As I understand it ANY application that uses multimedia on the Macintosh platform has to use the Quicktime "libraries" - including Macromedia. Doesn't that mean that anything that Macromedia uses on a Mac will necessarily use Quicktime??
First, because Apple doesn't have nearly the market share of Microsoft, no one cosiders them a monopoly. But, more importantly, remember that the MS case is based on MS using its software market share to force hardware vendors into bundling MS only products.
Since Apple supplies both the hardware and the software, they don't have this licensing issue. They *almost* did back when they were licensing their OS to clone vendors. I wonder if MS should consider opening up a hardware department that runs certified MS parts, if that turnkey solution would be seen as more monopoly or less? Hmmm...
Not really. Macs are more secure as web servers because they lack a command line interface and, because of its design as an end-user desktop, almost nothing can be done to the OS through an application if its not designed for that. I can't user the Chooser, for example, to do anything else except look at AppleTalk network devices. There's no CLI commands you can pass to that app. Note that this only applies to Mac OS 9.x and LOWER. OS X, with its BSD Unix core, is another animal entirely.
However, the same features that make the Mac secure against overflow bugs also limits its abilities as a server. I surely wouldn't run more that a small-user-base file server or web server on it.
Yes, but look at it from the perspective of the cell phone signal providers. They can sell more phones if 1) their phones can pick up signals from further away and 2) they save money because they don't need to have as many towers for coverage.
While I'm not an electrical expert, I see tons of potential for this. How about instead of that ugly TV antenna on your house, you just place a conductive plastic layer all over your roof?
Now, just how many CIO's aren't going to seriously consider switching vendors when a software house says they're doubling the price in order to get better quality control...
You may be surprised. CIO's need a technology background, but more importantly they need a *business* background. Better software may be more expensive initially, but will have a lower total cost of ownership in the long run because (ideally) you won't have the problems associated with buggier software, i.e. performance issues resulting in lost productivity, resulting in higher tech support costs, resulting in higher employment costs,... You get the picture.
I'll bet that if you proved to a CIO that this *really* was an "install it and forget it" kind of software, your company's success would be guaranteed. There's nothing that business people like more than a product that *actually* does what it advertises.
"He's one of those Old School bearded sandal wearing Unix dudes from way back."
Well, that explains it! If they had offered him a pound or two of some kick-ass Sensemilla, this whole issue would have dissapeared in a big puff of smoke!
This is exactly how state laws are supposed to work. If you don't like the laws of a particular state, MOVE!
Also, in a capitalist society (or mostly capitalist), businesses are supposed to be able to stand on their own merits, not whine about how government leaders have not cow-towed to them.
I agreed with you all the way up to the part where you said you don't want Quake servers running on your network segment.
Plus, after reading most of the posts here, no one seems to have mentioned the obvious - your upload speed is not the same as your download spee.
RoadRunner has always indicated that your download speed is much faster than upload. You upload speed *includes* all the people connecting to your Quake server at a not-so-blazing-anymore-128kbps connection total.
Meanwhile everyone else in the neighborhood can still *download* up to 512k, 640k, or whatever is promised.
My guess is that RR will only pick on you if you start being obnoxious with their service - like using your connection to port scan your neighbors to see if they have any trojans already installed.
Supposedly, RoadRunner is working on ways to make the connection switched instead of shared, although it may require digital cable instead of this 10bT thin-net they have everyone hooked up to now.
I also asked RR before using NAT - they had no problem with it.
So what's the deal with CLEC[?]'s these days? Is there any hope of survival against the incumbent phone companies who will do anything to squash competition?
IMHO, the problems started when the FCC said it was OK for telcos to be in the Internet connection business.
The problems we are seeing now - horribly long times for DSL installs, poor service from EVERYONE, smaller ISPs being driven out of business, and even COVADS current financial troubles - are a direct result of allowing the Bells to compete against ISPs.
Think about it. What if roads and cars worked the same way (I know, I know, it's stretching the analogy, but bear with me here), where there was only one company that built all the roads and then various companies that built cars to drive on those roads? Now, what happens if you let the road-building company make their own cars to sell to the public. Since they are now in control of BOTH cars and roadway, is there anything to stop them from accomodating their own cars at the expense of other car manufacturers?
I have a friend who owns a smaller ISP and they were considering a class-action lawsuit against SBC for their unethical and downright criminal actions when it came to dealing with ISPs as customers.
