To be honest, the way I understand it is that every piece of software that produces an XML stream is infringe this patent. Think every piece of webservice and XML processing out there. I'd say that pretty much every piece of software out there infringes on this.
The thing is very simple: Competition. This market is so heavily regulated that it clutters competition. In france we are one of the worst country in terms of competition and we have 3 nationwide providers. A 4th one is coming in next year.
It is the same in the DSL market. Back in the 90s, we had only the historic provider. Plans were horrendous: about 50â/month for 512/128kb nude DSL. They have opened up the market and now we get 30â/month for 20MB/1MB, unlimited TV (100channels), and a voip landline with a real number (transfered from my historic line) which is free to call any landlines in about 180 countries around the world. Plus mobiles in the US and Canada. The rest you pay as you use (mainly mobiles outside north america)
The key point in the US is the lack of competition. Just get the government to deregulate a bit or sell more licenses for mobile carriers and the thing will just crumble.
The thing is that the iPhone is one platform. All the blackberry out there don't share a common platform, nor a common SDK. Hardware specs are terribly diverse and hard to take advantage of if you want to target the whole 50 million blackberries out there. Plus there's no 3D at all.
Same can be said with pretty much all of the smartphones, but the iPhone, where the two different models share almost everything save a GPS for the second model.
The DS/DSi are on the same model and the PSP as well.
So you see, as a development platform, the iPhone 3G is much much closer to the current portable consoles than to the other smartphones.
This is the strange world of software and movies: when you're honest, you're hassled. If you pirate, your life suddenly becomes a lot easier.
To be fair, it's always been the case in every other field. It's easier not to pay taxes than to pay taxes. It's easier to steal your DVD than to wait in line for the cashier. That is, once you've defeated the stealing protection.
It's easier to follow no rules than it is to live by the law in general.
This is not entirely linked to DRM, you're stating here a fact of life.
It's actually funny how all they are fighting for seems just like common sense. The RIAA is blackmailing all the people they can, under ridiculously claims... Man, 150000:1, who in their right mind could come up with something that stupid !!!???!!!
Given up because they lacked the resources and training to effectively fight their opponents when the war started?
Well, that's what we, french people did! Of course, they did some psychological war which accounts for this result, but they should not have been that successful on that count...;-)
You have to stop believing everything you read on the internet. Seriously.
You may have one or two sets of defective earbuds, but mine, my wife's and my father's are all 18 month old and are doing perfectly fine. Plus I have another set from an iPod Shuffle and they are also doing fine 3.5 years later.
I don't know what you did with yours, but they are obviously not a sign that ALL iphone earbuds are crap.
If your friends tell you Apple is on the bleeding edge, it just means they just did not get it. Apple is about having a balanced product, which makes it lovable.
Unlike other phone makers (or mp3 makers) they don't believe in throwing in 4435 feats in their product to make the feature list on the back looks impressive, when only a handfull of them are really usable.
Apple will never sacrifice usability just to throw the latest gizmo in a device.
I thought iPhone 3G had a GPS built in. The location on the map didn't pinpoint the location, but just did show a circle on the screen. Thet's how a first gen iPhone behaves...
I could be wrong about the 3G though and there may be situations where it may not be able to pinpoint you exact location, which just made the location even slower than on the Apple ad....
Not even mentionning that the iPhone used is not an iPhone 3G but an iPhone Edge (CPU speed and other factors actually do matter in these tests) and that the demo starts with the iPhone turned off in the PCPro demo. And they don't zoom with double tap, they go to "big" websites, etc...
I am not saying the Apple version was realistic, but hey, the PCPro one is just as biaised in the other direction.
Let's try to explain this through mathematics, since logic fails me here.
Let's say you have a list of numbers, from which you know one thing: They are in the range 32 - 320, inclusively. If the average of all the numbers is 320, then it means all your numbers are 320 in your list.
The same, if your MP3 has an average bitrate of 320kbps, it means ALL its frames use the 320kbps encoding. Thus, it is CBR.
To get back on track, there are numerous projects that change over time and are not subject to design flaws.
