How will sun sell hardware? This question demonstrates that the poster has no understanding of the difference between server hardware and PC hardware.
This is not a choice between a Ultra 2 processor and a Celeron, and IDE or a SCSI, but a different raison d'etre for the hardware. The closest thing that Intel has is the Xeon which does not scale well, has too little cache, and is still prohibitively expensive. Alpha's are nice, but good Alpha systems cost just about as much as good Sun stations.
I work on a 10 year old Sparc Station, and it runs better than my 3 year old PC. I have an old dinosaur that runs Sun OS 3.5 on a Motorolla chip that powered the Mac IIfx and IIci. (Where are those Mac's now? Doorstops for the server room.) The Dinosaur acts as an application server for 10 graphic artists in advertising production. It's probably 15-20 years old and has 8 MB of RAM. Whay haven't we replaced it?? We haven't found anything better.
Sun may be expensive, but for the 3-5K you'll spend for their workstations, you really cant do better. (Well, there's the SGI O2 servers... Dear Santa,)
Sun has it's troubles as do all hardware vendors nowadays, but to think that Intel would pose a threat to their high end server business just because of OS is ludicrous.
The question is one of control. What happens when Joe Small Band offers mp3's on his site for promo purposes and he get's a letter saying "You owe us $20,000 for use of our compression format." If the implication made about Fudgehopper and the RIAA holds true, this could be used to squeeze the indies and guarantee that music production and distribution stay in the hands of the mega-corporations.
This is just one scenario of many. The fact that Vorbis is available will keep their actions in check. (Similar to the concept that the existance of Debian keeps the other Linux distros in check.)
Well, the truth is that for what we pay, and this is the pay that they base TCO's on, we get techs of comparable experience. Are you suggesting that our HR department be better? If so, this has to be figured into TCO.
People are lazy. The defense for HR when they hire an incompetent is "Well, he was an MCSE...".
I work in a backward industry for a company that does not have the resources or savvy to only get the best... There are companies around here that have much better pay and benefits and they get the best techs. But I'm also sure that many companies are the same.
Perhaps I should say that a "Unix Professional" is generally of a higher caliber than an "NT professional" of like station. I'm not sure that this is my point.
The point is that the media will have you believe that the cost to maintain a *nix is prohibitive. This is not the case. The cost to run an IT infrastructure depends on your ability to recruit able staffers which is something that every department has trouble with at every business.
The current cookie cutter become an NT professional in 2 weeks system will be the downfall of NT much as it would be if a similar program was started for Linux, Solaris, etc... The testing for an MCSE is based more around knowing the new features than knowing how to operate a server.
I got my MCSE about 3 years ago, and will not update for 2000. The certification has been made a mockery of by the company that is supposed to guarantee it's sanctity.
I'm not looking for sympathy, only refuting the too often touted TCO that always gets tossed into the fray by journalists that make assinine comments like this one. And our companies hiring policies are the very same ones that hired our *nix group. Why the disparity? Even in management, they were hired to manage.
But hey, if the sucess of our *nix group is due to good training and management, I accept the compliment.:)
I've thought about similar things, but the reality of it is that by the time you were big enough to notice, you could talk to several different companies that provide this service and set up a means to achieve it.
Also by that point you could use your own system and make the stations responsable for updating. No update, no view...
Do you not have a PHB?? Is your company one of the fabled and enlightened?
Our company thinks that NT is where it's at... They even tried to force our Graphic Artists off of their MAC's... (Fortunately for them, our NT admins couldn't get the program icons to come up for all users... Now they use 95. And their new MAc's...)
~Hammy
P.S., If your company really doesn't have their heads up their arses, are they hiring??
True, I too often say C: drive instead of system drive. I'm too used to thinking root partition, and C: drive equates to root partition in my brain....
(Always found the C:, D: thing a bit clumsy anyhoo...)
Yes, it is stupid. You cannot get to the C: drive to fix data corruption with a normal boot disk as with FAT. Especially on print servers where this eems to happen all too often... Ever see the message "Cannot find NTOSKRN.VXD"...
The only reason to configure the system drive on an NT machine as NTFS is if it contains sensitive data that you would not want accessed by a boot disk. But then you would also most likely argue that it should be NTFS on RAID 5....
But then some folks don't mind wasting 500 MB of disk space for their "Paralell Install" of NT...
Your responding to this negates your lame dig at the end.
~Hammy
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people with 90% market share"
P.S. The point of the thing is that print servers are trivial.
Ok, I've heard just about enough of all of the TCO nonsense.
When people talk about the higher price of kepping Linux maintained, this makes me cringe. Low-level NT techs are not much cheaper to hire, they generally got their MCSE from a 2 week cram course that did not cover Event Viewer, and do stupid things like put an NTFS C: drive on a print server.
