Transgaming has chosen a business-model that requires them to keep their source closed. I'm not sure they have a viable alternative for running a for-profit business.
Well, you do understand that code to most of WineX is indeed open; everybody is free to grab it from their public CVS server and build it himself. Their business is not about keeping their source code closed (except the part to deal with game's copy protection scheme; they have no choice, it's licensed and/or NDAed), it's about selling convenience. I don't think their business model is really good either as they are walking a very fine line; packaging software is easy, their competitive advantage is thin. More power to them if they can generate enough revenue to keep chugging. I personnally appreciate their work, and will buy their package (even if I am proficient enough to compile it for free).
For the record, they do send a lot of patches upstream to Wine, so your part about them not working with the Open Source community is, well, plain misinformation.
Nah, I think that the internet would have been considered an interesting business proposition since many other computer standards were created in private industry. Once consumers demanded that they wanted to be able to communicate between different networks, the service providers would've had to cave.
I wish. People would probably have continued to assume that data networks where exclusive to each providers since that's the way it is. The Internet, paid with (gasp!) your tax dollars proved it could be otherwise, and work. According to my recollection of the early 90s, telcos had been very unresponsive with providing IP data networks, screaming and kicking as long as they could before they had to cave in to their customer's demand. If there would have not been the publically funded Internet to show them the way, customers may never had thought open data networks where even possible, and accordingly never asked for interoperability. At the very least the demand would have been delayed by a long time.
I simply have a problem when tax dollars are used to fund this kind of research, especially considering that many times research does fail. I'm not quick to gamble with other people's money, nor am I quick to take it without them wanting to provide it.
You pay for private research too. The fact that the cost is incorporated in the price of goods you buy doest make it less a fact. The evil gobernement does not have a monopoly on failure, you end up paying for failures in private research too.
What you are basically complaining about is the lack of accountability of publically-funded research. This can be fixed, but conservative/libertarian choose the path of least resistance and throw the baby with the bathwater. Remember that, by definition, research involve a lot of failure. Considering the private sector is not really interested in funding failures, either we choose to forego the benefits of the the few success (the Internet) because "OMG my taxes!", or we take a (relatively small) collective risk and rip the benefit collectively. If we had to depend entirely on the private sector to fund research and provide innovation, the most we would have done with space exploration would have been launching LEO satelittes (and we probably would not even be there today if was not for the work of the NASA in past).
The problem with anti-governement conservative (and libertarian) is the level of dogmatism they show in their hatred of the governement. In this regard, they remind me of the marxist of old. They can justify their point-of-view with half-baked "pragmatism" all they want, they are no less idealist in their faith in "the market force" then marxist where in their faith of collectivism and the emergence of a new man. As usual, the truth lay somewhere in the middle.
The discussion is already old, hopefully some of the EE who participated still read it...
Let's say I am convinced and want to start using more efficient power supply now. First thing, I checked the spec for my PC PS at http://www.antec.com/specs/true330_spe.html. I used to think this what somewhat of high-end power supply, but I can see that the rated efficiency (in the Input section of the table) is only >= 68%. Is this normal for consumer-class PC power supply ? Any suggestion of PS with better efficiency ?
Something else: would it be worth it to replace all the power brick of my computer accessory (cable modem, hub, speaker, etc) with a standalone power supply with multiple voltage output (if such a thing exist) ? If yes, what would you recommend ? I guess finding "patch" cables (PS -> devices) with the appropriate connector could be somewhat of a problem, unless they standardized. A nice side-effect would be to cut the cable clutter.
Do I think that the outcome would have been very similar to the one we have now? Sure.
This is where you are wrong. Some (I would not dare say "most") interesting innovation do not present an interesting business proposition. Take the Internet; I am not quite sure the telco would have waken one day and say "let's build a cooperative packet network where I will carry your client's traffic for free if you agree to carry mine". If it was not for ARPAnet, we would be using Compuserve and Prodigy today IMHO.
Just as governement-sponsored research is not systematically good, it's not systematically bad either. Don't throw the baby with the bathwater.
Oh, and are you sure you know what GUI stands for? How about you look it up and compare it with the term "graphics card." Maybe you'll find a common link between the two:P
Non-sequitur. The real question is: are there any gain to be had by off-loading UI rendering to a graphic processor ? To which I answer: not much, considering modern CPU are plenty fast for the job and underused.
