isn't this the same thing this "community" blasts M$ for? forced hardware/software upgrades?
i don't want necessarilly want new "features", just the bug fixes, security holes plugged up, etc. one day maintainers won't be making RPM's for RH 6.2 (which installs on lower grade hardware), maybe they've quit already. this will make getting system updates quite challenging.
that's great for any machine taking sdram (p2 and above). how about the older 486 and original pentimum machines that take 72 pin simms? some of these mobo's will barely take 32 mb. LOTS of people are using these boxen for web servers, routers, firewalls, etc (anything non-gui based). i've tried many different ways including the text install to get rh 7.1 to install on my 486 w/ 16mb of ram, but it just wouldn't go. RH 6.2 installed just fine and worked for my needs.
from what i've heard, it's not exactly RH to blame. i think the kernel as of 2.4 is requiring more and more memory (sorry no links to back this one up).
it would just be nice to have a solid distro to install on this older hardware. my crack at a debian install lacked MUCH to be desired. auto hardware detection and configuration IS a great thing.
i guess i'm a little nieve. how does this exactly violate FCC regulations? Does the FCC prohibit people from communicating with their neighbour? Let's take away the fact that he's providing internet routing functionality, say my neighbour and i run a cat 5 wire between appartments (through one wall) for networked gaming? or maybe we're working on a project together, and share network resources. what is it about that cat 5 from my bedroom to theirs which violates fcc regulations?
i'm also curious which local building codes would be in violation? is it against code to have an outlette which originates in one living area, and ends in another living area? that would really prohibit me from renting my finished basement that has a small kitchen and bathroom since it's all on the same wiring, maybe even has a few cross phone lines, cable tv lines, etc.
so often we view it as, if you're not paying for it, your're stealing it. how about the position of , well, i'm paying for that (cable internet connection, tv, phone, water, electric, etc) i can use it as i damn well please including but not limited to sharing with everyone on the block. yeah, yeah, internet and phone service area fairly flat rates (per month) for most people, but that's just their charging structure currently. it hasn't always been that way, and may not always continue either.
these business HAVE to do this for their protection. if i were a business owner it would be much safer for me to rent/cash a check for or sell beer to someone who has a valid state license (or id) in the state i am conducting business. that way, one, i don't have to worry about what all the other states id's look like and concern myself with counterfits, and two, don't have to worry about someone taking off with my rental to another state where i can't really take them to court for steeling.
i'm sure most banks would cash a check for cash (legal tender in the us) using a passport for identification. i would think that if you don't have a valid state id/license for beer, you might know someone who does and will purchase it for you (dont' think that's illegal)...
even if the information shared by a system is encrypted, the decrypting of the information is not breaking any laws that i can see. the decryption system would merely be applying a formula to access the information. it could not assume that the information was copyright or that you don't have valid access to copyright information. i believe the dmca is setup to dis-allow decryption of COPYRIGHT material or to diseminate a system/method which primary use is to decrypt copyright information.
i see this example of decrypting encrypted information similar to writing printer drivers for winPrinters. i would merely be reverse enginerring their method of communication, any applying a formula. the driver isn't designed in order to circumvent copy protection measures of copyrighted works.
i'm totally in favor of standards and applications complying to them. i guess my major point was, why does mozilla want to be more standard compliant than any of their compeditors, especially for a 1.0 release?
while it's great to strive for excellence, this maybe the exactly the reason we're still only seeing 0.9.5 right now after what 5 years of development. i really love the browser, and all the work they've done, it just seems to me they set very high goals. they may eventually get to those goals, but this is the internet age and the competition could be moving circles around them.
if i'm a vendor or what ever, all i care about is a stable api for the time being. i need something that i can code/integrate to NOW so I can have a product in a few months. by that time the standards compliance thing could be all worked out and I'll know that i can plop 1.2.5 into all the work i've done.
they claim to want to have the best standards compliance among compeditors. first, who are the competition? all browsers? all free (beer) browsers? all open source browsers? secondly, why such a need for the standards compliance? in the past (and still currently afaik), browsers were build on loose compliance, and extending the standards to where they see the standards going into the future (css).
on a side note, it is good to see them put a loose timeframe on the release. their schedule has mozilla 1.0 in about 6 months, so we should expect it in about 9 realistically (sp). I can see their desire to want to lock down api's for a while on the 1.x version. We're seeing.x releases of mozilla almost every month. Won't we expect to have.x releases every month after the 1.0 release? maybe every other month?
