We've got the same ISA we've had from the seventies, keep in mind.
Is that good? Last I checked, Microsoft and Intel were busy trying to chuck all the legacy baggage out of the Intel archetecture... ISA bus, serial ports, parallel ports right now, x86 in the future. And isn't the instruction set only pertinent if you're doing assembly level coding? I thought that C abstracts you from knowing the intracacies of a given processor?
The reason I don't use Mac hardware is you can only get it from Apple (who charge A LOT!), and you can't buy, say, boxed processors and motherboards and build it yourself at a lower price.
A lot isn't really a lot anymore... you can have a kick ass system for under $2000, or a pretty usable iMac for under $1000. You can't really compare eMachines' offerings to PPC G4's...
Oh, and CPU isn't everything. Mac hardware is behind in terms of bus speed, RAM clock, and the AGP spec. So nya. Ummm... Mac's were the FIRST mainstream platform to move to 64-bit PCI. Yeah, their memory ONLY clocks at 100 MHz... that's not a big step down from 133, which is just beginning to surface... And, really, what's the difference in performance between a 2x AGP card and a 4x version of the same card? Can joe user tell? can you in a blind test? or is it what? 3 fps in quake?
You have it right that time - most posters are bitching that a unit can't use what it believes are the best tools for the job due to corporate policy.
I'm sure macromedia dictates that no one use an Adobe program as long as Macromedia has an equivalent program to it... Imagine finding that their site was designed in GoLive, or that their logo's were developed using Illustrator... There'd be some backlash there... Likewise, Microsoft can't the best job it can trying to sell copies of Advanced Server if people are able to point to their own products which don't use it...
To put this in terms you'll better understand, comparing Photoshop and the GIMP is like comparing a 64 CPU E10000 to a Pentium 60 running Linux...
If the gimp suits your needs, then by all means use it. But Photoshop costs $500+ dollars. That means that most of the people using it (or at least the ones that paid for it) really, trully need it's features... Otherwise they'ed already be using on of the plethora of cheaper alternatives...
they filed it in 1995... They received it in late 1998. Have they chase after anyone for doing NAT? No... this is the first we've heard of it, by someone doing searches through patents.ibm.com.
Frankly, if this patent is going to be filed and granted, i'm much happier to see that it's in the hands of a company that so far sees to have filed it as a means of protection rather than a means of harrassment.
Now, if they start going after other router manufacturers, maybe it'll be time to get up in arms. But overall, this is old news, and in almost 2 years they've yet to pull any manueering with this patent...
I don't think that the FBI would need to hangup if they were tapping your line and your friend picked up the phone to order pizza... That'd be an incredibly large loophole, where mosbsters, et al, could just have their henchmen do all the speaking in phone conversations.
No... They're tapping the phone line and any traffic on it in that case. And in this case, they're tapping your internet traffic (though i think just by email - but the good point here is that we just don't know how it works. does it scan POP3 traffic only? Are webmail accounts immune? If webmail acconts aren't immune, can they also spy on online shopping?)
So many questions, but the only really important thing here, is how do we know that they'll obtain the proper permissions prior to surveiling suspects?
If the only applications that won't play it are the ones that are expicitly designed not to play it, and with slashdotos hopes of opensource (TM) ruling the world, everyone and their grandmother will eventually be able to remove that module when they compile their next media player applet, correcto?
The EFF is afraid that the RIAA is going to introduce a cryptosystem that prevents anything and everything. That's not what this is. I downloaded the samples, it's just watermarking. The WAV files play fine in Windows Media Player and QuickTime... The EFF seems to be filled with just as many conspiracy theorists as slashdot.
And onto another tangent, which started this thread. If it's just not feasible, then there's no point in not helping just to prove that point. If it is feasible and you just don't want to help, say so... the original poster said somehting to the effect of "it can't work, so let's just sit back and break it once it arrives". If it CAN'T work, prove it. If you're afraid it can work, then say so...
And again, look at what they're supplying. WAV files whose watermarks should hold all the way down to encoding with a 64 kbps encoder. Maybe you might want to look at this, or else you'll spend the rest of your life listening to 56 kbps mp3's, if you think that SDMI will actually work in the end.
This isn't about encryption, it's watermarking, and that's a bit different. They can watermark anything, mp3 files,.wav files,.au files, et al... And none of the players even need to be aware of it, because it's just a little added noise, so far as the player is concerned.
Because maybe they could have created an effective one if people had helped, rather than just rant about how it wouldn't be effective? Why not help them, and really prove that it can't be done, rather than batten down the hatches and say "i don't want to see it be done, so i'm not gonna do anything except break it once it arrives".
