Companies and universities don't need to up their bandwidth when it's being used for activities that aren't in line with people job or education requirements... Why should they?
"We need to upgrade from our T-1's to T-3's because our employees insist on listening to music."
No. They can just say "our new policy is that if you want to listen to music here, please bring your CD's... we don't have the resources to allow for people to stream audio through our network"
Yeah... But at least BeamIt attempts to introduce some form of authenication in that it wants to know, or reasonably believe, that you own the CD (or at least have it in your possession)... Napster doesn't do that.
And come on people, be honest... Everyone who has never ever ever downloaded one song from napster which they did not already own, raise your hands high above everyone elses so we can call you liars. I admit that i did. I also admit that I deleted the song, as well as the program immediately thereafter. A LOT of the music i listen to is produced by small artists on small labels, and they DESERVE to make money from people buying their CD's... I'm not about to just let anyone who wants it to download it from me.
There's already plenty of precident of things being banned because of what they "can" do...
Though it's in a completely different league, on one hand the second amendment states that we have the right to keep and bare arms, but on the other hand, you can't have automatic weapons, many states bar handgun sales, "cop killer" bullets are illegal, and private sales are on their way out of the picture too...
Those are all things that our second amendment protects, and are no problem if only law abiding citizens ever get guns... But because of the minority of gun buyers, criminals, who would use the guns for the "wrong" purpose (after all, guns are made for killing, but you can't just kill anybody), the majority loses out.
Yeah, it's a leap away from napster in terms of effect on society and stuff like that, but it's also a perfect example of consitutional rights being taken away because they could be or were abused by a miniscule percentage of the population.
It does make sense for anyone, with the money, to buy at the top of the bell curve (750MHz PIII or Athlon) rather than several steps behind it (Celeron 333A, K-6 3D). In most cases the difference between the high end and low end is $1500 at most... In reality, for a machine that you expect to be functional for several years, that's not that much money.
So long as deevelopers know that faster CPU's are on the way, they'll continue to write programs that sap just about every available resource from the machine... Intel's salivating at the prospect that one day Win NT/2000 will be dumbed down enough to run the worlds desktops.
Windows is one example of code bloat... But there's also X, and especially the newer WM's, like Gnome and KDE... And as opensource developers try to match Microsofts applications in features, there's bound be more and more bloat on the way.
Remember, 10 years ago, what was the norm? 16 Mhz? maybe 25? or even 40 MHz AMD 386's? But regardless, for most apps, those were probably good enough, too. The person that says that 750 MHz is good enough for everyone can almost be compared to Bill Gate's (though i'm not 100% possitive it's his quote) "640K ought to be enough for anyone"
No... the 020 occured around the same time in evolution as the 286... It was more powerful, so maybe rank it in the 386 class. A 486 equivalent (in speed) it's not.
Yeah... I got one around CHristmas time, only to realize that pretty much every name, address, number, email address, etc is all permanently stored in my head... so the palm really acts as a backup, and for storing one-off things for places that i probably won't ever call again... For instance, pizza delivery in Dallas, a nightclub in San Francisco... Stuff i probably won't call again, but just maybe i will...
I did find one AWESOME application for it though... GNUkeyring... Secure storing of all my passwords... That's it's killer app for me... It also generates completley random passwords, so i ended up using it to regenerate all my passwords, so they weren't just variations on the same theme.
Plus, there's pocketchess!
I don't know... I aspired to put my entire life into my palm pilot, but once i did, i realized it really wasn't all that i once hoped it would be.
But back on subject... What in the world does opengl on the palm accomplish?!? Let people play quake on the train via a wireless connection? Will people controll themselves with Stylus'? I think i might be ready to dismiss this, and ask that maybe bored developers could create things of "real use" rather than doing things just to see if they can? I'm sorry.
I"m sorry... it was late, i lied... it's not implicit in UCITA that reverse engineering is barred, but in ever commentary I've seen about it, the first thing that's pointed out is that reverse engineering could stand to be vanquished. Since that's how so many applications in the world got started, and since things like proprietary file formats are what people gripe about the most, it appears almsot logical that some companies woudl seek to completely stamp it out.
