Well, I already use a desktop monitor with my notebook, so that isn't a problem.
But the previous poster hinted that there was some other reason it wouldn't work. Any idea what that is?
If it really does simulate a PCI bus, games should be able to autosense the graphics card on the docking desktop and bypass the notebook's internal graphics subsytem. Yes?
Most laptops don't have decent graphics cards or 3D accelerators. With this you could add a nVida or 3dfx card, just as you would with a desktop. My notebook is my only computer, so a solution like this is the only way I can play most modern games.
One way or another this was going to stretch out for years, given the realities of the legal system. As the last trial proved, the technical complexities are beyond most court's ability to fully comprehend, forcing them to rely on relatively misleading evidence such as out-of-context emails (on both sides), slanted expert testimony, and the impression of honest or lack thereof the judge gets from the testimony of high-tech execs.
I'm all for a breathing period to pull together reasonable, comprehendible cases if it will lead to an informed decision by the court. Regardless of which way the decision goes, the last thing we want is another vulnerable-to-appeal misfire like Jackson's.
Quietly encouraging piracy of your products in these markets makes perfect sense.
Interesting theory, but unfortunately false. I've just returned to the US after three years in China. Microsoft has a team of lawyers and investigators working full time cracking down on piracy--with more sucess than most. Indeed, they're by far the most agressive anti-piracy bunch in the region, doing a lot more than other manufacturers of frequently-pirated stuff, like Polo shirts, Rolex watches and Hello Kitty.
Are there any examples of something that we can prove flourished through piracy?
Excellent question. There are plenty of examples of thing that flourished (ie, were made commercialy sucessful) though unpaid copying, such as Doom and other demoware, but that's different.
The previous posters' examples of Windows and Office are clearly bogus. Piracy not why those two suceeded; indeed, most of the piracy is in the developing world (China, esp) and of foreign-language versions.
How about Photoshop? That's got to be one of the most pirated apps out there.
The real answer, however, is that piracy helps PC sales, but doesn't do much for the software being pirated.
Sorry, that's a telecommunications network, not a software app. Most telecoms networks have the capability to be tapped under court order; indeed, Globalstar would be one of the few exceptions if it didn't.
The allegation here was independent software apps (predictably, everyone immediately mentioned Microsoft) had such backdoors. I'm challenging them to provide any example of that.
That's comic. So they're alleging that software *bought from* the justice department might have a possible backdoor that the justice department could access? Please. Not only has no evidence turned up (did the mounties drop the investigation?), but even if it did, that would be neither very surprising nor what this thread is about. The allegation here is that commercial software from independent software firm (even possibly the scary evil empire itself, whooo) contain such a backdoor.
As a journalist, I can tell you that this smells as fishy as they come. I say the guy's a self-promoter hyping himself by exploiting paranoia. If he's brave (and informed) enough to go public with this kind of imflammatory charge, he should be brave and informed enough to be able to name a single app that has such a backdoor (and, no, Carnivore doesn't count. Sheesh!).
Actually, it makes more sense when you realize that he didn't want to mess too much with the original circuitry. Obviously the ideal situation would be to take the picture data straight from screen memory and run it through a LCD driver chip and then straight to the TFT. But if you're going to stick with the Atari's composite out, then you need analog video circuitry to get it back into digital. That, indeed, is the (non RF) core of a pocket TV, so it's not just the screen he's using..
The intro says an old Casio, but it looks new to me. It appears that he actually bought one just for the screen, throwing out the rest. There's got to be a cheaper way to get small TFTs.
Slightly busted. Microsoft's only the second-largest *PC* game publisher, according to PC Data (click on "more lists" and checkbox your way down to PC game software). Microsoft doesn't publish for consoles.
Given that xbox is a hybrid of a PC and a console, I don't really know which market is most relevent in establishing Microsoft's brand. But they are indeed huge, even in games, as I hope I've proven.
Uh, I'm actually writing from Tokyo, on my way to Hong Kong, where I live. And I didn't say Sony wasn't huge, I just said (or rather, I cited those who actually know this stuff) Microsoft was even more huge.
Why doesn't someone cite the *evidence* to the contrary, rather than just blowing wind?
Uh, no. Just the hour a week I leave them to romp around the library while I read. Any you try explaining to a three year old (or even a seven year old) what porn is and why they shouldn't be very, very upset by it.
Your company's webmail policy makes no sense, but I suppose you already knew that. How do they stop you? There are literally hundreds of free webmail sites.
Exactly. I let my kids use the libraries without close supervision because I know that there won't be some teenager downloading porn. It's my taxpayer dollars they're using, and that kind of controlled Internet access is exactly what I want them to provide.
