I won't ask that you put aside your political differences in this time of national mourning. I'm not.
I won't ask that you give up your rights quietly because 9/11 shows that those rights will be our downfall if we continue to have them. I won't and I don't buy that.
I won't ask that you give up fighting because 9/11 shows that nothing can be solved by war, and that only peace will succeed in making the world a safer place. Far better and more righteous people than I have tried to end war and have failed miserably.
I won't ask you to rise up against the US government for its brutality and evil around the world that caused us to be attacked. Every other nation is just as evil, and has just as horrifying skeletons in their closet. America is just happening now. No amount of wrong done excuses what the hijackers, and those who helped plan and fund the hijacking did.
I won't ask you to condemn or absolve Muslims as a group for the actions and beliefs of some that called themselves Muslim.
I won't try to convince you that the lives of those murdered were in any way more or less important than the lives of Israelis killed in suicide bombings, the lives of Palestinians killed by Israeli solders and civillians, the lives of Vietnamese women and children murdered by American soldiers at the Mi Lai Massacre, those that died when nuclear weapons were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those that died at the Battle of Pearl Harbor, or any other life lost. They aren't. A life is a life, whomever's it is.
All I ask is that you remember the dead. In the end, that's the best any of us can hope for after we die in this world. No amount of war or peace will bring them back to life. Whatever existence is or isn't waiting after life ends, memory is all that is left of the person in this world. Remember the dead, and be glad you are alive, because it could have been you on those planes, in the World Trade Towers, or the Pentagon. Remember the families and friends and their loss, because it could have been your friend, or brother, or sister, or mother, or father who died that day. Remember their loss and throw a party, and hang out, get drunk, play touch football, talk until the wee hours, play video games, watch movies, argue, or whatever you enjoy doing with them, because most of us will die before we're tired of this life.
In the end, what you do and what you believe doesn't matter to me, and I expect you feel the same about me. Just remember for those people, that went out of this life in a way few of us would choose to, and don't forget that we're all lucky to be alive.
Well, this pretty much sealed my decision to buy a Mac desktop instead of upgrading my wintel box. Unix, can be made to run X11 apps, Neverwinter Nights is coming out for it, no Palladium idiocy. Can't beat that with a stick.
If Apple does not include functionality to use OS7/8/9 apps in OSX, then it will hurt them.
You're obviously not intelligent enough to bash Apple.
Classic mode alows you to run OS 9 apps under OS X. Get it through your thick skull. Anything that 9 can run, 10 can run, with the Classic emulator running. Anyone who NEEDS to have something that runs earlier versions of MacOS won't be buying a new Apple after this year, or now, so they don't care in the first place.
Microsoft has made a big stink about naked pcs not being legal etc, hence Dell selling servers with a zero cost liscense to freedos (or whichever dos varient they shipped).
Not true. Microsoft's licensing agreement requires that all PCs shipped by those computer companies with the best discounted OEM license have an operating system installed. That's what MS is complaining about, a violation of their licensing agreement, not the law. It is not (yet) illegal to ship PCs without an operating system installed.
It's more a measure of the influence that the incoming Compaq people are having on HP. Compaq, overall, was staunchly a pro-Microsoft computer maker, far more than HP ever was. Compaq's lifeblood was machines running Windows 2000. HP had other irons in the fire, and could deal with a more tepid relationship.
When I was working there as a consultant, pro-Microsoft propaganda was everywhere. Sure, there were plenty of Linux people working there, but it was really under the radar. Microsoft was the party line and woe to anyone who would challenge that too vocally. Yeah, Compaq didn't mind if Linux ran on their machines, but they didn't really put a whole lot of effort into it. IIRC, Microsoft bought an obscene number of Compaq machines during the time I was there. There was also a massive Windows 2000 migration push at the time, which may have been related to it.
