Hmm. It doesn't really matter whether one uses the ide or the scsi-device to communicate with a cd-burner. Most people don't realize that ATAPI is essencially SCSI over IDE. That means that there is not a single pure IDE-CD-burner on the market, all (modern) burners are SCSI-devices, they only differ in the kind of hardware interface they use.
Since SCSI is acctually a hardware independant protocol, SCSI-commands can be send just over any channel (there is even iSCSI whitch uses TCP/IP, if recall correctly). In FreeBSD 4.x cdburn could send SCSI-commands over the IDE-interface to the cd-burner. One coulnd't use cdrecord on ide-burners with it, because cdrecord needed pure SCSI-devices. With Linux 2.6 one can now also use the IDE-devices to send SCSI commands. New cdrecord releases support that, so there is no need to add "scsi-emulation" to the kernel any longer.
So both FreeBSD and Linux have the same features now, but they were added in reverse order *g*
I think that you are pretty wrong. And there's an counterargument for pretty much anything you said.
What's worse? Neither, when 'having sex' is in the context of pornography. Both are about the same thing. They are about the objectification of other people.
Yes. But that doesn't mean that both are evil.
[During a murder] the victim is objectified.
Pornography (notice I did not say sex) is the ultimate expression of human-as-object. In pornography, we take one or more people and show them treating each other like objects upon which to achieve pleasure...ie, the participants in pornography demonstrate that they believe the other people in the scene are means to an end (the ends being self-gratification).
This is not true. The "participants in porn" don't demonstrate anything. They earn money, maybe they even have fun. That they fuck each other doesn't mean that they hate each other, or that every "participant" thinks he's better than anyone else. That they have sex doesn't mean that they think the other person is an object. During the act of making porn everyone does what the script says. This maybe rough, but it's just acting after all. Of course they have real sex, maybe they do things to each other, which are not quite normal - but that doesn't mean they aren't normal people when they're not acting.
Under no circumstances should we ever forget that other people are ends in and of themselves and not a means to an end.
In normal life: no. But that wisdom can't be transfered to the world of fantasy. Don't confuse that with reality.
When someone else annoys us or cuases us problems, we must remind ourselves that unlike a tool or other object in the world, these 'annoyances' or 'roadblocks' are people and are not here to serve us or anyone else. Likewise, when someone entices us or titilates us, we must remind ourselves that unlike a sextoy, these 'titillations' are people. They are someone's daughter or son.
That doesn't have anything to do with porn.
Even when they choose to act like a tool for our pleasure, we should never treat them like they are. They are worth more than that. Consensual sex isn't necessarily moral sex. And filming it so that others can also objectify the participants only makes it yet less moral.
Tell me, when you're fucking with your wife, you both choose to "act like a tool for your pleasure". What's bad about that? Nothing. The same thing happens when two random people have consensual sex. What's bad about that? Nothing. Filming it doesn't change anything about the badness. You however speak of "moral". You say that consensual sex isn't necessarily moral sex. What's "moral sex" and who defines that? You? Your church? OK. That's fine. But please don't impose your standarts on everyone else.
Furthermore, even if you totally disregard the idea that other people are exactly as valuable as you and that you are too valuable to demean yourself, you must at least acknowledge that what we see and what we experience does affect who we are and who we become.
I agree with you that anyone is as valuable as me. But I don't believe that somebody demeans himself when he has sex. If you think that, the problem lies within you. I also acknowledge that what we see affects us, but only the things we see in reality. Movies affect our moods. A movie can make you horny, or agressive, or tired, or whatever. But it can't change your mindset or personality. I know a guy who nearly exclusively watches splatter horror movies. He's an absolutely nice guy. He probably doesn't even have a screwed fantasy. Millions of children nowadays play Quake, Doom and Counterstrike, however no kid ever decides he want's to kill his neighbors with a chainsaw or kill random people with a sniper rifl
I think there's more to it. While we in capitalist western societies are tought that one person can make a difference, and have an impact on society, Marxists believe that individuals are a product of their environment and are thus shaped by it. So they believe that you don't influence your environment, but that your environment influences you instead.
