huh... Seems to me that any kiosks are going to have all the speed and quality of downloads combined with the convenience of going to a shop rather than buying over the internet.
I'm not sure... This doesn't seem like something the UK would do just to please the Republicans. There doesn't seem to be much direct political involvement, and in the UK we don't really like our government being too obvious about giving in to terror.
The thing is, POCs weren't successful because they were clones. They were successful because they were IBM clones. Apple had their own OS. So did Commodore, Sinclair and all the others. Even more recently, Sun, SGI and all the big non Wintel companies have used their own OS. Selling the OS as a separate item has always been atypical.
So, Scenario 1: MS manage to convince HP and DEC to licence their OS. This makes two a big assumptions in the first place - That they wouldn't want to make their own systems, and that Microsoft would be the ones who manage to convince them. But even if they do go with Microsoft, why are people going to buy these machines? They're not IBM or Apple. They have no software library. We're also assuming that IBM would do everything in house, even though Apple became successful from third party software (i.e. visicalc). My view is that IBM would make their own system, and it would sell because it was an IBM. All businesses would buy one, and prices would remain high.
It's possible that MS would get to the same position they're in right now by writing Windows, but they'd need some degree of success beforehand, and they would be competing directly with OS2
Meanwhile, the rest of the market would create their own competing incompatible computers. Eventually, a few of these companies would work to come up with a standard. This may use a third party's software. However, even though IBM are keeping prices high, the cost of the home computer would fall - possibly even more - and we'd have a situation similar to the 8-bit era lasting until a standard is formed.
As for Scenario 2 (and I can't imagine MS would object to exclusivity back then): Well, I think things would turn out just the same. IBM would be more likely to succeed. If MS created windows, it would be more likely to be licenced exclusively to IBM.
The tech industry would always have evolved. If someone can make hardware for less, then they will do so.
But I'm not sure that explains anything. The security services are presumably reasonably sure they've arrested the right people. Even if there was never a plot, the security situation has, at worst, remained the same. Not gone up.
And I don't. Unless I misunderstand, you can recompile Tivo's Linux kernel and run it on different hardware, can't you? However you see it, you have to realise that a lot of can interpret things differently.
No you can't. And this is where the fundamental disagreement is. It all depends on what you think the spirit of the GPL is. The FSF want to expand the scope of the GPL to hardware. Linus feels that he has no right to demand what others do with their hardware, and believes that the GPL offers the appropriate protections.
Tivo took a free kernel, modified it, and released their modified version. If their modifications are useful, then they go to the community. That was all that was asked of them. Nobody even suggested that they must allow other software to run on their machine. And why should they have to?
And is it really breaking the spirit? I use gcc to write proprietry applications. They even have restrictive copy protection (blame the publishers). Am I breaking the spirit of the GPL by using gcc in that way?
A 1K kernel will hardly make a lot of difference to anyone. I have a whole gigabyte of RAM in my machine. 1K? 100K? 1 Megabyte? 10 Megs? That's a pretty chunky kernel and we're still taking up a trivial chunk of our memory. Even the huge executables that we have these days aren't causing serious memory issues on modern PCs. Memory has outpaced executable size.
What we do want is lower power, and smaller. We can always take advantage of small or low power devices. If you want to reduce executable size, write a simple stack machine and an interpreter.
Or why not open notepad. Type a letter. Every so often you click onto the browser to add a couple of letters of username and password. Should be difficult to get your username or password using a keyogger.
An electricity meter is essentially a revolution counter put in series with the supply. Connecting the power ot the other side of the meter will bypass it.
I'd recommend getting your own power supply though - a diesel generaotr or something. Bypassing the supply is illegal, and while not a concern in itself for drug growers, one does not want to draw unnecessary attention to oneself by committing more crimes than needed.
They aren't being personal about it. If you claim to have stopped some arbitrary party's baby molestation, and quite pointedly did not mention names, then you also deserve congratulations. Are you claiming this?
The problem with a view of an evil government, is that it's grossly oversimplified. You can't assume an evil cabinet, evil MPs, evil police, evil local government and evil beurocracies. Some of these people are going to be at worst misguided.
We've known about a likely plot to blow up several planes.
