"To me AutoCAD is like MS Paint compared to Photoshop. Maybe other places use it more but they sure don't use it much in aerospace CAD."
Hence the lawsuit. This is an effort by a company to lock its customers into its product artificially rather than creating a product that competes on actual features/support etc... If you use AutoCAD and decide to move to another software, you either have to redraw all of your current drawings or do without them. This is identical to MS reasoning with regard to file formats; the only difference being that MS has to be very careful about who they sue due to anti-trust issues whereas AutoDesk has no such worries.
TRINITY: What happened? What did you see?
NEO: An article was posted to Slashdot and then I saw another that looked just like it.
TRINITY: How much like it? Was it the same article?
NEO: It might have been. I'm not sure.
NEO: What is it?
TRINITY: A deja vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix. It happens when they change something.
"Many large businesses will have Office 2007 delivered as part of existing IT contracts but small business and individual consumers will need persuading to make the change."
So, is this an admission by MS that there really is no compelling reason for an upgrade? What I mean is, if someone has to be persuaded to buy it, what is the reason they would need/want it?
I was the one who submitted this article and the reason MS was not mentioned is that they were not involved in the video interview that was released. I could have been a bit more specific with regards to the description though, so as not to ignore MS involvement in the project.
Windows will overwrite the MBR (master boot record) and you will not see lilo/grub when you reboot; you will automatically go into a Windows boot. All is not lost however. I am not sure how you would overcome this with grub (LILO never gives me problems and thus I have been reluctant to convert to GRUB -- GRUB has given me fits in the past w/i2o drivers). With LILO, you can boot with a rescue cd (Ubuntu, Knoppix, Trinity Rescue CD, etc...), mount your partitions and re-run LILO with an entry in lilo.conf for your Windows partition. In some cases, it may be wise to create a separate, small partition for your/boot folder at the beginning of the drive, though it is only older machines that suffer the problem I am referring to.
For instance, lets assume your Linux partition is the first partition on the first IDE hard-drive (/dev/hda1) and your swap partition is the 2nd (/dev/hda2) while Windows occupies the rd(/dev/hda3). Once you have installed windows (and wiped out your MBR with a windows only MBR) you would:
1). boot from some type of linux rescue cd
2). mount your root Linux partition
2 a). create a directory to mount to -- mkdir/temp
2 b). mount the partition on your directory -- mount/dev/hda1/temp
3). Just to be safe, mount some pseudo filesystems:
3 a). mount -t proc none/temp/proc
3 b). mount -o bind/dev/temp/dev
4). chroot to partition -- chroot/temp
4 a). refresh profile -- source/etc/profile
5). create/edit lilo.conf so that your boot entries look something like:
----snip----
#Linux bootable section
image =/boot/vmlinuz #use a real kernel from/boot
root =/dev/hda1
initrd = initrd #use a real initrd image from/boot *optional*
label = Linux
read-only
#windows bootable section
other =/dev/hda3
label = Windows
table =/dev/hda
----snip----
6). run LILO -- lilo
a). if you get no errors, reboot
It sounds like a lot of work, but really should only take a couple of minutes.
"...Microsoft-funded pressure group, the Initiative for Software Choice (ISC) warned of potentially dire effects if too much encouragement was given to open source software development."
"Microsoft was forced to integrate Internet Explorer into the operating system so that they could say to the Justice Department that they couldn't ship a version of Windows without it."
"Yeah, because they just decided to let an $11.7 million default judgment fall into place so they could say "naner naner boo boo" to a US Court. Not even close."
ummmm yea...
You do know that Spamhaus appeared in the original Illinois state court only to request a change of venue to a federal court, right? In other words, they showed up, said "You state guys have no jurisdiction in this case, it needs to go to a federal court.", thus admitting that the feds *do have* jurisdiction over this case. After having done that, Spamhaus *then* decided to ignore the courts.
Personally I am saddened and gloating about the whole situation. Spamhaus has never had any accountability and routinely listed innocent networks. Anyone who has ever been erroneously listed in Spamhaus' database will probably know where I am coming from here and any attempt to rectify the situation usually got you in more trouble (with regard to Spamhuas) than where you started. Also their canned response of "Don't send spam and you won't get listed" is the epitomy of arrogance. I find it ironic that it was that same arrogance that got them into their current situation.
