For some applications, 32Mb is all you need to support a Browser with enough plugins to handle most of the Internet- including distance learning applications.
As for the question of the Type I slot; Type I is not terribly useful compared to having a Type II/III slot or a CF slot. In the case of not having a Type II/III slot, it's a little pricey. In the case of a CF slot, you can cheat and just map the device to the IDE chain- but they don't like doing that because they think they're going to be selling a lot of these things for IADs and they don't want anything that might be useful for repurposing the device. (Don't get me started on that- it's a battle I've had on many occasions over the past year with these people...)
It would be an exception rather than the norm for boards in this class (which are generally intended for set-top and managed PC systems...). I've got several differing variations of this sort of motherboard as well as others in this class- they all support PXE.
Screwholes those aren't- they're those plastic rivets like you see on some of the earlier fansink setups on display cards. Also of note, the info on the chip says "Fan/Heatsink Required", but this beastie is just perfectly happy with a properly sized passive sink. I've seen boards with this CPU (with slightly different parts choices for ethernet and sound) that have this nifty gold colored heatsink that extends only about 3/8-1/2 of an inch above the chip- and they work very well.
I know that the 2D/3D is from a Trident Cyberblade core, the sound's an unknown, but they claim at least soundblaster support (not as good as could be, but hey...), and I believe that the ethernet's supported under the latest stable kernels.
As for performance, it's so-so. I've got an ECS box, branded the i-Note in hand, courtesy of my employer, that I've been playing about with. It's got a different (read: known to be supported and autodetected by Red Hat and others...) ethernet and sound chip choice, but I can give out some performance figures for the CPU all the same. For integer performance, it weighs in at the same basic performance level as a Celeron of the same clock speed. For floating point, it varies from task to task, but it performs anywhere from 1/2-3/4 as fast as a similarly clocked Celeron.
As a gamer's toy, this has some, but limited appeal. As a general consumer device, this has some things going for it.
It's not MEANT to be upgraded, though. RAM, HD, and DVD/CD drives are the only "upgradeable" parts in this design. This isn't intended for the gamer/hardcore crowd. This is intended for the office space crowd and the home crowd where they have some minimal usage of things like games and DVD playback, but need a largely maintenance free machine that will do things like wordprocessing, etc.
MOST people that want/need computers actually fall under that category, not the one that the/. crowd generally falls under.
This is a BGA mounted part, meaning no upgrading CPU (This is less of an isssue than you'd think...) and I think they may not have the 900+ parts in the BGA form factor yet.
They'll be relatively inexpensive. Retail for the whole shebang should be something on the order of about $300. They're gunning for set-top box territory with these, meaning that they have to be relatively inexpensive to begin with.
I hope this gets modded up to a 5. It really pegs things down. I have little desire for most of the record label offered bands these days. I have a desire for the older bands (when they tried to cultivate something of a following...) and indie stuff. Now, if only there was a way to do movies and the lot in an independant manner that wasn't quite so expensive...
They'll pass a similar stupid law up there in their Parliment and then you're back where you started. It's come time to attack this on as many fronts as we possibly can.
Yes, we are at the turning point, but how things go down is up to all of us.
No, the actual crime would be in the US, according to the claims. The US division of the company is the one that purportedly gave out the hacks for ITV's smartcards. It would be a DMCA violation, if that is the case.
And, that's because they don't want it done to them when they're running for re-election. It's going to boil down to someone other than a person running for office or acting on their behalf to make this work. I, for one, would do so.
That's why I pretty much stopped my CD purchasing habits. I listen pretty much to what I've already purchased and not a lot more. I don't listen to the radio all that often these days either.
That price, it DOES put things starkly in perspective, doesn't it?
Folks, isn't it time to remind them that we're why they're here in the first place and they should be a little nicer to us?
I see it less as a DRM and more as a secure delivery vehicle- it basically allows download from anywhere, but you only get to use it if you pay for it. Once unlocked from your system, it could be distributed indefinitely.
