>> Now a Linux development kit for symbian would be nice though.
Yeah, it would, wouldn't it? Why don't you go and download it for free
That link is for Java development on Linux -> Symbian. That's quite nice!
However, if you want to develop C++ applications you are out of luck! No Linux support.
Imagine; Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc, etc, supports Symbian because they do not want to be controlled by Microsoft and their Stinker platform. But to develop C++ applications, the Symbian developers have to (drumroll) use Windows!!:-(:-(:-(
Ken said: With UNIX, if you're looking for something, you can easily and quickly check that small manual and find out that it's not there. With VMS, no matter what you look for -- it's literally a five-foot shelf of documentation -- if you look long enough it's there. That's the difference - - the beauty of UNIX is it's simple; and the beauty of VMS is that it's all there
Having done much programming on both UNIX and VMS, I can say that this is completely true. VMS is much better documented. All parts fit together better, and the documentation is very clear. And VMS has more features that UNIX is missing, such as handling asynchronous event, doing parallell async I/O on dozens of disks simultaneously, scaling to thousands of network connections, etc. If you do some types of programming, UNIX certainly feels like a toy system. (It is becoming gradually better, though.)
Too late they realized that they had forgotten to implement a shutdown command or even a copy command and the filesystem was corrupted when they turned the power off
Hello!??! This is VMS we are talking about. The filesystem is not corrupted on power failure.
The Digital marketeers changed the name from VMS to OpenVMS when the OS got its POSIX branding. The funny thing is that VMS got it before most UNIX systems did.
In those days, there was a lot of fuzz among customers about the need to buy "open" systems and not "proprietary" ones, (meaning that VMS was proprietary and Solaris or HP-UX were open). That's why Digital felt POSIX branding was a good thing.
Then the customers bought lots of M$ Windows stuff instead; so much for wanting "open" systems!
Another fact: VMS came with source code from the start! On microfiche. Not so that you could recompile the OS, but rather learn about it, check bugs, etc.
If you want to look at the source to ensure yourself that there is no NSA/CIA/M$ malware or trojans there, how do you know you are looking at the right thing? Will M$ actually let you USE the source and create your own certified Win distribution? Using your own trusted compiler?
Don't think so.
Re:you know -- the current generation still rule
on
End In Sight For Alpha
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Loosey operating systems. ULTRIX was immature and buggy
AFAIK, Alphas never ran Ultrix. They ran OSF/1 (later renamed Tru64). The first true 64-bit OS released 10 years ago which still beat newer attempts in good, clean 64-bit design (including, for example, HP-UX).
VMS was VMS (some people love it, not sure why) They run it because of the reliability and clustering capabilities. Which VMS had 15 years ago and no UNIX yet has emulated...
It was a memory hog. With a "int" set to 64 bits as standard No, an int was 32 bits. A long (and void*) were 64 bits, just as it SHOULD be.
A common 14 year old AOL script kiddie who faithfully opens his pr0n.jpg.vb email attachments while using various "security tools" found on various "security related" sites (read: Trojans. Lots of Trojans.) can turn even an OpenBSD box into an insecurity-ridden deathtrap.
The difference is that I can give my 14-year old script kiddie son a non-root account on my BSD box, and be quite certain that he does not mess with my OS installation. He can only damage his own account, which I can restore. Try that with W*nd*ws!
How do THEY know that the person hasn't legally purchased the CD?
They don't, and it does not matter. The person does not own the copyright so he cannot legally distribute the material.
By the way, I guess both articles got some basic facts wrong. I don't think they are going to be sued for downloading but for offering copyrighted works. IMHO, this is what the **AA should have been doing all along instead of trying to block new technology.
And to answer all those comments that the anti piracy group cannot know what the files contain and should not have the right to set the fines themselves: You are right!
Just consider this fine as a generous offer. If you think it is unfair, then let the police investigae exactly what you have shared, and a court decide what you should pay.
It will be interesting to see where all this will end up...
This way when I install a game, I don't have to worry that it could steal my bank account information
But you don't need Palladium to solve this problem!! If you run Linux, you can do this by using chroot. The problem is readily solvable on todays hardware. But solving this is not what Microsoft is really interested in. If they wanted security for users they could have implemented it years ago. Like other systems.
