To some, this may seem pointless, but if it's truely plug-and-play, it could be a boon for many applications.
At home, I have several "older" computers with Windows installed, and they are pretty much used exclusivly as "Remote Desktop termianls" accessing a "server". Being able to eliminate Windows in favor of a quick-booting system would certainly be welcome. And never having to worry about local configuration, local backups, etc. again would be welcome.
But yes, for $150.00, I could set something up myself, but not everyone is as tech-savvy.
Anyone know of a good "do-it-yourself" alternative?
Entering a hacked serial number should NOT have deleted any user data. No company has the right to do that. Instead, they should have had the software simply entirely delete its current installation.
Of course, if the user's home directory is that vulnerable, maybe something deeper needs to be looked at.
"...That would allow any program written for Windows to run on Linux or Mac, and vice-versa..."
This is a bit misleading, because it's really a "one flavor of *nix on another flavor of *nix" system. Playing a Linux version of Quake III on an OSX Mac doesn't seem like rocket science because of OSX's native BSD roots.
I'll wager that if I took something like "Quicken" or "Microsoft Office Professional" for Windows and tried to run it on a Mac running QuickTransit that it certainly wouldn't work. I doubt if iMovie would run on a QuickTransit-enabled PC. THAT, my friends is the "computer-alchemy" goal. Of course, I would LOVE to be proven wrong on this!
Now, if they are talking about "any program written for Windows [that adheres to QuickTransit Requirements] to run on Linux..." then they may be accurate, but again, this really isn't "universal emulation".
I guess my real frustration is that "news" has somehow shifted from "reporting" to "marketing and editorializing" forsaking the accuracy and reliability of what's being reported. I too put freedom above all else in this country, but I believe that with freedom comes responsibility, and I believe that the news media is not being responsible. And the problem is that there is really no way to enforce responsibility.
I still stand by the statement, "Just because you have the right to do something doesn't make it right to do."
Are we simply buying a license to use content? Are we simply buying media that contains content? Are we buying both?
This is important, because different laws regulate them.
If I'm buying a license to use the content, then I am bound by the terms of the license. Under most circumstances, my right to use is typically disconencted from the media on which it is distributed (consider computer software.) How it is distributed or stored really becomes irrelevent. I could purchase it on DVD media, multiple CD media, DAT tape, on a Hard drive, or I could download it from a sales site. In any case, it is still typically illegal to copy it for re-dsitribution, but it is not illegal to back it up. And this is what many consumers want to do because of the "fragileness" of DVD media. Of course, the "industry" views ANY copying as illegal, which, if we are simply buying a license, then this could and should be challenged.
If, on the other hand, we are simply buying media that happens to contain content, then what we do with that media is really different from what I do with a toaster or a lawn mower when I buy it. Of course, you can't simply copy a toaster or a lawn mower, so it gets a bit stickier.
Which leads me to believe that I'm buying both. In that case, then the media is mine to do with as I want, but I a limited by the license to use. In any case, the DVD industry was very smart in their implementation because DVD's are typically encrypted, so even making a "fair use" backup requires circumventing the encryption which violates the DMCA.
We keep going around and around with this issue, and the problem is that no courts or legislation (that I know of) has really defined just what we are buying and just what we can do with what we bought. The closest is the DMCA that says it's illegal to circumvent the encryption, but it's so broad that it doesn't address the actual issue.
I would REALLY like to see an enforcable nation-wide election-related media blackout during the voting period. I'm getting really tired of the media projecting or proclaiming a winner based on either exit polls or 3% of voting returns. And they present return information from the East coast prior to the closing of voting on the West coast. How fair is that? OK, I don't know if anyone has actually studied if return infromation really influences voters on election day, but it doesn't seem right.
Oh, and I really don't buy the "Freedom of Speech" or "Freedom of the Press" arguments--the process of electing a national leader is a serious process that should not be compromised by partisan media.