By definition, a DRM system is supposed to ensure that this is impossible without the permission of the content owner. In my opinion, the players in the game are worrying about the wrong things. DRM's should be there for things like pay-per-view services (Which I've little problem with so long as there's other stuff to watch- make it all pay-per-view/listen/etc. and I give up on your stuff completely...) but for things like DVD, eBooks, etc. it should be a one-time transaction. If they do like many have suggested, make it uneconomically viable for infringement (Which doesn't mean using a DRM, which paradoxically makes it more viable to infringe on the copyright of the content...) then they'll have a heck of a lot less infringement going on and they'll still make something around what they're making now- it's just that a LOT more people will be buying into their stuff.
Treaties are agreements that our country will do a given thing, along with other countries. We can enact laws that mirror what we said we would- but only if it doesn't run counter to what the Constitution says can/can't be done. If a law is in violation of the Constitution, the people that signed that treaty on behalf of our country had no authority to do so in the first place.
Just like SDMI's watermarking was proven to be ineffective at keeping people from filing the serial numbers off and impairing quality, the same goes for video. If it's invisible to the user and is identifiable, it's removable as well.
...that Jack and Co spouted the same, now tired, tripe when VHS came out. It didn't destroy them then (it actually made them stronger once they embraced the technology...) and if they play their cards right now instead of the protectionist bullshit they're trying to get made up for them it'll be a repeat performance.
Which was supposed to be the centerpiece of their other lines of business... They couldn't get the consulting services business off the ground (Really bad timing more than anything else- nobody's doing ANYTHING in the industry. I just wish that these companies would wise up and realize that they make things far, far worse by trying to shore up their short-term profitability by laying people off- they're making the downturn that caused the lower profits worse than it needed to be.) so they killed the expensive part of the company and focused on the software that WAS making them money and reduced their staffing accordingly.
Frankly speaking, I do not believe that either Hollings or Disney have anything but the best of their interests in mind.
I do not think that Disney deserves the time or money that they seek to get from me. I do not think that I should be supporting a company that so callously thinks of me and everybody else in this country- that they presume that all of us are thieves and that they need to get the government to make it such that their stuff is protected from us.
When someone falsely accuses me of something, I generally do not associate or do business with them. And, that's what Disney and all the other businesses and politicians are doing by supporting the SSSCA- they're accusing all of us of being thieves. I'm going to do what I can to not put money in Disney's pockets. I was thinking of going to Disneyworld this summer. Now, I'm not so sure. I don't think I'll be going to their movies at all until they change their tune, and very likely all movies because I suspect the other MPAA members are for this bill as well. I don't think I'll be purchasing anything licensed from their properties either for the same reason. I'll make it a point of mentioning that they were the biggest backer of the SSSCA and what the SSSCA is all about when opportunities present themselves- and I've already done so several times this last week. The results seem favorable as the people that I told didn't know this all was going on and they had issues with the idea and with all of what has gone down about the hearings and all.
And, while I would love to see it in the theatres, I'm not going to put money in their pockets by doing it.
What if you have no equipment that can use those?
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
They're mandating DRM on everything- and if it's really there in a way that's "useful" to the content industries, it will prevent any usages not DRMed.
Yes, but they were the ones crafting the laws...
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
...that unregulated things. As someone else put it, it's been shown that it wasn't a good idea in the first place, why do we need the content industries writing their own laws regarding copyright?
You should be working on REMOVING him from office.
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
The man's obviously NOT acting in the interests of the people of SC, let alone of the nation, but instead acting in the interests of a business that really isn't even IN his constituency. At the very least, you should be building up a campaign of "anything BUT Hollings" for when his term is up. Tell everyone you know about the SSSCA (What it is and what it means- most people when told what this silly law means in laymen's terms, they get really, really pissed off about it...) and that HE's the one that is backing the bill in the Senate. Bluntly, the man is NOT working in the interests of his constituency OR the country as a whole. He doesn't need to hold that office any more.
...that the annoying ad campaigns don't work and never did? Has anyone told them that bigger, longer ads in the way of the content is the cause of the demise of network broadcast television?
The business model they're operating under isn't in touch with reality and isn't sustainable.
Re:Bipartisanship could actually save us.
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
It hasn't been signed into law yet. While I don't hold out a lot of hope, the fat lady's not sung yet on that one.