I don't think that manually putting your files into categories will really do much to improve your usage-expirience. What we need is "Google build into the OS". What about a file attribute, that, when it's set causes the operating system to index the file in the background, so that it's content can be quickly searched? Of course some kind of "Page Rank (tm)" system would be required to sort the files according to importance.
You just said it. It's not about the cables so much.
It's clear that the colors got better when you got a new TV. Get a new rf-cable (the vintage one from 1967 that you are using right now has quite a bad shield. Therefor the image gets bad). Your example with the TiVo is not that good: The composite-signal goes through the VCR. The VCR makes the colors fade, not the cable!
I want you guys to explain me one thing: When you are of the opinion that using composite or SVHS improves the quality for you so much, that you can't live without it, how come you can watch regular TV without your eyes starting to hurt? How come that at least in my home (brand new cables in my walls), I get to see 25 TV-stations (mostly PAL/PAL+) in cristal-clear image-quality with wonderful stereo sound through one single RF-cable? The colors are not faded. Contrasts do not bleed. The modulation doesn't hurt the signal too much.
I think this is a bad subject to start a religious war about. If you guys can see a difference, that's fine: go for it, buy expensive cables. If you have the money and it works for you *g*
But you said it right, monster-cables are most likely a rip off.
In the past I also believed that I could improve my VCR's image quality by using chinch or scart instead of the antenna-cable. It appears to be common knowledge that by using better cables the image quality improves. However that is just the theory. I read an article where a german electronics-magazine (was it "Video"?) really checked the signal's quality using all kinds of cables. They let both human testers rate the quality, and they also checked it with expensive gadgets. The result was surprising: Neighter the human testers, nor the devices would see any difference. The quality was the same, so matter whether they used the antenna-input, chinch, scart or even rgb-cables.
I believe that the "screenshots" in this article are fake. A little blur in Photoshop helps them to sell their expenisive cables.
There's a real cult around expensive cables, especially amoung the audiophile croud. It's simply ridiciculous that some people who have a 5000$ stereo spend 1000$ on the cables. There is no difference in sound. A copper-cable's resistance is the same, no matter wheter you payed 20$ or 300$ for the cable.
scary precedent? Well not really. Not in this case.
IANAL, but in Germany we do not have a precedent court system. That means that every case is usually decided without considering former court decissions. This has the advantage that former mistakes are not repeated. There are some exceptions, though. I think that you can point out an old decission and ask for a similar ruling, but you can't rely on it.
Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm really no expert.
In this case I would even agree to Mrs. Graf... I wouldn't want my face on pr0n as well. However I don't think that it was Microsoft's fault in this case.
This review is just plain shit. They don't test any boards and just tell you what they personally prefer. You can see this on the review of intel motherboards. That's just prejudice. I can't believe the cheap crap Epox produces gets top scores and the quality boards of MSI are just at position 8. I have used several MSI boards: They are stable as a rock and are supported for years. On their homepage I find recent bioses for boards that are 5 years old. The guy who does the tech-support in Germany (just one guy I think, but he's very competent and quickly replies to email) has compiled a high quality faq, with everything you ever wanted to know about MSI boards.
I have very bad experience with Epox boards: a friend of mine bought one, and even the parts that were on board had interupt-conflicts with each other. Really horrible design.
But come on, let's be honest: Something that works for me (with my hardware) doesn't have to work for you and vice versa. This review is purely useless!
Well although QT is not bad, it's surely not perfect. The player one can download is awfully slow on windows, annoys you with loading movies you don't want to watch when you start it up looks quite non-standard and ugly. QT files usually use the proprietary Sorensen codec which isn't available on Linux and makes QT files useless to anyone without Windows or Linux. If you want to deliver Video over the Internet use straight MPEG-4 (no matter whether divx, m$ or whatever). That works on nearly any platform in standart-players.
