This really has nothing to do with dynamic/static IP's he's just trying to run his own private DNS server and it's getting hijacked. If he was seeking a simple dynamic IP solution it wouldn't matter if the client machine's DNS was getting hijacked since the DNS changes would get propagated out to Comcast's server eventually.
That being said this shouldn't effect him at all in a practicial sense. A private DNS server running inside of a private domain's network couldn't get hijacked except for when it has to seek upstream for an address it doesn't know, but for all practical uses this shouldn't matter. Your client machines would still be getting everything your DNS server is intentionally serving authoritatively or otherwise. The only time this would matter is if you want to completely ditch Comcast's DNS and go with another DNS server outside of your private domain, like OpenDNS.
I'm not exactly sure what your getting at, but I don't know of many people that would take several simultaneous installs over a single, backwards compatible, one. You get your cake and eat it too.
I don't know that.NET was ever supposed to kill Java. It's severely handicapped by being limited to Windows, but it is pretty much a direct competitor. I'd have a hard time believing even Microsoft could delude themselves into thinking that domination was possible when they don't dominate server market share. Currently Netcraft shows MS to be in the 30-40% range, even if the numbers were skewed a bit by MS servers running Apache.. thats a huge percentage of servers that can't run.NET. Sure the MONO project has made tons of progress, but its unofficial, limited in some respects, and (understandably) lags behind MS releases.
Yeah it was probably a poor choice of words. Mostly I meant public schools (or private, for that matter), but my experience is admittedly limited to my current state.
Actually I did a little googling and found the source of my problem. Doesn't make having 2 or 3 different versions of.NET installed any less silly though.
Yeah and its increasingly annoying. Windows 7 doesn't seem to support.NET 1.1 at all, so your effectively cut off from all the programs that still use it. I've never developed using.NET so I can't say I understand why people continue to use antiquated versions. Furthermore its even more odd that Microsoft seems to insist on making each version backwards incompatible.
Perhaps you mean Outlook Express, because last I heard Outlook still has ~50% market share in the corporate world. It's probably even more overwhelming if you include the public sector. The problem is there just aren't any good (and complete) open source groupware alternatives. Trust me, I switched my school to eGroupware and it's still one of the biggest thorns in my backside to this day. Buggy stables and not enough developers to devote to fixing them seem the norm. There solution pretty much seems to throw their hands up into the air and tell you to upgrade to the latest snapshot. They don't seem to understand that people with production machines want to run stable code, not bleeding edge. Sorry, just kind of a gripe of mine.
Console games don't really use DRM, well.. not at least beyond attempts to stop actual copying of media. They don't require registration, serial numbers, restrict content, and all that jazz. It's one of the reasons there is a used game market for consoles.. so in that respect DRM may be very tempting for publishers to add to their console releases in the future. That's one thing we'd like to avoid. Of course the other reason that PCs don't have a resale market is the ease of pirating. Yet, if the industry sees it has a chance of combining the lower rates of piracy on the console (at least for the average user) with the resale limiting effects of DRM for an increase in profit.. then it may just go for it.
I agree with you, I could care less. Personally I don't even buy used games for the reasons I stated above, they typically aren't cheaper. Yet I could see the whole thing going very wrong in the future.
This logic just doesn't hold up, you can't compare the two that way. Yes, games are cycled through quickly, but the stakes are higher with cars. It doesn't take *nearly* the same amount of resources to create a game. The R&D as well as the manufacturing process, not to mention the maintenance of the manufacturing process, are all so much more when manufacturing a car. That's why they cost so much. Furthermore a game is less likely to be bought used, after it has been out a while no one wants it.. they want the next best thing, so while they may not still be making money on their last release they are still making money on the current one. That's not necessarily true with cars since the next best thing is not affordable. As far as used revenue -- car manufacturers only make money on new models themselves, I don't see the difference here. Perhaps there might be an exception with the "certified" selling of used luxury cars, but that's a niche market.