They would offer preferential treatment (in the form of lower prices, faster install dates, etc.) to their OWN subsidiary ISP and leave the others in the dust.
Until they get the telcos OUT of the ISP market, we are going to continue seeing messes like PacBell, SBC, Covad, and others.
Your position or ability may get you some *initial* respect, but real respect has to be earned - not only through technical accomplishments but also through inter-personal relationships with your co-workers.
Your age may initially color some people's perceptions of you, but only your actions and reactions will define you in the long run.
As a sys admin in a school setting, I can't even begin to count the number of technically gifted students we have that are constantly inquiring about "helping around the server room". Invariably, I'll have one of them bugging me for root access because they want to improve something or other on the servers.
Do they know more about certain technologies and programming than I do? You bet!
Do they know how to handle themselves when a psycho webmaster (long gone by now) uses them for political in-fighting? Hell no!
This is why I don't give them root, but I do allow them to do work under supervision.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that lots of technical knowledge=guaranteed respect. If that were the case, no one would respect your parents becuase they are not your technical equals.
FYI, I hope you remember this experience enough to NOT pass it along to others. Women have endured this same lack of respect for their knowledge and experience for generations - and it only worsens with age. At least you can look forward to outgrowing your youth. Gender is just a tad more difficult to "grow out of".:-P
Obviously this guy doesn't keep up with business news....
AOL has over 20 million subscribers, and over 60 million Instant Messenger users.
AFAIK, Last time I installed this for one of my users, AOL had bought Netscape and now comes with the Netscape engine as its built in browser. This means that IE specific pages may end up excluding all those little AOL users.
Seems to me it just doesn't make good business sense to purposely exclude a huge chunk of customer base - especially considering how much LARGER AOL is going to get after this Time-Warner merger.
I just had to get off my lurking butt to mention that G.Gordon Liddy, Monica Lewinsky (though she wasn't criminal), Tanya Harding, and several other examples of generally revolting individuals have profited from their "real-life stories" or the "lecture circuit". So why is Kevin Mitnick being singled out? What I see as the main difference here is the fear factor. Kevin Mitnick and "hackers" in general, scare the shit out of judges and law enforcement because they do not understand the technology, how it was misused, or how to defend themselves. This fear leads to an unreasonable hatred of any computer-savvy individuals with criminal intent. And it's reflected in the judge's comments.
a) I thought Mystery Men was very much along the lines of The Tick and retained the same tongue-in-cheek-but-lovable satire of the Tick comics. That movie turned out pretty good.
b) The Comic Book Superhero is a widespread enough "cultural icon" that practically *everyone* will get the joke.
I wouldn't worry about ratings. They can always send the Mad Cow to eat the Nielsen families.
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it ANY application that uses multimedia on the Macintosh platform has to use the Quicktime "libraries" - including Macromedia. Doesn't that mean that anything that Macromedia uses on a Mac will necessarily use Quicktime??
Since Apple supplies both the hardware and the software, they don't have this licensing issue. They *almost* did back when they were licensing their OS to clone vendors.
I wonder if MS should consider opening up a hardware department that runs certified MS parts, if that turnkey solution would be seen as more monopoly or less? Hmmm...
However, the same features that make the Mac secure against overflow bugs also limits its abilities as a server. I surely wouldn't run more that a small-user-base file server or web server on it.
While I'm not an electrical expert, I see tons of potential for this. How about instead of that ugly TV antenna on your house, you just place a conductive plastic layer all over your roof?
Now, just how many CIO's aren't going to seriously consider switching vendors when a software house says they're doubling the price in order to get better quality control...
You may be surprised. CIO's need a technology background, but more importantly they need a *business* background. Better software may be more expensive initially, but will have a lower total cost of ownership in the long run because (ideally) you won't have the problems associated with buggier software, i.e. performance issues resulting in lost productivity, resulting in higher tech support costs, resulting in higher employment costs,... You get the picture.
I'll bet that if you proved to a CIO that this *really* was an "install it and forget it" kind of software, your company's success would be guaranteed. There's nothing that business people like more than a product that *actually* does what it advertises.
bluesangria
Well, that explains it! If they had offered him a pound or two of some kick-ass Sensemilla, this whole issue would have dissapeared in a big puff of smoke!
bluesangria
"My sig file?....Uh, I forget..."
Also, in a capitalist society (or mostly capitalist), businesses are supposed to be able to stand on their own merits, not whine about how government leaders have not cow-towed to them.
