There you go kiddes, that one was clearly written by someone whose native language is NOT English.
Yet I find only 2 typoes and one (bigword) misspelling in what must be at least 150 words.
His grammar works better than most American kiddes', as well.
LEARN TO SPELL, or at least get a spellchecker, before you humiliate yourself in a public forum!
Fix this sentence (Spelled phonetically): "Thaar going over thaar to thaar car".
IBM is a high-visibility pusher of the bandwagon
on
IBM Wants Linux
·
· Score: 1
and quite welcome in my estimation, as the most voiciferous OEM to embrace Linux. Just their PR is a great thing for Linux, IMHO. Surely you've seen the commercials, with Avery Brooks (Cpt. Sisko, no less!) growling about how your existing software just isn't going to handle the future, and "something totally new" is needed. Then there's the "programmers from another dimension" (the guys in the space suits). Their software infrastructure is in immediate danger of complete and total meltdown, and they're searching the universe for "a new kind of software". They're caught wandering the corridors of Big Blue and sent firmly to the front desk - to obtain visitor passes.
The name of the Beast is never spoken, but it's pretty plain, from the "software infrastructure meltdown" business, where these guys are from. They look kinda like depresed versions of the Intel guys in the bunny suits: the music has stopped, the party is over, and the reality behind all the bullshit the market has fed them has set in. They need software that _works_, immediately. They run into this deliciously geeky blonde who has the solutions: "WebSphere, DB2, Lotus, Java, UNIX, and _Linux_ (pronounced correctly, right on yer TV!)".
The software guys drool. And I can't help but notice the conspicuous absence of M$, WinDoze, IE, NT, XP, IIS, Exchange, FrontPage, or any of those other Evil Empire things from her list.
Now, you & I know better, but to the great unwashed, until they see something on TV, it cannot _really_ exist. See the Intel vs. AMD debate for rants on how important TV exposure is to marketing. Did Dell ever manage to mention their Linux "support" in any of _their_ ads? One of the things Linux needs for mainstream desktop acceptance, (in addition to a user-configurable GIU and other graphic administration tools, "Office Productivity Apps", and yadda yadda yadda) is advertizing exposure. BIG TIME. Is Linus going to advertize on the TV? I doubt it. How about RedHat? Corel? I don't see it. I _do_ see Big Blue, huckstering Linux, and I think this is A Very Great Thing(tm) for Linux.
And YES, IBM's Linux involvement extends to Open Source, as they port their stuff (like jfs) to Linux, they _have_ given back the source to the community.
"In particular, IBM chose to embrace Linux as a way to help administrators with key server management tasks...."
What part of that suggests to you that SMIT won't be ported to Linux? Or that once it is, the source won't be released?
What IBM stands to gain by this is:
Piss off Redmond. There's still a score there to settle, and Linux looks like IBM's chance. Really, If I were BillG, the mere idea of Linux running on everything from the zSeries (aka System/390) down to blenders (while the M$ minions struggle to port WinBloze to IA-64), would keep me wide awake at night.
(REAL) Open Source Development. Not "Shared Source", "Community Source", or any of those other "open" source models which don't work. Come on, everybody knows the party line about Open Source(tm) causing cheaper, more robust, more secure, and generally better software. Well, don't you believe it yourselves? Instead of IBM having to develop their _entire_ operating system, they can rely on GNU/Linux for probably 90% of it, and only have to actually develop for themselves just the specific parts which handle the unique things in their hardware. If they Open Source _that_ (and why not, it gives no competitor anything), the community would have good examples of how _to_ do SMP, massive scaling, and the other things that Linux is weakest at - the big iron stuff that is still pretty much reserved for the commercial *NIXs.
I see IBM's involvement in Open Source and GNU/Linux to be a win/win situation for both Linux _and_ IBM. I applaud them for having the testicles to buck Redmond on this issue.
And have you guys _forgotten_ how IBM's endorsement turned QDos from something nobody in their right mind would have ever touched into the desktop computer industry's dominant "OS"?
Um...between the above and the subject line you're using, I hope you didn't get the impression that I am some sort of Intel fanboy.
Oh, no way! My comment was aimed towards the described induhvidual, and mostly at the general "Intel Inside" mentality. While I can't track him down and flame him directly, this is as good a forum as any to rant in. I hope _you_ don't get the impression that I'm less than proud to be an AMD customer.
I guess I _did_ kinda go off, didn't I. It's not as if anybody blasted you or the others who were calling the RDRAM fans zealots. I should probably go over to the fool and foam at the mouth there for a while...
Re:Can the internet community sue microsoft?
on
Code Red III
·
· Score: 1
OK what if you made the liability limit the purchase price of the software?
That would completely save the FSF/OSS developers, but the Empire, who's grown _very_ rich by selling shoddy crap, might lose some money.
And I don't think it's totally unreasonable for a software customer to have _some_ assurance that the product he's paying hard ca$h for might just actually work. In most industries, this is called a warranty, but the software industry seems somehow magically immune to consumers' expectation of this, as well as the general expectation of a product's basic safety. People won't buy a coffeepot without a warranty, what's so special about computer software?
I swear, I've yet to buy a commercial software program that actually _worked_! They're crap! The publishers of that shit need to be held to _some_ standard of "merchantability" or _something_!
Perhaps something along the lines of:
"We've made every reasonable effort to assure that our software is bug and problem free, and performs essentially as described in the instruction manuals. Unfortunately, we can't control the effects that _other_ software in your computer may have on ours, and while our support staff will make reasonable efforts to help you run our software, proper operation may not be possible in all circumstances. In this case, you should return the software, including all original media and materials, with a notarized affadavit to the effect that you have been unable to use it and retain no copies, to our customer service department along with a copy of your receipt. A refund will be sent to you for your purchase price, along with an apology for your inconvenience. We value your business and hope we will be able to solve your difficulty in our next product release."