all i want for christmas is a one point oh, a one point oh, a one point oh...:)
i'm not familiar with that. i tried to install kde from solaris binaries off kde's site onto an ultra-5 box, and it didn't work at all. i ended up grabbing source for gt and kde, build, and install, and it works great! i noticed that it takes _forever_ to compile kde on an ultra-5 box.
i had thought it was the patented mp3 format that was the core issue, not exactly the quality of the playback? i've ripped using ogg and mp3, and really can't tell a difference in quality using my 15$ speakers or headphones along with the onboard sound chip. i default to now encoding everything into ogg format just because, from what i understand, the encoding is not patented like the mp3 format. i would speculate that we'll see ogg players on the market in the near future. when that happens, then maybe i'll buy one. till then, i'm stuck using my pc to play the encoded music.
can you explain why you think the idea (let alone the man) is stupid? you call it insanity and compare the idea to pulling money from tobacco to pay for health costs, but I don't exactly see your reasoning why it's a bad idea?
i personally think it's a good idea, and i'll tell you why. if a person does damage to another person or their property, they should be responsible to replace or repair the damages (along with other penalties depending upon the crime). say i go and loot a few houses. along with the jail time i should expect to recieve for that crime, i should also be held accountable for the items i stole. in the same manner, if a corporation has committed a crime against another via it's anti-competitive, they should be reponsible to undo that damage. specifically, it was noted in the microsoft trial that they used anti-competitive practices twords netscape. i think they should have to pay a large sum of money to netscape to get it back into the browser business (mainstream). i also believe that it was pointed out during the trial that MS wouldn't allow OEM's to install alternative operating systems (OS/2, linux, whatever). they should then also kick some cash to some of those os distributors (RedHat, IBM, and others).
seems to have been frixed now. i think it's more of a dialect thing. somehow, some americans tend to want that extra syllable on there. there's an unusual break between the syllables in the word "athlon"
this has been said again and again. ms source is already open to anyone with a large checkbook. you can buy the source from them (although i'm sure there's a STRICT nda to sigh), and then they'll give you NO support for it (you've got the sources right). should a company be required to release openly all it's source code? i would think no more than a digital cable company who has a monopoly in a certain area should release the compression algoithms used for their channels. shouldn't anyone be able to build a box to decode those digital signals?
how about as an alternative, impose a LARGE fine which will go to competitors (that's who was ultimately hurt here right?), as well as strict rules that they can't do the anti-competitive practices (allow oem's to install other browsers customize os, etc).
i can see your point about the os asking you all the time to confirm your changes, but i think those are put there so that the solly cholly customer (who, if they don't know they have a choice in os or software probably don't need to be using alternatives) doesn't muck up their system only to call tech support to say "when ever i click on a blue link in a email message, this netscape thing keeps poping up, it use to use internet explorer, but now it doesn't. can you frix it?"
these "average" users i keep hearing about probably are on their first or maybe even their second, really don't care much if there's alternative software they can use. do most people care much that the tires on their spanking new car are probably 25k mile tires that wal-mart won't even sell? just sign the papers, and let me drive it.
i agree totally. the article is horrible. how can they say that a normal user doesn't understand what right clicking on a file is? if you can't figure that one out, you probably should not be on the mouse/keyboard. i would think that by putting the functionality right there on the right click pop-up, that's about as down to earth as you can get.
kde includes these file type associations by default. i wonder what happens when i click on a file of type "html" in the kde file manager (aka konqueror)? does mozilla open the file? oh yeah, i keep forgetting... it's Microsoft the big monopoly and they get to play by a different set of rules.
because right now they're creating the core technologies that will be used for the future processors. they know (from past experience i would assume) that it's going to take them 6 years to get this chip to production and out to the masses.
what makes yahoo.com an american domain? because it's "owned" by an american based company? doesn't yahoo have presense in lots of other countries?
anyway, i don't see how a domain name could be country based unless it's a.us or.au specific domain. even then, there would have to be government restrictions to regulate the traffic for those domains to keep it within the country. once a domain's traffic enters a particular country, they have to play by their laws and rules don't they? (yahoo - france - selling nazi stuff).
i'm not an advocate for government regulation of the internet at all, but i do think that it's certainly possible to happen. governments regulate all other forms of publishing and commerce. if i'm publishing a kiddie pr0n mag, i can't just go around distributing it anywhere. i probably can't even get it published just anywhere. if i'm trucking a load of marijuana from one country where it's legal, to another that's legal, i can't really go _through_ another country where it's not legal.
yep, i've heard of it. i'm not actually the engineer (so please correct me if i'm misled), but my understanding is that these chips store software. that's not exactly going with the original author's idea of implementing the desktop via hardware.
