You put the PAR2 files on the same disk? If not, how will you ensure your disk-and-par2 management scheme will work for the long term? I've found that after a move or 2 lots and lots of stuff - paper and CDs and backups ends up as a confused muddle.
The first laserjet was based on the CANON engine, so who spent the R&D money, again? Michael? I can't heeeaaar you....
What's really being "tested" is whether a company with a lot of cash comes into a mature industry, sets up shop with the newest tools & technologies can beat a company that's still saddled with old technology.
This question has been anwered many times. I wonder which MBA intern wrote that clueless speech for Dell.
There's a bunch of theatres here showing these films regularly.
Some friends visited me from Dallas & they were astounded that there was even one theatre showing these. The number of bikes on the streets also scared them.
I don't seek these out when I'm in other cities, so I can't tell you what other cities have a lot (or a little) of this.
If MS does not get the results it wants out of WinCe what would be the easiest way for MS to gain embedded market share?
Buy out Wind River and migrate WR's customer base to WinCE.
But if WR makes it much easier for their customers to move to Linux, and many of them do, Linux will have beaten MS handily in 2 areas (servers and embedded).
2 reasons for MS to buy WR - increase their own market share and deny Linux that market share.
>>> The thing that made the US a center for IT was the innovation.
Not innovation. Historical accident.
If the same kinds of historical accidents had happened in India, and say, for example, in 1940 India had hundreds of thousands of cars and a decent infrastructure are you suggesting the Indians would have been too stupid to do any innovating in computer systems themselves?
>>> The guy in the article made a similar comment and I fail to see how it's relevant at all. The issue here is that IBM licensed some code and SCO is claiming that IBM then used this licensed code in Linux. That SCO also participated in Linux development is utterly irrelevant unless they themselves also put proprietary Unix code into Linux.
The article in question covers this in the "waiver" discussion.
If SCO contributed any SCO UNIX code to Linux, ie if they did the same behavior that IBM's accused of then SCO has waived its rights to collect from IBM for that behavior.
And SCO did do that, see NZHeretic's article about Jun (forgot the last name).
We're in complete agreement AND One of the "analysts" that looked at the NDA and asked several times "can you prove this came from IBM", the guy showing him the code said no.
And 8 hours later Stowell (SCO Minister of disinformation) phoned the analyst and said the code presenter 'mis-spoke'.
If IBM submitted code to the Linux kernel and it got in, show the end-code AND the emails.
It's looking to me like someone (old-SCO employees? Caldera-SCO employees? new-SCO employees? ) submitted code, and the submitted code was ripped to pieces then merged into the kernel.
So there's no copyright claim against Linux, there's no claim against IBM.
That article sounds like SCO pulled off kernel mailing list submissions and is showing those (with all dates and submitter names removed) side-by-side with outtakes (supposedly) from UnixWare.
????? THEY'RE NOT showing IDENTICAL CODE IN THE KERNEL but MAILING LIST SUBMISSIONS!!!!!!!!!
I've asked this elsewhere (no answers yet) Would IBM have been stupid enough to sign a license that would hand over to AT&T any IBM property that IBM decided to add to AIX? ____ In the mid-1990s, Sun paid more than $100 million to Novell for a Unix royalty buyout and the ability to redistribute the Unix source code in derivative works, he says. Novell owned the rights to Unix at the time. "Sun wanted to control their destiny related to derivative works," McBride says, while IBM paid $10 million to buy the rights to an older Unix. It allegedly didn't pay for the rights to bypass the owner of Unix on derivative works.
of code copying from UnixWare to Linux would spread a LOT more fud than anything SCO has already done.
Sontag claims the IP violations are "all over the kernel"
1 Solid example, 50 or 60 identical lines would harm the Linux world HUGELY in terms of long-term public relations and bring a lot of people over to the SCO camp.
It's really very instructive that SCO has not released ONE example (if the violations are "all over the place" SCO will have plenty of examples to show the court. Their "we don't want the Linux folks cleaning up the evidence" claims are total BS )
> Why will the Matrix fail if Neo takes the door to save Trinity? Too many minds being freed.
> Why can't Neo save trinity and then deal with the Architect - and take her with him to start the new Zion?
the entire framework for him to 'deal with' the architect is gone. That building blowed up real good. AND he's under the threat that if he takes the door to Trinity the machines will destroy Zion.
>start the new Zion There's no 'new zion' without the machines' help. How are minds newly freed from the matrix, no medical equipment to 'free' their bodies surgically supposed to restart civilization?
> Why does the Architect put Neo in so much danger if he is required to keep the matrix stable? Why not just kill him in Zion?
