Re:I guess someone at TiVo downloaded Mythtv
on
TiVo to Offer SDK
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The DirecTV HD Tivo can do that as well. As a matter of fact, it can merge the OTA broadcasts with the regular programming guide. It can also record the HD DirecTV programming. And since it's not July 1 yet, I'm guessing that the DirecTV HD Tivo ignores the broadcast bit as well. Of course, that may change after July 1, but you're not going to be able to buy TV Tuner cards that ignore it after July 1 either.
I will. A monopoly is (legally) when no one can enter the market and make money, even if they have a better product. MS is a monopoly because no one can make money selling OSs except them.
Nope, wrong. There are people writing OSs and "making money". For example, the silly SkyOS thing is a closed source, commercial OS and is "making money". A monopoly is much harder to define than that.
1. A TiVo is never shut off. If you did, it couldn't record what you told it to record. Similarly, most TVs and VCRs are never really turned off when you turn them off, you have to completely pull the power cord to shut that equipment off. A Zaurus (like the Palm and PocketPC) is a RAM based device. The first time you turn it on taking it out of the box, it displays a grey screen for several seconds. That is linux booting. After that (unless you completely kill the battery) linux is never rebooted. It is resident in RAM so that it starts and stops instantly. So for the most part, embedded systems don't do much booting of an OS.
2. The NT kernel (Windows being many different products and some of them are not microkernels) was a microkernel when it was first written. Linux was a monolithic kernel when it was first written. Modern versions of both are really neither micro kernels or monolithic kernels. Many services got moved into kernel space on NT to increase performance (GDI and parts of Win32 for example). And, although not much has moved out of kernel space on linux, it's on demand loadable device drivers allow it to start and stop devices and certain kernel services similar to how a microkernel does. Further, linux *never* pages anything in kernel space in or out of RAM. So, both Windows and Linux load the drivers it needs on demand, it doesn't just load everything (at least, if you use the default, you can compile drivers statically into the kernel, but who actually does that anymore?).
So, in conclusion, most of what you said was wrong. Have fun calling people clueless!
Umm... if your point about Mario and Zelda is that people really liked them and so they still get attention and sequels... how is that different from Gran Turismo and Tekken? I mean, there are a lot of people who are excited about GT4 and Tekken 5. There are people who aren't. Same goes for Mario and Zelda games. Seems like you should maybe pick different examples.
Sorry, no, you don't receive a license to use the code. Read the GPL. You have every right to use the code through normal copyright law. The GPL is a license to allow you to do something you aren't allowed to do under copyright law, redistribute the code + make modifications.
That's an extremely weak response. Every single thing listed is something that Windows (and to a lesser extent Mac OS X) can do right now, today. And that is the expectation of a "desktop user". If you can't recreate that expectation, that person will not be happy. Thus, Linux is not ready for the "desktop".
Unless you'd like to point out a linux distro that can do that? Otherwise, I'm going to go along with Red Hat and say that, Linux is ready for some people's desktops now and will be ready for everyone else's desktop some time in the future.
So which version of Linux should I install so that I can use an iPod out of the box? Which version should I install so that any random web cam I purchase will work with it? Which will be able to run the latest game released? The answer is, none of them will do that. Linux is ready for some people's desktops (like mine) because I'm willing to make things work when they don't, and I'm willing to be careful about what hardware and software I purchase. Many other people. on the other hand, are not capable of doing that. When they buy the newest game or some random piece of hardware, they expect it to work. Red Hat understands this, so they're targetting places like the corporate desktop which requires a limited, known set of apps and have a consistent set of hardware and an IT staff to support the "end users". When more companies support Linux the way they do Windows (and I'm sure it will happen) then Linux will be "ready for the desktop".
