As other posters have noted, the delta wing configuration isn't new and it's advantages have been well known.
I suspect that the recent advent of "fly-by-wire" that Airbus first used has finally made this configuration "flyable".
Ok, so now they can build it, but passenger issues also have to be solved for it to be accepted. Personally, I think most folks would gladly trade the window view for more washrooms (which the new configuration might have room for).
If any of you have been on a 747-400 series, there is a LCD screen in the back of each seat. This allows each passenger to watch from movies/music/telemetry (my favourite). This could also be used to provide a "ground" view for those that have to have a window. Additionally, I suspect windows cost a lot of $ and weight. Look at cargo planes and you'll never see them (except for the pilots [well duh!]).
Okay, you people are all out of your minds, you know that. You do understand that Mars is really, really far away, and its really, really cold. And you can't breathe the air, which is so thin it would make your blood boil, so you're sort of freezing and boiling at the same time. And if you did go there, you couldn't come back for years. And it would cost millions of dollars per pound to get you there. And there's nothing there, anyway. We're talking about the same Mars, right? The Mars Society Mars.
Pardon me for being rude, but have you considered starting up, say... The Fiji Society? You might get more members.
For me, it was grade 4 when I came up with the brilliant idea of coupling a generator to a motor and using the power from the generator to run the motor, and draw off the "excess".
However, in a true feat of stubborness, I actually built a small prototype. Well, needless to say, it didn't work. But it would spin for a while before stopping (clearly much longer than just coasting).
Now that I'm all grown up and aware of such scientific limitations, I think I'll built a small, unlicensed, nuclear reactor.....:)
While I would love to see a mass migration to Linux, it won't happen without the apps. Granted, this is hardly a revelation.
However, what if the Windows desktop domination can be chipped away at by utilizing <flamesuit> Linux apps compiled for Windows </flamesuit>?
Conceivably, a number of folks who currently use Excel could probably work just as well in a Windows version of Gnumeric (or pick your Open Source equivalent).
Over time, as people migrate from Windows apps to Linux for Windows apps, they may eventually reach the point where they ask "why am I still running Windows?" and move to Linux.
Although Gnumeric may not be the best example of this, one of the touted advantages of GUI tookits for X are their cross-platform availablility (I'm specifically taking about Qt, and yes, I know Gnumeric is not Qt).
Lowering the transistional pain to small steps seems the only way I can see Linux eventually having a presence on the desktop.
Anybody else think this makes sense, or am I having a lapse of reason on the last day of 2001?
Point taken regarding 2.5 kernels. (I'm not trying these myself). However, the original poster may have only wanted to know how to run multiple 2.4/2.2 kernels.
In my own case I use 2.2.19 and have played with a number of the 2.4 kernels.
I'm just thinking back to kernel 2.0.0 arriving and wanting to run it on my 1.2.12 box. Granted, setting up lilo was pretty easy, but what's wrong with some help to speed up the procedure? (as long as the learning part still occurs)
In any event, I agree that the stock kernels supplied with most distros are built for compatibility first, performance/stablity second.
I always build a new kernel when setting up a new machine and rarely have problems after that.
How about if after auto-detecting the hardware, the new kernel is rolled in the background so that once the install is finished (all the packages) the new kernel is ready to go. Then setup the defualt lilo to have the "compatibility kernel" and the "what you really need kernel".
At the least, this could compile the kernel for the proper processor (486/P/P2/P3/Athlon, etc.) and dump unneeded support for SCSI, etc. (major functional areas)
To bring Linux to the desktop requires a lead-pipe cinch install process that includes setting up KDE/useful apps/PPP dialup or whatever. It's pretty much a sure bet that Linux won't be pre-installed on PCs anytime in the near future in quantity, so the procedure needs to be:
1) put CD in drive and reboot
2) reboot once install process tells you to.
