In Berlin, at the Zoologicial Gardens train station, there's a "shop" their called McClean - they may well have even been a chain. They provide clean toilet/shower facilities to weary travellers.
I thought you could pay more to get a higher level of service?
Still, good to see the US threatening to force prices down - keep in mind Oftel is starting to show it's teeth to BT, and it basically looks bad for BT if the prices for xDSL stuff is forced down _further_ in the states.
(Makes no difference to me, the exchange i'm on isn't on the initial list of xDSL exchanges, but 3 of the 4 surrounding exchanges are. Bastards.)
The way I read it, this only affects "prohibited content" or "potential prohibited content".
Therefore, this really only affects people hosted pr0n in Australia. And, with hosting costs being what they are, you would be mad to host anything of the like in Oz, right?
Or have I missed the point?
Seems a bit pointless to me, if I am reading it correctly. The only result I can see coming of this legislation is to push any such content providers out of the country (which potentially gives you less power to control those content providers, which doesn't seem desirable from the govt's perspective).
The vast majority of norty material surely comes from overseas, and therefore is not covered by this legislation (but by the earlier legislation which has passed and comes in to being Jan 1).
In summary: I don't see how this hands the online content industry to anyone.
According to the article, it's one license per authenticated user accessing your site simulatenously - and not one license per user who has ether bothered to authenticate themselves on your site.
It's not clear to me what they mean by authenticating, but they use the example of accepting online orders as requiring authentication... Anyway, for $2000 you can buy an "Internet Connector" which allows you to have unlimited simultaneous authenticated users.
$2k is chicken feed to most organisations, and considering only suckers pay RRP, you can be sure most places will get this at a substantial discount.
Pricing sounds pretty reasonable - certainly not enough to cause any concern to the large majority of businesses (ie, I don't expect anyone to jump to something other than a Microsoft product based on this pricing).
According to the article, it's one license per authenticated user accessing your site simulatenously - and not one license per user who has ether bothered to authenticate themselves on your site.
It's not clear to me what they mean by authenticating, but they use the example of accepting online orders as requiring authentication... Anyway, for $2000 you can buy an "Internet Connector" which allows you to have unlimited simultaneous authenticated users.
$2k is chicken feed to most organisations, and considering only suckers pay RRP, you can be sure most places will get this at a substantial discount.
Pricing sounds pretty reasonably - certainly not enough to cause any concern to the large majority of businesses (ie, I don't expect anyone to jump to something other than a Microsoft product based on this pricing).
Virgin Mobile (ie, a mobile phone company in the UK, branded by Branson's Virgin empire, but run by someone else (no doubt)) was valued at £1.36bn last week (by some firm in the City) - and the company hasn't got it's first subscriber yet, nor have they launched.
(Nor is there a link to a Virgin Mobile site from virgin.com... Oh well)
Granted, it's a slightly different scenario, where Virgin does have a pretty good past record in pulling things off (alright, ignore the trains and ignore their Body Shop rip-off), but still...
If I remember correctly, AOL Anywhere was supposed to launch around Christmas 99. AOL Anywhere was/is based on the Liberate (nee-NCI) platform and was supposed to be used via the TV.
Remember that Liberate is an off-shoot of Oracle? See the article elsewhere on/. regarding the NC from them that'll be sub-$200. What's the bet they can make that even cheaper if they subsidise it through revenues from e-commerce and advertising on the web site that you'll almost inevitably not be able to change?
If my generally feeling about this is correct, as far as the end user of this type of device is concerned, the OS is a non-issue... For devices of this cost for this market, they're going to be worried about cost, stability, and a half decent development environment. Hmm...
Also keep in mind that cost at this level make a huge difference. They'll be squeezing costs at every point they can, so they difference between free and, say, $5 for some other nice OS will make a huge difference to them.
Here's an article about reacto.com which appears to be doing something very similar to TUCOWS, except, erm, they're charging $130,000 to set you up to allow you to sell domains.
Searching this site doesn't appear to reveal any papers/press releases relevant to the story. You would think if they had actually done it they would be yelling a bit louder, no?
