When he went to Xerox Parc in what? 76 or 77, Steve Jobs said they showed him three things:
1 - the Windowing interface 2 - Peer to Peer networking 3 - Object Oriented programming
So, that's like 23 or 24 years ago that a working model of it was definetly laid out. It'll probably being 30 years old. by the end of the this/. discuussion
The problem with crypto in the more militaristic/repressive (I don't belive i'm wrong in saying that about China) and me, is that I'd gladly part with my secret key ring in exchange for my life.
Just like the other week when a big flack was raised about China attempting to censor what their citizens could view on the internet, this should come as no suprise, either. I mean, it's CHINA!!! Of course they're going to do their best about barring encryption from entering the country. The only way that this would even remotely news worthy is if they'ed explicity said that they were encouraging people to use crypto... Because that would have been news. This is not.
The gun debate's moot. Since they exist, I think everyone should have one gun. That way, no one would ever rob a bank because they'ed know that 50 people in that bank all have guns. No one would mug anyone either, unless they planned on killing them, because on their getaway, they might just get shot. of course, we'd thin the heard a bit in the beginning with all the beligerent drunks at bars having it out, but eventually the world would be a kinda, gentler place... all because of guns:)
You're seriously deluded... Microsoft funds studies to demonstrate how superior Windows NT is to Linux. Given that their mindset is this, that Linux users "generally" dislike microsoft to say the least, why in the world would they even consider porting SQL Server?
It only opens the market a little more horizontally, and does nothing to helping them grow the market upwards (in terms of scalability)...
The moment microsoft starts offering their core products on linux is the moment that people can actually run those apps without need to buy windows, which would quickly spiral out of control, IMO... Microsoft serves their shareholders interests best by limiting who they sell their products to to the 95% of people who already own their products.
Don't bash me for this... I'm just pointing it out.
Microsoft uses the revenues from it's profitable ventures to fund the loss-making ones. Given the size of their cash hoard, Windows Media is here for the long run, and maybe one day they'll even get it right.
It still makes absolutely no sense for them to port the player to Linux, though... MSFT's entire motto is that they want Windows to be the most compelling platform to do anything on. IF they stary porting their apps to Linux, it's almost an admission that Linux is viable.
They CAN port their software to Mac's, because Mac users and Windows users are worlds apart... In order for a windows person to use a mac, they need to go buy a mac. In order for a windows person to switch to linux, they need to install Linux. The closeness of the competition is the difference.
So far as their media player goes... I'll belive it when i see it... It'll probably just be for HP/UX, SPARC Solaris, AIX, or any other non x86 unix variant.
How would the server verify this? Rather than presenting links to the actual sites, would it present a list of CGI's that a browser could then click, causing the server to verify the page prior to passing it back to the client? That would be a major CPU killer.
And what happens if a site is slashdotted or subjected to a DOS attack? In the first instance, they'ed risk removal because they were too popular. In the second instance they'ed risk removal because of an enemy or script kiddie...
I think Alta Vista's fine... The entire nature of the internet is based on there being no central authority... sites come and go. Pages change. And there isn't really a reasonable way of dealing with it, in my eyes.
Look at your sig... Reverse engineering DVD's was also a "non-trivial" task. But that occured, due to neccessity. Because more expensive regular modems are available, it seems no one wants to get their hands dirty with WinModems.... And at least the manufacturers are open to it rather than blatantly hostile as was the case with MPAA... So whoever does it probably won't be subject to a lynchmob of winmodem manufacturers.
Unlike DVD, there is absolutely no argument that reverse engineering winmodems would be harmful to anybody. It would simply open up the market for them.
Not if they want to be able to say they've got "Official Red Hat Linux installed", they can't. Red Hat's name is close to the only asset they've got. They don't give it away for free. Remember a few months back when they cracked down on all the people on Ebay selling Red Hat Linux CDs?
Instead of complaining about WinModems, why hasn't some Linux developer written a driver for them? Then this issue would be solved once and for all. WinModems are a bit cheaper than real modems, and I'm sure most people can spare teh processor cycles to run them.