That makes zero sense. By your logic then, it would be comparatively hard to find a used car, but it's not. Typically everyone buying a new car brings a trade in. The same is not true for video games. Many car dealers have as many used cars as they do new, many more are purely used car lots. Its precisely why cars are so much more expensive and last so much longer that car manufacturers have to compete with used sales so much more. Rich Guy A is able to buy himself a new car every 2-3 years, but Poor Guy B, C, and D can only afford the kind of car he wants if he buys used. Rinse and repeat. It was different a couple of years ago when it was easy to get (if you had good credit) zero percent financing on a 5-6yr loan, but with loans becoming harder to get at higher APRs.. things changed. There is a reason why so many car manufacturers these days are struggling to stay afloat.
Except that the kind of people that sell their games typically turn right around and buy another -- if you consider that the two scenarios begin to balance. Sure there are some people who will turn around and buy another used game, but many people find buying used games at a 20% discount a little hard to swallow when you can typically find the same new games at a 20% discount if your patient enough to shop around.
Most of his logic is pretty off kilter, but he does have one point. Gamestop tends to sell used games at new game prices. I can't tell you how many times I've bought a game, released at a suggested retail of $50, for $40 (new) at retail store X while Gamestop is *still* selling the used copy for $40. They almost never reduce their prices, at least on modern consoles and your treated like a potential criminal if you dare to ask to see the game before you purchase it. Honestly I'm surprised they've lasted so long so far. I've purchased two things from them. The first because they were the only ones who had it in stock and the second because I was given a gift card there. They are always, in my mind, the last option.
Admittedly you have me there, but that's one reason why I would never buy one. Yes, you can choose to turn it into a Linux box and it can do most anything a Linux box can do. Yet when your running Linux the PS3 is no longer able to run games better then any desktop -- it is now effectively a desktop. From what I hear about its GPU, it might be worse than a modern desktop. When it is not running Linux it can do whatever PS3's can do. At the price point the PS3 sells for this isn't an especially large surprise, it's not cheap. Using a PS3 with Linux may relieve some pressure from your desktop, but for many that's relieving pressure in the wrong direction. I have three computers in this room alone, two downstairs, and another two that I brought to work in order to avoid my wife's wrath. I have one (modern) console, two if you count the antiques:P. Console's are the commodity, at least in my opinion. If you want to argue the point.. fine, there is no spoon -- the old school console is gone and all we have are computer games:P.
"Let's get this straight, consoles ARE computers, Von Neumann machines like any other."
Yes and so are calculators, phones, and even some toasters (http://www.embeddedarm.com/software/arm-netbsd-toaster.php), but I'm not going to do my day-to-day computing on a toaster.
If you want to quibble about the little things: People love to throw around big words like "Von Neumann machines" but I'm not completely convinced those same people know what that means. Sure they took a CS course or two and that's what their teachers told them, but they have no idea what an actual Von Neumann machine is. Want another set of words? Flynn's Taxonomy: Von Neuman machines are SISD by design, but many modern architectures such as the PS3 are MIMD. Most modern computers do not actually fit the defination any longer either and are in actuality SIMD or MIMD. Yes, you could argue that a modern parallel-processing computer is in actuality several Von Neuman machines bolted together -- but my point is, in this day and age that term is becoming stretched beyond its initial meaning.
"what happens when consoles become more versatile and can 'do so much more than gaming'..."
Your argument seems to be insinuating that you actually believe consoles will die out and be totally replaced by "versatile" computers. As once consoles take on all the aspects of an end user desktop computer, they will in fact be one and the same.
"I'm running a Linux desktop on my PS3. I can game, or do those other things you are thinking of on it."
That's great for you, but that doesn't make it any less of a dedicated, closed system with limited potential beyond it's basic design. The PS3 has limited hardware configuration potential and therefore has limited uses, it is not what I would call a general computing device. Yes, I realize the cell processor has the potential to blow the water out from under most desktops, but in its current configuration as the PS3 that potential is sorely limited.
Only because the manufacturer of said computer bundles the drivers with the provided installation media. Lose that "recovery media" and your in the same boat as the rest of us.
Generally Linux only comes with "general drivers" for the same items that Windows does. There really is no such thing as a general driver unless the API has become extremely stable, such as with USB. Just because one driver might support several video cards does not mean it's a "general driver" those video cards have their own chipsets/API and corresponding low-level code. Sure there's must likely a layer of abstraction in order to make the code more portable, but that's it. If Linux, as well as other open source OS's, has a weak point, it's X11, not the drivers.