AOL bought NetChannel Inc yonks ago (search for NetChannel on news.com for the background), and the AOL TV service is built, in part, by ex-NetChannel people. Blah, blah, blah... Whatever.
easyeverything, the new internet cafe (with five hundred terminals - largest net cafe in the world, apparently) near victoria station in london is £1/hr - i heard, but can't confirm, that there were plans to give you a free hours connection when you bought a coffee.
One of the jeans stores - Diesel's flagship store, IIRC - in London is doing this. Has been for 6 months or so. Read some good reviews of it, although i've never bothered to actually go look.
I can't find a link to it at the moment - anyone got the details?
That RSS stuff is pretty neat - thanks for pointing it out. Pity Netcenter's RSS validator is broken at the moment (even their sample mozilla.org code isn't working).
Their support newsgroup doesn't seem to exist either. Hmph.
I'll have to see if their support email address is working.
My (not at all interesting) point is that normally people 'round here get hyper about publishing the URL as http://www.slashdot.org/ and not http://slashdot.org/
Slashdot Mirror
Excuse my complete ignorance, but, the above message seems to imply that IBM's stuff can replace Sun's JRE - is this correct?
I spend my days staring at a big ugly Java app on an NT box at work, and any speed improvements would be appreciated greatly.
...j
In Berlin, at the Zoologicial Gardens train station, there's a "shop" their called McClean - they may well have even been a chain. They provide clean toilet/shower facilities to weary travellers.
Surely they're asking for a law-suit?
There Linux OS page links directly to this ftp site.
I can't, however, actually get on and have a look as their ftp server is maxed out at the moment.
I thought you could pay more to get a higher level of service?
Still, good to see the US threatening to force prices down - keep in mind Oftel is starting to show it's teeth to BT, and it basically looks bad for BT if the prices for xDSL stuff is forced down _further_ in the states.
(Makes no difference to me, the exchange i'm on isn't on the initial list of xDSL exchanges, but 3 of the 4 surrounding exchanges are. Bastards.)
There's a FAQ up on the Cygnus site regarding the merger.
Most interestingly (perhaps) is that a new CEO will be taking the helm at RedHat.
The way I read it, this only affects "prohibited content" or "potential prohibited content".
Therefore, this really only affects people hosted pr0n in Australia. And, with hosting costs being what they are, you would be mad to host anything of the like in Oz, right?
Or have I missed the point?
Seems a bit pointless to me, if I am reading it correctly. The only result I can see coming of this legislation is to push any such content providers out of the country (which potentially gives you less power to control those content providers, which doesn't seem desirable from the govt's perspective).
The vast majority of norty material surely comes from overseas, and therefore is not covered by this legislation (but by the earlier legislation which has passed and comes in to being Jan 1).
In summary: I don't see how this hands the online content industry to anyone.
...j
Well, having "connections in China" obviously makes you dodgy.
The relevance of that is what, exactly?
According to the article, it's one license per authenticated user accessing your site simulatenously - and not one license per user who has ether bothered to authenticate themselves on your site.
It's not clear to me what they mean by authenticating, but they use the example of accepting online orders as requiring authentication... Anyway, for $2000 you can buy an "Internet Connector" which allows you to have unlimited simultaneous authenticated users.
$2k is chicken feed to most organisations, and considering only suckers pay RRP, you can be sure most places will get this at a substantial discount.
Pricing sounds pretty reasonable - certainly not enough to cause any concern to the large majority of businesses (ie, I don't expect anyone to jump to something other than a Microsoft product based on this pricing).
Ho hum.
According to the article, it's one license per authenticated user accessing your site simulatenously - and not one license per user who has ether bothered to authenticate themselves on your site.
It's not clear to me what they mean by authenticating, but they use the example of accepting online orders as requiring authentication... Anyway, for $2000 you can buy an "Internet Connector" which allows you to have unlimited simultaneous authenticated users.
$2k is chicken feed to most organisations, and considering only suckers pay RRP, you can be sure most places will get this at a substantial discount.