First of all, if that was true the entire world would be using Macs. Next, I'll point out that I was talking about academics building clusters and whatnot. Those aren't exactly what normal students or companies are doing with Linux boxes. I wouldn't think that Red Hat would have a default policy for handling things like that. As for the rest, Red Hat has academic pricing available. You might need to buy Red Hat through the school, similar to the way Microsoft's academic pricing works, however.
I'm not sure where on their website it's listed now, but here a news story listing prices: http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5107941.html and here is the price list according to a university: http://acs.ucsd.edu/unixsupport/linuxhints.html.
They can sell you GPL software with any strings that they want attached as long as they do what they have to under the terms of the GPL. The GPL doesnt say that you can't offer support contracts. It also doesn't say that you can't demand that every machine it's installed on has a support contract. You can buy it, get your support contract voided and then do whatever you want with the software (it's clearly labeled that the distro as a whole is under the GPL). If you want the support contract, however, you have to have a support contract for every machine it's installed on. Notice that you're still free to give the distro to someone else, you still have the source to the entire thing, you can still modify it and redistribute it, etc, etc.
1) He said it's complementary for the duration of your RHN contract and there is a discount available for after that. And they did admin, and apologize for the SSL issue.
2) Umm, ok, who cares if they don't have a product for small business.
3) How exactly is that wrong?
4) WS includes server software. Go look at the package list.
5) They're still in business, aren't they? The couldn't have made any really big mistakes then.
6) All their software is already GPL, they can't take that back.
7) # of users of Linux affects growth of hardware support, not number of users of Red Hat 9. You do know that there are other distros besides Red Hat 9? And that sooner or later, Red Hat 9 was goign to EOL with or without Fedora?
8) If it couldn't grow then getting rid of it is a good business decision. Red Hat is a business right?
9)...
10) Go to their website, the educational discount pricing was released a few days ago. Or is their website not public enough?
You got an offer of an upgrade to something more expensive then what you had before but, thru paranoid delusions perhaps, you've decided that WS and ES are going to go EOL. Why? Who knows. The fact that there is a promised (contractually none the less) 5 years of support seems to mean nothing to you.
Hey, go use debian and see how much support you get from them.
If it was profitable by $100,000 but by dropping it they are profitable by $1,000,000 which do you think is the better choice? Remember, all the resources sunk into the RHL product was resources not going into RHEL. And competing with yourself (why should I buy RHEL when I can just get RHL) is not a good place to be.
The license that comes with RHEL says all the software is GPL, but by subscribing to this license you have to have a valid subscription for every machine that you own. What that basically says to me (IANAL or a Red Hat sales person) is that if you buy one copy and then explicitly tell them that you have no interest in their subscription, you can install it on as many machines as you want.
Why would you bother tho? You can download the SRPMs and recompile those. Or use fedora, an actual, community supported distro. Cause, honestly, there doesn't seem to be a lot of community support for RHEL.
Actually, it depends on how many customers views of reasonable it differs with. Of course it differs with all the people that want to be able to download a supported distro for free forever. But Red Hat doesn't care about those people because they aren't actually Red Hat's customers (as much as they'd like to think otherwise). They can also differ with people like academics who are running huge 1000 node clusters. I highly doubt that Red Hat deals with many of those potential customers every day. Hell, how many potential customers is that anyways?
What matters to Red Hat is if they keep the people who bring their primary revenue happy. If those customers aren't happy then Red Hat will fail. Otherwise, much to the unhappiness of many/.ers, Red Hat will continue to do fine. They don't care if they're known as the Linux too expensive to use if all of the Fortune 500 companies are paying for their annual subscriptions every year.
All that statement says is that you have to pay them for every installation you have. You can install it on multiple systems, but if you do you either have to pay them for each of them or say goodbye to your service contract.
Linux or RMS wouldn't ever get hauled to court in the first place because they are providing it at no cost. Red Hat and SuSE, however, could find themselves facing lawsuits.
You should watch CourtTV more often. There does *not* need to be a witness to get a conviction in a criminal court case. Watch Forensic Files some night and you can see that, with no witnesses, they can use physical evidence and get a conviction.