It's 2000-friggin-4. Let's follow Apple's lead and push the desktop onto the graphics card.
It's precisely because we are in 2004 that hardware-accelerated GUI rendering make little sense. I have a 2.4 Ghz CPU sitting mostly idle; why could'nt he take care of rendering my UI ? Is there something to it that is so intensive that it require a specialized co-processor ?
Back in 1997, when I was using a P133, my GUI was sluggish and my CPU was the bottleneck. Back then, hardware accelerated GUI would have made sense. Not anymore.
And, as the name in question is acronym for Practical Extraction and Report Language I think PERL is a perfectly valid way of writing it, if a little old-fashioned.
Exactly. I have not gone on this WiFi bandwagon yet as I do not own a laptop, but I think the thread of ubiquitous braodband connection everywhere is pretty exciting. However, I always wonder the impact it will have on net abuse. *I* know if I had to commit a crime or do something reprehensible online, I would take a laptop and park my car near an unsecure AP to do my deed.
Oups, click "Submit" too early. Should have said that if the adaptor show in the lsusb output, it's a software problem. There is still the possibility that it would not work in Linux either for some reason.
First thing you should have done is to plug it in a Linux box, and do/sbin/lsusb. If your adapter does not show up, it's b0rked. If it does, it's a Windows problem.
Same reason people kept developing GNOME even after the licensing issues with Qt and KDE were resolved. Ego.
Of course, it have nothing to do with language (plain C vs. C++), toolkit (Qt vs GTK), object model (DCOP vs.... CORBA ?), developper tradition and leadership, project goal, etc.
I, for one, would never trade the reliability of a landline for the boinkiness of a few consumer-grade WiFi router, tied to a (relatively) unreliable xDSL or cable net link, operating a best-effort protocol and managed by Joe Random.
How much does a landline cost anyway when you strip out all the useless gadget (CID, call waiting, etc) ? 20$ ? 30$ ? How low can this rigged VoIP-over-WiFi thingy can go ?
I highly doubt you're getting all of these things for $25 from a residential telco.
Of course not. But I don't need these gizmos.
Recently, I received my smallest telephone bill in a long time; it was 45$ CDN. Of this 45$, 15 where for long-distance call. The remaining 30$ CDN correspond to roughly 20~25$ USD, so I round that up to 25. This include landline service, 911 fee and various telco/sales tax. That is all.
One day, I realized that I had never used the call-waiting feature in the past two years, yet I was dutyfully paying for it every month. Every time a second call came, I told myself "Fsck that, they'll leave a voicemail" and continue my current conversation. That day I cancelled call waiting. I personnally hate it when people put me on hold to take a second call, and I hate juggling two call at once so it was good riddance.
I never had caller ID. You need to go to the phone to check whose ID is calling, so you may as well answer. When a telemarketer or solicitor call, I hang up rudely and I asked my gf to do the same.
I had voicemail for a long time. It was 6$/month. Considering an answering machine is about 35$ at Wallmart, I figured I would get back in my money in six months so I cancelled my voicemail service. It have been almost a year and I have yet to buy an answering machine. Strangely, I don't miss voicemail much; I figure if you really want to speak to me, you just call again around dinner time (when we are home). I vaguely have the project to make myself a voicemail system on my Linux box at home, but you know what they say : so many projects, so little time...
Busy call forwarding ? To forward where ? I do not have a cell phone.
Maybe I sound like a Luddite, but I am really not. I am a Linux sysadmin by profession, and recently got my ham license. I just don't like to spend my hard-earned $ on useless gadget. The money I save on stupid gizmo, I can spend on interesting toys (like, for example, one of these WRT54G router).
Would I trade the reliability of my landline (I can't remember losing service in the past... 15 years ?) for some ghetto rig built on consummer-level equipement running over best-effort protocol to shave a few $ from my monthly telephone bill of 25$ ? Thanks, but no thanks.
You can bitch and moan about MS insecurity, but at the end of the day, if you know your job as a network\system engineer, those problems go away.
Wishful thinking...
Network/system engineer (whatever that mean) that know their job are, unfortunately, a minority. If this was not the case, all these worms that exploited vulnerabilities for which patch where released would have been dud.
