I remember hearing that some computer store was taking orders over their dial-up BBS in the 1980s. I don't see any technical reason that such a setup couldn't have been used from long-distance dialup from another country to perform a transaction via computer.
How about Interac (direct payment) machines? I know I've been able to use my Canadian debit card in the US long before Amazon became big. I think that qualifies as an international transaction via computer as well.
How can anyone take this out-of-work patent attorney loser seriously? His patent is lame, his business model is lame and even his website is totally lame....NICE JPEG JIGSAW PUZZLE YA DUMB TURD! That "1996 school of WWW design techniques" screams "innovative" about as loudly as your stupid patent.
I use Windows Server 2003, I use Solaris. Novell can take SuSE Linux 9.x and Enterprise Server 8 and 9 and shove it up their ass, I am not going to change. i will change if i see a compelling reason to change, I dont see it, so i stay with what I like and what has proven time and time again for me to work very, very well
Must be nice to have so much money to throw away. The initial investment in your platforms of choice must've been quite impressively high.
For me, besides money, SQL slammer was enough to make me start wondering and Blaster and its varients were quite compelling reasons for me to look at changing.
Wow, a web page cites a source so it must be true right?
Ummmmm no I'm afraid not. I need not refute the study based on its merits because the study was made up.
Check out the Wikipedia entry on the source. Scroll to the bottom. The authors never broke down IQ below national levels to get state IQs. The numbers cited in that chart came from a hoax--they were likely made up as a joke to make Gore supporters look smarter than Bush supporters from the previous election. Using the results of standardised tests show much less gap between the "smartest" and "dumbest" states and nearly no correlation with their voting preferences.
Also, contrary to the citation, that publication made use of multiple IQ tests conducted at different times (it did not rely predominately on one IQ test), and did some fudging to obtain its numbers (UK was set at 100 and the rest of the world adjusted accordingly, even though IQ tests generally regard the world average to be 100 instead of 90 as they calculated)
No it isn't. In fact there are cases where it is really quite UNfair. That is the case when a country has a large, diverse geography and demographics. When it comes to electing a government that meets the diverse needs pure rep-by-pop or "1 person 1 vote" is a poor system. There has to be a mechanism in place to reflect LOCAL and REGIONAL interests as well as the simple majority.
If there was no electoral college or similar mechanism, NY, CA and other states with large urban centres could dominate. The concerns of people outside those area would be ignored because they couldn't mathematically compete against the concerns of urban costal USA. Believe me, what is right for LA or NYC is NOT right for Idaho and Wyoming. In case you havent noticed, LA and NYC appear to be different planets to just about the whole rest of the continent.
I'm not saying that the electoral college is the best way to go or it cannot be improved, I'm just saying that there has to be some balance in the selection of the US president. If the President could get elected by relying only on big cities then the whole country would go to hell in a handbasket. A life long resident of NYC or LA cannot comprehend at all what life is like in a place like Billings, MT.
Count yourselves lucky...in Canada, Paul Martin was voted in as PM literally because of how Toronto voted (all Toronto ridings but one went Liberal IIRC...if they all went Conservative it would've had a minorty governemt under Prime Minster Steven Harper). Whether or not that would've been better or worse is not the point--it's that under the Canadian system, someone can lead the nation with less than 40% of the popular vote and rely on concentration of votes to the point where A SINGLE CITY can be the kingmaker. And people wonder why Albertans are so grumpy politically, Quebec continuously threatens to secede from Canada and the Premier of Newfoundland storms out of meetings with the PM?
...is a style of government. Democracy is a process used by government. It seems to me that they are related but not the same thing. Isn't your statement kind of like saying "an orange is not a plant, it is a fruit"?
Doesn't democracy play an important role in a democratic republic? In my observation the US holds elections on every damn thing to do with government. Today, you are electing the President, congressmen, sentaors, judges, public commissioners, voting on propositions, etc etc etc.
Seems to me that the system was at least INTENDED to govern by majority opinion.
My first thought was "why the hell would a LAW FIRM file patent relating to digital image processing"? My second thought was "why would they wait over 16 YEARS to defend their patent"?
Not only is the patent itself flimsy at best, the way it is being used is obviously exploitation. Have we all lost sight of why patents were established in the first place? I don't recall the intention was to STIFLE innovation and provide an avenue to generate a sudden, large revenue stream for the patent holder.
Was not the original intent of the patent system to provide incentive for inventors to develop and produce their invention? Wasn't the idea to provide a temporary period of protection to the inventor to establish himself in the market for his invention without getting ripped off by an unscrupulous competitor?
I think that if I am right then the patent system should be overhauled and be more restrictive--especially since it was built around the invention of physical devices. Not just in what is patented, but how patents are granted.
If there already isn't such a provision in place, the patent applicant should be required to demonstrate his intent to USE the information in his patent. Before a patent is granted, I think there must be an "invention sponsor"--either an organisation set up by the inventor himself or an initial licensee--that submits a business plan or similar evidence that the invention will be used and marketed. The patent then could be provisionally granted for a short term (5 years maybe?) and at the end of this term, if there is no progress then the patent is expired and cannot be renewed (though an inventor could start the filing process from scratch).
I think that even if this sounds harsh, lawyers and unscrupulous businessmen have demonstrated they cannot be trusted with an overly permissive patent system. It is an obvious perversion of the system when the patent holder is obviously not in a business related to the patent and has gone for years with no licensee or partner to apply the invention. If patent holders want a high-level of protection for their ideas, I don't think it is too much to ask for them to provide a high-level of detail as to their intent in applying the patent.
There is a reason why tobacco is "politically acceptable substance to hate". There still may be some debate as to what second hand smoke does to people, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the smokers themselves are at increased risk of enphesyma and cancer and that by smoking you shorten your life considerably. As such, more people are quitting smoking and fewer start at all.
Regardless of what science says about health dangers of second hand smoke, you CANNOT DISPUTE that just like most other kinds of smoke, it is an irritant--particularly to non-smokers. Since the majority of the population in North America are now non-smokers, the majority find smoking distasteful. As it is a democratic society, majority rules on most matters. This is leading towards the eventual extinction of smoking in public.
I'm not sure some smokers realise this, but smoking is considered a dirty habit now. Never mind whether second-hand smoke is a health hazard. The smoke smells awful. The smoke makes people's eyes sting. It makes my eczema flare up when I'm in a smokey room. The butts are disguisting to look at. I've also noticed a slowly growing trend in the opinion that smoking is a habit of the low-class. It is about as appealing and sophisticated to many as spitting chewing tobacco. Unapologetic smokers are thought to be more likely low-income, uneducated individuals.