Contrast that with the gist of the M$ EULA:
"This software isn't warranted to do a damn thing. Don't come running to us if it doesn't work, all risk is on you. If it doesn't happen, you're screwed. We don't care. We don't have to."
The M$ EULA pisses me purple every time I see it. What a crock of shit!
And yet you agree to it when you _buy_ your computer! (I'm in the market for a laptop). It applies to software which you have no choice but to buy!
OSS is a different issue, because the developer has no control over what someone might do with his code, and what the consequences of that might be, but a monolithic, binary-only, shrink-wrapped (or preinstalled on the machine!) totally controlled-by-the-publisher black-box software package over which the _user_ has little to no control shouldn't be entirely the user's responsibility to understand and maintain.
This was always my problem with M$. There was too much that had to be done to their code to make it useful, and too little information or latitude given to the luser to allow him to fix it himself.
Imagine how messed up it would be if I could sue because I designed my real-time aircraft control system around the Linux 1.0 kernel and BIND?
If you design a real-time aircraft control system around Linux 1.0 and BIND, you should maybe _be_ sued - by the estates of the people killed in the crash!
I too was impressed by the TiBook's format, but disappointed by a maximum resolution of 1152x760. I want more than that. Even the 14" systems I'm considering have to have 1400x1050. If 1600x900 or so were available on the TiBook I'd have one in my backpack right now. I don't need 802.11.
Re:Can the internet community sue microsoft?
on
Code Red III
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, the EULA totally bends the customer over.
See goatse.cx for a graphic analysis. (but be advised that there's an obscenity warning out on that site!)(If only M$ would give you a similar obscenity warning before you read their EULA!)
But is it actually enforceable?
When I tell M$ cu$tomers about various provisions in the EULA in an attempt to explain to them how badly they're being screwed, the usual reaction is complete disbelief that anything so ridiculous could ever be enforced in a court.
Isn't it time somebody _tested_ this horseshit to see? Infineon had the glands to take RamBus to court, after other manufacturers caved and settled, and look what happened to RamBus! What if someone sued M$ for some major damages and a jury said: "Yes, if your software makes the customer's computer catch fire, burning down his house and killing his bedridden mother, M$ _has_ some liability in the matter!"?
If you'll look at the financial statements of companies like Toshiba that make these chips, I think you'll find that their profit margins are none too fat. 3.5% is a big bite, and one that the manufacturers can ill afford.
If I were Micron, I'd tell RamBus to go fsck themselves. I doubt that they'll get any more manufacturers to cave in to their claims. At best, they'll win hard-fought court battles for any royalties at all, battles which will leave them financailly drained. MUCH more likely is that they'll fight another fraud suit and _lose_, at which point the RAM industry will laugh at them even harder than they are now.
I'll say "Intel sucks, RDRAM bites, DDR rocks and AMD RULES!" Go READ the datasheets for the P4 and the Athlon and come back and tell me which is better. But if you can't understand those datasheets, shut up, you're not entitled to an opinion. Hersay does NOT count!
I have, on several occasions, detailed how AMD has licensed, cloned, or otherwise second-sourced every chip Intel's ever built, usually with better yields - which means better speed, better reliability, and LOWER PRICES for what are essentially the same chips.
That's not just the CPUs, either. That's UVEPROM, EEPROM, peripheral chips, and Intel's entire line.
But Intel has extravagant multimedia ads which lie out their ass, as well as, of course, dancers in bunny suits, so they get brand recognition (sorta like Micro$oft) and AMD must suck, right?
WRONG! AMD has people in bunny suits, too, only they're busy burning silicon instead of dancing on your TV. This savings allows them to bring you their product at lower prices.
And RamBus? RamBus should just cash it in, retire, and get out of the market before someone else sues the remaining snot out of them.
You're saying that because your copy is not perfect it's okay?,
Yes, basically, that's the argument, or, conversely, because a digital copy _is_ perfect, that's NOT ok.
The stated problem the IP industry has with digital technology is that "the hundredth-generation copy is just as good as the first."
Note that's "hundredth-generation", not "hundredth copy".
If you have a VHS tape of, say, the Matrix (just to pick on something that seems universally popular in this forum), and you go into business selling copies of it (this is strictly forbidden under the copyright statutes) you can make hundreds of "first generation" copies of that master tape and they'll all be quite good, more or less indistinguishable from the original. If you have a hundred VCRs, you only have to play the tape once to make a hundred copies, and your master will be capable of producing several thousands of copies
But eventually the master is going to wear out. The theory is that then you must start using one of your copies. The copy is called "first-generation" and the second round of copies you're making from that are "second generation" - copies of copies.
By the time you get a half-dozen generations down the chain (maybe even sooner), the quality of the copies will show definate degradation, for either audio cassettes or video tapes, or wood books reproduced on a photocopier.
NOT SO for a CD or a DVD or a digitally-published book. The first and subsequent generations are just as perfect as the master copy. This gives a DVD of the Matrix a FAR greater potential for creating copies than an analog VHS tape.