Low-level linux techs on the other hand are generally people who like to tinker with computers (that's why they got linux in the first place), learned their skills from trying to get work done on their computer, and do stupid things like over-partitioning their hard drives.
The last three MCSE's that our companies hired honestly did not know what Event Viewer was. Mind you, we are not one of the better paying industries, but... We have also hired in an ex-photographer who was learning Linux, after 2 years he is one of our best employees. (And one of our better NT techs)
The hidden cost of deploying NT is the cost of hiring unqualified people to maintain it. We have almost three times the staffing for NT as we do for *nix and NT is used as a file server and print server only. Unix does DB hosting, app hosting, achiving, etc.... We have 34 more *nix servers than NT servers as well. Three times the staffing.... *sigh*
The sad truth is that our *nix department experiences better uptime by far, is better run, is better documented, and runs for less doing more. Our NT department always looks busy at least... when they're not over here asking us to take a look at something.
~Hammy
"Windows 2000, based on NT technology"
NT = New Technology (really)
"Windows 2000, based on new technology technology"
So bloated they have to say technology twice!
The plain old fact of it is that Linux has really bad game support now. Look at Terminus, which was recently released. The joystick support in Linux cannot support many digital sticks, and you want a digital stick for space sims. This is not a knock, but a fact. Not to mention the inherent difficulty involved in installation, etc...
On a dual boot machine the choice was a no-brainer, as I own a joystick that is not Linux supported, I ended up buying the Win32 version. Yes, it broke my heart, but...
Same with many of the upcoming Linux games, Alpha Centauri?? Own it already... Heroes III, 49.99 for Linux, 19.95 for Windows. And I own it already.
Linux still has a long way to go in this market, but I'm not really certain that this is the direction we need to go. Our kernel (at least for the time being) is still structured around reliability, and until we have hardware manufacturers writing Linux drivers, we will always be playing catch-up with the win32 platform.
Anyway, am I the only one who read the line "The best workstation and the best platform were one and the same?" This would have started a flame war had it not been said by Carmack....
Q:) You want to do a streaming video presentation that is accessible to linux users. (Remembering that we have a 30%-40% user base that can't install it if it didn't come on the Red Hat CD...) What format would you use??
I agree that real sucks, but until there is a good alternative, what do you suggest? And I would also like to point out that in the early days of Linux, Real Player and Real Server were among the first commercial apps available for Linux, adding to our market acceptance.
--------------------------------------
I also think that any talk that is presented on the web should also have a transcript available, and slides. Mostly for the reason that it would be more accessible, and secondly for the users behind a corporate firewall that have Real access disabled. (Like here... 500 users and one T-1, no streaming media for you monkey boy....)
I will now have to get to it tomorrow. But, the/. effect won't be as bad tomorrow either.
~HamNRye
"Burned by the fire we make, what a shame."
Wow! Real Player started firing up and my lavaps was just one big green blob....
I would now like to tender my apologies to Netscape and Star Office. I had no earthly idea that such a small app could rival them for making a huge sucking sound....
Actually, at the prices good computer speakers go for nowadays, I get the little bookshelf stereos and hook them up. At $200, they're pricey, but less than the Bose acoustimass....
Add ihn the Auto DJ feature or a good playlist, it's better than a CD player at parties....
The judge in this case is not given a responsibility to decidde ethics, only law. Our current law does not recognize the ethical value of destroying large corporations...
In smaller cases, internet copyright infringement has already shut down smaller businesses. And the RIAA's entire point is that people are downloading songs/albums that they would have bought otherwise. That is the issue that the judge must rule on.
Fair use does not permit you to copy an entire work. Read "The letter U and the numeral 2: Fair Use and copyright." by the band Negativland. Tone Loc was sued by Van Halen for the use of a guitar riff from "Jamie's Crying". Just a riff! Not the whole song.
But it looks as though we might as well be debating the existance of God...
Another thing that interests me is the fact that intent is considered, quite explicitly, by Patel. I didn?t realize that the intent of the creators of a device could have such a large part to play in the legal fate of that device. If Napster had been created in all innocence of infringement issues, would it have a stronger defense?
Gosh, that seems pretty reasonable to me... The issue that we're debating is not the legality etc..., but the state of the injunction. Since their primary intent and raison'd'etre is music piracy, should the site be shut down while we consider the legality of this? Yes. If their primary intent and business was the sharing of (non-copyrighted) cookie recipes, can you justify the shutting down of the entire site?? They are not being blamed for an unexpected side effect, or unintentional use, but for designing and promoting a tool to be used for theft. From your comment it would seem you are not a total stranger to law, isn't this considered "malice and forethought"??
At this point I would like to point out that I refer to it as theft because that is what it is under modern law.