I don't think we really understand each other. I don't say, it's fucking bad. I think that XOSL is a reasonably good OS-loader. It's easy to use. It's good enough to fire up a Windows install on a hard disk. But still it lacks some features. It can't boot my kernel whitch resides on the partition/dev/hdd9 with my xfs partition managed by the linux volume manager, that is located at/dev/sda7 or somewhere else... This sureley isn't important for everyone, especially not for windows users. Also it's silly that one needs a dedicated partition. But otherwise XOSL is fine! Use it if you want to. But a windows-like gui doesn't turn me on at all. I need a reason to change, and thus a question like "What does this have, that Lilo doesn't have?" is perfectly valid (although I didn't ask it). If someone who really likes XOSL needs a feature it lacks, he can surely implement it. But I don't need it now, and will stick to grub.
Well... The solution is very easy. Tom and AMD simply tested different processors... Tom used an old Thunderbird, while AMD used a new Athlon with a MP core. It's no wonder the results are different.
The perfect bootloader would be a combination of Grub and XOSL.
I used XOSL in the past: while I think that it's nice, it's not perfect. What it lacks are some Unix/Linux-specific functions:
It should be possible to browse a filesystem and to select a kernel on it to boot. It should be possible to pass "command line parameters" to the kernel (like mem=256...). It also would be cool, if XOSL had the option to set the textmode, one wants to boot an operating system in (like dos...). It would be necessary to have an Unix/Linux-based install to be attractive to Unix/Linux-people, booting from an dos-bootdisk just isn't sexy...
All in all, XOSL is nice but not perfect. I'll stick to grub, until XOSL matures...
No... I think this works diffently. I think that their solution is fully server-side. One could do it the following way: When the user requests a web-page (which includes images and banners) the server checks whether the client also loads the banners. If he doesn't, he can't request a web-page again, without being informed that he has to disable his anti-banner software.
However I don't know whether this is such a good idea, because there's no way for the server to find out whether the client acceses the banners over his isp's proxy that could cache the banners. This way innocent users would be locked out.
There are a lot of different reasons why such a software that forces you to look on banners is a very bad idea (for example what about people who are blind and use text-browsers like lynx?), and we can just hope that the folks who run interesting servers will recognize that.
I think that people willing to die for their country are the reason such conflicts arise. If the terrorists were not willing to loose their life, nothing would have happened. Anybody who is willing to die for his ideals is not any better than a terrorist! And is to be blamed when such things happen. It's not about being willing to lose your life, it's about raising your voice. It's important that you understand that your life is not very important. If you loose it, nobody wins anything. But when you use it to do good to humankind, everybody profits. Sometimes it's important to defend yourself, but it's never a good idea to do this because you want revenge. The only acceptable reason to do this is to prevent further harm to yourself or to other people. And I don't know a war will prevent any harm.
I live in germany and we don't call the sausages used in hotdogs "frankfurter", we call them "wiener". I am not completely sure, but I think that in Austria "wiener" are called "frankfurter", and german "frankfurter" are called "wiener".
Anyway, that should be reason enough to sue somebody for using our words incorrectly, and misusing the german culture.
OK, we in Germany (Europe maybe, too) already know this. BMG used a copy-protection on a popular album of the finish gothic-rock group HIM. I think that this might have been the previous version of the Macrovision-copy-protection (Read on for more info...)
This copy-protection is really simple, but yet effective. Simply the TOC (The initial few bytes that contain the offsets of the tracks on the cd, and thus the position of the songs on the disc) is manipulated in a way that confuses CD-ROM drives, so they think the CD is invalid and refuse to read data.
Most cd-players ignore the manipulated bytes and can play the CD without major problems. There are some exceptions: on some players the music plays, but the time of the songs doesn't display correctly or jumps back and ahead... Very old players refuse to play such CDs...
