Best of all, though, it tells a lot of people that there is a decent alternative to Microsoft software." the more times ppl read about linux, hear what its like and reslise the m$ sucks the better.
why caldera? what advantages does tis offer over say redhat (I though IBM were in bed with rh).
also do I need a business desktop? wtf is a business desktop? are we talking an easy to use/install desktop encapsulating some raw power in order to acheive ease of use?
do I have one? assuming emacs is not the ultiamte business desktop:-)
just imagine the redhat boxes will be tuned to nickelodeon all day, debian boxes to a mixture of simpsons and the science channel and slackware boxes will only work will black and white low res (but fast and powerful) 1920's bmovies. Of course the *BSD version will be hard to find and the MacOSX box will be so user freindly that u never lose the remote.
an xp version will only show adverts and will crash after excess channel hopping (patch to follow)!
ounging in bed on a recent Saturday morning, David Bolan, an executive with a Silicon Valley startup, lifted his thumb from the remote control and caught his first glimpse of his livelihood on the screen.
There, a reseller was hawking 6,000 I.B.M. (news/quote) notebook computers left over from a crashed-and-burned company. The flameout must have been recent; the machines featured a new wireless technology called Bluetooth, for which Mr. Bolan's company, Pico Communications of Cupertino, Calif., designed networking products. Although the program conveyed a grim message about the high-technology meltdown, Mr. Bolan was thrilled when the announcer proclaimed Bluetooth the coming wave of unplugged communications.
"This is awesome," Mr. Bolan, vice president for business development at Pico, recalled thinking. "The consumer is finally starting to be educated about Bluetooth."
Last year was supposed to be the breakout year for Bluetooth technology, which carries information on radio waves among mobile phones, personal computers and other devices equipped with a Bluetooth chip. A fleet of products -- from cordless phone headsets to PC adapter kits -- were to have begun their cascade into the American market.
The vision was alluring: cell phones and computers could synchronize their contact lists as soon as they were within 30 feet, hand-held computers could send documents through the air to a nearby printer, and laptops could surf the Web using a phone's cellular network. In several years, supporters argued, every electronic device or appliance -- from computers to microwave ovens -- would use a Bluetooth chip to talk automatically with other devices.
Bluetooth supporters said chips would soon cost less than $5 and run on little power, allowing device makers to build the chips into each cell phone or hand-held device without worrying about battery drain. Encouraged by some of the world's largest electronics manufacturers, analysts estimated that nearly 1.5 billion Bluetooth-ready devices would be sold by 2005, creating vast communications networks between devices and appliances.
But the cascade turned out to be a trickle -- Bluetooth was still not ready for mass production. Chip costs remained high, and devices sometimes refused to talk to each other. A handful of products began appearing on the market last September, but in small numbers and at high prices. These were normal growing pains for a young technology, but two years of boasting brought publicity to its troubles.
Industry leaders say that with a new set of technical specifications and a more stable platform, Bluetooth is finally ready to pick up speed later this year, and take off in 2002. Motorola (news/quote), Ericsson (news/quote), 3Com (news/quote), Compaq, Toshiba (news/quote) and others have early Bluetooth products, including phone and PC adapters, on the market, with plans to increase distribution later this year, and Palm will offer a Bluetooth expansion card for its m500 series of hand-helds units by the end of the year.
"We are going to drive it to become ubiquitous," said Michael Mace, chief competitive officer and vice president for product planning for Palm, which wants to enable its devices to communicate wirelessly with PC's, phones and other machines.
But while engineers fine-tune Bluetooth and major manufacturers declare its rise is imminent, troubles have emerged. First, with the souring of the economy, corporations -- usually the first to adopt new technologies -- have cut budgets. Second, sales of handhelds and cellular phones, expected to be market drivers for Bluetooth, have plunged. And last, another wireless technology, originally expected to complement Bluetooth, came in and stole much of its thunder.
The other wireless networking standard, called IEEE 802.11b, or Wi-Fi, has picked up strong momentum among information technology managers and technology savvy consumers. Wi-Fi networks allow computer users to connect to the Internet wirelessly from Starbucks (news/quote) coffee bars, as well as from some shops, airport and hotel lounges and corporate offices and college campuses.