Judges are taught to observe the "Letter of Law" as well as the "Spirit of Law", IMHO, Napster has definitely violated the letter of the law, [All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication, hiring, lending public performance, and broadcasting is a violation of applicable laws.] and is treading a fine line with the spirit of the law. By conservative we mean to say she more closely observes the letter of the law, as opposed to the spirit of the law. Napster is trying to turn this in to a debate of copyright laws, but in reality they are simply trying to profit from an illegal trade. (Isn't that the CIA's job??)
The point is that they tread shaky legal ground in this arena and they have the audacity to tease the lions. If you reverse engineer a program to figure out why it crashes your system is that different than doing it to sell a "pirated" version?? I do believe so. What happened with Napster was not an unexpected consequence, but the design and purpose of the system.
Why do we love the laws against spam and rail against the laws against theft? I guess that we're just not the victims.....
Perhaps we should just phrase it "All technology is good except that which can be used to spy on or annoy me. If the technology harms a large enough corporation it's even better."
That "bong" is spelled 'bhong' just for starters, and were designed in times when cannabis was legal. And furthermore, their primary use is for the smoking of tabac and other herbal smoking mixes. Also, in many places and states the selling of bhongs is illegal as well as possession. Here in Richmond, owning a bhong is punishable by a $500 fine. Used or not used.
The one inch square bags are also excellent for the storage of various herbs etc...
But the debate rages in another direction:
Napster from it's initiation was designed for the piracy of music, advertised itself as "The Place" to steal music, and then covered their pages and FAQ's with lines about how the recording industry can't stop them etc...
If ziplock baggies had a big starburst on the front of the package stating "Now keeps Pot 30% fresher!" and had a logo of a little Joint hanging out in his ziplock "pad", they'd probably run into some problems with the law.
Slim Jim's are not advertised as "The quickest way to Drive Off your Dream Car", neither are Paper Clips advertised for picking locks on desks, coffee filters are not advertised as the best hash filter you'll find. Even the darn horoscopes in 7-11 are not audacious enough to advertise "Glass Case makes ideal crack pipe!".
Anything can be used to commit a crime in one way or another but they do not advertise them as such because they realize that there will be repercussions. Why did Napster take off while Gnutella has lingered in the "What's that?" bin?? Because they not only based their service around the theft, they provided easy to follow instructions and tech support. That does make them accomplices.
Look at L0phtcrack... Is that advertised as the latest greatest hacking utility?? Do they have instructions for attaching to port 139 and getting the Sam DB?? No, it is a security utility for checking your own orginizations passwords. (So they say... L0phtcrack and NetBus are the best computer programs since grep and more...)
The real truth of this is that a nation of shoplifters are mad at the security guard for busting them. I bet alot of the same people bitch about not getting paid for shareware, etc... (The rest either have no thoughts worth stealing [i.e. 99.9% of the world] or believe in free software and wonder if some big company is stealing from his code.) Even those in the last category should frown on Napster for the way they "protect" copyrights etc...
If Napster had tried to copyright "A file sharing system based on a database of user files across the internet" this forum would be full of rabid protest. Now it's just a bunch of kids who don't want their cookie jar taken away.
The problem with Napster is not function, but form.
~Jason
Put an end to the post office! That's who delivers my seeds! http://www.hempqc.com
While I applaud the gumption of the guy that wants to do this, I gotta rant...
I want non-bloated software that works. Everytime I start a new word processor it takes longer than the one I had last year. The same for web-browser, text editor, or any other damn thing.
The reason is that most of these programs are loaded down with useless features, inappropriate features, and just plain BS. I don't want a browser that will manage my "net life" but can't remember the passwords for my p0rn sites.
I have been using linux since 95, and the only thing to change is my text editor. Pico, coral, kwrite... I have Star Office installed just for the purpose of converting MS word docs. And that takes to #$%^& long.
Give me a browser that comes up in under 10 seconds, doesn't mind getting keyboard input, and doesn't ask me if I want to open my Url in composer or communicator. (If I wanted the damn file to open in composer I would be using composer already!)
The only bright star in the sky... Opera for Linux...
HamNDie
This message interrupted by a browser cra....
Suse is a fav distro b'cuz...
on
SuSE 7.0
·
· Score: 2
I have been using SUSE for years now. (My first was a Suse 5.1 Box, replaced my Ydgrassil distro) and I have found that it has the most complete selection of packages of any distro. And considering I run a LUG and get the software free (most times) that becomes very important. After using Suse so long I wonder how the other Distro's get by with 1 or 2 cd's....
This is really not surprising, the processor wars have had their casualties in the marketplace. With the competition drivi9ng hardware prices down, you would think that this would be the best time to buy/build a new PC. But with the problems encountered with the high end PIII, and the Slot A, no wait, Socket A, no wait, Fonzie says "Aaaayy..", this is undoubtedly the worst time.
