Not even remotely. Irix is still alive and well right now, and Linux certainly doesn't fully support the SGI hardware. Yes, SGI has made inroads into really getting use out of Linux, but it's a far cry from replacement.
Regardless, the point still remains: This 3DWM isn't running on Linux yet.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Well I wouldn't worry too much about that -- Has anyone even heard of these authors before?
Seriously though, books like this are just a small step up from "How to get rich like me" infomercials. They're next to worthless. Companies trying to make it rich online need to realize one thing: It's not easy. Everone who's making [serious] money off the Internet is doing so in niche markets. They're using tightly integrated systems with thoughtful interface designs. Roadmap schmoadmap -- it's different for everyone.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
It has to do more than that. It actually has to change the way each window displays itself on the screen. The Window Manager is not in charge of displaying a window on the screen, just managing it -- so this WM would either have to include it's own X server or somehow hook into an existing server. Otherwise it couldn't perform the angular transforms on the contents of windows.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Why would Linux run it first? It doesn't even sound like these guys have a Linux port of this system. Yes, the speculated that it would run on a 3D accelerated PC running Linux, but the machines they were testing on were SGI's: An Onyx and an O2.
So I guess when those holographic display monitors pop up, Irix will run it first:)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Hey, how does this work out? I was under the impression that the WM just handles the border, resizing, etc. of Windows in X. If that's the case, then how does 3DWM show a window from a different angle? Wouldn't it be more like a replacement for the X server?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Well yeah - I mean there's absolutely a concern about spying. If you can fit a camera on a fly? Of course! Audio too, I imagine.
But ingenuity will prevail in the end, I think. People will develop wearable flydars that will beep whenever any small objects fly near you. And then the flies will get more stealthy... And the flydar people will think of something else... And so on and so on.
I'm just going to get a pet frog:)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Yes you can run Wine apps concurrently with X apps. There are some really cool shots of Office 6.0 apps running under Wine, right next to their Linux equivalents (Gnumeric and Abiword I think). You can find them at the Gnome website I think.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I can't believe they ever shipped a product. It looked like they were just running a scam to get a big IPO (and maybe they still are). At least now they've cleaned up the webpage a little and have an actual distro. I wonder what it's based around? Anyone?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I gotta tell you - while those apps are nice for home-users, there are soooooo many people who buy PCs for just one reason: to get online. Believe me, parents do not buy computers so that they (or their children) can play games. Games end up being played, but it's almost never a reason for buying.
And people who use reference material (e.g. Encarta) only do so because it was shipped with their system. Very few people purchase Encarta off the shelf. Finance-software is a place you may have a point though. If that's what someone is looking for, then Linux can't really give them what they want. There's some stuff in development, but it will be a while before we have anything solid in that area.
Still, I remember reading a (I think it was Forrester) report about 50% of home PCs being used exclusively for WWW/Email/WordProcessing. Think about products like WebTV -- it only targets 2 of those three, and people buy it. Free OSes are great for that sort of system.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I'd like to see some numbers on that. I don't really see MS losing the OS market quite yet. I've heard people say that Linux is taking over in places where (for example) SCO was being used before. But admins who run NT do so because someone wants them to. Be it management or themselves.
It's much easier to replace a Unix with a Unix, but to replace a Windows with a Unix can be more complicated. Another example: At the company I work for, I've built a web-based service for our customers to receive software updates. Because all of their software runs through a Win32 interpereter program (and they all run Windows anyway) our server has to run on an NT system. I would love to rewrite the software as a Unix daemon, but it's just not a possibility.
I'm willing to bet that there are a lot more sob-stories like mine out there. So yes, Linux/xBSD is making inroads, but Windows isn't necessarily losing too much of it's ground. I guess time will tell though.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
90% meaningless? How do you figure that? Just because most people will get it OEM doesn't mean they aren't paying for it. OEMs add in the cost of the OS to their price-tags.
You're right, it doesn't add up to a lot on $2500 systems, but in the sub$500 market, it's a huge chunk of machine cost. This is a place where Linux (or a BSD) could fit ideally. Systems where the only applications that an end-user will need are Web-browsing and Word processing. Here, Linux is just as good, if not better, than windows; It's cheaper, it's more stable, and the apps are already there.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
My old sound card was ISA (The cheap version of the SB16) and when I started using Linux, there was no support for it, except from OSS and they were charging $20. I know it's not much, but I never shelled out the cash and then finally the Linux kernel added support for it. My new card, an ES1371, is detected without a catch.
