I think it's mostly because they can make more money this way. Early DVDs were two sided... pan&scan on one side, widescreen on the other. I think they just decided they can resell the DVDs to people when they buy widescreen if they release them seperately.
I don't know an sort of count, but if you read The Register frequently, you'll see a LOT of stories about really stupid decision in domain name cases. Like Vivendi Universal won the rights to vivendiuniversalsucks.com because "non-English speakers might not understand what sucks means and get confused." What else... I'm not positive on the details here, but I think Ford won the rights to jaguar.com from some little girl that had a site with hand drawn pictures of jaguars (the animals). I've seen plenty of really stupid decisions, and I certainly get the impression that the vast majority of domains get transferred ownership, no matter how legit they are.
I just installed Netscape 6.2.1 on a computer the other day. On the first startup, it asks for your Netscape.com user info, and offers to sign you up if you don't have any. You can just click cancel or decline (forget exactly), then it'll give you an "Are you sure?" type thing, and you answer that and that's the last you'll hear of it.
Nintendo does far better in the US than in Japan. The N64 didn't sell well at all in Japan, but it made them a lot of money here (last I remember hearing the PS only outsold the N64 3:2, tho that might've changed towards the end of the N64's life).
I wouldn't say Mario and Zelda were just rehashes. Mario 64 was really different than the previous ones. Majora's Mask, while it shared the same engine and a lot of the graphics of Ocarina of Time, definately played very differently due to the 3 day time limit restrictions.
The Zelda and Mario games sold really well. They certainly didn't hurt Nintendo at all. If anything is rehashed over and over, I'd say Square's stuff is. If you're not really into RPGs, then the vast majority of them look identical (and really really boring).
Nokia sold cellphones with GEOS on them for years. Then Microsoft threatened with Windows CE, so Nokia and a few other cell phone combines got together and wrote Symbian. Nokia's been shipping phones based off it for about two years now. SDK's have been available for a long time from Nokia's developer's site. Altho I will say, I signed up for one multiple times and never got it. Had no problems getting the SDK for their GEOS phones (even wrote an HTTP server for them). I know others have gotten them with no problems tho.
The big problem I've had with 2.4 is that the TCP stack constantly stalls. I'll transfer a few hundred k at 30k/s or more, and then it'll just totally stall. I usually have to abort the transfer and try it again. apt-get is rather painful like that, as I have to constantly hit ctrl-c then run it again.
I've got a 3com 905 card. Works perfectly in Windows. Passes the 3com diagnostics tests perfectly. Works fine in kernel 2.2, so that's what I stick with.
If you're running a production server, you only change the kernel if there's a good reason. If you're running 2.2, installing this version is a good idea, as it's only minor (but important) tweaks.
Personally, I'm going to try it out because the 2.4 series networking doesn't work well at all on my system. Sockets stall after transferring a few hundred kb, which makes any kind of net access a serious pain. But 2.2.19 had problems with my sound card... Maybe, just maybe, there will be a version that likes all my hardware...
The 1.x line ran really well on 8086's. 2.x was still usable, but a bit sluggish. The most recent versions require a 286. Unfortunately funding ran out before the 386 kernel upgrade got finished...
Almost everything was written in asm. All of 1.x was, and probably 99% of 2.x was. I can only think of 1 app and 2 libraries that were written in C in the 2.0 release. They were done in C mainly to test out C development. More C code creeped in as time went on tho. It's all asm, with stub functions to allow C development.
While they don't confirm GameCube development, Square says they really want to - or rather have to - develop FFXI for it.
http://cube.ign.com/news/36560.html
Mozilla (right now) isn't aimed for the average user tho. Someone who's going to have trouble downloading a JVM isn't going to know what Mozilla is in the first place. Netscape's releases include Sun's JVM.
The average IE user is probably as likely to go download a JVM as they are to go download Netscape. As history as shown, that's not gonna happen.