Both companies are far more interested in getting a product out the door, and not interested in getting a working product out the door. The result of this could be interesting to watch.
My guess is that the end result will just add to a growing contempt for the multipurpose PC adding to the appeal of small embedded devices. (Unless the small embedded devices try to go the same route...) As we know, all of these races to be first usually signal the death knoll for at least one of the companies involved, if not both.
End analysis? My next PC purchase will be after the market calms down, which may be never. If all else fails, we might have to go with "OSH", Open Source Hardware...
HamNRye "My only hope is that they don't breed..." -Said about "pet" penguins that have escaped or been abandoned by their owners.
Well, If you will read at the bottom of my post, DMA is turned on for the numbers I posted. The numbers would have been much closer, but I was playing MP3's at the time. They're is still a 1.5 second difference today with no MP3's playing.
Could be something wierdwith this PC, but that's the straight scoop from here.
Well, DAT tapes are still hopelessly crippled to this very day, with the recording undustry getting money for each one sold to cover the cost of "piracy". True, the RIAA has won some of the battles, but like a parasite, tends to kill its host. But I wonder to what extent?? The RIAA still gets a bit of revenue for every DAT sold, whether it is for computer backup, studio use, or otherwise.
How long can the hardware manufacturers keep this up?? The R&D is considerable, and then the RIAA comes through and makes these devices unattractive to consumers. Yes, people want to record music, and most of them for non-illegal reasons. I have ripped my CD collection to MP3 so I can keep a copy at work without having to lug around the CD's and damage them. I never have the song playing more than once at a time, etc...
Also, record and movie sales are boosted by the availability of new technology. Just thinking of all of the old vinyl that I have replaced with CD's over the last 5 years makes me cringe. With DVD as a new "standard", many VHS movie buffs will have to have "Army of Darkness" on DVD now.
What the RIAA is looking for is not a preservation of their time-worn business model, but revamping of their buisness model. Not only the control of the medium, but the use of the medium.
The belief that we as consumers will pay $300 for a machine, $10 for a disk, and $4 per view is insane. However, people do it all the time. The DVD's will still be laden with commercials and product placement, and the companies will make money each time you play a movie or DVD.
The only benefit over the above scenario is that the companies are trying to do away with the physical medium, i.e. the $10 disk. In their world, the disk would be replaced by your net connection, but the price per view is $8 per. They defend this pricing by saying that more than one person could be watching at a time, hence it's still a bargain...
Our entertainment industries are clearly out of hand, and the forecast is grimmer for the future.
Well, the fact of it is this. Windows NT, of which Win 2000 is a descendent, officially began as a joint project between IBM and MS in (I believe) 1988. When the project fell apart, IBM had OS/2 and MS had WinNT. This is one example. Win95 still uses alot of old DOS legacy code and hence is even older. If you wish to compare them by basis of Version number, Win 95, 98, etc... Then Linux still loses. Our Kernel 2.0 could be considered to coincide with Win95, and 2.2 with Win 98. I know that this is a poor comparison, but your comparison of Win 2000 as a "new" OS and Linux as an "old" OS is similarily flawed.
If indeed Win 2000 is a new kid on the block, I would have to congratulate M$ on the ability to put out such a good OS in such a short amount of time. As it stands, they have had at least 3 years more to come up with something that they have to run flawed benchmarks on to compete with a "new" OS.
Also, a comparison between the original 1991 Linux and the modern OS is a crock. I believe that Linus' own words were "It could run GCC and sh, and that was about it" (paraphrased, I don't feel like looking it up.)
If we keep bellowing the cry that Linux is so much older, it undermines the power of Open Source. Also, in a few years, M$ will be yacking about why use something "old" like Linux when we have the newer, better Win2003! Microsoft FUD has alredy gone in that direction with their criticism of *nix and it's derivitaves.
Are we new?? You bet ya! (And M$ is the one that's lemon scented.)
Slashdot Mirror
How will sun sell hardware? This question demonstrates that the poster has no understanding of the difference between server hardware and PC hardware.
This is not a choice between a Ultra 2 processor and a Celeron, and IDE or a SCSI, but a different raison d'etre for the hardware. The closest thing that Intel has is the Xeon which does not scale well, has too little cache, and is still prohibitively expensive. Alpha's are nice, but good Alpha systems cost just about as much as good Sun stations.
I work on a 10 year old Sparc Station, and it runs better than my 3 year old PC. I have an old dinosaur that runs Sun OS 3.5 on a Motorolla chip that powered the Mac IIfx and IIci. (Where are those Mac's now? Doorstops for the server room.) The Dinosaur acts as an application server for 10 graphic artists in advertising production. It's probably 15-20 years old and has 8 MB of RAM. Whay haven't we replaced it?? We haven't found anything better.