This is (officially) what the industry is hot under the collar about. This is why we can't watch DVDs under Linux. They claim they're suppressing copying of a digital media that allows for the generation of (many many thousands) more copies than (the many thousands) producable from analog media. What's to keep you (if you've a market for a hundred thousand copies of the Matrix) from just going out and buying a new master when the VHS wears out, I don't understand. It seems like a minimal investment, if you're selling the copies for money, which is the only reason anyone would make enough copies for this to make a difference! The scale implied here is that of _real_ piracy, for big money, and I really have to question the numbers of incidents of this. This isn't a kid with a burner making copies of his friends' CDs. A pirate making one hundred thousand copies of the Matrix is going to need an outlet, and he's going to be visible on the market. Why not go after that end of the business, rather than incorporate copy-protection measures so heavy-handed, and legislate copying prohibitions so severe, that they interfere with the legal and fair use of the product? It's _already_ a big time crime to sell a hundred thousand bootleg copies of the Matrix, yet the IP industry clamors that they need much tighter restrictions (such as the DMCA) to keep this from happening with digital media.
Well, that's the industry's claim. I believe that their sweat is actually because the playable lifetime of an analog media is limited (at which point you have to pay for a replacement) while a digital media is far more durable, and a couple of backups (which - as long as you don't give them away - is obviously protected and legal under "fair use") would make the digital copy permanant. Then the customer never buys another one. That's what they're _really_ worked about, though it's not what they state as the official excuse. It becomes painfully obvious that that's the problem with eBook uploading, as well.
Go back to the deposition from the MPA chairman. HINAL, but he knows "fair use" must be tolerated, and he _knows_ "the DMCA doesn't interfere with 'fair use'". Alas, his definition of "fair use" extends to time-shifting of free TV programs _only_. That's the _only_ legitimate use for that red button on yer VCR. Any other is piracy. Any and all decription or attempted decryption is defined by the DMCA as "piracy", even if it's just to watch yer DVD on yer Linux system, or to upload and read that eBook on yer computer's 19" monitor. Do NOT attempt to burden him with the troublesome technical detail that it's unnecessary for the hundred-thousand-copy pirate to _ever_ decrypt the DVD (or the eBook) in order to copy it, HINAT (He Is Not A Technician).
The question is really more like: "_Why_ will anyone write software, if it's Free?"
ESR has the answer to this.
I saw him speak to a roomfull of maybe 400 people.
"How many of you", he asks, "write software for a living?"
4 out of 5 hands go up.
"How many of your companies, your jobs, depend on the _sale_ of that software?"
Maybe a dozen hands are left.
Truly, 95% at least of the software development going on is done in house, to solve in-house problems, and is never sold.
None of the stuff I've ever written or maintained was ever sold. To anybody. For any price. The _output_ of that software is my boss' product, but the software itself is so specialized it's completely unsalable.
As a straw poll, how many of you develop software for _sale_, and how many develop software that is used completely inside your company?
Hey, Rob: This might be a good topic for a/. poll.
For commodity software - OS, compilers, utilities, GUIs, drivers, et al, the Free Software model has demonstrated itself to be perfectly viable. There's a _large_ community of people out there willing to create, and share, the things that everybody needs.
Specialized applications - now that's what software authors can make their living on.
swiss army knife
palm
palm keyboard
flashlight
cell phone
camera
minicorder
CDs
dog cookies
first aid incl. Excederin
checkbook
novel
hand lotion
tissues _&_ wetnaps
sewing kit
food & water
Where are you going, camping?
Yow, that must get heavy.
And us guys think we've got the geekiness market cornered.
Reading this is making me feel a whole lot better about the way I usually pack a phone, a couple of pagers, a PDA, and a wallet. OK I have a tiny flashlight on my keyring.
Of course, I guess I could always go back to the fanny pack, which had plenty of room to add the medium handgun...
$50 or so for Lose 3.11 upgrade version (I have no legitimate, installable, WinBloze license)
$50 about for MSVC++ 5.1 (educational edition from college bookstore)
I think that's all I've ever spent on M$
Linux?
$20 Slackware '96 Toolkit around March 1997 (best $20 I ever spent!!!)
$ 0 Four free CDs from lsl.com, I think it was
$30 SuSE 6.1, but that's on the brother's machine
$30 or so last fall at COMDEX' Linux pavillion - (grabbed what I could for free, paid for several others)
I've done about 4 Deb Slink installs over the phone, now they've all been updated to Potato. Yes, each took about 36 hours. Yes, I have a second line, and a firewall that's rather persistent about keeping its connection up.
That's $100 for M$, $80 on Linux (& BSD)
Unless you want to count the two or three hundred dollars I've spent on O'Reilly's books....
Which has been a better value? Don't ask.
I'll agree with the general sentiment that yer first install prolly oughta be from a CD, with a book (though the little pamphlet I got with the Slackware tookit got me through it). (It's possible to install at least Debian completely over the phone, you have to either have another machine to nfs from, or make about a dozen floppies, the rest can be done via ftp..) But don't pay too much for that.
Actually, the next time I go to COMDEX I'll probably just _give_ some $20 bills to the guys who're representing the stuff I use. They _do_ need to eat.
Is that still in production?
If so, I haven't found it on IBM's website (yet).
The closest I've come to the configuration discussed above at IBM has been about a T21p, which costs like $3000!
Now, I'd truly love to support IBM in their Linux crusade, but c'mon, a 50% premium is a little stiff. I'm sure the T21 is a very nice machine, and I oughta try to get a look at one, because its construction may (partially) warrant that price tag.
Inspiron 5000e? Nice, a bit heavy, but out of production..
The Apple powerbook, now, there's a screen! And in a fairly thin, lightweight package, too. (try & find a 15" UXGA 1600x1050 laptop under 7.+ pounds!)
Anybody know if I can get SO5.2 for MacOS X?
Or for the G4 Linux port, either?
