Although I get the feeling that the writer doesn't necessarily know what she is writing about, I'd take a look at it like this:
Sure, anyone can cobble together their own distribution. But would an end-user organization like Merrill Lynch want to? Probably not. I have no idea how large their internal IT is, but I would suspect that their not quite ready to have their own Linux distribution people inside the organization, so they outsource that (like so many other things), and not surprisingly, they turn to the percieved market leader Red Hat.
And as someone else has noted, there actually is a doubt about "free" and "patent violation". First, the GPL has not really been challenged in any court room yet. Also, it is not unconceivable that there is code somewhere in the kernel or some other crucial part of the distribution that is encumbered by a patent.
Now, put yourself in the seat of a user who's business relies on the stable, continuous operation of some application which happens to be deployed on Linux (or *BSD or whatever). What will happen to your operations when someone has a court order saying "stop what you're doing, you're using my code illegally?"
I don't know how likely such a scenario would be, but it is something to take into consideration.
The big advantage to NAS is that dozens of web servers can mount the NAS volume and all serve up the same content.
Being able to use of-the-shelf shared filesystems (NFS, SMB) is one big advantage when you introduce this into an environment, form the admin point of view.
However, shared filesystems can have vastly different performance characteristics compared to local, non-shared filesystems, and NFS is well known to be hard to get to grips with in terms of both performance and consistency across a cluster. There a quite a number of scenarios where NFS can be used very effectivly, and everything I hear about Filers is very good, but one should be generally cautionary when jumping into these klnds of setups.
As to the original question: if your organization already maintains a proper SAN, then by all means use it. Most likely, they can help you with backup and recovery as well, which in itself can be a major hassle.
OK, just to be pedantic: as I said, and you rightly repeated, the framerate and resolution will usually be those of the source material.
However, since the DVD standard has quite a number of allowable framerate/resolution combinations available, all DVD players I've ever heard about will scanrate and resolution-convert the image to fit the output standard.
So, it might help to have the "proper" output format and TV for a certain DVD, but it's not necessary.
Nope. Although the resolution and frame rate do depend on the source material, the actual encoding of the frames is completly independend of any (old) analog standards--it's MPEG 2 video.
As with game consoles, it might be advatageous to have a DVD/TV combo that can reproduce the original resolution and frame rate, but for most TV material, the conversion doesn't really degrade the image too much.
[A]l Qaeda is arguably one of the most advanced and resourceful enemies the United States has (if you ignore state governments). The fact that they did not have strong encryption shows that the policy of export controls was in fact productive.
If I'm not mistaken, quite a number of computers and related materials were found at sites supposedly connected to Al Qaeda. I don't remember any reports about any form of encryption being employed in any of these materials--in fact, it was pointed out in a couple of occasions that the terrorists did not use any encryption in their communications.
Why the prohibition of strong encryption should have been instrumental in their non-use of encryptions escapes me completely. Your comment is not insightful, it's stupid.
If the terrorist attacks tell us anything about the use of encryption by terrorists or mere criminals, it would be that they didn't rely on technology to perpetrate their atrocities, but on plain personal trust and dedication. And it has been noted that the reliance on SIGINT and related fields instead of classic espionage was partly responsible for the agencies being as clueless about this as they apparently were.
Well, if you had actually read the article, you might have noticed that the conference was held by a D.C. based non-profit organization by the name of "The Future of Music".
So it does make kind of sense to call it the "The Future of Music Conference", not?
Seah, these editors...
on
GNU Emacs 21
·
· Score: 1
It really is time for editors to become better integrated with their environments [...]
Right! These damn Slashdot editors have lost it a long time ago. When, for example, have you seen Michael at a Linux Installfest or a least a LAN party? It's time for them to start being part of the geek environment again!
Although I don't know too much about the DVI spec, I'm pretty sure that you can buy AGP or PCI cards with DVI out, and that this gadget would allow you to run that nifty Cinema Display...
Yes, but have you looked at actual flows of email that make it out of the system? When you finally get the messages, asking you to look at a long thread and comment on it. All the messages in the thread only give you the "real name" or whatever, but not their email address.
Although there is no real standard for it, most mail clients will add the sender's name and email address to the qoute ("On Tuesday, Foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:...").
Outlook doesn't do so, so you can't even tell which company the quoted person belongs to, or what their Internet mail address might be. And don't get me started on the malpractice of adding your own blurb to the top of the message, and having the original one in full at the bottom...