Sun may be expensive, but for the 3-5K you'll spend for their workstations, you really cant do better. (Well, there's the SGI O2 servers... Dear Santa,)
Sun has it's troubles as do all hardware vendors nowadays, but to think that Intel would pose a threat to their high end server business just because of OS is ludicrous.
~Hammy
The question is one of control. What happens when Joe Small Band offers mp3's on his site for promo purposes and he get's a letter saying "You owe us $20,000 for use of our compression format." If the implication made about Fudgehopper and the RIAA holds true, this could be used to squeeze the indies and guarantee that music production and distribution stay in the hands of the mega-corporations.
This is just one scenario of many. The fact that Vorbis is available will keep their actions in check. (Similar to the concept that the existance of Debian keeps the other Linux distros in check.)
~Hammy
"Freedom lost can no longer be defended."
Similar things were said about the GIF format before Unisys started sending out all of the letters about "Your website owes us $5,000 in licensing..."
Frauhopper (sp?) has, as alluded to in the article, already started exercising some of that muscle. The price of freedom is truly eternal vigilance...
~Hammy
Well, the truth is that for what we pay, and this is the pay that they base TCO's on, we get techs of comparable experience. Are you suggesting that our HR department be better? If so, this has to be figured into TCO.
:)
People are lazy. The defense for HR when they hire an incompetent is "Well, he was an MCSE...".
I work in a backward industry for a company that does not have the resources or savvy to only get the best... There are companies around here that have much better pay and benefits and they get the best techs. But I'm also sure that many companies are the same.
Perhaps I should say that a "Unix Professional" is generally of a higher caliber than an "NT professional" of like station. I'm not sure that this is my point.
The point is that the media will have you believe that the cost to maintain a *nix is prohibitive. This is not the case. The cost to run an IT infrastructure depends on your ability to recruit able staffers which is something that every department has trouble with at every business.
The current cookie cutter become an NT professional in 2 weeks system will be the downfall of NT much as it would be if a similar program was started for Linux, Solaris, etc... The testing for an MCSE is based more around knowing the new features than knowing how to operate a server.
I got my MCSE about 3 years ago, and will not update for 2000. The certification has been made a mockery of by the company that is supposed to guarantee it's sanctity.
I'm not looking for sympathy, only refuting the too often touted TCO that always gets tossed into the fray by journalists that make assinine comments like this one. And our companies hiring policies are the very same ones that hired our *nix group. Why the disparity? Even in management, they were hired to manage.
But hey, if the sucess of our *nix group is due to good training and management, I accept the compliment.
~Hammy, A.K.A. "Boss man"
I've thought about similar things, but the reality of it is that by the time you were big enough to notice, you could talk to several different companies that provide this service and set up a means to achieve it.
Also by that point you could use your own system and make the stations responsable for updating. No update, no view...
Find the method and the means will handle itself.
~Hammy
Do you not have a PHB?? Is your company one of the fabled and enlightened?
Our company thinks that NT is where it's at... They even tried to force our Graphic Artists off of their MAC's... (Fortunately for them, our NT admins couldn't get the program icons to come up for all users... Now they use 95. And their new MAc's...)
~Hammy
P.S., If your company really doesn't have their heads up their arses, are they hiring??
True, I too often say C: drive instead of system drive. I'm too used to thinking root partition, and C: drive equates to root partition in my brain....
(Always found the C:, D: thing a bit clumsy anyhoo...)
~Hammy
Yes, it is stupid. You cannot get to the C: drive to fix data corruption with a normal boot disk as with FAT. Especially on print servers where this eems to happen all too often... Ever see the message "Cannot find NTOSKRN.VXD"...
The only reason to configure the system drive on an NT machine as NTFS is if it contains sensitive data that you would not want accessed by a boot disk. But then you would also most likely argue that it should be NTFS on RAID 5....
But then some folks don't mind wasting 500 MB of disk space for their "Paralell Install" of NT...
Your responding to this negates your lame dig at the end.
~Hammy
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people with 90% market share"
P.S. The point of the thing is that print servers are trivial.
Ok, I've heard just about enough of all of the TCO nonsense.
When people talk about the higher price of kepping Linux maintained, this makes me cringe. Low-level NT techs are not much cheaper to hire, they generally got their MCSE from a 2 week cram course that did not cover Event Viewer, and do stupid things like put an NTFS C: drive on a print server.
Low-level linux techs on the other hand are generally people who like to tinker with computers (that's why they got linux in the first place), learned their skills from trying to get work done on their computer, and do stupid things like over-partitioning their hard drives.