I was born in '79 actually. Unless kids are playing video games right out of the womb these days I would have had to be over 25 to know what an Atari even was. To quote you "consoles only really started overtaking home computers for gaming between the late 80's and mid 90's" -- the consoles that I talked about were pretty much released in that time frame. Well the Atari 5200 was released in 1983, but the NES and SNES were definitely part of that era.
I don't disagree that in the gaming market, consoles are currently doing better -- but people often speak as if computer games will eventually largely disappear and that's just highly unlikely.
Yeah, but you pretty much prove me right with your statement. You invited your friends over to show off your Amiga, you were the minority. Amiga's were always marketed as sort of a hybrid gaming console anyway. I don't think it's a coincidence that Amiga filed for bankruptcy in 1994. The people that owned them seemed to love them, but not that many people owned them.
Not sure what your going for here. EA has a long tradition of being multi-platform. Unless you have numbers showing all of their console sales were up and PC sales down, I don't see how that would further your point. Even so, EA seems much more positive about their PC prospects then you do and according to last quarter earnings their online sales of PC games have doubled.
Considering how wide-spread computers are, computer gaming will never die. Perhaps the current market is stumbling, but in the long run that will hardly matter. I understand the advantages that consoles present, but computers do so much more than gaming and so many more people will always own computers then consoles. Computers have become a necessity in life for many people, consoles have not. Tapping this demographic will always be tempting for software publishers. The market simply has no chance of going away.
How old are you exactly? I'm not sure how anyone, who was old enough to know better, could claim that the state of PC video gaming was better in the 90's. Compatibility issues were rampant. Forget buying cards that supported specific API's (DirectX/OpenGL), you better hope your game directly supported your chipset. With the advent of Glide you better hope you owned a 3Dfx Voodoo or you were simply SOL. This is one of the reasons the PSX did so well in 1994 -- 3d with none of the compatibility problems.
I've never really understood that argument. While I was growing up, playing video games pretty much meant you had an Atari, NES, or SNES. I realize there were plenty of other consoles out during this time, but that's not the point -- in the past gaming was largely limited to consoles. Yet, for the past 15 years that has no longer been true. The gaming industry on the computer has grown by leaps and bounds. If there is a trend, its consoles that are on the way out, at least if you look at the past 30 years.
Oh god no, it destroyed my 5.25" floppy disc! I'm not defending Apple or anything, the last (and only) product from Apple I've ever owned is a IIgs. In the end, most of these viruses were more obnoxious than anything else as most of us didn't have hard drives to ruin and anybody who turned off write protection on the program disk rather than saving files to a secondary disk was worthy of scorn.
Seems like it might be easier to turn it into a load-balancing cluster, of course the server would have to be implemented in a way that the computational workload could be efficiently shared. The EVE code base has been around a while and it might require a lot of work to do this or risk not scaling well. In essence, instead of having server virtual computers on one blade you would have several blades acting as one, powerful virtual computer. Seems like that would definitely be the way to go though if one wanted to be "shardless."
Yeah, if you want actual honest attempts at RP you definitely have to go with MUDs, or perhaps even increase your chances with their proprietary equivalent, games like Gemstone 3 or Achaea. I've never attempted RP with an "MMO," they just don't tend to facilitate it very well.
I know very little about it, as there doesn't seem to be a ton of info available. It does seem like XTI still ships with Solaris and is at least available through third-party opensource libraries for linux.
It seems to me like most of what your saying sockets is missing, it has gained through higher-level abstractions. Since XTI seems to be a higher level API in and of itself.. I'm not sure if I fully grasp what real advantages it would provide.
In any case I have to imagine that the article is in actuality looking for something new. Perhaps something like XTI in that it is abstract and outside the umbrella of the kernel, but more effecient than what XTI was coming to be.
I suggest you RTFA. One person.. I repeat, ONE PERSON, who had allergies, was unaffected. I suggest you read up on mucus membranes (like your nose and lungs) -- they tend to be impaired when histamine reactions cause prodigious amounts of snot. Seriously, put two and two together.