The reason traffic tickets are thrown out without the police officer present is because there is no other evidence showing that you were speeding. Complete lack of evidence and no witness means there is reasonable doubt. Finger prints, DNA, shoe and tire prints, etc, even without a witness, can provide enough evidence to get a jury to convict.
They have to attempt to mitigate the damages if they want to receive damanges. Which means telling the relevant parties that the code is there. Have they told anyone yet what is infringing? If not, it's goign to be mighty hard to show that they tried to mitigate the damages.
That is talking about the service, not the files you purchase. As in, you can't reverse engineer the protocol, create a third party client and then sell it to people.
Last time I checked fonts were not something that programmers generally made. Maybe your comment would be relevant if we were talking about Exchange's splash screen, but it's certainly not remotely relevant to providing the functionality.
And I don't ever remember "OSS" promising fonts... developers promised antialiasing and font rendering comparable to windows and mac os and... guess what, they provided that functionality.
1) The subsidy lock is removable by punching a code into the phone. Most cell providers are nice enough to give you the code after you've completed yoru contract. If you don't want to wait that long or they wont give you a code, search for "Unlock GSM" on Google and you'll find plenty of people who will sell you an unlock code for your phone for about $20. You'll also get hits to buy the equipment (also useful for doing firmware upgrades) and you too can start your own unlock business.
I'm sorry but none of the things you listed are "new and innovative". We've got a hardware mp3 player, an all in one pc, a normal pc, a high end laptop, an online music store, an online store, some misc apps, movie editing software and an implementation of zeroconf. Apple's versions may be better than others, but they were hardly the ones who "innovated" them. Not unless you accept Microsoft's version of the word innovate. I would argue that, by and large, most of them aren't even significantly better than the competitors. I personally have nothing against Apple (I own an iBook), but it is true, Apple hasn't really done anything "insanely great" for a while now.
Slashdot Mirror
The DirecTV HD Tivo can do that as well. As a matter of fact, it can merge the OTA broadcasts with the regular programming guide. It can also record the HD DirecTV programming. And since it's not July 1 yet, I'm guessing that the DirecTV HD Tivo ignores the broadcast bit as well. Of course, that may change after July 1, but you're not going to be able to buy TV Tuner cards that ignore it after July 1 either.
Nope, wrong. There are people writing OSs and "making money". For example, the silly SkyOS thing is a closed source, commercial OS and is "making money". A monopoly is much harder to define than that.
1. A TiVo is never shut off. If you did, it couldn't record what you told it to record. Similarly, most TVs and VCRs are never really turned off when you turn them off, you have to completely pull the power cord to shut that equipment off. A Zaurus (like the Palm and PocketPC) is a RAM based device. The first time you turn it on taking it out of the box, it displays a grey screen for several seconds. That is linux booting. After that (unless you completely kill the battery) linux is never rebooted. It is resident in RAM so that it starts and stops instantly. So for the most part, embedded systems don't do much booting of an OS.
2. The NT kernel (Windows being many different products and some of them are not microkernels) was a microkernel when it was first written. Linux was a monolithic kernel when it was first written. Modern versions of both are really neither micro kernels or monolithic kernels. Many services got moved into kernel space on NT to increase performance (GDI and parts of Win32 for example). And, although not much has moved out of kernel space on linux, it's on demand loadable device drivers allow it to start and stop devices and certain kernel services similar to how a microkernel does. Further, linux *never* pages anything in kernel space in or out of RAM. So, both Windows and Linux load the drivers it needs on demand, it doesn't just load everything (at least, if you use the default, you can compile drivers statically into the kernel, but who actually does that anymore?).
So, in conclusion, most of what you said was wrong. Have fun calling people clueless!
Umm ... if your point about Mario and Zelda is that people really liked them and so they still get attention and sequels ... how is that different from Gran Turismo and Tekken? I mean, there are a lot of people who are excited about GT4 and Tekken 5. There are people who aren't. Same goes for Mario and Zelda games. Seems like you should maybe pick different examples.