But it isn't very difficult to read in such CD digitally: if you have a cd-player which has digital-out, you can simply plug that into your soundcard's digital-in, and read in the cd without any quality-losses...If you burn the digital data back to a cd-r, you will have a perfect digital copy, without any quality-losses, but with removed copy-protection!
After the CD was on the market, BMG announced that they won't realease any new albums with that copy-protection until it really has matured... Well, since Macrovision tries to sell it to the big players now, it maybe has...
So we tech-people won't have much trouble, but the usual user is fucked...
Don't know whether you are trolling, but the guys who do the anime are not in the MPAA...
And "region codeing" is evil because with it Americans can't watch the original (imported) japanese movies...
Delay
Hehe. I am from Germany, but I would be aftaid to sell the Transrapid to China. The next thing that will happen is that China will produce an own much cheeper plastic-maglev after they reverse-enineered our proud enineer's work of two decades *g*
I had the experience with newer computers and bigger hard-drives that a kernel with softupdates compiled in made acces to the disk slower (it is supposed to make it faster...). Is there a reasonable explanation for that phenomenon, or are my observations just exceptions?
This year at LinuxKongress (two months ago in Erlangen, Germany), I saw the presentation of the Linux-port to the SuperH-processor. This port was not ment to make Linux run on Dreamcast, but rather to make it run on the SuperH, which is an processor developped for embedded devices. So Linux could be used to run your tv or something (you wouldn't notice normally *g*). The fact that Linux now runs on Dreamcast is just a neat side-effect. I talked to one of the main-developpers (Yutaka Niibe, I think), and he said there even might be a SuperH Debian distrib in some time. RedHat is not very interested, because for them there's no money to earn. Well, I also asked, whether it is possible to hook up a hard-drive to a dreamcast, to get a nice and cheap linux-computer, but he told me that they didn't know how to do this because the Dreamcast is a closed architecture no one but Sega really understands... Well: we really need open standarts, even for video-games...
No. That's not true. At Linux-Kongress in Erlangen, Germany, I saw a presentation of Linux on the SuperH-Processor whitch is used by the Dreamcast (http://www.linux-kongress.de/2000/abstracts.html# niibe). I saw it booting on Dreamcast. Since Emacs wasn't installed, the developper started Vi, and the audience applauded. Wow. That was real Linux-feeling. I talked to the Developper (his name was Yutaka Niibe, I think...) and he said that maybe Debian will bring out a distribution for the SH-3/4. Redhat will not, probably, cause there is no money to earn for them.
I think that delaying Netscape a week or two to fix some bugs is really important. The delay would be a much lower price then bad press. The Guys who just say "Hey, why care about Netscape, we have Mozilla", just aren't right: Microsoft will start bitching and say: "Look at Netscape 6: It was released with a lot of known bugs, and that's the way it is with all Open-Source Software!". Managers will believe that, they don't know the difference between Netscape and Mozilla. And the whole community pays the price.
Slashdot Mirror
Since SCSI is acctually a hardware independant protocol, SCSI-commands can be send just over any channel (there is even iSCSI whitch uses TCP/IP, if recall correctly). In FreeBSD 4.x cdburn could send SCSI-commands over the IDE-interface to the cd-burner. One coulnd't use cdrecord on ide-burners with it, because cdrecord needed pure SCSI-devices. With Linux 2.6 one can now also use the IDE-devices to send SCSI commands. New cdrecord releases support that, so there is no need to add "scsi-emulation" to the kernel any longer.
So both FreeBSD and Linux have the same features now, but they were added in reverse order *g*
Yes. But that doesn't mean that both are evil.
This is not true. The "participants in porn" don't demonstrate anything. They earn money, maybe they even have fun. That they fuck each other doesn't mean that they hate each other, or that every "participant" thinks he's better than anyone else. That they have sex doesn't mean that they think the other person is an object. During the act of making porn everyone does what the script says. This maybe rough, but it's just acting after all. Of course they have real sex, maybe they do things to each other, which are not quite normal - but that doesn't mean they aren't normal people when they're not acting.