Last I knew, Microsoft had either abandoned per-processor licenses or been forced to. Instead they enforce "per-model" licenses. So long as Dell ships only Windows on a given *MODEL* of computer, they get the discount. Since the Linux version will presumably be a different part number, they in all likely hood are NOT paying for windows on those machines. However, if you want to dual-boot and have it installed that way from dell, it'd probably be cheaper for you to buy a windows laptop and install Linux on it, because Windows will cost a bit more to be installed on the Linux model than they pay across the rest of their lines.
Linux vs. AMD are two completely different arguments. AMD is direct comparable to Intel, rather than being a completely different beast as Linux is from Windows. Besides that, Intel was found to not be a monoploy, so they can still feel free to twist arms in regards to who uses which chips, where Microsoft has to grin and bear it until it finds out what it's future holds.
If intel's chip shortages last much past the end of this month, though, despite their immense loyalty, Dell may end up having great reason to investigate AMD processors. The question would be if AMD could produce enough parts for them. If they're going to be short either way, might as well stick with Intel.
AFAIK Redhat charges OEM's around $40 for their distro. That's about what Dell pays for Windows, hence the equality.
And as far as support calls go, I'm sure they get huge amounts more of calls from people with simple questions about their computer and applications rather than because the whole operating system crashed.
Linux's stability does nothing to address poor developers and dumb users, except people just won't need to restart their machines as often.
Depends on how much you want to index. There were millions of URLs back in 1995, so of course AV need that much RAM. If you try to index the entire web, you'll probably need the same amount. However, if you decide to start indexing subsets of the web, you'll be able to make do with much less.
Right now I think it's generally about 3 months or so before Altavista rechecks a link. All it would take to try lower the number of 404's you get is to lessen that time. But they're still growing, so they devote more of their bandwidth to finding new sites rather than continuously rechecking already indexed sites. How will opensourcing their software will change that?
While I'm psyched to see this happening, a few things pop into my mind.
Isn't Alta Vista on track to go public shortly? Without seeing their licensing terms, it's difficult to tell if this is a sincere move, or if it's just so they can be an "open source dot com". I guess we'll find out soon.
Not to be critical, because I've always wanted to have a commercial quality search engine, but Alta Vista's pretty advanced and just about the fastest search engine on the internet. What are they looking to gain by doing this? They don't need more developers, unless they're looking at laying off their team in hopes of the community shouldering the development effort for them.
And lastly, I doubt that they'll go with the GPL. No major vendor that's released their core product as opensource has had the guts to go fully to the GPL. But then I guess AltaVista's quite different than an operating system or application, as in it will still take years and millions of dollars for anyone to catch up with them in terms of eyeballs, which is where their money comes from these days...
Maybe slashdot could start a search engine though. Just a privatized one, picking up things like story links, member home pages, resume's etc... It could open some possibilities, but I still can't see how any of them would benefit alta vista.
Here's another question: If I use the Yellow Pages to make a list of local restaurants, and write reviews of everything Asian-sounding, and put an index in the back which includes addresses and phone numbers, is Ma Bell entitled to a cut for my derivative, value-added work?
In the idea world, that would be fine, as you took a subset of their data and added more to it. I would even think that you could lift all the Asian restaurant's phone numbers from all the yellow pages in the world and distribute a "Guide to Asian restuarant phone numbers" and be fine with that too.
I think the problem with this Phonebook analogy is that no one around here attaches much value to names in a phonebook, as they're basically commodities.
Things like yes, maps, Lexus Nexus data, statistics, etc, should be protectable. It's just such a fine line to draw, whether someone is just ripping someone else off, or if they're doing something with good intentions...
An idea license agreement, I think: "You can do whatever you want with this data (including subsetting it, merging it with other companies databases, etc) so long as you're honest and not simply trying to rip us off (by simply republishing our data in a form identical to what you first recieved). If you are, you have no right to this data"
In the direct mail industry, everyone is kept honest by seeding the lists. Seeding works for that purpose, but after a while the lists would end up being padded with 1-2% seed material due to all the hands they went through.
Unfortunately, there's no decent way to go about protecting everyone's interests. Mailers have to pay the cost of mailing the seeds, which are basically useless, and aren't informed of even how many names aren't valid. But generally the names are purchased (licensed, in software speak) for a specific amount of uses.
So far as other compilations go, it would get much more difficult. I'm all in favor of making sure the people that put forth the time and money to compile these databases are the first ones in line to profit from their efforts, because they're not doing it as a public service. But some organizations, like network solutions (imo) are downright abusive in the way they withhold, or at least make unneccessarily difficult in accessing, their data.