I've posted regarding this before, but I think it bears restatement. There are an AWFUL lot of strong personalities in what used to be Compaq, hardened by a bitter internal war during the days after the Digital merger. Large caliber bullets didn't fly, but there was a whole lot of political fallout, even when I was there long after the merger (for about a year, from summer 2000 to summer 2001 before the consultancy I worked for laid me off). The "HP Way", as laid back as it's projected to be, I believe, cannot stand up to the hardened take-no-prisoners warriors at Compaq. Sure, alot of people at Compaq are going to get laid off, but sometimes you have to sacrifice your own men in a battle to win a war, and I would bet that's how the Compaq people see it, a war to save their way of doing things, and in the end, their personal employment.
Re:"Save Gaming - Kill a Magic Player today."
on
Layoffs at WotC
·
· Score: 2
Ah, so you rely on the intelligence of others in order to "intelligently game" is that right? If you don't like how they do it, do it your own way. Hell, steal any of their ideas you do like, put your own ideas with them, and play your games like that.
Exactly how intelligent do you expect us to believe you are when you apparently believe TSR is holding a gun to your head, telling you to play D&D or else? Or are you angry that the gaming clique has expanded far beyond the exclusive borders you preferred, not wanting all the trashy gamers wandering around? In which case I pray that every idiot gamer in you continues to drive you up the wall. Elitist idiots like you are the ones that give gaming a bad name. Trading card, pen-and-paper, doesn't matter. They're just games. If you don't like 'em, don't play 'em. Don't piss in someone else's pool.
Didn't mean to imply that. The main point being, the WoD is their cash cow. Yeah, they do other stuff, but they can because Vampire and everything is spawned made them a whole lot of cash.
How long do you think White Wolf has been publishing, eh? You been living under a rock? White Wolf is fat and happy draining all the tragically living of their money with Vampire and all hte rest of their crap from the World of Darkness, and bringing out new game after new game. No, they're not the biggest dog on the block, but they sure aren't a scrappy upstart, nor are they wondering where their next meal will come from.
What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Warsinger was his real name to the people he gave that name to. I know several people I've met in real life only by the names they chose for themselves in online games/IRC, etc. Lots of people know me the same way. Warsinger, Fred Jones, the name his parents gave him, or whatever, they all point to the same person. Who cares what his legal name was?
Re:What exactly is ITC/Afga's complaint based on?
on
Adobe Gets Hit By DMCA
·
· Score: 2
All the link given states is that they're accusing Adobe of violating the DMCA with Acrobat. Is it that ITC/Afga are claiming that the embedding of fonts in PDF files with Acrobat defeats a technological measure used to control access to the copyrighted work? What technological measure would that be, for goodness sake. Is it possible to get an installable font out of a PDF that has a font embedded, or are they saying embedded fonts in PDFs bypass some license requirement that anyone who views a font through electronic means must have purchased a license for the font in question?
Hard to form any opinion about whether Adobe actually violates some portion of the DMCA, without hearing the actual complaint from ITC/Afga. Unless of course you're a thoughtless warrior against copyright, who doesn't care about niggling details like "the facts".
You can use IPSec on your gateway to prevent random people from using your gateway.
The above is a content-free statement that wishes it was a rebuttal. What gateway? My gateway to the internet? What, do you actually think I've got a Cisco with an IPSec module lying around that I can use merely for authenticating outbound web browsing? Are you clinically thick? Do you mean the wireless access point? How many consumer 802.11b access points do you think have an integrated VPN server built into them? None that I've found. Sure if you're an enterprise and have the cash to spend, and the need for wireless networking on a a large and secure scale, you can get a Colubris Access Controller, but I, and most of the other people fielding wireless access points for their homes, can't afford it. And even if they could, setting up a VPN securely is not a trivial task that just anyone can do. Neither is using a spare Intel box to run a xBSD or Linux-based VPN server, not to mention the issues involved in securing the VPN server itself, that many well paid system administrators and security professionals can't seem to do correctly.
Real security also has all kinds of side benefits, such as actually having reasonable assurances of security.
I dare you to find the right access point out of 53000 others WITHOUT having to come up with a story behind why you're inching around with a Pringles can trying to figure out which access point my computers are using. ANY security measure can be socially engineered into uselessness. All your "resonable assurance of security" buys you is a false sense of invulnerability, and the good feeling you get from spouting industry buzzwords.
