Li-Ion battery life depends on so many factors. Charging/discharging cycles, user patters, environmental exposure, etc. Just like all rechargable batteries they *will* die eventually.
The unit comes with a 1 year warranty with option to buy extended warranties. This is what warranties are for. Most batteries will not die after 18 months, most batteries will die in approx 3-5 years.
Many things have internal non-replacable rechargable batteries. Most PDA's for instance.
For those of you that read Gartner, you'll note where Sprint falls on the fabled magic quadrent. Its a special quadrent reserved for those who had a great idea and then blew it. Can you guess which?
I suppose I should have expected it. I do find it interesting to note however that my supposedly "flamebait" post has not been responded to with any flames. Mine is a valid argument. Too bad moderators can't see past their "everything with the word Linux in it is golden" glasses.
The problem here is the fact that people have gotten so used to the "free beer" aspect of Linux that they're having trouble reaching for the wallet even when they should.
Wrong. This is a typical psudointellectual argument which has no basis in truth. Look at the amount of people who have subscribed to WineX, people who bought additional copies of Quake 3 and other Loki games just to support Linux. People who have subscribed to Mandrake. People who have supported the EFF, etc. There is no basis that Linux users are money hoarders, there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Your examples of SuSE and WineX are unfounded, where are your numbers? I personally have subscribed to WineX, I have purchased multiple boxed distribs. I have purchsed Linux games that I already owned just to support Linux and I am not alone.
Well, maybe you're a bit lacking in knowledge about economics, but I do not believe obtaining the rights to the games you suggested is feasible right now.
I don't think I'm the only one grasping to windows because of games. Infact it's the only reason I have windows. If I could get all my games for linux, I would be using linux.
Please explain to me the feasibility and economics of wasting money to port bargain bin games nobody has ever heard of. I'm sure your greatly informative insights will enhance everyones understanding of these mystical economics you speak of. I'm sure there will be a few, maybe even a dozen copies sold of "Gorky 17" for Linux. It'll sit on two, maybe even three software store shelves. I can picture it now, it'll be between the Commander Keen Collection retail box set and Lotus 1-2-3.
Why in the world do all the crappy games get ported? Where in the hell is the Battlefield 1942's, the Half Life's, the Star Trek Armada's, the (Star|War)Craft's, the Star Wars Galaxies?
Why aren't the GOOD games getting ported? They expect shit like Gorky 17 to sell? Who the hell has even heard of it? I'm a gamer, I play PC/Console games constantly, I've heard of the Tycoon series but they generally are horrible, these other two I've never heard of for WINDOWS let alone for Linux.
Bottom line is: why does Epic hold off ports to *good* games until these peices of bargain bin junk sell? What does it prove if these games sell well on linux or not? It proves nothing. They will flop not because Linux users don't buy games, but because the games are garbage! Wouldn't it make more sense to spend money and effort to port some *real* games over, ones people will actually buy?
What are these retards thinking? It makes about as much sense as selling the windows version of Q3 first before the Linux one is out, and then allowing anyone to download the Linux binaries. Yeah, the Linux version isn't going to sell, because people want to play it *now* and there's no incentive to wait as you can covert it when the linux binaries are available.
My other main problem with it is that it is missing a certain level of standards, which is the set of standards that would define the services a device offers. It does have a mechanism for indicating the type of device to which you are connected, but it seems only enough to pick an icon, not to decide what to actually say.
Apparently the whole idea of bluetooth profiles is lost on you? This is exactly what their for. Devices support different profiles, such as, the virtual serial port profile, audio gateway, headset, file transfer, network access, PIM item transfer, etc. Descovering what a device does is as easy as asking it what profiles it supports.
What it needs is a set of protocols, preferably XML-based, since XML is 31337, that can transfer files, send/receive photos, take pictures, record audio, dial/talk on phone calls, etcetera. These would be organized into a menu on the device, like "Files", "Pictures", "Voice Recorder", "Phone", etcetera, so devices that do some or all of these would simply show a choice (tabs, maybe) for what feature to use.
Bluetooth *already does this*, just replace XML with OBEX and it does everything you just said. It makes me wonder where you got your experience, if any, with using bluetooth devices.
Gandi.net is a haven for spammers and are spammers themselves, I got many spams from them trying to switch me from godaddy, aswell as resellers of theirs. I would recommend NOT going with gandi.net. Do NOT support spammers!
Problem is, that our windows homedirs are of the//server/firstinitial/username syntax. Which of course smbmount can't cope with.
Sure it can, what are you talking about? If you want to mount these from the commandline however you have to escape the slashes and it turns out being:////server//firstinitial//username
Unlike napster however, file sharing is NOT part of the IRC RFC Protocol, the server itself does NOT facilitate searching for or downloading files and IRCs primary function is NOT file sharing, it's chatting.