Just what exactly was he doing to these primates anyway?
I am pretty sure he wasn't burning them up with molotov cocktails.
Just because he *may* have been doing something unethical (we don't even have any evidence in that regard) the solution is *not* going to be found in acts of aggression against him. There is a reason we have laws, police and courts.
"I seriously doubt RIAA makes any profit from 3,000$ dollar settlements. I would bet their lawyers cost more."
From what I understand, and I could be wrong, a lawyer isn't even initially involved except to do the initial filing if you contest. Otherwise, the *AAs have a "settlement negotiation hotline" that handles a vast majority of the settlements; I am sure it is not staffed by lawyers.
Or, if setting up a VPN is a little daunting, it is trivial to port-forward traffic from 443 to 3389 on a WinXP machine and have remote desktop/terminal services.
Ummmm... when was the last time you went to an auto dealer to have repair work done? You do realize that GM, Toyota, Honda or whomever does *not* pay $800 for an alternator right? Their costs are more along the line of about $50 (at the manufacturer level -- at the dealer level they still operate on about 40% markup on parts - margins can be higher on parts that are not available in the aftermarket). The $800 you pay is mostly profit. The same holds true for these cars -- I am sure that the cost of batteries to Tesla would be about 25% of the cost you (as the consumer, end-user, or whatever you would like to be called) would be paying to replace them.
Ok, I have had a couple drinks, but that made me laugh out loud. I am of the habit of using "**" for emphasis:) I got it from an older programer that I IM with regularly. Could it be a Canadian thing....?
I built a 2Tb storage device w/another 250Gb for the OS a couple years ago as a backup solution for ~30 colo servers. I used a Tyan dual Xeon motherboard (there is a lot of compressing taking place on this machine), A 3Ware hardware RAID card, and a Chenbro 3u rackmount case with 12 SATA hot-swap bays and a single internal bay. I put 13 250Gb drives in it (2x250Gb software mirrored for OS, 10xRAID5 = 2Tb storage and 1 hot spare).
At the time the cost was ~$4000 while commercial solutions were closer to ~$8,000. I used CentOS 3 as the OS (4 was still in beta) and had to use the centosplus unsupported kernel in order to use reiser on the 2Tb array -- ext3 didn't work for some reason that I don't recall. The 3Ware card showed up with stock kernel modules as a SCSI controller.
I assume someone could build a similar system for about the same cost with much more disk space now. Also, if cost is a factor, the hardware RAID card (~$800) could be dropped in favor of software RAID and a single processor mobo could be used. I really** like the Chenbro case though and for the extra cost it leaves a lot of room for expansion if you were to start with only 5 drives and wanted to expand later.
"If Microsoft would play fairly, then these demands to peak into source code to make sure it's playing nice wouldn't be an issue." "The only way to make sure that MS isn't playing games to cripple competitors is to have access to the source code."
I am not sure if you are trolling or if you are simply uninformed. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. At no time did the EU ever demand, or even request, that MS release source code of any type for anything. What the EU did demand of MS is that they release documentation of the protocols that MS is using. MS is intentionally trying to twist this around so that it looks like what the EU is demanding is the source code of MS software, but that is simply not the case.
I also do not claim to be an expert but this is my understanding of the distinction between firmware and hardware: firmware is software that can be programmed onto a generic chip. Said chip could theoretically host other software (ie. EPROMs). A hardware chip is one in which the transistors themselves perform the logic involved, however the chip is single-purpose; once it is made it can never be reprogrammed.
Slashdot Mirror
"Yes, it's called DCMA."
:)
Aaaahhh, DCMA. That makes the rest of your statement make more sense. I thought this argument revolved around the DMCA. My bad
"To me AutoCAD is like MS Paint compared to Photoshop. Maybe other places use it more but they sure don't use it much in aerospace CAD."
Hence the lawsuit. This is an effort by a company to lock its customers into its product artificially rather than creating a product that competes on actual features/support etc... If you use AutoCAD and decide to move to another software, you either have to redraw all of your current drawings or do without them. This is identical to MS reasoning with regard to file formats; the only difference being that MS has to be very careful about who they sue due to anti-trust issues whereas AutoDesk has no such worries.
