Actually, I didn't attend. I'm just a 20 year old student who works enough to pay for classes at Grand Rapids Community College.
If it's GPL, how will they be able to make their own improvements on it without releasing them under the GPL? With an LGPL sandwich layer?
Not that releasing their changes under the GPL is a problem. I suspect few companies have the specialization and the money to take what they learn from reading the LTSP code and clean-rooming it for their own product line. That means Novell can release code under the GPL, and not really worry about a competitor using in competition.
My concern is that the potential power users will get a locked-down machine, and not realize that it can be unlocked without switching away from Linux.
I disagree, to a point. It would be too easy for a newbie to come to the conclusion that Linux is insanely limited, and they have to use Windows to do anything more advanced.
Now, if you include directions on how to "unlock" your computer, you'll be OK. Include a system restore CD. (You know someone's going to buy and install Windows; make it easy for them to switch back.)
When the restore CD is run, ask them if they want to install the normal version (as it came on their computer) or the "advanced" version, which is pretty much the same as the normal except it allows you to select packages to install off the CD or the Internet.
I've got a really old 10base-T SMC ISA network card I never could get running...At the time, I was trying to turn an unused 386sx into a firewall.
The way Linux development used to work, if a piece of hardware wasn't popular, nobody wrote a driver for it. This is still true today, though to a lesser extent. (There's a lot more attention given to Linux today. Including programmers programmers paid to work on the kernel.)
I'm more interested in whether they'd keep the launch of a solution secret or not. There's too much risk that someone seeking the end of the world wout attempt to disrupt/destroy the launch.
With today's commuter distances, it's unlikely anyone will resort to walking to work.
Aside from it being too much effort, most of them would have to leave so early in the morning that they'd be pedestrians while it was still dark. An extremely dangerous proposition considering the difficulty many drivers have of seeing pedestrians in the dark.
Lucky you. I was a volunteer firefighter for about a year. I saw two accidents, with injuries in both. In one accident, an infant died. Not pleasant.
The next day at work, a coworker brought in her newborn infant. I never thought I'd be so happy to see something small and pink and wrinkly and wriggly.
Then you better join a campaign outlawing hardware-level integration of DRM. Because that's the only way I can think of to stop it.
IIRC, TCPA doesn't have to be enabled. That means you can still use newer hardware, just without the abilities granted by "trusted computing."
I'm not really a consumer of streaming multimedia, so I don't see a problem for me.
That doesn't mean I don't fight it...I've written my congressmen several times, even if I only get boilerplate letters back saying "blah blah blah we don't have the authority to pass laws regarding blah, so blah..."
Ah, but once Microsoft gets hit with an antitrust suit, a key issue will be opening the API. Which means that the Linux kernel will be able to support the DRM system.
You'll still need a key for the hardware to accept the kernel as a trusted piece of software, but that can be accomplished by a third party providing a compiled binary optimized for your system, along with a key and the source code.
From that point on, it's the user's responsibility to keep that key safe, and not allow anyone else to have access to it! Media will likely be encrypted and watermarked using your key, and you'll get accused of copyright violation if a copy of that watermark is found outside of your computer.
The compiled binary+key+source concept would also have to apply to playback software.
You need a compiled binary because software will need to be somehow certified safe. And the only way to do that is to have a "trusted" (by the copyright holders, that is) entity perform the auditing and compilation of the software.
It does raise barriers to software development, though, the tearing down of which is part of what free software has been all about. So it's not an ideal solution, but it's workable.
If the frame rate of the video card was locked in sync with the monitor, which was locked in sync with the sampling of the eyes, then exceeding what people think of as the limit of human perception wouldn't be important.
As it is, I can currently see the flicker from the 60Hz refresh rate on my monitor. And I'm sure that that playing back animation at 30fps wouldn't help.
Besides, I suspect the eyes don't see in a "frames" fashion, anyway. I'd like to see a new study testing the limits of what people can see.
For some of us Linux users, there's a second consideration: How difficult will it be to set up?