Not only that, smokers present a safety hazard. Insurance companies charge higher premiums to homeowners to permit smoking in their homes because of studies demonstrating an increased fire risk. The grasslands in an urban park within my city catch fire during dry weather, and the last few have ALL been attributed to careless disposal of lit cigarettes. One of the fires out an adjoining neighbourhood in danger as well.
Even as a non-smoker however, I do not agree with excessive government intrusion into private habits. I support the idea of a total ban on smoking in government buildings, schools, hospitals and establishments that permit children. I also support tax incentives for smoke-free businesses (promoting healthy lifestyles reduces the load on government funded medicare). I do NOT think business owners should be FORCED to ban smoking in situations outside the above (age 18+ only, private buildings). Given the state of society today, I think that is a reasonable compromise.
If smokers do not see that as a reasonable compromise, I might suggest to them to make an effort to quit smoking--the increased quality of life is amazing. If you do not believe even now that you have no good reason to quit, use your manners and keep your habit to yourself--smoke in your own home/yard only, or in a space designated as a smoking area. If you light up in public, chances are that the majority of people around you are non-smokers and are bothered by your smoke.
Voodoo is a high-end PC builder based in Calgary, Alberta Canada. If you are familiar with companies like Alienware you will have an idea of the kinds of machines they build. This is what the "Voodoo-style" reference in the article is about--the technique this company uses to fold cables to minimise tangle and make the insides look purty when you have a window on the case.
The site is still/.ed but I believe the technique involves the crafting of a doll representing the machine in question. I do believe poultry sacrifice and chanting incantations is involved in conferring the powers of cable folding upon the PC doll. The doll is then held aloft facing the machine and contorted appropriately, causing the forces of the spirit within the doll to move and fold the cables accordingly.
Quite fascinating really. The techniques they use in developing CPU and chipset cooling solutions is far too graphic to describe unfortunately.
It seems some "neo-liberal" disagreed with my contention that they share common characteristics with "neo-conservatives" and have dismissed my opinion as somewhat overrated.
That, or a certain brand of conservative can't believe that a Christian could hold socialist values, or that a conservative could possibly be athiest.
I dunno...perhaps my observation really is too obvious. It does demonstrate that not only do those who gravitate towards a more hard line posisiton think they are always right, they both tend to dismiss and/or try to supress those opinions they find disagreeable.
Neocon philosophy is *never* wrong. Any mistakes happen because the philosophy was not put into practice vigorously enough.
While I don't disagree with your conclusion, I've made the very same observation about "new liberalism", socialism and even Communism: Socialised medicine's failings are blamed on private clinics, inequalities in the workplace are still a problem because affirmative action is not adequately enforced in education and industry, the Soviet Union collapsed because of corrupt officials who did not follow the ideals of Communism and acted in their own interests before the state's, etc.
I suggest you further "modify your view" and google for more "facts" using terms related to liberalism and socialism. You'll find that philospohies that deviate from the "common sense middle" you are simply looking at two sides of the very same coin.
Incidentially, one of the most "neo-conservative" people I knew was an honours student in physics and a rather "devout" athiest. I also find that apart from some of the more evangelical churchgoers that devout Christians tend to be more liberal in a lot of ways (advocating more socialised medicine, subsidised housing, international aid, etc.) so I think the issue of evolution vs. creationism cannot be classified simply as a conservative vs. liberal issue.
Sorry, but coffee is supposed to be brewed that hot.
The brewing temperature is not in question. The serving temperature is. Industry standards recommend a serving temperature of hot beverages and soups of no more than 160F. That is still a scalding temperature, but it takes longer to burn at that temperature, so the heat will dissipate before injury could occur. Although in fast food kitchens it is common for settings to be non-adjustable, the hot plates of most commercial coffee makers have adjustable temperatures.
Coffee that is left in the pot for too long at too cool of a temperature does taste bad but that is why fresh pots have to be made periodically. Serving coffee in a little paper cup at its brewing temperature is rather ill advised.
Why is it that in the countries listed as most "restrictive" in terms of IP laws, that those that directly produce the least IP own the most and use/abuse the laws the most?
Take the US for example. While they have pop singers and the like enormously popular domestically AND internationally, their ownership of IP doesn't even begin to apporach that of the members corporations of RIAA and MPAA. Or technology: most of America's brightest minds take employment with large corporations and contininue to generate IP for the corporation, or have their IP taken from them ( Philo Farnsworth didn't get rich from inventing the modern television, but RCA sure got rich from his work).
It's a lot easier to take a stand on IP when you don't have to invent your own and have a crapload of money to buy it or take it from others.
McDonalds kitchens are designed so a monkey could almost make your meal (the typical cook at McDonalds knows about as much about cooking as a monkey). All temeratures and timers are pre-set and all the food is prepared to the point that it just needs cooking ans assembly.
In the case of it's coffee makers, according to the facts they were fixed at 185 degrees farenheit and cannot be adjusted except by a technician. "Room Temperature" is 70 or 75 degrees so there is a LOT of room to manoeuvre. OH&S experts recommend hot water heaters be set no higher than 130F to avoid scalding, over 50 degrees cooler than McJava. IIRC if you go to you local Tim Hortons the coffee is quite hot too, but still no more than 150 to 160F.
So yeah...there is room temperature, hot and McF*cking Crazy (tm). The reason McDonalds does not do anything about it is because it would cost more to pay technicians to alter thousands of coffee machines than it does to settle a few hundred lawsuits (which typically involve covering medical bills, not millions). Same reason Ford sold exploding Pintos (because despite the publicity, they did not explode and kill/injure enough people to make it worth fixing).
ALL pieces of hardware are known to stop working for some amount of people. That's why people get WARRANTIES. The most common reason for things to stop working is due to misuse... e.g. putting it on the carpet so it collects dust.
True enough, but when does it become unreasonable? Is one percent or ten percent premature failure rate acceptable? Also, ALL warranties are limited in some way, and more often than not do not cover damage due to misuse. Guess who defines "misuse"--the manufacturer. Is it really reasonable to consider operation of a home game console on a carpeted surface misuse?
HELLOOO...I think engineers would've figured out that even since before the Atari 2600, home video games are used mostly by kids, teens and college students in carpeted or otherwise "harsh" environments like basement rumpus rooms, dorm rooms, etc? The damn thing is usually hooked up to a big screen and has wired controllers for cryin' out loud...if MS wanted the XBox to sit on a clean, well ventilated shelf or desk like the PC it really is, then it should've come with wireless controllers so players could sit back from the TV without taking the machine and setting it on the floor.