It's not security through obscurity, it's creating a forest around your tree. While I may be able to secure the machines on my network, use a VPN for all transactions over the wireless network, there's no real way to secure my access point. WEP is a joke, plain and simple. If someone gets on my wireless network unauthorized by me, I'm liable for whatever shit they might pull through my internet connection, so I don't see the supposed stupidity in making it alot harder for someone to find the real access point. I have my doubts that this software is as effective at what it's trying to do as it's author(s) claim, but even so, it narrows the potential abusers of my network down to the determined, patient, and lucky. No security is perfect. You just have to run faster than the slowest guy to avoid getting eaten by the lion, you know?
And a better analogy would be trying to avoid venereal disease by dumping condoms all over the place so it's a veritable certainty that you'll be within reach of one wherever you happen to find yourself doing the nasty.
Hippies aren't outsiders anymore, I hate to break it to you.
And either way, you partly proved my point. I'm saying that the hardware defines the outsider these days, not necessarily the operating system you run on it. I run Linux on old iMacs and that tends to scare the normal computer people I know alot, for some reason. First I'm using "crappy flower power idiot" Apple hardware, and then I'm running that weird Linux crap on top of it, but the important (to them) part is that I'm using an Apple. Running Linux on my PC gets me a moment of "of cool, I've heard it's neat" and then that fades out.
So, I was merely saying, if outsider status is what you crave, you've got to start with an Apple machine. If you really want to scare/awe people, sure, put Linux on it, but the Apple logo on the hardware is what will put you way ahead of the outsider game.
You can get replacement parts for your Dreamcast...the easiest way being, get yourself a spare Dreamcast (they're what, $40?). Also, the most common hardware failure can be fixed with a simple resistor, a soldering iron, and the time needed to take apart and put it back together.
In the regular world, the computer that the "outsiders" use is Apple, if statement-making is your goal. Linux users are percieved more like auto junkies who rebuild transmissions on their own and the like. A Thinkpad with Linux on it looks the same as a Thinkpad with Windows XP on it being carried around. A TiBook or an iBook stand out.
Re:Agreed: Why did it take Red Hat to do this?
on
KDE Gets The Hat
·
· Score: 2
It took Red Hat to do it, because Red Hat is one of the few Linux distributors that actually acts like a regular OS distributing corporation, and less like a hippy collective that's doing it for enough money to get by on.
I've got nothing against hippies, or collectives, or doing what you do for the love of it. I do a lot of stuff for completely idealistic, and not really realistic reasons. However, when you do that, things like customer opinions tend to fall on deaf ears. Most Linux companies do things because they're the way they believe it should be done, not because that's how their users want it to be done. For the most part, Linux distro makers are evangelists, preaching their particular version of the gospel to all who would hear. They're not interested in changing their views, because they're convinced that this is the right way (either for everyone, or themselves) an there really isn't any reason for them to change it. At best you're politely told to look elsewhere for something that fits your needs, and at worst you're insulted for being a peon under the proprietary software devils.
Red Hat (and Mandrake, Lindows, and Lycoris to varying extents) are Linux distributions that are built and rebuilt thanks to user feedback, both corporate and home (though Red Hat is far more corporate oriented). They go out and ask customers and potential customers what they want from Linux and aside from completely impossible things ("We want Office XP to run natively on it") they do their best to get things working, so they can add whomever as a customer.
