You, sir, are a glutton for punishment! How long will *that* take?:-p
Linux on older mac hardware is okay, but I kind of prefer NetBSD. SCO's gonna sue them, anyway, too, because they've got binary compatibility on x86. Just a matter of time.
First of all, corporations don't pay taxes. They might have monies withdrawn from their accounts by the government, but they do not pay taxes. Individuals pay taxes, whether it be employees ("payroll taxes" are parts of your paycheck that you never see), customers, or shareholders (in the form of lost profits/dividends).
Even so, assuming a 25% tax rate on revenue (ungodly high), your math yields 35% in profits.
It doesn't compute.
Why? Well, you don't take into account at all costs of doing business other than salary.
Yes, there are greedy corporations. Yes, things could be better. Some of us are proactively working towards that end within the corporate world. I, personally, have no desire to be involved with offshoring, or the excesses of public corporations. In a private corporation, I'm free to take a smaller profit, and steadfastly refuse to offshore, up to the point where I cannot make money any longer. It's just a matter of principle. I couldn't do that with the gamblers on Wall Street who believe they should get 20% returns on their 401k's every year. Which is what the dot com bubble brought about. Supply-side economics has very little to do with it.
It's kind of open, as there are restrictions and licensing costs, but it's basically the same deal as MIPS or SPARC -- not very difficult for a fabricator to get involved if it so wishes. In fact, Samsung is manufacturing PPC chips for IBM, and may become a licensee.
As for Apple, the G-monikers say nothing of the manufacturer. My B+W G3 is a moto chip. My old iBook was an IBM. I have no idea who the manufacturer is -- but it's identified as a PPC7455, whatever that means (800MHz G4).
But you are right, POWER is a different chip, altogether. The 970 is based on the POWER4. And the forthcoming POWER5 is supposed to be a world-burner.
And they have a vested interest, because their own financial welfare depends upon the value of that stock. The CEO's are beholden to the boards of directors, and you get Carly Fiorina.
FWIW, there are good corporations around, but many of them aren't publicly traded. It's unfortunate that people like Michael Moore make the word "corporation" a four-letter word. Some of us choose a different way, and care about overall health instead of stock price.
But that doesn't get reported on the omnipresent stock reports on cable news.
Isn't that what the cockroach, Milquetoast, in Outland was supposed to be doing by whispering into people's (well, if you consider Bill the Cat a person) ears at night?
As for me, I normally change my dream input by consuming Tequila before bedtime. It rarely disappoints.:-D
Oh, I already got all that in undergrad school. You're even more hated when you say that you'd like to do something like criminal defense. Too bad Darl will already be in an orange jumpsuit by the time I'm finished with school.:-D
They are violating the GPL, because they're distributing GPL'd code, and do not accept the terms of its license. Namely, they distribute the Linux kernel to people (still), and they are distributing Samba.
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
So, perhaps, they aren't violating the GPL itself because they don't accept it anymore, but they are violating the authors' copyrights, because the GPL is the only license the authors allow the code to be distributed under. You can hash words all day.
I have about ten here in the office purchased within the past two years, as well as a few notebooks (shipment of those just before Thanksgiving, actually). According to this story, they're still third overall. Good machines, overall, but not much different than you'd get from HP or Dell.
I think it's basically a non-issue for Apple, because you're forgetting one thing -- IBM still sells a buttload of PC's. I'm sure they're not about to abandon their lucrative notebook line, or their still-popular desktop line. They're leaving the consumer market to Apple, which probably works best for the both of them, because IBM has never been really successful there. PC Jr.? PS/2? OS/2? Aptiva? You get my point.:-) The only advantage Apple has over IBM as far as this goes is a native MS Office.
Two interesting things could come out of this, I think....
1. Porting Lotus Smart Suite to Linux (I don't think they're going to be using *cough* SUN StarOffice or any deritive) 2. PPC97x-based (or Athlon64, since I think IBM is actually fabbing some of those?) business desktops running a desktop environment similar to Sun's Java Desktop.
64 bits, while not interesting in and of itself, is interesting in AMD's implementation. I have an UltraSparc sitting on my desk at work, and I assure you it's one of the most boring machines in the world. Why is AMD interesting? In the Opteron/Athlon 64 they've fixed some of the shortcomings of the x86 architecture. More registers. Access to more than 4GB of RAM without menutia (like Intel uses). Things that were expensive in a register-starved 32 bit processor aren't on an Athlon64.
No, it's not innovative, not by a longshot. It's the same damn thing Intel did when they introduced the 80386. But it continues the line unbroken, and that's why the processor is important.