Why do we have a slashdot story on a piece of hardware that stopped working? and why XBox (rhetorical question)? why not apple? i'm sure a fair amount of macs stop working within a year as well.
Because it stops working too quickly and too often? It isn't unique to/. or to computers. 60 minutes has done stories on shoddy products as well. Canadian TV watchers might remember two newsmagazine shows CBC's "Marketwatch" and CTV's "Live it Up!" that were almost exclusively dedicated to the quality of goods and services (like "Consumer Reports" for TV). People want a heads up when they could be buying a potential lemon. Because of this story, I know that if I ever get an XBox it might acutally be worth getting Future Shop's extended warranty for a change.
Why XBox? Becuase it is proving to be flimsy. Why not apple? Because they build quality products at this very moment. Apple HAS received a slagging from/. before (Remember the early powerbooks with the flakey power connectors? Hot cube machines? Earphones on some iPods?). The thing is, Apple got bitten by this and now when there are failures, they promptly and properly respond, even if the cause of the failure is questionable. With the latest iMac, most components are even user serviceable so you don't even have to send in your machine--Apple will overnight the needed parts at no cost to you. It's not always when it breaks down--it's the service you get when it happens.
My computer stopped working after 6 months... what did I do? I sent it in to get it repaired... for FREE because of a warranty
I'm glad your experience was relatively positive. I know of a builder here who (if possible) will immediately give you an identical replacement machine at no cost to you (and will even swap the hard drive from your machine, if the hard drive is not the cause of failure--so you don't even lose your data). Unfortunately, many companies are not so generous with their warranty policies. All too often, the warranty terms are in two columns of fine print on an A4 sheet that accidentally gets thrown away with the packing material--and the manufacturer follows it to the letter looking for any reason not to help you out. I'm not sure how Microsoft handles warranty claims, but if someone wants to sue maybe its more like the latter case.
I agree, it seems that the US is far to litigous and that the lawsuit seems frivilous. However, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say there MUST be a reason this person wasn't satisfied with just taking it in for repair. Are these machines consistently failing during warranty coverage? Did he get grief from Microsoft over the failure because they claimed he abused the product? Anyone out there care to relate their experiences?
...what distro would she use? And would she grant it a royal warrant?
I think it would be cool if say, every box and/or CD of the official SuSE Linux distro had the royal arms stamped on it, surrounded by the phrase "By Appointment to her Majesty the Queen". Maybe Novell could put the parliament buildings on the box to make it look a bit like the label on a bottle of HP sauce...
BIND is the market leader, and there is more info out there than for any other DNS. It's security issues are overblown (as they are not issues in the latest version). It is rock-solid stable and consumes relatively few resources.
I'm open to suggestions, save for one perhaps: Microsoft's DNS. The MS implementation is (or long had been) broken in terms of complying with specifications. In my experience it was less reliable as well. BIND9 hasn't caused *me* any real problems anyways--it even does dynamic DNS with my DHCP clients without a hitch (once I figured out how to config it).
Who else but Microsoft could get a PHB to fork over 25 large for a CMS that is no more capable than some of the free ones out there? Also, the phrases "World Readable" and "Word Writable by default" smell of old Microsoftware.
Nonetheless, the hardware support of even the latest Linux distributions is inferior to that of Windows or even Mac OS X
Puzzling statement to say the least. I find the opposite is true. For example, Linux support for scanners is broader than that of Windows 2000 and XP (Linux is better with legacy devices). Linux support of 64-bit hardware is also more mature (where is Microsoft now on that front?). Mac OS X? That one floored me. Mac OS can be kludged into running on other platforms I guess, but it only has ONE supported hardware platform. It is easy to offer exemplary hardware suport when you only support a VERY SMALL amount of hardware.
Monolithic and slow-to-change? If that is Linux, what is Windows, fossilised? Look at Windows NT4 and Windows Server 2003 or XP (especially in "classic mode"). Visually nothing really innovative and looking deeper even less innovative architecturally. Look at Linux over that same period--form the Kernel on up to KDE and GNOME. HUGE difference, both in modularity and pace of change.
I'm not American, so I cannot vote for US president. If I could, I certainly wouldn't do so simply based on the candidates' views on intellectual property rights. That said, they are an important indication of the general ideology of the candidate and how they each prioritise individual rights.
If I could vote, I do not think I could bring myself to vote for Bush OR Kerry. I'd have to select a third-party candidate, even if they stand no chance of winning. I'm not afraid of vote-splitting sending the wrong person to the White House (as Gore supporters contend Nader voters did last time), because I do not thing the US is any better or worse off with either "real" contender as president. It'll just be....different.
Kerry is "open to examining" the DMCA. He is "open to examining" EVERYTHING people are pissed off about. His present opinions often contradict his voting record and even some earlier statements. Kerry also talks at great length about what his opponents have done wrong but doesn't offer very convincing alternatives to the problems the US faces.
My impression is that Kerry is like Canada's current Prime Minister Paul Martin in that he has no ideology or concrete principles at all. If you want to know what "Kerry's America" would look like, examine "Martin's Canada". Basically, it is a continuation of what the last guys did. Things will coast along and the leader will wax indignant about what a mess things were left in and how we have to get to the bottom of things. Committees will be struck and reviews conducted. Unworkable bills will be introduced that will die on the order table. A lot will be said about how complicated the solution is until the next election (and the next if re-elected) until he is voted out or steps down. In Canada, that means more problems with underfunded/ill-equipped military, more megaproject boondoggles and fraudulant spending uncovered, more mad cow-related export bans and timber tarrifs. In the US it would mean you'll still be in IRAQ, RIAA will still be suing 12 year olds, prescription drugs will still be overpriced and inhuman, fundamentalist/extremist islamic terrorists will still behead American captors and anyone else who stands in their way.
As far as Bush goes...well at least we know what to expect. He is nothing if not consistent in his perpetual war on terror. No part of his policy seems untouched by the War on Terror. As someone who is inclined to believe in free-market economy and less government, I would be a traditional Republican supporter. However, it disturbs me that he seems to be losing sight of what he is defending (personal liberites--the "free world"). As a result we are getting BIGGER, more intrusive gov't. On economic matters the Bush government has been disappointingly protectionist/isolationist as well (sometimes in the name of national security--other times just becasue of public pressure to prop up an industry or the economy in general).
