Don't forget that MMX took over the floating point registers, you could only do one or the other. AltiVec is simply another unit and doesn't affect use of floating point.
Make sure you read the licenses attached to the sources. Several of them are NOT free -- generally the better ones too. PlayMedia is suing Nullsoft for using copyrighted source code. They are not suing *everyone* who ever used *any* MP3 code.
Of course adding MP3.com is frivolous, but that's another issue.
You've been listening to too many conspiracy theories, and haven't been paying attention to the facts:
* PlayMedia is suing Nullsoft and MP3.com over pirating the copyrighted AMP code. * The RIAA is cracking down on people who pirate already released and copyrighted music. * Music publishers worry about missing new talent that gains grass roots popularity on the net.
The first two responses are based on illegal acts, the third is just corporate greed seeing their monopoly slip away. The music publishers have as much to do with the PlayMedia suit as the CIA did in the JFK shooting.
Despite the uninformed opinions, there *is* a valid reason to go against NullSoft. MP3 is a patented format, and the player software they originally based WinAmp on was copyrighted. They have since moved WinAmp to another MP3-engine, which ends the alleged infringement at a particular point -- hopefully limiting their liability.
It's a shame that a decent format has to go through this wrangling, but Nullsoft brought this upon themselves when they first pirated the code and used it. They may have popularized MP3, but they didn't have a legal right to use it. Can anyone say GIF?
As for adding MP3.com, well, that's how litigation works. It seems highly unlikely that MP3.com will be found liable, but it will certainly impact their IPO.
Re:You can even unplug it during file transfer
on
Firewire Harddrives
·
· Score: 1
Yes, FireWire supports hotswapping... but be careful about unplugging a drive then plugging it in elsewhere. The hardware and drivers handle this fine, but the OS itself may not like a volume whose file system is in a bad state.
Hotswapping is nice for reorganizing peripherals, and may work for read-only storage devices, but you still have to be careful.:)
Upgradable? They are a brick with no power supply, 2 small connectors, and very simple electronics -- just buy a second one. Sure, they're a bit pricey now... they are first generation. Give em 6-12 months, and they'll come down.
If you want a chassis, buy a SCSI drive and an external case. If you want something small, light, and cheap, go FireWire.
If everyone followed the "standards", what would be the point of Open Source? Aren't we talking about the freedom to take software in a different direction? Standards help software interoperate, freedom helps software evolve.
By allowing vendors to customize distributions, you allow them to move faster than a committee or standards group, but you also open the doors to fragmentation.
If everyone followed the "standards", what would be the point of Open Source? Aren't we talking about the freedom to take software in a different direction? Standards help software interoperate, freedom helps software evolve. You *can* have it both ways, but don't blame someone for choosing the other path.
Apple making the QuickTime framework Open Source is a good thing. Unfortunately most of the good codecs (such as Sorensen) are distributed under license -- so Apple can't just make them available.
What I'd really like to see is the creators of these codecs open up their sources so that people could write free decompressors, while selling the actual compressors to "video professionals" -- the people who can and are willing to pay.
> when we start talking about JAIL TIME...we've gone too far.
Um, jail time *if they are convicted and sentenced*. It's still just a law, they haven't thrown out the whole trial system.
How about this -- would you like to keep getting those long-distance and credit-card phone calls if they were calling collect? "Free speech" is fine, as long as I don't have to foot the bill.
MacOS X Server (aka Rhapsody) is not targetted at the consumer -- it's an enterprise server (the only real market NeXT had left). It has AppleShare, Web, File, Mail servers, as well as WebObjects (a very powerful Web data interface). For $1000, Rhapsody's WebObjects is limited to 50 concurrent users, whereas the full license runs $4000 (which it has for years).
You can make a Linux box for much less and I would recommend that you do so, because this is alot of money for services you probably won't use. That said, this will be the last version for most of the old NeXT customers before the final migration to MacOS X itself.
Apple is organizing their hardware and operating systems in tiers, just like most other vendors. Don't get upset by the price if it's not targetted at you.