Slashdot Mirror
This really has nothing to do with dynamic/static IP's he's just trying to run his own private DNS server and it's getting hijacked. If he was seeking a simple dynamic IP solution it wouldn't matter if the client machine's DNS was getting hijacked since the DNS changes would get propagated out to Comcast's server eventually.
That being said this shouldn't effect him at all in a practicial sense. A private DNS server running inside of a private domain's network couldn't get hijacked except for when it has to seek upstream for an address it doesn't know, but for all practical uses this shouldn't matter. Your client machines would still be getting everything your DNS server is intentionally serving authoritatively or otherwise. The only time this would matter is if you want to completely ditch Comcast's DNS and go with another DNS server outside of your private domain, like OpenDNS.
Lol or because it was from *Technology* Review.
.NET != WebBrowser
I'm not exactly sure what your getting at, but I don't know of many people that would take several simultaneous installs over a single, backwards compatible, one. You get your cake and eat it too.
I don't know that .NET was ever supposed to kill Java. It's severely handicapped by being limited to Windows, but it is pretty much a direct competitor. I'd have a hard time believing even Microsoft could delude themselves into thinking that domination was possible when they don't dominate server market share. Currently Netcraft shows MS to be in the 30-40% range, even if the numbers were skewed a bit by MS servers running Apache.. thats a huge percentage of servers that can't run .NET. Sure the MONO project has made tons of progress, but its unofficial, limited in some respects, and (understandably) lags behind MS releases.
Yeah it was probably a poor choice of words. Mostly I meant public schools (or private, for that matter), but my experience is admittedly limited to my current state.
Actually I did a little googling and found the source of my problem. Doesn't make having 2 or 3 different versions of .NET installed any less silly though.
Yeah and its increasingly annoying. Windows 7 doesn't seem to support .NET 1.1 at all, so your effectively cut off from all the programs that still use it. I've never developed using .NET so I can't say I understand why people continue to use antiquated versions. Furthermore its even more odd that Microsoft seems to insist on making each version backwards incompatible.
Perhaps you mean Outlook Express, because last I heard Outlook still has ~50% market share in the corporate world. It's probably even more overwhelming if you include the public sector. The problem is there just aren't any good (and complete) open source groupware alternatives. Trust me, I switched my school to eGroupware and it's still one of the biggest thorns in my backside to this day. Buggy stables and not enough developers to devote to fixing them seem the norm. There solution pretty much seems to throw their hands up into the air and tell you to upgrade to the latest snapshot. They don't seem to understand that people with production machines want to run stable code, not bleeding edge. Sorry, just kind of a gripe of mine.
Console games don't really use DRM, well.. not at least beyond attempts to stop actual copying of media. They don't require registration, serial numbers, restrict content, and all that jazz. It's one of the reasons there is a used game market for consoles.. so in that respect DRM may be very tempting for publishers to add to their console releases in the future. That's one thing we'd like to avoid. Of course the other reason that PCs don't have a resale market is the ease of pirating. Yet, if the industry sees it has a chance of combining the lower rates of piracy on the console (at least for the average user) with the resale limiting effects of DRM for an increase in profit.. then it may just go for it.
I agree with you, I could care less. Personally I don't even buy used games for the reasons I stated above, they typically aren't cheaper. Yet I could see the whole thing going very wrong in the future.
This logic just doesn't hold up, you can't compare the two that way. Yes, games are cycled through quickly, but the stakes are higher with cars. It doesn't take *nearly* the same amount of resources to create a game. The R&D as well as the manufacturing process, not to mention the maintenance of the manufacturing process, are all so much more when manufacturing a car. That's why they cost so much. Furthermore a game is less likely to be bought used, after it has been out a while no one wants it.. they want the next best thing, so while they may not still be making money on their last release they are still making money on the current one. That's not necessarily true with cars since the next best thing is not affordable. As far as used revenue -- car manufacturers only make money on new models themselves, I don't see the difference here. Perhaps there might be an exception with the "certified" selling of used luxury cars, but that's a niche market.