For a very long time, this customer-centric attitude was hampered severely by a seemingly overwhelming desire not to step on the toes of anyone in the open source community. Lately though, Red Hat has done a lot of things that haven't made the open source zealots happy, but have made their customers happy. IIRC, Red Hat went out on a limb and introduced problems into gcc 2.96 that broke a lot of stuff in order to get support for some processor (Itanium? I don't recall exactly) that their corporate customers wanted to get Linux running on. And now this. Developers are pissed that their whims aren't being honored, but if that's what they wanted, they should've released their code under a more restrictive license. As it is, they can fume and hate Red Hat as much as their hearts desire, but Red Hat probably doesn't care too much about it. Sure, they'll probably be diplomatic about it, and try to smooth some feathers, but in the end, it's Red Hat's RIGHT to do all this stuff, and they're going to exercise those rights, if it gets Red Hat Linux on a corporation's workstations or servers. If people try and release code that won't run on Red Hat in some sort of idiotic retribution, as long as they release it under the GPL, LGPL, or any other license that allows people to modify and redistribute the source code, and Red Hat's users want it, Red Hat will cheerfully remove the Red Hat-checking code and redistribute it.
Linux is in the midst of maturing, and growing up into the real world. It's going to be painful, but when isn't growing up a painful, wrenching experience?
Agreed with you up until then, but you showed yourslef to be the troll you are just thee. Stop polluting the pool.
Re:There is almost always too much competition. .
on
VisionTek Folds
·
· Score: 2
VisionTek isn't nVidia's only retailer, but they are the number one retailer, and their best retailer. I've bought an nVidia card from PNY, and it was the biggest waste of money I've ever had the displeasure of experiencing. I bought two GeForce cards from "cheapo" no-name brand retailers that were dead on arrival before I bit the bullet and bought a VisionTek that's been the best video card I've ever owned. VisionTek exiting the market means I exit the nVidia market, because I don't trust the other manufacturers like I trusted VisionTek. An ATI card will be the next on the docket for me.
America is moving toware a device-oriented society. It's been said before, but I'll say it again, the general purpose computer is on its last legs. The DMCA killed it off, and there's no chance in hell of it being repealed. The various other legislation being proposed by the media conglomerates will merely determine how draconian the regime that is already in place will be. Devices are NOT getting more and more flexible. They're getting more and more specialized. TiVO is a perfect example. All it does is record digital video, and play it back. Things like the PS2, GameCube, and Xbox are slowly ousting the home PC as a gaming machine. Portable hardware MP3 players such as the iPod are becoming more and more prevelant. The device-only trend is going to continue, and the homebuilt PC will eventually be a thing of the past.
The fact that there are people who run software not intended to run on Xboxes or iPods is irrelevant. If they're in America, and they tell anyone else about how they did it, they're violating the DMCA. The sword of Damocles is already there, the only question left is whether or not companies are forced to drop it on you.
The news publishers who say "yes" say that turning off graphics in your web browser should be illegal too.
I hate to be one of those who pick on the Slashdot "editors" for their commentary, but I've got to jump in here. Can someone quote me the line from the GigaLaw article which states that the people suing Gator claim that browsing without graphics turned on is illegal?
If you're going to make a comment, please point to a reference. Nowhere could I find that mentioned. If you're just going to make shit up that you think is right, just shut up.
The consumer has the power to not buy it. Something that you all obviously have forgotten about.
If you don't like how it's being given to you, DON'T BUY IT. People survived for thousands of years without digital television, the Internet, and everything else. If they make it illegal for me to buy anything that isn't Holly-wood approved, I just won't buy any of it. End of story.
Digital TV? I don't even get cable. Waste of money. Too many channels, with too much crap, making the stuff I might want not worth the effort. Learn to live without it, or please don't take some mythical high ground. You're so greedy, even if this stuff goes through you'll still shell out for whatever media product you've just _got_ to have, and let the people you supposedly hate walk all over you and rob you blind. No sympathy.
Everything has ongoing expenses. Battle.net pays for itself with ads, and Blizzard's agreements with the ISPs that provide the battle.net servers. People need to maintain Counter Strike servers, and the large internet connections needed to support them (and with badwidth costs on the rise...). If you think those things have no ongoing expenses associated with them, you're deluding yourself. The difference is, with the pay for play games your favorite server is likely to stay around alot longer than Battle.net (dont' forget, Blizzard is working on a Warcraft pay-for-play MMORPG) or your favorite Counter Strike/Tribes 2 server.