It's late, so i'll keep this extremely short. I suggested RAID 3 over RAID 5 because there was an apparent emphasis on working with large files. That lead me to believe that they were working with imaging files of some sort, which is what the case turned out to be. I'd firmly stand by RAID 3 over 5 any day for applications such as imaging and video... Ones where there are large read and write operations and a minimal amount of seeks... If that were the case, which would be usual for file and database servers, i'd definetly suggest RAID 5
The GPL grants you some rights but also restricts some rights as well. Nothing in life is free... Maybe free as in beer, maybe free as in speech, but there's a 3rd aspect of freedom which I can't name, but what must exist. Specifially, the GPL refuses to let you take your changes private. That's a restriction, if i'd ever seen one. Yes, the GPL is good, but in terms of projects that may become commercially viable, a LOT of thought needs to be put into using the GPL...
For instance, co-opting. If Sun had licensed Java to Microsoft under the GPL, we'd have a completely fragmented Java right now. Microsoft could have made whatever changes they wanted, given the code back to sun, who would reject it, but then continue to distribute their code to the masses. Sun used a much stricter license, which means they could sheppard Java, make sure it was going in the direction they had forseen, and try to beat back people from outright destroying it.
For all the advantages UCITA offers to open-source, it doubles that in disadvantages... Would Linux even exist if reverse engineering were barred? How about star office? UCITA strictly states that reverse engineering, even just for interoptibility, is barred. So, existing open source software would do just fine and dandy... But new projects intended to say, interoperate with MS Windows 2001, would be completely out of the picture, unless they were developed in whole outside of UCITA's grasp... Even then inviduals might be able to download those projects and use them in the States, but large companies certainly wouldn't want to take that chance.
You don't get the same fault tolerance... In RAID 5, if you lose two drives at once, you're dead in the water. With RAID 0+1, one drive dies you're okay. If two drives die, there's a 50% chance you're out of luck, because if they're from each end of the set, you still have two workable drives working in a level 0 configuration.
Anyways. In that instance, you really want RAID 3... It's much higher performance than RAID 5, because the redundancy is on one drive and the rest all dedicate themselves to read/write in a striped set. If any one of the drives goes down - read up on this first, though - you definetly don't lose any data. I'm not sure about hotswappability, though... If RAID 3 turns out to be non-hotswappable, then your only option turns out to be RAID 5.
RAID 1 is the most reliable configuration you can have, in that fully 50% of your storage space is devoted to redundancy. However, if you're needing speed above all else, I'd say go with either RAID 3 or 5...
With just 4 drives, RAID 3 is the least expensive in terms of CPU usage. It's also better if you're most concerned with speed, in that 3 of your drives will be focused solely on read/write operations and the 4th will dedicate itself to redundancy... Rather than splitting the data and redundancy across drives. You add many more seeks...
I'm not sure what your end goal is... I'm thinking you're looking at something like video editting where throughput means everything compared to anything else. If you're already doing a lot of seeks - database operations - go with RAID 5, as it's more easily expandable.
-----
As a finaly note, if you're going to invest in new drives, you may want to check the newest 10,000 RPM drives... The added RPM's plus the increased density of the tracks means that they're easily more than 150% faster...
No.... SGI's been bleeding money for a while. They need to focus onto what they believe are their core businesses and get some profitability back. Then maybe their stock will rise and they can acquire other companies.
So far as I know, a lot of the tech in the Origin series came directly from Cray. So... SGI paid a huge lump for access to some of cray's technology pool, but didn't really want to peruse Cray's
Until we see MUCH better desktop and server systems, as well as gigabit ethernet, Beowolfs will really only be able to serve the lowend of the super computer market. Don't fool yourself into thinking that the technology is there yet.
It just can't happen. It's way beyond the protocol level... You could probably make a closed source client/server solution that simply won't cut, copy, or forward emails and encrypts all data in transit, but that doesn't prevent a screen capture or simply retyping it.
Which then purges the duplicate files and creates new copies of them when they change, so that you only ever store data once?
I think this story was reported poorly, in that everyone here's just thinking that they did symbolic links all over again, when they actually did a bunch more than that. Unfortunately, not everyone has read the artical to see what they actually accomplished.