i'm still a little skeptical on the idea. would a hardware implementation of a desktop kinda lock a user into one monitor/display unit? I guess that could be just a "setting" that's stored on one of these nifty EEPROM's:)
that's definately an interesting idea, but how would you propose to handle upgrades?
also, that much of a integration of hw/sw seems a little scary to me. now all the sudden, all the other software i run on my box is dependant on this desktop chip i have on my machine.with the costs of hardware these days, i just don't see a practical need to move this stuff out of the RAM/core CPU area. Enough system ram for one of these desktops costs less than a few days lunch, and those athlon t-birds... well, they're just c00l to have heating up the place:)!
i gotta say getting DRI, OpenGL, SDL or whatever working on a linux box does not seem as easy as applying some directx patch MS puts out. i've got an ATI AIW 128 32MB AGP card, and it goes something like this: build and install XFree86 4.1.0 from source (this gets the games working ok), next, build and install ati.2 drivers from the wonderfull livid folks. this gets xawtv working. build a new kernel, install kde, any system changes, (move your mouse the wrong way), and rebuild and re-install them all again. don't get me wrong, once it's installed and working, it works great (i wish i had the ability to record the xawtv streams to avi files), but getting it up seems to have a STEEP learning curve.
i agree that most of the drug paraphernalia isn't commonly used for legal purposes (probably the same as the dvd ripping software, like you're not going to snag a copy of your buddies dvd either, right?), but there are legal uses. roll your own cigaretts, you need those rolling papers. smoke your tobacco out of a pipe, probably want a few screens and a new pipe every now and then. now, a 6 ft. plastic/glass water pipe... i think that's got to be a point where you say "wait a second there... you're not stuffing tobacco in that thing"
i just think it's really funny that the actual intent of the sale is what's regulated and not just the items.
i thought it was more the fact that non os essential application couldn't be uninstalled (IE), and that they wouldn't allow vendors to ship with alternative software to what they provided (NS). all the big linux players bundle as much as possible into their distributions, some of the same functionality that MS is finally providing has been IN the linux kernel for a long time (firewall, ICS). i think one of the major differences is that with a linux system it's totally customizeable and ALL the interfaces are freely (beer) available.
it does sound like the same old song and dance though. someone posted that messenger isn't able to be uninstalled
Slashdot Mirror
isn't this the same thing this "community" blasts M$ for? forced hardware/software upgrades?
i don't want necessarilly want new "features", just the bug fixes, security holes plugged up, etc. one day maintainers won't be making RPM's for RH 6.2 (which installs on lower grade hardware), maybe they've quit already. this will make getting system updates quite challenging.
that's great for any machine taking sdram (p2 and above). how about the older 486 and original pentimum machines that take 72 pin simms? some of these mobo's will barely take 32 mb. LOTS of people are using these boxen for web servers, routers, firewalls, etc (anything non-gui based). i've tried many different ways including the text install to get rh 7.1 to install on my 486 w/ 16mb of ram, but it just wouldn't go. RH 6.2 installed just fine and worked for my needs.
from what i've heard, it's not exactly RH to blame. i think the kernel as of 2.4 is requiring more and more memory (sorry no links to back this one up).
it would just be nice to have a solid distro to install on this older hardware. my crack at a debian install lacked MUCH to be desired. auto hardware detection and configuration IS a great thing.
i guess i'm a little nieve. how does this exactly violate FCC regulations? Does the FCC prohibit people from communicating with their neighbour? Let's take away the fact that he's providing internet routing functionality, say my neighbour and i run a cat 5 wire between appartments (through one wall) for networked gaming? or maybe we're working on a project together, and share network resources. what is it about that cat 5 from my bedroom to theirs which violates fcc regulations?
i'm also curious which local building codes would be in violation? is it against code to have an outlette which originates in one living area, and ends in another living area? that would really prohibit me from renting my finished basement that has a small kitchen and bathroom since it's all on the same wiring, maybe even has a few cross phone lines, cable tv lines, etc.
so often we view it as, if you're not paying for it, your're stealing it. how about the position of , well, i'm paying for that (cable internet connection, tv, phone, water, electric, etc) i can use it as i damn well please including but not limited to sharing with everyone on the block. yeah, yeah, internet and phone service area fairly flat rates (per month) for most people, but that's just their charging structure currently. it hasn't always been that way, and may not always continue either.
these business HAVE to do this for their protection. if i were a business owner it would be much safer for me to rent/cash a check for or sell beer to someone who has a valid state license (or id) in the state i am conducting business. that way, one, i don't have to worry about what all the other states id's look like and concern myself with counterfits, and two, don't have to worry about someone taking off with my rental to another state where i can't really take them to court for steeling.