Model: Dell Inspiron 4000. 256 MB RAM. 10 GB HD. 700-850 MHZ PIII. Some winmodem I really don't care about it.14" TFT screen Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 Potato as the only OS
That one's on my short list. I'm willing to go another $75 for the 20G disk, but the step to $30G is too much.
the internal modem: I was told from a friend that its possible to use some linux winmodem drivers to use it. No personal experiences
The "Gold Card Modem" listed in their options costs a little extra, but is worth it to me as it is billed in their 'extra info' as having DOS support. That's a pretty good indicator of a "real" modem, but I'm _still_ going to ask them about this. I'm not buying a machine with an imbedded LoseModem, why should I pay for that?
the internal sound hardware. No problem at all. ESS Maestro 3 support in 2.2.19
That's a comforting thing to hear.
the internal 10/100MHz ethernet interface:Comes without it...
Right, you get ethernet either with the modem options (no DOS support for either eth/modem combo) or seperately, for which they want too much. I've had 3 good experiences with Linksys PCMCIA ethernet cards from BestBuy & RadioShit (which think they're NE2000s and which the CardServices module makes hot-pluggable!) so that's what I'll probably use.
BTW Once you have built in a built in modem and ethernet port I am not sure what use PCMCIA ports really have? I have removed the blanker cards to allow better air flow.
I find them handy to stuff my CF cards into (with a $10 adapter) and move things to/from the PDA. They'd be useful if you had a CF digital camera, too.
The blanker cards may be intended to insure that the air comes in near something that needs cooling, rather than in through the PCMCIA holes....
The customizer will let you pick between a couple of M$ "options", but not Linux.
You have to (had to) _call_ Dell on the phone and ask them if they would put Linux on it, and the answer to that is (was) "yes". I did not ask about being relieved of/refunded the M$ tax, as I'm sure they would look upon a pre-installed RH as "costing" them at least as much as bundled WinBlooze.
There's nothing like a level playing field to demonstrate "lack of customer demand".
I'm actively in the market for a laptop. I want that huge screen, so that narrows the choices somewhat. I think my eventual decision is going to be based on whose laptop has Linux drivers available for:
1. the internal modem
2. the internal sound hardware
3. the internal 10/100MHz ethernet interface
Seeing as they all have these things, and they're all rather dodgy for Linux drivers. I'm going to make an issue of this, as by the time I pay for all this neato gear (that I can't use) and for WinBloze (that I won't use) and then pay more to replace these with things I _can_ and will use, that laptop starts looking much more expensive than it would be if its imbedded hardware were useful with Linux.
I thought they had been outlawed in principle - for safety reasons.
I remember those well. They were a _great_ way to do all kinds of foot injuries, from pinching them in the moving parts to scraping them on the ground. There were, of course, the whole gamut of collision class problems (other kids had pedal carz, too) and then there were the running-off-the -road style problems (just put one over a curb - with or without help from another vehicle - a rollover is a distinct possibility, with pinched fingers pretty much guaranteed).
But the _real_ way to really really kill yourself was to get a bigger kid (the bigger the better - kinda like the big-block V8 engines that were being mounted in real cars at the time) to shove you up to an honest 15MPH or so. At that kind of speed, anything could happen - except that you couldn't get yer feet anywhere _near_ the pedals, so braking was pretty much out of the question.
It sure was a good thing we didn't live near any good, steep hills. The kids who lived near hills had _scars_.
All I see in toy stores anymore are electric jobs with a top speed of about 2 mi/hr, and reduction gearing so strong that there's no possibility of pushing them any faster.
DON'T GET ME WRONG! Pedal cars taught me vital lessons: that I wasn't indestructable, and that moving concrete sidewalk can _hurt_ raw skin. Both these proved invaluable as soon as I learned to ride a bicycle....
You can't tell me any amount of engineering in the world can make those things "safe".
"Was there really an embedded market that existed before those early [PCs and their] microprocessors?"
Oh, yes, you bet.
Before the 6502 and the 6809 and 8085/6/7/8 & the Z80 there were at least a couple of previous generations of stuff like the 8008 (and before it the 4004), another from Fairchild called the F8, Intersil's 1600, RCA's 1802 and three or four others that were in an old book I thought I still had around here, but I guess not..
Believe it or not, the 8080, as scummy as it was, was a "best of breed" that pushed a number of even less capable competitors off the map. I'm _not_ talking about the 6502 or the 6800, they came later and were superior. Something like an 8008 or an F8, a few support chips, a 64-byte static RAM, and a 256x8 fuse-link PROM (or often much, much less) could replace several dozen RTL or TTL chips, and this kind of equipment took over many complicated logic tasks (like say, "dumb" terminals or printers or modems) _long_ before they could be equipped with the kind of storage it takes to make a PC.
I could rant on, but I'm not real solid about the facts and the dates and certainly not the part numbers, so I think I'll go read this:
http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu.html#Sec1
There's plenty out there to be found in the area of microcontroller history.
I like that. I think it's pretty obvious that if we want to maintain our privacy we're going to need things like anonymous email, anonymous digital ca$h, pgp/gpg and probably other tools. I'm _surprised_ no one has yet come up with the concept of an anonymous credit card, 'twould be a convenient way to buy stuff. Is it possible there's 'no market demand' for such a service?
I can't think of a better source of software for such products than the FSF. Neither emperor (neither Gates nor McNealy) seems the slightest bit interested in the privacy of his subjects, so there shouldn't be too much of a struggle over who's going to 'innovate' this stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're really Hertz, you could do us all a favor by suing the snot outta these guys.
Are you telling me, then, that English _is_ your native language?
There you go kiddes, that one was clearly written by someone whose native language is NOT English.