Of course, maybe/. just needs a big warning that goes along with the posting of a new kernel...
is there a way to have more than one kernel (e.g. a stable one and a development one) on the same machine and boot to one or the other
Sure is. The kernel sources will untar to different directories based on version (how 'bout that?), so no problem with overwriting your stable ".config".
Anyhoo, after building your new kernel, copy it to the same location as your current kernel, but with a different name. (on Redhat this is/boot, slackware is/). Then edit your lilo.conf file in/etc.
Add a new section that looks like:
image =/root/bzImage25 (whatever your new kernel is called)
root =/dev/hda1 (or whatever you are using)
label = Linux251 (or whatever)
read-only
Save lilo.conf and run lilo. This will re-install lilo with the new settings. Of course, if you're not using lilo, then cheerfully disregard the above.:)
On reboot, you should be able to pick from both the old kernel and the new kernel.
As for where the FM is, check out the LILO mini-HOWTO (in/usr/doc/Linux-mini-HOWTOs on my system).
LOL, thats an interesting assesment. At a local car show I was near the security booth when one man came to report his 1969 camaro was stolen and he couldn't figure out how it was stolen since he had the rotor out of the distributor in his pocket. Literally within 5 minutes another man came in to report that someone stole the rotor out of the distributor on his chevy truck.
Now I'm laughing since I read the same story in a car-mag (think it was Carcraft) a few months ago.
Back on-topic, the best way to prevent your nearly new car from being stolen is to wire a hidden switch into the fuel pump circuit. Forget about clubs, they won't stop someone who's determined.
If you shut off the fuel pump circuit when you park, the sequence of events when a thief steals your car will be as follows:
1) they break into the car (well duh!)
2) they break off any clubs, etc
3) they break the ignition lock
4) start the car (it will still start without the pump)
5) they drive about 50 feet and the car stalls (no more fuel)
Now, the thief is totally exposed with onlookers wondering why he stopped his car in the middle of the parking lot. You can bet that he'll run for it since he can't futz around with so much attention.
The key is to make sure the kill switch is hidden or non-obvious. I've seen friends use the cigarette lighter (they didn't smoke) as the switch. Pretty sneaky eh?
Although my insurance company won't give me a discount for this "anti-theft" system, I'd rather still have my car than a few more bucks in my pocket.
I've been hacking on cars (old and new) for 20 years and this is the best anti-theft system I've thought of for cars with electric fuel pumps.
I'm intrigued by your idea, insofar as I'd like to know if it can be done for anywhere near a reasonable cost. I've played around with PC/104 modules and had Linux run on them without troubles. The module I'm currently using for an embedded system supports dual 100M ethernet (ya, a tad excessive:), 64M RAM, up to 192M of chip-on-disk (HD replacement) and comes on a single PC/104 board. To make it functional as a system, only a power supply board and a video board were needed. I think the power board could be dumped if running on batteries.
I've in the past looked at some industrial LCD screens that were B&W and came with a driver card that was standard VGA, not your typical funky laptop arrangement. They were pricey at the time ($1000 in 98), but may have decreased.
Battery life can be had if you're willing to carry around a heavier battery (there are lots of off-the-shelf ones available).
The problem I see is that it would be difficult to impossible to build this into a case that would rival a typical laptop for size. Those R&D guys doing laptop design are miracle workers! I can just imagine what they must be saying everytime marketing comes along and says "we need it smaller".....
In the end, though, you'll probably end up making the same decision I did and buy a standard laptop of some sort (I'm using a Dell C500 right now and it works great with Linux (Slackware)).
Just don't give up if you really want to do this. There seem to be a pile of nay-sayers for/.
I'm building my own car right now just for fun and to prove it can still be done.:)
Agreed. As you pointed out, there is no driving reason for consumers to move to this new format (we've already got random access, etc.). What if the RIAA members "pushed" this format change because it helped them instead?
Consumers already have CDs and are happy with them (and the fact that they are easy to rip helps too). But, the RIAA is probably kicking themselves now for ever supporting such a "loose" format. Don't you think the RIAA would love to be able to take back all CDs ever sold and promote this format (or another with limited copying for Joe Sixpaxk)?