Re:Hosting IRC is asking for a BSA 'investigation'
on
IRC in the Dog House?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Except that there is no content stored on the servers, and all the swapping is done via DCC (Direct Client Connection) and not through the server.
Hosting an IRC server is not like running an illegal music swapping site in the open. Now, running and serving content in one of said IRC servers channels... that's a different story.
Since you have a IIIx you can use the Graffiti Replacement Trick. The reason Palm moved to Graffiti 2 is because Xerox sued Palm over a unistroke character patent.
With that qualifier, and with the understanding that all domains resolving is causing havoc, would it be a decent compromise if a mis-spelled didn't resolve to verisigns little "are you sure you didn't mean..." page, but did in a few seconds? Would a few second of 404 be enough to fix the resolution problems occuring?
Unfortunately, this is not technically possible. The way a web browser accesses a website is thus:
1. You type in "http://slashdot.org" and click GO in the browser. 2. The browser asks your (ISPs) DNS server what the IP address of "slashdot.org" is. 3. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks a root server "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the root server responds with "I don't know, but here's the IP address of the server that runs the.org top level domain, he should know." 4. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks the.org top level domain "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the.org TLD server responds with "I don't know, but here's the IP address of the server that runs the slashdot.org domain, he should know." 5. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks the slashdot.org server "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the server returns the valid IP address and your (ISPs) DNS server returns that to the web browser 6. Your web browser tries to connect to that IP address and requests a page.
As you can see the DNS host name resolution comes way before the browser actually requests a page, it has to know where to request it from first! This DNS resolution will eventually return an IP address of the servers hostname you typed in, or it will return "not found", one or the other, there is no possible way, without breaking the DNS standard and adding to it, to do the few seconds of "not found" and then redirect to a page.
What verisign is doing is taking over step #4. If they don't have a record of a domain existing in their.com top level domain servers, they just say "Oh, I found it! it's 12.158.80.10", which is the IP address for sitefinder.verisign.com.
We can certainly pre-bless a license before they start developing [...] We do suggest the GPL and FreeBSD licenses are likely to meet quick approval
You want us to give up the provision that if someone uses your free Perforce licenses for commercial purposes, we can go after you for the value of commercial Perforce licenses. It appears that you want to be completely free and clear if these free licenses happen to end up getting used for commercial purposes; the comment about "running Perforce is not a role that comes with financial responsibility" suggests that you're not willing to be on the hook for anything whatsoever in case the restricted terms of the open source license are violated.
The software you develop can be used commercially under our EULA for OSSD. Perl certainly is. Our basic requirement is that the software is not proprietary, i.e. it is distributed as open source.
I think what the CEO is trying to say is that as long as you keep offering the source as open while developing using Perforce it's OK, but as soon as you take that code, close it up nice and tight and start selling it yourself without offering source to anyone, then you're in violation. If someone else takes your BSD licensed code your team was developing in Perforce and then develops that on something else (CVS say) and sells it commercially then you're not in violation as long as you keep offering the source you're developing yourself in Perforce.
Then again he is making two contradictory remarks, saying he agrees with BSD licenced code being developed with Perforce then making a comment about the restrictive terms of the license being violated. Anyone can take BSD code, modify it and close it up nice and tight, put it in a shrinkwrap box with a pricetag on it and sit it on a rack without giving out source. Hell, MS does it.
This is pretty murky, without reading the license myself, which there doesn't seem to be a link to, I really don't know, and IANAL either.
Regardless, the argument submitted by the CEO of Perforce on point #3 is 100% valid and just. I don't think that should be contested. If you want to make and code a completely in house app then use another revision control system.
Slashdot Mirror
Li-Ion battery life depends on so many factors. Charging/discharging cycles, user patters, environmental exposure, etc. Just like all rechargable batteries they *will* die eventually.
The unit comes with a 1 year warranty with option to buy extended warranties. This is what warranties are for. Most batteries will not die after 18 months, most batteries will die in approx 3-5 years.
Many things have internal non-replacable rechargable batteries. Most PDA's for instance.
Pick any two:
1. Thin
2. Replaceable Battery
3. Lots of storage
For those of you that read Gartner, you'll note where Sprint falls on the fabled magic quadrent. Its a special quadrent reserved for those who had a great idea and then blew it. Can you guess which?
The Delta Quadrant? ie: ST: Voyager?
One box running multiple sites should not be less valued than multiple boxes running one site each for this simple reason:
Linux can do it better than Windows and therefore more Linux boxes are going to run multiple sites!
LOTR is not a trilogy, it is *one story*. It is actually split up into 6 books comprising three volumes.