This seemingly vast archive of images is nothing short of amazing.
However, the colors in at least some of the pictures "just don't seem right" to me. Is this due to mismatches between my monitors RGB and the original filters, degradation in the emulsion, or other artifacts of the original process?
Unfortunatly, I couldn't find more info on the restauration details; anyone knows any links?
Is it just me, or are some "professionals" just falling for the exaggerated claims of IT vendors when it comes to "external memory"?
As far as I'm concerned, my ability to remember important stuff if still as good as ten years ago--I still only remember what my gadget can't keep for me, or the stuff too important to commit to external storage only.
And: what exactly is the difference between jotting down that phone number or date in your TimeSystem organiser, or some rather helpful electronic piece?
And the end of the day, I can back up my electronic memory far easier than my paper memories...
I dont't agree with the conclusion: what I like most about Star Trek is the fact that it points out a very interesting cultural view, especially the original series. Star Wars, on the other hand, is rather remote to current (or then-current) political and social developments, but rather quite like some not-quite adoloscent fantasy. I don't doubt it has quite a vision on it's own, but nowadays, I'm not as impressed by the story as I was as a ten-year old.
TNG was certainly influcend by Star Wars, but retained many of the moral aspects of the original series. It and the original display some very interesting views on American and 60th culture (at least in retrospect, for me as an European). Watching the original series can be quite funny, especially when it gets near to sex. Gene Roddenberry obviously had strong opinions about humanitariasm, but at the same time were either struck with complete disregard for women, or had to fold to "market requirements," so women couldn't play an integral part until the later epsiodes of TNG, and the later series.
In some sense, DS9 is an abnomination of the main theme, but Voyager returned to the completed-story-telling of ST and TNG. DS9 might be special in directly competing with Babylon 5, and resembles most of what I would judge as a soap-opera. DS9 also is special in the fact that is the only series to have a strong religious context to it's story, albeit it being a somehwat eastern-thinking one instead of some rather constitutional Christianity based, which I would suppose to be prevalent in the U.S.
There are a number of very enlightning stories in all series, and from a quality point of view, given the fact the first (er, 4th to 6th) episodes of Star Wars were feature films, I find many episodes of all four series of ST on par with them. [I won't even start on the feature films.] One of my favorites might illustrate my view: the Doctor is stranded on an alien planet in a museum (who has seen it should know what I'm writing about). The story telling in this episode uses a really amazing twist, and I would hope the next films would be able to keep up with that quality.
So my conclusion on comparing Star Wars to Star Trek: it's like Apples and Oranges, and each has it's virtues, especially the fact that I judge the feasture films as "add ons."
I dont't agree with the conclusion: what I like most about Star Trek is the fact that it points out a very interesting cultural view, especially the original series. Star Wars, on the other hand, is rather remote to current (or then-current) political and social developments, but rather quite like some not-quite adoloscent fantasy. I don't doubt it has quite a vision on it's own, but nowadays, I'm not as impressed by the story as I was as a ten-year old.
TNG was certainly influcend by Star Wars, but retained many of the moral aspects of the original series. It displays some very interesting views on American and 60th culture (at least in retrospect, for me as an European). Watching the original series can be quite funny, especially when it gets near to sex. Gene Roddenberry obviously had strong opinions about humanitariasm, but at the same time were either struck with complete disregard for women, or had to fold to "market requirements," so women couldn't play an integral part until the later epsiodes of TNG, and the later series.
In some sense, DS9 is an abnomination of the main theme, but Voyager returned to the completed-story-telling of ST and TNG. DS9 might be special in directly competing with Babylon 5, and resembles most of what I would judge as a soap-opera. DS9 also is special in the fact that is the only series to have a strong religious context to it's story, albeit it being a somehwat eastern-thinking one instead of some rather constitutional Christianity based, which I would suppose to be prevalent in the U.S.
There are a number of very enlightning stories in all series, and from a quality point of view, given the fact the first (er, 4th to 6th) episodes of Star Wars were feature films, I find many episodes of all four series of ST on par with them. [I won't even start on the feature films.] One of my favorites might illustrate my view: the Doctor is stranded on an alien planet in a museum (who has seen it should know what I'm writing about). The story telling in this episode uses a really amazing twist, and I would hope the next films would be able to keep up with that quality.
So my conclusion on comparing Star Wars to Star Trek: it's like Apples and Oranges, and each has it's virtues, especially the fact that I judge the feasture films as "add ons."