I know. Information wants to be free. But this is a capitalistic society. If information does infact become free, then no one will gather information anymore.
Display PostScript is actually rather limiting this day and age. Let me say that I don't know if PostScript level 3 fixed any of these issues, but so far as level 1 and 2 go:
PostScript couldn't support RGB images. That's good for printing, but lousy for screen displays.
PostScript couldn't layer objects. You can't just layer a 50% magenta square over a 50% cyan square and hope for a 50% red square. Whatever is on top takes precendence. Expensive trapping software would enable you to see the overprints, if you specified them, but by default, whatever is on top is what you are going to get.
PostScript also couldn't really handle bitmapped images that gracefully. There are so many headers that EPS's of bitmapped graphics are significantly larger than any other file format.
PostScript still rules for printing. It forces designers to pay for their mistakes (often directly out of their pockets!) when they try to accomplish effects that simply aren't feasible on an offset press.
Display PostScript has been extremely SLOW compared to other imaging models.
But looking to the future, Apple was quite smart to drop DPS for a PDF based model. More and more publishing is being done in an RGB format, so designers benefit. And since consumers using iMacs are also viewing those same documents on their screens, it makes little sense to adopt an imaging model that converts colors across several color spaces needlessly.
Some people set both their disk cache and ATM font cache to absurdly high levels and wonder how come their System Software takes sooo much memory. Same goes with Virtual Memory.
But in the end, yes, Operating Systems take up memory. I think in PC computing this month it described that a stock Windows 98 install with Real Player G2 and MS Office 2000 actually was requesting 72 Megabytes of memory from the machine after start up. No apps running besides what was automatically launched as a result of the software installs.
So, take solace. It's not just Mac's and Linux that suffer from bloat, Windows does too... And it's not too hard to look around and pinpoint where all that bloat comes from, but i think it would be hard to pinpoint exactly which features you could do without in order to slim down your memory usage... Face it, memories cheap these days - not as cheap as it has been - so the best cure may be simply buying more of it.
Go away ass... You've just made yourself out to be an even worse bigot than any BeOS or BSD or Linux user could ever hope to be.... Let people choose for themselves. If they like what they're doing, let them do it.
You probably use Linux? Why? Isn't Solairis, *BSD, or Unixware good enough for you? Why would you even want to learn to use a new unix, help develop it, etc...? Because that's what you want to do, that's why.
Let BeOS users do what they want. Let Mac users do what they want. Let Windows users do what they want. And let Linux users do what they want.
The entire reason the world is where it is is because people weren't entirely satisified withtheir lives. They went out and explored alternatives. Not many were supported. Some were killed. Some failed. But they tried. That's the point. Don't follow the tail that wags you, usse your brain and try being original.
You could stream a series of JPEGS (30/second = full motion video... I just saw an Andy Warhol exhibit today that was running at 16 fps, and that was quite tolerable.)
Then you'd need to stream sound. MP3, i belive is covered by patents, but so far they've basically been ignored.... so is MP3 audio good enough for you?
You could do it, but you'd end up using up more bandwidth than the alternatives.
You forgot that pron availability was the among the reasons that VHS beat BetaMax, which was infact supperior to VHS...
I rememer way back when when the internet was first starting to take off, people predicted it woudl do well, solely because of the wide availablity of porn. Not that porn was going to rule the internet, but because porn marketers are more in line with consumers' minds. They flock to the soon to be popular formats and completely diss the ones that don't support their needs.
That, or, they decide which formats to support and their customers flock to those formats... The momentum draws the rest of the crowd as well.
Why are websites choosing Microsoft media streaming products over freely available alternatives?'. Well, for one, Microsofts products are "good enough." Fot two, people believe that Microsoft is the best developer in terms of interfacing with microsoft products. Kind of like how everyone jumped to intel's chipsets prior to them locking everyone out with patents.
Three would be that, for the larger producers, Microsoft pays for their hardware. I guess the thinking would be that the just have to pay $50,000 for hardware, but if 1,000 people go to the site and need windows to interact with it, then that's the breakeven point.
Unrelated to those points, but valid non the less, is that if Redhat, Caldera, etc... can all bundle DNS servers, Email servers, Web Servers, Streaming Video servers, compilers, etc with their $50 dollar OSes, hten Microsoft deserves to be able to distribut the same services with their $600+ OSes and $2500 server suites (back orifice... er... office!)