What if the RIAA offered a deal where they will exchange your "old" CDs and vinyl for "new" DataPlay discs? In this way they have dropped the cost of switching to the new format for consumers and they (the RIAA) gets what they want, no more CDs. This might sound expensive (and thus counter RIAA), but consider that the production cost is the lowest chunk of $ in the cost of a CD. A dollar hit on all CDs ever sold might be worth ridding themselves of CDs forever, and thus staving off their (the RIAA) obsolecence in light of digital file swapping.
There has to be a reason why the RIAA members would pour money into YAMF (yet another music format)...
"Nobody has yet circumnavigated the moon in a rocket space ship, but the idea is not laughed down."
To me, this seems like the biggest miss. When this was originally written, we were only 19 years away from a landing.
Show how fast things can develop when we're motivated as a society to do it. I think that had that motivation lasted, we would surely have made Mars by now.
This should be modded up. I think that this is the issue; that the majority of MS customers are too lazy/stupid/easily satisfied/intimidated by computers to look for better alternatives than the ones that they have been spoon-fed.
Most people (think: your Mother) have enough difficulty installing a new piece of software that they surely are not going to replace something they already have, even if it's slow/full of security holes/unreliable/etc.
It has been this way since DOS days, when DR-DOS or QEMM/Desqview (or OS/2) were far superior to MS-DOS, but most people didn't bother to change.
Us folks on/. would be well to keep in mind that our total population makes up.1% or less of all computer users worldwide and the other 99.9% of folks have resigned themselves to accepting MS' products as "good enough for me".
What does this mean for us? That we'll be bitching forever on/. because I can't see the current situation changing.
The LILO problem has plagued me for years, which is why I switched over to LOADLIN in the first place. With the kernel uptimes I typically get, there's no need for me to have a "quick boot" sequence. I keep a floppy disk with DOS (dooh!) in each floppy drive with my kernels on it.
Totally safe, and you don't have to worry about Windows screwing up your boot sector.
In fact, I loaded my kernel images onto the Windows partition so they could be loaded faster (and redundancy for the floppy).
To ensure that the MCSE certification is recognized as a leading IT professional credential with value and credibility, it is critical that MCSEs be up to date on the most advanced technology available
It may be pesimistic, but I can't see Average Joe ever understanding the issues and the tech to the point where they could adequately protect themselves.
This section:
Some ISPs now offer security services, and will provide "firewall" services for their customers, but this comes at a high price. Most users want $19.95 a month service, which is basically just buying a raw, wide open pipe.
Gave me an idea... What if there were an OS (I'm talking Windows/Mac) option to not allow outsiders to initiate a socket? Such that all traffic in/out of Average Joe had to be initiated by Average Joe. For people on @home (or similar) this should not be a big limitation as they're not suppossed to be running servers anyway! (which is why I'm not a customer).
The implementation of this is left as an exercise for the reader.
I never use anything below 128kbps, as a matter of fact, 160kbps is sometimes even needed to really get it right.
Same here. I've been using the variable rate encoding with Xing with very good results. My question would be whether this thing could play back these files properly.
What would be really neat is if the download software could selctively reduce the bitrate from the original mp3. If I were just planning on listening on headphones, then I could get away with 64k.
How about an ethernet hookup instead of usb for downloading new tunes?
But I suspect that SDMI is here to stay. Ask yourself who you know that is using mp3s... it's mostly geeks like yourself right?
Well, the much larger market for music isn't and they want something convienent and legal. While SDMI may be inconvienent to use, I suspect it will be very convienent to buy on-line.
mp3s will never have the legitamacy to be sold on-line through easily accessible channels. This will ensure that mp3s will always stay in the realm of rip-it-yourselfers (like me). The mass market isn't here though.
As I said, I hope I'm wrong, but I suspect that mp3 will stay fringe and won't eat into the profits of the RIAA as much as they claim.