I personally do not condemn Apple for re-interating U.S. export law in their licence.
Some expert in both U.S. export law and knowable about licensing should explain whether it might be necessary for Apple to have export restrictions in the license, or whether it might be sufficient to restrict distribution via some Web form (or some other mechanism).
There is one additional point: anyone exporting anything from the U.S. must comply with U.S. law, including the restriction to re-export the product to any country on the list of banned countries. From a practical standpoint, Apple only formalizes the recipients obligiation to U.S. law in the license (as opposed to having the recipient to "sign" a seperate contract). So your rights under this license are not any worse as they would be anyway. Nonetheless, Apple would be doing many people a favour if they only included restrictions in the license which are neccessary by law.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, anyone can cobble together their own distribution. But would an end-user organization like Merrill Lynch want to? Probably not. I have no idea how large their internal IT is, but I would suspect that their not quite ready to have their own Linux distribution people inside the organization, so they outsource that (like so many other things), and not surprisingly, they turn to the percieved market leader Red Hat.
And as someone else has noted, there actually is a doubt about "free" and "patent violation". First, the GPL has not really been challenged in any court room yet. Also, it is not unconceivable that there is code somewhere in the kernel or some other crucial part of the distribution that is encumbered by a patent.
Now, put yourself in the seat of a user who's business relies on the stable, continuous operation of some application which happens to be deployed on Linux (or *BSD or whatever). What will happen to your operations when someone has a court order saying "stop what you're doing, you're using my code illegally?"
I don't know how likely such a scenario would be, but it is something to take into consideration.
Thet would depend on what you (or Nokia) understand to be "soon".
The 6310 was announced last CeBIT, and Nokia only managed to start shipping a couple of weeks back...
Being able to use of-the-shelf shared filesystems (NFS, SMB) is one big advantage when you introduce this into an environment, form the admin point of view.
However, shared filesystems can have vastly different performance characteristics compared to local, non-shared filesystems, and NFS is well known to be hard to get to grips with in terms of both performance and consistency across a cluster. There a quite a number of scenarios where NFS can be used very effectivly, and everything I hear about Filers is very good, but one should be generally cautionary when jumping into these klnds of setups.
As to the original question: if your organization already maintains a proper SAN, then by all means use it. Most likely, they can help you with backup and recovery as well, which in itself can be a major hassle.
However, since the DVD standard has quite a number of allowable framerate/resolution combinations available, all DVD players I've ever heard about will scanrate and resolution-convert the image to fit the output standard.
So, it might help to have the "proper" output format and TV for a certain DVD, but it's not necessary.
Nope. Although the resolution and frame rate do depend on the source material, the actual encoding of the frames is completly independend of any (old) analog standards--it's MPEG 2 video.
As with game consoles, it might be advatageous to have a DVD/TV combo that can reproduce the original resolution and frame rate, but for most TV material, the conversion doesn't really degrade the image too much.
If I'm not mistaken, quite a number of computers and related materials were found at sites supposedly connected to Al Qaeda. I don't remember any reports about any form of encryption being employed in any of these materials--in fact, it was pointed out in a couple of occasions that the terrorists did not use any encryption in their communications.
Why the prohibition of strong encryption should have been instrumental in their non-use of encryptions escapes me completely. Your comment is not insightful, it's stupid.
If the terrorist attacks tell us anything about the use of encryption by terrorists or mere criminals, it would be that they didn't rely on technology to perpetrate their atrocities, but on plain personal trust and dedication. And it has been noted that the reliance on SIGINT and related fields instead of classic espionage was partly responsible for the agencies being as clueless about this as they apparently were.
So it does make kind of sense to call it the "The Future of Music Conference", not?
Right! These damn Slashdot editors have lost it a long time ago. When, for example, have you seen Michael at a Linux Installfest or a least a LAN party? It's time for them to start being part of the geek environment again!
And... whoops, never mind...
Although I don't know too much about the DVI spec, I'm pretty sure that you can buy AGP or PCI cards with DVI out, and that this gadget would allow you to run that nifty Cinema Display...
Although there is no real standard for it, most mail clients will add the sender's name and email address to the qoute ("On Tuesday, Foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:...").
Outlook doesn't do so, so you can't even tell which company the quoted person belongs to, or what their Internet mail address might be. And don't get me started on the malpractice of adding your own blurb to the top of the message, and having the original one in full at the bottom...
