Don't be so optimistic. The headend will probably be inside the ISP's network, so they will only enable mulitcast inside their own network. And they will hack their routers so that only their central server can create multicast groups.
Oh yeah, the edge routers can log multicast joins so they still know what you're watching (although "they" is the ISP, not Microsoft).
IPTV only sends the channels that you are currently watching, but they still bill you for all the channels you have access to. Due to the way the content owners have structured the contracts, you'll never get a la carte TV channels unless the government intervenes.
I admit that not every desktop Linux problem is solved. But in my office I don't use multimedia much and all the printers seem to just work (in my experience, PostScript is PostScript).
The Open Source development community hasn't solved the usability problems, particularly software and hardware installation.
This is not a problem in large companies, because they have full-time professional IT staff who can install and configure Linux.
Yum and apt-get are largely superior software installation solutions to anything MS has, why isn't the last step in releasing a new software package to put it on the yum / apt-get / urpmi repositories?
Because building and testing packages for every Linux distro is a lot of work, so volunteers just don't do it.
Either the licenses are compatible or they are not. You cannot mix GPL'ed and CDDL'ed code, therefore they are not compatible. Assigning blame does not solve anything.
You can't change the license on CDDL (or MPL, or GPL, or...) code, so there's no possibility of "forking under a different license". Likewise if you create a mixed CDDL/whatever project (which is possible for some values of whatever), the code that was originally under CDDL is still under CDDL, and thus still subject to the patent grant.
In other words, the gotchas that you are worrying about just do not exist.
Only the proprietors of Fort Knox would consider the cost benefit ratio of such software worthwhile.
I think this is a great analogy for Coyotos. Developing and verifying the kernel will cost tens of millions of dollars, but once it's done it can be used by a lot of people for a long time without much change.
If the data is encrypted with an N-bit symmetric key, you could escrow N-56 bits of the key with your trusted party and they could brute-force the remaining 56 bits in a few days.
Alternately, you could use secret splitting to divide the escrowed data among M trusted parties such that K of them must cooperate to recover the data.
I know this probably isn't what you want to hear, but you should do nothing. Every major open source project already has a torrent, and having two separate torrents for a given file is worse than one.
BitTorrent tracker hosting is not an exotic service, and the people who need it already have it. It's good for HE's customers that they're offering tracker hosting, but it's hardly a new thing.
Not really. e.g. MS Portable Media Center is only VHS resolution (320x240)
Can we burn our movies to DVD like we can burn our music to CD?
If so, don't expect to pay much less than the cost of a regular DVD.
I have a Mac & PC, but for everyone here who lives on *nix, will there be cross-platform software?
Of course not!
Are we going to be downloading 4.6GB DVD's or compressed divx-like files?
It's gotta be WMV9 or H.264 or VP7, which makes it a little harder to burn to DVD.
Also, how are you going to pay for all that bandwidth without killing your customers with additional charges?
By offloading the bandwidth cost to the customers (BitTorrent-style), of course!
Finally, what will be the selling point to downloading movies to your computer. Why not just go out and rent, or even yet, rent online through NetFlix or Blockbuster?
I've read a lot about ZFS and I haven't seen anything about new APIs. It sounds more like a better implementation of the standard Unix filesystem APIs to me.
But since the Solaris 10 man pages are on the Web, feel free to correct me.
Slashdot Mirror
The Gamecube uses "Gekko", a customized 750.
No, all the channels are coming down the cable all the time. The box just chooses which one to decode.
Don't be so optimistic. The headend will probably be inside the ISP's network, so they will only enable mulitcast inside their own network. And they will hack their routers so that only their central server can create multicast groups.
Oh yeah, the edge routers can log multicast joins so they still know what you're watching (although "they" is the ISP, not Microsoft).
IPTV only sends the channels that you are currently watching, but they still bill you for all the channels you have access to. Due to the way the content owners have structured the contracts, you'll never get a la carte TV channels unless the government intervenes.
Maybe you should merely be vigilant; I don't think vigilante action is called for at this point.