Hyperthreading is interesting, I agree, but I'd much prefer more affordable dual processor machines. Why in the world do Intel, AMD, and Microsoft go out of their way to keep SMP machines off the desktop? Apple certainly is going in the opposite direction.
In fact, it's not much of a question for me anymore -- when there's a problem, it's normally hardware malfunction. I have several machines with 160+ day uptimes, which would be longer if not for an extended power outage at the office.
IBM just confirmed what I already knew. Guess what, Win2k is pretty stable, too. Sorry, but it's true.
But, jeeze, isn't anyone else drooling over those systems they tested on? Makes me hate my busted whiteboxes and horrible HP's a little more everyday.
Repeat after me....."MMMM, dual Power4......MMMM, dual Power4...."
You assign an employee to listen to the other station for a couple of days. It becomes pretty easy to figure out what their clock looks like after about 30 hours of listening to the station.....
:58 Legal ID :58 -:06 Two current hit songs :06 -:10 Backsell, promo, 1:20 in commercials, frontsell :10 -:40 "Ten song marathon" or whatever the catch phrase is. :41 Backsell, contest/giveaway sounder :41 -:49 Spots :50 frontsell :51 -:56 One current hit, one classic hit. :57 -:58 contest winner,:30 spot.
Every single one of the FM stations in the market where I am has its long break at around:40. Every single one. As I tried to imply in my OP, stations copy each other, even if they're owned by different companies.
Newsflash.....most music stations synchronize their breaks and clocks. I realize that you don't want to hear the commercials, but that's what we, the talent are there for, in the end -- to hold your interest long enough for you to listen to some commercials.
As for the websites, station websites are just billboards. Name five stations who are making money on "teh intarweb." So, they change the logo and the talent.....big deal. The stations where I work use basically the same CSS for each station -- only the colors are different. And, again, I don't work for CC; I actually work for a small company.
"I wrote them (and looking at the original ones, I'm a bit ashamed: the "toupper()" and "tolower()" macros are so horribly ugly that I wouldn't admit to writing them if it wasn't because somebody else claimed to have done so;)"
If SCO is big on claiming ugly code, I can only imagine what a convoluted mess UnixWarez actually is.:-)
But they're hardly the problem. CC is a clumsy puppy -- well intentioned, but poorly trained. Since the mid-80's on the FM dial, and the early-90's on the AM dial, there hasn't been a whole lot of variety. Every market has a whacky Morning Zoo show on a heavy metal or top 40 station. They play bits created by a syndicator, and pass them off as "something funny we came up with last night." Then you have the AM stations which are either syndicated AM talk, or satelitte religious programming.
So, what's Clear Channel done? They're trying to make their AM stations like local TV stations. Local news/issues programs during prime time, and well-known network programming other times. For the music stations, it's even easier. They've got vertical integration among the stations, with playlists based on formats. Go ahead, examine the playlists of stations in the same format owned by companies other than Clear Channel. By and large, it's the same music.
The only real difference between markets is the level of talent and the fit and polish of the delivery. In big markets, you get good jocks and tight production. In small markets, you can hear some pretty awful radio.:-) I'm sitting in a station newsroom right now, at work, so I think I know what I'm talking about here. And no, I don't work for Clear Channel.
As for XM, I've done three cross-country trips in the past two years via auto. I don't think I'd want to do it without an XM receiver. While there is some good local stuff out there, XM is good quality wherever you happen to be, and it's consistent. Montana is big, and sometimes you can't find a station for a couple of hours. I think the talk programming is better on XM than on Sirius, but that's just personal opinion. If you really dig on NPR, Sirius would probalby be more your cup of tea.
A conventional monolithic kernel which enforces security policy, and governs basically everything from networking to disk access....yeah, that's pretty much part of Unix. OSX doesn't have that.
Take a look at this which talks about the future MIPS machines, which will still run Irix. Irix, despite its weirdness, can still do things Linux can't. Go take a look at a very high end Irix server (something like an Origin 2k or 3k), and you'll see the difference.
Slashdot Mirror
If the caps I've got sitting in my drawer here come up "used" when I go to buy stuff.....
It's pretty easy though, since you have to register through iTunes. Cheaters will be tracked down.
But whoever is doing this is a lowlife.
You, sir, are a glutton for punishment! How long will *that* take? :-p
Linux on older mac hardware is okay, but I kind of prefer NetBSD. SCO's gonna sue them, anyway, too, because they've got binary compatibility on x86. Just a matter of time.