With all that's been going on in the Kernel with sound drivers, let's not overlook the app-level sound system. As it stands, I don't believe the kernel allows multiple programs to output sound. Programs like ESD are great for doing just that, and I think the new version of KDE's audio daemon has ESD support. Linux is starting to sound pretty good.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Well I think it goes without saying that this sets a dangerous precedent. It's obvious that lawsuits have become too much of a "cure-all" in the US recently. The question is: What can we do about it?
Jury selection isn't likely to change anytime soon, and I don't think it should -- the idea is sound. What I don't understand is how the Toshiba case (and many others) ever became so inflated. $2 Billion. Seriously, I don't have all the facts, but could their floppy-problem have actually caused that much loss?
Thoughts anyone?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Well, my condolences for your bedroom, but really, I'd just like to see either one of them trash the other. Because, to do so, they'd have to come out with a line chips that was *much* faster than the other (the differences now really aren't that great, relative to each processors speed) and it would have to have a viable pricetage. Cheap speed? Sounds good to me.
Then, after the solid whooping, I'd like the other one to come back and do the same. A nice see-saw of continuous ingenuity that allows me to maximize my utility, while one company or the other maximizes it's profits. Let the best man win!
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Oh, for the long-past days of using mapedit to create rooms of Pacman Ghosts and Robo-Hitlers and sending innocent friends through them. Wolfenstein was such a truly classic game. Can this do it justice?? I'm have my doubts, but I'm keeping an open mind. Maybe those days aren't so long past...
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Okay, this is my last post, because it's late and, like I said, I really don't care anymore and I'd rather not take this to the level of name-calling. You can reply if you'd like Musc, and maybe someone else will pick up the debate.
Look at what I said earlier. You not seeing a movie doesn't help anyone (obviously). But if everyone pirated the movie, as you suggest, instead of paying for it, then the producer doesn't get any money. If the producers don't get any money then they can't make any more movies and so the industry dies out. Since you obviously enjoy watching movies, it seems to me that the death of the movie-creating industry would strike you as being a bad thing.
Moreover, there are plenty of other ways to see a movie that do not involve violating IP laws and ethical consideration in general. If you really want to see if for free, then wait for it to be on one of the Networks or pay a marginal fee to HBO (or another movie channel) so you can hear all the original swearing.
Anyway, like I said: I don't care. Do what you want, I can't stop you. It's late and I'm going to bed.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I can't begin to tell you how sick I am of people saying that theft of digital media is completely differnt than theft of physical media. Yes, it does have different ramifications, but the principle is the same.
While digital media is certainly much easier to duplicate then the physical, it still costs money to produce. People have to be paid for their work, without which, that digital media would not exist. The costs of producing ANY media are defrayed (and turned into profit) by selling the product. No matter what it is, if you get it for free then you're obviously not paying the pricetag, and therefore not defraying the producers overhead.
You (along with many others) make the argument that it doesn't make a difference whether you pirate it, because you wouldn't buy it in the first place. This is true in some ways, but it's on very shaky ground. If one person did what you suggest (pirates instead of going without) then there really is no difference.
Imagine though, if everyone did that. Now nobody is paying for the content and the producer isn't seeing a penny to compensate for his work/investment. Suddenly the market for his product has no value for him and he will, unless he doesn't care about losing money, discontinue production of newer media.
Here's the real issue: You're using something that a person just like you spent time and hard work to create. By not paying them, it's a slap in their face. If you don't respect them enough to pay their price, then don't use their product. I don't care what it is - Music, Video, Software, whatever.
I guess you're right though: It's not theft in the traditional sense of the word. You aren't actually stealing anything, just copying it. But it is theft by the legal definition. You are violating another persons right to profit off of the use of their intellectual property. You're also causing the destruction of a market that you obviously enjoy to some extent. Have a little foresight and do the right thing. If the price is too high then vote with your feet -- don't use the product.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Good logic. What exactly are movie-makers expecting to get for free? Your money? Hardly. They spend enormous amounts of their own money in the production of those films. Sometimes it pays off (Titanic) and sometimes it doesn't (Waterworld). But because they're trying to maxmize their own profits, you think they're being greedy.
Well fine, maybe they are being greedy, but to be honest, the market doesn't agree with you. They're obviously not charging more than most people are willing to spend, or they wouldn't be making sales -- that's the beauty of a free market; it maintains itself as long as there's not a monopoly. And there's no monopoly on movie production, either; Indy films get funding all the time from private and personal investors.
How many times do I have to say it: If you don't like what they're charging then vote with your feet. Watch a different movie. Watch paint dry. Don't watch anything at all. I don't care - but just because you think the industry is overpriced does not give you warrant to violate their rights.