I think the idea here is to cut off net access for an unpatched machine so it doesn't get infected in the first place.
So, assuming you are not a huge corporate customer, how exactly *do* you get updates at this point?
TRINITY: What happened? What did you see?
NEO: An article was posted to Slashdot and then I saw another that looked just like it.
TRINITY: How much like it? Was it the same article?
NEO: It might have been. I'm not sure.
NEO: What is it?
TRINITY: A deja vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix. It happens when they change something.
"Many large businesses will have Office 2007 delivered as part of existing IT contracts but small business and individual consumers will need persuading to make the change."
So, is this an admission by MS that there really is no compelling reason for an upgrade? What I mean is, if someone has to be persuaded to buy it, what is the reason they would need/want it?
I was the one who submitted this article and the reason MS was not mentioned is that they were not involved in the video interview that was released. I could have been a bit more specific with regards to the description though, so as not to ignore MS involvement in the project.
Windows will overwrite the MBR (master boot record) and you will not see lilo/grub when you reboot; you will automatically go into a Windows boot. All is not lost however. I am not sure how you would overcome this with grub (LILO never gives me problems and thus I have been reluctant to convert to GRUB -- GRUB has given me fits in the past w/i2o drivers). With LILO, you can boot with a rescue cd (Ubuntu, Knoppix, Trinity Rescue CD, etc...), mount your partitions and re-run LILO with an entry in lilo.conf for your Windows partition. In some cases, it may be wise to create a separate, small partition for your /boot folder at the beginning of the drive, though it is only older machines that suffer the problem I am referring to.
/temp /dev/hda1 /temp /temp/proc /dev /temp/dev /temp /etc/profile
/boot/vmlinuz #use a real kernel from /boot /dev/hda1 /boot *optional* /dev/hda3 /dev/hda
For instance, lets assume your Linux partition is the first partition on the first IDE hard-drive (/dev/hda1) and your swap partition is the 2nd (/dev/hda2) while Windows occupies the rd(/dev/hda3). Once you have installed windows (and wiped out your MBR with a windows only MBR) you would:
1). boot from some type of linux rescue cd
2). mount your root Linux partition
2 a). create a directory to mount to -- mkdir
2 b). mount the partition on your directory -- mount
3). Just to be safe, mount some pseudo filesystems:
3 a). mount -t proc none
3 b). mount -o bind
4). chroot to partition -- chroot
4 a). refresh profile -- source
5). create/edit lilo.conf so that your boot entries look something like:
----snip----
#Linux bootable section
image =
root =
initrd = initrd #use a real initrd image from
label = Linux
read-only
#windows bootable section
other =
label = Windows
table =
----snip----
6). run LILO -- lilo
a). if you get no errors, reboot
It sounds like a lot of work, but really should only take a couple of minutes.
"...Microsoft-funded pressure group, the Initiative for Software Choice (ISC) warned of potentially dire effects if too much encouragement was given to open source software development."
Say no more.
Oops.... Forgot to quote this line as well:
"Microsoft was forced to integrate Internet Explorer into the operating system so that they could say to the Justice Department that they couldn't ship a version of Windows without it."
"...governments forcing Microsoft browsers into the operating system..."
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
If watching a DVD is a crime then only criminals will watch DVDs.
Unfortunately the *AAs could not care less if you watch/listen to their products. All they care about is that you *buy* their product.
"Yeah, because they just decided to let an $11.7 million default judgment fall into place so they could say "naner naner boo boo" to a US Court. Not even close."
ummmm yea...
You do know that Spamhaus appeared in the original Illinois state court only to request a change of venue to a federal court, right? In other words, they showed up, said "You state guys have no jurisdiction in this case, it needs to go to a federal court.", thus admitting that the feds *do have* jurisdiction over this case. After having done that, Spamhaus *then* decided to ignore the courts.
Personally I am saddened and gloating about the whole situation. Spamhaus has never had any accountability and routinely listed innocent networks. Anyone who has ever been erroneously listed in Spamhaus' database will probably know where I am coming from here and any attempt to rectify the situation usually got you in more trouble (with regard to Spamhuas) than where you started. Also their canned response of "Don't send spam and you won't get listed" is the epitomy of arrogance. I find it ironic that it was that same arrogance that got them into their current situation.