They are, unless there's some other company making machines that run Irix.
First of all, corporations don't pay taxes. They might have monies withdrawn from their accounts by the government, but they do not pay taxes. Individuals pay taxes, whether it be employees ("payroll taxes" are parts of your paycheck that you never see), customers, or shareholders (in the form of lost profits/dividends).
Even so, assuming a 25% tax rate on revenue (ungodly high), your math yields 35% in profits.
It doesn't compute.
Why? Well, you don't take into account at all costs of doing business other than salary.
Yes, there are greedy corporations. Yes, things could be better. Some of us are proactively working towards that end within the corporate world. I, personally, have no desire to be involved with offshoring, or the excesses of public corporations. In a private corporation, I'm free to take a smaller profit, and steadfastly refuse to offshore, up to the point where I cannot make money any longer. It's just a matter of principle. I couldn't do that with the gamblers on Wall Street who believe they should get 20% returns on their 401k's every year. Which is what the dot com bubble brought about. Supply-side economics has very little to do with it.
Quit trolling.
*woosh*
:-)
It's the sound you hear when you miss the joke
I'm talking about the substances (usually green) that inspire the sessions, themselves.
How do you distribute the source code of an improv jaz session?
:-p
I believe that's a felony in most states.
I liked the comment about how IBM had little or no Intel expertise.
Uhh, they invented the PC, *and* they ported AIX to it in the late 80's.
It's kind of open, as there are restrictions and licensing costs, but it's basically the same deal as MIPS or SPARC -- not very difficult for a fabricator to get involved if it so wishes. In fact, Samsung is manufacturing PPC chips for IBM, and may become a licensee.
:-)
As for Apple, the G-monikers say nothing of the manufacturer. My B+W G3 is a moto chip. My old iBook was an IBM. I have no idea who the manufacturer is -- but it's identified as a PPC7455, whatever that means (800MHz G4).
But you are right, POWER is a different chip, altogether. The 970 is based on the POWER4. And the forthcoming POWER5 is supposed to be a world-burner.
Not like I'll ever be able to afford one.
And they have a vested interest, because their own financial welfare depends upon the value of that stock. The CEO's are beholden to the boards of directors, and you get Carly Fiorina.
FWIW, there are good corporations around, but many of them aren't publicly traded. It's unfortunate that people like Michael Moore make the word "corporation" a four-letter word. Some of us choose a different way, and care about overall health instead of stock price.
But that doesn't get reported on the omnipresent stock reports on cable news.
Isn't that what the cockroach, Milquetoast, in Outland was supposed to be doing by whispering into people's (well, if you consider Bill the Cat a person) ears at night?
:-D
As for me, I normally change my dream input by consuming Tequila before bedtime. It rarely disappoints.
Oh, I already got all that in undergrad school. You're even more hated when you say that you'd like to do something like criminal defense. Too bad Darl will already be in an orange jumpsuit by the time I'm finished with school. :-D
I thought that was supposed to be a carp! /me is preparing for law school.....
They are violating the GPL, because they're distributing GPL'd code, and do not accept the terms of its license. Namely, they distribute the Linux kernel to people (still), and they are distributing Samba.
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
So, perhaps, they aren't violating the GPL itself because they don't accept it anymore, but they are violating the authors' copyrights, because the GPL is the only license the authors allow the code to be distributed under. You can hash words all day.
I have about ten here in the office purchased within the past two years, as well as a few notebooks (shipment of those just before Thanksgiving, actually). According to this story, they're still third overall. Good machines, overall, but not much different than you'd get from HP or Dell.
I think it's basically a non-issue for Apple, because you're forgetting one thing -- IBM still sells a buttload of PC's. I'm sure they're not about to abandon their lucrative notebook line, or their still-popular desktop line. They're leaving the consumer market to Apple, which probably works best for the both of them, because IBM has never been really successful there. PC Jr.? PS/2? OS/2? Aptiva? You get my point. :-) The only advantage Apple has over IBM as far as this goes is a native MS Office.
Two interesting things could come out of this, I think....
1. Porting Lotus Smart Suite to Linux (I don't think they're going to be using *cough* SUN StarOffice or any deritive)
2. PPC97x-based (or Athlon64, since I think IBM is actually fabbing some of those?) business desktops running a desktop environment similar to Sun's Java Desktop.
Perhaps I'm feeding a troll here, but....