I know what you mean about brand recognition in general, but in this particular sense, I don't think that it would tend to matter all that much to Apple. Apple sells Mac OS systems. People can run Linux on their hardware, but that's as far as their support goes. And everything that they say or do, no matter what, is constantly criticized and attacked by the slashdot community, which just happens to be the most vocal representation of the Linux community. Obviously they won't buy Apple's hardware and they have very little interest in their software, since it's not free and won't run on x86. Linux isn't for the mainstream, it's for the power users and nerds. That's not at all Apple's target market. The name recognition will do little to ease everyone's bias against them, and in the end Apple would simply be doing the Open Source community a favor and receive very very little in regards to thanks for their efforts.
Sorry, no. It's almost impossible to explain, but if you take a Mac user and a PC user next to each other, and make them switch seats, the Mac person will have next to no difficulty adapting to the new system, where as the PC person will gripe immensly about the smallest discrepency. And they get frustrated much more quickly, PC users. Not because the OS is at fault, but because they're so closed minded that they can't possibly envision that there may be another way to do things....
This is not a bash at all PC users. Just the ones i've witenessed in my lifetime:)
I still have to disagree... At work I run a beige Mac G3... Granted, it's got 136 Megs of RAM (and "oh... the 21-inch monitor!":)
But day in and day out, I run QuarkXPress, SoundJam MP, Netscape 4.7, MS Internet Explorer 4.5, Outlook Express 5, Lotus Notes (I forgot what version), Adobe Illustrator, Microsoft Word, Filemaker, and Anarchie, concurrently, with no difficulties. I don't even shut down my machine at night, just leave it where it was and come back and sit down and do it.
I can't even remembre the last time I had a major issue that wasn't network wide, including the PC's (it would seem that Lotus Notes is one of the flakiest products I've ever seen).
All the IT people generally avoid my desk because I can counter every thing that they suggest, citing the fact that I have less problems than anyone else in the department, and I'm the only person responsible for touching my machine.
That's strictly my experience. Apparently, yours has varied.
Slashdot Mirror
When he went to Xerox Parc in what? 76 or 77, Steve Jobs said they showed him three things:
/. discuussion
1 - the Windowing interface
2 - Peer to Peer networking
3 - Object Oriented programming
So, that's like 23 or 24 years ago that a working model of it was definetly laid out. It'll probably being 30 years old. by the end of the this
The problem with crypto in the more militaristic/repressive (I don't belive i'm wrong in saying that about China) and me, is that I'd gladly part with my secret key ring in exchange for my life.
:)
Just like the other week when a big flack was raised about China attempting to censor what their citizens could view on the internet, this should come as no suprise, either. I mean, it's CHINA!!! Of course they're going to do their best about barring encryption from entering the country. The only way that this would even remotely news worthy is if they'ed explicity said that they were encouraging people to use crypto... Because that would have been news. This is not.
The gun debate's moot. Since they exist, I think everyone should have one gun. That way, no one would ever rob a bank because they'ed know that 50 people in that bank all have guns. No one would mug anyone either, unless they planned on killing them, because on their getaway, they might just get shot. of course, we'd thin the heard a bit in the beginning with all the beligerent drunks at bars having it out, but eventually the world would be a kinda, gentler place... all because of guns
You're seriously deluded... Microsoft funds studies to demonstrate how superior Windows NT is to Linux. Given that their mindset is this, that Linux users "generally" dislike microsoft to say the least, why in the world would they even consider porting SQL Server?
It only opens the market a little more horizontally, and does nothing to helping them grow the market upwards (in terms of scalability)...
The moment microsoft starts offering their core products on linux is the moment that people can actually run those apps without need to buy windows, which would quickly spiral out of control, IMO... Microsoft serves their shareholders interests best by limiting who they sell their products to to the 95% of people who already own their products.
Don't bash me for this... I'm just pointing it out.
Microsoft uses the revenues from it's profitable ventures to fund the loss-making ones. Given the size of their cash hoard, Windows Media is here for the long run, and maybe one day they'll even get it right.
It still makes absolutely no sense for them to port the player to Linux, though... MSFT's entire motto is that they want Windows to be the most compelling platform to do anything on. IF they stary porting their apps to Linux, it's almost an admission that Linux is viable.
