illegal behaviour. That's not conjecture. It's not hypothesis. It's established fact!
You might claim that I'm speaking "crap" and being a "childish brat" and spreading "FUD". But I've just got to point at the court records to justify my opinion. What do you have to justify yours? That you think Windows 2000 is the "best choice"? Colour me unimpressed. It's easy to be the best when you've killed all your competition.
My point was best made concisely but it was difficult to reduce the history of Microsoft into less than 50 words, so I didn't bother. If you're still unconvinced then here's the long version.
Microsoft has played dirty with all of the competition I listed. For example:
Those are just the confirmed and indisputable nasties. There are plenty of vicious rumors about other nasties they've pulled.
Now you could argue that there were multiple contributing reasons why each OS failed. I would not disagree. That doesn't invalidate my point which is that Microsoft got where they are with illegal and dishonest behaviour. The judges came to the same conclusion. However the judges had to write over 170 pages of text to say that without "oversimplifying". It's silly for you to expect the same level of detail from a throwaway comment on slashdot. My best guess it that you just want to discount anybody who disagrees with you, and you'll use any excuse to do it.
You might not have noticed this recent court case where some smart judges decided that you're wrong. Microsoft got big by bullying people around. It's no secret.
I agree Linux isn't ready, but GEOS and OS/2 and DRDOS and MacOS and BeOS were ready and they still didn't survive. They aren't around anymore because Microsoft played dirty. End of story.
Christmas came early this year.
woohoo
You're right. That's even worse. I can't imagine anything more disgusting.
Spoken like somebody who has never read LKML.
Practise what you preach.
Yes.
If you use resources without the owner's permission, it's a crime. It doesn't make any difference if the resources were improperly secured. If you get caught doing it, then the magistrate is going to throw the book at you.
You said
And he said
Little "b" means "bits". 10baseT is plenty of bandwidth for streaming CD audio.
No, they won't.
Hating RMS is a religion. Facts don't faze the fanatics.
So what you really wanted was Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop. But instead of buying these products you thought you could buy cheaper (free) "equivalents". Then you complain that they're not exactly the same as the more expensive products.
The free software people aren't claiming that these products are exactly the same. If you want Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop then open your wallet and buy them. Your expectation was that you could download a free product and get Microsoft Word. That's your mistake.
Which would make you a pretty bloody awful investor.