But if they're trying to tie the hands of hardware hackers, then Intel is shooting themselves in the foot, and AMD has just got a big win on a forfeit.
Oooh yeaaah, I'm pretty sure Intel execs will commite suicide when they loose 10k processor sales worldwide because some nerdy geeks who are already buying AMD anyway (mostly because they think that AMD is a poor little renegade, a victim, the brand for people against the big guys) are not going to buy their brand new processors.
A start menu divided by Program Type (graphics, sounds, internet, etc) and then containing just individual programs makes much more sense.
Not for me, when I want to run app "X", I want to go directly to the app name, I don't want to have to figure out in what category the application fits in.
They are using Open Source not because they are fans of ESR, but because they get real benefits from it. If it only cost to them, they would stop instead of keep adding new open source projects like open directory, rendezvous and webcore.
They are using Open Source because Darwin uses BSD code and they didn't want to receive any bad publicity for closing ther own modifications.
Darwin is not a product, is only a kernel. The *product* is MacOS X.
I don't know if it was a joke but: Apple doesn't receive any benefits from the darwin source.
Says who? Don't you remember the infamous "dial-up with modem hangs the system" for which the cause was found by an outsider? Recently someone also found a locking bug [apple.com] in the file system code (log/pass = archives/archives). Most driver developers are also very happy that the source code of the kernel is available, because it makes their development a lot easier. Maybe you should actually read the open source and darwin-related mailing lists a bit instead of spreading FUD like that.
Wow!!! Two bugs??? That's a lot, huh? I'm pretty sure that Apple is already planning to release the source of all its products, because man, two bugs were found for free. Dude, Apple owe millions to these fine open-source guys!!!
</sarcasm>
Hey Halo1, when I mentioned "benefit" I was really talking about the kind of benefit that allows the company that released the source to pay all costs related to the opening of the source. Apple isn't a good example because MacOS X is not an Open Source product (did you forgot the hole context of this article? Microsoft opening an *entire* product?), Darwin is just a small 'gift' and I am pretty sure that a couple of patches are *not* worth all the infra-structure investment Apple made to open its kernel source.
Two kernel patches are not a real benefit, they are just a small payback that is certainly not enough to get the whole 'open the source' equation "out of the red". A real benefit generates *profit* (all kinds of profit, not only US Dollars), otherwise is not a true benefit at all (IMHO).
Apple's download server for Darwin certainly cost more than two kernel patches. (And yes, I'm talking about the bandwidth, not the server hardware).
Two: A radical fragmenting hardware shift catches them off guard, and they need to very very quickly cover every new platform.
Market leaders can't afford to rely on voluntary developers to move to new platforms.
They can't afford and they WON'T, because they have enough money (or enough popularity to get money from investors) to pay all development costs included in this kind of platform transition.
Voluntary programmers don't grow out of trees, you know.
Sorry, this is not Flamebait: Only broke companies see benefit on releasing the source.
Apple went broke again? The last time [slashdot.org] was only a month ago!
I don't know if it was a joke but: Apple doesn't receive any benefits from the darwin source. It is not the "jump in and help us" kind of source release.
But even if only if they released the sourcecode to a tiny fraction of their it could benefit them.
Sorry, this is not Flamebait: Only broke companies see benefit on releasing the source. The *true* benefit only applies to the open source development community (liked it? use it in your own app), where the final users *may* receive some benefits, depending on the goodwill of open source developers (will they act like 31337 jerks, like the mplayer people?).
Billionare companies like Microsoft don't need "help" in the "jeez, let's save 10 millions on development staff paychecks" sense.
You never know, it might just eventually improve their products. Look at Netscape/Mozilla!
Good rendering engine, terrible User Interface (the worst of all browsers). Tabbed interface, yadda yadda yadda, ONE good idea doesn't saves Mozilla's UI.
Forgot what Microsoft is about? User Interface.
Someone else said "I think the idea is that people who produce things like TVs, Refrigerators, water heaters etc... could easily intergrate these things into their products for a minimal cost."
Well, no. All big development firms can afford to design their own ethernet interfaces (with $5USD realtek ICs), as this product also needs a microcontroller/processor to send the data (it doesn't control anything, it is just a physical interface translator).
This device is made for hobbysts developing microcontroller projects.