Slashdot Mirror
I won't ask that you put aside your political differences in this time of national mourning. I'm not.
I won't ask that you give up your rights quietly because 9/11 shows that those rights will be our downfall if we continue to have them. I won't and I don't buy that.
I won't ask that you give up fighting because 9/11 shows that nothing can be solved by war, and that only peace will succeed in making the world a safer place. Far better and more righteous people than I have tried to end war and have failed miserably.
I won't ask you to rise up against the US government for its brutality and evil around the world that caused us to be attacked. Every other nation is just as evil, and has just as horrifying skeletons in their closet. America is just happening now. No amount of wrong done excuses what the hijackers, and those who helped plan and fund the hijacking did.
I won't ask you to condemn or absolve Muslims as a group for the actions and beliefs of some that called themselves Muslim.
I won't try to convince you that the lives of those murdered were in any way more or less important than the lives of Israelis killed in suicide bombings, the lives of Palestinians killed by Israeli solders and civillians, the lives of Vietnamese women and children murdered by American soldiers at the Mi Lai Massacre, those that died when nuclear weapons were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those that died at the Battle of Pearl Harbor, or any other life lost. They aren't. A life is a life, whomever's it is.
All I ask is that you remember the dead. In the end, that's the best any of us can hope for after we die in this world. No amount of war or peace will bring them back to life. Whatever existence is or isn't waiting after life ends, memory is all that is left of the person in this world. Remember the dead, and be glad you are alive, because it could have been you on those planes, in the World Trade Towers, or the Pentagon. Remember the families and friends and their loss, because it could have been your friend, or brother, or sister, or mother, or father who died that day. Remember their loss and throw a party, and hang out, get drunk, play touch football, talk until the wee hours, play video games, watch movies, argue, or whatever you enjoy doing with them, because most of us will die before we're tired of this life.
In the end, what you do and what you believe doesn't matter to me, and I expect you feel the same about me. Just remember for those people, that went out of this life in a way few of us would choose to, and don't forget that we're all lucky to be alive.
That's it, I guess...
Well, this pretty much sealed my decision to buy a Mac desktop instead of upgrading my wintel box. Unix, can be made to run X11 apps, Neverwinter Nights is coming out for it, no Palladium idiocy. Can't beat that with a stick.
If Apple does not include functionality to use OS7/8/9 apps in OSX, then it will hurt them.
You're obviously not intelligent enough to bash Apple.
Classic mode alows you to run OS 9 apps under OS X. Get it through your thick skull. Anything that 9 can run, 10 can run, with the Classic emulator running. Anyone who NEEDS to have something that runs earlier versions of MacOS won't be buying a new Apple after this year, or now, so they don't care in the first place.
Microsoft has made a big stink about naked pcs not being legal etc, hence Dell selling servers with a zero cost liscense to freedos (or whichever dos varient they shipped).
Not true. Microsoft's licensing agreement requires that all PCs shipped by those computer companies with the best discounted OEM license have an operating system installed. That's what MS is complaining about, a violation of their licensing agreement, not the law. It is not (yet) illegal to ship PCs without an operating system installed.
It's more a measure of the influence that the incoming Compaq people are having on HP. Compaq, overall, was staunchly a pro-Microsoft computer maker, far more than HP ever was. Compaq's lifeblood was machines running Windows 2000. HP had other irons in the fire, and could deal with a more tepid relationship.
When I was working there as a consultant, pro-Microsoft propaganda was everywhere. Sure, there were plenty of Linux people working there, but it was really under the radar. Microsoft was the party line and woe to anyone who would challenge that too vocally. Yeah, Compaq didn't mind if Linux ran on their machines, but they didn't really put a whole lot of effort into it. IIRC, Microsoft bought an obscene number of Compaq machines during the time I was there. There was also a massive Windows 2000 migration push at the time, which may have been related to it.