They CAN port their software to Mac's, because Mac users and Windows users are worlds apart... In order for a windows person to use a mac, they need to go buy a mac. In order for a windows person to switch to linux, they need to install Linux. The closeness of the competition is the difference.
So far as their media player goes... I'll belive it when i see it... It'll probably just be for HP/UX, SPARC Solaris, AIX, or any other non x86 unix variant.
How would the server verify this? Rather than presenting links to the actual sites, would it present a list of CGI's that a browser could then click, causing the server to verify the page prior to passing it back to the client? That would be a major CPU killer.
And what happens if a site is slashdotted or subjected to a DOS attack? In the first instance, they'ed risk removal because they were too popular. In the second instance they'ed risk removal because of an enemy or script kiddie...
I think Alta Vista's fine... The entire nature of the internet is based on there being no central authority... sites come and go. Pages change. And there isn't really a reasonable way of dealing with it, in my eyes.
Look at your sig... Reverse engineering DVD's was also a "non-trivial" task. But that occured, due to neccessity. Because more expensive regular modems are available, it seems no one wants to get their hands dirty with WinModems.... And at least the manufacturers are open to it rather than blatantly hostile as was the case with MPAA... So whoever does it probably won't be subject to a lynchmob of winmodem manufacturers.
Unlike DVD, there is absolutely no argument that reverse engineering winmodems would be harmful to anybody. It would simply open up the market for them.
Not if they want to be able to say they've got "Official Red Hat Linux installed", they can't. Red Hat's name is close to the only asset they've got. They don't give it away for free. Remember a few months back when they cracked down on all the people on Ebay selling Red Hat Linux CDs?
Instead of complaining about WinModems, why hasn't some Linux developer written a driver for them? Then this issue would be solved once and for all. WinModems are a bit cheaper than real modems, and I'm sure most people can spare teh processor cycles to run them.
Last I knew, Microsoft had either abandoned per-processor licenses or been forced to. Instead they enforce "per-model" licenses. So long as Dell ships only Windows on a given *MODEL* of computer, they get the discount. Since the Linux version will presumably be a different part number, they in all likely hood are NOT paying for windows on those machines. However, if you want to dual-boot and have it installed that way from dell, it'd probably be cheaper for you to buy a windows laptop and install Linux on it, because Windows will cost a bit more to be installed on the Linux model than they pay across the rest of their lines.
Linux vs. AMD are two completely different arguments. AMD is direct comparable to Intel, rather than being a completely different beast as Linux is from Windows. Besides that, Intel was found to not be a monoploy, so they can still feel free to twist arms in regards to who uses which chips, where Microsoft has to grin and bear it until it finds out what it's future holds.
If intel's chip shortages last much past the end of this month, though, despite their immense loyalty, Dell may end up having great reason to investigate AMD processors. The question would be if AMD could produce enough parts for them. If they're going to be short either way, might as well stick with Intel.
AFAIK Redhat charges OEM's around $40 for their distro. That's about what Dell pays for Windows, hence the equality.
And as far as support calls go, I'm sure they get huge amounts more of calls from people with simple questions about their computer and applications rather than because the whole operating system crashed.
Linux's stability does nothing to address poor developers and dumb users, except people just won't need to restart their machines as often.
Depends on how much you want to index. There were millions of URLs back in 1995, so of course AV need that much RAM. If you try to index the entire web, you'll probably need the same amount. However, if you decide to start indexing subsets of the web, you'll be able to make do with much less.
Right now I think it's generally about 3 months or so before Altavista rechecks a link. All it would take to try lower the number of 404's you get is to lessen that time. But they're still growing, so they devote more of their bandwidth to finding new sites rather than continuously rechecking already indexed sites. How will opensourcing their software will change that?
While I'm psyched to see this happening, a few things pop into my mind.
Isn't Alta Vista on track to go public shortly? Without seeing their licensing terms, it's difficult to tell if this is a sincere move, or if it's just so they can be an "open source dot com". I guess we'll find out soon.
Not to be critical, because I've always wanted to have a commercial quality search engine, but Alta Vista's pretty advanced and just about the fastest search engine on the internet. What are they looking to gain by doing this? They don't need more developers, unless they're looking at laying off their team in hopes of the community shouldering the development effort for them.