Now, the perpetrators have been arrested, and anyone else who may have been involved is potentially compromised, so will probsbly not risk carrying it out. As a result, an attack is less likely. So the alert level has gone up.
We go out of our way to block spam. We install baysean filters. Automate blocking as much as possible. Delete anything with a subject line that looks remotely like spam. We're clearly not remotely interested in anything advertised by unsolicted email.
And then they try to circumvent this. Why? Do they think that if we actually read the text of the spam, we'll suddenly decide we want some "male enhancement pills"? I can sort of understand it with cold calling. At least you can engage the victim in a dialogue and try to peruade them that they do want whatever you're selling.
Yes, but didn't it require a 386 or better to run the IDE, or was that a different version? Always struck me as odd that it had a 32 bit processor requirement but no 32 bit compiler.
It was nice that you could write a simple single file C application, and compile and run it without any concern over projects and solutions or makefiles. Also nice that it gave a lot of screen real estate to the editor.
All kinds of things go wrong. That's why you have a maintenence contract. The net result is similar, except that if you decide you don't need it anymore, everything still works.
Why can't Microsoft use its position in the software industry to leverage content providers away from DRM.
Because they want to control the DRM. They want to do what Apple did with iTunes and the iPod. If all downlaodable media is designed for Windows, then they when downloadable content becomes mainstream, people will want PVRs with download capability running Windows CE because that will be the OS that's most compatible with the exisitng downloadable contnet.
It seems perfectly reasonable, and logical that a copy of the software should have been sold along with the parking garage. There's no legal reason not to do this. There's only the cultural reason that people believe that software needs a licence. The bricks don't neeed to be licenced. The motors don't need to be licenced. Software is just another component and should be treated as such.
Slashdot Mirror
huh... Seems to me that any kiosks are going to have all the speed and quality of downloads combined with the convenience of going to a shop rather than buying over the internet.
I'm not sure... This doesn't seem like something the UK would do just to please the Republicans. There doesn't seem to be much direct political involvement, and in the UK we don't really like our government being too obvious about giving in to terror.
The thing is, POCs weren't successful because they were clones. They were successful because they were IBM clones. Apple had their own OS. So did Commodore, Sinclair and all the others. Even more recently, Sun, SGI and all the big non Wintel companies have used their own OS. Selling the OS as a separate item has always been atypical.
So, Scenario 1: MS manage to convince HP and DEC to licence their OS. This makes two a big assumptions in the first place - That they wouldn't want to make their own systems, and that Microsoft would be the ones who manage to convince them. But even if they do go with Microsoft, why are people going to buy these machines? They're not IBM or Apple. They have no software library. We're also assuming that IBM would do everything in house, even though Apple became successful from third party software (i.e. visicalc). My view is that IBM would make their own system, and it would sell because it was an IBM. All businesses would buy one, and prices would remain high.
It's possible that MS would get to the same position they're in right now by writing Windows, but they'd need some degree of success beforehand, and they would be competing directly with OS2
Meanwhile, the rest of the market would create their own competing incompatible computers. Eventually, a few of these companies would work to come up with a standard. This may use a third party's software. However, even though IBM are keeping prices high, the cost of the home computer would fall - possibly even more - and we'd have a situation similar to the 8-bit era lasting until a standard is formed.
As for Scenario 2 (and I can't imagine MS would object to exclusivity back then): Well, I think things would turn out just the same. IBM would be more likely to succeed. If MS created windows, it would be more likely to be licenced exclusively to IBM.
The tech industry would always have evolved. If someone can make hardware for less, then they will do so.
But why did they choose int 2/9 for the daisy chaining? Why not int 7/15, or int 0/8? (And were they forced to use matched pins?)
But I'm not sure that explains anything. The security services are presumably reasonably sure they've arrested the right people. Even if there was never a plot, the security situation has, at worst, remained the same. Not gone up.
And I don't. Unless I misunderstand, you can recompile Tivo's Linux kernel and run it on different hardware, can't you? However you see it, you have to realise that a lot of can interpret things differently.
No you can't. And this is where the fundamental disagreement is. It all depends on what you think the spirit of the GPL is. The FSF want to expand the scope of the GPL to hardware. Linus feels that he has no right to demand what others do with their hardware, and believes that the GPL offers the appropriate protections.