I've posted regarding this before, but I think it bears restatement. There are an AWFUL lot of strong personalities in what used to be Compaq, hardened by a bitter internal war during the days after the Digital merger. Large caliber bullets didn't fly, but there was a whole lot of political fallout, even when I was there long after the merger (for about a year, from summer 2000 to summer 2001 before the consultancy I worked for laid me off). The "HP Way", as laid back as it's projected to be, I believe, cannot stand up to the hardened take-no-prisoners warriors at Compaq. Sure, alot of people at Compaq are going to get laid off, but sometimes you have to sacrifice your own men in a battle to win a war, and I would bet that's how the Compaq people see it, a war to save their way of doing things, and in the end, their personal employment.
Ah, so you rely on the intelligence of others in order to "intelligently game" is that right? If you don't like how they do it, do it your own way. Hell, steal any of their ideas you do like, put your own ideas with them, and play your games like that.
Exactly how intelligent do you expect us to believe you are when you apparently believe TSR is holding a gun to your head, telling you to play D&D or else? Or are you angry that the gaming clique has expanded far beyond the exclusive borders you preferred, not wanting all the trashy gamers wandering around? In which case I pray that every idiot gamer in you continues to drive you up the wall. Elitist idiots like you are the ones that give gaming a bad name. Trading card, pen-and-paper, doesn't matter. They're just games. If you don't like 'em, don't play 'em. Don't piss in someone else's pool.
Didn't mean to imply that. The main point being, the WoD is their cash cow. Yeah, they do other stuff, but they can because Vampire and everything is spawned made them a whole lot of cash.
Newer? Hungrier?
How long do you think White Wolf has been publishing, eh? You been living under a rock? White Wolf is fat and happy draining all the tragically living of their money with Vampire and all hte rest of their crap from the World of Darkness, and bringing out new game after new game. No, they're not the biggest dog on the block, but they sure aren't a scrappy upstart, nor are they wondering where their next meal will come from.
What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Warsinger was his real name to the people he gave that name to. I know several people I've met in real life only by the names they chose for themselves in online games/IRC, etc. Lots of people know me the same way. Warsinger, Fred Jones, the name his parents gave him, or whatever, they all point to the same person. Who cares what his legal name was?
Thanks for the info, makes much more sense now.
Mod the parent up, informative.
All the link given states is that they're accusing Adobe of violating the DMCA with Acrobat. Is it that ITC/Afga are claiming that the embedding of fonts in PDF files with Acrobat defeats a technological measure used to control access to the copyrighted work? What technological measure would that be, for goodness sake. Is it possible to get an installable font out of a PDF that has a font embedded, or are they saying embedded fonts in PDFs bypass some license requirement that anyone who views a font through electronic means must have purchased a license for the font in question?
Hard to form any opinion about whether Adobe actually violates some portion of the DMCA, without hearing the actual complaint from ITC/Afga. Unless of course you're a thoughtless warrior against copyright, who doesn't care about niggling details like "the facts".
You can use IPSec on your gateway to prevent random people from using your gateway.
The above is a content-free statement that wishes it was a rebuttal. What gateway? My gateway to the internet? What, do you actually think I've got a Cisco with an IPSec module lying around that I can use merely for authenticating outbound web browsing? Are you clinically thick? Do you mean the wireless access point? How many consumer 802.11b access points do you think have an integrated VPN server built into them? None that I've found. Sure if you're an enterprise and have the cash to spend, and the need for wireless networking on a a large and secure scale, you can get a Colubris Access Controller, but I, and most of the other people fielding wireless access points for their homes, can't afford it. And even if they could, setting up a VPN securely is not a trivial task that just anyone can do. Neither is using a spare Intel box to run a xBSD or Linux-based VPN server, not to mention the issues involved in securing the VPN server itself, that many well paid system administrators and security professionals can't seem to do correctly.
Real security also has all kinds of side benefits, such as actually having reasonable assurances of security.
I dare you to find the right access point out of 53000 others WITHOUT having to come up with a story behind why you're inching around with a Pringles can trying to figure out which access point my computers are using. ANY security measure can be socially engineered into uselessness. All your "resonable assurance of security" buys you is a false sense of invulnerability, and the good feeling you get from spouting industry buzzwords.
