Re:IA64 is the "heir apparent"
on
Itanium Update
·
· Score: 2
While you have certainly kept track of Intel, I believe you've completely ignored the rest of the world's history.
That is, all these companies have had their share of problems.
When the Alpha was first released it ran *HOT*. I had one of the early DEC3000/300 on my desk. DEC had other problems with the Alpha. The CPU itself was denied it's future because of poor quality boxes it was put into.
I'm not quite as farmiliar with Sparc or PowerPC, but we shouldn't forget that Sun was having difficulties with the Sparc found in the E10000 not too long ago. To the companies who had paid millions for these boxes, it was a bigger deal than the Pentium floating point problem.
AMD has had their share of flops. The early 386 and 486 designs were good, but should we all forget the K5 and the early K6?
I had a Cyrix 486DX/50 clone back in '94, and it wouldn't work with a variety of software under Linux such as ghostscript. Cyrix replaced it, reluctantly... I had to argue with them on the phone despite Infoworld articles reporting the problem.
I don't see Intel has having a signifigantly worse track record than others. Their product is certainly used in a higher number and thus the failures are higher profile.
When you sign-in to Passport there are two checkboxes...
One says 'Sign me on Automatically'. If you check this, a cookie is stored that remembers to authenticate you from then on.
If you don't check this box(which is the default condition), then a cookie is created and stored which remembers your username. But the authentication information is stored as a session cookie which disappears when you close the browser.
There is a second checkbox. It says 'I'm using a public computer'. This stores a session cookie on your machine for both the username and authentication.
Once you have closed the browser, the session cookie is gone and you no longer authenticate automatically, nor is your username auto entered for you.
So while I understand your concern, Microsoft has provided two checkboxes which alleviate this concern. Neither checkbox is on by default which means the default behavior is to remember your username only.
If you have a better solution to this problem, I'm sure we'd all appreciate hearing about it.
BTW, the paper you linked to has much better explanations of problems Passport might have then what you wrote about. Man in the middle type attacks that involve redirecting DNS, etc.
Go ahead... I dare you to find an ICE COLD soda in London!
It can't be done.
These freaks try to serve Coke to you warm! If you order Coke in a restaurant you have to request ice, and even then they only give you TWO CUBES OF ICE!?
Ok, but get this. Besides selling warm Coke. They do not sell Mountain Dew anywhere!!!
It's hard to imagine a place on earth which does not have the Dew, but it exists in Europe. The really weird thing is that they run Mt. Dew advertisements on TV, but they've air brushed out the Dew logos and put in Pepsi. It's FREAKY!
The only explanation I could come up with is that Mt. Dew tastes even worse warm than Coke does.
The United States will never lose an edge to Europe in the tech market as long as we have plentiful stocks of ICE COLD Mountain Dew and Coca-Cola!
Roxio has a monopoly in CD recording software by way of CD Creator. Roxio dictates to manufacturers how to do the hardware interface. Roxio charges an extremely HIGH price to consumers to obtain this software.
I had to upgrade from CD Creator v3 to v4 for Win2k compatibility. Roxio wanted like $90 for this upgrade.
I was able to buy a brand new CD-RW drive with bundled CD Creator for $99. A new 10X drive which was faster than my old 4X Yamaha.
I would hardly say that Roxio by itself has been benefiting consumers.
Besides, all Microsoft has done is license the software from Roxio and include it in WinXP by default.
If anything this is an example of how bundling can benefit consumers.
Chances are, the Roxio software in WinXP is limited in some fashion. Obviously Roxio did this in order to leverage sales of their Deluxe product.
But since WinXP contains some rudimentary support for CD-R drives in some fashion we now have a standard! Hardware makers can write drivers that plug into the existing WinXP OS. Software makers of all sorts can leverage the existing CD-R handling and create more full featured writing programs.
I see this as increasing consumer well being, similar to the way Microsoft increased our ability to network when they integrated TCP/IP into Win95 and eliminated the need to buy third party products like LANtastic.
It's difficult for me to explain because I've been using NT exclusively since '97 except for one brief month in '98 when I ran Win98 to try it.
But let me first state:
Win9x is *NOT* stable.
As far as incompatibilies, this was true in the early days of NT. But since around 1998 or so it's been difficult to find hardware that does not work on NT. Similarly nearly all software with the exception of games has worked fine.