Actually, the system didn't serve them very well at all. Virgin records provided pretty much no promotion at all for their last 2 commericial albums. There was practically no advertising. And they were horrible when it came to releasing the CD singles. While Perfect did really well on the radio, they didn't bother to release the single until it started falling off the charts. Machina's singles didn't even get released in the US, only in the UK.
Oh, and also keep in mind that over the past fewyears the band has given people a lot of demo tapes with unreleased songs and alternate versions of released stuff for distribution. They didn't like the system at all. They just used it when it was easier, and worked around it when it got in the way. Despite the coolness of Machina 2 being free, most people posting messages on their website indicated they would've prefered to be able to go to the store and buy a CD.
They didn't say distribute it only as mp3s. They just said to distribute it. spifc.org (Smashing Pumpkins Internet Fan Club) had CDs professionally made from their vinyl, and for a few months made free copies for anyone - just had to send them a pair of blank CDs and a SASE.
If you check the readme while installing Easy CD Creater 4.0, you'll notice it says you have to install Internet Explorer because Microsoft won't let them distribute the necessary DLL files seperately.
Why is that? The part I quoted 2 messages up says usage is prohibited unless the license is 100% enforcable. Is there a law against having a clause like that? If so, I would agree with you.
If not however, I see things happening a bit differently. Yes, Microsoft would have to go fight the case in Maryland. But I think their case would basically come down to claiming that the user was unauthorized to use their systems. I have no idea whether that lawsuit would be worth persuing or not tho.
Based on what happened with this case, I doubt that'll happen. Microsoft wanted the UCITA, and its already causing them to (theoretically) lose users. Most people will just click thru and use the service without paying attention to it. Even if they did, how many people do you think actually read the UCITA? Or how many people do you think knew that despite the name containing the word Uniform, it isn't uniform between states? So this won't affect their userbase, altho it does cut down on the number of people theoretically able to use their software.
They'll probably just end up with a clause in the license that changes the problem parts for Maryland users. Like how the MSN Rebate terms were different in California. So the UCITA won't really make a difference.
Use of the Passport Web Site and service is unauthorized in any jurisdiction that does not give effect to all provisions of these terms and conditions, including without limitation this paragraph.
The problem is that the version of UCITA which Maryland passed specificly says that if there is a problem with licensing issues in Maryland, that the issue must be solved in Maryland, under Maryland's laws.
Nintendo made almost twice as much money as Sony and Sega combined. Electronic Arts made the second most money off games, and Nintendo made more than double what they made.
Nintendo owns about 40% of Rare, and pays all publishing and advertising costs for Rare games. So while Nintendo didn't actually make Conker, they paid someone to make it for them.
Invisibility is handled at the server, not the client. Authorization to add to a contact list is done via the client tho. The ICQ protocol as a whole isn't too bad tho; it's definately easier to work with than AIM.
(I've written an ICQ clone, and looked into AIM, so I know what I'm talking about)
Ya know, this is exactly what Geoworks got a patent on around 94 or so. The one they're using to get money from everyone using WAP. This patent just seems like a subset of the Geoworks one.
I think the point was more rather than rewriting several major parts of the kernel for one release, why not let 2.4 rewrite one major system, then 2.6 rewrite the next, etc. And of course get updated drivers and other nice things along the way. Say 2.4 was released a year ago with all the nice hardware support improvements (USB, card services, PCI changes, anything else I missed), and then 2.6 came out now with all the memory management rewrites? I don't see a downside to that. I never heard complaints about memory management before, but plenty of people wanted USB. So why not cut back on the scale of each release? Targetting for roughly yearly releases sounds reasonable to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's mostly because they can make more money this way. Early DVDs were two sided... pan&scan on one side, widescreen on the other. I think they just decided they can resell the DVDs to people when they buy widescreen if they release them seperately.