Supporters of both technologies say there is room for both in the marketplace. But if Wi-Fi succeeds in adopting Bluetooth's most attractive attributes -- low power consumption and cost -- it could be used in a wide range of small devices, which could then use the Internet to communicate with each other. This script, some observers predict, could render Bluetooth a well-planned, heavily financed failure.
The development of Bluetooth goes back to 1994, when researchers in Ericsson's labs began work on a way to make hands-free cell phone calls without using cables. They found their solution in radio waves. Unlike infrared, which enlivens television remote controls and allows users of hand-held computers to beam their business cards to one another, radio waves can travel through walls and in many directions at once, up to about 30 feet. They used little power -- a crucial feature for devices that run on batteries. And, at least in theory, the radio chips could be made small and inexpensive, so they could be built into every phone.
In 1998, Ericsson assembled a special-interest group to begin developing this technology for the general market. The first members were the cell phone maker Nokia (news/quote), the computer manufacturers I.B.M. and Toshiba, and the chip maker Intel (news/quote). Jim Kardach, an Intel technician and amateur historian, dubbed the wireless standard "Bluetooth," after Harald Bluetooth, a Scandinavian king who unified Denmark and Norway in the 10th century. The imagery was simple: the technology would bring together devices just like King Bluetooth linked the two countries.
Joined by other technology leaders like Microsoft (news/quote), Compaq Computer (news/quote) and Lucent Technologies (news/quote), the Bluetooth Special Interest Group -- which now numbers 2,500 companies -- began suggesting that Bluetooth was the wireless technology that futurists awaited. In the beginning, they envisioned Bluetooth replacing cables to carry information not just within, but between devices, creating so-called personal-area networks unencumbered by wires.
In this Bluetooth-enabled future, proponents say, travelers will walk into airports and be instantly recognized by their devices. The airline's computer system will send, via radio waves, the passenger's boarding pass, departure gate and flight status directly to the handheld or cell phone. On the road, a car with a broken fan belt can diagnose its troubles and contact a repairman through the network.
"We're banking on the consumer marketplace to win with Bluetooth," said Francis Dance, telematics services project manager for BMW of North America.
For that to happen, Bluetooth chips need others to talk with. But the price of chip sets has not declined nearly as fast as expected. Mr. Mace, the Palm executive, said his company will begin placing a Bluetooth chip set inside every handheld when chip sets costs less than $10, about half their price today. In the meantime, Palm and other manufacturers are relying on kits that add Bluetooth to existing devices. The kits can cost $200 per device, an expensive price to eliminate cables.
this is not what 802.11 is intended for oh come on, focus your brain and think back to what the internet was intended for...a world wide pr0n stash? a business network? history geeks have always took cool technology and adapted it thats why we have such cool toys to play with.
all the ppl paying will only get 24 hrs to watch the film but all those clever crackers will get hours of enjoyment cracking the thing.
also why release the dvd before the download? lets face it if you download it cheaply, watch it and if you really like it you buy the dvd.
but uf you do it the other way; you buy the dvd and then decide to download it. WHY? becoz u cant be bothered to open the dvd case ?!? surely is a better option?
I don't think that a lack of documentation is the reason linux has "more popularity (if it does)." I just think that it's more advertised.
Disagree, i think it plays a part.
IMHO most budding geeksters who are sitting on their wondiws boxes just waiting to install a proper OS over the top come to sites like this to lurk and find out what OS to go for. the general consensus is that *nix is thaw way to go and the choice is either BSD or Linux. BSD is much more elitist that Linux so its bes tto learn linux and then 'gradyuate' onto BSd at a later date. if you really wanna be a sheep you have to follow this path... corel, redhat, mandrake, debian, slackware. then and can you go on to bigger and B(SD)etter things.
So your contention is that a program can run just as fast on a virtual machine as one that is compiled natively?
your kidding, right? seriously...why dont we all go back to using machein code - its faster than C, C++ and Visual Basic, it can do webstuff (all webservers on the planet talk to the cpu) and all the current compatibility issues we have will look like tiny ants. Im joking (no realyl I am) but come on C++ has its uses sure but its definately go onefoto in the grave, Im not sure that Java is a long term sucsessor but it certanly can do anything C can but better.
just imagine the overclocking capabilites:-) seriously though data speed is one thing that is becoming less important but power efficency is something that we really should start to worry about. Afetr all: a 6 litre V8 can be burnt off by a snail when theres not a petrol station in site.