I'm done repeating myself. Pirate movies if you want to. Be a thief. Convince yourself it's justifiable. People like you make me sick.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Look, I completely understand that it sucks to pay good money to see a shitty movie. I can't tell you how many times I've left a theatre thinking, "Did I really just pay $7.50 for that crap?" But that's the risk you take when you go see a movie. And unless you feel like putting those theatres out of business (which pirating movies certainly would do) it's a risk you'll just have to take. Read a movie review, for crying out loud. A lot of the reviewers are idiots, but there are a few good ones out there.
I can't believe you wrote that you "don't have the time... [and] the energy " to watch a bad movie. How does time or energy factor into this? You'll spend the same amount of time on a film whether you steal it or pay for it legitimately. Besides, if you don't have the time or energy, maybe there are more pressing issues to deal with than entertainment
Which brings me to another point: The fact that our society is filled with movie-lovers does not make movies a necessity. I know dozens of people who do not regularly go to the movies. I know a few people who NEVER go to the movies and, in fact, they live quite normal lives. Yes, social bonds are breaking down, but how does going to see a movie fix that?? If anything, it just makes it worse? To anyone who must see movies to function as a normal person, I have only this to say: Get a friggin life. Read a book. Talk to a friend (GASP) in person. There is life beyond the mind-numbing drone of force-fed media. You can live a heathly existance without advertisements and cheap plotlines. Don't use your unnatural dependencies as an excuse for crime, though -- it doesn't cut it.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
That's life? That's life? You're answer to putting an industry out of business is "That's life"? Yeah, that's really good. What a wonderfully dillusional world you must live in, where everything revolves around you.
Why should payment be viewed as a donation? In what way is paying someone for their product any type of an option? And even stranger, why should it be legal? What legal ground is there for allowing copyright infringement??
Why is IP such an abomination? If you had your way, people would never get compensated for their effort. That's completely bogus -- In such a world where IP doesn't exist, what motivation is there for producing content?
Your suggestion that the entire industry disappear is just plain ignorant. You obviously enjoy what the industry creates, otherwise you wouldn't even bother pirating it. What you proposing would wipe out an entire artform that you yourself find appealing. All because you had to be selfish.
Imagine if that happened in the art world. Art is one of the most cherished and fundamental expressions of our culture. Artwork is considered intellectual property. By your statements, it would be okay with you if the entire industry of art disappeared, all because they weren't willing to give away their property for free.
Grow up. You can't have everything for free. There are time when payment is due - people work hard and deserve to be compensated for their time.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Look at what you're saying! Do you think that music and movies are some kind of god-given right? I don't care how inflated you think the prices are, that doesn't give you warrant to steal them.
Extortion has to be the biggest stretch of the imagination. No one needs movies. You don't have to pay their price, but don't expect to get something for free, just because you don't think it's reasonable. I don't think it's reasonable to pay $35,000 for a car. I happen to know that cars do not cost that much to build. That, however, does not give me the right to walk into a Nissan dealership and drive off in a new Maxima without paying for it.
If you don't pay for a movie, then the producers don't get a return on their investment. If they don't get their money back, they won't sink money into another film. Unless you're satisfied with a thousand films a year that all look like "Blair Witch", then someone needs to shell out a couple million.
From your last comment, though, it seems like you wouldn't mind if the entire movie industry disappeared. Fine. Go fsck yourself because the rest of us enjoy it. People like you are nothing but theives. Go ahead and justify it by telling yourself that they are the one's who're extorting you. Its dillusional and no moral person would have any part in it.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I said that GPL would not be an option. That doesn't stop them from releasing it as freeware though. As long as they don't give out the source, then it's A-OK.
Actually, what they could do is write the decoder into a proprietary (freeware) library. That way they could OpenSource the viewer program so that people could customize the actual player (e.g. GTK or KDE or whatever). The player would have to be LGPL'ed to allow linking with a non-GPL library, but that's better than nothing.
My point is this: I want Linux to get DVD (so that I don't have to boot to Windows to watch mine), but I want it done LEGALLY:)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
What if you don't think it's worth paying for? Do you keep it? Do you delete it? What makes it okay for you to be the judge of whether or not someone else get's paid?