And lastly, I doubt that they'll go with the GPL. No major vendor that's released their core product as opensource has had the guts to go fully to the GPL. But then I guess AltaVista's quite different than an operating system or application, as in it will still take years and millions of dollars for anyone to catch up with them in terms of eyeballs, which is where their money comes from these days...
Maybe slashdot could start a search engine though. Just a privatized one, picking up things like story links, member home pages, resume's etc... It could open some possibilities, but I still can't see how any of them would benefit alta vista.
Here's another question: If I use the Yellow Pages to make a list of local restaurants, and write reviews of everything Asian-sounding, and put an index in the back which includes addresses and phone numbers, is Ma Bell entitled to a cut for my derivative, value-added work?
In the idea world, that would be fine, as you took a subset of their data and added more to it. I would even think that you could lift all the Asian restaurant's phone numbers from all the yellow pages in the world and distribute a "Guide to Asian restuarant phone numbers" and be fine with that too.
I think the problem with this Phonebook analogy is that no one around here attaches much value to names in a phonebook, as they're basically commodities.
Things like yes, maps, Lexus Nexus data, statistics, etc, should be protectable. It's just such a fine line to draw, whether someone is just ripping someone else off, or if they're doing something with good intentions...
An idea license agreement, I think: "You can do whatever you want with this data (including subsetting it, merging it with other companies databases, etc) so long as you're honest and not simply trying to rip us off (by simply republishing our data in a form identical to what you first recieved). If you are, you have no right to this data"
In the direct mail industry, everyone is kept honest by seeding the lists. Seeding works for that purpose, but after a while the lists would end up being padded with 1-2% seed material due to all the hands they went through.
Unfortunately, there's no decent way to go about protecting everyone's interests. Mailers have to pay the cost of mailing the seeds, which are basically useless, and aren't informed of even how many names aren't valid. But generally the names are purchased (licensed, in software speak) for a specific amount of uses.
So far as other compilations go, it would get much more difficult. I'm all in favor of making sure the people that put forth the time and money to compile these databases are the first ones in line to profit from their efforts, because they're not doing it as a public service. But some organizations, like network solutions (imo) are downright abusive in the way they withhold, or at least make unneccessarily difficult in accessing, their data.
I know. Information wants to be free. But this is a capitalistic society. If information does infact become free, then no one will gather information anymore.
Display PostScript is actually rather limiting this day and age. Let me say that I don't know if PostScript level 3 fixed any of these issues, but so far as level 1 and 2 go:
PostScript couldn't support RGB images. That's good for printing, but lousy for screen displays.
PostScript couldn't layer objects. You can't just layer a 50% magenta square over a 50% cyan square and hope for a 50% red square. Whatever is on top takes precendence. Expensive trapping software would enable you to see the overprints, if you specified them, but by default, whatever is on top is what you are going to get.
PostScript also couldn't really handle bitmapped images that gracefully. There are so many headers that EPS's of bitmapped graphics are significantly larger than any other file format.
PostScript still rules for printing. It forces designers to pay for their mistakes (often directly out of their pockets!) when they try to accomplish effects that simply aren't feasible on an offset press.
Display PostScript has been extremely SLOW compared to other imaging models.
But looking to the future, Apple was quite smart to drop DPS for a PDF based model. More and more publishing is being done in an RGB format, so designers benefit. And since consumers using iMacs are also viewing those same documents on their screens, it makes little sense to adopt an imaging model that converts colors across several color spaces needlessly.
Some people set both their disk cache and ATM font cache to absurdly high levels and wonder how come their System Software takes sooo much memory. Same goes with Virtual Memory.
But in the end, yes, Operating Systems take up memory. I think in PC computing this month it described that a stock Windows 98 install with Real Player G2 and MS Office 2000 actually was requesting 72 Megabytes of memory from the machine after start up. No apps running besides what was automatically launched as a result of the software installs.
So, take solace. It's not just Mac's and Linux that suffer from bloat, Windows does too... And it's not too hard to look around and pinpoint where all that bloat comes from, but i think it would be hard to pinpoint exactly which features you could do without in order to slim down your memory usage... Face it, memories cheap these days - not as cheap as it has been - so the best cure may be simply buying more of it.
Go away ass... You've just made yourself out to be an even worse bigot than any BeOS or BSD or Linux user could ever hope to be.... Let people choose for themselves. If they like what they're doing, let them do it.