Pricing sounds pretty reasonably - certainly not enough to cause any concern to the large majority of businesses (ie, I don't expect anyone to jump to something other than a Microsoft product based on this pricing).
Ho hum.
Virgin Mobile (ie, a mobile phone company in the UK, branded by Branson's Virgin empire, but run by someone else (no doubt)) was valued at £1.36bn last week (by some firm in the City) - and the company hasn't got it's first subscriber yet, nor have they launched.
(Nor is there a link to a Virgin Mobile site from virgin.com... Oh well)
Granted, it's a slightly different scenario, where Virgin does have a pretty good past record in pulling things off (alright, ignore the trains and ignore their Body Shop rip-off), but still...
It's all a bit silly, innit?
Oh boy...
Looking at the first few comments posting to this article, it seems as though we're in for a bumpy ride.
This almost certainly has nothing to do with spam, and a lot to do with the $10m of investors money that disappeared.
Read the article and think before posting some off-the-cuff reply.
...j
If I remember correctly, AOL Anywhere was supposed to launch around Christmas 99. AOL Anywhere was/is based on the Liberate (nee-NCI) platform and was supposed to be used via the TV.
/. regarding the NC from them that'll be sub-$200. What's the bet they can make that even cheaper if they subsidise it through revenues from e-commerce and advertising on the web site that you'll almost inevitably not be able to change?
Remember that Liberate is an off-shoot of Oracle? See the article elsewhere on
If my generally feeling about this is correct, as far as the end user of this type of device is concerned, the OS is a non-issue... For devices of this cost for this market, they're going to be worried about cost, stability, and a half decent development environment. Hmm...
Also keep in mind that cost at this level make a huge difference. They'll be squeezing costs at every point they can, so they difference between free and, say, $5 for some other nice OS will make a huge difference to them.
Oh well, whatever...
...j
Here's an article about reacto.com which appears to be doing something very similar to TUCOWS, except, erm, they're charging $130,000 to set you up to allow you to sell domains.
Or have I missed the point of reacto.com?
AOL bought NetChannel Inc yonks ago (search for NetChannel on news.com for the background), and the AOL TV service is built, in part, by ex-NetChannel people. Blah, blah, blah... Whatever.
(erk, bad formatting on that last post - whoops).
Perhaps not at all interesting is the fact that NTL (big phone company in the UK) launched a big fat pipe to Ireland in early 98.
May or may not be related to the decommissioning of the tower mentioned in the original article.
Whatever...
...j
It's about Menwith Hill, the US spy-base in the UK that supposedly taps communications all over Europe.
did you bother to read the article?
easyeverything, the new internet cafe (with five hundred terminals - largest net cafe in the world, apparently) near victoria station in london is £1/hr - i heard, but can't confirm, that there were plans to give you a free hours connection when you bought a coffee.
...j
One of the jeans stores - Diesel's flagship store, IIRC - in London is doing this. Has been for 6 months or so. Read some good reviews of it, although i've never bothered to actually go look.
I can't find a link to it at the moment - anyone got the details?
...j
adfu not server ads on slashdot means no money for rob and friends, means they have to get real jobs, means slashdot withers and dies.
dickhead.
...j
I thought his job was running slashdot/Blockstackers along with various other misfits.
Sounds pretty swanky to me. (Hmm - there's a joke there somewhere)
(See the BSI link to the left).
...j
...as long as they look cool, right?
Bah!
...j
That RSS stuff is pretty neat - thanks for pointing it out. Pity Netcenter's RSS validator is broken at the moment (even their sample mozilla.org code isn't working).
Their support newsgroup doesn't seem to exist either. Hmph.
I'll have to see if their support email address is working.
[sob]
...j
Sony endorsing Linux as the development platform is hardly going to cause Linux to go mainstream.
Hmph.
...j
My (not at all interesting) point is that normally people 'round here get hyper about publishing the URL as http://www.slashdot.org/ and not http://slashdot.org/
Interesting, huh?
...j