Small company gave us grief so we refuse to deal with them regardless of potential gain?
Maybe if small company had asked first, things would be different. In this case, they took first, and didn't stop taking until the networks got their lawyers into the act... And you expect the networks to want to work with this company? There's plenty of other ones out there, either today, tomrrow or next week, that can do the same exact thing, but in a manner that's more agreeable to the networks.
I'm being redundant to myself here, but once again, one of the problems was that though the size of their audience was growing, the networks had no way to gauge exactly how much it was growing... They couldn't get any viewship information like they can through Neilsen and the cable companies. So the extra eyeballs essentially mean zip to them in terms of raising their advertising rates, unless they can get full access to log files etc...
Even with access to those logs, it'd take a while before they could realistically integrate netcasting with broadcasting... There'd be a significant amount of reprogramming theye'd need to do in order to integrate the two data sets.
Rebroadcasting Television content on the web may and probably does benefit advertisers... The problem lies in the fact that the networks can accurately gauge their audience anymore and therefore can't give relevant numbers to their advertisers.
A medium could have been reached, if iCrave had decided to go the safe route rather than the "well, i can do it, so therefore i should do it" route.
No... What they're saying is that because it's their content, they expect to be paid for it, just like they are from regular cable stations. I'd bet if someone showed up at their door with a real business plan, capital of their own, they could arrange to acquire rebroadcasting rights to some of the networks content. But they'ed have to pay for it, just like every other channel does.
Right now, iCraveTV was overlaying their own ads, so they were profiting from the networks investment without actually reimbursing them. further, it's not apparent that they were giving the networks the numbers of eyeballs that were actually viewing the shows, who was seeing what ads, etc, so the increased viewership means nothing to them when they have no data on it. They can't go to their advertisers and ask for an extra $5,000 per ad because there's an unknown amount of people viewing their content on the internet.
The net is not and should not be a "safe haven" where people and companies don't have to obey the same rules and laws that conventional companies have to endure.
they get upset because they feel they're being cheated. They paid their money to create the shows in the first place, receieve some money from their advertisers, and then saw someone else was extracting more money from more advertisers and not giving them a dime for it. It seems understandable.
As usual (flaimbait, probably) it seems someone with an idea jumped forward with it without really thinking about how anyone else would feel. Ultimately, TV will be on the internet. It could have been sooner if they had decided to walk up to the networks and ask rather than just take what they pleased.
Their proprietary software is what inspires brand loyalty in their customers. AOL is not just another ISP. They provide more of an experience, rather than just a pipe. I don't think they even want to be just an ISP... The customer base is much less stable.
For instance, I've gone through 5 or 6 local ISP's and finally settled on a cable connection in the past year... Soon as DSL becomes available in my area, i'll switch to that. Why? Because I'm just looking for pipes. Therefore, I'm not AOL's ideal customer either.
The pro side of this is that AOL can continue to offer whatever it likes to it's customers, but other ISP's can continute to offer flat fee access to their subscribers, using AOL's pipes. There won't be any worries that in order to access faster connections that you'll need to be running proprietary software that may not be available for your chosen platform.
No... IBM lost billions in it's PC business, but made up for it with mainframes, workstations, software and services. Mainframes aren't nearly as glamorous as PC's, as they ship in such small volumes, but the margins on those are immense compared to those from PC's... Like 40-50% rather than the 5-15% you see in the PC marketplace.
Yes, ebay makes money. But not nearly enough to justify their valuation. I can't imagine that they'll ever grow into it... People are just hoping and hoping that they will, because they're now one of the "old-timers" of the net. As in they've been public for over a year and a half without getting bought out.
According to some artical i read recently, Amazon is actually making a tidy profit from their core business (books). The other parts of the company are just about to become profitable as well, they just needed to get their volumes up. The main reason they show huge losses these days is because they file their acquisitions as expenses rather than capital investments. That way they don't need to pay nearly as much in taxes.
No matter how much people don't like them, Amazon's not appearing to go away... It very well may end up being the wal-mart of the web.
Considering that DeCSS came out in the way latter part of 1999, plus even now it's not a really workable product, it's too early to say that it won't have an impact on the industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Companies and universities don't need to up their bandwidth when it's being used for activities that aren't in line with people job or education requirements... Why should they?