i'm sure most banks would cash a check for cash (legal tender in the us) using a passport for identification. i would think that if you don't have a valid state id/license for beer, you might know someone who does and will purchase it for you (dont' think that's illegal)...
even if the information shared by a system is encrypted, the decrypting of the information is not breaking any laws that i can see. the decryption system would merely be applying a formula to access the information. it could not assume that the information was copyright or that you don't have valid access to copyright information. i believe the dmca is setup to dis-allow decryption of COPYRIGHT material or to diseminate a system/method which primary use is to decrypt copyright information.
i see this example of decrypting encrypted information similar to writing printer drivers for winPrinters. i would merely be reverse enginerring their method of communication, any applying a formula. the driver isn't designed in order to circumvent copy protection measures of copyrighted works.
did you notice a difference between the 900 p3, and the 1.5tbird?
when amd starts manufacturing those tbirds at 3.5gz, they'll probably have to come self-equipped inside a water cooling solution.
i'm totally in favor of standards and applications complying to them. i guess my major point was, why does mozilla want to be more standard compliant than any of their compeditors, especially for a 1.0 release?
while it's great to strive for excellence, this maybe the exactly the reason we're still only seeing 0.9.5 right now after what 5 years of development. i really love the browser, and all the work they've done, it just seems to me they set very high goals. they may eventually get to those goals, but this is the internet age and the competition could be moving circles around them.
if i'm a vendor or what ever, all i care about is a stable api for the time being. i need something that i can code/integrate to NOW so I can have a product in a few months. by that time the standards compliance thing could be all worked out and I'll know that i can plop 1.2.5 into all the work i've done.
they claim to want to have the best standards compliance among compeditors. first, who are the competition? all browsers? all free (beer) browsers? all open source browsers? secondly, why such a need for the standards compliance? in the past (and still currently afaik), browsers were build on loose compliance, and extending the standards to where they see the standards going into the future (css).
.x releases of mozilla almost every month. Won't we expect to have .x releases every month after the 1.0 release? maybe every other month?
:)
on a side note, it is good to see them put a loose timeframe on the release. their schedule has mozilla 1.0 in about 6 months, so we should expect it in about 9 realistically (sp). I can see their desire to want to lock down api's for a while on the 1.x version. We're seeing
all i want for christmas is a one point oh, a one point oh, a one point oh...
can it be the ./ effect already? i'm getting "unable to connect to SQL server" when going to the article ...
i'm not familiar with that. i tried to install kde from solaris binaries off kde's site onto an ultra-5 box, and it didn't work at all. i ended up grabbing source for gt and kde, build, and install, and it works great! i noticed that it takes _forever_ to compile kde on an ultra-5 box.
i had thought it was the patented mp3 format that was the core issue, not exactly the quality of the playback? i've ripped using ogg and mp3, and really can't tell a difference in quality using my 15$ speakers or headphones along with the onboard sound chip. i default to now encoding everything into ogg format just because, from what i understand, the encoding is not patented like the mp3 format. i would speculate that we'll see ogg players on the market in the near future. when that happens, then maybe i'll buy one. till then, i'm stuck using my pc to play the encoded music.
can you explain why you think the idea (let alone the man) is stupid? you call it insanity and compare the idea to pulling money from tobacco to pay for health costs, but I don't exactly see your reasoning why it's a bad idea?
i personally think it's a good idea, and i'll tell you why. if a person does damage to another person or their property, they should be responsible to replace or repair the damages (along with other penalties depending upon the crime). say i go and loot a few houses. along with the jail time i should expect to recieve for that crime, i should also be held accountable for the items i stole. in the same manner, if a corporation has committed a crime against another via it's anti-competitive, they should be reponsible to undo that damage. specifically, it was noted in the microsoft trial that they used anti-competitive practices twords netscape. i think they should have to pay a large sum of money to netscape to get it back into the browser business (mainstream). i also believe that it was pointed out during the trial that MS wouldn't allow OEM's to install alternative operating systems (OS/2, linux, whatever). they should then also kick some cash to some of those os distributors (RedHat, IBM, and others).
and yes, this is slashdot.
seems to have been frixed now. i think it's more of a dialect thing. somehow, some americans tend to want that extra syllable on there. there's an unusual break between the syllables in the word "athlon"
this has been said again and again. ms source is already open to anyone with a large checkbook. you can buy the source from them (although i'm sure there's a STRICT nda to sigh), and then they'll give you NO support for it (you've got the sources right). should a company be required to release openly all it's source code? i would think no more than a digital cable company who has a monopoly in a certain area should release the compression algoithms used for their channels. shouldn't anyone be able to build a box to decode those digital signals?