Sorry, no, you don't receive a license to use the code. Read the GPL. You have every right to use the code through normal copyright law. The GPL is a license to allow you to do something you aren't allowed to do under copyright law, redistribute the code + make modifications.
That's an extremely weak response. Every single thing listed is something that Windows (and to a lesser extent Mac OS X) can do right now, today. And that is the expectation of a "desktop user". If you can't recreate that expectation, that person will not be happy. Thus, Linux is not ready for the "desktop".
Unless you'd like to point out a linux distro that can do that? Otherwise, I'm going to go along with Red Hat and say that, Linux is ready for some people's desktops now and will be ready for everyone else's desktop some time in the future.
So which version of Linux should I install so that I can use an iPod out of the box? Which version should I install so that any random web cam I purchase will work with it? Which will be able to run the latest game released? The answer is, none of them will do that. Linux is ready for some people's desktops (like mine) because I'm willing to make things work when they don't, and I'm willing to be careful about what hardware and software I purchase. Many other people. on the other hand, are not capable of doing that. When they buy the newest game or some random piece of hardware, they expect it to work. Red Hat understands this, so they're targetting places like the corporate desktop which requires a limited, known set of apps and have a consistent set of hardware and an IT staff to support the "end users". When more companies support Linux the way they do Windows (and I'm sure it will happen) then Linux will be "ready for the desktop".
First of all, if that was true the entire world would be using Macs. Next, I'll point out that I was talking about academics building clusters and whatnot. Those aren't exactly what normal students or companies are doing with Linux boxes. I wouldn't think that Red Hat would have a default policy for handling things like that. As for the rest, Red Hat has academic pricing available. You might need to buy Red Hat through the school, similar to the way Microsoft's academic pricing works, however.
How exactly have they cut your subscription short?
And how exactly is $179 (price of RHEL WS) less expensive then XP (which is > $200 for the non-upgrade price).
Seems to me that the only one here that is distorting the truth is you.
I'm not sure where on their website it's listed now, but here a news story listing prices: http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5107941.html and here is the price list according to a university: http://acs.ucsd.edu/unixsupport/linuxhints.html.
They can sell you GPL software with any strings that they want attached as long as they do what they have to under the terms of the GPL. The GPL doesnt say that you can't offer support contracts. It also doesn't say that you can't demand that every machine it's installed on has a support contract. You can buy it, get your support contract voided and then do whatever you want with the software (it's clearly labeled that the distro as a whole is under the GPL). If you want the support contract, however, you have to have a support contract for every machine it's installed on. Notice that you're still free to give the distro to someone else, you still have the source to the entire thing, you can still modify it and redistribute it, etc, etc.
1) He said it's complementary for the duration of your RHN contract and there is a discount available for after that. And they did admin, and apologize for the SSL issue.
...
2) Umm, ok, who cares if they don't have a product for small business.
3) How exactly is that wrong?
4) WS includes server software. Go look at the package list.
5) They're still in business, aren't they? The couldn't have made any really big mistakes then.
6) All their software is already GPL, they can't take that back.
7) # of users of Linux affects growth of hardware support, not number of users of Red Hat 9. You do know that there are other distros besides Red Hat 9? And that sooner or later, Red Hat 9 was goign to EOL with or without Fedora?
8) If it couldn't grow then getting rid of it is a good business decision. Red Hat is a business right?
9)
10) Go to their website, the educational discount pricing was released a few days ago. Or is their website not public enough?
Would you like some cheese with your whine?
You got an offer of an upgrade to something more expensive then what you had before but, thru paranoid delusions perhaps, you've decided that WS and ES are going to go EOL. Why? Who knows. The fact that there is a promised (contractually none the less) 5 years of support seems to mean nothing to you.
Hey, go use debian and see how much support you get from them.