Everyone gets down on companies for not doing peer review around here, so when some finally do come forward and ask for assistance, they're refused... It's almost childish.
If you really want to set out and show that it wont' be effective, or can't be effective, sit down with them now and demonstrate it to that effect. Who know's maybe they'll listen and realize that they're embarking on a fruitless quest, if that's what the case turns out to be.
My guesses: games, creating and using more efficeint audio, video compression algorythms, voice recognition (if you're of the camp that it'll ever catch on in such a big way), et al...
Who knows, maybe a "killer app" will emerge that's completely off the radar screen right now.
By the way, back in the days of 40 and 66 MHz processors, did we ever really think that we'ed be able to fully utilize a 400 Mhz machine? Or not even fully, but be able to occassionally spike it's CPU usage up near 100%? Doubtfully...
I was interpretting "common" as being commonly used. which it is. It's just not open. But that doesnt' change the fact that it's the most commonly found protocol.
Re:Will Sun become a linux company??
on
Sun Buys Cobalt
·
· Score: 2
Maybe if linux can scale up to handle their entire product line and support things like hot swap and stuff, they will... But until then, they'll just use Linux where it fits into the puzzle. Like they should, rather than trying to shoehorn Linux into ever conceivable computer.
Suns gone on record saying they support Linux in that Linux is Unix, so each sale of a Linux machine not only isn't a Windows sale, it's also a sale that further grows the Unix market, so when people have outgrown Linux they're already ni the family and can move on to Solaris on sparc hardware.
Hate to break it to you but, having 95% of the clients in the world all using the same protocol qualifies that protocol as being "common". And they've been working at their protocol for quite some time now, it's not like it was a kneejerk reaction to Linux. But past that, you're right. It'd be nice if they'ed tell people how it works so people could make interoppible software which could eventually challenge their positions...
how many of these large companies actually go through and pay microsoft twice for windows? The licensing might say one thing, but i'm sure most of them think that microsoft will overlook that...
Actually, most Mac programs are staticly linked, in that when you install a program, it's just one large application that functions on it's own, save for dependencies on things like quicktime. And microsoft apps unload a bunch of stuff into the system folder, but by and large, when you install a program on a Mac, everything installs into only the folder you specified, rather than scattering randomly named.dll files into the system folder.
some mac programs do make use of shared libraries, though. But even for those ones, when you launch them, they first look in the folder that the program is in for the library. if it's not there, then it looks in the system folder.
Makes it really easy to move programs from machine to machine, or set up a base system to clone other machines from.
If librarys and DLL's are good for managing memory, that's good, but we've got plenty of disk space these days so that each program you install can (read: should) keep its' DLL's to itself rather than putting them into a shared repository. I hate uninstalling windows programs and being asked what to do with a given DLL that was found in the windows registry. Since they have such obscure names, i often just leave them, and therefore end up needing to do periodic reinstalls, just to purge those DLL's and abandoned registry entries from my systems...
If you're going for something that vague, why not go for SPECint95/Price? MHz numbers are meaning less, afterall... Witness the performance of G3's, G4's, Celerons, Durons, Pentiums, WinChips, and Athlons at similar levels of speed or performance, and you'll see that MHz is only vaguely tied to a chips performance level...
They need those managers, lest they need to learn about business rather than concentrate on what they're good at. And those producers help them out a bit too, tweaking the sounds in the studio... And all that money for advertising that was spent is undoubtably the reason that you heard of the band in the first place, and hence want their CD. And i don't know where you live or what not, but i've bought plenty of brand new CD's recently for $12.49 to $14.99.
Yeha, and just yesterday there was a story about a guy complaining about how sun was violating his rights somehow, via violating the GPL. SO. Violating musician's rights is okay, but not programmers.... isn't that splendid?
And when a company goes after napster, yes, people say "no, go after the user". WHen a band goes after the users people say they're attacking their fans. What's an IP holder to do, according to slashdot? GPL it, i suppose.
That doesn't work. People have every right to determine what rights they'ed like to lend their creations to other to under. Respect their rules, and people will respect yours (not you, original poster, i'm just lecturing:)
The first powerPC macs to beat out the Quadra 840AV in 68k performance were 604/PCI based machines, which didn't arise for at least (i'm guessing here - 2 years) after the NuBus PowerPC's.
If they migrate their OS anywhere from the PowerPC, let's hope they go to Alpha's...
I haven't played with a DP at all, but file extensions on the Mac kinda scare me. I hope you weren't insinuating that file type/creator codes are on their way out.