"We need to upgrade from our T-1's to T-3's because our employees insist on listening to music."
No. They can just say "our new policy is that if you want to listen to music here, please bring your CD's... we don't have the resources to allow for people to stream audio through our network"
Yeah... But at least BeamIt attempts to introduce some form of authenication in that it wants to know, or reasonably believe, that you own the CD (or at least have it in your possession)... Napster doesn't do that.
And come on people, be honest... Everyone who has never ever ever downloaded one song from napster which they did not already own, raise your hands high above everyone elses so we can call you liars. I admit that i did. I also admit that I deleted the song, as well as the program immediately thereafter. A LOT of the music i listen to is produced by small artists on small labels, and they DESERVE to make money from people buying their CD's... I'm not about to just let anyone who wants it to download it from me.
There's already plenty of precident of things being banned because of what they "can" do...
Though it's in a completely different league, on one hand the second amendment states that we have the right to keep and bare arms, but on the other hand, you can't have automatic weapons, many states bar handgun sales, "cop killer" bullets are illegal, and private sales are on their way out of the picture too...
Those are all things that our second amendment protects, and are no problem if only law abiding citizens ever get guns... But because of the minority of gun buyers, criminals, who would use the guns for the "wrong" purpose (after all, guns are made for killing, but you can't just kill anybody), the majority loses out.
Yeah, it's a leap away from napster in terms of effect on society and stuff like that, but it's also a perfect example of consitutional rights being taken away because they could be or were abused by a miniscule percentage of the population.
It does make sense for anyone, with the money, to buy at the top of the bell curve (750MHz PIII or Athlon) rather than several steps behind it (Celeron 333A, K-6 3D). In most cases the difference between the high end and low end is $1500 at most... In reality, for a machine that you expect to be functional for several years, that's not that much money.
So long as deevelopers know that faster CPU's are on the way, they'll continue to write programs that sap just about every available resource from the machine... Intel's salivating at the prospect that one day Win NT/2000 will be dumbed down enough to run the worlds desktops.
Windows is one example of code bloat... But there's also X, and especially the newer WM's, like Gnome and KDE... And as opensource developers try to match Microsofts applications in features, there's bound be more and more bloat on the way.
Remember, 10 years ago, what was the norm? 16 Mhz? maybe 25? or even 40 MHz AMD 386's? But regardless, for most apps, those were probably good enough, too. The person that says that 750 MHz is good enough for everyone can almost be compared to Bill Gate's (though i'm not 100% possitive it's his quote) "640K ought to be enough for anyone"
No... the 020 occured around the same time in evolution as the 286... It was more powerful, so maybe rank it in the 386 class. A 486 equivalent (in speed) it's not.
Yeah... I got one around CHristmas time, only to realize that pretty much every name, address, number, email address, etc is all permanently stored in my head... so the palm really acts as a backup, and for storing one-off things for places that i probably won't ever call again... For instance, pizza delivery in Dallas, a nightclub in San Francisco... Stuff i probably won't call again, but just maybe i will...
I did find one AWESOME application for it though... GNUkeyring... Secure storing of all my passwords... That's it's killer app for me... It also generates completley random passwords, so i ended up using it to regenerate all my passwords, so they weren't just variations on the same theme.
Plus, there's pocketchess!
I don't know... I aspired to put my entire life into my palm pilot, but once i did, i realized it really wasn't all that i once hoped it would be.
But back on subject... What in the world does opengl on the palm accomplish?!? Let people play quake on the train via a wireless connection? Will people controll themselves with Stylus'? I think i might be ready to dismiss this, and ask that maybe bored developers could create things of "real use" rather than doing things just to see if they can? I'm sorry.
I"m sorry... it was late, i lied... it's not implicit in UCITA that reverse engineering is barred, but in ever commentary I've seen about it, the first thing that's pointed out is that reverse engineering could stand to be vanquished. Since that's how so many applications in the world got started, and since things like proprietary file formats are what people gripe about the most, it appears almsot logical that some companies woudl seek to completely stamp it out.