Hopefully the Chinese will leave DRM out of their chips and give people looking for a "free" CPU a competitive option to the crippled intel/AMD CPUs.
This is an Embedded CPU, not a desktop CPU. You can't change CPUs like you change socks, this chip will never be a "competitive option" because there is no interest at all in creating desktop motherboards for this CPU, just for anti-DRM people.
BTW, DRM is about content providing, if all content is published exclusively under DRM-enabled formats, your Dragon PC will be "crippled" too, and Intel and AMD CPUs will have more "features" (will be able to decode the data) than your Dragon PC.
I would say that based on the interview above, she would have a hard time writing anything more complex than a small grocery list. At very least she's not a friend of the big words [expage.com].
You don't like her style. PERIOD. A lot of Heavy Metal bands also write simplistic and nonsense (like some lyrics that look like the script for an Anime episode) lyrics and some people think that they are the biggest geniuses of the entire humanity. If I listen only to one song I will also think that they are big loosers (nerdy loosers, btw) with no musical abilities at all. Even worse, if the song I heard is on of the nonsense ones, I'll end up thinking that Heavy Metal composers are all lunatics.
You have to "feel" more than one song, get in touch with the style (I'm not asking you to listen to Avril, I'l talking about Heavy Metal) and then you'll end up liking it. It works that way on all kinds of music.
She is a teenager, you have to judge her by her musical abilities, not by the way she talks (like a skater girl).
I did some maths.
As a semi-future-proofing-power-user. I built a PC in 1998. I put in 256MB RAM to try to keep it running as long as possible. That's price-equivilent to 2GB at todays prices.
It's really not going to be long before the geeks feel they need to do so.
Actually, that's five years, exactly the time that all my computers last (and I believe that yours too). So today you are going to buy a PC with 2GB of RAM, in five years you can still have 32 bits while using 8GB (bank switching).
You don't have to worry about memory, 5, 10 years is a *lot* of time for the computer industry
How is different from network tv, where the scripts are rehashes of something from 10 or 20 years ago and you know the entire plot (painful jokes included) in the first two minutes.
The jokes aren't that bad if who's watching it's not a bitter person like you are.
...it's the "boot track" (warning: there is no such term).
That's still very bad, as the first track is reserved to boot-loader data and there is no standard designating "addresses" to this kind of data.
So, if all software companies decide to write data on this track, we are going to see a lot of collisions in a near future, affecting all users, not only those with dual booting configurations.
BTW, 1st track sector-based protections are much easier to crack. Why? What else would that low-level call/procedure do? Crack kiddies don't have to go all the way thru reverse engineering (what this registry access does? what this normal file writing does?), all they have to do is search for extremely different procedure calls.
What will stop Microsoft from buying all or investing in the game companies to kill competition?
The fact that these game companies need to publish games on the largest number of consoles in order to be profitable. It means that they can only buy almost-broke publishers, and not extremely profitable ones.
And don't forget that for each Vivendi that might have been sold/killed, we can have another brand new publisher entering into the market. That's pretty obvious, really: Console X owns X % of the market, with Y% of its owers very interested in buying new games. There will be new publishers, they just can't stop that unless Microsoft tries to steal every single (or at least most of them) console from Sony And Nintendo consumers;).
If they want to completely dominate the market, artificially, they need to buy all console makers, and that's not going to happen unless Microsoft pays much more than 'Company Value + X years of profit', which would be extremely stupid for them to do that.
2. If you give geeks a chance to play with it, they can start to tell regular people how it works, why they should get it, etc.
3. Since most "regular" people don't care or don't want to know why it works the way it does, if the people who care why it works (geeks), show others that it just works, others will be inclined to buy that product.
Sorry but NO. They are not using GPL because they can get free help from geek people, they are doing that so they only have to focus on the underlying electronics.
BTW, that's were fight for in the market: Eletronics enginnering, who makes the cheaper decoding IC, who uses it, who haves the better design, etc. etc.
Actually, for certain applications, IR works great.
Sure, I couldn't agree more. But... If you need what IR provides, then you use it, the same goes for Wi-Fi.
A "perfectly round square" is still a circle/wheel (/whatever?:), no matter what you call it, and (IMHO) that's what the University of Warwick's engineering department is trying to do with Wi-Fi. If they need IR, they should use IR, PERIOD, you can't remove the only technology advantage (wireless communication between walls and objects without line of sight), and give it the same name.