"So several seconds of complete silence is a "creative element"?"
Apparently silence can be copyrighted.
Just what exactly was he doing to these primates anyway?
I am pretty sure he wasn't burning them up with molotov cocktails.
Just because he *may* have been doing something unethical (we don't even have any evidence in that regard) the solution is *not* going to be found in acts of aggression against him. There is a reason we have laws, police and courts.
"...and RIAA probably smacked around for selective defense of their copyright."
IANAL, but I think that only applies to trademarks, not copyrights. Any lawyers in the house that could enlighten me?
"I seriously doubt RIAA makes any profit from 3,000$ dollar settlements. I would bet their lawyers cost more."
From what I understand, and I could be wrong, a lawyer isn't even initially involved except to do the initial filing if you contest. Otherwise, the *AAs have a "settlement negotiation hotline" that handles a vast majority of the settlements; I am sure it is not staffed by lawyers.
Or, if setting up a VPN is a little daunting, it is trivial to port-forward traffic from 443 to 3389 on a WinXP machine and have remote desktop/terminal services.
Ummmm... when was the last time you went to an auto dealer to have repair work done? You do realize that GM, Toyota, Honda or whomever does *not* pay $800 for an alternator right? Their costs are more along the line of about $50 (at the manufacturer level -- at the dealer level they still operate on about 40% markup on parts - margins can be higher on parts that are not available in the aftermarket). The $800 you pay is mostly profit. The same holds true for these cars -- I am sure that the cost of batteries to Tesla would be about 25% of the cost you (as the consumer, end-user, or whatever you would like to be called) would be paying to replace them.
Ok, I have had a couple drinks, but that made me laugh out loud. I am of the habit of using "**" for emphasis :) I got it from an older programer that I IM with regularly. Could it be a Canadian thing....?
Very nice and based on my favorite distro as well CentOS.
/. user card is in serious jeopardy of being revoked :)
However, for someone posting with such a low UID, I would have expected a link. Your
I built a 2Tb storage device w/another 250Gb for the OS a couple years ago as a backup solution for ~30 colo servers. I used a Tyan dual Xeon motherboard (there is a lot of compressing taking place on this machine), A 3Ware hardware RAID card, and a Chenbro 3u rackmount case with 12 SATA hot-swap bays and a single internal bay. I put 13 250Gb drives in it (2x250Gb software mirrored for OS, 10xRAID5 = 2Tb storage and 1 hot spare).
At the time the cost was ~$4000 while commercial solutions were closer to ~$8,000. I used CentOS 3 as the OS (4 was still in beta) and had to use the centosplus unsupported kernel in order to use reiser on the 2Tb array -- ext3 didn't work for some reason that I don't recall. The 3Ware card showed up with stock kernel modules as a SCSI controller.
I assume someone could build a similar system for about the same cost with much more disk space now. Also, if cost is a factor, the hardware RAID card (~$800) could be dropped in favor of software RAID and a single processor mobo could be used. I really** like the Chenbro case though and for the extra cost it leaves a lot of room for expansion if you were to start with only 5 drives and wanted to expand later.
"If Microsoft would play fairly, then these demands to peak into source code to make sure it's playing nice wouldn't be an issue."
"The only way to make sure that MS isn't playing games to cripple competitors is to have access to the source code."
I am not sure if you are trolling or if you are simply uninformed. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. At no time did the EU ever demand, or even request, that MS release source code of any type for anything. What the EU did demand of MS is that they release documentation of the protocols that MS is using. MS is intentionally trying to twist this around so that it looks like what the EU is demanding is the source code of MS software, but that is simply not the case.
Wouldn't it be firmware then?
I also do not claim to be an expert but this is my understanding of the distinction between firmware and hardware: firmware is software that can be programmed onto a generic chip. Said chip could theoretically host other software (ie. EPROMs). A hardware chip is one in which the transistors themselves perform the logic involved, however the chip is single-purpose; once it is made it can never be reprogrammed.
You could start with the RIAA
Or, did you mean the bands that were represented by RIAA members? I could not find a list for that -- perhaps someone else may have a link for you.
Well, that and 2 bottles of conditioner a year is not a huge expense :)