Plus, after reading most of the posts here, no one seems to have mentioned the obvious - your upload speed is not the same as your download spee.
RoadRunner has always indicated that your download speed is much faster than upload. You upload speed *includes* all the people connecting to your Quake server at a not-so-blazing-anymore-128kbps connection total.
Meanwhile everyone else in the neighborhood can still *download* up to 512k, 640k, or whatever is promised.
My guess is that RR will only pick on you if you start being obnoxious with their service - like using your connection to port scan your neighbors to see if they have any trojans already installed.
Supposedly, RoadRunner is working on ways to make the connection switched instead of shared, although it may require digital cable instead of this 10bT thin-net they have everyone hooked up to now.
I also asked RR before using NAT - they had no problem with it.
Quick! Everybody release a copyrighted CD of themselves singing in the shower and ship it off to Europe!
I smell EASY MONEY!!
The problems we are seeing now - horribly long times for DSL installs, poor service from EVERYONE, smaller ISPs being driven out of business, and even COVADS current financial troubles - are a direct result of allowing the Bells to compete against ISPs.
Think about it. What if roads and cars worked the same way (I know, I know, it's stretching the analogy, but bear with me here), where there was only one company that built all the roads and then various companies that built cars to drive on those roads? Now, what happens if you let the road-building company make their own cars to sell to the public. Since they are now in control of BOTH cars and roadway, is there anything to stop them from accomodating their own cars at the expense of other car manufacturers?
I have a friend who owns a smaller ISP and they were considering a class-action lawsuit against SBC for their unethical and downright criminal actions when it came to dealing with ISPs as customers.
They would offer preferential treatment (in the form of lower prices, faster install dates, etc.) to their OWN subsidiary ISP and leave the others in the dust.
Until they get the telcos OUT of the ISP market, we are going to continue seeing messes like PacBell, SBC, Covad, and others.
Your position or ability may get you some *initial* respect, but real respect has to be earned - not only through technical accomplishments but also through inter-personal relationships with your co-workers. Your age may initially color some people's perceptions of you, but only your actions and reactions will define you in the long run. As a sys admin in a school setting, I can't even begin to count the number of technically gifted students we have that are constantly inquiring about "helping around the server room". Invariably, I'll have one of them bugging me for root access because they want to improve something or other on the servers. Do they know more about certain technologies and programming than I do? You bet! Do they know how to handle themselves when a psycho webmaster (long gone by now) uses them for political in-fighting? Hell no! This is why I don't give them root, but I do allow them to do work under supervision. Don't make the mistake of thinking that lots of technical knowledge=guaranteed respect. If that were the case, no one would respect your parents becuase they are not your technical equals. FYI, I hope you remember this experience enough to NOT pass it along to others. Women have endured this same lack of respect for their knowledge and experience for generations - and it only worsens with age. At least you can look forward to outgrowing your youth. Gender is just a tad more difficult to "grow out of". :-P
Obviously this guy doesn't keep up with business news.... AOL has over 20 million subscribers, and over 60 million Instant Messenger users. AFAIK, Last time I installed this for one of my users, AOL had bought Netscape and now comes with the Netscape engine as its built in browser. This means that IE specific pages may end up excluding all those little AOL users. Seems to me it just doesn't make good business sense to purposely exclude a huge chunk of customer base - especially considering how much LARGER AOL is going to get after this Time-Warner merger.
I just had to get off my lurking butt to mention that G.Gordon Liddy, Monica Lewinsky (though she wasn't criminal), Tanya Harding, and several other examples of generally revolting individuals have profited from their "real-life stories" or the "lecture circuit". So why is Kevin Mitnick being singled out? What I see as the main difference here is the fear factor. Kevin Mitnick and "hackers" in general, scare the shit out of judges and law enforcement because they do not understand the technology, how it was misused, or how to defend themselves. This fear leads to an unreasonable hatred of any computer-savvy individuals with criminal intent. And it's reflected in the judge's comments.
It might turn out to be good.
a) I thought Mystery Men was very much along the lines of The Tick and retained the same tongue-in-cheek-but-lovable satire of the Tick comics. That movie turned out pretty good.
b) The Comic Book Superhero is a widespread enough "cultural icon" that practically *everyone* will get the joke.
I wouldn't worry about ratings. They can always send the Mad Cow to eat the Nielsen families.
bluesangria