how about as an alternative, impose a LARGE fine which will go to competitors (that's who was ultimately hurt here right?), as well as strict rules that they can't do the anti-competitive practices (allow oem's to install other browsers customize os, etc).
these "average" users i keep hearing about probably are on their first or maybe even their second, really don't care much if there's alternative software they can use. do most people care much that the tires on their spanking new car are probably 25k mile tires that wal-mart won't even sell? just sign the papers, and let me drive it.
i agree totally. the article is horrible. how can they say that a normal user doesn't understand what right clicking on a file is? if you can't figure that one out, you probably should not be on the mouse/keyboard. i would think that by putting the functionality right there on the right click pop-up, that's about as down to earth as you can get.
kde includes these file type associations by default. i wonder what happens when i click on a file of type "html" in the kde file manager (aka konqueror)? does mozilla open the file? oh yeah, i keep forgetting... it's Microsoft the big monopoly and they get to play by a different set of rules.
because right now they're creating the core technologies that will be used for the future processors. they know (from past experience i would assume) that it's going to take them 6 years to get this chip to production and out to the masses.
how is it implied that .com is an american domain? or .net .org .edu .gov for that matter?
we own the net?
what makes yahoo.com an american domain? because it's "owned" by an american based company? doesn't yahoo have presense in lots of other countries?
.us or .au specific domain. even then, there would have to be government restrictions to regulate the traffic for those domains to keep it within the country. once a domain's traffic enters a particular country, they have to play by their laws and rules don't they? (yahoo - france - selling nazi stuff).
anyway, i don't see how a domain name could be country based unless it's a
i'm not an advocate for government regulation of the internet at all, but i do think that it's certainly possible to happen. governments regulate all other forms of publishing and commerce. if i'm publishing a kiddie pr0n mag, i can't just go around distributing it anywhere. i probably can't even get it published just anywhere. if i'm trucking a load of marijuana from one country where it's legal, to another that's legal, i can't really go _through_ another country where it's not legal.
yep, i've heard of it. i'm not actually the engineer (so please correct me if i'm misled), but my understanding is that these chips store software. that's not exactly going with the original author's idea of implementing the desktop via hardware.
:)
i'm still a little skeptical on the idea. would a hardware implementation of a desktop kinda lock a user into one monitor/display unit? I guess that could be just a "setting" that's stored on one of these nifty EEPROM's
that's definately an interesting idea, but how would you propose to handle upgrades?
also, that much of a integration of hw/sw seems a little scary to me. now all the sudden, all the other software i run on my box is dependant on this desktop chip i have on my machine.with the costs of hardware these days, i just don't see a practical need to move this stuff out of the RAM/core CPU area. Enough system ram for one of these desktops costs less than a few days lunch, and those athlon t-birds... well, they're just c00l to have heating up the place :)!
i gotta say getting DRI, OpenGL, SDL or whatever working on a linux box does not seem as easy as applying some directx patch MS puts out. i've got an ATI AIW 128 32MB AGP card, and it goes something like this: build and install XFree86 4.1.0 from source (this gets the games working ok), next, build and install ati.2 drivers from the wonderfull livid folks. this gets xawtv working. build a new kernel, install kde, any system changes, (move your mouse the wrong way), and rebuild and re-install them all again. don't get me wrong, once it's installed and working, it works great (i wish i had the ability to record the xawtv streams to avi files), but getting it up seems to have a STEEP learning curve.
i totally agree! my point was just that i thought it wasn't the bundling that got ms in trouble but the anti-competitive practices they used.
i agree that most of the drug paraphernalia isn't commonly used for legal purposes (probably the same as the dvd ripping software, like you're not going to snag a copy of your buddies dvd either, right?), but there are legal uses. roll your own cigaretts, you need those rolling papers. smoke your tobacco out of a pipe, probably want a few screens and a new pipe every now and then. now, a 6 ft. plastic/glass water pipe... i think that's got to be a point where you say "wait a second there... you're not stuffing tobacco in that thing"
i just think it's really funny that the actual intent of the sale is what's regulated and not just the items.
i thought it was more the fact that non os essential application couldn't be uninstalled (IE), and that they wouldn't allow vendors to ship with alternative software to what they provided (NS). all the big linux players bundle as much as possible into their distributions, some of the same functionality that MS is finally providing has been IN the linux kernel for a long time (firewall, ICS). i think one of the major differences is that with a linux system it's totally customizeable and ALL the interfaces are freely (beer) available.
it does sound like the same old song and dance though. someone posted that messenger isn't able to be uninstalled