I admit that not every desktop Linux problem is solved. But in my office I don't use multimedia much and all the printers seem to just work (in my experience, PostScript is PostScript).
Use HandBrake.
The Open Source development community hasn't solved the usability problems, particularly software and hardware installation.
This is not a problem in large companies, because they have full-time professional IT staff who can install and configure Linux.
Yum and apt-get are largely superior software installation solutions to anything MS has, why isn't the last step in releasing a new software package to put it on the yum / apt-get / urpmi repositories?
Because building and testing packages for every Linux distro is a lot of work, so volunteers just don't do it.
Either the licenses are compatible or they are not. You cannot mix GPL'ed and CDDL'ed code, therefore they are not compatible. Assigning blame does not solve anything.
It most certainly IS a real world application, thousands of people are using it right now.
My point is that RC5 cracking does not accomplish anything useful. It isn't even entertaining IMO.
And it's certainly not the only application that gains massive acceleration via Altivec.
Sure, but those programs run faster on a G5. I think RC5 cracking is the only program that runs faster on a G4 than a G5.
I stand by the claim that for all useful applications, an Xserve G5 beats a Mac mini cluster.
You can't change the license on CDDL (or MPL, or GPL, or ...) code, so there's no possibility of "forking under a different license". Likewise if you create a mixed CDDL/whatever project (which is possible for some values of whatever), the code that was originally under CDDL is still under CDDL, and thus still subject to the patent grant.
In other words, the gotchas that you are worrying about just do not exist.
Yes, it is really open source.
The real question is whether Sun's license is compatible with the GPL.
That's not a question; it is not compatible.
Of course, RC5 cracking is a total anomaly. It's the only application that the G4 is the best at, and it's not even a real-world application.
Firewire is not switched, so a cluster using IP over Firewire would usually be slower than using 100Mbps Ethernet.
Some researchers are working on trojan-resistant/phishing-resistant user interfaces that make it much harder for users to screw things up.
Only the proprietors of Fort Knox would consider the cost benefit ratio of such software worthwhile.
I think this is a great analogy for Coyotos. Developing and verifying the kernel will cost tens of millions of dollars, but once it's done it can be used by a lot of people for a long time without much change.
If the data is encrypted with an N-bit symmetric key, you could escrow N-56 bits of the key with your trusted party and they could brute-force the remaining 56 bits in a few days.
Alternately, you could use secret splitting to divide the escrowed data among M trusted parties such that K of them must cooperate to recover the data.
Paying for a dedicated POTS line just to get free long distance over Bellster is a waste of money. It would be cheaper to just get Packet8.
I know this probably isn't what you want to hear, but you should do nothing. Every major open source project already has a torrent, and having two separate torrents for a given file is worse than one.
BitTorrent tracker hosting is not an exotic service, and the people who need it already have it. It's good for HE's customers that they're offering tracker hosting, but it's hardly a new thing.
DMCA safe harbor. ISPs aren't liable for anything.
Are there any decent portable movie players?
Not really. e.g. MS Portable Media Center is only VHS resolution (320x240)
Can we burn our movies to DVD like we can burn our music to CD?
If so, don't expect to pay much less than the cost of a regular DVD.
I have a Mac & PC, but for everyone here who lives on *nix, will there be cross-platform software?
Of course not!
Are we going to be downloading 4.6GB DVD's or compressed divx-like files?
It's gotta be WMV9 or H.264 or VP7, which makes it a little harder to burn to DVD.
Also, how are you going to pay for all that bandwidth without killing your customers with additional charges?
By offloading the bandwidth cost to the customers (BitTorrent-style), of course!
Finally, what will be the selling point to downloading movies to your computer. Why not just go out and rent, or even yet, rent online through NetFlix or Blockbuster?
Owning != renting.
What *I* want is the ability to browse, order, download and view movies from my TV.
Try Akimbo.
Do you think Napster will be any better? Their current music service is Windows-only.
I've read a lot about ZFS and I haven't seen anything about new APIs. It sounds more like a better implementation of the standard Unix filesystem APIs to me.
But since the Solaris 10 man pages are on the Web, feel free to correct me.