I'd say that although the ideology is a polar opposite that GWBush runs the US very much like Pierre Trudeau ran Canada in the 70s and 80s (fans of Trudeau are cringing as they read this). Both are somewhat autocratic. Both did damage to international relations with traditional allies. Both have made questionable moves to broadly curtail freedom in the name of national security (Read up on the "FLQ Crisis" in Quebec and how Trudeau dealt with it--thankfully it was short term, but the "War Measures Act" made the Patriot Act look like a municipal parking bylaw by comparison--and it was in effect across the nation even though the danger was in one region of the country). Trudeau walked over opponents/critics in his obession with his "Just Society" much like Bush does now in his "War on Terror", and both obsessions touched every facet of live for the average citizen.
The good thing is that both countries are democracies of a sort, so eventually you get the opportunity to "throw the bums out". Ultimately who wins this week won't be the downfall--as long as citizens defend democracy.
Come on this has been true fro[sic] over 20 years in PC games.
I'd say closer to 30 years. Some background:
In the early 70s the chip maker General Instruments made a "pong on a chip" device as a skunkworks project (ie. it was a "for fun" project not designed for any of their customers). They observed that Atari Pong and Magnavox Odyssey (the REAL first video tennis game) were selling quite well. As such, G.I. contacted the inventor of the original game, Ralph Baer, for a license agreement to market the chip (Magnavox did not use a single-chip solution--it used Baer's original design).
This is where the "over-hype" comes in. Baer was good friends with Arnold Greenberg--president of Coleco. He told Greenberg about the new chip that was to be released in 1975 and secured G.I.s first big customer in Coleco.
Using engineering samples, Coleco developed the first "Telstar" Pong/Odyssey clone and became a pioneer in the field of overhype and vapourware even before people knew about Bill and Paul's new BASIC. By the time G.I. finally made the first production run of the chips, Coleco had people falling over each other to get a Telstar, which was always in short supply due to manufacturing difficulties. Competitors made clones using the same chip once GI sorted the problems out (and Coleco was still having problems with supply) and sparked a "pong mania".
Eventually the flood of mostly low quality machines caused a shakeout--by that time Coleco was a big enough player in the market to survive. Atari made a CPU-based system with ROM cartriges and started a new craze. Coleco and Mattel joined in and Atari and Mattel learned all about hype from Coleco. They were the "Big 3 of vapourware". By the early 80s all of them had hit systems with lots of games and were promising even more games and better machines. All three also hyped computer expansions and/or next-gen systems. All three were either late to market or reneged on promises.
The public had high expectations based on the Big 3's marketing hype. What they got were things like Atari 2600 Pac Man and E.T., A late initial shipment of Coleco ADAM computers that were DOA and nothing from Mattel but a limited release of a crappy computer expansion and more expensive, slightly incompatible Intellivisions that were no better than the original except perhaps for better looks and speech built in.
The "big crash" 20 years ago was caused precisely because of this overhype. Nintendo succeeded because it blindsided the public with the NES--no one expected the big release of a new system becuase the console market was dead in 1985. No expectations + good product = big hit. It maintained supremacy by being selective about licensed developers and for awhile with monopolistic practises.
I don't forsee a big crash like in the 80s again where all the big players in console hardware die off, but I do see a shakeout on the developer side if they do not learn from this history. It might come to a point where Sony, Nintendo and MS take (even more?) charge of all the major games development for their respective systems. However, I'd prefer if they remained open but did like UBISoft and release demos as development is done and not fuel speculation about what isn't done.
I'd have to protest the "competitive pricing" point. You could buy the same stuff at The Brick and O.A.C. you don't have to pay for it until it's obsolete.
There are at least three in Calgary, Alberta. To the north in Edmonton, there are two in the same mall (West Edmonton mall--because the couch-potatoes who pay that kind of money for a TV would have a heart attack before they could walk the length of that damn mall).
Trivia: the West Edmonton Mall is the largest mall in the world by square footage. It houses the worlds largest indoor roller-coaster and is surrounded by the worlds largest parking lot (based on number of spots--it is multi-level parkade so I think it is smaller than the disneyworld paring lot by acerage). This is why Sony and many others have two stores in that one mall. It also has more operational submarines than the Canadian navy (not joking--although the mall subs are an amusement ride).
More trivia: The "Mall of America" was built by and is still owned by Canadians--the same ones who built the mall in Edmonton. The Alberta government helped finance the construction of the both malls with loan guarantees using Canadian taxpayers' money. Proof that governments really don't care how they spend your tax dollars.
The idea is that there would be an "operating system" in firmware on the video card--or perhaps a beefed-up BIOS. Video card makers would handle the differing raw hardware interface with this "GDOS"and from the PCs perspetive the interface would be the same..so the main computer OS could use one driver for whatever GPU is used.
cool idea...might be a good compromise for ATI and nVIDIA. They should agree on a standard "GDOS" specification and write implementations for their cards firmware, which would replace the pre-compiled, closed-source driver. They could then leave it up to Microsoft, Linux developers, etc. to write a single, standard, OpenGL-capable driver--basically a 3D version of a standard VESA driver.
Putting the "secret sauce" in the firmware means they really don't have to talk X86 if they don't want to-it could be a lot of special, proprietary microcode if need be. It also wouldn't be platform-specific so they could concentrate on making great video cards instead of writing drivers (which most often they are crap at doing anyways).
It is well known that various drivers and OSes with the same card result in significantly different performace. If a driver is buggy or slow, then they can yell at Microsoft or Linux developers or whatever to fix it...right now they have to shoulder the responsibility.
...Windows Automotive is probably yet another rehash on the same concept they've been trying to push for most of the last decade.
We've also seen the result in high-end BMWs with i(can't)Drive. Thus far the implementations have been very flawed to say the least. Sure, MS won't control your engine or modulate your antilock brakes, but they DO want to control your radio, heating/AC, security system, GPS navigation, etc.
MS has come at automotive apps like it was another PC. Not only is is a royal PITA to navigate dynamic menus to operate your radio, climate control, etc...it is also dangerous. WinAuto might not crash because it blows up your engine, but it could be a safety hazard if the cumbersome interface keeps changing the radio station to Michael Bolton when you try to defrost your windshield, or the trunk flies open on the freeway, or your locks refuse to operate to let you out of the car, or the GPS navigation sends you the wrong way down a one-way road etc etc...
MS historically doesn't begin to hit its stride until the third major release of a technology. I sure don't want any cars on the road with WinAuto v1.x or 2.x that's for sure.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember hearing that some computer store was taking orders over their dial-up BBS in the 1980s. I don't see any technical reason that such a setup couldn't have been used from long-distance dialup from another country to perform a transaction via computer.
How about Interac (direct payment) machines? I know I've been able to use my Canadian debit card in the US long before Amazon became big. I think that qualifies as an international transaction via computer as well.