Thanks for the insight. It seems to me that Microsoft is just trying to capture the entire streaming market share by doing this. Clearly, their motive is to have a lock on the server side.
I doubt they even care about the client side, since that's not where the money will be made. (just look at HTTP clients/servers)
Yet another proprietary protocol that the world doesn't need.
From what I've read of the comments, it looks at though Napster is on firm legal ground, if only they could afford a defence. This looks like a good opportunity for mp3.com to step in with some of their IPO $$$.
Other thoughts I've had are that Napster should have made their software more "general purpose". Advertise it as a way to trade pics (you know which type), and have it "conviently" also transfer mp3s.
Look at how many mp3s are flying around in IRC, but you don't see the RIAA trying to sue. The trouble with Napster is that it is too high-profile and it was only a matter of time before the RIAA took notice.
As others have already said, last resort is open-source the server/client.
I couldn't agree more. In my last job (notice how all of these stories are from past jobs?), I created a monitoring tool (on Linux). Others in the company spent 10 times the time and money on a parallel project, using management dictated means, and to this day, their solution does nothing, while mine still chunks away.
Now, the story I hear is they want to port my Linux solution over to their "management" platforms.... good luck!
Slashdot Mirror
As other posters have noted, the delta wing configuration isn't new and it's advantages have been well known.
I suspect that the recent advent of "fly-by-wire" that Airbus first used has finally made this configuration "flyable".
Ok, so now they can build it, but passenger issues also have to be solved for it to be accepted. Personally, I think most folks would gladly trade the window view for more washrooms (which the new configuration might have room for).
If any of you have been on a 747-400 series, there is a LCD screen in the back of each seat. This allows each passenger to watch from movies/music/telemetry (my favourite). This could also be used to provide a "ground" view for those that have to have a window. Additionally, I suspect windows cost a lot of $ and weight. Look at cargo planes and you'll never see them (except for the pilots [well duh!]).
2010 eh? Well, I'll be happy to give it a try.
Although not new, have a read of this speech given by James Cameron to the Mars Society.
... The Fiji Society? You might get more members.
http://www.marssociety.org/cameron_one.asp
Okay, you people are all out of your minds, you know that. You do understand that Mars is really, really far away, and its really, really cold. And you can't breathe the air, which is so thin it would make your blood boil, so you're sort of freezing and boiling at the same time. And if you did go there, you couldn't come back for years. And it would cost millions of dollars per pound to get you there. And there's nothing there, anyway. We're talking about the same Mars, right? The Mars Society Mars.
Pardon me for being rude, but have you considered starting up, say
It's a great read.
Maybe we all need to keep such open minds...
:)
For me, it was grade 4 when I came up with the brilliant idea of coupling a generator to a motor and using the power from the generator to run the motor, and draw off the "excess".
However, in a true feat of stubborness, I actually built a small prototype. Well, needless to say, it didn't work. But it would spin for a while before stopping (clearly much longer than just coasting).
Now that I'm all grown up and aware of such scientific limitations, I think I'll built a small, unlicensed, nuclear reactor.....
While I would love to see a mass migration to Linux, it won't happen without the apps. Granted, this is hardly a revelation.
However, what if the Windows desktop domination can be chipped away at by utilizing <flamesuit> Linux apps compiled for Windows </flamesuit>?
Conceivably, a number of folks who currently use Excel could probably work just as well in a Windows version of Gnumeric (or pick your Open Source equivalent).
Over time, as people migrate from Windows apps to Linux for Windows apps, they may eventually reach the point where they ask "why am I still running Windows?" and move to Linux.
Although Gnumeric may not be the best example of this, one of the touted advantages of GUI tookits for X are their cross-platform availablility (I'm specifically taking about Qt, and yes, I know Gnumeric is not Qt).
Lowering the transistional pain to small steps seems the only way I can see Linux eventually having a presence on the desktop.
Anybody else think this makes sense, or am I having a lapse of reason on the last day of 2001?