Once I learned how to set up my Riva TNT2 with the NVidia drivers, I didn't have much of a problem doing it again whenever I upgraded my kernel.
However, that didn't prepare me for the obstacles involved in setting up my recently-bought ATI Radeon 9000. I'm not saying it was harder, just different.
I would have preferred to upgrade to a new NVidia card, but I didn't want to go back to a 2.4 kernel. (At the time, you needed to apply a third-party patch to the driver glue to get it to work with the 2.5/2.6.opre* kernels.)
Now, I'm happy to say that my Radeon works fine, and I don't need to reinstall a driver every time I upgrade my kernel.
Since NVidia didn't have drivers out for the 2.6.x kernel at the time, I upgraded to an ATI Radeon 9000. (Yes, upgrade. I was running a Riva TNT2.)
DRI works fine, for the most part. But RTCW doesn't run past the initial menu system. (And the Linux FAQ for RTCW wasn't much help...but it's been a while since I last tried to get it working.)
On the other hand, I'm having a blast with some of the xscreensaver hacks that my video card was too slow to run, previously. I'll just sit there watching it warp my collection of Linux-themed background images for an hour at a time.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I didn't attend. I'm just a 20 year old student who works enough to pay for classes at Grand Rapids Community College.
If it's GPL, how will they be able to make their own improvements on it without releasing them under the GPL? With an LGPL sandwich layer?
Not that releasing their changes under the GPL is a problem. I suspect few companies have the specialization and the money to take what they learn from reading the LTSP code and clean-rooming it for their own product line. That means Novell can release code under the GPL, and not really worry about a competitor using in competition.
closed beta
What license is LTSP under, anyway? I didn't see it in their "About Us" or their FAQ.
"newbies" (that will always be newbies)
Yes, there will always be those.
My concern is that the potential power users will get a locked-down machine, and not realize that it can be unlocked without switching away from Linux.
Huh.
I just realized that most of the time, my CPU is idle. It never occured to me that LTSP would result in more efficient usage of the host machine.
What is the most common operating system in Windows, and how is it normally obtained?
For such a large system, that's probably true.
I only see one problem: how powerful of a system would be required to serve all those machines at once? Would a small cluster be better?
I disagree, to a point. It would be too easy for a newbie to come to the conclusion that Linux is insanely limited, and they have to use Windows to do anything more advanced.
Now, if you include directions on how to "unlock" your computer, you'll be OK. Include a system restore CD. (You know someone's going to buy and install Windows; make it easy for them to switch back.)
When the restore CD is run, ask them if they want to install the normal version (as it came on their computer) or the "advanced" version, which is pretty much the same as the normal except it allows you to select packages to install off the CD or the Internet.
What I want to know is, if I install Mono, will I have to cease relations with my computer until it goes away?
I've got a really old 10base-T SMC ISA network card I never could get running...At the time, I was trying to turn an unused 386sx into a firewall.
The way Linux development used to work, if a piece of hardware wasn't popular, nobody wrote a driver for it. This is still true today, though to a lesser extent. (There's a lot more attention given to Linux today. Including programmers programmers paid to work on the kernel.)
Unless he's a teacher. That's what I assumed, since it'd be damned expensive to be taking journalism classes for eight years at the university level.
Also, his jargon jibes with what I was taught, so it doesn't seem unlikely.
I'm more interested in whether they'd keep the launch of a solution secret or not. There's too much risk that someone seeking the end of the world wout attempt to disrupt/destroy the launch.
With today's commuter distances, it's unlikely anyone will resort to walking to work.
Aside from it being too much effort, most of them would have to leave so early in the morning that they'd be pedestrians while it was still dark. An extremely dangerous proposition considering the difficulty many drivers have of seeing pedestrians in the dark.
for Dell to entice stay
Argh...what was I thinking?!
And I haven't used an RPN calculator in months!
Lucky you. I was a volunteer firefighter for about a year. I saw two accidents, with injuries in both. In one accident, an infant died. Not pleasant.