In my experience, I have mostly worked with such projects: Web Sites. These pieces of software are designed, then they live for years and years and keep evolving. There is nothing wrong with that.
I also found out that no matter what framework you will use, you will end up needing more or different things from it. What may have been a good idea at some point will be a bad one after enough iterations of the project.
That goes for all frameworks regardless. It is of course not true for straight libraries (AXIS comes to mind) because they are at an endpoint of your software stack and don't require major changes if removed.
I think what the GP said was that you can easily fit a 1:30 hour full hd movie in 9GB storage space at a quality level which would satisfy 99%+ of the public. Which is true.
At some point, more bitrate is just a waste. Look at DVD-A : Can anyone tell me on good faith that 192KHz 32 bit audio sound better than 96KHz 24-bit ? No one, because it is several orders of magnitude over whatever the ear can distinguish.
Likewise, anything over 15MBps (average, granted) is very very very very likely to be wasted bits. At least for full HD with a HC H.264 codec.
That said, you will always find people who like to think that bigger is better. While it is true when you think small, at some point, it becomes an annoyance;-)
And here you go! You've just confused users and programmers.
Identifying the faulty app is something a normal user will have a hard time finding out!
That said, I don't think Apple want to lock anything out. They're just fascists! Whenever they want something, they'll go to unbelievable length to make it happen.
In this case, they just don't want 'official' apps to be able to 'taint' the iphone. And to do so, they go to unbelievable length of just forbidding the whole class of applications that could do it. I am pretty sure they will allow for background apps if they find an acceptable technological way of ensuring the app could not make the iphone looks bad. If they can't find a way, they'll just not make it happen.
In most legal system, the one thing that will make the difference is intent. If I create my own song and call the MP3 "Britney - I did it again" I can hardly blame some accidental infringer for thinking it was a Britney Spears song. Specially if they represent the copyright holder.
And you still have the choice to die while not breathing oxygen. Or to be so completely moronic as to pretend not to understand a perfectly accepted expression "having to".
The thing I don't get is: How can you have two different licenses on the file that are contradictory in their terms? How can you - in the same piece of file - write two things that are contradictory and be satisfied with it? This is something that I don't get. Legal mumbo jumbo aside, it just makes no sense at all.
IANAL and all of that, but I don't understand your statement of "you can always add the GPL to a code file, since the original license does not prohibit that"...
So I have a file with a license that says "You can distribute and modifiy provided you do: A, B and C". That's pretty clear to me. Then you're going to add another piece of text saying that "No, no, you can't. Here's what I want you to do in order to modify and distribute: You need D, E, F, G and H".
So anyone looking at the new and (inconsistent in my view) file cannot honor the first and original license. It's hard to write "You can do this provided you do that" followed by "No, no, you also need this other thing" and call that anything but garbage.
In my view, the GPL and BSD licenses are not compatible in the sense that you can't take a BSD file, slap the GPL on it and consider it done. The resulting file is just nonsense, from a licensing standpoint. One license grant rights that the other one restricts.
What the original author can do is release a file starting with "You may choose either of the following license:" and then enclose a piece of BSD and a piece of GPL license. It's a bit like distributing two versions of your code: One GPL and one BSD and letting users choose their best fit.
"If I do all that I can do whatever the HELL I want with code covered under it".
From what I understand, that just exactly what Theo is saying. So you can distribute the code. You can stick the GPL on it. But then, even when you've stuck the GPL on it, you can't still remove the BSD license !
From what I've understood, Theo is complaining about people taking such code (containing BSD & GPL licenses) and just stripping one out. That would be obviously wrong and illegal, unless the people is the legit owner of the copyright - then he can choose to change its licensing terms.
I still don't understand what the fuss is all about...
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, the way I understand it is that every piece of software that produces an XML stream is infringe this patent. Think every piece of webservice and XML processing out there. I'd say that pretty much every piece of software out there infringes on this.
The thing is very simple: Competition. This market is so heavily regulated that it clutters competition. In france we are one of the worst country in terms of competition and we have 3 nationwide providers. A 4th one is coming in next year.