right then Im gonna play guitar cos I once practiced with a tennis racket. I need a bass, drums, etc. long hair not required we record some songs, then ftp the mps onto every file server going and then sue the lot, Im not a greedy man, 150 million is too much, say 10 million each? in court...why didn't we sell a single copy? not because we have no talented (doesn't stop the backstreet boys) but because of the internet pirates, retire to hot conutry and life workng on apache 2.00000001 on a laptop on the beech. any takers?
imagine jail being locked in a tiny cold dark room, little furniture, a small window leaving rarely; sounds like my life - do u get high spped net access in jail? fi not hope Im locked up near here A Motley Crew Beams No-Cost Broadband In New York
Stop this already! File sharing should not be illegal! At least not the technology allowing it! File sharing is SO MUCH MORE than just porn and copyrighted mp3s!
zope, python, php hell even java is sniffed at by management. zop, erm I dont believe we have a glossy brochure about that on.
we are still trying to rid the network of a horrible netware/nt4 combinatin that never worked but is still implemented, why aren't we using linux? no salemen have pushed it onto management and the Novell certified (tm) network admin probably feels that the currwent setup suits him best.
Oh, right. Let me guess: where you work, all the secretaries installed NT on their own, and as soon as those W2K boxes arrive, they're going to upgrade.
LOL! Can u imagine how long the phones were left rinign while they figured out Active Directory! Anyway Xp should be really simple for the secs compared to 2K:)
freebsd!!! its easier to install than debian (lots easier) and it isn't redhat! now thats gotta be worth something? also *BSD is the best server enviroment on the planet and is slowly becoming the best desktop - its at least on par with linux.
Slashdot Mirror
the EB-TX210 looks like a pretty cool phone. but does it have infared, couldn't see it.
mobile.box.sk is as good a place as any to grab phone 'warez' and there are lots of fone sites but there are only so many ringtones you can take.
Im there Ive done it! oh yeah! DOH!
Best of all, though, it tells a lot of people that there is a decent alternative to Microsoft software."
the more times ppl read about linux, hear what its like and reslise the m$ sucks the better.
why caldera? what advantages does tis offer over say redhat (I though IBM were in bed with rh).
:-)
also do I need a business desktop? wtf is a business desktop? are we talking an easy to use/install desktop encapsulating some raw power in order to acheive ease of use?
do I have one? assuming emacs is not the ultiamte business desktop
we've known about gravity for years and we can't agree on a standard for weight?
*nix has no change!!!
if m$ had been split - each half would be able to blame the other over things like this :-)
just imagine the redhat boxes will be tuned to nickelodeon all day, debian boxes to a mixture of simpsons and the science channel and slackware boxes will only work will black and white low res (but fast and powerful) 1920's bmovies. Of course the *BSD version will be hard to find and the MacOSX box will be so user freindly that u never lose the remote.
an xp version will only show adverts and will crash after excess channel hopping (patch to follow)!
YEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:-)
mod this up mod this up mod this up this is cool!
Bluetooth Wireless Stumbles at the Starting Gate
By CHRIS GAITHER
ounging in bed on a recent Saturday morning, David Bolan, an executive with a Silicon Valley startup, lifted his thumb from the remote control and caught his first glimpse of his livelihood on the screen.
There, a reseller was hawking 6,000 I.B.M. (news/quote) notebook computers left over from a crashed-and-burned company. The flameout must have been recent; the machines featured a new wireless technology called Bluetooth, for which Mr. Bolan's company, Pico Communications of Cupertino, Calif., designed networking products. Although the program conveyed a grim message about the high-technology meltdown, Mr. Bolan was thrilled when the announcer proclaimed Bluetooth the coming wave of unplugged communications.
"This is awesome," Mr. Bolan, vice president for business development at Pico, recalled thinking. "The consumer is finally starting to be educated about Bluetooth."
Last year was supposed to be the breakout year for Bluetooth technology, which carries information on radio waves among mobile phones, personal computers and other devices equipped with a Bluetooth chip. A fleet of products -- from cordless phone headsets to PC adapter kits -- were to have begun their cascade into the American market.
The vision was alluring: cell phones and computers could synchronize their contact lists as soon as they were within 30 feet, hand-held computers could send documents through the air to a nearby printer, and laptops could surf the Web using a phone's cellular network. In several years, supporters argued, every electronic device or appliance -- from computers to microwave ovens -- would use a Bluetooth chip to talk automatically with other devices.
