Architectural differences between OS9 and OSX will mean that MOL will be significantly slower for OSX for a long time.
MOL has to buffer the screen in order to make its graphics drivers glue the two operating systems together. MOL-in-a-window may buffer the screen twice or more. Iduno. OSX buffers each window, composites it, and buffers the resulting screen. Between the two of them, you've got so many layers of buffers that the MOL+OSX GUI is destined to be really tetchy.
If some OpenGL hackers were to spend a while writing a Mac OS X OpenGL driver for MOL, and then MOL were able to pass those OpenGL calls to the Linux OpenGL drivers, QuartzExtreme could give us bufferless graphics for MOL+OSX.
Does that sound like a lot of work? Yes, yes it does. I don't think it'll probably ever happen. That means I don't think the MOL folks will ever be able to get OSX running like they've got OS9 running right now. If some big company threw a couple (good) full time developers at it, then maybe.
Not only that, but MOL has been running on non-Apple boxes (IBMs) for a long time. The submitted story is so inaccurate that it's as if the submitter was trolling for corrections.
No, patent "A warning system for ON/OFF switches." This warning system would consist of a label that says: "WARNING" or "CAUTION" followed by text describing the result of using the switch.
Now make OSHA require that everyone uses your warning system.
Jiminy Jesus fuck. One of the "New Design Features" is "Symbols of Freedom". I don't understand. After everything else in this country has become embarassing, now I'm going to have to be embarassed by the twenty dollar bill. This is annoying.
They didn't go into detail about Schiller's comment on Longhorn's Quartz-like qualities. The similarities are interesting. If Longhorn is going to use 3D cards to accelerate their 2D desktop, they will be able to quickly do double-buffering for windows, real alpha channels and compositing, etc.
You know how if an app is frozen, and you hide it then restore it, it can't redraw and looks like soup? Well, that doesn't ever happen in Mac OS X, and it's due to window double-buffering. You'll get that feature, and more. Copied from Apple. It's a major architectural change to the GUI.
Um, in most datawarehouseing situations (for example, a bank), it is assumed that you are not working with the most recent data. You are working with a snapshot from 10 minutes ago. Or two hours ago. Or a day ago.
Your characterization is still correct, in that my transactions from last week cannot disappear once they've been posted, but Google has this problem as well. Google solves it with massive redundancy. I don't know if that would be cost effective for my bank.
We have a use tax in California as well. However, you have to claim it at the end of the year, and most people "forget" to send all that extra cash to Governor Benedict Arnold.
Maybe we should spam him with catalogs. Mother*$%&er.
Um... when I worked at the PSE Options Floor, many people refered to themselves as market makers that did not seem to do what you describe. Each symbol had a lead market maker that may have had special responsibilities (and definitely had certain advantages), but most market makers held long or short positions. Perhaps things were different for symbols with very low volume, but I do not believe so.
Market makers could certainly manipulate the price, but only because they had access to large amounts of capital and could buy or sell a lot of stock. If one individual attempted to do what you describe, one of the other forty market makers watching that symbol would make their efforts completely ineffectual.
Yes, the exchange needs market makers to provide liquidity, but the only way they provide liquidity is by having a ton of cash and making trades.
Iduno. I was way, way at the botton of the totem pole when I worked there. It's completely likely that I was totally misinformed. I just don't think my boss posted a bid/ask on any options that he was held to. Again, maybe it's different for stocks.
No no no, the problem is that in addition to expecting you to pay for the software, and then the monthly fee, they expect you to continue buying more software in order to see any improvements in service.
Yeah. I've had Snow Crash mentioned by three different professors in four different univ. classes. It might seem trite now, but it was quite different when it came out.
Reread my post. I understand that they are actually different things. That doesn't imply any legal distinction that I can think of. "A matter of intentions" doesn't necessarily mean anything legally in this case.
Bullshit. A market maker is someone who pays for a seat in the pits and has a ton of cash to throw around. They are enabled by their securities company to make trades. When you see folks in weird cotton jackets on the trading floor, odds are they:
1) Are a broker 2) Are a market maker 3) Support the brokers 4) Support the market makers
The difference between you and a market maker is that you can't afford a security company, you can't afford a seat on the floor, you don't do drugs, and you aren't a compulsive gambler. Market makers can either represent large companies, or work for themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
IBM ships computers that can run LinuxPPC.
Architectural differences between OS9 and OSX will mean that MOL will be significantly slower for OSX for a long time.
MOL has to buffer the screen in order to make its graphics drivers glue the two operating systems together. MOL-in-a-window may buffer the screen twice or more. Iduno. OSX buffers each window, composites it, and buffers the resulting screen. Between the two of them, you've got so many layers of buffers that the MOL+OSX GUI is destined to be really tetchy.
If some OpenGL hackers were to spend a while writing a Mac OS X OpenGL driver for MOL, and then MOL were able to pass those OpenGL calls to the Linux OpenGL drivers, QuartzExtreme could give us bufferless graphics for MOL+OSX.
Does that sound like a lot of work? Yes, yes it does. I don't think it'll probably ever happen. That means I don't think the MOL folks will ever be able to get OSX running like they've got OS9 running right now. If some big company threw a couple (good) full time developers at it, then maybe.
