If console designers want to see thousands of original titles, they need only make their platforms open to garage development.
Of course, independent development, while it does result in original content, doesn't necessarily dump cash into the Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony coffers, so it isn't creativity or originality that's the real issue here.
It's properly licensed and royalty bound creativity and originality.
If Didio did not sign the NDA, and they showed her the code, can they still claim the code as a trade secret????
SCO can't claim the code as a trade secret, anyway. By their own claims, the code is present in every copy of the 2.4 and 2.5 kernels in existence, the source of which is readily available and readable. Therefore, the code no longer has trade secret status.
The code doesn't remain a trade secret just because SCO won't tell you which parts of the code are theirs. Especially since they distributed that code themselves.
From IPWatchDog.com:
According to the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a "trade secret" is:
information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program device, method, technique, or process, that: (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from no being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and (ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
It's safe to say that SCO fails point (ii) rather miserably.
I joined the ACLU in the aftermatch of 9/11. And my junk mail quadrupled because both Bill Clinton and the Dalai Lama felt oblgied to personally plead with me for financial support.
When it came time to re-donate, I said no and let them know that I didn't join an organization to fight for my privacy just to have them hand out my address to every charity in the country.
IIRC, SCO released a statement regarding the whole GPL issue (SCO distributed the kernel with the copyrighted code under GPL, therefore it must bless the distribution of said code) saying that they are not held to the GPL because they weren't aware at the time that the infringing code was in the kernel.
Couldn't Red Hat or any other distributor use a similar argument? If they used the kernel in good faith, unaware of the alleged infringement, aren't they just as 'innocent' as SCO when it comes to the distribution of a tainted kernel?
Red Hat sort of shot themselves in the foot, I think, by launching a counter-suit before making an official offer to remove code that SCO claimed was infringing. When they end up in court, it would have looked much better for Red Hat to have offered to fix the infringement and have SCO deny that offer than to have just flat out refused SCO's claim and instead launch the injunction.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that Microsoft has guaranteed the right of theme makers to mimic the Windows Explorer shell by their victory in the Macintosh vs. Microsoft "Look and Feel" lawsuit of yore.
It would be bad form for Microsoft to have gone through all that trouble so that they could "look and feel" like the Mac and then turn around and say that legal decision applies only to them.
When reformatting an old HP Omnibook 2000 (P-133, 1.3gig HD, no CD-Rom), I decided to give Debian (woody) a go because it had the cleanest, purest install I could find without going the route of Gentoo.
Three weeks later, I finally had it working properly.
My first stumblings were because of the installer not liking my PCMCIA card. A purchase of a new card fixed that. But then I got to the package installer and wow... it was one of the most unusable things I had ever encountered. Just when I thought I was getting the hang of it, I would press Enter one too many times and the install would take off before I had even gotten through all the options.
Once I decided to just abandon that and do a base install / apt-get what I need setup, things went better, but then every time I did a startx, my system would lock hard. I worked on that one a long time before breaking down and just installing the 2.4.18 kernel package. Problem solved, but it took a long time for me to get to that point (and a test install of Red Hat had X11 coming up properly the first time).
Then I got blackbox and fluxbox installed to try out some lightweight but functional window managers. Worked great until I ran XDM, which would then vomit all over itself. Finally figured out where in the XSM configuration I needed to make changes. Got that running well.
Fortunately, I didn't need sound, serial, or parallel working on this laptop for the task for which I intended it, otherwise I might have been scratching my balding head even more.
All that said, it's running now. Apt-get is an absolute dream (a package manager that takes care of dependencies for me? Sweet joy!). But my difficulty in getting basic things done was enough that I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Had the laptop been a bit beefier, I would have given up after day three and gone straight to Red Hat.
So, at this point, I'm enjoying my Debian install, but I wouldn't ever do it again with a system that I considered critical or that had to be up and running quickly.
The standard is not unattainable. SCO is correct in saying that Linus can't possibly check every code submissions for copyright violations.
Thus the solution, obviously, is for Linus to not accept code submissions. It's easy for Linus to attain their standard by changing the entire development model of Linux.
So, technically, it is attainable, just not in the current development environment.
Technically, you would receive a check for at least $5 *if* and only if there weren't so many claimants that dividing the settlement among them doesn't make individual pay-outs less than $5. If that happens, none of the claimants get anything.
So, for those of you who have put your names in... The fewer people that know about this, the bigger your share of the pie (up to $20).
Instead of making me skip commercials at all, how about letting me pay $10 a month to never see another damn commercial again?
Yeah, how about it... uninterrupted programming, no more Snuggle bear, and never EVER having to fast forward past smug news anchors saying things like, "The world may be coming to an end. We'll tell you for sure at 11."
Are you sure? Try installing the stock ATI drivers on a Dell OEM ATI card. I haven't tried it since the 64MB DDR Radeons, but back then, ATI's own drivers would not install at all with the OEM card.