Win2k improved the situation greatly by implementing DirectX fully so now every modern game runs very well.
There are also numerous usability features in Win2k especially that make it a compelling upgrade over Win95. Far less annoying, it doesn't steal focus away from your mouse at inopertune times. The quicklaunch bar is good, as is the more consistent ability to manage icons in the start menu.
Another feature of NT/Win2k over Win9x is that they are faster. Part of this is because the shell is multi-threaded. On Win9x when you start a program up, as it's loading and doing it's thing, you are locked out of doing anything else. For someone going from WinNT/2k back to Win95 it is readily apparent and frustrating.
As far as Windows XP, the most compelling feature of this will be the final elimination of Win9x from the support channel. You spoke of incompatibilities, and now you will see none. A vendor can write one set of drivers which will work on either Home or Professional editions.
There are usability changes in WinXP as well. I haven't decided if I like them all yet, but I certainly find many of them to be solid improvements.
Yes, it's true that WinXP is a evolutionary upgrade from Win2k. But if you are coming from Win95, I shudder to think why you wouldn't at least upgrade to Win2k.
I find it interesting you reject my supposed attacks and yet can find nothing better to do yourself.
Now as for your feable attempts at name dropping... I have a decade of experience working at AT&T, USBank, General Motors and other companies implementing the very systems you imply I have no experience with.
Lose the arrogant attitude, and drop the name calling. It doesn't make you look good.
Re:DMCA is being used to squelch non profit websit
on
ACM vs. RIAA
·
· Score: 2
Oh, I agree that being repugnant and inflammatory is no excuse for censorship.
I'm just concerned as to what the real content was that was shut down. If it's like the company logo's and stuff, then that's not fair.
But in recent years some groups have resorted to terrorism because their words are not being heard.
I just want to know whether they have crossed that line or not.
The advantage of the web discussion group such as/. is that flame wars seldom last more than two days. This is one of the problems with usenet, people can't just let a discussion die and it goes on for weeks.
The disadvantage at least in the case of/. is that with the moderation system you don't see a lot of the really interesting comments.
Then again most of the comments you read on/. aren't interesting or intelligent, so maybe that's a good thing.:)
I think you are deluding yourself if you think the ACM has a greater degree of prestige and trust in the eyes of the public.
Scientists and college professors are oftentimes the worst persons to listen to when it comes to discussions of public policy. The reason being that they are very knowledgeable in their narrow field of expertise, but completely clueless when it comes to real world matters.
That's not to say they don't have some valid input, but history has shown you don't want to listen to them without some balance.
Re:DMCA is being used to squelch non profit websit
on
ACM vs. RIAA
·
· Score: 2
The article on salon is rather short on details. What was on the website that this company thought was a copyright violation?
I'm also a bit concerned about treating these people like the underdog because it appears as they though are quite violent.
What do you mean can't do? You just got finished explaining how you can do it with ASP.Net.
Maybe if PHP, Apache and MySQL provided today what ASP.Net provides, I'd say WOW. But we both know that it doesn't. Or at least I know this, because I've been working with ASP.Net.
Being able to write a URL, and load balance a web server isn't anything particularly unique to Linux.
Ho hum. It's amazing how excited people get about Linux just because they have limited exposure to technology.
Slashdot Mirror
While you have certainly kept track of Intel, I believe you've completely ignored the rest of the world's history.
That is, all these companies have had their share of problems.
When the Alpha was first released it ran *HOT*. I had one of the early DEC3000/300 on my desk. DEC had other problems with the Alpha. The CPU itself was denied it's future because of poor quality boxes it was put into.
I'm not quite as farmiliar with Sparc or PowerPC, but we shouldn't forget that Sun was having difficulties with the Sparc found in the E10000 not too long ago. To the companies who had paid millions for these boxes, it was a bigger deal than the Pentium floating point problem.
AMD has had their share of flops. The early 386 and 486 designs were good, but should we all forget the K5 and the early K6?
I had a Cyrix 486DX/50 clone back in '94, and it wouldn't work with a variety of software under Linux such as ghostscript. Cyrix replaced it, reluctantly... I had to argue with them on the phone despite Infoworld articles reporting the problem.
I don't see Intel has having a signifigantly worse track record than others. Their product is certainly used in a higher number and thus the failures are higher profile.
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I made my numbers up, and even poll numbers can be
But clearly 28% is far less than 55% as the original poster said.