I suppose I should have expected it. I do find it interesting to note however that my supposedly "flamebait" post has not been responded to with any flames. Mine is a valid argument. Too bad moderators can't see past their "everything with the word Linux in it is golden" glasses.
Buy a Gamecube and be done with it.
I'd love to see you play an RTS with a gamepad.
The last good Windows game that came out was BF1942, in my opinion.
You know what they say about opinions... I'll just say that you and your friend must not play a lot of games and leave it at that.
Heh. You ask for evidence but yet you don't supply your own.
Infact I did, you must have trouble reading.
Answer this question: do you believe Quake 3 or any other Loki games sold enough to cover the costs to port that game?
What I believe a fact to be is irrelevant.
Also, could you list all of the costs involved in porting a game?
Yes actually:
1. Licensing (which is quite frankly a crock)
2. Development
Now if you want to sell it:
3. Publishing
-- iCEBaLM
The problem here is the fact that people have gotten so used to the "free beer" aspect of Linux that they're having trouble reaching for the wallet even when they should.
Wrong. This is a typical psudointellectual argument which has no basis in truth. Look at the amount of people who have subscribed to WineX, people who bought additional copies of Quake 3 and other Loki games just to support Linux. People who have subscribed to Mandrake. People who have supported the EFF, etc. There is no basis that Linux users are money hoarders, there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Your examples of SuSE and WineX are unfounded, where are your numbers? I personally have subscribed to WineX, I have purchased multiple boxed distribs. I have purchsed Linux games that I already owned just to support Linux and I am not alone.
Well, maybe you're a bit lacking in knowledge about economics, but I do not believe obtaining the rights to the games you suggested is feasible right now.
I don't think I'm the only one grasping to windows because of games. Infact it's the only reason I have windows. If I could get all my games for linux, I would be using linux.
Please explain to me the feasibility and economics of wasting money to port bargain bin games nobody has ever heard of. I'm sure your greatly informative insights will enhance everyones understanding of these mystical economics you speak of. I'm sure there will be a few, maybe even a dozen copies sold of "Gorky 17" for Linux. It'll sit on two, maybe even three software store shelves. I can picture it now, it'll be between the Commander Keen Collection retail box set and Lotus 1-2-3.
Why in the world do all the crappy games get ported? Where in the hell is the Battlefield 1942's, the Half Life's, the Star Trek Armada's, the (Star|War)Craft's, the Star Wars Galaxies?
Why aren't the GOOD games getting ported? They expect shit like Gorky 17 to sell? Who the hell has even heard of it? I'm a gamer, I play PC/Console games constantly, I've heard of the Tycoon series but they generally are horrible, these other two I've never heard of for WINDOWS let alone for Linux.
Bottom line is: why does Epic hold off ports to *good* games until these peices of bargain bin junk sell? What does it prove if these games sell well on linux or not? It proves nothing. They will flop not because Linux users don't buy games, but because the games are garbage! Wouldn't it make more sense to spend money and effort to port some *real* games over, ones people will actually buy?
What are these retards thinking? It makes about as much sense as selling the windows version of Q3 first before the Linux one is out, and then allowing anyone to download the Linux binaries. Yeah, the Linux version isn't going to sell, because people want to play it *now* and there's no incentive to wait as you can covert it when the linux binaries are available.
What the hell is a vertical market?
Writing viruses OTOH is unquestinably illegal.
I'd like to clarify that. Writing viruses is *not* illegal. Unleashing them into the wild knowing full well what they'll do is.
My other main problem with it is that it is missing a certain level of standards, which is the set of standards that would define the services a device offers. It does have a mechanism for indicating the type of device to which you are connected, but it seems only enough to pick an icon, not to decide what to actually say.
Apparently the whole idea of bluetooth profiles is lost on you? This is exactly what their for. Devices support different profiles, such as, the virtual serial port profile, audio gateway, headset, file transfer, network access, PIM item transfer, etc. Descovering what a device does is as easy as asking it what profiles it supports.
What it needs is a set of protocols, preferably XML-based, since XML is 31337, that can transfer files, send/receive photos, take pictures, record audio, dial/talk on phone calls, etcetera. These would be organized into a menu on the device, like "Files", "Pictures", "Voice Recorder", "Phone", etcetera, so devices that do some or all of these would simply show a choice (tabs, maybe) for what feature to use.
Bluetooth *already does this*, just replace XML with OBEX and it does everything you just said. It makes me wonder where you got your experience, if any, with using bluetooth devices.
-- iCEBaLM
Mirrored here at http://www.icebalm.com/lists.tgz
Yeah, the "Dell Digital Music Store" has a great selection, I went to that page and imagine my surprise at seeing:
Check out Hoobastank's newest single!
I had to read that name atleast 5 times, while laughing, to make sure it was real.