Yet I find only 2 typoes and one (bigword) misspelling in what must be at least 150 words.
His grammar works better than most American kiddes', as well.
LEARN TO SPELL, or at least get a spellchecker, before you humiliate yourself in a public forum!
Fix this sentence (Spelled phonetically): "Thaar going over thaar to thaar car".
and quite welcome in my estimation, as the most voiciferous OEM to embrace Linux. Just their PR is a great thing for Linux, IMHO. Surely you've seen the commercials, with Avery Brooks (Cpt. Sisko, no less!) growling about how your existing software just isn't going to handle the future, and "something totally new" is needed. Then there's the "programmers from another dimension" (the guys in the space suits). Their software infrastructure is in immediate danger of complete and total meltdown, and they're searching the universe for "a new kind of software". They're caught wandering the corridors of Big Blue and sent firmly to the front desk - to obtain visitor passes.
The name of the Beast is never spoken, but it's pretty plain, from the "software infrastructure meltdown" business, where these guys are from. They look kinda like depresed versions of the Intel guys in the bunny suits: the music has stopped, the party is over, and the reality behind all the bullshit the market has fed them has set in. They need software that _works_, immediately. They run into this deliciously geeky blonde who has the solutions: "WebSphere, DB2, Lotus, Java, UNIX, and _Linux_ (pronounced correctly, right on yer TV!)".
The software guys drool. And I can't help but notice the conspicuous absence of M$, WinDoze, IE, NT, XP, IIS, Exchange, FrontPage, or any of those other Evil Empire things from her list.
Now, you & I know better, but to the great unwashed, until they see something on TV, it cannot _really_ exist. See the Intel vs. AMD debate for rants on how important TV exposure is to marketing. Did Dell ever manage to mention their Linux "support" in any of _their_ ads? One of the things Linux needs for mainstream desktop acceptance, (in addition to a user-configurable GIU and other graphic administration tools, "Office Productivity Apps", and yadda yadda yadda) is advertizing exposure. BIG TIME. Is Linus going to advertize on the TV? I doubt it. How about RedHat? Corel? I don't see it. I _do_ see Big Blue, huckstering Linux, and I think this is A Very Great Thing(tm) for Linux.
And YES, IBM's Linux involvement extends to Open Source, as they port their stuff (like jfs) to Linux, they _have_ given back the source to the community.
"In particular, IBM chose to embrace Linux as a way to help administrators with key server management tasks...."
What part of that suggests to you that SMIT won't be ported to Linux? Or that once it is, the source won't be released?
What IBM stands to gain by this is:
Piss off Redmond. There's still a score there to settle, and Linux looks like IBM's chance. Really, If I were BillG, the mere idea of Linux running on everything from the zSeries (aka System/390) down to blenders (while the M$ minions struggle to port WinBloze to IA-64), would keep me wide awake at night.
(REAL) Open Source Development. Not "Shared Source", "Community Source", or any of those other "open" source models which don't work. Come on, everybody knows the party line about Open Source(tm) causing cheaper, more robust, more secure, and generally better software. Well, don't you believe it yourselves? Instead of IBM having to develop their _entire_ operating system, they can rely on GNU/Linux for probably 90% of it, and only have to actually develop for themselves just the specific parts which handle the unique things in their hardware. If they Open Source _that_ (and why not, it gives no competitor anything), the community would have good examples of how _to_ do SMP, massive scaling, and the other things that Linux is weakest at - the big iron stuff that is still pretty much reserved for the commercial *NIXs.
I see IBM's involvement in Open Source and GNU/Linux to be a win/win situation for both Linux _and_ IBM. I applaud them for having the testicles to buck Redmond on this issue.
And have you guys _forgotten_ how IBM's endorsement turned QDos from something nobody in their right mind would have ever touched into the desktop computer industry's dominant "OS"?
What is the relationship of the "purple book" and the creation of the "purple dinosour"? Any guesses?
Mine would be "absolutely none". They're nowhere near even the same hue of purple.
Um...between the above and the subject line you're using, I hope you didn't get the impression that I am some sort of Intel fanboy.
Oh, no way! My comment was aimed towards the described induhvidual, and mostly at the general "Intel Inside" mentality. While I can't track him down and flame him directly, this is as good a forum as any to rant in. I hope _you_ don't get the impression that I'm less than proud to be an AMD customer.
I guess I _did_ kinda go off, didn't I. It's not as if anybody blasted you or the others who were calling the RDRAM fans zealots. I should probably go over to the fool and foam at the mouth there for a while...
OK what if you made the liability limit the purchase price of the software?
That would completely save the FSF/OSS developers, but the Empire, who's grown _very_ rich by selling shoddy crap, might lose some money.
And I don't think it's totally unreasonable for a software customer to have _some_ assurance that the product he's paying hard ca$h for might just actually work. In most industries, this is called a warranty, but the software industry seems somehow magically immune to consumers' expectation of this, as well as the general expectation of a product's basic safety. People won't buy a coffeepot without a warranty, what's so special about computer software?
I swear, I've yet to buy a commercial software program that actually _worked_! They're crap! The publishers of that shit need to be held to _some_ standard of "merchantability" or _something_!
Perhaps something along the lines of: "We've made every reasonable effort to assure that our software is bug and problem free, and performs essentially as described in the instruction manuals. Unfortunately, we can't control the effects that _other_ software in your computer may have on ours, and while our support staff will make reasonable efforts to help you run our software, proper operation may not be possible in all circumstances. In this case, you should return the software, including all original media and materials, with a notarized affadavit to the effect that you have been unable to use it and retain no copies, to our customer service department along with a copy of your receipt. A refund will be sent to you for your purchase price, along with an apology for your inconvenience. We value your business and hope we will be able to solve your difficulty in our next product release."