"For years, few paid much attention to the Electoral College. But in the close election of 2000, every vote counted in the battle between Republican George Bush and Democrat Al Gore."
Give me a break! Ignorance is absolutely no excuse. If the process is a truely bad process, then it needs to be addressed and changed, but just because the general public never took the time to actually understand how their country operates is no reason to blindly scrap a long-standing, proven system. No, it is not perfect, but there will NEVER be ANY perfect system that will be agreed upon by all parties.
Well, as a ReplayTV user, I often download selected movies, shows, or specials and burn them to DVD for later or repeated viewing. While this isn't the norm, it's certainly a whole lot easier than unplugging the box and flying it to my brother-in-law...
If you purchase a movie ticket for tonight and hold it until next week, would you expect to be allowed to view it later? No, in fact under most circumstances, you wouldn't even be entitled to a refund if you missed the showing. The problem is that the Studios don't view it as "you paid for it" giving you unlimited viewing rights. No, they view it as "you paid for the ability (access) to view it within their viewing window." Just because you missed the "viewing window" is not their problem. They provided the content that you paid for, but if you couldn't watch it on their terms (to which you agree), then you're out of luck.
T.S. Eliot makes constant allusions to other works in his poetry. It's part of what his poetry is trying to say: that our artists and cultural zeitgeist as a whole don't have the resources to make truly original or meaningful art. The best we can do is try to reorganize and reinterpret what *used* to be meaningful.
Then again, maybe I'm wrong and Dante Alligheri, William Shakespeare, Andrew Marvell and God (Author of the printed book that is stolen most often)'s respective estates should have slammed him with a cease and desist.
While I agree with your logic, it's probably a matter of semantics. To me, there's a big difference between allusions or interpretations and the "sampling" and "mixing" that's being done in the music world.
For example, say I "sampled" phrases (copied the text) from all of the above authors' works and re-combined them into a story or poem. What would this be considered? Maybe if it was created as a tribute or as some "artistic statement", it would be accepted, but when it becomes the "norm" of current writing styles (as current music has become) then where is ths innovation? Obviously, it requires creativity, but would the author be truely considered a "writer" and would the work be considered a "new" and "innovative" literary work? I'll bet that when I was in school, my teachers and professors would have called it plagiarism. Unfortunatly, it's a fine line...
And my point is instead of sampling it, why not learn how to "re-create" or play it in new and different ways? OK, definitely not a musician, and I'm obviously way over-simplifying things, but isn't sampling and mixing in its most basic form really nothing more than just "cutting and pasting" prior works? I'm definitely not trying to put down current artists, and yes, there is a creative "edge" that's required to make the end result sound good.
I'm just peeved by the lack of "innovation"--artists relying on other artist work for the source of their works. Is creativity creating somthing new or is creativity just reworking something old? Obviously it can be either, but I see more and more of the later and less and less of the former...
...it should be put on hiatus for a while. Simply producing one series after another for sake of "having something" is not the way to go. This "have-to-have-it-now" and "have-to-have-it-always" mentality is really doing nothing more than producing inferior works and tarnishing the genre.
Maybe after it "sits" for a while we will anticipate and appreciate it more--of course, they'll have to deliver...
OK, I admit that I'm not a fan of the the current "mix" and "sampled" genre of music, but to me, it seems like there's not a whole lot of artistic innovation in mixing together stuff that's already been created. Yes, some will slam me for that statement, but how about coming up with something brand new or evolutionary instead of rehashing and recycling old music?
Is anyone else getting tired of seeing the use of, or the slight modification of "retro" stuff being pawned off as "new"?
It's an interesting dilema because of the unfortunate double-standard that exists: companies certainly won't hesitate to immediatly show you the door without any notice if THEY want to get rid of you, but you are "expected" to give them up to two or more weeks when YOU want to leave. Obviously, this is not compulsary, but it's highly traditional.