In normal life: no. But that wisdom can't be transfered to the world of fantasy. Don't confuse that with reality.
That doesn't have anything to do with porn.
Tell me, when you're fucking with your wife, you both choose to "act like a tool for your pleasure". What's bad about that? Nothing. The same thing happens when two random people have consensual sex. What's bad about that? Nothing. Filming it doesn't change anything about the badness. You however speak of "moral". You say that consensual sex isn't necessarily moral sex. What's "moral sex" and who defines that? You? Your church? OK. That's fine. But please don't impose your standarts on everyone else.
I agree with you that anyone is as valuable as me.
But I don't believe that somebody demeans himself when he has sex. If you think that, the problem lies within you. I also acknowledge that what we see affects us, but only the things we see in reality. Movies affect our moods. A movie can make you horny, or agressive, or tired, or whatever. But it can't change your mindset or personality. I know a guy who nearly exclusively watches splatter horror movies. He's an absolutely nice guy. He probably doesn't even have a screwed fantasy. Millions of children nowadays play Quake, Doom and Counterstrike, however no kid ever decides he want's to kill his neighbors with a chainsaw or kill random people with a sniper rifl
I think there's more to it. While we in capitalist western societies are tought that one person can make a difference, and have an impact on society, Marxists believe that individuals are a product of their environment and are thus shaped by it. So they believe that you don't influence your environment, but that your environment influences you instead.
I don't think that manually putting your files into categories will really do much to improve your usage-expirience. What we need is "Google build into the OS". What about a file attribute, that, when it's set causes the operating system to index the file in the background, so that it's content can be quickly searched? Of course some kind of "Page Rank (tm)" system would be required to sort the files according to importance.
You just said it. It's not about the cables so much.
It's clear that the colors got better when you got a new TV. Get a new rf-cable (the vintage one from 1967 that you are using right now has quite a bad shield. Therefor the image gets bad). Your example with the TiVo is not that good: The composite-signal goes through the VCR. The VCR makes the colors fade, not the cable!
I want you guys to explain me one thing: When you are of the opinion that using composite or SVHS improves the quality for you so much, that you can't live without it, how come you can watch regular TV without your eyes starting to hurt? How come that at least in my home (brand new cables in my walls), I get to see 25 TV-stations (mostly PAL/PAL+) in cristal-clear image-quality with wonderful stereo sound through one single RF-cable? The colors are not faded. Contrasts do not bleed. The modulation doesn't hurt the signal too much.
I think this is a bad subject to start a religious war about. If you guys can see a difference, that's fine: go for it, buy expensive cables. If you have the money and it works for you *g*
But you said it right, monster-cables are most likely a rip off.
ciao
In the past I also believed that I could improve my VCR's image quality by using chinch or scart instead of the antenna-cable. It appears to be common knowledge that by using better cables the image quality improves. However that is just the theory. I read an article where a german electronics-magazine (was it "Video"?) really checked the signal's quality using all kinds of cables. They let both human testers rate the quality, and they also checked it with expensive gadgets. The result was surprising: Neighter the human testers, nor the devices would see any difference. The quality was the same, so matter whether they used the antenna-input, chinch, scart or even rgb-cables.
I believe that the "screenshots" in this article are fake. A little blur in Photoshop helps them to sell their expenisive cables.
There's a real cult around expensive cables, especially amoung the audiophile croud. It's simply ridiciculous that some people who have a 5000$ stereo spend 1000$ on the cables. There is no difference in sound. A copper-cable's resistance is the same, no matter wheter you payed 20$ or 300$ for the cable.
Please slashdoters. Don't believe that crap.
ciao
IANAL, but in Germany we do not have a precedent court system. That means that every case is usually decided without considering former court decissions. This has the advantage that former mistakes are not repeated. There are some exceptions, though. I think that you can point out an old decission and ask for a similar ruling, but you can't rely on it.
Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm really no expert.
In this case I would even agree to Mrs. Graf... I wouldn't want my face on pr0n as well. However I don't think that it was Microsoft's fault in this case.
I have very bad experience with Epox boards: a friend of mine bought one, and even the parts that were on board had interupt-conflicts with each other. Really horrible design.
But come on, let's be honest: Something that works for me (with my hardware) doesn't have to work for you and vice versa. This review is purely useless!
Well although QT is not bad, it's surely not perfect. The player one can download is awfully slow on windows, annoys you with loading movies you don't want to watch when you start it up looks quite non-standard and ugly. QT files usually use the proprietary Sorensen codec which isn't available on Linux and makes QT files useless to anyone without Windows or Linux. If you want to deliver Video over the Internet use straight MPEG-4 (no matter whether divx, m$ or whatever). That works on nearly any platform in standart-players.
I don't think we really understand each other. I don't say, it's fucking bad. I think that XOSL is a reasonably good OS-loader. It's easy to use. It's good enough to fire up a Windows install on a hard disk. But still it lacks some features. It can't boot my kernel whitch resides on the partition /dev/hdd9 with my xfs partition managed by the linux volume manager, that is located at /dev/sda7 or somewhere else... This sureley isn't important for everyone, especially not for windows users. Also it's silly that one needs a dedicated partition. But otherwise XOSL is fine! Use it if you want to. But a windows-like gui doesn't turn me on at all. I need a reason to change, and thus a question like "What does this have, that Lilo doesn't have?" is perfectly valid (although I didn't ask it). If someone who really likes XOSL needs a feature it lacks, he can surely implement it. But I don't need it now, and will stick to grub.
Well... The solution is very easy. Tom and AMD simply tested different processors... Tom used an old Thunderbird, while AMD used a new Athlon with a MP core. It's no wonder the results are different.
It's that simple!
I used XOSL in the past: while I think that it's nice, it's not perfect. What it lacks are some Unix/Linux-specific functions:
It should be possible to browse a filesystem and to select a kernel on it to boot. It should be possible to pass "command line parameters" to the kernel (like mem=256...). It also would be cool, if XOSL had the option to set the textmode, one wants to boot an operating system in (like dos...). It would be necessary to have an Unix/Linux-based install to be attractive to Unix/Linux-people, booting from an dos-bootdisk just isn't sexy...
All in all, XOSL is nice but not perfect. I'll stick to grub, until XOSL matures...
However I don't know whether this is such a good idea, because there's no way for the server to find out whether the client acceses the banners over his isp's proxy that could cache the banners. This way innocent users would be locked out.
There are a lot of different reasons why such a software that forces you to look on banners is a very bad idea (for example what about people who are blind and use text-browsers like lynx?), and we can just hope that the folks who run interesting servers will recognize that.
I think that people willing to die for their country are the reason such conflicts arise.
If the terrorists were not willing to loose their life, nothing would have happened.
Anybody who is willing to die for his ideals is not any better than a terrorist! And is to be blamed when such things happen.
It's not about being willing to lose your life, it's about raising your voice.
It's important that you understand that your life is not very important. If you loose it, nobody wins anything. But when you use it to do good to humankind, everybody profits. Sometimes it's important to defend yourself, but it's never a good idea to do this because you want revenge. The only acceptable reason to do this is to prevent further harm to yourself or to other people.
And I don't know a war will prevent any harm.
That reminds me of a joke, I recently heard:
A very small advertisement in the New York Times reads:
If everybody in NYC drank French Apple Wine, we could afford much bigger ads.
Anyway, that should be reason enough to sue somebody for using our words incorrectly, and misusing the german culture.