And since when can you not access email through a browser?
Fair enough. But could you please follow the link in my original post? Sony isn't #2, Microsoft is. And that's not just computer related circles, it's overall brand recognition.
You got a better source than Interbrand for your claim? Post the link.
How are games not part of "computer related circles"? Before the PSX came out, nobody would have ranked Sony above Microsoft in terms of *relevent* brand power in this market.
The point is not whether Sony will roll over or not, it's whether Microsoft has what it takes to reach critical mass with a game console. And my answer is that if they execute well, there's no reason why they can't suceed. They have all the necessary ingredients: brand, technology, money, experience and motivation. And sorry to break it to the evil-empire contigent, but so far they seem to be doing everything right.
Actually, Sony is not the second most-widely known brand in the world: Microsoft is. Microsoft's also the world's second largest game publisher. So what was your point again?
I always thought Brewster's neatest trick was getting his company this amazing space in San Francisco's leafy and spacious retired military base, the Presidio. It was reserved for non-profit firms, so he said that Alexa was archiving the web. Then, lo and behold, he found some commerical application of that library (does anyone actually use that "context" bar thing?) and sold the company to Amazon for a bazillion dollars. And kept his space!
Look, this isn't about WML vs c-HTML or some other matter of arcane standards preference. It's about circuit-switiched vs packet-switched. Which is like the difference between a batch-mode mainframe and an interactive PC. Or DSL vs a dial-up modem. It's no contest which is going to be the most popular with consumers and the most effective overall. It's the persistance of the connection that makes all the difference, not the data standard.
WAP is just a kludge to make the most out of our terrible circuit-switched wireless infrastructure. If we had widespread packet-based networks that could handle voice *and* data (ie, not Metricom, et al) we wouldn't be having this discussion.
But we don't have those networks. And if the FCC doesn't get it's act together and kick the UHF channels of the spectrum, we won't for years to come.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I already use a desktop monitor with my notebook, so that isn't a problem.
But the previous poster hinted that there was some other reason it wouldn't work. Any idea what that is?
If it really does simulate a PCI bus, games should be able to autosense the graphics card on the docking desktop and bypass the notebook's internal graphics subsytem. Yes?
Most laptops don't have decent graphics cards or 3D accelerators. With this you could add a nVida or 3dfx card, just as you would with a desktop. My notebook is my only computer, so a solution like this is the only way I can play most modern games.
One way or another this was going to stretch out for years, given the realities of the legal system. As the last trial proved, the technical complexities are beyond most court's ability to fully comprehend, forcing them to rely on relatively misleading evidence such as out-of-context emails (on both sides), slanted expert testimony, and the impression of honest or lack thereof the judge gets from the testimony of high-tech execs.
I'm all for a breathing period to pull together reasonable, comprehendible cases if it will lead to an informed decision by the court. Regardless of which way the decision goes, the last thing we want is another vulnerable-to-appeal misfire like Jackson's.
Quietly encouraging piracy of your products in these markets makes perfect sense.
Interesting theory, but unfortunately false. I've just returned to the US after three years in China. Microsoft has a team of lawyers and investigators working full time cracking down on piracy--with more sucess than most. Indeed, they're by far the most agressive anti-piracy bunch in the region, doing a lot more than other manufacturers of frequently-pirated stuff, like Polo shirts, Rolex watches and Hello Kitty.
Are there any examples of something that we can prove flourished through piracy?
Excellent question. There are plenty of examples of thing that flourished (ie, were made commercialy sucessful) though unpaid copying, such as Doom and other demoware, but that's different. The previous posters' examples of Windows and Office are clearly bogus. Piracy not why those two suceeded; indeed, most of the piracy is in the developing world (China, esp) and of foreign-language versions. How about Photoshop? That's got to be one of the most pirated apps out there.
The real answer, however, is that piracy helps PC sales, but doesn't do much for the software being pirated.
"Ambitious", even "over-ambitious"?
or, given the tenor of the response, "foolish".
Sorry, that's a telecommunications network, not a software app. Most telecoms networks have the capability to be tapped under court order; indeed, Globalstar would be one of the few exceptions if it didn't.
The allegation here was independent software apps (predictably, everyone immediately mentioned Microsoft) had such backdoors. I'm challenging them to provide any example of that.
That's comic. So they're alleging that software *bought from* the justice department might have a possible backdoor that the justice department could access? Please. Not only has no evidence turned up (did the mounties drop the investigation?), but even if it did, that would be neither very surprising nor what this thread is about. The allegation here is that commercial software from independent software firm (even possibly the scary evil empire itself, whooo) contain such a backdoor.