Contrast that with the gist of the M$ EULA: "This software isn't warranted to do a damn thing. Don't come running to us if it doesn't work, all risk is on you. If it doesn't happen, you're screwed. We don't care. We don't have to."
The M$ EULA pisses me purple every time I see it. What a crock of shit!
And yet you agree to it when you _buy_ your computer! (I'm in the market for a laptop). It applies to software which you have no choice but to buy!
OSS is a different issue, because the developer has no control over what someone might do with his code, and what the consequences of that might be, but a monolithic, binary-only, shrink-wrapped (or preinstalled on the machine!) totally controlled-by-the-publisher black-box software package over which the _user_ has little to no control shouldn't be entirely the user's responsibility to understand and maintain.
This was always my problem with M$. There was too much that had to be done to their code to make it useful, and too little information or latitude given to the luser to allow him to fix it himself.
Imagine how messed up it would be if I could sue because I designed my real-time aircraft control system around the Linux 1.0 kernel and BIND?
If you design a real-time aircraft control system around Linux 1.0 and BIND, you should maybe _be_ sued - by the estates of the people killed in the crash!
I too was impressed by the TiBook's format, but disappointed by a maximum resolution of 1152x760. I want more than that. Even the 14" systems I'm considering have to have 1400x1050. If 1600x900 or so were available on the TiBook I'd have one in my backpack right now. I don't need 802.11.
Yeah, the EULA totally bends the customer over.
See goatse.cx for a graphic analysis. (but be advised that there's an obscenity warning out on that site!)(If only M$ would give you a similar obscenity warning before you read their EULA!)
But is it actually enforceable?
When I tell M$ cu$tomers about various provisions in the EULA in an attempt to explain to them how badly they're being screwed, the usual reaction is complete disbelief that anything so ridiculous could ever be enforced in a court.
Isn't it time somebody _tested_ this horseshit to see? Infineon had the glands to take RamBus to court, after other manufacturers caved and settled, and look what happened to RamBus! What if someone sued M$ for some major damages and a jury said: "Yes, if your software makes the customer's computer catch fire, burning down his house and killing his bedridden mother, M$ _has_ some liability in the matter!"?
If you'll look at the financial statements of companies like Toshiba that make these chips, I think you'll find that their profit margins are none too fat. 3.5% is a big bite, and one that the manufacturers can ill afford.
If I were Micron, I'd tell RamBus to go fsck themselves. I doubt that they'll get any more manufacturers to cave in to their claims. At best, they'll win hard-fought court battles for any royalties at all, battles which will leave them financailly drained. MUCH more likely is that they'll fight another fraud suit and _lose_, at which point the RAM industry will laugh at them even harder than they are now.
YES.
Not having to pay RamBus 3.5% will make the prices fall that much faster.
I'll say "Intel sucks, RDRAM bites, DDR rocks and AMD RULES!" Go READ the datasheets for the P4 and the Athlon and come back and tell me which is better. But if you can't understand those datasheets, shut up, you're not entitled to an opinion. Hersay does NOT count!
I have, on several occasions, detailed how AMD has licensed, cloned, or otherwise second-sourced every chip Intel's ever built, usually with better yields - which means better speed, better reliability, and LOWER PRICES for what are essentially the same chips.
That's not just the CPUs, either. That's UVEPROM, EEPROM, peripheral chips, and Intel's entire line.
But Intel has extravagant multimedia ads which lie out their ass, as well as, of course, dancers in bunny suits, so they get brand recognition (sorta like Micro$oft) and AMD must suck, right?
WRONG! AMD has people in bunny suits, too, only they're busy burning silicon instead of dancing on your TV. This savings allows them to bring you their product at lower prices.
And RamBus? RamBus should just cash it in, retire, and get out of the market before someone else sues the remaining snot out of them.
You're saying that because your copy is not perfect it's okay?,
Yes, basically, that's the argument, or, conversely, because a digital copy _is_ perfect, that's NOT ok.
The stated problem the IP industry has with digital technology is that "the hundredth-generation copy is just as good as the first."
Note that's "hundredth-generation", not "hundredth copy".
If you have a VHS tape of, say, the Matrix (just to pick on something that seems universally popular in this forum), and you go into business selling copies of it (this is strictly forbidden under the copyright statutes) you can make hundreds of "first generation" copies of that master tape and they'll all be quite good, more or less indistinguishable from the original. If you have a hundred VCRs, you only have to play the tape once to make a hundred copies, and your master will be capable of producing several thousands of copies
But eventually the master is going to wear out. The theory is that then you must start using one of your copies. The copy is called "first-generation" and the second round of copies you're making from that are "second generation" - copies of copies.
By the time you get a half-dozen generations down the chain (maybe even sooner), the quality of the copies will show definate degradation, for either audio cassettes or video tapes, or wood books reproduced on a photocopier.
NOT SO for a CD or a DVD or a digitally-published book. The first and subsequent generations are just as perfect as the master copy. This gives a DVD of the Matrix a FAR greater potential for creating copies than an analog VHS tape.