If you need a wheel (if that's the best "technology" for a specific situation) then just get a Wheel, you don't need to call it a "perfectly round square", it's a wheel, damn it!
...the University of Warwick's engineering department shows some spanking new technology that replaces those nasty and still interceptable wireless signals with a brand new concept called "cabling".
Come on people, this is a terrible approach (as it kills the *only* Wi-Fi advantage), based on security through obscurity, *and* at the same time a questionable achievement, cuz ya know... IR isn't a new technology/concept/medium...
Scary because you could buy all the hardware off the shelf for about half a million dollars.
Scary? Why? Oh, and the interconnect hardware and installation is going to cost you more than 4x this value if you want good latencies and reliability.
Exploiting a vulnerability like this is similar to walking down the ally behind the bank and finding an unlocked door that takes you straight into the vault.
No, exploiting a vulnerability is the same thing as an alarm system and safe lock expert breaking into the bank in the middle of the night.
"Exploiting" an open door is comparable to deleting files on anonymous FTP, even if you cam do it (stupid admin), it doesn't mean that you are right if you destroy other people's data.
Slashdot Mirror
Darwin is not a product, is only a kernel. The *product* is MacOS X.
Wow!!! Two bugs??? That's a lot, huh? I'm pretty sure that Apple is already planning to release the source of all its products, because man, two bugs were found for free. Dude, Apple owe millions to these fine open-source guys!!!
</sarcasm>
Hey Halo1, when I mentioned "benefit" I was really talking about the kind of benefit that allows the company that released the source to pay all costs related to the opening of the source. Apple isn't a good example because MacOS X is not an Open Source product (did you forgot the hole context of this article? Microsoft opening an *entire* product?), Darwin is just a small 'gift' and I am pretty sure that a couple of patches are *not* worth all the infra-structure investment Apple made to open its kernel source.
Two kernel patches are not a real benefit, they are just a small payback that is certainly not enough to get the whole 'open the source' equation "out of the red". A real benefit generates *profit* (all kinds of profit, not only US Dollars), otherwise is not a true benefit at all (IMHO).
Apple's download server for Darwin certainly cost more than two kernel patches. (And yes, I'm talking about the bandwidth, not the server hardware).
They can't afford and they WON'T, because they have enough money (or enough popularity to get money from investors) to pay all development costs included in this kind of platform transition.
Voluntary programmers don't grow out of trees, you know.
But even if only if they released the sourcecode to a tiny fraction of their it could benefit them.
Sorry, this is not Flamebait: Only broke companies see benefit on releasing the source. The *true* benefit only applies to the open source development community (liked it? use it in your own app), where the final users *may* receive some benefits, depending on the goodwill of open source developers (will they act like 31337 jerks, like the mplayer people?).
Billionare companies like Microsoft don't need "help" in the "jeez, let's save 10 millions on development staff paychecks" sense.
You never know, it might just eventually improve their products. Look at Netscape/Mozilla!
Good rendering engine, terrible User Interface (the worst of all browsers). Tabbed interface, yadda yadda yadda, ONE good idea doesn't saves Mozilla's UI.
Forgot what Microsoft is about? User Interface.
Someone else said "I think the idea is that people who produce things like TVs, Refrigerators, water heaters etc... could easily intergrate these things into their products for a minimal cost."
Well, no. All big development firms can afford to design their own ethernet interfaces (with $5USD realtek ICs), as this product also needs a microcontroller/processor to send the data (it doesn't control anything, it is just a physical interface translator).
This device is made for hobbysts developing microcontroller projects.
BTW, DRM is about content providing, if all content is published exclusively under DRM-enabled formats, your Dragon PC will be "crippled" too, and Intel and AMD CPUs will have more "features" (will be able to decode the data) than your Dragon PC.
and I'm f*%cking sick of how it's so cool to hate her.
Yep, you said everything: Some people hate her just to look cool ("look buddies, I'm a Heavy Metal intellectual too").
She's not, like, very smart [news.com.au].
I would say that based on the interview above, she would have a hard time writing anything more complex than a small grocery list. At very least she's not a friend of the big words [expage.com].
