When I read the slashdot story submition I feel upset that they're being ordered to take down the site, but when I read the letter that was sent by the Cinema to the copycat site I understand exactly why they are asking the site to be removed and makes it become a story not worth the submition.
The question at hand is should the law be upheld and enforce the original site to make their site more accessable to others, not whether or not this copycat site should be taken down or not. Based off the letter which was sent by the original site owners, it makes perfect sense that the copycat site should come down and stay down.
Apple considers themselves a hardware company. They feel that good software and functionality drives hardware sales. I have seen apple buying more and more software companies, but you can see it's all around having better software to sell hardware. The software is a loss leader. Even with apps like Logic ($999) or Shake ($3000). Those apps take so much R&D and don't sell very many units compared to an office app. Prices are high on those softwares to just break even with the R&D and promote more hardware sales.
You didn't even acknowledge the fact that he wants to switch songs without having to leave the game's environment.
If iTunes offered an easy API for Unreal and others to plug into, that would be nice cause then they could stay DRM'ed files and interface with iTunes/quicktime inside unreal. Just like iPhoto and iMovie do.
How does any of that blather equal a lack of support for Linux?
Well, it's one thing to say "Linux is going to take over Microsoft Windows." But it's another thing to actually release products that only work for Linux and don't even have an option to run Windows. Not having PowerPC products shows IBM's fear and fall back plan if this linux thing doesn't all pan out.
What exactly do their Thinkpad configurations have to do with their support of Linux? Last I checked, Linux was originally developed for x86. ..
Well, think about it. IBM wants to promote it's own PowerPC processor line and get rid of those stupid INTEL INSIDE stickers on their computers. BUT, they will not make PowerPC laptops because IBM knows there is no current market for Linux ONLY laptops.
They know that making a PowerPC Laptop slated for Linux ONLY would be a waste of money. They like the idea that they sell thinkpads PRETENDING that people are actually installing Linux on them.
While IBM's products run on Windows, it wants its customers to see how nicely they would run on Linux as well, using the free operating system as a lure
That is one of the main things that is such a misconception with Linux. IBM uses REDHAT LINUX and SUSE. NEITHER of those are "FREE" as in Beer. RedHat Enterprise stuff can cost THOUSANDS of dollars. MORE than any Microsoft OPERATING SYSTEM has EVER cost. You'd think RedHat Enterprise editions came with a free Oracle license or something.
If IBM was REALLY committed to LINUX then they would offer a PowerPC based THINKPAD that came with Linux installed. IBM makes PowerPC processors, IBM sells ONLY INTEL based ThankPads. Don't you see a conflict of intereste there? I think IBM's committment to Linux is true, but yet unrealistic at the same time.
The interesting thing is hymn (playfair) now keeps all the Apple Meta data in the file including your apple userid that you used to purchase the file with. This should be helpfull to keep people from posting their music on usenet/p2p networks.
If Windows went away tomorrow and Linux became the defacto standard, we would have the same issues.
Personally, I used to be a heavy Linux fan, but in the last two years I've converted to a MacOSX fan. But I still believe you're wrong. Having a Unix based OS dominant in the community would not result in the same wide spread of viruses/trojans.
Unix by it's nature does not have you running as root/administrator. The logged in user does not have access to put binaries and startup scripts all over the harddrive. The logged in user can't start a service below port 1024. So the wide spread of viruses sent via email would affect the current logged in user only.
I'm sure linux virsus could be just as nasty or worse, but they would not have the same global impact and spread like wildfire like windows ones do. Windows 95/98/ME is nothing like a Unix box. And most of the problem systems aren't running XP/2000 yet.
Personally, I think it'd be better for OOo to stop trying to be compatible (or at least stop advertising it,) and "do its own thing" -- people would stop judging it as a "fake MS office". You might not convert as many businesses, but you might convince more start-ups to go with it from day 1.
I know that MSOffice has the ability to have filters for opening/saving documents. Can't the OO hackers instead of trying to reverse engineer word docs just figure out how to make a decent word import/export filter? I think that would be a first step in the right direction.