Slashdot Mirror
For some applications, 32Mb is all you need to support a Browser with enough plugins to handle most of the Internet- including distance learning applications.
As for the question of the Type I slot; Type I is not terribly useful compared to having a Type II/III slot or a CF slot. In the case of not having a Type II/III slot, it's a little pricey. In the case of a CF slot, you can cheat and just map the device to the IDE chain- but they don't like doing that because they think they're going to be selling a lot of these things for IADs and they don't want anything that might be useful for repurposing the device. (Don't get me started on that- it's a battle I've had on many occasions over the past year with these people...)
It would be an exception rather than the norm for boards in this class (which are generally intended for set-top and managed PC systems...). I've got several differing variations of this sort of motherboard as well as others in this class- they all support PXE.
Screwholes those aren't- they're those plastic rivets like you see on some of the earlier fansink setups on display cards. Also of note, the info on the chip says "Fan/Heatsink Required", but this beastie is just perfectly happy with a properly sized passive sink. I've seen boards with this CPU (with slightly different parts choices for ethernet and sound) that have this nifty gold colored heatsink that extends only about 3/8-1/2 of an inch above the chip- and they work very well.
I know that the 2D/3D is from a Trident Cyberblade core, the sound's an unknown, but they claim at least soundblaster support (not as good as could be, but hey...), and I believe that the ethernet's supported under the latest stable kernels.
As for performance, it's so-so. I've got an ECS box, branded the i-Note in hand, courtesy of my employer, that I've been playing about with. It's got a different (read: known to be supported and autodetected by Red Hat and others...) ethernet and sound chip choice, but I can give out some performance figures for the CPU all the same. For integer performance, it weighs in at the same basic performance level as a Celeron of the same clock speed. For floating point, it varies from task to task, but it performs anywhere from 1/2-3/4 as fast as a similarly clocked Celeron.
As a gamer's toy, this has some, but limited appeal. As a general consumer device, this has some things going for it.
It's not MEANT to be upgraded, though. RAM, HD, and DVD/CD drives are the only "upgradeable" parts in this design. This isn't intended for the gamer/hardcore crowd. This is intended for the office space crowd and the home crowd where they have some minimal usage of things like games and DVD playback, but need a largely maintenance free machine that will do things like wordprocessing, etc.
/. crowd generally falls under.
MOST people that want/need computers actually fall under that category, not the one that the
This is a BGA mounted part, meaning no upgrading CPU (This is less of an isssue than you'd think...) and I think they may not have the 900+ parts in the BGA form factor yet.
They'll be relatively inexpensive. Retail for the whole shebang should be something on the order of about $300. They're gunning for set-top box territory with these, meaning that they have to be relatively inexpensive to begin with.
I hope this gets modded up to a 5. It really pegs things down. I have little desire for most of the record label offered bands these days. I have a desire for the older bands (when they tried to cultivate something of a following...) and indie stuff. Now, if only there was a way to do movies and the lot in an independant manner that wasn't quite so expensive...
They'll pass a similar stupid law up there in their Parliment and then you're back where you started. It's come time to attack this on as many fronts as we possibly can.
Yes, we are at the turning point, but how things go down is up to all of us.
No, the actual crime would be in the US, according to the claims. The US division of the company is the one that purportedly gave out the hacks for ITV's smartcards. It would be a DMCA violation, if that is the case.
One of the upper management DID charge to his credit card at one point so that they could make payroll.
And, that's because they don't want it done to them when they're running for re-election. It's going to boil down to someone other than a person running for office or acting on their behalf to make this work. I, for one, would do so.
That's why I pretty much stopped my CD purchasing habits. I listen pretty much to what I've already purchased and not a lot more. I don't listen to the radio all that often these days either.
That price, it DOES put things starkly in perspective, doesn't it?
Folks, isn't it time to remind them that we're why they're here in the first place and they should be a little nicer to us?
I see it less as a DRM and more as a secure delivery vehicle- it basically allows download from anywhere, but you only get to use it if you pay for it. Once unlocked from your system, it could be distributed indefinitely.