It is the same in the DSL market. Back in the 90s, we had only the historic provider. Plans were horrendous: about 50â/month for 512/128kb nude DSL. They have opened up the market and now we get 30â/month for 20MB/1MB, unlimited TV (100channels), and a voip landline with a real number (transfered from my historic line) which is free to call any landlines in about 180 countries around the world. Plus mobiles in the US and Canada. The rest you pay as you use (mainly mobiles outside north america)
The key point in the US is the lack of competition. Just get the government to deregulate a bit or sell more licenses for mobile carriers and the thing will just crumble.
The thing is that the iPhone is one platform. All the blackberry out there don't share a common platform, nor a common SDK. Hardware specs are terribly diverse and hard to take advantage of if you want to target the whole 50 million blackberries out there. Plus there's no 3D at all.
Same can be said with pretty much all of the smartphones, but the iPhone, where the two different models share almost everything save a GPS for the second model.
The DS/DSi are on the same model and the PSP as well.
So you see, as a development platform, the iPhone 3G is much much closer to the current portable consoles than to the other smartphones.
11? SIGSEGV?
This is the strange world of software and movies: when you're honest, you're hassled. If you pirate, your life suddenly becomes a lot easier.
To be fair, it's always been the case in every other field. It's easier not to pay taxes than to pay taxes. It's easier to steal your DVD than to wait in line for the cashier. That is, once you've defeated the stealing protection.
It's easier to follow no rules than it is to live by the law in general.
This is not entirely linked to DRM, you're stating here a fact of life.
It's actually funny how all they are fighting for seems just like common sense. The RIAA is blackmailing all the people they can, under ridiculously claims... Man, 150000:1, who in their right mind could come up with something that stupid !!!???!!!
Do you know anything about the issue? I mean, at all?
Drepper never suggested not to fix a bug for the ARM architecture....
Given up because they lacked the resources and training to effectively fight their opponents when the war started?
Well, that's what we, french people did! Of course, they did some psychological war which accounts for this result, but they should not have been that successful on that count... ;-)
You have to stop believing everything you read on the internet. Seriously.
You may have one or two sets of defective earbuds, but mine, my wife's and my father's are all 18 month old and are doing perfectly fine. Plus I have another set from an iPod Shuffle and they are also doing fine 3.5 years later.
I don't know what you did with yours, but they are obviously not a sign that ALL iphone earbuds are crap.
If your friends tell you Apple is on the bleeding edge, it just means they just did not get it. Apple is about having a balanced product, which makes it lovable.
Unlike other phone makers (or mp3 makers) they don't believe in throwing in 4435 feats in their product to make the feature list on the back looks impressive, when only a handfull of them are really usable.
Apple will never sacrifice usability just to throw the latest gizmo in a device.
I thought iPhone 3G had a GPS built in. The location on the map didn't pinpoint the location, but just did show a circle on the screen. Thet's how a first gen iPhone behaves...
I could be wrong about the 3G though and there may be situations where it may not be able to pinpoint you exact location, which just made the location even slower than on the Apple ad....
Not even mentionning that the iPhone used is not an iPhone 3G but an iPhone Edge (CPU speed and other factors actually do matter in these tests) and that the demo starts with the iPhone turned off in the PCPro demo. And they don't zoom with double tap, they go to "big" websites, etc...
I am not saying the Apple version was realistic, but hey, the PCPro one is just as biaised in the other direction.
Let's try to explain this through mathematics, since logic fails me here.
Let's say you have a list of numbers, from which you know one thing: They are in the range 32 - 320, inclusively. If the average of all the numbers is 320, then it means all your numbers are 320 in your list.
The same, if your MP3 has an average bitrate of 320kbps, it means ALL its frames use the 320kbps encoding. Thus, it is CBR.
>> when you can have your music played at 192000 Hz and a 48-bit volume scale
WAV can be just that, you know...
Still, there is no such thing as 320kbps VBR...
If my encoder let me choose this option, I would be very suspicious.