Bluetooth supporters said chips would soon cost less than $5 and run on little power, allowing device makers to build the chips into each cell phone or hand-held device without worrying about battery drain. Encouraged by some of the world's largest electronics manufacturers, analysts estimated that nearly 1.5 billion Bluetooth-ready devices would be sold by 2005, creating vast communications networks between devices and appliances.
But the cascade turned out to be a trickle -- Bluetooth was still not ready for mass production. Chip costs remained high, and devices sometimes refused to talk to each other. A handful of products began appearing on the market last September, but in small numbers and at high prices. These were normal growing pains for a young technology, but two years of boasting brought publicity to its troubles.
Industry leaders say that with a new set of technical specifications and a more stable platform, Bluetooth is finally ready to pick up speed later this year, and take off in 2002. Motorola (news/quote), Ericsson (news/quote), 3Com (news/quote), Compaq, Toshiba (news/quote) and others have early Bluetooth products, including phone and PC adapters, on the market, with plans to increase distribution later this year, and Palm will offer a Bluetooth expansion card for its m500 series of hand-helds units by the end of the year.
"We are going to drive it to become ubiquitous," said Michael Mace, chief competitive officer and vice president for product planning for Palm, which wants to enable its devices to communicate wirelessly with PC's, phones and other machines.
But while engineers fine-tune Bluetooth and major manufacturers declare its rise is imminent, troubles have emerged. First, with the souring of the economy, corporations -- usually the first to adopt new technologies -- have cut budgets. Second, sales of handhelds and cellular phones, expected to be market drivers for Bluetooth, have plunged. And last, another wireless technology, originally expected to complement Bluetooth, came in and stole much of its thunder.
The other wireless networking standard, called IEEE 802.11b, or Wi-Fi, has picked up strong momentum among information technology managers and technology savvy consumers. Wi-Fi networks allow computer users to connect to the Internet wirelessly from Starbucks (news/quote) coffee bars, as well as from some shops, airport and hotel lounges and corporate offices and college campuses.
Supporters of both technologies say there is room for both in the marketplace. But if Wi-Fi succeeds in adopting Bluetooth's most attractive attributes -- low power consumption and cost -- it could be used in a wide range of small devices, which could then use the Internet to communicate with each other. This script, some observers predict, could render Bluetooth a well-planned, heavily financed failure.
The development of Bluetooth goes back to 1994, when researchers in Ericsson's labs began work on a way to make hands-free cell phone calls without using cables. They found their solution in radio waves. Unlike infrared, which enlivens television remote controls and allows users of hand-held computers to beam their business cards to one another, radio waves can travel through walls and in many directions at once, up to about 30 feet. They used little power -- a crucial feature for devices that run on batteries. And, at least in theory, the radio chips could be made small and inexpensive, so they could be built into every phone.
In 1998, Ericsson assembled a special-interest group to begin developing this technology for the general market. The first members were the cell phone maker Nokia (news/quote), the computer manufacturers I.B.M. and Toshiba, and the chip maker Intel (news/quote). Jim Kardach, an Intel technician and amateur historian, dubbed the wireless standard "Bluetooth," after Harald Bluetooth, a Scandinavian king who unified Denmark and Norway in the 10th century. The imagery was simple: the technology would bring together devices just like King Bluetooth linked the two countries.
Joined by other technology leaders like Microsoft (news/quote), Compaq Computer (news/quote) and Lucent Technologies (news/quote), the Bluetooth Special Interest Group -- which now numbers 2,500 companies -- began suggesting that Bluetooth was the wireless technology that futurists awaited. In the beginning, they envisioned Bluetooth replacing cables to carry information not just within, but between devices, creating so-called personal-area networks unencumbered by wires.
In this Bluetooth-enabled future, proponents say, travelers will walk into airports and be instantly recognized by their devices. The airline's computer system will send, via radio waves, the passenger's boarding pass, departure gate and flight status directly to the handheld or cell phone. On the road, a car with a broken fan belt can diagnose its troubles and contact a repairman through the network.
"We're banking on the consumer marketplace to win with Bluetooth," said Francis Dance, telematics services project manager for BMW of North America.