The only thing Palladium provides is taking control away from the owner. Really! Think about it!!!
if they want me to crawl around on the ground in a nice suit, they better be paying me enough to afford buying a new suit every week
That's why all tech personell that are actually permitted to touch the expensive computing hardware should wear white robes. Over the suits. Like in the good old days!;-)
Sorry, but encryption really does not solve the problem. It helps (a teeny weeny bit), but if you think you are safe just because you use encryption, think again.
They might see that it is SMTP traffic, but they can't see what you wrote
Yes, they can see that you are mailing newjobs@careerpath.com, sales@cybersex.com and tipping off anonymoustips@big.newspaper.com, but they can't see what you actually wrote.
They might see it's web traffic, but they can't see exactly what it is They can see that you frequent www.goatse.cx, but they can't see what you saw. They may have to go there themselves...
They might see an ssh session, but they can't sniff your root password They can see that you ssh to our.competitor.com and eevil.haxors.md, but can't see what you are doing. Time to target some other surveillance techniques on you!
Yeah, you are leaving them completely in the dark by using super-duper cant-ever-crack-this 128-bit encryption...
You know, system speed is not all about what frequency your CPU is clocked at. The memory system (FSB speed, cache size) matters too!
This is, IMHO, what all these benchmarks show. It is no surprise that a Pentium FSB running at 533 MHz can beat an Athlon with a FSB at 266 MHz. I'm actually more impressed that the Athlon managed to beat the Pentium on some benchmarks.
Listen kids, back in MY days, we used teletypes. Those keyboards were not for the weak. You had to hammer down the keys. And when one key was down, the other were mechanically locked and could not be pressed. You would hurt your fingers if you tried to hammer two keys at once.
The wonder of the teletype! No electronics. It was all mechanics. Imagine that! And they also had a paper tape reader/puncher which was handy to save your programs if your 100K disk allowance was used up.
It may sound like a good idea to separate the OS from the HW company. It might attract other HW companies to use the OS.
Psion did this with their OS (EPOC). The OS was transferred to Symbian. The idea was to let other companies such as Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc use the OS in their new mobile phones. I don't think they were successfull. Motorola cancelled their product...
Now Psion has stopped making new PDAs using EPOC. PocketPC seems to be the winner here.
I really hope that Palm does not go the same route. If PalmOS looses market share, would Palm simply make a PocketPC-based PDA with some simple apps for migrating from PalmOS?
Obviously not. More likely, a key generated at some point in the setup process, and your fingerprint is merely the passphrase to access the key. Same way PGP does it, really.
And when I have stolen your laptop, and I remove the disk and put it in my own Linux-controlled laptop, exactly how is the fingerprint scanner protecting the disk / flash ROM?
And how is the "passphrase" in the scheme above secret? And how do I change it once it has become known?
How does a "fingerprint scanning device" that operates with known inputs make ANY memory device (bar smartcards which isn't used here) on your stolen laptop "secret" from me?
The article fails to give a technical explanation on exactly how the fingerprints enhance security. Does anyone here really believe that this laptop can protect its data when it is stolen? In order to do that it must encrypt the data on the disk.
Using what encryption key? Your fingerprint? Does anyone believe that your fingerprints are secret? You are putting thousands of copies of your prints on various objects every day. You probably have several fingerprints on your laptop! And once your secret encryption key becomes known, how do you change your key?:-)
The key (sorry) to good encryption security is to change your keys often.
Until a good technical description on the security is provided I will regard this laptop as techno-babble trying to impress PHB types.
Re:First minute free is NOT ubiquitous in the US
on
GPS Meets PCS
·
· Score: 2
It's my understanding that common practice in Europe (and Japan?) is no charge for incoming calls.
In Sweden, there are providers that give you money when you receive a mobile call. This has really boosted the mobile phone usage in some groups.
Slashdot Mirror
And the sponsor behind this bill is Ernest (Fritz) Hollings. The Disney senator behind UCITA, etc.
My head spins! Now what dark plots are behind this new do-not-call list?
>> Now a Linux development kit for symbian would be nice though.
:-( :-( :-(
Yeah, it would, wouldn't it? Why don't you go and download it for free
That link is for Java development on Linux -> Symbian. That's quite nice!
However, if you want to develop C++ applications you are out of luck! No Linux support.
Imagine; Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc, etc, supports Symbian because they do not want to be controlled by Microsoft and their Stinker platform. But to develop C++ applications, the Symbian developers have to (drumroll) use Windows!!