Happy New Year,
Greg
I'm in Langley and out here Telus DSL is consistently at the claimed 1.5Mbps. Easy to make work in Linux too since they're just using DHCP.
Point taken regarding 2.5 kernels. (I'm not trying these myself). However, the original poster may have only wanted to know how to run multiple 2.4/2.2 kernels.
/. just needs a big warning that goes along with the posting of a new kernel...
In my own case I use 2.2.19 and have played with a number of the 2.4 kernels.
I'm just thinking back to kernel 2.0.0 arriving and wanting to run it on my 1.2.12 box. Granted, setting up lilo was pretty easy, but what's wrong with some help to speed up the procedure? (as long as the learning part still occurs)
In any event, I agree that the stock kernels supplied with most distros are built for compatibility first, performance/stablity second.
I always build a new kernel when setting up a new machine and rarely have problems after that.
How about if after auto-detecting the hardware, the new kernel is rolled in the background so that once the install is finished (all the packages) the new kernel is ready to go. Then setup the defualt lilo to have the "compatibility kernel" and the "what you really need kernel".
At the least, this could compile the kernel for the proper processor (486/P/P2/P3/Athlon, etc.) and dump unneeded support for SCSI, etc. (major functional areas)
To bring Linux to the desktop requires a lead-pipe cinch install process that includes setting up KDE/useful apps/PPP dialup or whatever. It's pretty much a sure bet that Linux won't be pre-installed on PCs anytime in the near future in quantity, so the procedure needs to be:
1) put CD in drive and reboot
2) reboot once install process tells you to.
Of course, maybe
is there a way to have more than one kernel (e.g. a stable one and a development one) on the same machine and boot to one or the other
/boot, slackware is /). Then edit your lilo.conf file in /etc.
/root/bzImage25 (whatever your new kernel is called)
/dev/hda1 (or whatever you are using)
:)
/usr/doc/Linux-mini-HOWTOs on my system).
Sure is. The kernel sources will untar to different directories based on version (how 'bout that?), so no problem with overwriting your stable ".config".
Anyhoo, after building your new kernel, copy it to the same location as your current kernel, but with a different name. (on Redhat this is
Add a new section that looks like:
image =
root =
label = Linux251 (or whatever)
read-only
Save lilo.conf and run lilo. This will re-install lilo with the new settings. Of course, if you're not using lilo, then cheerfully disregard the above.
On reboot, you should be able to pick from both the old kernel and the new kernel.
As for where the FM is, check out the LILO mini-HOWTO (in
Have fun.
LOL, thats an interesting assesment. At a local car show I was near the security booth when one man came to report his 1969 camaro was stolen and he couldn't figure out how it was stolen since he had the rotor out of the distributor in his pocket. Literally within 5 minutes another man came in to report that someone stole the rotor out of the distributor on his chevy truck.
Now I'm laughing since I read the same story in a car-mag (think it was Carcraft) a few months ago.
Back on-topic, the best way to prevent your nearly new car from being stolen is to wire a hidden switch into the fuel pump circuit. Forget about clubs, they won't stop someone who's determined.
If you shut off the fuel pump circuit when you park, the sequence of events when a thief steals your car will be as follows:
1) they break into the car (well duh!)
2) they break off any clubs, etc
3) they break the ignition lock
4) start the car (it will still start without the pump)
5) they drive about 50 feet and the car stalls (no more fuel)
Now, the thief is totally exposed with onlookers wondering why he stopped his car in the middle of the parking lot. You can bet that he'll run for it since he can't futz around with so much attention.
The key is to make sure the kill switch is hidden or non-obvious. I've seen friends use the cigarette lighter (they didn't smoke) as the switch. Pretty sneaky eh?
Although my insurance company won't give me a discount for this "anti-theft" system, I'd rather still have my car than a few more bucks in my pocket.
I've been hacking on cars (old and new) for 20 years and this is the best anti-theft system I've thought of for cars with electric fuel pumps.