It's not security through obscurity, it's creating a forest around your tree. While I may be able to secure the machines on my network, use a VPN for all transactions over the wireless network, there's no real way to secure my access point. WEP is a joke, plain and simple. If someone gets on my wireless network unauthorized by me, I'm liable for whatever shit they might pull through my internet connection, so I don't see the supposed stupidity in making it alot harder for someone to find the real access point. I have my doubts that this software is as effective at what it's trying to do as it's author(s) claim, but even so, it narrows the potential abusers of my network down to the determined, patient, and lucky. No security is perfect. You just have to run faster than the slowest guy to avoid getting eaten by the lion, you know?
And a better analogy would be trying to avoid venereal disease by dumping condoms all over the place so it's a veritable certainty that you'll be within reach of one wherever you happen to find yourself doing the nasty.
A better
Hippies aren't outsiders anymore, I hate to break it to you.
And either way, you partly proved my point. I'm saying that the hardware defines the outsider these days, not necessarily the operating system you run on it. I run Linux on old iMacs and that tends to scare the normal computer people I know alot, for some reason. First I'm using "crappy flower power idiot" Apple hardware, and then I'm running that weird Linux crap on top of it, but the important (to them) part is that I'm using an Apple. Running Linux on my PC gets me a moment of "of cool, I've heard it's neat" and then that fades out.
So, I was merely saying, if outsider status is what you crave, you've got to start with an Apple machine. If you really want to scare/awe people, sure, put Linux on it, but the Apple logo on the hardware is what will put you way ahead of the outsider game.
You can get replacement parts for your Dreamcast...the easiest way being, get yourself a spare Dreamcast (they're what, $40?). Also, the most common hardware failure can be fixed with a simple resistor, a soldering iron, and the time needed to take apart and put it back together.
In the regular world, the computer that the "outsiders" use is Apple, if statement-making is your goal. Linux users are percieved more like auto junkies who rebuild transmissions on their own and the like. A Thinkpad with Linux on it looks the same as a Thinkpad with Windows XP on it being carried around. A TiBook or an iBook stand out.
It took Red Hat to do it, because Red Hat is one of the few Linux distributors that actually acts like a regular OS distributing corporation, and less like a hippy collective that's doing it for enough money to get by on.
I've got nothing against hippies, or collectives, or doing what you do for the love of it. I do a lot of stuff for completely idealistic, and not really realistic reasons. However, when you do that, things like customer opinions tend to fall on deaf ears. Most Linux companies do things because they're the way they believe it should be done, not because that's how their users want it to be done. For the most part, Linux distro makers are evangelists, preaching their particular version of the gospel to all who would hear. They're not interested in changing their views, because they're convinced that this is the right way (either for everyone, or themselves) an there really isn't any reason for them to change it. At best you're politely told to look elsewhere for something that fits your needs, and at worst you're insulted for being a peon under the proprietary software devils.
Red Hat (and Mandrake, Lindows, and Lycoris to varying extents) are Linux distributions that are built and rebuilt thanks to user feedback, both corporate and home (though Red Hat is far more corporate oriented). They go out and ask customers and potential customers what they want from Linux and aside from completely impossible things ("We want Office XP to run natively on it") they do their best to get things working, so they can add whomever as a customer.
For a very long time, this customer-centric attitude was hampered severely by a seemingly overwhelming desire not to step on the toes of anyone in the open source community. Lately though, Red Hat has done a lot of things that haven't made the open source zealots happy, but have made their customers happy. IIRC, Red Hat went out on a limb and introduced problems into gcc 2.96 that broke a lot of stuff in order to get support for some processor (Itanium? I don't recall exactly) that their corporate customers wanted to get Linux running on. And now this. Developers are pissed that their whims aren't being honored, but if that's what they wanted, they should've released their code under a more restrictive license. As it is, they can fume and hate Red Hat as much as their hearts desire, but Red Hat probably doesn't care too much about it. Sure, they'll probably be diplomatic about it, and try to smooth some feathers, but in the end, it's Red Hat's RIGHT to do all this stuff, and they're going to exercise those rights, if it gets Red Hat Linux on a corporation's workstations or servers. If people try and release code that won't run on Red Hat in some sort of idiotic retribution, as long as they release it under the GPL, LGPL, or any other license that allows people to modify and redistribute the source code, and Red Hat's users want it, Red Hat will cheerfully remove the Red Hat-checking code and redistribute it.