Ken said: With UNIX, if you're looking for something, you can easily and quickly check that small manual and find out that it's not there. With VMS, no matter what you look for -- it's literally a five-foot shelf of documentation -- if you look long enough it's there. That's the difference - - the beauty of UNIX is it's simple; and the beauty of VMS is that it's all there
Having done much programming on both UNIX and VMS, I can say that this is completely true. VMS is much better documented. All parts fit together better, and the documentation is very clear. And VMS has more features that UNIX is missing, such as handling asynchronous event, doing parallell async I/O on dozens of disks simultaneously, scaling to thousands of network connections, etc. If you do some types of programming, UNIX certainly feels like a toy system. (It is becoming gradually better, though.)
64 bit does not mean a thing. 99.99999999999999% of software today does NOT run on it.
Guess what, 100% of Alpha VMS software runs on 64-bit hardware. Because Alpha has been 64 bit for about ten years. 64-bittness is nothing new here...
Too late they realized that they had forgotten to implement a shutdown command or even a copy command and the filesystem was corrupted when they turned the power off
Hello!??! This is VMS we are talking about. The filesystem is not corrupted on power failure.
The Digital marketeers changed the name from VMS to OpenVMS when the OS got its POSIX branding. The funny thing is that VMS got it before most UNIX systems did.
In those days, there was a lot of fuzz among customers about the need to buy "open" systems and not "proprietary" ones, (meaning that VMS was proprietary and Solaris or HP-UX were open). That's why Digital felt POSIX branding was a good thing.
Then the customers bought lots of M$ Windows stuff instead; so much for wanting "open" systems!
Another fact: VMS came with source code from the start! On microfiche. Not so that you could recompile the OS, but rather learn about it, check bugs, etc.
And:
5. Your fingerprints are not secret. You are leaving thousand copies of them daily on objects you touch. Combine this with item 1.....
If you want to look at the source to ensure yourself that there is no NSA/CIA/M$ malware or trojans there, how do you know you are looking at the right thing? Will M$ actually let you USE the source and create your own certified Win distribution? Using your own trusted compiler?
Don't think so.
Loosey operating systems. ULTRIX was immature and buggy
AFAIK, Alphas never ran Ultrix. They ran OSF/1 (later renamed Tru64). The first true 64-bit OS released 10 years ago which still beat newer attempts in good, clean 64-bit design (including, for example, HP-UX).
VMS was VMS (some people love it, not sure why)
They run it because of the reliability and clustering capabilities. Which VMS had 15 years ago and no UNIX yet has emulated...
It was a memory hog. With a "int" set to 64 bits as standard
No, an int was 32 bits. A long (and void*) were 64 bits, just as it SHOULD be.
See LP64
and each machine instruction taking up a lot of room (256 bits I think)
Have you ever used an Alpha? Each instruction is 32 bits long.
A common 14 year old AOL script kiddie who faithfully opens his pr0n.jpg.vb email attachments while using various "security tools" found on various "security related" sites (read: Trojans. Lots of Trojans.) can turn even an OpenBSD box into an insecurity-ridden deathtrap.
The difference is that I can give my 14-year old script kiddie son a non-root account on my BSD box, and be quite certain that he does not mess with my OS installation. He can only damage his own account, which I can restore. Try that with W*nd*ws!
How do THEY know that the person hasn't legally purchased the CD?
They don't, and it does not matter. The person does not own the copyright so he cannot legally distribute the material.
By the way, I guess both articles got some basic facts wrong. I don't think they are going to be sued for downloading but for offering copyrighted works. IMHO, this is what the **AA should have been doing all along instead of trying to block new technology.
And to answer all those comments that the anti piracy group cannot know what the files contain and should not have the right to set the fines themselves: You are right!
Just consider this fine as a generous offer. If you think it is unfair, then let the police investigae exactly what you have shared, and a court decide what you should pay.
It will be interesting to see where all this will end up...
Having a closed source appliance with wireless network built in takes the conecpt of spyware to a new dimension.
;-)
Do you have ANY control over what kind of information this device shares with its real masters (remember, you are not its master, merely its owner)?
The fingerprint feature comes in handy in this scenario. Now the **AA knows exactly what music you are stealing
This way when I install a game, I don't have to worry that it could steal my bank account information
But you don't need Palladium to solve this problem!! If you run Linux, you can do this by using chroot. The problem is readily solvable on todays hardware. But solving this is not what Microsoft is really interested in. If they wanted security for users they could have implemented it years ago. Like other systems.