I don't know an sort of count, but if you read The Register frequently, you'll see a LOT of stories about really stupid decision in domain name cases. Like Vivendi Universal won the rights to vivendiuniversalsucks.com because "non-English speakers might not understand what sucks means and get confused." What else... I'm not positive on the details here, but I think Ford won the rights to jaguar.com from some little girl that had a site with hand drawn pictures of jaguars (the animals). I've seen plenty of really stupid decisions, and I certainly get the impression that the vast majority of domains get transferred ownership, no matter how legit they are.
I just installed Netscape 6.2.1 on a computer the other day. On the first startup, it asks for your Netscape.com user info, and offers to sign you up if you don't have any. You can just click cancel or decline (forget exactly), then it'll give you an "Are you sure?" type thing, and you answer that and that's the last you'll hear of it.
Nintendo does far better in the US than in Japan. The N64 didn't sell well at all in Japan, but it made them a lot of money here (last I remember hearing the PS only outsold the N64 3:2, tho that might've changed towards the end of the N64's life).
I wouldn't say Mario and Zelda were just rehashes. Mario 64 was really different than the previous ones. Majora's Mask, while it shared the same engine and a lot of the graphics of Ocarina of Time, definately played very differently due to the 3 day time limit restrictions.
The Zelda and Mario games sold really well. They certainly didn't hurt Nintendo at all. If anything is rehashed over and over, I'd say Square's stuff is. If you're not really into RPGs, then the vast majority of them look identical (and really really boring).
Nokia sold cellphones with GEOS on them for years. Then Microsoft threatened with Windows CE, so Nokia and a few other cell phone combines got together and wrote Symbian. Nokia's been shipping phones based off it for about two years now. SDK's have been available for a long time from Nokia's developer's site. Altho I will say, I signed up for one multiple times and never got it. Had no problems getting the SDK for their GEOS phones (even wrote an HTTP server for them). I know others have gotten them with no problems tho.
So what's the news here?
Correction for music. The charts are based off of sales. It's the gold/platinum/diamond awards that are based off copies shipped.
The big problem I've had with 2.4 is that the TCP stack constantly stalls. I'll transfer a few hundred k at 30k/s or more, and then it'll just totally stall. I usually have to abort the transfer and try it again. apt-get is rather painful like that, as I have to constantly hit ctrl-c then run it again.
I've got a 3com 905 card. Works perfectly in Windows. Passes the 3com diagnostics tests perfectly. Works fine in kernel 2.2, so that's what I stick with.
If you're running a production server, you only change the kernel if there's a good reason. If you're running 2.2, installing this version is a good idea, as it's only minor (but important) tweaks.
Personally, I'm going to try it out because the 2.4 series networking doesn't work well at all on my system. Sockets stall after transferring a few hundred kb, which makes any kind of net access a serious pain. But 2.2.19 had problems with my sound card... Maybe, just maybe, there will be a version that likes all my hardware...
a) The Mozilla team is simply checking it in to the tree so that other people can work on it. They aren't touching it until after 1.0.
b) The browser is the only part of Mozilla that is required. Everything else can be turned off during the install.
So what's the problem?
The 1.x line ran really well on 8086's. 2.x was still usable, but a bit sluggish. The most recent versions require a 286. Unfortunately funding ran out before the 386 kernel upgrade got finished...
Almost everything was written in asm. All of 1.x was, and probably 99% of 2.x was. I can only think of 1 app and 2 libraries that were written in C in the 2.0 release. They were done in C mainly to test out C development. More C code creeped in as time went on tho. It's all asm, with stub functions to allow C development.
While they don't confirm GameCube development, Square says they really want to - or rather have to - develop FFXI for it. http://cube.ign.com/news/36560.html
Mozilla (right now) isn't aimed for the average user tho. Someone who's going to have trouble downloading a JVM isn't going to know what Mozilla is in the first place. Netscape's releases include Sun's JVM. The average IE user is probably as likely to go download a JVM as they are to go download Netscape. As history as shown, that's not gonna happen.