It all really depends on your situation. The best bet is to not burn bridges because you never know when you may need the resources of the company or your colleagues in the future. Just come up with an equitable compromise.
Remember that YOU are in the driver's seat. YOU are the one making the decision, not them. And stand by your decision--if they offer you more money or a promotion, absolutely turn it down and take the new job. Are really suddenly worth more to them now? Is staying really in your best interest? If you stay, it shows that you are not willing to stand by your word.
Just don't be shocked if they ask you to leave immediatly.
-I want a PDA that has an overall form factor the Palm Vx, just enlarged to the size half sheet of US paper (8 1/2" 5 1/2") and as thing as practical. The screen would be color and have a high-enough resolution to be able to view a full page of graphics and text. Obviously, this makes it less pocketable, but it would give me the ability to see and present full pages--ideal for business and personal applications.
-The screen should be a touch-screen with handwriting recognition (Graffiti, Jot, Newton, doesn't matter, just something decent.) And take a cue from the Newton and have auto-shape recognition included. For some reason, no one seems to want to or be able to do this.
-It should have removable a hard case/cover similar to Palm's hard "book-style" case for the Palm Vx, with WiFi integrated into the case--integrate the antenna into the cover portion and have the connector integrated into the spine. Maybe even integrate a flat battery pack into the case or something.
-It should have an OPTIONAL camera, but not included by default to please corporate users. And the camera should fit into a covered "port" in the device, not sticking out. If the camera is not present, then a "blank" could be inserted.
-The idea is to have clean lines with nothing that can snag or get caught on things.
-The OS could really be anything as long as the applications are fast, intuitive, feature-rich, and compatible with "standard" documents. The OS also has to be "instant on"--no booting every time--and program launching should be fast and snappy. The appearance of an "hourglass" should be the very rare exception, not the rule.
-Battery life should be days, not minutes or hours.
-Phone capabilities should be optional or leverage VoIP with the WiFi connection.
-Full multimedia capabilities. Voice recording, MP3 playback, video capture and playback, etc.
-Removable media such as SD cards or some yet-to-be-produced high-capacity storage.
For me, the ideal PDA/handheld would be the Sony UX-50 with a larger screen, a removable camera (to appease corporate America) and much better battery life.
...that I can legally produce a product that contains a copy of the DVD decryption software found in a DVD player to play or duplicate encrypted DVD's?
I put Blue Painter's Tape over the blue searing, eye-blinding, Power LED on my ReplayTV 5040 box. It didn't "block out" the light completely, but it softened it enough that it's no longer annoying.
While none of us would like to incur more fees, the simple fact that my Vonage bill is currently about $60.00 less per month then my Bell South bill, a small additional fee to cover this wouldn't be so bad. You can debate the pros and cons of whether or not VoIP wiretapping should even be done, but if it does, a small added fee to an already inexpensive service shouldn't be a problem.
dude, how many adblockers do you need to be developed before you figure out how to use one?
You're missing the point. The very fact that you even have touse ad blockers with Yahoo Mail is illustrative of the annoyance that their service is. Gmail simply doesn't require the use of any ad blockers.
You nailed it! Obviously, desktop email clients tend to be the most "powerful" and feature-rich, but you can't always have access. Personally, I'm rarely at home in front of my PC, so that availablity of Web-based email is a Godsend. Realistically speaking, most Web clients are certainly adequate, but Gmail's unique Search and Label functions combined with its very fast interface makes it my #1 choice.
On the other side, if you typically access the same PC, then definitely go with a desktop client.
While Gmail Notifier DOES open a new compose window, be aware that unless you check the "keep me logged in for two weeks" checkbox on the login screen, you will have to log in every time, even if you are already logged into Gmail in another browser window.
While it's a bit cumbersom, at least it's still more secure...
Yes, but my MAJOR problem with Yahoo Mail (and just about everything else that is Yahoo) is the annoying, flashy, irrelevent ads taking up valuable screen space. And short of purchasing Business Email from Yahoo, there is no account that is "ad-free" If I'm going to pay for a service, I damn well better not be bombarded with ads.