It's late, so i'll keep this extremely short. I suggested RAID 3 over RAID 5 because there was an apparent emphasis on working with large files. That lead me to believe that they were working with imaging files of some sort, which is what the case turned out to be. I'd firmly stand by RAID 3 over 5 any day for applications such as imaging and video... Ones where there are large read and write operations and a minimal amount of seeks... If that were the case, which would be usual for file and database servers, i'd definetly suggest RAID 5
The GPL grants you some rights but also restricts some rights as well. Nothing in life is free... Maybe free as in beer, maybe free as in speech, but there's a 3rd aspect of freedom which I can't name, but what must exist. Specifially, the GPL refuses to let you take your changes private. That's a restriction, if i'd ever seen one. Yes, the GPL is good, but in terms of projects that may become commercially viable, a LOT of thought needs to be put into using the GPL...
For instance, co-opting. If Sun had licensed Java to Microsoft under the GPL, we'd have a completely fragmented Java right now. Microsoft could have made whatever changes they wanted, given the code back to sun, who would reject it, but then continue to distribute their code to the masses. Sun used a much stricter license, which means they could sheppard Java, make sure it was going in the direction they had forseen, and try to beat back people from outright destroying it.
For all the advantages UCITA offers to open-source, it doubles that in disadvantages... Would Linux even exist if reverse engineering were barred? How about star office? UCITA strictly states that reverse engineering, even just for interoptibility, is barred. So, existing open source software would do just fine and dandy... But new projects intended to say, interoperate with MS Windows 2001, would be completely out of the picture, unless they were developed in whole outside of UCITA's grasp... Even then inviduals might be able to download those projects and use them in the States, but large companies certainly wouldn't want to take that chance.
You don't get the same fault tolerance... In RAID 5, if you lose two drives at once, you're dead in the water. With RAID 0+1, one drive dies you're okay. If two drives die, there's a 50% chance you're out of luck, because if they're from each end of the set, you still have two workable drives working in a level 0 configuration.
Hey... I'll take your job :)
Anyways. In that instance, you really want RAID 3... It's much higher performance than RAID 5, because the redundancy is on one drive and the rest all dedicate themselves to read/write in a striped set. If any one of the drives goes down - read up on this first, though - you definetly don't lose any data. I'm not sure about hotswappability, though... If RAID 3 turns out to be non-hotswappable, then your only option turns out to be RAID 5.
RAID 1 is the most reliable configuration you can have, in that fully 50% of your storage space is devoted to redundancy. However, if you're needing speed above all else, I'd say go with either RAID 3 or 5...
With just 4 drives, RAID 3 is the least expensive in terms of CPU usage. It's also better if you're most concerned with speed, in that 3 of your drives will be focused solely on read/write operations and the 4th will dedicate itself to redundancy... Rather than splitting the data and redundancy across drives. You add many more seeks...
I'm not sure what your end goal is... I'm thinking you're looking at something like video editting where throughput means everything compared to anything else. If you're already doing a lot of seeks - database operations - go with RAID 5, as it's more easily expandable.
-----
As a finaly note, if you're going to invest in new drives, you may want to check the newest 10,000 RPM drives... The added RPM's plus the increased density of the tracks means that they're easily more than 150% faster...
No.... SGI's been bleeding money for a while. They need to focus onto what they believe are their core businesses and get some profitability back. Then maybe their stock will rise and they can acquire other companies.
So far as I know, a lot of the tech in the Origin series came directly from Cray. So... SGI paid a huge lump for access to some of cray's technology pool, but didn't really want to peruse Cray's
Until we see MUCH better desktop and server systems, as well as gigabit ethernet, Beowolfs will really only be able to serve the lowend of the super computer market. Don't fool yourself into thinking that the technology is there yet.
It just can't happen. It's way beyond the protocol level... You could probably make a closed source client/server solution that simply won't cut, copy, or forward emails and encrypts all data in transit, but that doesn't prevent a screen capture or simply retyping it.
Which then purges the duplicate files and creates new copies of them when they change, so that you only ever store data once?
I think this story was reported poorly, in that everyone here's just thinking that they did symbolic links all over again, when they actually did a bunch more than that. Unfortunately, not everyone has read the artical to see what they actually accomplished.