The only thing Palladium provides is taking control away from the owner. Really! Think about it!!!
if they want me to crawl around on the ground in a nice suit, they better be paying me enough to afford buying a new suit every week
;-)
That's why all tech personell that are actually permitted to touch the expensive computing hardware should wear white robes. Over the suits. Like in the good old days!
What Palladium does is to enable the computer to NOT trust its owner.
Any other problem allegedly solved by Palladium can be solved without it.
Really!!
My software studio controlled by Cubase SX from Steinberg. By having lots of power in your PC, you can emulate more VST instruments and sound effects.
In this business, you can't get enough GHz!
Sorry, but encryption really does not solve the problem. It helps (a teeny weeny bit), but if you think you are safe just because you use encryption, think again.
They might see that it is SMTP traffic, but they can't see what you wrote
Yes, they can see that you are mailing newjobs@careerpath.com, sales@cybersex.com and tipping off anonymoustips@big.newspaper.com, but they can't see what you actually wrote.
They might see it's web traffic, but they can't see exactly what it is
They can see that you frequent www.goatse.cx, but they can't see what you saw. They may have to go there themselves...
They might see an ssh session, but they can't sniff your root password
They can see that you ssh to our.competitor.com and eevil.haxors.md, but can't see what you are doing. Time to target some other surveillance techniques on you!
Yeah, you are leaving them completely in the dark by using super-duper cant-ever-crack-this 128-bit encryption...
You know, system speed is not all about what frequency your CPU is clocked at. The memory system (FSB speed, cache size) matters too!
This is, IMHO, what all these benchmarks show. It is no surprise that a Pentium FSB running at 533 MHz can beat an Athlon with a FSB at 266 MHz. I'm actually more impressed that the Athlon managed to beat the Pentium on some benchmarks.
Listen kids, back in MY days, we used teletypes. Those keyboards were not for the weak. You had to hammer down the keys. And when one key was down, the other were mechanically locked and could not be pressed. You would hurt your fingers if you tried to hammer two keys at once.
The wonder of the teletype! No electronics. It was all mechanics. Imagine that! And they also had a paper tape reader/puncher which was handy to save your programs if your 100K disk allowance was used up.
So you want an Aquapac?
http://developer.mimer.com
runs on Windows, Unix, Linux and VMS
Client/server. Multiuser.
Supports Embedded SQL, ODBC and JDBC
Advanced optimistic transaction control
High level of SQL standard conformance
Stored procedures
/per@mimer.se
For any questions, feel free to ask me
It may sound like a good idea to separate the OS from the HW company. It might attract other HW companies to use the OS.
Psion did this with their OS (EPOC). The OS was transferred to Symbian. The idea was to let other companies such as Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc use the OS in their new mobile phones. I don't think they were successfull. Motorola cancelled their product...
Now Psion has stopped making new PDAs using EPOC. PocketPC seems to be the winner here.
I really hope that Palm does not go the same route. If PalmOS looses market share, would Palm simply make a PocketPC-based PDA with some simple apps for migrating from PalmOS?
Obviously not. More likely, a key generated at some point in the setup process, and your fingerprint is merely the passphrase to access the key. Same way PGP does it, really.
And when I have stolen your laptop, and I remove the disk and put it in my own Linux-controlled laptop, exactly how is the fingerprint scanner protecting the disk / flash ROM?
And how is the "passphrase" in the scheme above secret? And how do I change it once it has become known?
How does a "fingerprint scanning device" that operates with known inputs make ANY memory device (bar smartcards which isn't used here) on your stolen laptop "secret" from me?
The article fails to give a technical explanation on exactly how the fingerprints enhance security. Does anyone here really believe that this laptop can protect its data when it is stolen? In order to do that it must encrypt the data on the disk.
:-)
Using what encryption key? Your fingerprint? Does anyone believe that your fingerprints are secret? You are putting thousands of copies of your prints on various objects every day. You probably have several fingerprints on your laptop! And once your secret encryption key becomes known, how do you change your key?
The key (sorry) to good encryption security is to change your keys often.
Until a good technical description on the security is provided I will regard this laptop as techno-babble trying to impress PHB types.
It's my understanding that common practice in Europe (and Japan?) is no charge for incoming calls.
In Sweden, there are providers that give you money when you receive a mobile call. This has really boosted the mobile phone usage in some groups.