Those manufacturers with razor thin margins probably aren't packing their boxes with lots of features or high quality components. They get by on shipping lots of cheap boxes.
Those manufacturers that can afford extra ports are shipping boxes to consumers who want the features and are willing to pay for better hardware configurations. People doing DV editing, those who want low cost laptop peripherals, and consumers sick of SCSI -- those will be the people who are going to buy these systems.
Besides someone is going to bear the cost of developing a new 1394-compatible standard, and they'll probably end up paying more getting it to market than they would just paying the licensing.
1. It's fine for a static configuration, but bringing a new device is a pain. Now try juggling more than 7 devices on the bus. FireWire supports up to 128 devices. 2. Power over the bus is optional -- for laptop peripherals, etc. 3. Flexible topology is dangerous? What if the Internet were serial in nature? Your objection makes no sense. 4. SCSI is still in pretty wide use, and prices have come down alot in the last 5 years. It's just those honking big cables and connectors.
And I hope Apple makes enough money to justify their investment... the technology is worth it.
I do not object to charging money for a product. I object to charging money for a standard.
Let's be clear here (or pedantic): A standard is a technical whitepaper, describing how a piece of technology operates. A patent is a legal document that gives certain rights to the inventor. These are not mutually exclusive, nor should they be.
Where would we be if all makers of IBM compatible PCs had to pay a license fee to IBM? What if IDE and SCSI were toll roads? What if VHS had required license fees?
There are examples on both sides of the fence -- how about PostScript or PCI? If a new technology is head and shoulders above what's currently available (not just a speedbump), then it's not unreasonable to levy a surcharge and recoup your investment.
Now if the fee is too high then it'll stifle the market and nobody benefits, but I think $1 / port is reasonable.
The assertion that the fee is small is not adequate defense. Months back, the Open Group attempted to levy a "small" fee for X11R6.4.
I think most people balked because they were being charged for something that they weren't previously. If you levy a charge from day zero, everyone knows what they are in for.
Slashdot Mirror
Well put.
Don't forget that MMX took over the floating point registers, you could only do one or the other. AltiVec is simply another unit and doesn't affect use of floating point.
Make sure you read the licenses attached to the sources. Several of them are NOT free -- generally the better ones too. PlayMedia is suing Nullsoft for using copyrighted source code. They are not suing *everyone* who ever used *any* MP3 code.
Of course adding MP3.com is frivolous, but that's another issue.
You've been listening to too many conspiracy theories, and haven't been paying attention to the facts:
* PlayMedia is suing Nullsoft and MP3.com over pirating the copyrighted AMP code.
* The RIAA is cracking down on people who pirate already released and copyrighted music.
* Music publishers worry about missing new talent that gains grass roots popularity on the net.
The first two responses are based on illegal acts, the third is just corporate greed seeing their monopoly slip away. The music publishers have as much to do with the PlayMedia suit as the CIA did in the JFK shooting.
Despite the uninformed opinions, there *is* a valid reason to go against NullSoft. MP3 is a patented format, and the player software they originally based WinAmp on was copyrighted. They have since moved WinAmp to another MP3-engine, which ends the alleged infringement at a particular point -- hopefully limiting their liability.
It's a shame that a decent format has to go through this wrangling, but Nullsoft brought this upon themselves when they first pirated the code and used it. They may have popularized MP3, but they didn't have a legal right to use it. Can anyone say GIF?
As for adding MP3.com, well, that's how litigation works. It seems highly unlikely that MP3.com will be found liable, but it will certainly impact their IPO.
Yes, FireWire supports hotswapping... but be careful about unplugging a drive then plugging it in elsewhere. The hardware and drivers handle this fine, but the OS itself may not like a volume whose file system is in a bad state.
:)
Hotswapping is nice for reorganizing peripherals, and may work for read-only storage devices, but you still have to be careful.
Upgradable? They are a brick with no power supply, 2 small connectors, and very simple electronics -- just buy a second one. Sure, they're a bit pricey now... they are first generation. Give em 6-12 months, and they'll come down.
