Printing ink doesn't taste very nice. Champagne doesn't make for very clear printouts. What is the point of this futile comparision ?
Yep. Plus a magnum of Dom will probably provide about a dozen glasses of Champagne whereas a cartridge will manage hundreds of sheets of paper.
I love the way the media is so obsessed with comparisons that they feel obliged to make pointless ones. I remember a hanger for a giant airship was described as being as high as an olympic swimming pool on its end. All those who have seen an olympic swimming pool balancing on its end will understand how tall that is.
In user-space, I suspect *BSD and GNU+ are virtually identical, probaly more than half of the actual installed software on a GNU/Linux or *BSD server is the same.
No doubt. Isn't most of the software on proprietry Unixes GNU and BSD stuff.
Yep. Very nice it was too. Meant that they could go up to a full 32-bit architecture with minimal problems, no nasty hacks to address more than a megabyte, and no switching between different modes to run legacy apps. (Granted, switching to PPC caused its own set of problems)
MacOS and RiscOS both used cooperative multitasking at that stage. Many systems at the time with memory protection had a very crude system since not everything had an MMU.
They were just fooling with concepts. They didn't have any plans to do anything with it at the time. Some Apple people saw it and they decided to produce a computer based on that. So I guess it was Apple that were betting on it. They were the ones who got the system up to a workable GUI and demonstrated it as a commercial success.
NT 3.5 did have a few things going for it that while already fairly tried and tested, not everyone had (unless I'm mistaken, which I very much might be). Things like a journalled file system, prememptive multi tasking and memory protection. There were a few systems that didn't even have long filenames back then.
Not that MS really pioneered anything with these features. They were all well established on many other systems, but they were far from being the last to the party.
Oh yes. "Pear computers" or something ike that. I remember them betting on a 32-bit architecture instead of 16-bit. Needed far fewer hacks to get to work when true 32-bit machines came out.
I've considered publishing my fingerprints and retinal scans (approx US$15 million per copy). With a clause in the copyright information preventing them using it with "implied" consent.
Just be interesting to be able to prosecute anyone who uses them for copyright infringment and loss of earnings. I feel that $15 million will be adequate to compensat me for loss of privacy.
True, but everyone already has a VCR. Plus, it just feels wrong to slot tapes into a TV itself. They expect VCRs to be separate units. OTOH, anonymous boxes don't look like they do anything. A TV that can record is just an extra feature to add to a TV.
When I buy a TV, I want the best screen, the best speakers, the best control software, the right connectors, and a good remote control. I don't buy these separately. Why should I buy a separate DVR? Especially as the cost of an adequately sized hard disk and compression hardware falls.
Familiarity is also important. TiVO has been hard to sell. People don't know what it is, apart from a silver box. A TV that can pause and record is still a TV.
Sigh. I really must buy a TV factory and market this idea.
No. However, the thing is, I've never been interested in a combo VCR/TV. Maybe it's because I already have both a TV and a Video recorder. I do want a built in PVR. I also want a usb port and the ability to store my photos on my TV. (actually, I want it to replace a lot of the functionality of my PC - I'll leave internet and games to a dedicated computer though).
I guess one of the reeasons is that people don't know what a PVR is. They also have no reason to buy a new TV because a new one will have the same features as the old one. A built in PVR is a viable new feature. An actual reason to replace a creaking old set.
But do most people prefer to do this? Since you're posting on/. I'll assume you are not afraid of wires. Some people are though. A TiVO in a setup is a scary prospect for a lot of people. Here's how my system was configured:
SCART from Cable box to TiVO
SCART from TiVO to VCR
SCART from TiVO to TV
Aerial connection from wall to TiVO
Aerial connection from tivo to VCR
Aerial connection from VCR to TV
Telephone connection from TiVO to wall socket
Cable connection from wall to cable box
Plugs to all 4 units.
That's a lot of wires.
And TVs don't go wrong very often. Adding the inconvenience of external devices is a bigger problem.
It should be possible to design something that doesn't require a subscription. Personally I'm getting a bit tired of everything being sold as a service. Don't you remember when you could buy products? The main trouble with TiVO is that most non-techies can't quite work out what it's supposed to do. They might find it easier to get their heads around pausable TV or maybe even something like "Memory TV (tm)".
Portability isn't a great problem for most people. I know I could never be bothered unplugging 5 or 6 cables and then lugging a Tivo to a different room. Maybe you want to, but I'm afraid you're in the minority. Besides, there will probably always be a second box solution for people who do want to be able to. What would be a benefit is that an integrated PVR would be a lot easier to set up. There would only be the usual TV connectors. No separate box, no separate power connector.
Slashdot Mirror
41%. 7% of people use IE5
Printing ink doesn't taste very nice. Champagne doesn't make for very clear printouts. What is the point of this futile comparision ?
Yep. Plus a magnum of Dom will probably provide about a dozen glasses of Champagne whereas a cartridge will manage hundreds of sheets of paper.
I love the way the media is so obsessed with comparisons that they feel obliged to make pointless ones. I remember a hanger for a giant airship was described as being as high as an olympic swimming pool on its end. All those who have seen an olympic swimming pool balancing on its end will understand how tall that is.
My point is that if you buy a new printer, you don't get as much ink as you would if you paid the extra for the new ink cartridges.