More seriously, 320KBPS is the maximum bitrate for MP3. So if you get a file that is 320kbps, it is CBR by definition.
To get back on track, there are numerous projects that change over time and are not subject to design flaws.
In my experience, I have mostly worked with such projects: Web Sites. These pieces of software are designed, then they live for years and years and keep evolving. There is nothing wrong with that.
I also found out that no matter what framework you will use, you will end up needing more or different things from it. What may have been a good idea at some point will be a bad one after enough iterations of the project.
That goes for all frameworks regardless. It is of course not true for straight libraries (AXIS comes to mind) because they are at an endpoint of your software stack and don't require major changes if removed.
I think what the GP said was that you can easily fit a 1:30 hour full hd movie in 9GB storage space at a quality level which would satisfy 99%+ of the public. Which is true.
;-)
At some point, more bitrate is just a waste. Look at DVD-A : Can anyone tell me on good faith that 192KHz 32 bit audio sound better than 96KHz 24-bit ? No one, because it is several orders of magnitude over whatever the ear can distinguish.
Likewise, anything over 15MBps (average, granted) is very very very very likely to be wasted bits. At least for full HD with a HC H.264 codec.
That said, you will always find people who like to think that bigger is better. While it is true when you think small, at some point, it becomes an annoyance
And here you go! You've just confused users and programmers.
Identifying the faulty app is something a normal user will have a hard time finding out!
That said, I don't think Apple want to lock anything out. They're just fascists! Whenever they want something, they'll go to unbelievable length to make it happen.
In this case, they just don't want 'official' apps to be able to 'taint' the iphone. And to do so, they go to unbelievable length of just forbidding the whole class of applications that could do it. I am pretty sure they will allow for background apps if they find an acceptable technological way of ensuring the app could not make the iphone looks bad. If they can't find a way, they'll just not make it happen.
In most legal system, the one thing that will make the difference is intent. If I create my own song and call the MP3 "Britney - I did it again" I can hardly blame some accidental infringer for thinking it was a Britney Spears song. Specially if they represent the copyright holder.
dude, as far as i can recall, all major browsers have a quirks mode nowadays...
It is not a joke. It is a preview. Not even a beta. Whining on the HDD requirements at that stage seems a bit stupid, really.
And you still have the choice to die while not breathing oxygen. Or to be so completely moronic as to pretend not to understand a perfectly accepted expression "having to".
The thing I don't get is: How can you have two different licenses on the file that are contradictory in their terms? How can you - in the same piece of file - write two things that are contradictory and be satisfied with it? This is something that I don't get. Legal mumbo jumbo aside, it just makes no sense at all.
IANAL and all of that, but I don't understand your statement of "you can always add the GPL to a code file, since the original license does not prohibit that"...
So I have a file with a license that says "You can distribute and modifiy provided you do: A, B and C". That's pretty clear to me. Then you're going to add another piece of text saying that "No, no, you can't. Here's what I want you to do in order to modify and distribute: You need D, E, F, G and H".
So anyone looking at the new and (inconsistent in my view) file cannot honor the first and original license. It's hard to write "You can do this provided you do that" followed by "No, no, you also need this other thing" and call that anything but garbage.
In my view, the GPL and BSD licenses are not compatible in the sense that you can't take a BSD file, slap the GPL on it and consider it done. The resulting file is just nonsense, from a licensing standpoint. One license grant rights that the other one restricts.
What the original author can do is release a file starting with "You may choose either of the following license:" and then enclose a piece of BSD and a piece of GPL license. It's a bit like distributing two versions of your code: One GPL and one BSD and letting users choose their best fit.
"If I do all that I can do whatever the HELL I want with code covered under it".
From what I understand, that just exactly what Theo is saying. So you can distribute the code. You can stick the GPL on it. But then, even when you've stuck the GPL on it, you can't still remove the BSD license !
From what I've understood, Theo is complaining about people taking such code (containing BSD & GPL licenses) and just stripping one out. That would be obviously wrong and illegal, unless the people is the legit owner of the copyright - then he can choose to change its licensing terms.
I still don't understand what the fuss is all about...