The next day at work, a coworker brought in her newborn infant. I never thought I'd be so happy to see something small and pink and wrinkly and wriggly.
Keep in mind that Intel has x86-64 support coming. That may well be enough for Dell to entice stay with the program a little bit longer.
Uh, AMD has frequency control via PowerNOW!
I don't recall if their mobile processors shut down power to unused portions of the die. I believe they do, though.
Yeah, but if they don't start shipping Opteron, the press (and shallow portions of the tech public) will backlash against Dell.
It's a pretty low thing to do, but I'd love to see AMD in Dell machines.
Then you better join a campaign outlawing hardware-level integration of DRM. Because that's the only way I can think of to stop it.
IIRC, TCPA doesn't have to be enabled. That means you can still use newer hardware, just without the abilities granted by "trusted computing."
I'm not really a consumer of streaming multimedia, so I don't see a problem for me.
That doesn't mean I don't fight it...I've written my congressmen several times, even if I only get boilerplate letters back saying "blah blah blah we don't have the authority to pass laws regarding blah, so blah..."
Ah, but once Microsoft gets hit with an antitrust suit, a key issue will be opening the API. Which means that the Linux kernel will be able to support the DRM system.
You'll still need a key for the hardware to accept the kernel as a trusted piece of software, but that can be accomplished by a third party providing a compiled binary optimized for your system, along with a key and the source code.
From that point on, it's the user's responsibility to keep that key safe, and not allow anyone else to have access to it! Media will likely be encrypted and watermarked using your key, and you'll get accused of copyright violation if a copy of that watermark is found outside of your computer.
The compiled binary+key+source concept would also have to apply to playback software.
You need a compiled binary because software will need to be somehow certified safe. And the only way to do that is to have a "trusted" (by the copyright holders, that is) entity perform the auditing and compilation of the software.
It does raise barriers to software development, though, the tearing down of which is part of what free software has been all about. So it's not an ideal solution, but it's workable.
Oh, hush.
This, to me, looks like irrefutable evidence of anticompetitive behavior. For the next antitrust trial.
(Why do I feel so optimistic all of a sudden?)
If that doesn't count as anticompetitive behavior, I don't know what does.
I see this as good news for the future, since the repercussions on MS should be more severe than last time.
For the short term, everyone keep an eye on their applications, and look for prior art!
Only if it's not on the GPU die.
If the frame rate of the video card was locked in sync with the monitor, which was locked in sync with the sampling of the eyes, then exceeding what people think of as the limit of human perception wouldn't be important.
As it is, I can currently see the flicker from the 60Hz refresh rate on my monitor. And I'm sure that that playing back animation at 30fps wouldn't help.
Besides, I suspect the eyes don't see in a "frames" fashion, anyway. I'd like to see a new study testing the limits of what people can see.
For some of us Linux users, there's a second consideration: How difficult will it be to set up?
Once I learned how to set up my Riva TNT2 with the NVidia drivers, I didn't have much of a problem doing it again whenever I upgraded my kernel.
However, that didn't prepare me for the obstacles involved in setting up my recently-bought ATI Radeon 9000. I'm not saying it was harder, just different.
I would have preferred to upgrade to a new NVidia card, but I didn't want to go back to a 2.4 kernel. (At the time, you needed to apply a third-party patch to the driver glue to get it to work with the 2.5/2.6.opre* kernels.)
Now, I'm happy to say that my Radeon works fine, and I don't need to reinstall a driver every time I upgrade my kernel.
Since NVidia didn't have drivers out for the 2.6.x kernel at the time, I upgraded to an ATI Radeon 9000. (Yes, upgrade. I was running a Riva TNT2.)
DRI works fine, for the most part. But RTCW doesn't run past the initial menu system. (And the Linux FAQ for RTCW wasn't much help...but it's been a while since I last tried to get it working.)
On the other hand, I'm having a blast with some of the xscreensaver hacks that my video card was too slow to run, previously. I'll just sit there watching it warp my collection of Linux-themed background images for an hour at a time.