By definition, a DRM system is supposed to ensure that this is impossible without the permission of the content owner. In my opinion, the players in the game are worrying about the wrong things. DRM's should be there for things like pay-per-view services (Which I've little problem with so long as there's other stuff to watch- make it all pay-per-view/listen/etc. and I give up on your stuff completely...) but for things like DVD, eBooks, etc. it should be a one-time transaction. If they do like many have suggested, make it uneconomically viable for infringement (Which doesn't mean using a DRM, which paradoxically makes it more viable to infringe on the copyright of the content...) then they'll have a heck of a lot less infringement going on and they'll still make something around what they're making now- it's just that a LOT more people will be buying into their stuff.
Treaties are agreements that our country will do a given thing, along with other countries. We can enact laws that mirror what we said we would- but only if it doesn't run counter to what the Constitution says can/can't be done. If a law is in violation of the Constitution, the people that signed that treaty on behalf of our country had no authority to do so in the first place.
Just like SDMI's watermarking was proven to be ineffective at keeping people from filing the serial numbers off and impairing quality, the same goes for video. If it's invisible to the user and is identifiable, it's removable as well.
...that Jack and Co spouted the same, now tired, tripe when VHS came out. It didn't destroy them then (it actually made them stronger once they embraced the technology...) and if they play their cards right now instead of the protectionist bullshit they're trying to get made up for them it'll be a repeat performance.
Which was supposed to be the centerpiece of their other lines of business... They couldn't get the consulting services business off the ground (Really bad timing more than anything else- nobody's doing ANYTHING in the industry. I just wish that these companies would wise up and realize that they make things far, far worse by trying to shore up their short-term profitability by laying people off- they're making the downturn that caused the lower profits worse than it needed to be.) so they killed the expensive part of the company and focused on the software that WAS making them money and reduced their staffing accordingly.
Frankly speaking, I do not believe that either Hollings or Disney have anything but the best of their interests in mind.
I do not think that Disney deserves the time or money that they seek to get from me. I do not think that I should be supporting a company that so callously thinks of me and everybody else in this country- that they presume that all of us are thieves and that they need to get the government to make it such that their stuff is protected from us.
When someone falsely accuses me of something, I generally do not associate or do business with them. And, that's what Disney and all the other businesses and politicians are doing by supporting the SSSCA- they're accusing all of us of being thieves. I'm going to do what I can to not put money in Disney's pockets. I was thinking of going to Disneyworld this summer. Now, I'm not so sure. I don't think I'll be going to their movies at all until they change their tune, and very likely all movies because I suspect the other MPAA members are for this bill as well. I don't think I'll be purchasing anything licensed from their properties either for the same reason. I'll make it a point of mentioning that they were the biggest backer of the SSSCA and what the SSSCA is all about when opportunities present themselves- and I've already done so several times this last week. The results seem favorable as the people that I told didn't know this all was going on and they had issues with the idea and with all of what has gone down about the hearings and all.
And, while I would love to see it in the theatres, I'm not going to put money in their pockets by doing it.
They're mandating DRM on everything- and if it's really there in a way that's "useful" to the content industries, it will prevent any usages not DRMed.
...that unregulated things. As someone else put it, it's been shown that it wasn't a good idea in the first place, why do we need the content industries writing their own laws regarding copyright?
The man's obviously NOT acting in the interests of the people of SC, let alone of the nation, but instead acting in the interests of a business that really isn't even IN his constituency. At the very least, you should be building up a campaign of "anything BUT Hollings" for when his term is up. Tell everyone you know about the SSSCA (What it is and what it means- most people when told what this silly law means in laymen's terms, they get really, really pissed off about it...) and that HE's the one that is backing the bill in the Senate. Bluntly, the man is NOT working in the interests of his constituency OR the country as a whole. He doesn't need to hold that office any more.
...that the annoying ad campaigns don't work and never did? Has anyone told them that bigger, longer ads in the way of the content is the cause of the demise of network broadcast television?
The business model they're operating under isn't in touch with reality and isn't sustainable.
It hasn't been signed into law yet. While I don't hold out a lot of hope, the fat lady's not sung yet on that one.