How can anyone take this out-of-work patent attorney loser seriously? His patent is lame, his business model is lame and even his website is totally lame....NICE JPEG JIGSAW PUZZLE YA DUMB TURD! That "1996 school of WWW design techniques" screams "innovative" about as loudly as your stupid patent.
I use Windows Server 2003, I use Solaris. Novell can take SuSE Linux 9.x and Enterprise Server 8 and 9 and shove it up their ass, I am not going to change. i will change if i see a compelling reason to change, I dont see it, so i stay with what I like and what has proven time and time again for me to work very, very well
Must be nice to have so much money to throw away. The initial investment in your platforms of choice must've been quite impressively high.
For me, besides money, SQL slammer was enough to make me start wondering and Blaster and its varients were quite compelling reasons for me to look at changing.
This sounds a lot like Kerry vs. Bush by minute ...
I'm just wondering when will Ballmer call someone a flip-flopper?
So then, what does that make BSD users, Ralph Nader supporters?
Wow, a web page cites a source so it must be true right?
Ummmmm no I'm afraid not. I need not refute the study based on its merits because the study was made up.
Check out the Wikipedia entry on the source. Scroll to the bottom. The authors never broke down IQ below national levels to get state IQs. The numbers cited in that chart came from a hoax--they were likely made up as a joke to make Gore supporters look smarter than Bush supporters from the previous election. Using the results of standardised tests show much less gap between the "smartest" and "dumbest" states and nearly no correlation with their voting preferences.
Also, contrary to the citation, that publication made use of multiple IQ tests conducted at different times (it did not rely predominately on one IQ test), and did some fudging to obtain its numbers (UK was set at 100 and the rest of the world adjusted accordingly, even though IQ tests generally regard the world average to be 100 instead of 90 as they calculated)
1 person, 1 vote is the only fair system.
No it isn't. In fact there are cases where it is really quite UNfair. That is the case when a country has a large, diverse geography and demographics. When it comes to electing a government that meets the diverse needs pure rep-by-pop or "1 person 1 vote" is a poor system. There has to be a mechanism in place to reflect LOCAL and REGIONAL interests as well as the simple majority.
If there was no electoral college or similar mechanism, NY, CA and other states with large urban centres could dominate. The concerns of people outside those area would be ignored because they couldn't mathematically compete against the concerns of urban costal USA. Believe me, what is right for LA or NYC is NOT right for Idaho and Wyoming. In case you havent noticed, LA and NYC appear to be different planets to just about the whole rest of the continent.
I'm not saying that the electoral college is the best way to go or it cannot be improved, I'm just saying that there has to be some balance in the selection of the US president. If the President could get elected by relying only on big cities then the whole country would go to hell in a handbasket. A life long resident of NYC or LA cannot comprehend at all what life is like in a place like Billings, MT.
Count yourselves lucky...in Canada, Paul Martin was voted in as PM literally because of how Toronto voted (all Toronto ridings but one went Liberal IIRC...if they all went Conservative it would've had a minorty governemt under Prime Minster Steven Harper). Whether or not that would've been better or worse is not the point--it's that under the Canadian system, someone can lead the nation with less than 40% of the popular vote and rely on concentration of votes to the point where A SINGLE CITY can be the kingmaker. And people wonder why Albertans are so grumpy politically, Quebec continuously threatens to secede from Canada and the Premier of Newfoundland storms out of meetings with the PM?
...is a style of government. Democracy is a process used by government. It seems to me that they are related but not the same thing. Isn't your statement kind of like saying "an orange is not a plant, it is a fruit"?
Doesn't democracy play an important role in a democratic republic? In my observation the US holds elections on every damn thing to do with government. Today, you are electing the President, congressmen, sentaors, judges, public commissioners, voting on propositions, etc etc etc.
Seems to me that the system was at least INTENDED to govern by majority opinion.
My first thought was "why the hell would a LAW FIRM file patent relating to digital image processing"? My second thought was "why would they wait over 16 YEARS to defend their patent"?
Not only is the patent itself flimsy at best, the way it is being used is obviously exploitation. Have we all lost sight of why patents were established in the first place? I don't recall the intention was to STIFLE innovation and provide an avenue to generate a sudden, large revenue stream for the patent holder.
Was not the original intent of the patent system to provide incentive for inventors to develop and produce their invention? Wasn't the idea to provide a temporary period of protection to the inventor to establish himself in the market for his invention without getting ripped off by an unscrupulous competitor?
I think that if I am right then the patent system should be overhauled and be more restrictive--especially since it was built around the invention of physical devices. Not just in what is patented, but how patents are granted.
If there already isn't such a provision in place, the patent applicant should be required to demonstrate his intent to USE the information in his patent. Before a patent is granted, I think there must be an "invention sponsor"--either an organisation set up by the inventor himself or an initial licensee--that submits a business plan or similar evidence that the invention will be used and marketed. The patent then could be provisionally granted for a short term (5 years maybe?) and at the end of this term, if there is no progress then the patent is expired and cannot be renewed (though an inventor could start the filing process from scratch).
I think that even if this sounds harsh, lawyers and unscrupulous businessmen have demonstrated they cannot be trusted with an overly permissive patent system. It is an obvious perversion of the system when the patent holder is obviously not in a business related to the patent and has gone for years with no licensee or partner to apply the invention. If patent holders want a high-level of protection for their ideas, I don't think it is too much to ask for them to provide a high-level of detail as to their intent in applying the patent.
...at Benson and Hedges?
There is a reason why tobacco is "politically acceptable substance to hate". There still may be some debate as to what second hand smoke does to people, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the smokers themselves are at increased risk of enphesyma and cancer and that by smoking you shorten your life considerably. As such, more people are quitting smoking and fewer start at all.
Regardless of what science says about health dangers of second hand smoke, you CANNOT DISPUTE that just like most other kinds of smoke, it is an irritant--particularly to non-smokers. Since the majority of the population in North America are now non-smokers, the majority find smoking distasteful. As it is a democratic society, majority rules on most matters. This is leading towards the eventual extinction of smoking in public.
I'm not sure some smokers realise this, but smoking is considered a dirty habit now. Never mind whether second-hand smoke is a health hazard. The smoke smells awful. The smoke makes people's eyes sting. It makes my eczema flare up when I'm in a smokey room. The butts are disguisting to look at. I've also noticed a slowly growing trend in the opinion that smoking is a habit of the low-class. It is about as appealing and sophisticated to many as spitting chewing tobacco. Unapologetic smokers are thought to be more likely low-income, uneducated individuals.