GRH
I'm intrigued by your idea, insofar as I'd like to know if it can be done for anywhere near a reasonable cost. I've played around with PC/104 modules and had Linux run on them without troubles. The module I'm currently using for an embedded system supports dual 100M ethernet (ya, a tad excessive :), 64M RAM, up to 192M of chip-on-disk (HD replacement) and comes on a single PC/104 board. To make it functional as a system, only a power supply board and a video board were needed. I think the power board could be dumped if running on batteries.
/.
:)
I've in the past looked at some industrial LCD screens that were B&W and came with a driver card that was standard VGA, not your typical funky laptop arrangement. They were pricey at the time ($1000 in 98), but may have decreased.
Battery life can be had if you're willing to carry around a heavier battery (there are lots of off-the-shelf ones available).
The problem I see is that it would be difficult to impossible to build this into a case that would rival a typical laptop for size. Those R&D guys doing laptop design are miracle workers! I can just imagine what they must be saying everytime marketing comes along and says "we need it smaller".....
In the end, though, you'll probably end up making the same decision I did and buy a standard laptop of some sort (I'm using a Dell C500 right now and it works great with Linux (Slackware)).
Just don't give up if you really want to do this. There seem to be a pile of nay-sayers for
I'm building my own car right now just for fun and to prove it can still be done.
Greg
Agreed. As you pointed out, there is no driving reason for consumers to move to this new format (we've already got random access, etc.). What if the RIAA members "pushed" this format change because it helped them instead?
Consumers already have CDs and are happy with them (and the fact that they are easy to rip helps too). But, the RIAA is probably kicking themselves now for ever supporting such a "loose" format. Don't you think the RIAA would love to be able to take back all CDs ever sold and promote this format (or another with limited copying for Joe Sixpaxk)?
What if the RIAA offered a deal where they will exchange your "old" CDs and vinyl for "new" DataPlay discs? In this way they have dropped the cost of switching to the new format for consumers and they (the RIAA) gets what they want, no more CDs. This might sound expensive (and thus counter RIAA), but consider that the production cost is the lowest chunk of $ in the cost of a CD. A dollar hit on all CDs ever sold might be worth ridding themselves of CDs forever, and thus staving off their (the RIAA) obsolecence in light of digital file swapping.
There has to be a reason why the RIAA members would pour money into YAMF (yet another music format)...
GRH
Given your needs (dual ethernet, linux support), check out http://www.tri-m.com
No, I don't work for them, (but I do work a stone's throw away) but I am going to be trying out a board for a custom vpn type of thing.
Pricing is around $600, but that's Canadian.
Just a thought.
"Nobody has yet circumnavigated the moon in a rocket space ship, but the idea is not laughed down."
To me, this seems like the biggest miss. When this was originally written, we were only 19 years away from a landing.
Show how fast things can develop when we're motivated as a society to do it. I think that had that motivation lasted, we would surely have made Mars by now.
GRH
This should be modded up. I think that this is the issue; that the majority of MS customers are too lazy/stupid/easily satisfied/intimidated by computers to look for better alternatives than the ones that they have been spoon-fed.
/. would be well to keep in mind that our total population makes up .1% or less of all computer users worldwide and the other 99.9% of folks have resigned themselves to accepting MS' products as "good enough for me".
/. because I can't see the current situation changing.
Most people (think: your Mother) have enough difficulty installing a new piece of software that they surely are not going to replace something they already have, even if it's slow/full of security holes/unreliable/etc.
It has been this way since DOS days, when DR-DOS or QEMM/Desqview (or OS/2) were far superior to MS-DOS, but most people didn't bother to change.
Us folks on
What does this mean for us? That we'll be bitching forever on
GRH
Okay, you've stopped laughing now....
However, since a linguist developed the language for ST, I'll bet it's pretty straightforward to learn.
I mean, if you were to sit down and think up a new language, would you think up English? Me neither.