It's not up to the Architect alone. The entire solution is a jury - rigged bugfix, an ugly hack, something Linus would never allow into the kernel. Neo's mention of the Oracle elicited a wince from the Architect. The Architect admints this solution was thought up by another. This suggests the current Matrix is held together with duct tape, bungee cords and perl scripts.
> Why does the Matrix need to use Zion to deal with the anomaly? The Matrix is held together with duct tape and perl scripts. If you've ever coded you know that sometimes the easiest way to fix a bug is to paper over the existing code instead of fixing the existing code 'elegantly'. The whole Zion business is probably an outgrowth of this. More clues as to the duct-tapeness of the Matrix is that the Agents were so hot to get the codes in the 1st matrix when it turns out they could have drilled down at any time. this suggests that some parts of the code have been papered over, the right hand of the equals sign does not know what the left is doing.
> How does having Neo start a new Zion temporarily fix the anomaly? The Matrix is held together with duct tape and perl scripts.
Slashdot Mirror
but NT is based on the DEC OS whose name I forget.
VAX-VMS, wasn't it?
If possible data loss is all I have to worry about, I won't test and migrate.
So, how about hiring someone to whack you upside the head with a 2x4 or an aluminum baseball bat if you don't do your testing and migration.
THAT'S motivation.
You put the PAR2 files on the same disk?
If not, how will you ensure your disk-and-par2 management scheme will work for the long term?
I've found that after a move or 2 lots and lots of stuff - paper and CDs and backups ends up as a confused muddle.
I saw something like this happening.
....
Wish I'd put my thoughts down somewhere I could point to & say I told you so.
(After the McVoy/Lord stuff I donated to Arch development & was going to participate, but life happened)
the Sunday algorithm is now the fastest, AFAIR
Gee, I guess Bernie Shifman moved to Ottawa.
How much does HP spend on R&D
....
FOR PRINTERS ???
The first laserjet was based on the CANON engine, so who spent the R&D money, again? Michael? I can't heeeaaar you
What's really being "tested" is whether a company with a lot of cash comes into a mature industry, sets up shop with the newest tools & technologies can beat a company that's still saddled with old technology.
This question has been anwered many times. I wonder which MBA intern wrote that clueless speech for Dell.
There's a bunch of theatres here showing these films regularly.
Some friends visited me from Dallas & they were astounded that there was even one theatre showing these. The number of bikes on the streets also scared them.
I don't seek these out when I'm in other cities, so I can't tell you what other cities have a lot (or a little) of this.
If MS does not get the results it wants out of WinCe what would be the easiest way for MS to gain embedded market share?
Buy out Wind River and migrate WR's customer base to WinCE.
But if WR makes it much easier for their customers to move to Linux, and many of them do, Linux will have beaten MS handily in 2 areas (servers and embedded).
2 reasons for MS to buy WR - increase their own market share and deny Linux that market share.
I was going to give you a dressing down, SCO was formed '93?
.... is clearly visible here, because then ....
....
But of course SCOldera's confuse-em-with-bullshit (if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance)
Then I remembered you probably mean old-sco not SCOldera.
heh...
I've been saying for some time,
when IBM takes Ransom Love's deposition
>>> The thing that made the US a center for IT was the innovation.
Not innovation. Historical accident.
If the same kinds of historical accidents had happened in India, and say, for example, in 1940 India had hundreds of thousands of cars and a decent infrastructure are you suggesting the Indians would have been too stupid to do any innovating in computer systems themselves?
>> move their base to Canada or some other country.
Anyone doing business in the US can be sued in the US.
the company that was re-broadcasting US TV feeds back to the US was Canadian, remember? I don't think they even had a US lawyer.
That didn't make much difference to the US judge who issued the takedown orders.
>>> The guy in the article made a similar comment and I fail to see how it's relevant at all. The issue here is that IBM licensed some code and SCO is claiming that IBM then used this licensed code in Linux. That SCO also participated in Linux development is utterly irrelevant unless they themselves also put proprietary Unix code into Linux.
The article in question covers this in the "waiver" discussion.
If SCO contributed any SCO UNIX code to Linux, ie if they did the same behavior that IBM's accused of then SCO has waived its rights to collect from IBM for that behavior.
And SCO did do that, see NZHeretic's article about Jun (forgot the last name).
Contracts run 2 ways.
>>>>to show where they came from (i.e. IBM).
We're in complete agreement
AND
One of the "analysts" that looked at the NDA and asked several times "can you prove this came from IBM", the guy showing him the code said no.
And 8 hours later Stowell (SCO Minister of disinformation) phoned the analyst and said the code presenter 'mis-spoke'.