Not only that, smokers present a safety hazard. Insurance companies charge higher premiums to homeowners to permit smoking in their homes because of studies demonstrating an increased fire risk. The grasslands in an urban park within my city catch fire during dry weather, and the last few have ALL been attributed to careless disposal of lit cigarettes. One of the fires out an adjoining neighbourhood in danger as well.
Even as a non-smoker however, I do not agree with excessive government intrusion into private habits. I support the idea of a total ban on smoking in government buildings, schools, hospitals and establishments that permit children. I also support tax incentives for smoke-free businesses (promoting healthy lifestyles reduces the load on government funded medicare). I do NOT think business owners should be FORCED to ban smoking in situations outside the above (age 18+ only, private buildings). Given the state of society today, I think that is a reasonable compromise.
If smokers do not see that as a reasonable compromise, I might suggest to them to make an effort to quit smoking--the increased quality of life is amazing. If you do not believe even now that you have no good reason to quit, use your manners and keep your habit to yourself--smoke in your own home/yard only, or in a space designated as a smoking area. If you light up in public, chances are that the majority of people around you are non-smokers and are bothered by your smoke.
Voodoo is a high-end PC builder based in Calgary, Alberta Canada. If you are familiar with companies like Alienware you will have an idea of the kinds of machines they build. This is what the "Voodoo-style" reference in the article is about--the technique this company uses to fold cables to minimise tangle and make the insides look purty when you have a window on the case.
/.ed but I believe the technique involves the crafting of a doll representing the machine in question. I do believe poultry sacrifice and chanting incantations is involved in conferring the powers of cable folding upon the PC doll. The doll is then held aloft facing the machine and contorted appropriately, causing the forces of the spirit within the doll to move and fold the cables accordingly.
The site is still
Quite fascinating really. The techniques they use in developing CPU and chipset cooling solutions is far too graphic to describe unfortunately.
It seems some "neo-liberal" disagreed with my contention that they share common characteristics with "neo-conservatives" and have dismissed my opinion as somewhat overrated.
That, or a certain brand of conservative can't believe that a Christian could hold socialist values, or that a conservative could possibly be athiest.
I dunno...perhaps my observation really is too obvious. It does demonstrate that not only do those who gravitate towards a more hard line posisiton think they are always right, they both tend to dismiss and/or try to supress those opinions they find disagreeable.
Neocon philosophy is *never* wrong. Any mistakes happen because the philosophy was not put into practice vigorously enough.
While I don't disagree with your conclusion, I've made the very same observation about "new liberalism", socialism and even Communism: Socialised medicine's failings are blamed on private clinics, inequalities in the workplace are still a problem because affirmative action is not adequately enforced in education and industry, the Soviet Union collapsed because of corrupt officials who did not follow the ideals of Communism and acted in their own interests before the state's, etc.
I suggest you further "modify your view" and google for more "facts" using terms related to liberalism and socialism. You'll find that philospohies that deviate from the "common sense middle" you are simply looking at two sides of the very same coin.
Incidentially, one of the most "neo-conservative" people I knew was an honours student in physics and a rather "devout" athiest. I also find that apart from some of the more evangelical churchgoers that devout Christians tend to be more liberal in a lot of ways (advocating more socialised medicine, subsidised housing, international aid, etc.) so I think the issue of evolution vs. creationism cannot be classified simply as a conservative vs. liberal issue.
Sorry, but coffee is supposed to be brewed that hot.
The brewing temperature is not in question. The serving temperature is. Industry standards recommend a serving temperature of hot beverages and soups of no more than 160F. That is still a scalding temperature, but it takes longer to burn at that temperature, so the heat will dissipate before injury could occur. Although in fast food kitchens it is common for settings to be non-adjustable, the hot plates of most commercial coffee makers have adjustable temperatures.
Coffee that is left in the pot for too long at too cool of a temperature does taste bad but that is why fresh pots have to be made periodically. Serving coffee in a little paper cup at its brewing temperature is rather ill advised.
What is so offensive about ricers.
I for one find them hilarious.
Who can take a civic
A rusty old DX?
Add a giant spoiler and some plastic ground effects?
The ricer man can
the ricer man caaaaan!
My apologies to Sammy Davis Jr.
Why is it that in the countries listed as most "restrictive" in terms of IP laws, that those that directly produce the least IP own the most and use/abuse the laws the most?
Take the US for example. While they have pop singers and the like enormously popular domestically AND internationally, their ownership of IP doesn't even begin to apporach that of the members corporations of RIAA and MPAA. Or technology: most of America's brightest minds take employment with large corporations and contininue to generate IP for the corporation, or have their IP taken from them ( Philo Farnsworth didn't get rich from inventing the modern television, but RCA sure got rich from his work).
It's a lot easier to take a stand on IP when you don't have to invent your own and have a crapload of money to buy it or take it from others.
Somewhat OT but you asked.
McDonalds kitchens are designed so a monkey could almost make your meal (the typical cook at McDonalds knows about as much about cooking as a monkey). All temeratures and timers are pre-set and all the food is prepared to the point that it just needs cooking ans assembly.
In the case of it's coffee makers, according to the facts they were fixed at 185 degrees farenheit and cannot be adjusted except by a technician. "Room Temperature" is 70 or 75 degrees so there is a LOT of room to manoeuvre. OH&S experts recommend hot water heaters be set no higher than 130F to avoid scalding, over 50 degrees cooler than McJava. IIRC if you go to you local Tim Hortons the coffee is quite hot too, but still no more than 150 to 160F.
So yeah...there is room temperature, hot and McF*cking Crazy (tm). The reason McDonalds does not do anything about it is because it would cost more to pay technicians to alter thousands of coffee machines than it does to settle a few hundred lawsuits (which typically involve covering medical bills, not millions). Same reason Ford sold exploding Pintos (because despite the publicity, they did not explode and kill/injure enough people to make it worth fixing).
ALL pieces of hardware are known to stop working for some amount of people. That's why people get WARRANTIES. The most common reason for things to stop working is due to misuse... e.g. putting it on the carpet so it collects dust.
/. or to computers. 60 minutes has done stories on shoddy products as well. Canadian TV watchers might remember two newsmagazine shows CBC's "Marketwatch" and CTV's "Live it Up!" that were almost exclusively dedicated to the quality of goods and services (like "Consumer Reports" for TV). People want a heads up when they could be buying a potential lemon. Because of this story, I know that if I ever get an XBox it might acutally be worth getting Future Shop's extended warranty for a change.