64 bits, while not interesting in and of itself, is interesting in AMD's implementation. I have an UltraSparc sitting on my desk at work, and I assure you it's one of the most boring machines in the world. Why is AMD interesting? In the Opteron/Athlon 64 they've fixed some of the shortcomings of the x86 architecture. More registers. Access to more than 4GB of RAM without menutia (like Intel uses). Things that were expensive in a register-starved 32 bit processor aren't on an Athlon64.
No, it's not innovative, not by a longshot. It's the same damn thing Intel did when they introduced the 80386. But it continues the line unbroken, and that's why the processor is important.
Hyperthreading is interesting, I agree, but I'd much prefer more affordable dual processor machines. Why in the world do Intel, AMD, and Microsoft go out of their way to keep SMP machines off the desktop? Apple certainly is going in the opposite direction.
Even timothy's stories are better than this one.
Gotta ramp up the production before you make the announcement. I have a feeling that these will sell very quickly.
In fact, it's not much of a question for me anymore -- when there's a problem, it's normally hardware malfunction. I have several machines with 160+ day uptimes, which would be longer if not for an extended power outage at the office.
IBM just confirmed what I already knew. Guess what, Win2k is pretty stable, too. Sorry, but it's true.
But, jeeze, isn't anyone else drooling over those systems they tested on? Makes me hate my busted whiteboxes and horrible HP's a little more everyday.
Repeat after me....."MMMM, dual Power4......MMMM, dual Power4...."
You assign an employee to listen to the other station for a couple of days. It becomes pretty easy to figure out what their clock looks like after about 30 hours of listening to the station.....
:58 Legal ID
:58 - :06 Two current hit songs
:06 - :10 Backsell, promo, 1:20 in commercials, frontsell
:10 - :40 "Ten song marathon" or whatever the catch phrase is.
:41 Backsell, contest/giveaway sounder
:41 - :49 Spots
:50 frontsell
:51 - :56 One current hit, one classic hit.
:57 - :58 contest winner, :30 spot.
:40. Every single one. As I tried to imply in my OP, stations copy each other, even if they're owned by different companies.
Every single one of the FM stations in the market where I am has its long break at around
Newsflash.....most music stations synchronize their breaks and clocks. I realize that you don't want to hear the commercials, but that's what we, the talent are there for, in the end -- to hold your interest long enough for you to listen to some commercials.
As for the websites, station websites are just billboards. Name five stations who are making money on "teh intarweb." So, they change the logo and the talent.....big deal. The stations where I work use basically the same CSS for each station -- only the colors are different. And, again, I don't work for CC; I actually work for a small company.
"I wrote them (and looking at the original ones, I'm a bit ashamed: the "toupper()" and "tolower()" macros are so horribly ugly that I wouldn't admit to writing them if it wasn't because somebody else claimed to have done so ;)"
:-)
If SCO is big on claiming ugly code, I can only imagine what a convoluted mess UnixWarez actually is.
But they're hardly the problem. CC is a clumsy puppy -- well intentioned, but poorly trained. Since the mid-80's on the FM dial, and the early-90's on the AM dial, there hasn't been a whole lot of variety. Every market has a whacky Morning Zoo show on a heavy metal or top 40 station. They play bits created by a syndicator, and pass them off as "something funny we came up with last night." Then you have the AM stations which are either syndicated AM talk, or satelitte religious programming.
:-) I'm sitting in a station newsroom right now, at work, so I think I know what I'm talking about here. And no, I don't work for Clear Channel.
So, what's Clear Channel done? They're trying to make their AM stations like local TV stations. Local news/issues programs during prime time, and well-known network programming other times. For the music stations, it's even easier. They've got vertical integration among the stations, with playlists based on formats. Go ahead, examine the playlists of stations in the same format owned by companies other than Clear Channel. By and large, it's the same music.
The only real difference between markets is the level of talent and the fit and polish of the delivery. In big markets, you get good jocks and tight production. In small markets, you can hear some pretty awful radio.
As for XM, I've done three cross-country trips in the past two years via auto. I don't think I'd want to do it without an XM receiver. While there is some good local stuff out there, XM is good quality wherever you happen to be, and it's consistent. Montana is big, and sometimes you can't find a station for a couple of hours. I think the talk programming is better on XM than on Sirius, but that's just personal opinion. If you really dig on NPR, Sirius would probalby be more your cup of tea.
A conventional monolithic kernel which enforces security policy, and governs basically everything from networking to disk access....yeah, that's pretty much part of Unix. OSX doesn't have that.
Take a look at this which talks about the future MIPS machines, which will still run Irix. Irix, despite its weirdness, can still do things Linux can't. Go take a look at a very high end Irix server (something like an Origin 2k or 3k), and you'll see the difference.