If "image is everything", you're better off sending a.pdf document. It's not just OO.o-to-MS that creates a problem; it's moving from one version of MS to another too.
As you probably know, not every instance can be solved with pdf. If you're trying to work on some numbers with a client or any sort of 'working document' you can't send it as a pdf.
The article appears slashdotted, but the biggest problem I have with OO isn't 'features' compared to MSOffice, but it's compatibility. I can typically open MSOffice files just fine, modify them in OO, save them, send them to people with MSOffice and they look HORRIBLE to the MSOffice people. The data is typically all there, but all garbled and derranged like I screwed it all up or didn't know how to format things to look nicely.
Until OO is 100% comptible with MSOffice, it will not be likely a small business would switch to it. It puts them at a disadvantage when trying to look like a big company. Image is everything when you're a little guy playing with the big boys.
AH come on, tombraider the MOVIE was much more exciting than the video games. Well, at least the later ones. Sure, I loved making Lara Croft run around for hours on end with minimal action, but the movies were much more fullfilling and conclusive to what was going on than the video games.
I stand corrected, looks like apple has updated their site since this morning. They added a compatibility page explaining XSAN is not just for MacOSX.
If you have a heterogeneous network, you can add non-Mac OS X clients to your Xsan-based SAN using ADIC's StorNext File System. Add any combination of Windows XP-, Windows 2003-, Windows NT-, Windows 2000-, Linux-, IRIX-, Solaris-, or AIX-based computers as nodes on your storage area network. Xsan and the StorNext File System work together seamlessly.
Sorry but the best filesystem for high I/O by far IMHO is XFS on SGI Irix. When you run I/O via the distributed filesystem on a san where 40 machines mount to the same filesystem at once.
Don't you mean CXFS? I guess CXFS vs XSAN will be an interesting battle. Currently XSAN only works on OSX, but I would imagine they will open it to all platforms if they want it to succeed. But it looks like XSAN can work with 64 machines at once, where CXFS works with 32 machines at once according to what I can find. It does appear CXFS can handle larger filesystems, but we'll see how that pans out.
Anyone want to buy a used iBook? 12" G4, 800 mhz, about 5 months old. I'm willing to part with it for $1099 US.
Dude, get over it. You tell me how much money you could get for a 5 month old dell laptop you bought for $1099. Probably $300, if anything. Apple Hardware resales amazingly well. You'd be shocked.
I bought a PowerMac 800MHz G4 for around $1500, I used it for about 6 - 8 months and sold it for $1000 in 3 hours on ebay with Buyit now. Try to do that with PC hardware.. good luck!
Xsan is a typical SAN filesystem, not just "network mount points".
Not to question your knowledge in SAN, but have you read what Xsan is and can do?
Maybe you should read inbetween the lines. It sounds like special software along with fiberchannel. It's much much more than "regular san". You ever tried to mount san read/write onto several systems? It will cause errors and problems all over your filesystems. XSan allows you to mount multipule systems read/write onto the same fiberchannel san system. This requires special software way beyond regular san. People have been looking for solutions like this for years. The closest thing to it is gigabit NFS, but NFS is intensely CPU intensive. I'd be curious to see how well this handles.
I think the biggest problem for Open Source software is a clear business model. The GPL makes it so just about no business would want to invest millions into something that they have to give out for free.
All I know about Bush is I had a job when Clinton was president.
And of course you know that it takes about 4 years to feel the effects of what a president does. So maybe now that clinton has been gone lone enough maybe even the likes of you could find a job again.
Sure, studies have proven smoking can cause death so it has to say it on the label... Also running windows on the internet can cause you to receive tons of viruses and such. The label should be clear and explain this. The EUA is a joke. Who has time to read through 12 pages of the small print license before installing the software. People should know what they're getting into, and there should be limites to the amount of information that is 'viewable' to the end user. Just cause there's 12 pages of small type doesn't mean it's truely "viewable". If they're required to show the license, users should be required to get the jist of the agreement before being forced to agree.