/. before (Remember the early powerbooks with the flakey power connectors? Hot cube machines? Earphones on some iPods?). The thing is, Apple got bitten by this and now when there are failures, they promptly and properly respond, even if the cause of the failure is questionable. With the latest iMac, most components are even user serviceable so you don't even have to send in your machine--Apple will overnight the needed parts at no cost to you. It's not always when it breaks down--it's the service you get when it happens.
True enough, but when does it become unreasonable? Is one percent or ten percent premature failure rate acceptable? Also, ALL warranties are limited in some way, and more often than not do not cover damage due to misuse. Guess who defines "misuse"--the manufacturer. Is it really reasonable to consider operation of a home game console on a carpeted surface misuse?
HELLOOO...I think engineers would've figured out that even since before the Atari 2600, home video games are used mostly by kids, teens and college students in carpeted or otherwise "harsh" environments like basement rumpus rooms, dorm rooms, etc? The damn thing is usually hooked up to a big screen and has wired controllers for cryin' out loud...if MS wanted the XBox to sit on a clean, well ventilated shelf or desk like the PC it really is, then it should've come with wireless controllers so players could sit back from the TV without taking the machine and setting it on the floor.
Why do we have a slashdot story on a piece of hardware that stopped working? and why XBox (rhetorical question)? why not apple? i'm sure a fair amount of macs stop working within a year as well.
Because it stops working too quickly and too often? It isn't unique to
Why XBox? Becuase it is proving to be flimsy. Why not apple? Because they build quality products at this very moment. Apple HAS received a slagging from
My computer stopped working after 6 months... what did I do? I sent it in to get it repaired... for FREE because of a warranty
I'm glad your experience was relatively positive. I know of a builder here who (if possible) will immediately give you an identical replacement machine at no cost to you (and will even swap the hard drive from your machine, if the hard drive is not the cause of failure--so you don't even lose your data). Unfortunately, many companies are not so generous with their warranty policies. All too often, the warranty terms are in two columns of fine print on an A4 sheet that accidentally gets thrown away with the packing material--and the manufacturer follows it to the letter looking for any reason not to help you out. I'm not sure how Microsoft handles warranty claims, but if someone wants to sue maybe its more like the latter case.
I agree, it seems that the US is far to litigous and that the lawsuit seems frivilous. However, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say there MUST be a reason this person wasn't satisfied with just taking it in for repair. Are these machines consistently failing during warranty coverage? Did he get grief from Microsoft over the failure because they claimed he abused the product? Anyone out there care to relate their experiences?
As so
...what distro would she use? And would she grant it a royal warrant?
I think it would be cool if say, every box and/or CD of the official SuSE Linux distro had the royal arms stamped on it, surrounded by the phrase "By Appointment to her Majesty the Queen". Maybe Novell could put the parliament buildings on the box to make it look a bit like the label on a bottle of HP sauce...
mmmm.....HP sauce...
BIND is the market leader, and there is more info out there than for any other DNS. It's security issues are overblown (as they are not issues in the latest version). It is rock-solid stable and consumes relatively few resources.
I'm open to suggestions, save for one perhaps: Microsoft's DNS. The MS implementation is (or long had been) broken in terms of complying with specifications. In my experience it was less reliable as well. BIND9 hasn't caused *me* any real problems anyways--it even does dynamic DNS with my DHCP clients without a hitch (once I figured out how to config it).
I'm guessing it is Microsoft Content Management Server.
Who else but Microsoft could get a PHB to fork over 25 large for a CMS that is no more capable than some of the free ones out there? Also, the phrases "World Readable" and "Word Writable by default" smell of old Microsoftware.
Nonetheless, the hardware support of even the latest Linux distributions is inferior to that of Windows or even Mac OS X
Puzzling statement to say the least. I find the opposite is true. For example, Linux support for scanners is broader than that of Windows 2000 and XP (Linux is better with legacy devices). Linux support of 64-bit hardware is also more mature (where is Microsoft now on that front?). Mac OS X? That one floored me. Mac OS can be kludged into running on other platforms I guess, but it only has ONE supported hardware platform. It is easy to offer exemplary hardware suport when you only support a VERY SMALL amount of hardware.
Monolithic and slow-to-change? If that is Linux, what is Windows, fossilised? Look at Windows NT4 and Windows Server 2003 or XP (especially in "classic mode"). Visually nothing really innovative and looking deeper even less innovative architecturally. Look at Linux over that same period--form the Kernel on up to KDE and GNOME. HUGE difference, both in modularity and pace of change.
...is indicative of his opinions on other issues.
I'm not American, so I cannot vote for US president. If I could, I certainly wouldn't do so simply based on the candidates' views on intellectual property rights. That said, they are an important indication of the general ideology of the candidate and how they each prioritise individual rights.
If I could vote, I do not think I could bring myself to vote for Bush OR Kerry. I'd have to select a third-party candidate, even if they stand no chance of winning. I'm not afraid of vote-splitting sending the wrong person to the White House (as Gore supporters contend Nader voters did last time), because I do not thing the US is any better or worse off with either "real" contender as president. It'll just be....different.
Kerry is "open to examining" the DMCA. He is "open to examining" EVERYTHING people are pissed off about. His present opinions often contradict his voting record and even some earlier statements. Kerry also talks at great length about what his opponents have done wrong but doesn't offer very convincing alternatives to the problems the US faces.
My impression is that Kerry is like Canada's current Prime Minister Paul Martin in that he has no ideology or concrete principles at all. If you want to know what "Kerry's America" would look like, examine "Martin's Canada". Basically, it is a continuation of what the last guys did. Things will coast along and the leader will wax indignant about what a mess things were left in and how we have to get to the bottom of things. Committees will be struck and reviews conducted. Unworkable bills will be introduced that will die on the order table. A lot will be said about how complicated the solution is until the next election (and the next if re-elected) until he is voted out or steps down. In Canada, that means more problems with underfunded/ill-equipped military, more megaproject boondoggles and fraudulant spending uncovered, more mad cow-related export bans and timber tarrifs. In the US it would mean you'll still be in IRAQ, RIAA will still be suing 12 year olds, prescription drugs will still be overpriced and inhuman, fundamentalist/extremist islamic terrorists will still behead American captors and anyone else who stands in their way.
As far as Bush goes...well at least we know what to expect. He is nothing if not consistent in his perpetual war on terror. No part of his policy seems untouched by the War on Terror. As someone who is inclined to believe in free-market economy and less government, I would be a traditional Republican supporter. However, it disturbs me that he seems to be losing sight of what he is defending (personal liberites--the "free world"). As a result we are getting BIGGER, more intrusive gov't. On economic matters the Bush government has been disappointingly protectionist/isolationist as well (sometimes in the name of national security--other times just becasue of public pressure to prop up an industry or the economy in general).