Tivo took a free kernel, modified it, and released their modified version. If their modifications are useful, then they go to the community. That was all that was asked of them. Nobody even suggested that they must allow other software to run on their machine. And why should they have to?
And is it really breaking the spirit? I use gcc to write proprietry applications. They even have restrictive copy protection (blame the publishers). Am I breaking the spirit of the GPL by using gcc in that way?
Don't you mean "IAB, GUT, PMA, AO, TY"?
Unfortunately, slashdot insists that I add some lower case letters, kinda ruining the joke.
A 1K kernel will hardly make a lot of difference to anyone. I have a whole gigabyte of RAM in my machine. 1K? 100K? 1 Megabyte? 10 Megs? That's a pretty chunky kernel and we're still taking up a trivial chunk of our memory. Even the huge executables that we have these days aren't causing serious memory issues on modern PCs. Memory has outpaced executable size.
What we do want is lower power, and smaller. We can always take advantage of small or low power devices. If you want to reduce executable size, write a simple stack machine and an interpreter.
Or why not open notepad. Type a letter. Every so often you click onto the browser to add a couple of letters of username and password. Should be difficult to get your username or password using a keyogger.
An electricity meter is essentially a revolution counter put in series with the supply. Connecting the power ot the other side of the meter will bypass it.
I'd recommend getting your own power supply though - a diesel generaotr or something. Bypassing the supply is illegal, and while not a concern in itself for drug growers, one does not want to draw unnecessary attention to oneself by committing more crimes than needed.
They aren't being personal about it. If you claim to have stopped some arbitrary party's baby molestation, and quite pointedly did not mention names, then you also deserve congratulations. Are you claiming this?
Because they may not be Arabs.
If you want.
Me, I'm quite happy to speculate, since that isn't going to result in a severe penalty for anyone.
The problem with a view of an evil government, is that it's grossly oversimplified. You can't assume an evil cabinet, evil MPs, evil police, evil local government and evil beurocracies. Some of these people are going to be at worst misguided.
We've known about a likely plot to blow up several planes.
Now, the perpetrators have been arrested, and anyone else who may have been involved is potentially compromised, so will probsbly not risk carrying it out. As a result, an attack is less likely. So the alert level has gone up.
Hey, don't knock niche markets.
If you wrote a game for the mac, then there would be no competition at all. Every single Mac gamer in the world would buy it. You'd sell dozens!
Ooops. Must learn to preview.
We go out of our way to block spam. We install baysean filters. Automate blocking as much as possible. Delete anything with a subject line that looks remotely like spam. We're clearly not remotely interested in anything advertised by unsolicted email.
And then they try to circumvent this. Why? Do they think that if we actually read the text of the spam, we'll suddenly decide we want some "male enhancement pills"? I can sort of understand it with cold calling. At least you can engage the victim in a dialogue and try to peruade them that they do want whatever you're selling.
Yes, but didn't it require a 386 or better to run the IDE, or was that a different version? Always struck me as odd that it had a 32 bit processor requirement but no 32 bit compiler.
It was nice that you could write a simple single file C application, and compile and run it without any concern over projects and solutions or makefiles. Also nice that it gave a lot of screen real estate to the editor.
All kinds of things go wrong. That's why you have a maintenence contract. The net result is similar, except that if you decide you don't need it anymore, everything still works.
Why can't Microsoft use its position in the software industry to leverage content providers away from DRM.
Because they want to control the DRM. They want to do what Apple did with iTunes and the iPod. If all downlaodable media is designed for Windows, then they when downloadable content becomes mainstream, people will want PVRs with download capability running Windows CE because that will be the OS that's most compatible with the exisitng downloadable contnet.
It seems perfectly reasonable, and logical that a copy of the software should have been sold along with the parking garage. There's no legal reason not to do this. There's only the cultural reason that people believe that software needs a licence. The bricks don't neeed to be licenced. The motors don't need to be licenced. Software is just another component and should be treated as such.
I don't actually give a dman about piracy. People were copying games when they came on tape, and they're still doing it.
Why not post your full contact details here, you self righteous twats.
(Just thught I'd pre-empt them).