The last three MCSE's that our companies hired honestly did not know what Event Viewer was. Mind you, we are not one of the better paying industries, but... We have also hired in an ex-photographer who was learning Linux, after 2 years he is one of our best employees. (And one of our better NT techs)
The hidden cost of deploying NT is the cost of hiring unqualified people to maintain it. We have almost three times the staffing for NT as we do for *nix and NT is used as a file server and print server only. Unix does DB hosting, app hosting, achiving, etc.... We have 34 more *nix servers than NT servers as well. Three times the staffing.... *sigh*
The sad truth is that our *nix department experiences better uptime by far, is better run, is better documented, and runs for less doing more. Our NT department always looks busy at least... when they're not over here asking us to take a look at something.
~Hammy
"Windows 2000, based on NT technology"
NT = New Technology (really)
"Windows 2000, based on new technology technology"
So bloated they have to say technology twice!
The plain old fact of it is that Linux has really bad game support now. Look at Terminus, which was recently released. The joystick support in Linux cannot support many digital sticks, and you want a digital stick for space sims. This is not a knock, but a fact. Not to mention the inherent difficulty involved in installation, etc...
On a dual boot machine the choice was a no-brainer, as I own a joystick that is not Linux supported, I ended up buying the Win32 version. Yes, it broke my heart, but...
Same with many of the upcoming Linux games, Alpha Centauri?? Own it already... Heroes III, 49.99 for Linux, 19.95 for Windows. And I own it already.
Linux still has a long way to go in this market, but I'm not really certain that this is the direction we need to go. Our kernel (at least for the time being) is still structured around reliability, and until we have hardware manufacturers writing Linux drivers, we will always be playing catch-up with the win32 platform.
Anyway, am I the only one who read the line "The best workstation and the best platform were one and the same?" This would have started a flame war had it not been said by Carmack....
~Hammy
Reverse the question....
/. effect won't be as bad tomorrow either.
Q:) You want to do a streaming video presentation that is accessible to linux users. (Remembering that we have a 30%-40% user base that can't install it if it didn't come on the Red Hat CD...) What format would you use??
I agree that real sucks, but until there is a good alternative, what do you suggest? And I would also like to point out that in the early days of Linux, Real Player and Real Server were among the first commercial apps available for Linux, adding to our market acceptance.
--------------------------------------
I also think that any talk that is presented on the web should also have a transcript available, and slides. Mostly for the reason that it would be more accessible, and secondly for the users behind a corporate firewall that have Real access disabled. (Like here... 500 users and one T-1, no streaming media for you monkey boy....)
I will now have to get to it tomorrow. But, the
~HamNRye
"Burned by the fire we make, what a shame."
You rock dude!
Thanks a million, I'll bookmark this and come back when I have some moderator points...
HamNRye
Wow! Real Player started firing up and my lavaps was just one big green blob....
I would now like to tender my apologies to Netscape and Star Office. I had no earthly idea that such a small app could rival them for making a huge sucking sound....
Actually, at the prices good computer speakers go for nowadays, I get the little bookshelf stereos and hook them up. At $200, they're pricey, but less than the Bose acoustimass....
Add ihn the Auto DJ feature or a good playlist, it's better than a CD player at parties....
The judge in this case is not given a responsibility to decidde ethics, only law. Our current law does not recognize the ethical value of destroying large corporations...
In smaller cases, internet copyright infringement has already shut down smaller businesses. And the RIAA's entire point is that people are downloading songs/albums that they would have bought otherwise. That is the issue that the judge must rule on.
Fair use does not permit you to copy an entire work. Read "The letter U and the numeral 2: Fair Use and copyright." by the band Negativland. Tone Loc was sued by Van Halen for the use of a guitar riff from "Jamie's Crying". Just a riff! Not the whole song.
But it looks as though we might as well be debating the existance of God...
At those prices you could just buy a computer.
MP3 devices for stereo setup?? There's (again) the PC... An 1/8" to 2 male RCA y cable does the trick...
Another thing that interests me is the fact that intent is considered, quite explicitly, by Patel. I didn?t realize that the intent of the creators of a device could have such a large part to play in the legal fate of that device. If Napster had been created in all innocence of infringement issues, would it have a stronger defense?
Gosh, that seems pretty reasonable to me... The issue that we're debating is not the legality etc..., but the state of the injunction. Since their primary intent and raison'd'etre is music piracy, should the site be shut down while we consider the legality of this? Yes. If their primary intent and business was the sharing of (non-copyrighted) cookie recipes, can you justify the shutting down of the entire site?? They are not being blamed for an unexpected side effect, or unintentional use, but for designing and promoting a tool to be used for theft. From your comment it would seem you are not a total stranger to law, isn't this considered "malice and forethought"??
At this point I would like to point out that I refer to it as theft because that is what it is under modern law.