I repeat: prove it.
Yeah, there are a lot of errors in the article. One other that I noticed: the Dreamast doesn't crank 200 polygons/sec. More like 20m.
As a journalist, I can tell you that this smells as fishy as they come. I say the guy's a self-promoter hyping himself by exploiting paranoia. If he's brave (and informed) enough to go public with this kind of imflammatory charge, he should be brave and informed enough to be able to name a single app that has such a backdoor (and, no, Carnivore doesn't count. Sheesh!).
I'll call him on it. Name 'em or shut up.
Well, yes, thirty years ago that was true. But these days billion in the UK means the same as billion here. So it's back to $113.
Actually, it makes more sense when you realize that he didn't want to mess too much with the original circuitry. Obviously the ideal situation would be to take the picture data straight from screen memory and run it through a LCD driver chip and then straight to the TFT. But if you're going to stick with the Atari's composite out, then you need analog video circuitry to get it back into digital. That, indeed, is the (non RF) core of a pocket TV, so it's not just the screen he's using..
It's a children's library. They're *supposed* to romp around.
Actually he didn't, the story submitter did. And this page shows what appears to be the new box the Casio came in.
The intro says an old Casio, but it looks new to me. It appears that he actually bought one just for the screen, throwing out the rest. There's got to be a cheaper way to get small TFTs.
(sorry, repeat post: crappy /. servers!)
Slightly busted. Microsoft's only the second-largest *PC* game publisher, according to PC Data (click on "more lists" and checkbox your way down to PC game software). Microsoft doesn't publish for consoles.
Given that xbox is a hybrid of a PC and a console, I don't really know which market is most relevent in establishing Microsoft's brand. But they are indeed huge, even in games, as I hope I've proven.
Uh, I'm actually writing from Tokyo, on my way to Hong Kong, where I live. And I didn't say Sony wasn't huge, I just said (or rather, I cited those who actually know this stuff) Microsoft was even more huge.
Why doesn't someone cite the *evidence* to the contrary, rather than just blowing wind?
Uh, no. Just the hour a week I leave them to romp around the library while I read. Any you try explaining to a three year old (or even a seven year old) what porn is and why they shouldn't be very, very upset by it.
Your company's webmail policy makes no sense, but I suppose you already knew that. How do they stop you? There are literally hundreds of free webmail sites.
Exactly. I let my kids use the libraries without close supervision because I know that there won't be some teenager downloading porn. It's my taxpayer dollars they're using, and that kind of controlled Internet access is exactly what I want them to provide.
And since when can you not access email through a browser?
Fair enough. But could you please follow the link in my original post? Sony isn't #2, Microsoft is. And that's not just computer related circles, it's overall brand recognition.
You got a better source than Interbrand for your claim? Post the link.
How are games not part of "computer related circles"? Before the PSX came out, nobody would have ranked Sony above Microsoft in terms of *relevent* brand power in this market.
The point is not whether Sony will roll over or not, it's whether Microsoft has what it takes to reach critical mass with a game console. And my answer is that if they execute well, there's no reason why they can't suceed. They have all the necessary ingredients: brand, technology, money, experience and motivation. And sorry to break it to the evil-empire contigent, but so far they seem to be doing everything right.
Sorry to break up your rituous rant, but the parent was *sarcasm*. The P Naughton bit should have tipped you off.
Actually, Sony is not the second most-widely known brand in the world: Microsoft is. Microsoft's also the world's second largest game publisher. So what was your point again?
I always thought Brewster's neatest trick was getting his company this amazing space in San Francisco's leafy and spacious retired military base, the Presidio. It was reserved for non-profit firms, so he said that Alexa was archiving the web. Then, lo and behold, he found some commerical application of that library (does anyone actually use that "context" bar thing?) and sold the company to Amazon for a bazillion dollars. And kept his space!
Look, this isn't about WML vs c-HTML or some other matter of arcane standards preference. It's about circuit-switiched vs packet-switched. Which is like the difference between a batch-mode mainframe and an interactive PC. Or DSL vs a dial-up modem. It's no contest which is going to be the most popular with consumers and the most effective overall. It's the persistance of the connection that makes all the difference, not the data standard.
WAP is just a kludge to make the most out of our terrible circuit-switched wireless infrastructure. If we had widespread packet-based networks that could handle voice *and* data (ie, not Metricom, et al) we wouldn't be having this discussion.
But we don't have those networks. And if the FCC doesn't get it's act together and kick the UHF channels of the spectrum, we won't for years to come.