You don't like her style. PERIOD. A lot of Heavy Metal bands also write simplistic and nonsense (like some lyrics that look like the script for an Anime episode) lyrics and some people think that they are the biggest geniuses of the entire humanity. If I listen only to one song I will also think that they are big loosers (nerdy loosers, btw) with no musical abilities at all. Even worse, if the song I heard is on of the nonsense ones, I'll end up thinking that Heavy Metal composers are all lunatics.
You have to "feel" more than one song, get in touch with the style (I'm not asking you to listen to Avril, I'l talking about Heavy Metal) and then you'll end up liking it. It works that way on all kinds of music.
She is a teenager, you have to judge her by her musical abilities, not by the way she talks (like a skater girl).
Disclaimer: I am not anti-sematic or anything
;)
You mean anti-semantic? Judging from the above phrase, yes you are
What a bitch.... Doing anonymous trolling, you're sure a pain in the ass, stupid idiot...
How is different from network tv, where the scripts are rehashes of something from 10 or 20 years ago and you know the entire plot (painful jokes included) in the first two minutes.
The jokes aren't that bad if who's watching it's not a bitter person like you are.
...it's the "boot track" (warning: there is no such term).
That's still very bad, as the first track is reserved to boot-loader data and there is no standard designating "addresses" to this kind of data.
So, if all software companies decide to write data on this track, we are going to see a lot of collisions in a near future, affecting all users, not only those with dual booting configurations.
BTW, 1st track sector-based protections are much easier to crack. Why? What else would that low-level call/procedure do? Crack kiddies don't have to go all the way thru reverse engineering (what this registry access does? what this normal file writing does?), all they have to do is search for extremely different procedure calls.
What will stop Microsoft from buying all or investing in the game companies to kill competition?
;).
The fact that these game companies need to publish games on the largest number of consoles in order to be profitable. It means that they can only buy almost-broke publishers, and not extremely profitable ones.
And don't forget that for each Vivendi that might have been sold/killed, we can have another brand new publisher entering into the market. That's pretty obvious, really: Console X owns X % of the market, with Y% of its owers very interested in buying new games. There will be new publishers, they just can't stop that unless Microsoft tries to steal every single (or at least most of them) console from Sony And Nintendo consumers
If they want to completely dominate the market, artificially, they need to buy all console makers, and that's not going to happen unless Microsoft pays much more than 'Company Value + X years of profit', which would be extremely stupid for them to do that.
Exactly... the first thing I thought when I read this article was "here's yet more proof that microsoft is an abusive monopoly".
Nope, It's a proof that they have a lot of money. Sony, Nintendo and others can also do the same thing.
2. If you give geeks a chance to play with it, they can start to tell regular people how it works, why they should get it, etc.
3. Since most "regular" people don't care or don't want to know why it works the way it does, if the people who care why it works (geeks), show others that it just works, others will be inclined to buy that product.
Sorry but NO. They are not using GPL because they can get free help from geek people, they are doing that so they only have to focus on the underlying electronics.
BTW, that's were fight for in the market: Eletronics enginnering, who makes the cheaper decoding IC, who uses it, who haves the better design, etc. etc.
I was always amazed at it, and always wondered if there were any practical uses for this.
Not in space... You know why...
A "perfectly round square" is still a circle/wheel (/whatever?
If you need a wheel (if that's the best "technology" for a specific situation) then just get a Wheel, you don't need to call it a "perfectly round square", it's a wheel, damn it!
...the University of Warwick's engineering department shows some spanking new technology that replaces those nasty and still interceptable wireless signals with a brand new concept called "cabling".
Come on people, this is a terrible approach (as it kills the *only* Wi-Fi advantage), based on security through obscurity, *and* at the same time a questionable achievement, cuz ya know... IR isn't a new technology/concept/medium...
Scary because you could buy all the hardware off the shelf for about half a million dollars.
Scary? Why? Oh, and the interconnect hardware and installation is going to cost you more than 4x this value if you want good latencies and reliability.
Exploiting a vulnerability like this is similar to walking down the ally behind the bank and finding an unlocked door that takes you straight into the vault.
No, exploiting a vulnerability is the same thing as an alarm system and safe lock expert breaking into the bank in the middle of the night.
"Exploiting" an open door is comparable to deleting files on anonymous FTP, even if you cam do it (stupid admin), it doesn't mean that you are right if you destroy other people's data.