This is (officially) what the industry is hot under the collar about. This is why we can't watch DVDs under Linux. They claim they're suppressing copying of a digital media that allows for the generation of (many many thousands) more copies than (the many thousands) producable from analog media. What's to keep you (if you've a market for a hundred thousand copies of the Matrix) from just going out and buying a new master when the VHS wears out, I don't understand. It seems like a minimal investment, if you're selling the copies for money, which is the only reason anyone would make enough copies for this to make a difference! The scale implied here is that of _real_ piracy, for big money, and I really have to question the numbers of incidents of this. This isn't a kid with a burner making copies of his friends' CDs. A pirate making one hundred thousand copies of the Matrix is going to need an outlet, and he's going to be visible on the market. Why not go after that end of the business, rather than incorporate copy-protection measures so heavy-handed, and legislate copying prohibitions so severe, that they interfere with the legal and fair use of the product? It's _already_ a big time crime to sell a hundred thousand bootleg copies of the Matrix, yet the IP industry clamors that they need much tighter restrictions (such as the DMCA) to keep this from happening with digital media.
Well, that's the industry's claim. I believe that their sweat is actually because the playable lifetime of an analog media is limited (at which point you have to pay for a replacement) while a digital media is far more durable, and a couple of backups (which - as long as you don't give them away - is obviously protected and legal under "fair use") would make the digital copy permanant. Then the customer never buys another one. That's what they're _really_ worked about, though it's not what they state as the official excuse. It becomes painfully obvious that that's the problem with eBook uploading, as well.
Go back to the deposition from the MPA chairman. HINAL, but he knows "fair use" must be tolerated, and he _knows_ "the DMCA doesn't interfere with 'fair use'". Alas, his definition of "fair use" extends to time-shifting of free TV programs _only_. That's the _only_ legitimate use for that red button on yer VCR. Any other is piracy. Any and all decription or attempted decryption is defined by the DMCA as "piracy", even if it's just to watch yer DVD on yer Linux system, or to upload and read that eBook on yer computer's 19" monitor. Do NOT attempt to burden him with the troublesome technical detail that it's unnecessary for the hundred-thousand-copy pirate to _ever_ decrypt the DVD (or the eBook) in order to copy it, HINAT (He Is Not A Technician).
The question is really more like: "_Why_ will anyone write software, if it's Free?"
/. poll.
ESR has the answer to this.
I saw him speak to a roomfull of maybe 400 people.
"How many of you", he asks, "write software for a living?"
4 out of 5 hands go up.
"How many of your companies, your jobs, depend on the _sale_ of that software?"
Maybe a dozen hands are left.
Truly, 95% at least of the software development going on is done in house, to solve in-house problems, and is never sold.
None of the stuff I've ever written or maintained was ever sold. To anybody. For any price. The _output_ of that software is my boss' product, but the software itself is so specialized it's completely unsalable.
As a straw poll, how many of you develop software for _sale_, and how many develop software that is used completely inside your company?
Hey, Rob: This might be a good topic for a
For commodity software - OS, compilers, utilities, GUIs, drivers, et al, the Free Software model has demonstrated itself to be perfectly viable. There's a _large_ community of people out there willing to create, and share, the things that everybody needs.
Specialized applications - now that's what software authors can make their living on.
swiss army knife
palm
palm keyboard
flashlight
cell phone
camera
minicorder
CDs
dog cookies
first aid incl. Excederin
checkbook
novel
hand lotion
tissues _&_ wetnaps
sewing kit
food & water
Where are you going, camping?
Yow, that must get heavy.
And us guys think we've got the geekiness market cornered.
Reading this is making me feel a whole lot better about the way I usually pack a phone, a couple of pagers, a PDA, and a wallet. OK I have a tiny flashlight on my keyring.
Of course, I guess I could always go back to the fanny pack, which had plenty of room to add the medium handgun...
Let's see...
$50 or so for Lose 3.11 upgrade version (I have no legitimate, installable, WinBloze license)
$50 about for MSVC++ 5.1 (educational edition from college bookstore)
I think that's all I've ever spent on M$
Linux?
$20 Slackware '96 Toolkit around March 1997 (best $20 I ever spent!!!)
$ 0 Four free CDs from lsl.com, I think it was
$30 SuSE 6.1, but that's on the brother's machine
$30 or so last fall at COMDEX' Linux pavillion - (grabbed what I could for free, paid for several others)
I've done about 4 Deb Slink installs over the phone, now they've all been updated to Potato. Yes, each took about 36 hours. Yes, I have a second line, and a firewall that's rather persistent about keeping its connection up.
That's $100 for M$, $80 on Linux (& BSD)
Unless you want to count the two or three hundred dollars I've spent on O'Reilly's books....
Which has been a better value? Don't ask.
I'll agree with the general sentiment that yer first install prolly oughta be from a CD, with a book (though the little pamphlet I got with the Slackware tookit got me through it). (It's possible to install at least Debian completely over the phone, you have to either have another machine to nfs from, or make about a dozen floppies, the rest can be done via ftp..) But don't pay too much for that.
Actually, the next time I go to COMDEX I'll probably just _give_ some $20 bills to the guys who're representing the stuff I use. They _do_ need to eat.
Is that still in production?
If so, I haven't found it on IBM's website (yet).
The closest I've come to the configuration discussed above at IBM has been about a T21p, which costs like $3000!
Now, I'd truly love to support IBM in their Linux crusade, but c'mon, a 50% premium is a little stiff. I'm sure the T21 is a very nice machine, and I oughta try to get a look at one, because its construction may (partially) warrant that price tag.
Inspiron 5000e? Nice, a bit heavy, but out of production..
The Apple powerbook, now, there's a screen! And in a fairly thin, lightweight package, too. (try & find a 15" UXGA 1600x1050 laptop under 7.+ pounds!)
Anybody know if I can get SO5.2 for MacOS X?
Or for the G4 Linux port, either?
Model: Dell Inspiron 4000. 256 MB RAM. 10 GB HD. 700-850 MHZ PIII. Some winmodem I really don't care about it.14" TFT screen Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 Potato as the only OS
:Comes without it...