If it was profitable by $100,000 but by dropping it they are profitable by $1,000,000 which do you think is the better choice? Remember, all the resources sunk into the RHL product was resources not going into RHEL. And competing with yourself (why should I buy RHEL when I can just get RHL) is not a good place to be.
The license that comes with RHEL says all the software is GPL, but by subscribing to this license you have to have a valid subscription for every machine that you own. What that basically says to me (IANAL or a Red Hat sales person) is that if you buy one copy and then explicitly tell them that you have no interest in their subscription, you can install it on as many machines as you want.
Why would you bother tho? You can download the SRPMs and recompile those. Or use fedora, an actual, community supported distro. Cause, honestly, there doesn't seem to be a lot of community support for RHEL.
Actually, it depends on how many customers views of reasonable it differs with. Of course it differs with all the people that want to be able to download a supported distro for free forever. But Red Hat doesn't care about those people because they aren't actually Red Hat's customers (as much as they'd like to think otherwise). They can also differ with people like academics who are running huge 1000 node clusters. I highly doubt that Red Hat deals with many of those potential customers every day. Hell, how many potential customers is that anyways?
/.ers, Red Hat will continue to do fine. They don't care if they're known as the Linux too expensive to use if all of the Fortune 500 companies are paying for their annual subscriptions every year.
What matters to Red Hat is if they keep the people who bring their primary revenue happy. If those customers aren't happy then Red Hat will fail. Otherwise, much to the unhappiness of many
All that statement says is that you have to pay them for every installation you have. You can install it on multiple systems, but if you do you either have to pay them for each of them or say goodbye to your service contract.
Linux or RMS wouldn't ever get hauled to court in the first place because they are providing it at no cost. Red Hat and SuSE, however, could find themselves facing lawsuits.
You should watch CourtTV more often. There does *not* need to be a witness to get a conviction in a criminal court case. Watch Forensic Files some night and you can see that, with no witnesses, they can use physical evidence and get a conviction.
The reason traffic tickets are thrown out without the police officer present is because there is no other evidence showing that you were speeding. Complete lack of evidence and no witness means there is reasonable doubt. Finger prints, DNA, shoe and tire prints, etc, even without a witness, can provide enough evidence to get a jury to convict.
They have to attempt to mitigate the damages if they want to receive damanges. Which means telling the relevant parties that the code is there. Have they told anyone yet what is infringing? If not, it's goign to be mighty hard to show that they tried to mitigate the damages.
That is talking about the service, not the files you purchase. As in, you can't reverse engineer the protocol, create a third party client and then sell it to people.
They have to pay these fees to the RIAA whether or not they play music from RIAA labels.
Last time I checked fonts were not something that programmers generally made. Maybe your comment would be relevant if we were talking about Exchange's splash screen, but it's certainly not remotely relevant to providing the functionality.
... developers promised antialiasing and font rendering comparable to windows and mac os and ... guess what, they provided that functionality.
And I don't ever remember "OSS" promising fonts
1) The subsidy lock is removable by punching a code into the phone.
Most cell providers are nice enough to give you the code after you've completed yoru contract.
If you don't want to wait that long or they wont give you a code, search for "Unlock GSM" on Google and you'll find plenty of people
who will sell you an unlock code for your phone for about $20. You'll also get hits to buy the equipment (also useful for doing firmware upgrades) and you too can start your own unlock business.
I'm sorry but none of the things you listed are "new and innovative". We've got a hardware mp3 player, an all in one pc, a normal pc, a high end laptop, an online music store, an online store, some misc apps, movie editing software and an implementation of zeroconf. Apple's versions may be better than others, but they were hardly the ones who "innovated" them. Not unless you accept Microsoft's version of the word innovate. I would argue that, by and large, most of them aren't even significantly better than the competitors. I personally have nothing against Apple (I own an iBook), but it is true, Apple hasn't really done anything "insanely great" for a while now.