That makes zero sense. By your logic then, it would be comparatively hard to find a used car, but it's not. Typically everyone buying a new car brings a trade in. The same is not true for video games. Many car dealers have as many used cars as they do new, many more are purely used car lots. Its precisely why cars are so much more expensive and last so much longer that car manufacturers have to compete with used sales so much more. Rich Guy A is able to buy himself a new car every 2-3 years, but Poor Guy B, C, and D can only afford the kind of car he wants if he buys used. Rinse and repeat. It was different a couple of years ago when it was easy to get (if you had good credit) zero percent financing on a 5-6yr loan, but with loans becoming harder to get at higher APRs.. things changed. There is a reason why so many car manufacturers these days are struggling to stay afloat.
Except that the kind of people that sell their games typically turn right around and buy another -- if you consider that the two scenarios begin to balance. Sure there are some people who will turn around and buy another used game, but many people find buying used games at a 20% discount a little hard to swallow when you can typically find the same new games at a 20% discount if your patient enough to shop around.
Most of his logic is pretty off kilter, but he does have one point. Gamestop tends to sell used games at new game prices. I can't tell you how many times I've bought a game, released at a suggested retail of $50, for $40 (new) at retail store X while Gamestop is *still* selling the used copy for $40. They almost never reduce their prices, at least on modern consoles and your treated like a potential criminal if you dare to ask to see the game before you purchase it. Honestly I'm surprised they've lasted so long so far. I've purchased two things from them. The first because they were the only ones who had it in stock and the second because I was given a gift card there. They are always, in my mind, the last option.
Admittedly you have me there, but that's one reason why I would never buy one. Yes, you can choose to turn it into a Linux box and it can do most anything a Linux box can do. Yet when your running Linux the PS3 is no longer able to run games better then any desktop -- it is now effectively a desktop. From what I hear about its GPU, it might be worse than a modern desktop. When it is not running Linux it can do whatever PS3's can do. At the price point the PS3 sells for this isn't an especially large surprise, it's not cheap. Using a PS3 with Linux may relieve some pressure from your desktop, but for many that's relieving pressure in the wrong direction. I have three computers in this room alone, two downstairs, and another two that I brought to work in order to avoid my wife's wrath. I have one (modern) console, two if you count the antiques :P. Console's are the commodity, at least in my opinion. If you want to argue the point.. fine, there is no spoon -- the old school console is gone and all we have are computer games :P.
"Let's get this straight, consoles ARE computers, Von Neumann machines like any other."
Yes and so are calculators, phones, and even some toasters (http://www.embeddedarm.com/software/arm-netbsd-toaster.php), but I'm not going to do my day-to-day computing on a toaster.
If you want to quibble about the little things: People love to throw around big words like "Von Neumann machines" but I'm not completely convinced those same people know what that means. Sure they took a CS course or two and that's what their teachers told them, but they have no idea what an actual Von Neumann machine is. Want another set of words? Flynn's Taxonomy: Von Neuman machines are SISD by design, but many modern architectures such as the PS3 are MIMD. Most modern computers do not actually fit the defination any longer either and are in actuality SIMD or MIMD. Yes, you could argue that a modern parallel-processing computer is in actuality several Von Neuman machines bolted together -- but my point is, in this day and age that term is becoming stretched beyond its initial meaning.
"what happens when consoles become more versatile and can 'do so much more than gaming'..."
Your argument seems to be insinuating that you actually believe consoles will die out and be totally replaced by "versatile" computers. As once consoles take on all the aspects of an end user desktop computer, they will in fact be one and the same.
"I'm running a Linux desktop on my PS3. I can game, or do those other things you are thinking of on it."
That's great for you, but that doesn't make it any less of a dedicated, closed system with limited potential beyond it's basic design. The PS3 has limited hardware configuration potential and therefore has limited uses, it is not what I would call a general computing device. Yes, I realize the cell processor has the potential to blow the water out from under most desktops, but in its current configuration as the PS3 that potential is sorely limited.
Only because the manufacturer of said computer bundles the drivers with the provided installation media. Lose that "recovery media" and your in the same boat as the rest of us.
Generally Linux only comes with "general drivers" for the same items that Windows does. There really is no such thing as a general driver unless the API has become extremely stable, such as with USB. Just because one driver might support several video cards does not mean it's a "general driver" those video cards have their own chipsets/API and corresponding low-level code. Sure there's must likely a layer of abstraction in order to make the code more portable, but that's it. If Linux, as well as other open source OS's, has a weak point, it's X11, not the drivers.