#!/usr/bin/perl APPEAL: listen (please, please); open yourself, wide; join (you, me), connect (us,together), tell me. do something if distressed; @dawn, dance; @evening, sing; read (books,$poems,stories) until peaceful; study if able; write me if-you-please; sort your feelings, reset goals, seek (friends, family, anyone); do*not*die (like this) if sin abounds; keys (hidden), open (locks, doors), tell secrets; do not, I-beg-you, close them, yet. accept (yourself, changes), bind (grief, despair); require truth, goodness if-you-will, each moment; select (always), length(of-days) # listen (a perl poem) # Sharon Hopkins # rev. June 19, 1995
This copy-protection is really simple, but yet effective. Simply the TOC (The initial few bytes that contain the offsets of the tracks on the cd, and thus the position of the songs on the disc) is manipulated in a way that confuses CD-ROM drives, so they think the CD is invalid and refuse to read data.
Most cd-players ignore the manipulated bytes and can play the CD without major problems. There are some exceptions: on some players the music plays, but the time of the songs doesn't display correctly or jumps back and ahead... Very old players refuse to play such CDs...
But it isn't very difficult to read in such CD digitally: if you have a cd-player which has digital-out, you can simply plug that into your soundcard's digital-in, and read in the cd without any quality-losses...If you burn the digital data back to a cd-r, you will have a perfect digital copy, without any quality-losses, but with removed copy-protection!
After the CD was on the market, BMG announced that they won't realease any new albums with that copy-protection until it really has matured... Well, since Macrovision tries to sell it to the big players now, it maybe has...
So we tech-people won't have much trouble, but the usual user is fucked...
Don't know whether you are trolling, but the guys who do the anime are not in the MPAA... And "region codeing" is evil because with it Americans can't watch the original (imported) japanese movies... Delay
Hehe. I am from Germany, but I would be aftaid to sell the Transrapid to China. The next thing that will happen is that China will produce an own much cheeper plastic-maglev after they reverse-enineered our proud enineer's work of two decades *g*
I had the experience with newer computers and bigger hard-drives that a kernel with softupdates compiled in made acces to the disk slower (it is supposed to make it faster...). Is there a reasonable explanation for that phenomenon, or are my observations just exceptions?
This year at LinuxKongress (two months ago in Erlangen, Germany), I saw the presentation of the Linux-port to the SuperH-processor. This port was not ment to make Linux run on Dreamcast, but rather to make it run on the SuperH, which is an processor developped for embedded devices. So Linux could be used to run your tv or something (you wouldn't notice normally *g*). The fact that Linux now runs on Dreamcast is just a neat side-effect. I talked to one of the main-developpers (Yutaka Niibe, I think), and he said there even might be a SuperH Debian distrib in some time. RedHat is not very interested, because for them there's no money to earn. Well, I also asked, whether it is possible to hook up a hard-drive to a dreamcast, to get a nice and cheap linux-computer, but he told me that they didn't know how to do this because the Dreamcast is a closed architecture no one but Sega really understands... Well: we really need open standarts, even for video-games...
No. That's not true. At Linux-Kongress in Erlangen, Germany, I saw a presentation of Linux on the SuperH-Processor whitch is used by the Dreamcast (http://www.linux-kongress.de/2000/abstracts.html# niibe). I saw it booting on Dreamcast. Since Emacs wasn't installed, the developper started Vi, and the audience applauded. Wow. That was real Linux-feeling. I talked to the Developper (his name was Yutaka Niibe, I think...) and he said that maybe Debian will bring out a distribution for the SH-3/4. Redhat will not, probably, cause there is no money to earn for them.
I think that delaying Netscape a week or two to fix some bugs is really important. The delay would be a much lower price then bad press. The Guys who just say "Hey, why care about Netscape, we have Mozilla", just aren't right: Microsoft will start bitching and say: "Look at Netscape 6: It was released with a lot of known bugs, and that's the way it is with all Open-Source Software!". Managers will believe that, they don't know the difference between Netscape and Mozilla. And the whole community pays the price.