Don't get me wrong - your philosophy is better than the original posters, but it's still a blatent violation of intellectual property laws. It's the same thing as if I stole a movie from Sam Goody's and only paid for it after I decided it was decent. Even if it was bad and I return it, I just got a free rental. That's what I like to call "Selfish", not to mention theft.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Slashdot Mirror
Regardless, the point still remains: This 3DWM isn't running on Linux yet.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Seriously though, books like this are just a small step up from "How to get rich like me" infomercials. They're next to worthless. Companies trying to make it rich online need to realize one thing: It's not easy. Everone who's making [serious] money off the Internet is doing so in niche markets. They're using tightly integrated systems with thoughtful interface designs. Roadmap schmoadmap -- it's different for everyone.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
So I guess when those holographic display monitors pop up, Irix will run it first
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
But ingenuity will prevail in the end, I think. People will develop wearable flydars that will beep whenever any small objects fly near you. And then the flies will get more stealthy... And the flydar people will think of something else... And so on and so on.
I'm just going to get a pet frog :)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
And people who use reference material (e.g. Encarta) only do so because it was shipped with their system. Very few people purchase Encarta off the shelf. Finance-software is a place you may have a point though. If that's what someone is looking for, then Linux can't really give them what they want. There's some stuff in development, but it will be a while before we have anything solid in that area.
Still, I remember reading a (I think it was Forrester) report about 50% of home PCs being used exclusively for WWW/Email/WordProcessing. Think about products like WebTV -- it only targets 2 of those three, and people buy it. Free OSes are great for that sort of system.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
It's much easier to replace a Unix with a Unix, but to replace a Windows with a Unix can be more complicated. Another example: At the company I work for, I've built a web-based service for our customers to receive software updates. Because all of their software runs through a Win32 interpereter program (and they all run Windows anyway) our server has to run on an NT system. I would love to rewrite the software as a Unix daemon, but it's just not a possibility.
I'm willing to bet that there are a lot more sob-stories like mine out there. So yes, Linux/xBSD is making inroads, but Windows isn't necessarily losing too much of it's ground. I guess time will tell though.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
You're right, it doesn't add up to a lot on $2500 systems, but in the sub$500 market, it's a huge chunk of machine cost. This is a place where Linux (or a BSD) could fit ideally. Systems where the only applications that an end-user will need are Web-browsing and Word processing. Here, Linux is just as good, if not better, than windows; It's cheaper, it's more stable, and the apps are already there.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
My old sound card was ISA (The cheap version of the SB16) and when I started using Linux, there was no support for it, except from OSS and they were charging $20. I know it's not much, but I never shelled out the cash and then finally the Linux kernel added support for it. My new card, an ES1371, is detected without a catch.
With all that's been going on in the Kernel with sound drivers, let's not overlook the app-level sound system. As it stands, I don't believe the kernel allows multiple programs to output sound. Programs like ESD are great for doing just that, and I think the new version of KDE's audio daemon has ESD support. Linux is starting to sound pretty good.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Jury selection isn't likely to change anytime soon, and I don't think it should -- the idea is sound. What I don't understand is how the Toshiba case (and many others) ever became so inflated. $2 Billion. Seriously, I don't have all the facts, but could their floppy-problem have actually caused that much loss?
Thoughts anyone?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Then, after the solid whooping, I'd like the other one to come back and do the same. A nice see-saw of continuous ingenuity that allows me to maximize my utility, while one company or the other maximizes it's profits.
Let the best man win!
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Wolfenstein was such a truly classic game. Can this do it justice?? I'm have my doubts, but I'm keeping an open mind. Maybe those days aren't so long past...
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Look at what I said earlier. You not seeing a movie doesn't help anyone (obviously). But if everyone pirated the movie, as you suggest, instead of paying for it, then the producer doesn't get any money. If the producers don't get any money then they can't make any more movies and so the industry dies out. Since you obviously enjoy watching movies, it seems to me that the death of the movie-creating industry would strike you as being a bad thing.
Moreover, there are plenty of other ways to see a movie that do not involve violating IP laws and ethical consideration in general. If you really want to see if for free, then wait for it to be on one of the Networks or pay a marginal fee to HBO (or another movie channel) so you can hear all the original swearing.
Anyway, like I said: I don't care. Do what you want, I can't stop you. It's late and I'm going to bed.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
While digital media is certainly much easier to duplicate then the physical, it still costs money to produce. People have to be paid for their work, without which, that digital media would not exist. The costs of producing ANY media are defrayed (and turned into profit) by selling the product. No matter what it is, if you get it for free then you're obviously not paying the pricetag, and therefore not defraying the producers overhead.
You (along with many others) make the argument that it doesn't make a difference whether you pirate it, because you wouldn't buy it in the first place. This is true in some ways, but it's on very shaky ground. If one person did what you suggest (pirates instead of going without) then there really is no difference.
Imagine though, if everyone did that. Now nobody is paying for the content and the producer isn't seeing a penny to compensate for his work/investment. Suddenly the market for his product has no value for him and he will, unless he doesn't care about losing money, discontinue production of newer media.