When you sign-in to Passport there are two checkboxes...
One says 'Sign me on Automatically'. If you check this, a cookie is stored that remembers to authenticate you from then on.
If you don't check this box(which is the default condition), then a cookie is created and stored which remembers your username. But the authentication information is stored as a session cookie which disappears when you close the browser.
There is a second checkbox. It says 'I'm using a public computer'. This stores a session cookie on your machine for both the username and authentication.
Once you have closed the browser, the session cookie is gone and you no longer authenticate automatically, nor is your username auto entered for you.
So while I understand your concern, Microsoft has provided two checkboxes which alleviate this concern. Neither checkbox is on by default which means the default behavior is to remember your username only.
If you have a better solution to this problem, I'm sure we'd all appreciate hearing about it.
BTW, the paper you linked to has much better explanations of problems Passport might have then what you wrote about. Man in the middle type attacks that involve redirecting DNS, etc.
That's like saying Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly because of Apple and Linux.
Uhh, Conservatives only make up around 15% of the populace of the United States.
Liberals make up like 20%...
The rest of us are Moderates.
Go ahead... I dare you to find an ICE COLD soda in London!
It can't be done.
These freaks try to serve Coke to you warm! If you order Coke in a restaurant you have to request ice, and even then they only give you TWO CUBES OF ICE!?
Ok, but get this. Besides selling warm Coke. They do not sell Mountain Dew anywhere!!!
It's hard to imagine a place on earth which does not have the Dew, but it exists in Europe. The really weird thing is that they run Mt. Dew advertisements on TV, but they've air brushed out the Dew logos and put in Pepsi. It's FREAKY!
The only explanation I could come up with is that Mt. Dew tastes even worse warm than Coke does.
The United States will never lose an edge to Europe in the tech market as long as we have plentiful stocks of ICE COLD Mountain Dew and Coca-Cola!
Sure... If you got 5 days to kill with your 56K modem.
It still took 8 hours to download with my 1Mbps DSL line.
Again, the CD's need to be cheap at the local Best Buy or you can forget about it.
Today what is the situation?
Roxio has a monopoly in CD recording software by way of CD Creator. Roxio dictates to manufacturers how to do the hardware interface. Roxio charges an extremely HIGH price to consumers to obtain this software.
I had to upgrade from CD Creator v3 to v4 for Win2k compatibility. Roxio wanted like $90 for this upgrade.
I was able to buy a brand new CD-RW drive with bundled CD Creator for $99. A new 10X drive which was faster than my old 4X Yamaha.
I would hardly say that Roxio by itself has been benefiting consumers.
Besides, all Microsoft has done is license the software from Roxio and include it in WinXP by default.
If anything this is an example of how bundling can benefit consumers.
Chances are, the Roxio software in WinXP is limited in some fashion. Obviously Roxio did this in order to leverage sales of their Deluxe product.
But since WinXP contains some rudimentary support for CD-R drives in some fashion we now have a standard! Hardware makers can write drivers that plug into the existing WinXP OS. Software makers of all sorts can leverage the existing CD-R handling and create more full featured writing programs.
I see this as increasing consumer well being, similar to the way Microsoft increased our ability to network when they integrated TCP/IP into Win95 and eliminated the need to buy third party products like LANtastic.
Perhaps, but when you go to Best Buy all you see is the Mandrake Power Edition for $64.99.
Oh, and the Redhat Deluxe Workstation for $79.99.
So, ok another $20 or so and I can get WinXP. I'd rather have WinXP anyway since it runs my software.
Linux was a far more compelling upgrade when it sold for $20 at Best Buy. That was over two years ago, however.
It's difficult for me to explain because I've been using NT exclusively since '97 except for one brief month in '98 when I ran Win98 to try it.
But let me first state:
Win9x is *NOT* stable.
As far as incompatibilies, this was true in the early days of NT. But since around 1998 or so it's been difficult to find hardware that does not work on NT. Similarly nearly all software with the exception of games has worked fine.
Win2k improved the situation greatly by implementing DirectX fully so now every modern game runs very well.
There are also numerous usability features in Win2k especially that make it a compelling upgrade over Win95. Far less annoying, it doesn't steal focus away from your mouse at inopertune times. The quicklaunch bar is good, as is the more consistent ability to manage icons in the start menu.