I was born in '79 actually. Unless kids are playing video games right out of the womb these days I would have had to be over 25 to know what an Atari even was. To quote you "consoles only really started overtaking home computers for gaming between the late 80's and mid 90's" -- the consoles that I talked about were pretty much released in that time frame. Well the Atari 5200 was released in 1983, but the NES and SNES were definitely part of that era.
I don't disagree that in the gaming market, consoles are currently doing better -- but people often speak as if computer games will eventually largely disappear and that's just highly unlikely.
Yeah, but you pretty much prove me right with your statement. You invited your friends over to show off your Amiga, you were the minority. Amiga's were always marketed as sort of a hybrid gaming console anyway. I don't think it's a coincidence that Amiga filed for bankruptcy in 1994. The people that owned them seemed to love them, but not that many people owned them.
Not sure what your going for here. EA has a long tradition of being multi-platform. Unless you have numbers showing all of their console sales were up and PC sales down, I don't see how that would further your point. Even so, EA seems much more positive about their PC prospects then you do and according to last quarter earnings their online sales of PC games have doubled.
Considering how wide-spread computers are, computer gaming will never die. Perhaps the current market is stumbling, but in the long run that will hardly matter. I understand the advantages that consoles present, but computers do so much more than gaming and so many more people will always own computers then consoles. Computers have become a necessity in life for many people, consoles have not. Tapping this demographic will always be tempting for software publishers. The market simply has no chance of going away.
How old are you exactly? I'm not sure how anyone, who was old enough to know better, could claim that the state of PC video gaming was better in the 90's. Compatibility issues were rampant. Forget buying cards that supported specific API's (DirectX/OpenGL), you better hope your game directly supported your chipset. With the advent of Glide you better hope you owned a 3Dfx Voodoo or you were simply SOL. This is one of the reasons the PSX did so well in 1994 -- 3d with none of the compatibility problems.
I've never really understood that argument. While I was growing up, playing video games pretty much meant you had an Atari, NES, or SNES. I realize there were plenty of other consoles out during this time, but that's not the point -- in the past gaming was largely limited to consoles. Yet, for the past 15 years that has no longer been true. The gaming industry on the computer has grown by leaps and bounds. If there is a trend, its consoles that are on the way out, at least if you look at the past 30 years.
Oh god no, it destroyed my 5.25" floppy disc! I'm not defending Apple or anything, the last (and only) product from Apple I've ever owned is a IIgs. In the end, most of these viruses were more obnoxious than anything else as most of us didn't have hard drives to ruin and anybody who turned off write protection on the program disk rather than saving files to a secondary disk was worthy of scorn.
Seems like it might be easier to turn it into a load-balancing cluster, of course the server would have to be implemented in a way that the computational workload could be efficiently shared. The EVE code base has been around a while and it might require a lot of work to do this or risk not scaling well. In essence, instead of having server virtual computers on one blade you would have several blades acting as one, powerful virtual computer. Seems like that would definitely be the way to go though if one wanted to be "shardless."
Yeah, if you want actual honest attempts at RP you definitely have to go with MUDs, or perhaps even increase your chances with their proprietary equivalent, games like Gemstone 3 or Achaea. I've never attempted RP with an "MMO," they just don't tend to facilitate it very well.
I know very little about it, as there doesn't seem to be a ton of info available. It does seem like XTI still ships with Solaris and is at least available through third-party opensource libraries for linux.
It seems to me like most of what your saying sockets is missing, it has gained through higher-level abstractions. Since XTI seems to be a higher level API in and of itself.. I'm not sure if I fully grasp what real advantages it would provide.
In any case I have to imagine that the article is in actuality looking for something new. Perhaps something like XTI in that it is abstract and outside the umbrella of the kernel, but more effecient than what XTI was coming to be.
I suggest you RTFA. One person.. I repeat, ONE PERSON, who had allergies, was unaffected. I suggest you read up on mucus membranes (like your nose and lungs) -- they tend to be impaired when histamine reactions cause prodigious amounts of snot. Seriously, put two and two together.