Here's the real issue: You're using something that a person just like you spent time and hard work to create. By not paying them, it's a slap in their face. If you don't respect them enough to pay their price, then don't use their product. I don't care what it is - Music, Video, Software, whatever.
I guess you're right though: It's not theft in the traditional sense of the word. You aren't actually stealing anything, just copying it. But it is theft by the legal definition. You are violating another persons right to profit off of the use of their intellectual property. You're also causing the destruction of a market that you obviously enjoy to some extent. Have a little foresight and do the right thing. If the price is too high then vote with your feet -- don't use the product.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Well fine, maybe they are being greedy, but to be honest, the market doesn't agree with you. They're obviously not charging more than most people are willing to spend, or they wouldn't be making sales -- that's the beauty of a free market; it maintains itself as long as there's not a monopoly. And there's no monopoly on movie production, either; Indy films get funding all the time from private and personal investors.
How many times do I have to say it: If you don't like what they're charging then vote with your feet. Watch a different movie. Watch paint dry. Don't watch anything at all. I don't care - but just because you think the industry is overpriced does not give you warrant to violate their rights.
I'm done repeating myself. Pirate movies if you want to. Be a thief. Convince yourself it's justifiable. People like you make me sick.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
I can't believe you wrote that you "don't have the time ... [and] the energy " to watch a bad movie. How does time or energy factor into this? You'll spend the same amount of time on a film whether you steal it or pay for it legitimately. Besides, if you don't have the time or energy, maybe there are more pressing issues to deal with than entertainment
Which brings me to another point: The fact that our society is filled with movie-lovers does not make movies a necessity. I know dozens of people who do not regularly go to the movies. I know a few people who NEVER go to the movies and, in fact, they live quite normal lives. Yes, social bonds are breaking down, but how does going to see a movie fix that?? If anything, it just makes it worse? To anyone who must see movies to function as a normal person, I have only this to say: Get a friggin life. Read a book. Talk to a friend (GASP) in person. There is life beyond the mind-numbing drone of force-fed media. You can live a heathly existance without advertisements and cheap plotlines. Don't use your unnatural dependencies as an excuse for crime, though -- it doesn't cut it.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Why should payment be viewed as a donation? In what way is paying someone for their product any type of an option? And even stranger, why should it be legal? What legal ground is there for allowing copyright infringement??
Why is IP such an abomination? If you had your way, people would never get compensated for their effort. That's completely bogus -- In such a world where IP doesn't exist, what motivation is there for producing content?
Your suggestion that the entire industry disappear is just plain ignorant. You obviously enjoy what the industry creates, otherwise you wouldn't even bother pirating it. What you proposing would wipe out an entire artform that you yourself find appealing. All because you had to be selfish.
Imagine if that happened in the art world. Art is one of the most cherished and fundamental expressions of our culture. Artwork is considered intellectual property. By your statements, it would be okay with you if the entire industry of art disappeared, all because they weren't willing to give away their property for free.
Grow up. You can't have everything for free. There are time when payment is due - people work hard and deserve to be compensated for their time.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Somebody moderate that piece up.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Extortion has to be the biggest stretch of the imagination. No one needs movies. You don't have to pay their price, but don't expect to get something for free, just because you don't think it's reasonable. I don't think it's reasonable to pay $35,000 for a car. I happen to know that cars do not cost that much to build. That, however, does not give me the right to walk into a Nissan dealership and drive off in a new Maxima without paying for it.
If you don't pay for a movie, then the producers don't get a return on their investment. If they don't get their money back, they won't sink money into another film. Unless you're satisfied with a thousand films a year that all look like "Blair Witch", then someone needs to shell out a couple million.
From your last comment, though, it seems like you wouldn't mind if the entire movie industry disappeared. Fine. Go fsck yourself because the rest of us enjoy it. People like you are nothing but theives. Go ahead and justify it by telling yourself that they are the one's who're extorting you. Its dillusional and no moral person would have any part in it.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Actually, what they could do is write the decoder into a proprietary (freeware) library. That way they could OpenSource the viewer program so that people could customize the actual player (e.g. GTK or KDE or whatever). The player would have to be LGPL'ed to allow linking with a non-GPL library, but that's better than nothing.
My point is this: I want Linux to get DVD (so that I don't have to boot to Windows to watch mine), but I want it done LEGALLY :)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Don't get me wrong - your philosophy is better than the original posters, but it's still a blatent violation of intellectual property laws. It's the same thing as if I stole a movie from Sam Goody's and only paid for it after I decided it was decent. Even if it was bad and I return it, I just got a free rental. That's what I like to call "Selfish", not to mention theft.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."