Considering the credibility of all the claims these guys make, at least some of them must have had their head too close to one in the past.
License fees for what? Last time I checked, they wrote PalmOS themselves, without any third-party parts in it...
However, the colors in at least some of the pictures "just don't seem right" to me. Is this due to mismatches between my monitors RGB and the original filters, degradation in the emulsion, or other artifacts of the original process?
Unfortunatly, I couldn't find more info on the restauration details; anyone knows any links?
As far as I'm concerned, my ability to remember important stuff if still as good as ten years ago--I still only remember what my gadget can't keep for me, or the stuff too important to commit to external storage only.
And: what exactly is the difference between jotting down that phone number or date in your TimeSystem organiser, or some rather helpful electronic piece?
And the end of the day, I can back up my electronic memory far easier than my paper memories...
TNG was certainly influcend by Star Wars, but retained many of the moral aspects of the original series. It and the original display some very interesting views on American and 60th culture (at least in retrospect, for me as an European). Watching the original series can be quite funny, especially when it gets near to sex. Gene Roddenberry obviously had strong opinions about humanitariasm, but at the same time were either struck with complete disregard for women, or had to fold to "market requirements," so women couldn't play an integral part until the later epsiodes of TNG, and the later series.
In some sense, DS9 is an abnomination of the main theme, but Voyager returned to the completed-story-telling of ST and TNG. DS9 might be special in directly competing with Babylon 5, and resembles most of what I would judge as a soap-opera. DS9 also is special in the fact that is the only series to have a strong religious context to it's story, albeit it being a somehwat eastern-thinking one instead of some rather constitutional Christianity based, which I would suppose to be prevalent in the U.S.
There are a number of very enlightning stories in all series, and from a quality point of view, given the fact the first (er, 4th to 6th) episodes of Star Wars were feature films, I find many episodes of all four series of ST on par with them. [I won't even start on the feature films.] One of my favorites might illustrate my view: the Doctor is stranded on an alien planet in a museum (who has seen it should know what I'm writing about). The story telling in this episode uses a really amazing twist, and I would hope the next films would be able to keep up with that quality.
So my conclusion on comparing Star Wars to Star Trek: it's like Apples and Oranges, and each has it's virtues, especially the fact that I judge the feasture films as "add ons."
TNG was certainly influcend by Star Wars, but retained many of the moral aspects of the original series. It displays some very interesting views on American and 60th culture (at least in retrospect, for me as an European). Watching the original series can be quite funny, especially when it gets near to sex. Gene Roddenberry obviously had strong opinions about humanitariasm, but at the same time were either struck with complete disregard for women, or had to fold to "market requirements," so women couldn't play an integral part until the later epsiodes of TNG, and the later series.
In some sense, DS9 is an abnomination of the main theme, but Voyager returned to the completed-story-telling of ST and TNG. DS9 might be special in directly competing with Babylon 5, and resembles most of what I would judge as a soap-opera. DS9 also is special in the fact that is the only series to have a strong religious context to it's story, albeit it being a somehwat eastern-thinking one instead of some rather constitutional Christianity based, which I would suppose to be prevalent in the U.S.
There are a number of very enlightning stories in all series, and from a quality point of view, given the fact the first (er, 4th to 6th) episodes of Star Wars were feature films, I find many episodes of all four series of ST on par with them. [I won't even start on the feature films.] One of my favorites might illustrate my view: the Doctor is stranded on an alien planet in a museum (who has seen it should know what I'm writing about). The story telling in this episode uses a really amazing twist, and I would hope the next films would be able to keep up with that quality.
So my conclusion on comparing Star Wars to Star Trek: it's like Apples and Oranges, and each has it's virtues, especially the fact that I judge the feasture films as "add ons."
Some expert in both U.S. export law and knowable about licensing should explain whether it might be necessary for Apple to have export restrictions in the license, or whether it might be sufficient to restrict distribution via some Web form (or some other mechanism).
There is one additional point: anyone exporting anything from the U.S. must comply with U.S. law, including the restriction to re-export the product to any country on the list of banned countries. From a practical standpoint, Apple only formalizes the recipients obligiation to U.S. law in the license (as opposed to having the recipient to "sign" a seperate contract). So your rights under this license are not any worse as they would be anyway. Nonetheless, Apple would be doing many people a favour if they only included restrictions in the license which are neccessary by law.