But have you?
Small company gave us grief so we refuse to deal with them regardless of potential gain?
Maybe if small company had asked first, things would be different. In this case, they took first, and didn't stop taking until the networks got their lawyers into the act... And you expect the networks to want to work with this company? There's plenty of other ones out there, either today, tomrrow or next week, that can do the same exact thing, but in a manner that's more agreeable to the networks.
I'm being redundant to myself here, but once again, one of the problems was that though the size of their audience was growing, the networks had no way to gauge exactly how much it was growing... They couldn't get any viewship information like they can through Neilsen and the cable companies. So the extra eyeballs essentially mean zip to them in terms of raising their advertising rates, unless they can get full access to log files etc...
Even with access to those logs, it'd take a while before they could realistically integrate netcasting with broadcasting... There'd be a significant amount of reprogramming theye'd need to do in order to integrate the two data sets.
Rebroadcasting Television content on the web may and probably does benefit advertisers... The problem lies in the fact that the networks can accurately gauge their audience anymore and therefore can't give relevant numbers to their advertisers.
A medium could have been reached, if iCrave had decided to go the safe route rather than the "well, i can do it, so therefore i should do it" route.
No... What they're saying is that because it's their content, they expect to be paid for it, just like they are from regular cable stations. I'd bet if someone showed up at their door with a real business plan, capital of their own, they could arrange to acquire rebroadcasting rights to some of the networks content. But they'ed have to pay for it, just like every other channel does.
Right now, iCraveTV was overlaying their own ads, so they were profiting from the networks investment without actually reimbursing them. further, it's not apparent that they were giving the networks the numbers of eyeballs that were actually viewing the shows, who was seeing what ads, etc, so the increased viewership means nothing to them when they have no data on it. They can't go to their advertisers and ask for an extra $5,000 per ad because there's an unknown amount of people viewing their content on the internet.
The net is not and should not be a "safe haven" where people and companies don't have to obey the same rules and laws that conventional companies have to endure.
they get upset because they feel they're being cheated. They paid their money to create the shows in the first place, receieve some money from their advertisers, and then saw someone else was extracting more money from more advertisers and not giving them a dime for it. It seems understandable.
As usual (flaimbait, probably) it seems someone with an idea jumped forward with it without really thinking about how anyone else would feel. Ultimately, TV will be on the internet. It could have been sooner if they had decided to walk up to the networks and ask rather than just take what they pleased.
Their proprietary software is what inspires brand loyalty in their customers. AOL is not just another ISP. They provide more of an experience, rather than just a pipe. I don't think they even want to be just an ISP... The customer base is much less stable.
For instance, I've gone through 5 or 6 local ISP's and finally settled on a cable connection in the past year... Soon as DSL becomes available in my area, i'll switch to that. Why? Because I'm just looking for pipes. Therefore, I'm not AOL's ideal customer either.
The pro side of this is that AOL can continue to offer whatever it likes to it's customers, but other ISP's can continute to offer flat fee access to their subscribers, using AOL's pipes. There won't be any worries that in order to access faster connections that you'll need to be running proprietary software that may not be available for your chosen platform.
No... IBM lost billions in it's PC business, but made up for it with mainframes, workstations, software and services. Mainframes aren't nearly as glamorous as PC's, as they ship in such small volumes, but the margins on those are immense compared to those from PC's... Like 40-50% rather than the 5-15% you see in the PC marketplace.
Yes, ebay makes money. But not nearly enough to justify their valuation. I can't imagine that they'll ever grow into it... People are just hoping and hoping that they will, because they're now one of the "old-timers" of the net. As in they've been public for over a year and a half without getting bought out.
According to some artical i read recently, Amazon is actually making a tidy profit from their core business (books). The other parts of the company are just about to become profitable as well, they just needed to get their volumes up. The main reason they show huge losses these days is because they file their acquisitions as expenses rather than capital investments. That way they don't need to pay nearly as much in taxes.
No matter how much people don't like them, Amazon's not appearing to go away... It very well may end up being the wal-mart of the web.
Considering that DeCSS came out in the way latter part of 1999, plus even now it's not a really workable product, it's too early to say that it won't have an impact on the industry.