And on that note, how does that affect people that use hacks which remove the license or just puts the software in place without using the main installer (so no license)? Are they NOT held responsible to the terms and conditions?
Slashdot Mirror
The question at hand is should the law be upheld and enforce the original site to make their site more accessable to others, not whether or not this copycat site should be taken down or not. Based off the letter which was sent by the original site owners, it makes perfect sense that the copycat site should come down and stay down.
Apple considers themselves a hardware company. They feel that good software and functionality drives hardware sales. I have seen apple buying more and more software companies, but you can see it's all around having better software to sell hardware. The software is a loss leader. Even with apps like Logic ($999) or Shake ($3000). Those apps take so much R&D and don't sell very many units compared to an office app. Prices are high on those softwares to just break even with the R&D and promote more hardware sales.
You didn't even acknowledge the fact that he wants to switch songs without having to leave the game's environment.
If iTunes offered an easy API for Unreal and others to plug into, that would be nice cause then they could stay DRM'ed files and interface with iTunes/quicktime inside unreal. Just like iPhoto and iMovie do.
That link has been slashdotted. Seriously, there's like thousands of requests now for gmail accounts.
how about an invite?
invite at nhorizon dot net
They know that making a PowerPC Laptop slated for Linux ONLY would be a waste of money. They like the idea that they sell thinkpads PRETENDING that people are actually installing Linux on them.
If IBM was REALLY committed to LINUX then they would offer a PowerPC based THINKPAD that came with Linux installed. IBM makes PowerPC processors, IBM sells ONLY INTEL based ThankPads. Don't you see a conflict of intereste there? I think IBM's committment to Linux is true, but yet unrealistic at the same time.
The interesting thing is hymn (playfair) now keeps all the Apple Meta data in the file including your apple userid that you used to purchase the file with. This should be helpfull to keep people from posting their music on usenet/p2p networks.
I would what seti could do by the extra cycles in parallel with the CPU. Is it possible to get 2x or 3x the crunching of data for seti clients?
We better not tell them about Usenet, he might have a heart attack.
Unix by it's nature does not have you running as root/administrator. The logged in user does not have access to put binaries and startup scripts all over the harddrive. The logged in user can't start a service below port 1024. So the wide spread of viruses sent via email would affect the current logged in user only.
I'm sure linux virsus could be just as nasty or worse, but they would not have the same global impact and spread like wildfire like windows ones do. Windows 95/98/ME is nothing like a Unix box. And most of the problem systems aren't running XP/2000 yet.
Until OO is 100% comptible with MSOffice, it will not be likely a small business would switch to it. It puts them at a disadvantage when trying to look like a big company. Image is everything when you're a little guy playing with the big boys.
AH come on, tombraider the MOVIE was much more exciting than the video games. Well, at least the later ones. Sure, I loved making Lara Croft run around for hours on end with minimal action, but the movies were much more fullfilling and conclusive to what was going on than the video games.
I bought a PowerMac 800MHz G4 for around $1500, I used it for about 6 - 8 months and sold it for $1000 in 3 hours on ebay with Buyit now. Try to do that with PC hardware.. good luck!
Maybe you should read inbetween the lines. It sounds like special software along with fiberchannel. It's much much more than "regular san". You ever tried to mount san read/write onto several systems? It will cause errors and problems all over your filesystems. XSan allows you to mount multipule systems read/write onto the same fiberchannel san system. This requires special software way beyond regular san. People have been looking for solutions like this for years. The closest thing to it is gigabit NFS, but NFS is intensely CPU intensive. I'd be curious to see how well this handles.
Isn't this illegal on several levels? How are these companies not being sued left and right? I can't believe this has become an acceptible standard.
I think the biggest problem for Open Source software is a clear business model. The GPL makes it so just about no business would want to invest millions into something that they have to give out for free.
And on that note, how does that affect people that use hacks which remove the license or just puts the software in place without using the main installer (so no license)? Are they NOT held responsible to the terms and conditions?