I'd say that although the ideology is a polar opposite that GWBush runs the US very much like Pierre Trudeau ran Canada in the 70s and 80s (fans of Trudeau are cringing as they read this). Both are somewhat autocratic. Both did damage to international relations with traditional allies. Both have made questionable moves to broadly curtail freedom in the name of national security (Read up on the "FLQ Crisis" in Quebec and how Trudeau dealt with it--thankfully it was short term, but the "War Measures Act" made the Patriot Act look like a municipal parking bylaw by comparison--and it was in effect across the nation even though the danger was in one region of the country). Trudeau walked over opponents/critics in his obession with his "Just Society" much like Bush does now in his "War on Terror", and both obsessions touched every facet of live for the average citizen.
The good thing is that both countries are democracies of a sort, so eventually you get the opportunity to "throw the bums out". Ultimately who wins this week won't be the downfall--as long as citizens defend democracy.
Come on this has been true fro[sic] over 20 years in PC games.
I'd say closer to 30 years. Some background:
In the early 70s the chip maker General Instruments made a "pong on a chip" device as a skunkworks project (ie. it was a "for fun" project not designed for any of their customers). They observed that Atari Pong and Magnavox Odyssey (the REAL first video tennis game) were selling quite well. As such, G.I. contacted the inventor of the original game, Ralph Baer, for a license agreement to market the chip (Magnavox did not use a single-chip solution--it used Baer's original design).
This is where the "over-hype" comes in. Baer was good friends with Arnold Greenberg--president of Coleco. He told Greenberg about the new chip that was to be released in 1975 and secured G.I.s first big customer in Coleco.
Using engineering samples, Coleco developed the first "Telstar" Pong/Odyssey clone and became a pioneer in the field of overhype and vapourware even before people knew about Bill and Paul's new BASIC. By the time G.I. finally made the first production run of the chips, Coleco had people falling over each other to get a Telstar, which was always in short supply due to manufacturing difficulties. Competitors made clones using the same chip once GI sorted the problems out (and Coleco was still having problems with supply) and sparked a "pong mania".
Eventually the flood of mostly low quality machines caused a shakeout--by that time Coleco was a big enough player in the market to survive. Atari made a CPU-based system with ROM cartriges and started a new craze. Coleco and Mattel joined in and Atari and Mattel learned all about hype from Coleco. They were the "Big 3 of vapourware". By the early 80s all of them had hit systems with lots of games and were promising even more games and better machines. All three also hyped computer expansions and/or next-gen systems. All three were either late to market or reneged on promises.
The public had high expectations based on the Big 3's marketing hype. What they got were things like Atari 2600 Pac Man and E.T., A late initial shipment of Coleco ADAM computers that were DOA and nothing from Mattel but a limited release of a crappy computer expansion and more expensive, slightly incompatible Intellivisions that were no better than the original except perhaps for better looks and speech built in.
The "big crash" 20 years ago was caused precisely because of this overhype. Nintendo succeeded because it blindsided the public with the NES--no one expected the big release of a new system becuase the console market was dead in 1985. No expectations + good product = big hit. It maintained supremacy by being selective about licensed developers and for awhile with monopolistic practises.
I don't forsee a big crash like in the 80s again where all the big players in console hardware die off, but I do see a shakeout on the developer side if they do not learn from this history. It might come to a point where Sony, Nintendo and MS take (even more?) charge of all the major games development for their respective systems. However, I'd prefer if they remained open but did like UBISoft and release demos as development is done and not fuel speculation about what isn't done.
I'd have to protest the "competitive pricing" point. You could buy the same stuff at The Brick and O.A.C. you don't have to pay for it until it's obsolete.
There are at least three in Calgary, Alberta. To the north in Edmonton, there are two in the same mall (West Edmonton mall--because the couch-potatoes who pay that kind of money for a TV would have a heart attack before they could walk the length of that damn mall).
Trivia: the West Edmonton Mall is the largest mall in the world by square footage. It houses the worlds largest indoor roller-coaster and is surrounded by the worlds largest parking lot (based on number of spots--it is multi-level parkade so I think it is smaller than the disneyworld paring lot by acerage). This is why Sony and many others have two stores in that one mall. It also has more operational submarines than the Canadian navy (not joking--although the mall subs are an amusement ride).
More trivia: The "Mall of America" was built by and is still owned by Canadians--the same ones who built the mall in Edmonton. The Alberta government helped finance the construction of the both malls with loan guarantees using Canadian taxpayers' money. Proof that governments really don't care how they spend your tax dollars.
The idea is that there would be an "operating system" in firmware on the video card--or perhaps a beefed-up BIOS. Video card makers would handle the differing raw hardware interface with this "GDOS"and from the PCs perspetive the interface would be the same..so the main computer OS could use one driver for whatever GPU is used.
cool idea...might be a good compromise for ATI and nVIDIA. They should agree on a standard "GDOS" specification and write implementations for their cards firmware, which would replace the pre-compiled, closed-source driver. They could then leave it up to Microsoft, Linux developers, etc. to write a single, standard, OpenGL-capable driver--basically a 3D version of a standard VESA driver.
Putting the "secret sauce" in the firmware means they really don't have to talk X86 if they don't want to-it could be a lot of special, proprietary microcode if need be. It also wouldn't be platform-specific so they could concentrate on making great video cards instead of writing drivers (which most often they are crap at doing anyways).
It is well known that various drivers and OSes with the same card result in significantly different performace. If a driver is buggy or slow, then they can yell at Microsoft or Linux developers or whatever to fix it...right now they have to shoulder the responsibility.
...Windows Automotive is probably yet another rehash on the same concept they've been trying to push for most of the last decade.
We've also seen the result in high-end BMWs with i(can't)Drive. Thus far the implementations have been very flawed to say the least. Sure, MS won't control your engine or modulate your antilock brakes, but they DO want to control your radio, heating/AC, security system, GPS navigation, etc.
MS has come at automotive apps like it was another PC. Not only is is a royal PITA to navigate dynamic menus to operate your radio, climate control, etc...it is also dangerous. WinAuto might not crash because it blows up your engine, but it could be a safety hazard if the cumbersome interface keeps changing the radio station to Michael Bolton when you try to defrost your windshield, or the trunk flies open on the freeway, or your locks refuse to operate to let you out of the car, or the GPS navigation sends you the wrong way down a one-way road etc etc...
MS historically doesn't begin to hit its stride until the third major release of a technology. I sure don't want any cars on the road with WinAuto v1.x or 2.x that's for sure.