Gmail's implementation (whose success is yet to be determined) provides unobtrusive, typically relevent, and often useful ads that are presented in a non-insulting way making the whole experience very pleasant. To back-pedal a but on my above statement, I would pay for Gmail even if it included ads because the presentation is professional and non-intrusive.
Slashdot Mirror
To some, this may seem pointless, but if it's truely plug-and-play, it could be a boon for many applications.
At home, I have several "older" computers with Windows installed, and they are pretty much used exclusivly as "Remote Desktop termianls" accessing a "server". Being able to eliminate Windows in favor of a quick-booting system would certainly be welcome. And never having to worry about local configuration, local backups, etc. again would be welcome.
But yes, for $150.00, I could set something up myself, but not everyone is as tech-savvy.
Anyone know of a good "do-it-yourself" alternative?
Entering a hacked serial number should NOT have deleted any user data. No company has the right to do that. Instead, they should have had the software simply entirely delete its current installation.
Of course, if the user's home directory is that vulnerable, maybe something deeper needs to be looked at.
I'll wager that if I took something like "Quicken" or "Microsoft Office Professional" for Windows and tried to run it on a Mac running QuickTransit that it certainly wouldn't work. I doubt if iMovie would run on a QuickTransit-enabled PC. THAT, my friends is the "computer-alchemy" goal. Of course, I would LOVE to be proven wrong on this!
Now, if they are talking about "any program written for Windows [that adheres to QuickTransit Requirements] to run on Linux..." then they may be accurate, but again, this really isn't "universal emulation".
I guess my real frustration is that "news" has somehow shifted from "reporting" to "marketing and editorializing" forsaking the accuracy and reliability of what's being reported. I too put freedom above all else in this country, but I believe that with freedom comes responsibility, and I believe that the news media is not being responsible. And the problem is that there is really no way to enforce responsibility.
I still stand by the statement, "Just because you have the right to do something doesn't make it right to do."
It all boils down to what are consumers buying?
Are we simply buying a license to use content?
Are we simply buying media that contains content?
Are we buying both?
This is important, because different laws regulate them.
If I'm buying a license to use the content, then I am bound by the terms of the license. Under most circumstances, my right to use is typically disconencted from the media on which it is distributed (consider computer software.) How it is distributed or stored really becomes irrelevent. I could purchase it on DVD media, multiple CD media, DAT tape, on a Hard drive, or I could download it from a sales site. In any case, it is still typically illegal to copy it for re-dsitribution, but it is not illegal to back it up. And this is what many consumers want to do because of the "fragileness" of DVD media. Of course, the "industry" views ANY copying as illegal, which, if we are simply buying a license, then this could and should be challenged.
If, on the other hand, we are simply buying media that happens to contain content, then what we do with that media is really different from what I do with a toaster or a lawn mower when I buy it. Of course, you can't simply copy a toaster or a lawn mower, so it gets a bit stickier.
Which leads me to believe that I'm buying both. In that case, then the media is mine to do with as I want, but I a limited by the license to use. In any case, the DVD industry was very smart in their implementation because DVD's are typically encrypted, so even making a "fair use" backup requires circumventing the encryption which violates the DMCA.
We keep going around and around with this issue, and the problem is that no courts or legislation (that I know of) has really defined just what we are buying and just what we can do with what we bought. The closest is the DMCA that says it's illegal to circumvent the encryption, but it's so broad that it doesn't address the actual issue.
I would REALLY like to see an enforcable nation-wide election-related media blackout during the voting period. I'm getting really tired of the media projecting or proclaiming a winner based on either exit polls or 3% of voting returns. And they present return information from the East coast prior to the closing of voting on the West coast. How fair is that? OK, I don't know if anyone has actually studied if return infromation really influences voters on election day, but it doesn't seem right.