For that to happen, Bluetooth chips need others to talk with. But the price of chip sets has not declined nearly as fast as expected. Mr. Mace, the Palm executive, said his company will begin placing a Bluetooth chip set inside every handheld when chip sets costs less than $10, about half their price today. In the meantime, Palm and other manufacturers are relying on kits that add Bluetooth to existing devices. The kits can cost $200 per device, an expensive price to eliminate cables.
this is not what 802.11 is intended for
oh come on, focus your brain and think back to what the internet was intended for...a world wide pr0n stash? a business network? history
geeks have always took cool technology and adapted it thats why we have such cool toys to play with.
fsck! screwed up html
all the ppl paying will only get 24 hrs to watch the film but all those clever crackers will get hours of enjoyment cracking the thing.
also why release the dvd before the download? lets face it if you download it cheaply, watch it and if you really like it you buy the dvd.
but uf you do it the other way; you buy the dvd and then decide to download it. WHY? becoz u cant be bothered to open the dvd case ?!? surely is a better option?
lawyers or r&d ???
how the fuck do trolls like this get +2 its just like the pop charts with losers like n-sync getting to #1
mod this troll down!!!
I don't think that a lack of documentation is the reason linux has "more popularity (if it does)." I just think that it's more advertised.
Disagree, i think it plays a part.IMHO most budding geeksters who are sitting on their wondiws boxes just waiting to install a proper OS over the top come to sites like this to lurk and find out what OS to go for.
the general consensus is that *nix is thaw way to go and the choice is either BSD or Linux.
BSD is much more elitist that Linux so its bes tto learn linux and then 'gradyuate' onto BSd at a later date.
if you really wanna be a sheep you have to follow this path... corel, redhat, mandrake, debian, slackware. then and can you go on to bigger and B(SD)etter things.
So your contention is that a program can run just as fast on a virtual machine as one that is compiled natively?
your kidding, right?seriously...why dont we all go back to using machein code - its faster than C, C++ and Visual Basic, it can do webstuff (all webservers on the planet talk to the cpu) and all the current compatibility issues we have will look like tiny ants.
Im joking (no realyl I am) but come on C++ has its uses sure but its definately go onefoto in the grave, Im not sure that Java is a long term sucsessor but it certanly can do anything C can but better.
just imagine the overclocking capabilites :-)
seriously though data speed is one thing that is becoming less important but power efficency is something that we really should start to worry about. Afetr all: a 6 litre V8 can be burnt off by a snail when theres not a petrol station in site.
right then Im gonna play guitar cos I once practiced with a tennis racket. I need a bass, drums, etc. long hair not required
we record some songs, then ftp the mps onto every file server going and then sue the lot, Im not a greedy man, 150 million is too much, say 10 million each?
in court...why didn't we sell a single copy? not because we have no talented (doesn't stop the backstreet boys) but because of the internet pirates, retire to hot conutry and life workng on apache 2.00000001 on a laptop on the beech.
any takers?
imagine jail being locked in a tiny cold dark room, little furniture, a small window leaving rarely; sounds like my life - do u get high spped net access in jail? fi not hope Im locked up near here A Motley Crew Beams No-Cost Broadband In New York
Stop this already! File sharing should not be illegal! At least not the technology allowing it! File sharing is SO MUCH MORE than just porn and copyrighted mp3s!
agreed file sharing is also about porn & mp3!zope, python, php hell even java is sniffed at by management. zop, erm I dont believe we have a glossy brochure about that on.
we are still trying to rid the network of a horrible netware/nt4 combinatin that never worked but is still implemented, why aren't we using linux? no salemen have pushed it onto management and the Novell certified (tm) network admin probably feels that the currwent setup suits him best.
Oh, right. Let me guess: where you work, all the secretaries installed NT on their own, and as soon as those W2K boxes arrive, they're going to upgrade. LOL! Can u imagine how long the phones were left rinign while they figured out Active Directory! Anyway Xp should be really simple for the secs compared to 2K :)
http://babel.altavista.com/?urltext=http%3A%2F%2Fw ww.heise.de%2Fct%2F01%2F17%2F048%2F&lp=de_en
i just hope no one gets the patent to breathing!
freebsd!!! its easier to install than debian (lots easier) and it isn't redhat! now thats gotta be worth something? also *BSD is the best server enviroment on the planet and is slowly becoming the best desktop - its at least on par with linux.