Judges are taught to observe the "Letter of Law" as well as the "Spirit of Law", IMHO, Napster has definitely violated the letter of the law, [All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication, hiring, lending public performance, and broadcasting is a violation of applicable laws.] and is treading a fine line with the spirit of the law. By conservative we mean to say she more closely observes the letter of the law, as opposed to the spirit of the law. Napster is trying to turn this in to a debate of copyright laws, but in reality they are simply trying to profit from an illegal trade. (Isn't that the CIA's job??)
The point is that they tread shaky legal ground in this arena and they have the audacity to tease the lions. If you reverse engineer a program to figure out why it crashes your system is that different than doing it to sell a "pirated" version?? I do believe so. What happened with Napster was not an unexpected consequence, but the design and purpose of the system.
Why do we love the laws against spam and rail against the laws against theft? I guess that we're just not the victims.....
Perhaps we should just phrase it "All technology is good except that which can be used to spy on or annoy me. If the technology harms a large enough corporation it's even better."
~Jason
"I'm not biased, just consistent in my position."
That "bong" is spelled 'bhong' just for starters, and were designed in times when cannabis was legal. And furthermore, their primary use is for the smoking of tabac and other herbal smoking mixes. Also, in many places and states the selling of bhongs is illegal as well as possession. Here in Richmond, owning a bhong is punishable by a $500 fine. Used or not used.
The one inch square bags are also excellent for the storage of various herbs etc...
But the debate rages in another direction:
Napster from it's initiation was designed for the piracy of music, advertised itself as "The Place" to steal music, and then covered their pages and FAQ's with lines about how the recording industry can't stop them etc...
If ziplock baggies had a big starburst on the front of the package stating "Now keeps Pot 30% fresher!" and had a logo of a little Joint hanging out in his ziplock "pad", they'd probably run into some problems with the law.
Slim Jim's are not advertised as "The quickest way to Drive Off your Dream Car", neither are Paper Clips advertised for picking locks on desks, coffee filters are not advertised as the best hash filter you'll find. Even the darn horoscopes in 7-11 are not audacious enough to advertise "Glass Case makes ideal crack pipe!".
Anything can be used to commit a crime in one way or another but they do not advertise them as such because they realize that there will be repercussions. Why did Napster take off while Gnutella has lingered in the "What's that?" bin?? Because they not only based their service around the theft, they provided easy to follow instructions and tech support. That does make them accomplices.
Look at L0phtcrack... Is that advertised as the latest greatest hacking utility?? Do they have instructions for attaching to port 139 and getting the Sam DB?? No, it is a security utility for checking your own orginizations passwords. (So they say... L0phtcrack and NetBus are the best computer programs since grep and more...)
The real truth of this is that a nation of shoplifters are mad at the security guard for busting them. I bet alot of the same people bitch about not getting paid for shareware, etc... (The rest either have no thoughts worth stealing [i.e. 99.9% of the world] or believe in free software and wonder if some big company is stealing from his code.) Even those in the last category should frown on Napster for the way they "protect" copyrights etc...
If Napster had tried to copyright "A file sharing system based on a database of user files across the internet" this forum would be full of rabid protest. Now it's just a bunch of kids who don't want their cookie jar taken away.
The problem with Napster is not function, but form.
~Jason
Put an end to the post office! That's who delivers my seeds! http://www.hempqc.com
While I applaud the gumption of the guy that wants to do this, I gotta rant...
I want non-bloated software that works. Everytime I start a new word processor it takes longer than the one I had last year. The same for web-browser, text editor, or any other damn thing.
The reason is that most of these programs are loaded down with useless features, inappropriate features, and just plain BS. I don't want a browser that will manage my "net life" but can't remember the passwords for my p0rn sites.
I have been using linux since 95, and the only thing to change is my text editor. Pico, coral, kwrite... I have Star Office installed just for the purpose of converting MS word docs. And that takes to #$%^& long.
Give me a browser that comes up in under 10 seconds, doesn't mind getting keyboard input, and doesn't ask me if I want to open my Url in composer or communicator. (If I wanted the damn file to open in composer I would be using composer already!)
The only bright star in the sky... Opera for Linux...
HamNDie
This message interrupted by a browser cra....
I have been using SUSE for years now. (My first was a Suse 5.1 Box, replaced my Ydgrassil distro) and I have found that it has the most complete selection of packages of any distro. And considering I run a LUG and get the software free (most times) that becomes very important. After using Suse so long I wonder how the other Distro's get by with 1 or 2 cd's....
This is really not surprising, the processor wars have had their casualties in the marketplace. With the competition drivi9ng hardware prices down, you would think that this would be the best time to buy/build a new PC. But with the problems encountered with the high end PIII, and the Slot A, no wait, Socket A, no wait, Fonzie says "Aaaayy..", this is undoubtedly the worst time.