I've always relished the type and creator codes, because files would essentially remember what program you used to create them. If you downloaded a page from the web and double clicked it later on, it'd open in Netscape. If you double clicked another.html file, but that one having been created in dreamweaver, meaning that you're probably writing the page, then it'd open in dreamweaver. The same with almost everything else.
I want the old/current filesystem... none of this.xxx stuff.
I read slashdot. What's that got to do with it? Slashdot is hardly "news", rather, it's an opinionated site. The only news here that you read is extremely one sided and biased. I believe nothing i read here until i find out the other side of the story as well... Maybe you should try that too?
Well, she's just making a stink for the sake of it, i'm thinking. The RIAA hasn't even gotten a dime from MP3.com... They're supposedly owed "up to" half a billion dollars in damages, but the actual amount isn't determined, yet. Either which way, MP3.com has $150 million set aside for court costs... But to my knowledge, they haven't cut a check to Universal yet... So Courtney's suing for something that they don't even have, settlement money... Way to go Courtney.
Why couldn't she wait til they actually had received the money and then made the determination that they weren't going to pay her... And besides which, how many albums does Hole have? I'm thinking 4 or 5... So she's entitled to her cut of $100,000 to $125,000. Minus court costs and legal feees. And probably at her current royalty rate... which gives her something like $3,000 or so...
Of course, according to her recent tirade, she doesn't even own the rights to her music - she signed them away to the labels, so by her logic, they owe her nothing...
Not to everyone: when you sign a contract, read it first. If you don't like it's terms, don't sign it, or try to negotiate better terms.
It sounds like Sun wrote a compiler that takes linux driver source code and creates solarix x86 binary drivers... And the author of one of the drivers they demonstrated it with wants them to GPL their kernel because of that? Am i right or wrong here?
If i'm right, then it sounds stupid. The only way someone can make a driver is if they have the source in the first place. And just because the driver is a program that runs inside the kernel, i don't see why the kernel should lose it's copyright protection as a result?
Slashdot Mirror
We've got the same ISA we've had from the seventies, keep in mind.
Is that good? Last I checked, Microsoft and Intel were busy trying to chuck all the legacy baggage out of the Intel archetecture... ISA bus, serial ports, parallel ports right now, x86 in the future. And isn't the instruction set only pertinent if you're doing assembly level coding? I thought that C abstracts you from knowing the intracacies of a given processor?
The reason I don't use Mac hardware is you can only get it from Apple (who charge A LOT!), and you can't buy, say, boxed processors and motherboards and build it yourself at a lower price.
A lot isn't really a lot anymore... you can have a kick ass system for under $2000, or a pretty usable iMac for under $1000. You can't really compare eMachines' offerings to PPC G4's...
Oh, and CPU isn't everything. Mac hardware is behind in terms of bus speed, RAM clock, and the AGP spec. So nya.
Ummm... Mac's were the FIRST mainstream platform to move to 64-bit PCI. Yeah, their memory ONLY clocks at 100 MHz... that's not a big step down from 133, which is just beginning to surface... And, really, what's the difference in performance between a 2x AGP card and a 4x version of the same card? Can joe user tell? can you in a blind test? or is it what? 3 fps in quake?
You have it right that time - most posters are bitching that a unit can't use what it believes are the best tools for the job due to corporate policy.
I'm sure macromedia dictates that no one use an Adobe program as long as Macromedia has an equivalent program to it... Imagine finding that their site was designed in GoLive, or that their logo's were developed using Illustrator... There'd be some backlash there... Likewise, Microsoft can't the best job it can trying to sell copies of Advanced Server if people are able to point to their own products which don't use it...
Come on, get serious here...
To put this in terms you'll better understand, comparing Photoshop and the GIMP is like comparing a 64 CPU E10000 to a Pentium 60 running Linux...
If the gimp suits your needs, then by all means use it. But Photoshop costs $500+ dollars. That means that most of the people using it (or at least the ones that paid for it) really, trully need it's features... Otherwise they'ed already be using on of the plethora of cheaper alternatives...
they filed it in 1995... They received it in late 1998. Have they chase after anyone for doing NAT? No... this is the first we've heard of it, by someone doing searches through patents.ibm.com.
Frankly, if this patent is going to be filed and granted, i'm much happier to see that it's in the hands of a company that so far sees to have filed it as a means of protection rather than a means of harrassment.
Now, if they start going after other router manufacturers, maybe it'll be time to get up in arms. But overall, this is old news, and in almost 2 years they've yet to pull any manueering with this patent...
I don't think that the FBI would need to hangup if they were tapping your line and your friend picked up the phone to order pizza... That'd be an incredibly large loophole, where mosbsters, et al, could just have their henchmen do all the speaking in phone conversations.