If you want a chassis, buy a SCSI drive and an external case. If you want something small, light, and cheap, go FireWire.
If everyone followed the "standards", what would be the point of Open Source? Aren't we talking about the freedom to take software in a different direction? Standards help software interoperate, freedom helps software evolve.
By allowing vendors to customize distributions, you allow them to move faster than a committee or standards group, but you also open the doors to fragmentation.
You can't have one without the other.
If everyone followed the "standards", what would be the point of Open Source? Aren't we talking about the freedom to take software in a different direction? Standards help software interoperate, freedom helps software evolve. You *can* have it both ways, but don't blame someone for choosing the other path.
Apple making the QuickTime framework Open Source is a good thing. Unfortunately most of the good codecs (such as Sorensen) are distributed under license -- so Apple can't just make them available.
What I'd really like to see is the creators of these codecs open up their sources so that people could write free decompressors, while selling the actual compressors to "video professionals" -- the people who can and are willing to pay.
OT *is* fast, but MacOS X and MacOS X server only have BSD Sockets support in the kernel. Everything above goes thru the heavy compatibility layer.
> when we start talking about JAIL TIME...we've gone too far.
Um, jail time *if they are convicted and sentenced*. It's still just a law, they haven't thrown out the whole trial system.
How about this -- would you like to keep getting those long-distance and credit-card phone calls if they were calling collect? "Free speech" is fine, as long as I don't have to foot the bill.
MacOS X Server (aka Rhapsody) is not targetted at the consumer -- it's an
enterprise server (the only real market NeXT had left). It has AppleShare,
Web, File, Mail servers, as well as WebObjects (a very powerful Web
data interface). For $1000, Rhapsody's WebObjects is limited to 50 concurrent
users, whereas the full license runs $4000 (which it has for years).
You can make a Linux box for much less and I would recommend that you do so,
because this is alot of money for services you probably won't use. That said,
this will be the last version for most of the old NeXT customers before the
final migration to MacOS X itself.
Apple is organizing their hardware and operating systems in tiers, just like
most other vendors. Don't get upset by the price if it's not targetted at you.
Those manufacturers with razor thin margins probably aren't packing their boxes with lots of features or high quality components. They get by on shipping lots of cheap boxes.
Those manufacturers that can afford extra ports are shipping boxes to consumers who want the features and are willing to pay for better hardware configurations. People doing DV editing, those who want low cost laptop peripherals, and consumers sick of SCSI -- those will be the people who are going to buy these systems.
Besides someone is going to bear the cost of developing a new 1394-compatible standard, and they'll probably end up paying more getting it to market than they would just paying the licensing.
Let's keep it in perspective
Hmmm...
1. It's fine for a static configuration, but bringing a new device is a pain. Now try juggling more than 7 devices on the bus. FireWire supports up to 128 devices.
2. Power over the bus is optional -- for laptop peripherals, etc.
3. Flexible topology is dangerous? What if the Internet were serial in nature? Your objection makes no sense.
4. SCSI is still in pretty wide use, and prices have come down alot in the last 5 years. It's just those honking big cables and connectors.
And I hope Apple makes enough money to justify their investment... the technology is worth it.
Let's be clear here (or pedantic): A standard is a technical whitepaper, describing how a piece of technology operates. A patent is a legal document that gives certain rights to the inventor. These are not mutually exclusive, nor should they be.
Where would we be if all makers of IBM compatible PCs had to pay a license fee to IBM? What if IDE and SCSI were toll roads? What if VHS had required license fees?
There are examples on both sides of the fence -- how about PostScript or PCI? If a new technology is head and shoulders above what's currently available (not just a speedbump), then it's not unreasonable to levy a surcharge and recoup your investment.
Now if the fee is too high then it'll stifle the market and nobody benefits, but I think $1 / port is reasonable.
The assertion that the fee is small is not adequate defense. Months back, the Open Group attempted to levy a "small" fee for X11R6.4.
I think most people balked because they were being charged for something that they weren't previously. If you levy a charge from day zero, everyone knows what they are in for.