Another feature of NT/Win2k over Win9x is that they are faster. Part of this is because the shell is multi-threaded. On Win9x when you start a program up, as it's loading and doing it's thing, you are locked out of doing anything else. For someone going from WinNT/2k back to Win95 it is readily apparent and frustrating.
As far as Windows XP, the most compelling feature of this will be the final elimination of Win9x from the support channel. You spoke of incompatibilities, and now you will see none. A vendor can write one set of drivers which will work on either Home or Professional editions.
There are usability changes in WinXP as well. I haven't decided if I like them all yet, but I certainly find many of them to be solid improvements.
Yes, it's true that WinXP is a evolutionary upgrade from Win2k. But if you are coming from Win95, I shudder to think why you wouldn't at least upgrade to Win2k.
A Windows shill?
I find it interesting you reject my supposed attacks and yet can find nothing better to do yourself.
Now as for your feable attempts at name dropping... I have a decade of experience working at AT&T, USBank, General Motors and other companies implementing the very systems you imply I have no experience with.
Lose the arrogant attitude, and drop the name calling. It doesn't make you look good.
Oh, I agree that being repugnant and inflammatory is no excuse for censorship.
I'm just concerned as to what the real content was that was shut down. If it's like the company logo's and stuff, then that's not fair.
But in recent years some groups have resorted to terrorism because their words are not being heard.
I just want to know whether they have crossed that line or not.
Prevention is social, and difficult to coordinate. Even our most technical users still stupidly opened up ILOVEYOU.
There is innoculation in the form of patches and anti-virus. If kept up to date you will see very little damage from these problems.
The advantage of the web discussion group such as /. is that flame wars seldom last more than two days. This is one of the problems with usenet, people can't just let a discussion die and it goes on for weeks.
/. is that with the moderation system you don't see a lot of the really interesting comments.
/. aren't interesting or intelligent, so maybe that's a good thing. :)
The disadvantage at least in the case of
Then again most of the comments you read on
I think you are deluding yourself if you think the ACM has a greater degree of prestige and trust in the eyes of the public.
Scientists and college professors are oftentimes the worst persons to listen to when it comes to discussions of public policy. The reason being that they are very knowledgeable in their narrow field of expertise, but completely clueless when it comes to real world matters.
That's not to say they don't have some valid input, but history has shown you don't want to listen to them without some balance.
The article on salon is rather short on details. What was on the website that this company thought was a copyright violation?
I'm also a bit concerned about treating these people like the underdog because it appears as they though are quite violent.
Yet the list of those companies which have benefitted from partnerships with Microsoft is even longer yet.
IBM
Intel
Apple
Compaq
Dell
etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum
What I'm curious is the number of companies that have gotten screwed over by turning to Linux.
Trolltech
Corel
SGI
etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum
As did the people with patches...
Although I rather highly doubt there were many patches submitted. FSF advocates tend to like to whine a lot but seldom produce.
Yes you gave some examples, but they weren't particularly good examples. That was my point.
I'm sorry if you feel insulted, but maybe you shouldn't go around pretending to be an expert if you don't know what you are talking about.
Hey now. If you are going to go around saying Microsoft has a well known history of screwing over partners I really expect you to substantiate it.
In what way do you feel IBM and Apple were screwed over?
I see no place that IBM has done anything but screw themselves over. Both in the initial PC and later with OS/2.
Similarly with Apple. Microsoft never stole anything from them. I know that's their claim, but when they went to court they lost that battle.
If you want to believe in fairy tales, you are certainly welcome to do so. Just don't go around claiming them as well known facts.
So?
These people used someone elses code for free without compensating them.
So the lesson is... Don't try to work with the OSS community, becuase they will screw you over?
What do you mean can't do? You just got finished explaining how you can do it with ASP.Net.
Maybe if PHP, Apache and MySQL provided today what ASP.Net provides, I'd say WOW. But we both know that it doesn't. Or at least I know this, because I've been working with ASP.Net.
Being able to write a URL, and load balance a web server isn't anything particularly unique to Linux.
Ho hum. It's amazing how excited people get about Linux just because they have limited exposure to technology.
The most interesting phenomena of the anti-Microsoft troll is that all of their arguments center around the phrase "The story I heard..."
Maybe before you condemn Microsoft you should go fidn the facts and understand the issues.
You've still failed to provide evidence of this history of Microsoft screwing over partners.
You say I shouldn't trust Microsoft, but yet I am having a very difficult time trusting you.