No... They're tapping the phone line and any traffic on it in that case. And in this case, they're tapping your internet traffic (though i think just by email - but the good point here is that we just don't know how it works. does it scan POP3 traffic only? Are webmail accounts immune? If webmail acconts aren't immune, can they also spy on online shopping?)
So many questions, but the only really important thing here, is how do we know that they'll obtain the proper permissions prior to surveiling suspects?
Whats that matter to you, mr. linux user?
If the only applications that won't play it are the ones that are expicitly designed not to play it, and with slashdotos hopes of opensource (TM) ruling the world, everyone and their grandmother will eventually be able to remove that module when they compile their next media player applet, correcto?
The EFF is afraid that the RIAA is going to introduce a cryptosystem that prevents anything and everything. That's not what this is. I downloaded the samples, it's just watermarking. The WAV files play fine in Windows Media Player and QuickTime... The EFF seems to be filled with just as many conspiracy theorists as slashdot.
And onto another tangent, which started this thread. If it's just not feasible, then there's no point in not helping just to prove that point. If it is feasible and you just don't want to help, say so... the original poster said somehting to the effect of "it can't work, so let's just sit back and break it once it arrives". If it CAN'T work, prove it. If you're afraid it can work, then say so...
And again, look at what they're supplying. WAV files whose watermarks should hold all the way down to encoding with a 64 kbps encoder. Maybe you might want to look at this, or else you'll spend the rest of your life listening to 56 kbps mp3's, if you think that SDMI will actually work in the end.
This isn't about encryption, it's watermarking, and that's a bit different. They can watermark anything, mp3 files, .wav files, .au files, et al... And none of the players even need to be aware of it, because it's just a little added noise, so far as the player is concerned.
Because maybe they could have created an effective one if people had helped, rather than just rant about how it wouldn't be effective? Why not help them, and really prove that it can't be done, rather than batten down the hatches and say "i don't want to see it be done, so i'm not gonna do anything except break it once it arrives".
Everyone gets down on companies for not doing peer review around here, so when some finally do come forward and ask for assistance, they're refused... It's almost childish.
If you really want to set out and show that it wont' be effective, or can't be effective, sit down with them now and demonstrate it to that effect. Who know's maybe they'll listen and realize that they're embarking on a fruitless quest, if that's what the case turns out to be.
My guesses: games, creating and using more efficeint audio, video compression algorythms, voice recognition (if you're of the camp that it'll ever catch on in such a big way), et al...
Who knows, maybe a "killer app" will emerge that's completely off the radar screen right now.
By the way, back in the days of 40 and 66 MHz processors, did we ever really think that we'ed be able to fully utilize a 400 Mhz machine? Or not even fully, but be able to occassionally spike it's CPU usage up near 100%? Doubtfully...
I was interpretting "common" as being commonly used. which it is. It's just not open. But that doesnt' change the fact that it's the most commonly found protocol.
Maybe if linux can scale up to handle their entire product line and support things like hot swap and stuff, they will... But until then, they'll just use Linux where it fits into the puzzle. Like they should, rather than trying to shoehorn Linux into ever conceivable computer.
Suns gone on record saying they support Linux in that Linux is Unix, so each sale of a Linux machine not only isn't a Windows sale, it's also a sale that further grows the Unix market, so when people have outgrown Linux they're already ni the family and can move on to Solaris on sparc hardware.
Hate to break it to you but, having 95% of the clients in the world all using the same protocol qualifies that protocol as being "common". And they've been working at their protocol for quite some time now, it's not like it was a kneejerk reaction to Linux. But past that, you're right. It'd be nice if they'ed tell people how it works so people could make interoppible software which could eventually challenge their positions...
how many of these large companies actually go through and pay microsoft twice for windows? The licensing might say one thing, but i'm sure most of them think that microsoft will overlook that...
Actually, most Mac programs are staticly linked, in that when you install a program, it's just one large application that functions on it's own, save for dependencies on things like quicktime. And microsoft apps unload a bunch of stuff into the system folder, but by and large, when you install a program on a Mac, everything installs into only the folder you specified, rather than scattering randomly named .dll files into the system folder.
some mac programs do make use of shared libraries, though. But even for those ones, when you launch them, they first look in the folder that the program is in for the library. if it's not there, then it looks in the system folder.
Makes it really easy to move programs from machine to machine, or set up a base system to clone other machines from.
If librarys and DLL's are good for managing memory, that's good, but we've got plenty of disk space these days so that each program you install can (read: should) keep its' DLL's to itself rather than putting them into a shared repository. I hate uninstalling windows programs and being asked what to do with a given DLL that was found in the windows registry. Since they have such obscure names, i often just leave them, and therefore end up needing to do periodic reinstalls, just to purge those DLL's and abandoned registry entries from my systems...