You do realise that the ink cartridges that come with the printer are almost empty, don't you?
In user-space, I suspect *BSD and GNU+ are virtually identical, probaly more than half of the actual installed software on a GNU/Linux or *BSD server is the same.
No doubt. Isn't most of the software on proprietry Unixes GNU and BSD stuff.
Yep. Very nice it was too. Meant that they could go up to a full 32-bit architecture with minimal problems, no nasty hacks to address more than a megabyte, and no switching between different modes to run legacy apps. (Granted, switching to PPC caused its own set of problems)
Fair enough. I was thinking how it compared with non-free kernels. However, it does have better hardware support than other free kernels.
MacOS and RiscOS both used cooperative multitasking at that stage. Many systems at the time with memory protection had a very crude system since not everything had an MMU.
Yep. A breakthrough to factor products of large prime numbers would be useful. However, the factors of a prime number such as 12409 are 1 and 12409.
Server-wise, what does Linux do that the other flavors of UNIX can't?
Be installed on 100 machines without paying for a licence for each one.
We bet on graphical user interface.
Wasn't that from PARC, Xerox?...
They were just fooling with concepts. They didn't have any plans to do anything with it at the time. Some Apple people saw it and they decided to produce a computer based on that. So I guess it was Apple that were betting on it. They were the ones who got the system up to a workable GUI and demonstrated it as a commercial success.
NT 3.5 did have a few things going for it that while already fairly tried and tested, not everyone had (unless I'm mistaken, which I very much might be). Things like a journalled file system, prememptive multi tasking and memory protection. There were a few systems that didn't even have long filenames back then.
Not that MS really pioneered anything with these features. They were all well established on many other systems, but they were far from being the last to the party.
Oh yes. "Pear computers" or something ike that. I remember them betting on a 32-bit architecture instead of 16-bit. Needed far fewer hacks to get to work when true 32-bit machines came out.
Next you'll be suggesting that consumers have rights other than the right to pay money to corporations.
And that this is enforced by putting all hardware in mould (same stuff they use for ICs)?
That wouldn't work. I used to work for a microchip company. Apparently it's typical in the industry to take chips apart and look at how they work.
I've considered publishing my fingerprints and retinal scans (approx US$15 million per copy). With a clause in the copyright information preventing them using it with "implied" consent.
Just be interesting to be able to prosecute anyone who uses them for copyright infringment and loss of earnings. I feel that $15 million will be adequate to compensat me for loss of privacy.
Who'd want to do that? She'd end up writing a song about how she was fucked by a geek that she hates and wants to see more of.
Well, someone in other areas can damn well set up their own script.
Why not just submit every number from 000-0000 to 999-9999?
True, but everyone already has a VCR. Plus, it just feels wrong to slot tapes into a TV itself. They expect VCRs to be separate units. OTOH, anonymous boxes don't look like they do anything. A TV that can record is just an extra feature to add to a TV.
When I buy a TV, I want the best screen, the best speakers, the best control software, the right connectors, and a good remote control. I don't buy these separately. Why should I buy a separate DVR? Especially as the cost of an adequately sized hard disk and compression hardware falls.
Familiarity is also important. TiVO has been hard to sell. People don't know what it is, apart from a silver box. A TV that can pause and record is still a TV.
Sigh. I really must buy a TV factory and market this idea.
No. However, the thing is, I've never been interested in a combo VCR/TV. Maybe it's because I already have both a TV and a Video recorder. I do want a built in PVR. I also want a usb port and the ability to store my photos on my TV. (actually, I want it to replace a lot of the functionality of my PC - I'll leave internet and games to a dedicated computer though).
I guess one of the reeasons is that people don't know what a PVR is. They also have no reason to buy a new TV because a new one will have the same features as the old one. A built in PVR is a viable new feature. An actual reason to replace a creaking old set.
Who said anything about "amazing"? Just something I want.
But do most people prefer to do this? Since you're posting on /. I'll assume you are not afraid of wires. Some people are though. A TiVO in a setup is a scary prospect for a lot of people. Here's how my system was configured:
SCART from Cable box to TiVO
SCART from TiVO to VCR
SCART from TiVO to TV
Aerial connection from wall to TiVO
Aerial connection from tivo to VCR
Aerial connection from VCR to TV
Telephone connection from TiVO to wall socket
Cable connection from wall to cable box
Plugs to all 4 units.
That's a lot of wires.
And TVs don't go wrong very often. Adding the inconvenience of external devices is a bigger problem.
Ah. I see your point. Next thing I'll be proposing a heavier than air flying machine.
Fair point about the subscription.
It should be possible to design something that doesn't require a subscription. Personally I'm getting a bit tired of everything being sold as a service. Don't you remember when you could buy products? The main trouble with TiVO is that most non-techies can't quite work out what it's supposed to do. They might find it easier to get their heads around pausable TV or maybe even something like "Memory TV (tm)".
Portability isn't a great problem for most people. I know I could never be bothered unplugging 5 or 6 cables and then lugging a Tivo to a different room. Maybe you want to, but I'm afraid you're in the minority. Besides, there will probably always be a second box solution for people who do want to be able to. What would be a benefit is that an integrated PVR would be a lot easier to set up. There would only be the usual TV connectors. No separate box, no separate power connector.