Not only that, but MOL has been running on non-Apple boxes (IBMs) for a long time. The submitted story is so inaccurate that it's as if the submitter was trolling for corrections.
On one hand the potential cool uses astound me, while the possibilty of abuse frightens me. A lot.
Shut up and bend over.
No, patent "A warning system for ON/OFF switches." This warning system would consist of a label that says: "WARNING" or "CAUTION" followed by text describing the result of using the switch.
Now make OSHA require that everyone uses your warning system.
Those look like VESA standard mounting brackets. I'm pretty sure that you can wire them to CRTs. Dunno if those arms can hold up CRTs, though.
Remember, Moore's law says computing power will double every 18 months - not raw computing "speed."
No, no it doesn't. Go look it up.
Get your lawyers lubed up and ready to go.
They aren't patenting basic life processes. They're patenting basic live processes online. That's completely different.
Jon Stewart should start patenting doing things on weed. He'd make a fortune.
"But dude, we're patenting one click ordering on weed! "
"Dude, have you ever sold books? Well, what about selling books online? Oh. Well, what about selling books online on weed?! Let's patent that, dude."
Jingoism is embarassing, not freedom.
Jiminy Jesus fuck. One of the "New Design Features" is "Symbols of Freedom". I don't understand. After everything else in this country has become embarassing, now I'm going to have to be embarassed by the twenty dollar bill. This is annoying.
They didn't go into detail about Schiller's comment on Longhorn's Quartz-like qualities. The similarities are interesting. If Longhorn is going to use 3D cards to accelerate their 2D desktop, they will be able to quickly do double-buffering for windows, real alpha channels and compositing, etc.
You know how if an app is frozen, and you hide it then restore it, it can't redraw and looks like soup? Well, that doesn't ever happen in Mac OS X, and it's due to window double-buffering. You'll get that feature, and more. Copied from Apple. It's a major architectural change to the GUI.
Um, in most datawarehouseing situations (for example, a bank), it is assumed that you are not working with the most recent data. You are working with a snapshot from 10 minutes ago. Or two hours ago. Or a day ago.
Your characterization is still correct, in that my transactions from last week cannot disappear once they've been posted, but Google has this problem as well. Google solves it with massive redundancy. I don't know if that would be cost effective for my bank.
We have a use tax in California as well. However, you have to claim it at the end of the year, and most people "forget" to send all that extra cash to Governor Benedict Arnold.
Maybe we should spam him with catalogs. Mother*$%&er.
Um... when I worked at the PSE Options Floor, many people refered to themselves as market makers that did not seem to do what you describe. Each symbol had a lead market maker that may have had special responsibilities (and definitely had certain advantages), but most market makers held long or short positions. Perhaps things were different for symbols with very low volume, but I do not believe so.
Market makers could certainly manipulate the price, but only because they had access to large amounts of capital and could buy or sell a lot of stock. If one individual attempted to do what you describe, one of the other forty market makers watching that symbol would make their efforts completely ineffectual.
Yes, the exchange needs market makers to provide liquidity, but the only way they provide liquidity is by having a ton of cash and making trades.
Iduno. I was way, way at the botton of the totem pole when I worked there. It's completely likely that I was totally misinformed. I just don't think my boss posted a bid/ask on any options that he was held to. Again, maybe it's different for stocks.
If it's still worth it to stock Diablo II on shelves in Office Depot, then it's probably still selling. And it's definitely still in Office Depot.
No no no, the problem is that in addition to expecting you to pay for the software, and then the monthly fee, they expect you to continue buying more software in order to see any improvements in service.
Great. Now, thanks to you, I know who the fuck Avril Levigne is. I could have done without knowing that much about her for the rest of my life.
I'd love to say it was your fault, but I couldn't stop reading...
Yeah. I've had Snow Crash mentioned by three different professors in four different univ. classes. It might seem trite now, but it was quite different when it came out.
Not really. For the price of that 10MB disk, back in 1985, now you can buy an IDE RAID setup that could saturate your PCI bus.
Many examples where intention matters leap to mind. I still haven't heard anyone explain why they matter here. That's all I'm asking for.
Reread my post. I understand that they are actually different things. That doesn't imply any legal distinction that I can think of. "A matter of intentions" doesn't necessarily mean anything legally in this case.
Dre is against file sharing of music. Not sampling. Are you too dim to see the difference?
Um... Yes?
While I understand that they are two different things, I do not understand what would put them on different legal ground.
Bullshit. A market maker is someone who pays for a seat in the pits and has a ton of cash to throw around. They are enabled by their securities company to make trades. When you see folks in weird cotton jackets on the trading floor, odds are they:
1) Are a broker
2) Are a market maker
3) Support the brokers
4) Support the market makers
The difference between you and a market maker is that you can't afford a security company, you can't afford a seat on the floor, you don't do drugs, and you aren't a compulsive gambler. Market makers can either represent large companies, or work for themselves.
But I digress...
If it makes you feel any better, I'd be tempted to mod you down too. And I never mod down.
It is easy to read Mike's post while ignoring his sniping. I don't want to have to wade through thirty comments about how childish it is, though.