That one's on my short list. I'm willing to go another $75 for the 20G disk, but the step to $30G is too much.
the internal modem: I was told from a friend that its possible to use some linux winmodem drivers to use it. No personal experiences
The "Gold Card Modem" listed in their options costs a little extra, but is worth it to me as it is billed in their 'extra info' as having DOS support. That's a pretty good indicator of a "real" modem, but I'm _still_ going to ask them about this. I'm not buying a machine with an imbedded LoseModem, why should I pay for that?
the internal sound hardware. No problem at all. ESS Maestro 3 support in 2.2.19
That's a comforting thing to hear.
the internal 10/100MHz ethernet interface
Right, you get ethernet either with the modem options (no DOS support for either eth/modem combo) or seperately, for which they want too much. I've had 3 good experiences with Linksys PCMCIA ethernet cards from BestBuy & RadioShit (which think they're NE2000s and which the CardServices module makes hot-pluggable!) so that's what I'll probably use.
BTW Once you have built in a built in modem and ethernet port I am not sure what use PCMCIA ports really have? I have removed the blanker cards to allow better air flow.
I find them handy to stuff my CF cards into (with a $10 adapter) and move things to/from the PDA. They'd be useful if you had a CF digital camera, too.
The blanker cards may be intended to insure that the air comes in near something that needs cooling, rather than in through the PCMCIA holes....
The customizer will let you pick between a couple of M$ "options", but not Linux.
You have to (had to) _call_ Dell on the phone and ask them if they would put Linux on it, and the answer to that is (was) "yes". I did not ask about being relieved of/refunded the M$ tax, as I'm sure they would look upon a pre-installed RH as "costing" them at least as much as bundled WinBlooze.
There's nothing like a level playing field to demonstrate "lack of customer demand".
I'm actively in the market for a laptop. I want that huge screen, so that narrows the choices somewhat. I think my eventual decision is going to be based on whose laptop has Linux drivers available for:
1. the internal modem
2. the internal sound hardware
3. the internal 10/100MHz ethernet interface
Seeing as they all have these things, and they're all rather dodgy for Linux drivers. I'm going to make an issue of this, as by the time I pay for all this neato gear (that I can't use) and for WinBloze (that I won't use) and then pay more to replace these with things I _can_ and will use, that laptop starts looking much more expensive than it would be if its imbedded hardware were useful with Linux.
Some kind of IE plugin? Who uses _that_, and why should we care what the www looks like through IE, anyway?
If you can get a decent rendition of the artwork (full-scale), I know a hungry silkscreener that would love to print some shirts.....
Jeezus, do they still _make_ pedal carz?
I thought they had been outlawed in principle - for safety reasons.
I remember those well. They were a _great_ way to do all kinds of foot injuries, from pinching them in the moving parts to scraping them on the ground. There were, of course, the whole gamut of collision class problems (other kids had pedal carz, too) and then there were the running-off-the -road style problems (just put one over a curb - with or without help from another vehicle - a rollover is a distinct possibility, with pinched fingers pretty much guaranteed).
But the _real_ way to really really kill yourself was to get a bigger kid (the bigger the better - kinda like the big-block V8 engines that were being mounted in real cars at the time) to shove you up to an honest 15MPH or so. At that kind of speed, anything could happen - except that you couldn't get yer feet anywhere _near_ the pedals, so braking was pretty much out of the question.
It sure was a good thing we didn't live near any good, steep hills. The kids who lived near hills had _scars_.
All I see in toy stores anymore are electric jobs with a top speed of about 2 mi/hr, and reduction gearing so strong that there's no possibility of pushing them any faster.
DON'T GET ME WRONG! Pedal cars taught me vital lessons: that I wasn't indestructable, and that moving concrete sidewalk can _hurt_ raw skin. Both these proved invaluable as soon as I learned to ride a bicycle....
You can't tell me any amount of engineering in the world can make those things "safe".
Lego? Fsck that - I was known to eat _staples_!
"Was there really an embedded market that existed before those early [PCs and their] microprocessors?"
1
Oh, yes, you bet.
Before the 6502 and the 6809 and 8085/6/7/8 & the Z80 there were at least a couple of previous generations of stuff like the 8008 (and before it the 4004), another from Fairchild called the F8, Intersil's 1600, RCA's 1802 and three or four others that were in an old book I thought I still had around here, but I guess not..
Believe it or not, the 8080, as scummy as it was, was a "best of breed" that pushed a number of even less capable competitors off the map. I'm _not_ talking about the 6502 or the 6800, they came later and were superior. Something like an 8008 or an F8, a few support chips, a 64-byte static RAM, and a 256x8 fuse-link PROM (or often much, much less) could replace several dozen RTL or TTL chips, and this kind of equipment took over many complicated logic tasks (like say, "dumb" terminals or printers or modems) _long_ before they could be equipped with the kind of storage it takes to make a PC.
I could rant on, but I'm not real solid about the facts and the dates and certainly not the part numbers, so I think I'll go read this:
http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu.html#Sec
There's plenty out there to be found in the area of microcontroller history.
I like that. I think it's pretty obvious that if we want to maintain our privacy we're going to need things like anonymous email, anonymous digital ca$h, pgp/gpg and probably other tools. I'm _surprised_ no one has yet come up with the concept of an anonymous credit card, 'twould be a convenient way to buy stuff. Is it possible there's 'no market demand' for such a service?
I can't think of a better source of software for such products than the FSF. Neither emperor (neither Gates nor McNealy) seems the slightest bit interested in the privacy of his subjects, so there shouldn't be too much of a struggle over who's going to 'innovate' this stuff.