Actually, the system didn't serve them very well at all. Virgin records provided pretty much no promotion at all for their last 2 commericial albums. There was practically no advertising. And they were horrible when it came to releasing the CD singles. While Perfect did really well on the radio, they didn't bother to release the single until it started falling off the charts. Machina's singles didn't even get released in the US, only in the UK.
Oh, and also keep in mind that over the past fewyears the band has given people a lot of demo tapes with unreleased songs and alternate versions of released stuff for distribution. They didn't like the system at all. They just used it when it was easier, and worked around it when it got in the way. Despite the coolness of Machina 2 being free, most people posting messages on their website indicated they would've prefered to be able to go to the store and buy a CD.
They didn't say distribute it only as mp3s. They just said to distribute it. spifc.org (Smashing Pumpkins Internet Fan Club) had CDs professionally made from their vinyl, and for a few months made free copies for anyone - just had to send them a pair of blank CDs and a SASE.
If you check the readme while installing Easy CD Creater 4.0, you'll notice it says you have to install Internet Explorer because Microsoft won't let them distribute the necessary DLL files seperately.
Why is that? The part I quoted 2 messages up says usage is prohibited unless the license is 100% enforcable. Is there a law against having a clause like that? If so, I would agree with you.
If not however, I see things happening a bit differently. Yes, Microsoft would have to go fight the case in Maryland. But I think their case would basically come down to claiming that the user was unauthorized to use their systems. I have no idea whether that lawsuit would be worth persuing or not tho.
Based on what happened with this case, I doubt that'll happen. Microsoft wanted the UCITA, and its already causing them to (theoretically) lose users. Most people will just click thru and use the service without paying attention to it. Even if they did, how many people do you think actually read the UCITA? Or how many people do you think knew that despite the name containing the word Uniform, it isn't uniform between states? So this won't affect their userbase, altho it does cut down on the number of people theoretically able to use their software.
They'll probably just end up with a clause in the license that changes the problem parts for Maryland users. Like how the MSN Rebate terms were different in California. So the UCITA won't really make a difference.
This is the problem:
Use of the Passport Web Site and service is unauthorized in any jurisdiction that does not give effect to all provisions of these terms and conditions, including without limitation this paragraph.
The problem is that the version of UCITA which Maryland passed specificly says that if there is a problem with licensing issues in Maryland, that the issue must be solved in Maryland, under Maryland's laws.
Here you go, take a look:
http://ign64.ign.com/news/30185.html
Nintendo made almost twice as much money as Sony and Sega combined. Electronic Arts made the second most money off games, and Nintendo made more than double what they made.
If that's true, then why did Nintendo make more money from video games last year than Sony and Sega combined?
Nintendo owns about 40% of Rare, and pays all publishing and advertising costs for Rare games. So while Nintendo didn't actually make Conker, they paid someone to make it for them.
Invisibility is handled at the server, not the client. Authorization to add to a contact list is done via the client tho. The ICQ protocol as a whole isn't too bad tho; it's definately easier to work with than AIM.
(I've written an ICQ clone, and looked into AIM, so I know what I'm talking about)
Ya know, this is exactly what Geoworks got a patent on around 94 or so. The one they're using to get money from everyone using WAP. This patent just seems like a subset of the Geoworks one.
I think the point was more rather than rewriting several major parts of the kernel for one release, why not let 2.4 rewrite one major system, then 2.6 rewrite the next, etc. And of course get updated drivers and other nice things along the way. Say 2.4 was released a year ago with all the nice hardware support improvements (USB, card services, PCI changes, anything else I missed), and then 2.6 came out now with all the memory management rewrites? I don't see a downside to that. I never heard complaints about memory management before, but plenty of people wanted USB. So why not cut back on the scale of each release? Targetting for roughly yearly releases sounds reasonable to me.
It's going to be in the $150-$200 price range. So it'll be significantly cheaper than the competition.