You probably use Linux? Why? Isn't Solairis, *BSD, or Unixware good enough for you? Why would you even want to learn to use a new unix, help develop it, etc...? Because that's what you want to do, that's why.
Let BeOS users do what they want. Let Mac users do what they want. Let Windows users do what they want. And let Linux users do what they want.
The entire reason the world is where it is is because people weren't entirely satisified withtheir lives. They went out and explored alternatives. Not many were supported. Some were killed. Some failed. But they tried. That's the point. Don't follow the tail that wags you, usse your brain and try being original.
You could stream a series of JPEGS (30/second = full motion video... I just saw an Andy Warhol exhibit today that was running at 16 fps, and that was quite tolerable.)
Then you'd need to stream sound. MP3, i belive is covered by patents, but so far they've basically been ignored.... so is MP3 audio good enough for you?
You could do it, but you'd end up using up more bandwidth than the alternatives.
You forgot that pron availability was the among the reasons that VHS beat BetaMax, which was infact supperior to VHS...
I rememer way back when when the internet was first starting to take off, people predicted it woudl do well, solely because of the wide availablity of porn. Not that porn was going to rule the internet, but because porn marketers are more in line with consumers' minds. They flock to the soon to be popular formats and completely diss the ones that don't support their needs.
That, or, they decide which formats to support and their customers flock to those formats... The momentum draws the rest of the crowd as well.
Why are websites choosing Microsoft media streaming products over freely available alternatives?'.
Well, for one, Microsofts products are "good enough." Fot two, people believe that Microsoft is the best developer in terms of interfacing with microsoft products. Kind of like how everyone jumped to intel's chipsets prior to them locking everyone out with patents.
Three would be that, for the larger producers, Microsoft pays for their hardware. I guess the thinking would be that the just have to pay $50,000 for hardware, but if 1,000 people go to the site and need windows to interact with it, then that's the breakeven point.
Unrelated to those points, but valid non the less, is that if Redhat, Caldera, etc... can all bundle DNS servers, Email servers, Web Servers, Streaming Video servers, compilers, etc with their $50 dollar OSes, hten Microsoft deserves to be able to distribut the same services with their $600+ OSes and $2500 server suites (back orifice... er... office!)
I know what you mean about brand recognition in general, but in this particular sense, I don't think that it would tend to matter all that much to Apple. Apple sells Mac OS systems. People can run Linux on their hardware, but that's as far as their support goes. And everything that they say or do, no matter what, is constantly criticized and attacked by the slashdot community, which just happens to be the most vocal representation of the Linux community. Obviously they won't buy Apple's hardware and they have very little interest in their software, since it's not free and won't run on x86. Linux isn't for the mainstream, it's for the power users and nerds. That's not at all Apple's target market. The name recognition will do little to ease everyone's bias against them, and in the end Apple would simply be doing the Open Source community a favor and receive very very little in regards to thanks for their efforts.
Sorry, no. It's almost impossible to explain, but if you take a Mac user and a PC user next to each other, and make them switch seats, the Mac person will have next to no difficulty adapting to the new system, where as the PC person will gripe immensly about the smallest discrepency. And they get frustrated much more quickly, PC users. Not because the OS is at fault, but because they're so closed minded that they can't possibly envision that there may be another way to do things....
:)
This is not a bash at all PC users. Just the ones i've witenessed in my lifetime
I still have to disagree... At work I run a beige Mac G3... Granted, it's got 136 Megs of RAM (and "oh... the 21-inch monitor!" :)
But day in and day out, I run QuarkXPress, SoundJam MP, Netscape 4.7, MS Internet Explorer 4.5, Outlook Express 5, Lotus Notes (I forgot what version), Adobe Illustrator, Microsoft Word, Filemaker, and Anarchie, concurrently, with no difficulties. I don't even shut down my machine at night, just leave it where it was and come back and sit down and do it.
I can't even remembre the last time I had a major issue that wasn't network wide, including the PC's (it would seem that Lotus Notes is one of the flakiest products I've ever seen).
All the IT people generally avoid my desk because I can counter every thing that they suggest, citing the fact that I have less problems than anyone else in the department, and I'm the only person responsible for touching my machine.
That's strictly my experience. Apparently, yours has varied.