Transgaming is doing this... kind of. Except that they ask people to pay without actually making promises of what level of money must be attained before the code becomes GPL'd.
They've promised that, at some point, it all gets handed back to the community, but there has been zero discussion of when this might be.
Likewise, my 8500 128 sits in the gaming (ie, XP) machine. A 7200 sits in my Linux workstation. Plays Quake 3 like a charm, but without the S3TC support, no UT2003.
Wow, they (Movielink) really want you to be 100% on the Microsoft bandwagon. Not only must you use MS's OS, you have to use their browser:
Thank you for your interest in Movielink. We want you to take part in the powerful Internet movie rental experience that Movielink delivers; however, you currently do not meet our minimum system requirements. You will need to adjust the following:
You need Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher - Upgrade Now
If they want me to take part in the powerful Internet movie rental experience so much, they should stop that silly browser blocking. And honestly, switching to Mozilla has been the best browser upgrade I've ever made.
Evil? Wow, that's going a bit far for some cable guy installing software.
I can just picture him leaving the house chuckling under his breath... "Stupid mortals. They know not what I have done!! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!"
When the cable guy came to my house, I told him I didn't want all that stuff on my machine and he said he could record it as a self-install, which actually knocked money off the cost of installation.
I still find the trailers exciting, if for no other reason than to see how characters and scenes are being realized. The short flash of Treebeard's bottom half intrigued me in this one - I can't wait to see a higher resolution version.
The AOL ISP client is not being bundled with Lindows. It is just Netscape 7, which has AIM, but that's about as far as it goes for interoperating with the AOL service.
So, right now, NOBODY has AOL for Linux. You can all relax.
The "Expensive" bit is a BIG downside with Mercury. I believe the last invoice I saw from them was charging about $100 per virtual user. This is on top of the $50G or so for the core software (LoadRunner Controller, VUser Generator, a few extra monitors). And then there's a yearly maintenance charge to keep all those VUsers running in the latest and greatest versions.
So, if you're looking to test 5,000 simultaneous users, open the pocketbook.
If everything can be exercised via HTTP calls, give OpenSTA a try. http://www.opensta.org
That won't cover interface changes, necessarily, but it will provide load testing.
Slashdot Mirror
If console designers want to see thousands of original titles, they need only make their platforms open to garage development.
Of course, independent development, while it does result in original content, doesn't necessarily dump cash into the Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony coffers, so it isn't creativity or originality that's the real issue here.
It's properly licensed and royalty bound creativity and originality.
SCO can't claim the code as a trade secret, anyway. By their own claims, the code is present in every copy of the 2.4 and 2.5 kernels in existence, the source of which is readily available and readable. Therefore, the code no longer has trade secret status.
The code doesn't remain a trade secret just because SCO won't tell you which parts of the code are theirs. Especially since they distributed that code themselves.
From IPWatchDog.com:
It's safe to say that SCO fails point (ii) rather miserably.You're right. It's a damn shame she has some kooky belief that people need to face and resolve tough issues.
I just can't stand it when somebody wants to make a difference and does so by actually trying to get themselves into a position to do so.
Ambition sucks.
That's why my goal is to rule the world from within my Slashdot comments.
I joined the ACLU in the aftermatch of 9/11. And my junk mail quadrupled because both Bill Clinton and the Dalai Lama felt oblgied to personally plead with me for financial support.
When it came time to re-donate, I said no and let them know that I didn't join an organization to fight for my privacy just to have them hand out my address to every charity in the country.
So be an armchair critic. Joining the ACLU sucks.
My mistake. Apparently, Red Hat did offer to rewrite the offending code.
IIRC, SCO released a statement regarding the whole GPL issue (SCO distributed the kernel with the copyrighted code under GPL, therefore it must bless the distribution of said code) saying that they are not held to the GPL because they weren't aware at the time that the infringing code was in the kernel.
Couldn't Red Hat or any other distributor use a similar argument? If they used the kernel in good faith, unaware of the alleged infringement, aren't they just as 'innocent' as SCO when it comes to the distribution of a tainted kernel?
Red Hat sort of shot themselves in the foot, I think, by launching a counter-suit before making an official offer to remove code that SCO claimed was infringing. When they end up in court, it would have looked much better for Red Hat to have offered to fix the infringement and have SCO deny that offer than to have just flat out refused SCO's claim and instead launch the injunction.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that Microsoft has guaranteed the right of theme makers to mimic the Windows Explorer shell by their victory in the Macintosh vs. Microsoft "Look and Feel" lawsuit of yore.
It would be bad form for Microsoft to have gone through all that trouble so that they could "look and feel" like the Mac and then turn around and say that legal decision applies only to them.
When reformatting an old HP Omnibook 2000 (P-133, 1.3gig HD, no CD-Rom), I decided to give Debian (woody) a go because it had the cleanest, purest install I could find without going the route of Gentoo.