If IBM submitted code to the Linux kernel and it got in, show the end-code AND the emails.
It's looking to me like someone (old-SCO employees? Caldera-SCO employees? new-SCO employees? ) submitted code, and the submitted code was ripped to pieces then merged into the kernel.
So there's no copyright claim against Linux, there's no claim against IBM.
That article sounds like SCO pulled off kernel mailing list submissions and is showing those (with all dates and submitter names removed) side-by-side with outtakes (supposedly) from UnixWare.
?????
THEY'RE NOT showing IDENTICAL CODE IN THE KERNEL but MAILING LIST SUBMISSIONS!!!!!!!!!
I've asked this elsewhere (no answers yet)
Would IBM have been stupid enough to sign a license that would hand over to AT&T any IBM property that IBM decided to add to AIX?
____
In the mid-1990s, Sun paid more than $100 million to Novell for a Unix royalty buyout and the ability to redistribute the Unix source code in derivative works, he says. Novell owned the rights to Unix at the time. "Sun wanted to control their destiny related to derivative works," McBride says, while IBM paid $10 million to buy the rights to an older Unix. It allegedly didn't pay for the rights to bypass the owner of Unix on derivative works.
Most of the SCO stock is 'closely held', meaning the owners will not part with it except for a LOT of MOOLAH.
A putative market cap of 100Mil means nothing if the marority holder won't part with his stock for less than $50 or $100.
Remember that the current price is set at the margin, and acquiring all of the stock has NOTHING to do with the margin.
of code copying from UnixWare to Linux would spread a LOT more fud than anything SCO has already done.
Sontag claims the IP violations are "all over the kernel"
1 Solid example, 50 or 60 identical lines would harm the Linux world HUGELY in terms of long-term public relations and bring a lot of people over to the SCO camp.
It's really very instructive that SCO has not released ONE example (if the violations are "all over the place" SCO will have plenty of examples to show the court. Their "we don't want the Linux folks cleaning up the evidence" claims are total BS )
> Why will the Matrix fail if Neo takes the door to save Trinity?
Too many minds being freed.
> Why can't Neo save trinity and then deal with the Architect - and take her with him to start the new Zion?
the entire framework for him to 'deal with' the architect is gone. That building blowed up real good.
AND he's under the threat that if he takes the door to Trinity the machines will destroy Zion.
>start the new Zion
There's no 'new zion' without the machines' help. How are minds newly freed from the matrix, no medical equipment to 'free' their bodies surgically supposed to restart civilization?
> Why does the Architect put Neo in so much danger if he is required to keep the matrix stable? Why not just kill him in Zion?
It's not up to the Architect alone. The entire solution is a jury - rigged bugfix, an ugly hack, something Linus would never allow into the kernel.
Neo's mention of the Oracle elicited a wince from the Architect. The Architect admints this solution was thought up by another. This suggests the current Matrix is held together with duct tape, bungee cords and perl scripts.
> Why does the Matrix need to use Zion to deal with the anomaly?
The Matrix is held together with duct tape and perl scripts. If you've ever coded you know that sometimes the easiest way to fix a bug is to paper over the existing code instead of fixing the existing code 'elegantly'. The whole Zion business is probably an outgrowth of this. More clues as to the duct-tapeness of the Matrix is that the Agents were so hot to get the codes in the 1st matrix when it turns out they could have drilled down at any time. this suggests that some parts of the code have been papered over, the right hand of the equals sign does not know what the left is doing.
> How does having Neo start a new Zion temporarily fix the anomaly?
The Matrix is held together with duct tape and perl scripts.
>After all, screaming is an irrational, emotional response that doesn't lend itself to effective problem-solving.
Never read "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates", have you? Screaming, pissing, hissy fits are SOP at MS.
Some of those guys may even do it every day to keep in practice.
Don Lancaster said this was the way to go with electrical vehicles 20 years ago. Way to go, GM, you've reinvented the wheel.
Schiffman, that is.
perhaps you meant overPEER piddling files onto p2p networks?
since it is OVERpeer one would assume it's piddling onto instead of into?
You just never see it or have much control over it.
If you have a NT system around take a look at the c:\boot.ini file ( if your boot drive is c:)
from memory (and probably a little inaccurate), that shows you the 'native' format for partition naming.
and production lines is HUGE, HUGE, HUGE for hard drive platters.
It would be an enormous design and implementation task to get the lines able to produce multiple sizes.
It's the same with CPUs, the only reason it does not seem that way (all CPUs one speed) is the speed/yield spread.
They could limit the size seen by a firmware change but why in the world would you throw away capacity you're paying for?