GRH
The LILO problem has plagued me for years, which is why I switched over to LOADLIN in the first place. With the kernel uptimes I typically get, there's no need for me to have a "quick boot" sequence. I keep a floppy disk with DOS (dooh!) in each floppy drive with my kernels on it.
Totally safe, and you don't have to worry about Windows screwing up your boot sector.
In fact, I loaded my kernel images onto the Windows partition so they could be loaded faster (and redundancy for the floppy).
GRH
To ensure that the MCSE certification is recognized as a leading IT professional credential with value and credibility, it is critical that MCSEs be up to date on the most advanced technology available
You mean they're going to make MCSEs learn BeOS?
It may be pesimistic, but I can't see Average Joe ever understanding the issues and the tech to the point where they could adequately protect themselves.
This section:
Some ISPs now offer security services, and will provide "firewall" services for their customers, but this comes at a high price. Most users want $19.95 a month service, which is basically just buying a raw, wide open pipe.
Gave me an idea... What if there were an OS (I'm talking Windows/Mac) option to not allow outsiders to initiate a socket? Such that all traffic in/out of Average Joe had to be initiated by Average Joe. For people on @home (or similar) this should not be a big limitation as they're not suppossed to be running servers anyway! (which is why I'm not a customer).
The implementation of this is left as an exercise for the reader.
GRH
Thanks, I had a read of that article too. Boy this thing looks good in "marketing speak", but it sucks at a usability/hackability level.
GRH
Moderate the parent message up. Everybody should read this link. It'll really make you think twice.
GRH
I never use anything below 128kbps, as a matter of fact, 160kbps is sometimes even needed to really get it right.
Same here. I've been using the variable rate encoding with Xing with very good results. My question would be whether this thing could play back these files properly.
What would be really neat is if the download software could selctively reduce the bitrate from the original mp3. If I were just planning on listening on headphones, then I could get away with 64k.
How about an ethernet hookup instead of usb for downloading new tunes?
GRH
But I suspect that SDMI is here to stay. Ask yourself who you know that is using mp3s... it's mostly geeks like yourself right?
Well, the much larger market for music isn't and they want something convienent and legal. While SDMI may be inconvienent to use, I suspect it will be very convienent to buy on-line.
mp3s will never have the legitamacy to be sold on-line through easily accessible channels. This will ensure that mp3s will always stay in the realm of rip-it-yourselfers (like me). The mass market isn't here though.
As I said, I hope I'm wrong, but I suspect that mp3 will stay fringe and won't eat into the profits of the RIAA as much as they claim.
GRH
(with 20+G of mp3s)
Thanks for the insight. It seems to me that Microsoft is just trying to capture the entire streaming market share by doing this. Clearly, their motive is to have a lock on the server side.
I doubt they even care about the client side, since that's not where the money will be made. (just look at HTTP clients/servers)
Yet another proprietary protocol that the world doesn't need.
GRH
Do you want to paint my truck when you get done your case? :)
Seriously, though, we must read painting instructions from similar automotive sources.
I've got the compressor, I just need to find a paint gun I like.
Maybe I'll give your advice a try on my case before I paint my truck.
GRH
From what I've read of the comments, it looks at though Napster is on firm legal ground, if only they could afford a defence. This looks like a good opportunity for mp3.com to step in with some of their IPO $$$.
Other thoughts I've had are that Napster should have made their software more "general purpose". Advertise it as a way to trade pics (you know which type), and have it "conviently" also transfer mp3s.
Look at how many mp3s are flying around in IRC, but you don't see the RIAA trying to sue. The trouble with Napster is that it is too high-profile and it was only a matter of time before the RIAA took notice.
As others have already said, last resort is open-source the server/client.
GRH
I couldn't agree more. In my last job (notice how all of these stories are from past jobs?), I created a monitoring tool (on Linux). Others in the company spent 10 times the time and money on a parallel project, using management dictated means, and to this day, their solution does nothing, while mine still chunks away.
Now, the story I hear is they want to port my Linux solution over to their "management" platforms.... good luck!
Keep non-tech people out of these decisions.
GRH