Security problems never go away. They come back, and back, and back again. Not that Linux is any better, mind you.
Wrong. Most Region 1 DVD have been translated in Quebec. Why I know ? Because they keep the same (Quebec) actor to dub Hollywood celebrities in every movies, and I recognize them. It's funny to watch Brad Pitt but hear Alain Zouvi (a totally different type of actor) speak.
Feel free to point to specific movie whose translation have been done in Europe, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Textbook karma whore example this is.
Well, you do understand that code to most of WineX is indeed open; everybody is free to grab it from their public CVS server and build it himself. Their business is not about keeping their source code closed (except the part to deal with game's copy protection scheme; they have no choice, it's licensed and/or NDAed), it's about selling convenience. I don't think their business model is really good either as they are walking a very fine line; packaging software is easy, their competitive advantage is thin. More power to them if they can generate enough revenue to keep chugging. I personnally appreciate their work, and will buy their package (even if I am proficient enough to compile it for free).
For the record, they do send a lot of patches upstream to Wine, so your part about them not working with the Open Source community is, well, plain misinformation.
I wish. People would probably have continued to assume that data networks where exclusive to each providers since that's the way it is. The Internet, paid with (gasp!) your tax dollars proved it could be otherwise, and work. According to my recollection of the early 90s, telcos had been very unresponsive with providing IP data networks, screaming and kicking as long as they could before they had to cave in to their customer's demand. If there would have not been the publically funded Internet to show them the way, customers may never had thought open data networks where even possible, and accordingly never asked for interoperability. At the very least the demand would have been delayed by a long time.
You pay for private research too. The fact that the cost is incorporated in the price of goods you buy doest make it less a fact. The evil gobernement does not have a monopoly on failure, you end up paying for failures in private research too.
What you are basically complaining about is the lack of accountability of publically-funded research. This can be fixed, but conservative/libertarian choose the path of least resistance and throw the baby with the bathwater. Remember that, by definition, research involve a lot of failure. Considering the private sector is not really interested in funding failures, either we choose to forego the benefits of the the few success (the Internet) because "OMG my taxes!", or we take a (relatively small) collective risk and rip the benefit collectively. If we had to depend entirely on the private sector to fund research and provide innovation, the most we would have done with space exploration would have been launching LEO satelittes (and we probably would not even be there today if was not for the work of the NASA in past).
The problem with anti-governement conservative (and libertarian) is the level of dogmatism they show in their hatred of the governement. In this regard, they remind me of the marxist of old. They can justify their point-of-view with half-baked "pragmatism" all they want, they are no less idealist in their faith in "the market force" then marxist where in their faith of collectivism and the emergence of a new man. As usual, the truth lay somewhere in the middle.
The discussion is already old, hopefully some of the EE who participated still read it ...
Let's say I am convinced and want to start using more efficient power supply now. First thing, I checked the spec for my PC PS at http://www.antec.com/specs/true330_spe.html. I used to think this what somewhat of high-end power supply, but I can see that the rated efficiency (in the Input section of the table) is only >= 68%. Is this normal for consumer-class PC power supply ? Any suggestion of PS with better efficiency ?
Something else: would it be worth it to replace all the power brick of my computer accessory (cable modem, hub, speaker, etc) with a standalone power supply with multiple voltage output (if such a thing exist) ? If yes, what would you recommend ? I guess finding "patch" cables (PS -> devices) with the appropriate connector could be somewhat of a problem, unless they standardized. A nice side-effect would be to cut the cable clutter.
This is where you are wrong. Some (I would not dare say "most") interesting innovation do not present an interesting business proposition. Take the Internet; I am not quite sure the telco would have waken one day and say "let's build a cooperative packet network where I will carry your client's traffic for free if you agree to carry mine". If it was not for ARPAnet, we would be using Compuserve and Prodigy today IMHO.
Just as governement-sponsored research is not systematically good, it's not systematically bad either. Don't throw the baby with the bathwater.
Non-sequitur. The real question is: are there any gain to be had by off-loading UI rendering to a graphic processor ? To which I answer: not much, considering modern CPU are plenty fast for the job and underused.
It's precisely because we are in 2004 that hardware-accelerated GUI rendering make little sense. I have a 2.4 Ghz CPU sitting mostly idle; why could'nt he take care of rendering my UI ? Is there something to it that is so intensive that it require a specialized co-processor ?