Sorry for the ramble...
From Intels' Pentium III datasheets
450 Mhz = 25.3 watts
500 Mhz = 28 watts
600 MHz = 34.5
Those are (i believe) numbers for the SECC versions. The FPGA versions are a bit lower, as follows:
533EB = 14 w
600EB = 15.8 w
800EB = 20.8 w
All the way up to the non-existant 1.13 GHz P3, which draws 35.5 w
If you're going for something that vague, why not go for SPECint95/Price? MHz numbers are meaning less, afterall... Witness the performance of G3's, G4's, Celerons, Durons, Pentiums, WinChips, and Athlons at similar levels of speed or performance, and you'll see that MHz is only vaguely tied to a chips performance level...
They need those managers, lest they need to learn about business rather than concentrate on what they're good at. And those producers help them out a bit too, tweaking the sounds in the studio... And all that money for advertising that was spent is undoubtably the reason that you heard of the band in the first place, and hence want their CD. And i don't know where you live or what not, but i've bought plenty of brand new CD's recently for $12.49 to $14.99.
Yeha, and just yesterday there was a story about a guy complaining about how sun was violating his rights somehow, via violating the GPL. SO. Violating musician's rights is okay, but not programmers.... isn't that splendid?
:)
And when a company goes after napster, yes, people say "no, go after the user". WHen a band goes after the users people say they're attacking their fans. What's an IP holder to do, according to slashdot? GPL it, i suppose.
That doesn't work. People have every right to determine what rights they'ed like to lend their creations to other to under. Respect their rules, and people will respect yours (not you, original poster, i'm just lecturing
no... it actually took a bit longer for the emulation performance to catch up to 68k performance...
1st generation 6100/60, 7100/66, 8100/80
2nd generation 6100/66, 7100/80, 8100/100, 8100/110
3rd generation 7200/75 + 90, 7500/100, 8500/120, 9500/120, 9500/132
The first powerPC macs to beat out the Quadra 840AV in 68k performance were 604/PCI based machines, which didn't arise for at least (i'm guessing here - 2 years) after the NuBus PowerPC's.
If they migrate their OS anywhere from the PowerPC, let's hope they go to Alpha's...
I haven't played with a DP at all, but file extensions on the Mac kinda scare me. I hope you weren't insinuating that file type/creator codes are on their way out.
.html file, but that one having been created in dreamweaver, meaning that you're probably writing the page, then it'd open in dreamweaver. The same with almost everything else.
.xxx stuff.
I've always relished the type and creator codes, because files would essentially remember what program you used to create them. If you downloaded a page from the web and double clicked it later on, it'd open in Netscape. If you double clicked another
I want the old/current filesystem... none of this
it's been doing that for quite a while, i thought (booting on x86)... and if it boots on x86, it definetly will boot on Virtual PC.
I read slashdot. What's that got to do with it? Slashdot is hardly "news", rather, it's an opinionated site. The only news here that you read is extremely one sided and biased. I believe nothing i read here until i find out the other side of the story as well... Maybe you should try that too?
Well, she's just making a stink for the sake of it, i'm thinking. The RIAA hasn't even gotten a dime from MP3.com... They're supposedly owed "up to" half a billion dollars in damages, but the actual amount isn't determined, yet. Either which way, MP3.com has $150 million set aside for court costs... But to my knowledge, they haven't cut a check to Universal yet... So Courtney's suing for something that they don't even have, settlement money... Way to go Courtney.
Why couldn't she wait til they actually had received the money and then made the determination that they weren't going to pay her... And besides which, how many albums does Hole have? I'm thinking 4 or 5... So she's entitled to her cut of $100,000 to $125,000. Minus court costs and legal feees. And probably at her current royalty rate... which gives her something like $3,000 or so...
Of course, according to her recent tirade, she doesn't even own the rights to her music - she signed them away to the labels, so by her logic, they owe her nothing...
Not to everyone: when you sign a contract, read it first. If you don't like it's terms, don't sign it, or try to negotiate better terms.
It sounds like Sun wrote a compiler that takes linux driver source code and creates solarix x86 binary drivers... And the author of one of the drivers they demonstrated it with wants them to GPL their kernel because of that? Am i right or wrong here?
If i'm right, then it sounds stupid. The only way someone can make a driver is if they have the source in the first place. And just because the driver is a program that runs inside the kernel, i don't see why the kernel should lose it's copyright protection as a result?
If i'm wrong, correct me, please!