Oh, and I really don't buy the "Freedom of Speech" or "Freedom of the Press" arguments--the process of electing a national leader is a serious process that should not be compromised by partisan media.
Well, as a ReplayTV user, I often download selected movies, shows, or specials and burn them to DVD for later or repeated viewing. While this isn't the norm, it's certainly a whole lot easier than unplugging the box and flying it to my brother-in-law...
If you purchase a movie ticket for tonight and hold it until next week, would you expect to be allowed to view it later? No, in fact under most circumstances, you wouldn't even be entitled to a refund if you missed the showing. The problem is that the Studios don't view it as "you paid for it" giving you unlimited viewing rights. No, they view it as "you paid for the ability (access) to view it within their viewing window." Just because you missed the "viewing window" is not their problem. They provided the content that you paid for, but if you couldn't watch it on their terms (to which you agree), then you're out of luck.
I mean, if they're filibustering, can't someone throw a chair at him or Duct tape his mouth or something? C'mon, there has to be a better way!
What if you extended this idea to literature?
T.S. Eliot makes constant allusions to other works in his poetry. It's part of what his poetry is trying to say: that our artists and cultural zeitgeist as a whole don't have the resources to make truly original or meaningful art. The best we can do is try to reorganize and reinterpret what *used* to be meaningful.
Then again, maybe I'm wrong and Dante Alligheri, William Shakespeare, Andrew Marvell and God (Author of the printed book that is stolen most often)'s respective estates should have slammed him with a cease and desist.
While I agree with your logic, it's probably a matter of semantics. To me, there's a big difference between allusions or interpretations and the "sampling" and "mixing" that's being done in the music world.
For example, say I "sampled" phrases (copied the text) from all of the above authors' works and re-combined them into a story or poem. What would this be considered? Maybe if it was created as a tribute or as some "artistic statement", it would be accepted, but when it becomes the "norm" of current writing styles (as current music has become) then where is ths innovation? Obviously, it requires creativity, but would the author be truely considered a "writer" and would the work be considered a "new" and "innovative" literary work? I'll bet that when I was in school, my teachers and professors would have called it plagiarism. Unfortunatly, it's a fine line...
And my point is instead of sampling it, why not learn how to "re-create" or play it in new and different ways? OK, definitely not a musician, and I'm obviously way over-simplifying things, but isn't sampling and mixing in its most basic form really nothing more than just "cutting and pasting" prior works? I'm definitely not trying to put down current artists, and yes, there is a creative "edge" that's required to make the end result sound good.
I'm just peeved by the lack of "innovation"--artists relying on other artist work for the source of their works. Is creativity creating somthing new or is creativity just reworking something old? Obviously it can be either, but I see more and more of the later and less and less of the former...
...it should be put on hiatus for a while. Simply producing one series after another for sake of "having something" is not the way to go. This "have-to-have-it-now" and "have-to-have-it-always" mentality is really doing nothing more than producing inferior works and tarnishing the genre.
Maybe after it "sits" for a while we will anticipate and appreciate it more--of course, they'll have to deliver...
OK, I admit that I'm not a fan of the the current "mix" and "sampled" genre of music, but to me, it seems like there's not a whole lot of artistic innovation in mixing together stuff that's already been created. Yes, some will slam me for that statement, but how about coming up with something brand new or evolutionary instead of rehashing and recycling old music?
Is anyone else getting tired of seeing the use of, or the slight modification of "retro" stuff being pawned off as "new"?
It's an interesting dilema because of the unfortunate double-standard that exists: companies certainly won't hesitate to immediatly show you the door without any notice if THEY want to get rid of you, but you are "expected" to give them up to two or more weeks when YOU want to leave. Obviously, this is not compulsary, but it's highly traditional.
It all really depends on your situation. The best bet is to not burn bridges because you never know when you may need the resources of the company or your colleagues in the future. Just come up with an equitable compromise.