Both companies are far more interested in getting a product out the door, and not interested in getting a working product out the door. The result of this could be interesting to watch.
My guess is that the end result will just add to a growing contempt for the multipurpose PC adding to the appeal of small embedded devices. (Unless the small embedded devices try to go the same route...) As we know, all of these races to be first usually signal the death knoll for at least one of the companies involved, if not both.
End analysis? My next PC purchase will be after the market calms down, which may be never. If all else fails, we might have to go with "OSH", Open Source Hardware...
HamNRye
"My only hope is that they don't breed..."
-Said about "pet" penguins that have escaped or been abandoned by their owners.
Well, If you will read at the bottom of my post, DMA is turned on for the numbers I posted. The numbers would have been much closer, but I was playing MP3's at the time. They're is still a 1.5 second difference today with no MP3's playing.
Could be something wierdwith this PC, but that's the straight scoop from here.
I'm with this guy on the DMA issue, bu I also noticed that they never set the IDE drive to use 32 bit access. Here's some sample output:
/dev/hda
/dev/hda
/dev/hda
/dev/hda
pharlap:~ # hdparm -c
/dev/hda:
I/O support = 0 (default 16-bit)
pharlap:~ # hdparm -t
/dev/hda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 7.48 seconds = 4.28 MB/sec
pharlap:~ # hdparm -c 1
/dev/hda:
setting 32-bit I/O support flag to 1
I/O support = 1 (32-bit)
pharlap:~ # hdparm -t
/dev/hda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 4.42 seconds = 7.24 MB/sec
These benchmarks were taken while playing MP3's, so the numbers will be low. DMA was/is enabled.
Well, DAT tapes are still hopelessly crippled to this very day, with the recording undustry getting money for each one sold to cover the cost of "piracy". True, the RIAA has won some of the battles, but like a parasite, tends to kill its host. But I wonder to what extent?? The RIAA still gets a bit of revenue for every DAT sold, whether it is for computer backup, studio use, or otherwise.
How long can the hardware manufacturers keep this up?? The R&D is considerable, and then the RIAA comes through and makes these devices unattractive to consumers. Yes, people want to record music, and most of them for non-illegal reasons. I have ripped my CD collection to MP3 so I can keep a copy at work without having to lug around the CD's and damage them. I never have the song playing more than once at a time, etc...
Also, record and movie sales are boosted by the availability of new technology. Just thinking of all of the old vinyl that I have replaced with CD's over the last 5 years makes me cringe. With DVD as a new "standard", many VHS movie buffs will have to have "Army of Darkness" on DVD now.
What the RIAA is looking for is not a preservation of their time-worn business model, but revamping of their buisness model. Not only the control of the medium, but the use of the medium.
The belief that we as consumers will pay $300 for a machine, $10 for a disk, and $4 per view is insane. However, people do it all the time. The DVD's will still be laden with commercials and product placement, and the companies will make money each time you play a movie or DVD.
The only benefit over the above scenario is that the companies are trying to do away with the physical medium, i.e. the $10 disk. In their world, the disk would be replaced by your net connection, but the price per view is $8 per. They defend this pricing by saying that more than one person could be watching at a time, hence it's still a bargain...
Our entertainment industries are clearly out of hand, and the forecast is grimmer for the future.
Wow, did I stray off topic or what??
~The Ham Man
Well, the fact of it is this. Windows NT, of which Win 2000 is a descendent, officially began as a joint project between IBM and MS in (I believe) 1988. When the project fell apart, IBM had OS/2 and MS had WinNT. This is one example. Win95 still uses alot of old DOS legacy code and hence is even older. If you wish to compare them by basis of Version number, Win 95, 98, etc... Then Linux still loses. Our Kernel 2.0 could be considered to coincide with Win95, and 2.2 with Win 98. I know that this is a poor comparison, but your comparison of Win 2000 as a "new" OS and Linux as an "old" OS is similarily flawed.
If indeed Win 2000 is a new kid on the block, I would have to congratulate M$ on the ability to put out such a good OS in such a short amount of time. As it stands, they have had at least 3 years more to come up with something that they have to run flawed benchmarks on to compete with a "new" OS.
Also, a comparison between the original 1991 Linux and the modern OS is a crock. I believe that Linus' own words were "It could run GCC and sh, and that was about it" (paraphrased, I don't feel like looking it up.)
If we keep bellowing the cry that Linux is so much older, it undermines the power of Open Source. Also, in a few years, M$ will be yacking about why use something "old" like Linux when we have the newer, better Win2003! Microsoft FUD has alredy gone in that direction with their criticism of *nix and it's derivitaves.
Are we new?? You bet ya! (And M$ is the one that's lemon scented.)
Rave on cats he cried!
HamNRye