Three weeks later, I finally had it working properly.
My first stumblings were because of the installer not liking my PCMCIA card. A purchase of a new card fixed that. But then I got to the package installer and wow... it was one of the most unusable things I had ever encountered. Just when I thought I was getting the hang of it, I would press Enter one too many times and the install would take off before I had even gotten through all the options.
Once I decided to just abandon that and do a base install / apt-get what I need setup, things went better, but then every time I did a startx, my system would lock hard. I worked on that one a long time before breaking down and just installing the 2.4.18 kernel package. Problem solved, but it took a long time for me to get to that point (and a test install of Red Hat had X11 coming up properly the first time).
Then I got blackbox and fluxbox installed to try out some lightweight but functional window managers. Worked great until I ran XDM, which would then vomit all over itself. Finally figured out where in the XSM configuration I needed to make changes. Got that running well.
Fortunately, I didn't need sound, serial, or parallel working on this laptop for the task for which I intended it, otherwise I might have been scratching my balding head even more.
All that said, it's running now. Apt-get is an absolute dream (a package manager that takes care of dependencies for me? Sweet joy!). But my difficulty in getting basic things done was enough that I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Had the laptop been a bit beefier, I would have given up after day three and gone straight to Red Hat.
So, at this point, I'm enjoying my Debian install, but I wouldn't ever do it again with a system that I considered critical or that had to be up and running quickly.
The standard is not unattainable. SCO is correct in saying that Linus can't possibly check every code submissions for copyright violations.
Thus the solution, obviously, is for Linus to not accept code submissions. It's easy for Linus to attain their standard by changing the entire development model of Linux.
So, technically, it is attainable, just not in the current development environment.
You might want to look up the meaning of wherefore. Unless you're questioning why Ximian exists at all?
WinAmp 2.8 handles OGG streaming, but it is hopelessly broken in 3.0 and has been so for half a year now.
So when you tell your friends to download WinAmp, make sure they get the old one.
Technically, you would receive a check for at least $5 *if* and only if there weren't so many claimants that dividing the settlement among them doesn't make individual pay-outs less than $5. If that happens, none of the claimants get anything.
So, for those of you who have put your names in... The fewer people that know about this, the bigger your share of the pie (up to $20).
Instead of making me skip commercials at all, how about letting me pay $10 a month to never see another damn commercial again?
Yeah, how about it... uninterrupted programming, no more Snuggle bear, and never EVER having to fast forward past smug news anchors saying things like, "The world may be coming to an end. We'll tell you for sure at 11."
Are you sure? Try installing the stock ATI drivers on a Dell OEM ATI card. I haven't tried it since the 64MB DDR Radeons, but back then, ATI's own drivers would not install at all with the OEM card.
Transgaming is doing this ... kind of. Except that they ask people to pay without actually making promises of what level of money must be attained before the code becomes GPL'd.
They've promised that, at some point, it all gets handed back to the community, but there has been zero discussion of when this might be.
Likewise, my 8500 128 sits in the gaming (ie, XP) machine. A 7200 sits in my Linux workstation. Plays Quake 3 like a charm, but without the S3TC support, no UT2003.
Evil? Wow, that's going a bit far for some cable guy installing software.
I can just picture him leaving the house chuckling under his breath... "Stupid mortals. They know not what I have done!! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!"
When the cable guy came to my house, I told him I didn't want all that stuff on my machine and he said he could record it as a self-install, which actually knocked money off the cost of installation.
You have a special IE6, then, because mine had no idea what to do with downloaded .sid files.
Are you sure you aren't just seeing the GIFs generated on the Zoom/Resolution page itself?
Never mind the Tetris mark, watch out for Blizzard/Vivendi who HATE anything that makes their game more fun for people.
I still find the trailers exciting, if for no other reason than to see how characters and scenes are being realized. The short flash of Treebeard's bottom half intrigued me in this one - I can't wait to see a higher resolution version.
Well, good, at least nobody read the article.
The AOL ISP client is not being bundled with Lindows. It is just Netscape 7, which has AIM, but that's about as far as it goes for interoperating with the AOL service.
So, right now, NOBODY has AOL for Linux. You can all relax.
Twin brother of Fernando Poo. They parted ways after a bit of an incident.
Crystal Method also did this for their Tweekend release.
The "Expensive" bit is a BIG downside with Mercury. I believe the last invoice I saw from them was charging about $100 per virtual user. This is on top of the $50G or so for the core software (LoadRunner Controller, VUser Generator, a few extra monitors). And then there's a yearly maintenance charge to keep all those VUsers running in the latest and greatest versions.
So, if you're looking to test 5,000 simultaneous users, open the pocketbook.
If everything can be exercised via HTTP calls, give OpenSTA a try. http://www.opensta.org
That won't cover interface changes, necessarily, but it will provide load testing.