Back in 1997, when I was using a P133, my GUI was sluggish and my CPU was the bottleneck. Back then, hardware accelerated GUI would have made sense. Not anymore.
No. Check perlfaq1(1) for the whole story.
Exactly. I have not gone on this WiFi bandwagon yet as I do not own a laptop, but I think the thread of ubiquitous braodband connection everywhere is pretty exciting. However, I always wonder the impact it will have on net abuse. *I* know if I had to commit a crime or do something reprehensible online, I would take a laptop and park my car near an unsecure AP to do my deed.
Install Fedora Core 2, and be done with it.
Oups, click "Submit" too early. Should have said that if the adaptor show in the lsusb output, it's a software problem. There is still the possibility that it would not work in Linux either for some reason.
First thing you should have done is to plug it in a Linux box, and do /sbin/lsusb. If your adapter does not show up, it's b0rked. If it does, it's a Windows problem.
... that linuxtoday.com is currently /.'ed.
Of course, it have nothing to do with language (plain C vs. C++), toolkit (Qt vs GTK), object model (DCOP vs. ... CORBA ?), developper tradition and leadership, project goal, etc.
I, for one, would never trade the reliability of a landline for the boinkiness of a few consumer-grade WiFi router, tied to a (relatively) unreliable xDSL or cable net link, operating a best-effort protocol and managed by Joe Random.
How much does a landline cost anyway when you strip out all the useless gadget (CID, call waiting, etc) ? 20$ ? 30$ ? How low can this rigged VoIP-over-WiFi thingy can go ?
You mean something like ... switchdesk ?/p.
Of course not. But I don't need these gizmos.
Recently, I received my smallest telephone bill in a long time; it was 45$ CDN. Of this 45$, 15 where for long-distance call. The remaining 30$ CDN correspond to roughly 20~25$ USD, so I round that up to 25. This include landline service, 911 fee and various telco/sales tax. That is all.
One day, I realized that I had never used the call-waiting feature in the past two years, yet I was dutyfully paying for it every month. Every time a second call came, I told myself "Fsck that, they'll leave a voicemail" and continue my current conversation. That day I cancelled call waiting. I personnally hate it when people put me on hold to take a second call, and I hate juggling two call at once so it was good riddance.
I never had caller ID. You need to go to the phone to check whose ID is calling, so you may as well answer. When a telemarketer or solicitor call, I hang up rudely and I asked my gf to do the same.
I had voicemail for a long time. It was 6$/month. Considering an answering machine is about 35$ at Wallmart, I figured I would get back in my money in six months so I cancelled my voicemail service. It have been almost a year and I have yet to buy an answering machine. Strangely, I don't miss voicemail much; I figure if you really want to speak to me, you just call again around dinner time (when we are home). I vaguely have the project to make myself a voicemail system on my Linux box at home, but you know what they say : so many projects, so little time ...
Busy call forwarding ? To forward where ? I do not have a cell phone.
Maybe I sound like a Luddite, but I am really not. I am a Linux sysadmin by profession, and recently got my ham license. I just don't like to spend my hard-earned $ on useless gadget. The money I save on stupid gizmo, I can spend on interesting toys (like, for example, one of these WRT54G router).
Would I trade the reliability of my landline (I can't remember losing service in the past ... 15 years ?) for some ghetto rig built on consummer-level equipement running over best-effort protocol to shave a few $ from my monthly telephone bill of 25$ ? Thanks, but no thanks.
Perfectly clear. Which part don't you understand ?
j/k
You mean something like yum, up2date, urpmi, YaST or (gasp!) apt ?
Wishful thinking ...
This post having been moderated +5 Insightful make me loose what faith I had left in the Slashdot community.
-10, Uninformed.
I can't remember the exact percentage (40 or 60%), but a huge portion of music programming must be in French in Québec; it's the law.
Wrong. Most Region 1 DVD have been translated in Quebec. Why I know ? Because they keep the same (Quebec) actor to dub Hollywood celebrities in every movies, and I recognize them. It's funny to watch Brad Pitt but hear Alain Zouvi (a totally different type of actor) speak.
Feel free to point to specific movie whose translation have been done in Europe, though.
Please clarify. What exactly make you hate French Canadian ? The fact that someplace, some people speak something else than English ?