-- iCEBaLM
Gandi.net is a haven for spammers and are spammers themselves, I got many spams from them trying to switch me from godaddy, aswell as resellers of theirs. I would recommend NOT going with gandi.net. Do NOT support spammers!
Problem is, that our windows homedirs are of the //server/firstinitial/username syntax. Which of course smbmount can't cope with.
////server//firstinitial//username
Sure it can, what are you talking about? If you want to mount these from the commandline however you have to escape the slashes and it turns out being:
-- iCEBaLM
Come on man, ironic, you know? It's like rain on your wedding day or a free ride when you've already paid!
Unlike napster however, file sharing is NOT part of the IRC RFC Protocol, the server itself does NOT facilitate searching for or downloading files and IRCs primary function is NOT file sharing, it's chatting.
Except that there is no content stored on the servers, and all the swapping is done via DCC (Direct Client Connection) and not through the server.
Hosting an IRC server is not like running an illegal music swapping site in the open. Now, running and serving content in one of said IRC servers channels... that's a different story.
-- iCEBaLM
Since you have a IIIx you can use the Graffiti Replacement Trick. The reason Palm moved to Graffiti 2 is because Xerox sued Palm over a unistroke character patent.
-- iCEBaLM
wear only a small linux penguin pin like our lovely "patriots" in the US gov't are so fond of doing these days with the american flag pin.
I'm sure many Torontonians would really go for the american flag pin.
-- iCEBaLM
With that qualifier, and with the understanding that all domains resolving is causing havoc, would it be a decent compromise if a mis-spelled didn't resolve to verisigns little "are you sure you didn't mean..." page, but did in a few seconds? Would a few second of 404 be enough to fix the resolution problems occuring?
.org top level domain, he should know." .org top level domain "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the .org TLD server responds with "I don't know, but here's the IP address of the server that runs the slashdot.org domain, he should know."
.com top level domain servers, they just say "Oh, I found it! it's 12.158.80.10", which is the IP address for sitefinder.verisign.com.
Unfortunately, this is not technically possible. The way a web browser accesses a website is thus:
1. You type in "http://slashdot.org" and click GO in the browser.
2. The browser asks your (ISPs) DNS server what the IP address of "slashdot.org" is.
3. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks a root server "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the root server responds with "I don't know, but here's the IP address of the server that runs the
4. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks the
5. Your (ISPs) DNS server asks the slashdot.org server "what is the IP address of slashdot.org?", the server returns the valid IP address and your (ISPs) DNS server returns that to the web browser
6. Your web browser tries to connect to that IP address and requests a page.
As you can see the DNS host name resolution comes way before the browser actually requests a page, it has to know where to request it from first! This DNS resolution will eventually return an IP address of the servers hostname you typed in, or it will return "not found", one or the other, there is no possible way, without breaking the DNS standard and adding to it, to do the few seconds of "not found" and then redirect to a page.
What verisign is doing is taking over step #4. If they don't have a record of a domain existing in their
-- iCEBaLM
Blockquote two excerpts from CEOs Email:
We can certainly pre-bless a license before they start developing [...] We do suggest the GPL and FreeBSD licenses are likely to meet quick
approval
You want us to give up the provision that if someone uses your free Perforce licenses for commercial purposes, we can go after you for the
value of commercial Perforce licenses. It appears that you want to be completely free and clear if these free licenses happen to end up getting used for commercial purposes; the comment about "running Perforce is not a role that comes with financial responsibility" suggests that you're not willing to be on the hook for anything whatsoever in case the restricted terms of the open source license are violated.
The software you develop can be used commercially under our EULA for OSSD. Perl certainly is. Our basic requirement is that the software is not proprietary, i.e. it is distributed as open source.
I think what the CEO is trying to say is that as long as you keep offering the source as open while developing using Perforce it's OK, but as soon as you take that code, close it up nice and tight and start selling it yourself without offering source to anyone, then you're in violation. If someone else takes your BSD licensed code your team was developing in Perforce and then develops that on something else (CVS say) and sells it commercially then you're not in violation as long as you keep offering the source you're developing yourself in Perforce.
Then again he is making two contradictory remarks, saying he agrees with BSD licenced code being developed with Perforce then making a comment about the restrictive terms of the license being violated. Anyone can take BSD code, modify it and close it up nice and tight, put it in a shrinkwrap box with a pricetag on it and sit it on a rack without giving out source. Hell, MS does it.
This is pretty murky, without reading the license myself, which there doesn't seem to be a link to, I really don't know, and IANAL either.
Regardless, the argument submitted by the CEO of Perforce on point #3 is 100% valid and just. I don't think that should be contested. If you want to make and code a completely in house app then use another revision control system.
-- iCEBaLM
I see you don't read very well. You might want to re-read my comment where I state that my PDA assists me by playing music.
-- iCEBaLM