So next I suppose we'll find out that the Holocaust never really happened, and African slaves in the confederate south were generally happy and well treated.
Oh, the panic that would have ensued had it been prematurely announced that there was a 10th planet...
Hey, wait, wasn't this the umpteenth tenth planet that's been discovered? We keep hearing about a new one every few years. So far, order has been kept in the streets.
First, Mach is the name of the kernel. Darwin is the name of the BSD layer which runs basic functions in OS X.
The/. summary mentioned that the kernel, and I would have to assume that kernel support would be necessary in order to have any piece of hardware enabled. Are you saying that Rosetta talks directly to the hardware and bypasses the kernel?
THESE ARE DEVELOPER MACHINES AND DO NOT REPRESENT HARDWARE THAT APPLE WILL SHIP.
This is about the kernel, not the hardware.
Really, if we take this attitude, we're forced to conclude that NOTHING about the developer platform can be counted upon to be in the commercial product. That's completely absurd. No, not everything will be in the commercial product, but it's not like they deliberately build the developer platform to be completely different from what they eventually release to the public.
Common sense tells us that if there's DRM support in the OS X on Intel kernel, there's at the very least a chance that it'll be in the shipping product.
If we're going to make noise over it, we damn well ought to do it as soon as we have first inkling of it, not when it's already too late. You don't wait until your neck is in a noose to hire a lawyer.
I'm all for this. Since all the porn on the internet can be freely downloaded via p2p or usenet, they could make the tax 1000% and it still wouldn't bother me.
Someone needs to inform the senate that multiplication by zero results in zero.
This might be true to some extent, except that console marketshare is up for grabs with each generation.
Microsoft got where it was not by piracy, but by marketing, signing up every developer they could, leveraging the already quite large PC gaming market, and solid games that were worth playing. Piracy had little to nothing to do with the success of the console -- if they games had sucked, would anyone have bothered to pirate them?
Has it? They've got marketshare, but are they profitable yet? Would they be able to sustain this business model if they didn't have the benefit of the MS Monopoly war chest from Windows and Office?
Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time...
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Microsoft had to change the name after discovering that "Firefox" was already in use by the Mozilla Foundation.
Some contracts are legally unenforceable. That is, it is against the law to enforce them. I cannot, for example, sell myself into slavery, even if I sign a contract and am completely willing to become a slave. I think this case may well test the enforceability of non-compete clauses.
1) Sell console at a loss or very little profit. 2) Sell games at absurd profit to make up for console. 3) Make games easy to pirate to encourage people to buy your console. 4) High price of games and easy copy-ability drives everyone to not buy your games. 5) ??? 6) Certainly not profit.
Slashdot Mirror
John Carmack will never, ever be regaurded the same way that John Lennon is.
But, with any luck, John Romero will get plugged 8 times in the chest at point blank range by a disturbed Daikatana fan.
People will be arrested for distributing Vista Binaries when they DON'T run p2p applications on their computers.
I have become enlightened.
Who'd a thunk it?
Don't mess with Texas.
True, but the last time I was paying attention, MSFT was around $50/share.
Innovate. v. 1. Imitate.
GOOG 299.19
MSFT 26.81
It's been a while since I looked at the stocks, but MS is kindof dipping low. Did they just split or something?
"Proudly serving my corporate masters" -- need I say anything more?
So next I suppose we'll find out that the Holocaust never really happened, and African slaves in the confederate south were generally happy and well treated.
I just hope this rating system doesn't suck as much as slashdot moderation.
Oh, the panic that would have ensued had it been prematurely announced that there was a 10th planet...
Hey, wait, wasn't this the umpteenth tenth planet that's been discovered? We keep hearing about a new one every few years. So far, order has been kept in the streets.
First, Mach is the name of the kernel. Darwin is the name of the BSD layer which runs basic functions in OS X.
/. summary mentioned that the kernel, and I would have to assume that kernel support would be necessary in order to have any piece of hardware enabled. Are you saying that Rosetta talks directly to the hardware and bypasses the kernel?
The
This is about the kernel, not the hardware.
Really, if we take this attitude, we're forced to conclude that NOTHING about the developer platform can be counted upon to be in the commercial product. That's completely absurd. No, not everything will be in the commercial product, but it's not like they deliberately build the developer platform to be completely different from what they eventually release to the public.
Common sense tells us that if there's DRM support in the OS X on Intel kernel, there's at the very least a chance that it'll be in the shipping product.
If we're going to make noise over it, we damn well ought to do it as soon as we have first inkling of it, not when it's already too late. You don't wait until your neck is in a noose to hire a lawyer.
Very true.
The same could be also said about Bell Labs.
Something tells me this is a step backward.
I'm all for this. Since all the porn on the internet can be freely downloaded via p2p or usenet, they could make the tax 1000% and it still wouldn't bother me.
Someone needs to inform the senate that multiplication by zero results in zero.
If they can't ell an mp3 player, they should make an ogg player. I'd laugh my ass off at that.
This might be true to some extent, except that console marketshare is up for grabs with each generation.
Microsoft got where it was not by piracy, but by marketing, signing up every developer they could, leveraging the already quite large PC gaming market, and solid games that were worth playing. Piracy had little to nothing to do with the success of the console -- if they games had sucked, would anyone have bothered to pirate them?
Has it? They've got marketshare, but are they profitable yet? Would they be able to sustain this business model if they didn't have the benefit of the MS Monopoly war chest from Windows and Office?
Microsoft had to change the name after discovering that "Firefox" was already in use by the Mozilla Foundation.
Some contracts are legally unenforceable. That is, it is against the law to enforce them. I cannot, for example, sell myself into slavery, even if I sign a contract and am completely willing to become a slave. I think this case may well test the enforceability of non-compete clauses.
Um yeah, that's a great business model:
1) Sell console at a loss or very little profit.
2) Sell games at absurd profit to make up for console.
3) Make games easy to pirate to encourage people to buy your console.
4) High price of games and easy copy-ability drives everyone to not buy your games.
5) ???
6) Certainly not profit.
Need A Shuttle Alternative
Don't copy
That floppy
Scriggitty scra-scra-scratch.
'Scuse me while I kiss this guy.