Linux is in the midst of maturing, and growing up into the real world. It's going to be painful, but when isn't growing up a painful, wrenching experience?
Maybe some of us can't use Quartz Extreme. Like those of us with older iBooks and iMacs.
Now shut your pie hole and go buy an nvidia card.
Two words. Fuck you.
Agreed with you up until then, but you showed yourslef to be the troll you are just thee. Stop polluting the pool.
VisionTek isn't nVidia's only retailer, but they are the number one retailer, and their best retailer. I've bought an nVidia card from PNY, and it was the biggest waste of money I've ever had the displeasure of experiencing. I bought two GeForce cards from "cheapo" no-name brand retailers that were dead on arrival before I bit the bullet and bought a VisionTek that's been the best video card I've ever owned. VisionTek exiting the market means I exit the nVidia market, because I don't trust the other manufacturers like I trusted VisionTek. An ATI card will be the next on the docket for me.
America is moving toware a device-oriented society. It's been said before, but I'll say it again, the general purpose computer is on its last legs. The DMCA killed it off, and there's no chance in hell of it being repealed. The various other legislation being proposed by the media conglomerates will merely determine how draconian the regime that is already in place will be. Devices are NOT getting more and more flexible. They're getting more and more specialized. TiVO is a perfect example. All it does is record digital video, and play it back. Things like the PS2, GameCube, and Xbox are slowly ousting the home PC as a gaming machine. Portable hardware MP3 players such as the iPod are becoming more and more prevelant. The device-only trend is going to continue, and the homebuilt PC will eventually be a thing of the past.
The fact that there are people who run software not intended to run on Xboxes or iPods is irrelevant. If they're in America, and they tell anyone else about how they did it, they're violating the DMCA. The sword of Damocles is already there, the only question left is whether or not companies are forced to drop it on you.
The news publishers who say "yes" say that turning off graphics in your web browser should be illegal too.
I hate to be one of those who pick on the Slashdot "editors" for their commentary, but I've got to jump in here. Can someone quote me the line from the GigaLaw article which states that the people suing Gator claim that browsing without graphics turned on is illegal?
If you're going to make a comment, please point to a reference. Nowhere could I find that mentioned. If you're just going to make shit up that you think is right, just shut up.
The consumer has the power to not buy it. Something that you all obviously have forgotten about.
If you don't like how it's being given to you, DON'T BUY IT. People survived for thousands of years without digital television, the Internet, and everything else. If they make it illegal for me to buy anything that isn't Holly-wood approved, I just won't buy any of it. End of story.
Digital TV? I don't even get cable. Waste of money. Too many channels, with too much crap, making the stuff I might want not worth the effort. Learn to live without it, or please don't take some mythical high ground. You're so greedy, even if this stuff goes through you'll still shell out for whatever media product you've just _got_ to have, and let the people you supposedly hate walk all over you and rob you blind. No sympathy.
Everything has ongoing expenses. Battle.net pays for itself with ads, and Blizzard's agreements with the ISPs that provide the battle.net servers. People need to maintain Counter Strike servers, and the large internet connections needed to support them (and with badwidth costs on the rise...). If you think those things have no ongoing expenses associated with them, you're deluding yourself. The difference is, with the pay for play games your favorite server is likely to stay around alot longer than Battle.net (dont' forget, Blizzard is working on a Warcraft pay-for-play MMORPG) or your favorite Counter Strike/Tribes 2 server.
"developer given" release dates are worth about as much as the molecules of phosphor that you read them from.
In other words, next to nothing. Believe it when you have the client on your machine and are running it. not before.