What I want to know is, will Sun force us to use proprietary cabling and/or proprietary monitors with these "cheap" workstations, or will they get rid of the proprietary monitor connector and use something like an SVGA or DVI connector like the rest of the world?
I mean, a sub-$1000 workstation sounds great, but that's not so great if you need to buy a special monitor to use with it, or at the least, an expensive or hard-to-find adapter cable.
Please note, I'm not saying that SVGA is a great connector standard. I'm just saying that it's what everyone uses in commodity hardware, and I could see a lot of software shops buying el-cheapo 17-inch monitors to save a few dollars/yen/whatever so they can concentrate on what's important, getting a Sparc on someone's desk.
If you read the specs on Sun's website, it clearly states that the Sun Blade 100 workstation does in fact have internal PCI slot(s). The PCi card (the one that gives you a Wintel PC inside your Sun workstation) sits in one of the PCI slots, leaving the other open for half-length and full-length PCI cards.
I had written a diatribe about this very topic in response to coverage elsewhere, but somehow I feel Slashdot is the best place to post my writings. So here's an (edited) version of what I wrote:
This is essentially corporate welfare in action, people.
Napster currently acts as a clearing house for allowing end users to share their existing collections of MP3 files. In order for Napster to effect the changes they've proposed as part of their settlement, they'd have to do two things.
Number one, they'd have to create a centralized repository for all music. In other words, instead of facilitating peer-to-peer file sharing between users, they'd have a server farm containing all the music they were authorized to distribute. This allows record labels final say over what gets on the servers, what the quality level is going to be (hence the "lowered quality" part of the announcement, forcing people to go out and buy CDs), and most of all, where you are going to get your music from.
Number two, they'd have to shift their system away from MP3 files and towards files that support digital rights management. That's the only way they'd have a ghost of a chance of preventing end users from writing the music to blank CDs or copying it to their portable MP3 players. Either that, or they'd have to create a closed, proprietary application that stores downloaded music in an encrypted database so that users can't extract individual music files for their own use without paying a fee to do so. What will this do to third party Napster clone applications? It'll kill them off in the short term. And you can bet Napster and RIAA lawyers will go after anyone who tries to make a Napster-compatible client application, using the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA to stomp the "offenders." This probably means you can say goodbye to Linux or Mac support.
It's time, my friends, to support MP3 and alternatives such as Ogg Vorbis. We also need better peer-to-peer file sharing technologies to stay one step ahead of these jack-booted thugs. Maybe when the RIAA and the MPAA and other organizations of their ilk realize that dictating terms to us in this manner doesn't work, they'll start trying to work with the technology sector to find a happy medium.
The sad thing is, I really have no problem with paying for what I use. I buy most of my music on CD and use MP3 for creating mixes and for archival purposes. I've never used Napster, although I've played with Gnutella. Most of the MP3 files I've downloaded (legitimately from places like mp3.com or illegitimately from other users), I've used to screen potential music purchases. But I can't see how turning Napster into a clone of FM radio is going to work. Actually, this isn't a clone of FM radio -- I can still record FM radio broadcasts using tape or MiniDisc or a computer hard drive.
Slashdot Mirror
What I want to know is, will Sun force us to use proprietary cabling and/or proprietary monitors with these "cheap" workstations, or will they get rid of the proprietary monitor connector and use something like an SVGA or DVI connector like the rest of the world?
I mean, a sub-$1000 workstation sounds great, but that's not so great if you need to buy a special monitor to use with it, or at the least, an expensive or hard-to-find adapter cable.
Please note, I'm not saying that SVGA is a great connector standard. I'm just saying that it's what everyone uses in commodity hardware, and I could see a lot of software shops buying el-cheapo 17-inch monitors to save a few dollars/yen/whatever so they can concentrate on what's important, getting a Sparc on someone's desk.
If you read the specs on Sun's website, it clearly states that the Sun Blade 100 workstation does in fact have internal PCI slot(s). The PCi card (the one that gives you a Wintel PC inside your Sun workstation) sits in one of the PCI slots, leaving the other open for half-length and full-length PCI cards.
I had written a diatribe about this very topic in response to coverage elsewhere, but somehow I feel Slashdot is the best place to post my writings. So here's an (edited) version of what I wrote:
This is essentially corporate welfare in action, people.
Napster currently acts as a clearing house for allowing end users to share their existing collections of MP3 files. In order for Napster to effect the changes they've proposed as part of their settlement, they'd have to do two things.
Number one, they'd have to create a centralized repository for all music. In other words, instead of facilitating peer-to-peer file sharing between users, they'd have a server farm containing all the music they were authorized to distribute. This allows record labels final say over what gets on the servers, what the quality level is going to be (hence the "lowered quality" part of the announcement, forcing people to go out and buy CDs), and most of all, where you are going to get your music from.
Number two, they'd have to shift their system away from MP3 files and towards files that support digital rights management. That's the only way they'd have a ghost of a chance of preventing end users from writing the music to blank CDs or copying it to their portable MP3 players. Either that, or they'd have to create a closed, proprietary application that stores downloaded music in an encrypted database so that users can't extract individual music files for their own use without paying a fee to do so. What will this do to third party Napster clone applications? It'll kill them off in the short term. And you can bet Napster and RIAA lawyers will go after anyone who tries to make a Napster-compatible client application, using the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA to stomp the "offenders." This probably means you can say goodbye to Linux or Mac support.
It's time, my friends, to support MP3 and alternatives such as Ogg Vorbis. We also need better peer-to-peer file sharing technologies to stay one step ahead of these jack-booted thugs. Maybe when the RIAA and the MPAA and other organizations of their ilk realize that dictating terms to us in this manner doesn't work, they'll start trying to work with the technology sector to find a happy medium.
The sad thing is, I really have no problem with paying for what I use. I buy most of my music on CD and use MP3 for creating mixes and for archival purposes. I've never used Napster, although I've played with Gnutella. Most of the MP3 files I've downloaded (legitimately from places like mp3.com or illegitimately from other users), I've used to screen potential music purchases. But I can't see how turning Napster into a clone of FM radio is going to work. Actually, this isn't a clone of FM radio -- I can still record FM radio broadcasts using tape or MiniDisc or a computer hard drive.