Remember that YOU are in the driver's seat. YOU are the one making the decision, not them. And stand by your decision--if they offer you more money or a promotion, absolutely turn it down and take the new job. Are really suddenly worth more to them now? Is staying really in your best interest? If you stay, it shows that you are not willing to stand by your word.
Just don't be shocked if they ask you to leave immediatly.
-I want a PDA that has an overall form factor the Palm Vx, just enlarged to the size half sheet of US paper (8 1/2" 5 1/2") and as thing as practical. The screen would be color and have a high-enough resolution to be able to view a full page of graphics and text. Obviously, this makes it less pocketable, but it would give me the ability to see and present full pages--ideal for business and personal applications.
-The screen should be a touch-screen with handwriting recognition (Graffiti, Jot, Newton, doesn't matter, just something decent.) And take a cue from the Newton and have auto-shape recognition included. For some reason, no one seems to want to or be able to do this.
-It should have removable a hard case/cover similar to Palm's hard "book-style" case for the Palm Vx, with WiFi integrated into the case--integrate the antenna into the cover portion and have the connector integrated into the spine. Maybe even integrate a flat battery pack into the case or something.
-It should have an OPTIONAL camera, but not included by default to please corporate users. And the camera should fit into a covered "port" in the device, not sticking out. If the camera is not present, then a "blank" could be inserted.
-The idea is to have clean lines with nothing that can snag or get caught on things.
-The OS could really be anything as long as the applications are fast, intuitive, feature-rich, and compatible with "standard" documents. The OS also has to be "instant on"--no booting every time--and program launching should be fast and snappy. The appearance of an "hourglass" should be the very rare exception, not the rule.
-Battery life should be days, not minutes or hours.
-Phone capabilities should be optional or leverage VoIP with the WiFi connection.
-Full multimedia capabilities. Voice recording, MP3 playback, video capture and playback, etc.
-Removable media such as SD cards or some yet-to-be-produced high-capacity storage.
For me, the ideal PDA/handheld would be the Sony UX-50 with a larger screen, a removable camera (to appease corporate America) and much better battery life.
...that I can legally produce a product that contains a copy of the DVD decryption software found in a DVD player to play or duplicate encrypted DVD's?
I put Blue Painter's Tape over the blue searing, eye-blinding, Power LED on my ReplayTV 5040 box. It didn't "block out" the light completely, but it softened it enough that it's no longer annoying.
While none of us would like to incur more fees, the simple fact that my Vonage bill is currently about $60.00 less per month then my Bell South bill, a small additional fee to cover this wouldn't be so bad. You can debate the pros and cons of whether or not VoIP wiretapping should even be done, but if it does, a small added fee to an already inexpensive service shouldn't be a problem.
You nailed it! Obviously, desktop email clients tend to be the most "powerful" and feature-rich, but you can't always have access. Personally, I'm rarely at home in front of my PC, so that availablity of Web-based email is a Godsend. Realistically speaking, most Web clients are certainly adequate, but Gmail's unique Search and Label functions combined with its very fast interface makes it my #1 choice.
On the other side, if you typically access the same PC, then definitely go with a desktop client.
While Gmail Notifier DOES open a new compose window, be aware that unless you check the "keep me logged in for two weeks" checkbox on the login screen, you will have to log in every time, even if you are already logged into Gmail in another browser window.
While it's a bit cumbersom, at least it's still more secure...
Yes, but my MAJOR problem with Yahoo Mail (and just about everything else that is Yahoo) is the annoying, flashy, irrelevent ads taking up valuable screen space. And short of purchasing Business Email from Yahoo, there is no account that is "ad-free" If I'm going to pay for a service, I damn well better not be bombarded with ads.
Gmail's implementation (whose success is yet to be determined) provides unobtrusive, typically relevent, and often useful ads that are presented in a non-insulting way making the whole experience very pleasant. To back-pedal a but on my above statement, I would pay for Gmail even if it included ads because the presentation is professional and non-intrusive.