Indeed, it is not Apple's fault if Chimera loses developers. Chimera isa great browser, I use both it and Safari, and while i keep IE around to check the HTML I write, I haven't used it for over a month now.
Chimera was my only browser until Safari came out. And while I now primarily use Safari, Chimera is still in my Dock, right next to Safari. Several pages I visit do not load properly (or at all) in Safari, and I have sent bug reports in. Chimera continues to run reliably and without fail for me.
Twirlip of the Mists makes good points about how tabs, while convenient, are also making a mess of the function of the browser. I love Tabs, I swear by them when I'm in Chimera, but Twirlip's points about making tabs draggable are a consideration. I tend to keep a two windows with 2-5 tabs up when using Chimera, and the last thing I want is Excel-style contextual-menus for working with tabs.
I hope Chimera does stick around, and that someday Safari will have tabs. But Apple is the champion of Drag-n-Drop, having brought it to us in System 7 Pro (some programs installed it in System 7.1, though) and faithfully carried it with them. Tabs, as they are today, have their static place in preferences and programs, but such dynamic tabs may be hard for Apple to stomach.
While the concept of putting Windows on Linux (BSD is more likely, as you mentioned) is a great thought, I agree that it would be a huge undertaking. The changeover would essentially need to happen in the same manner as the Mac OS X conversion - with the previous operating system running as well to manage old apps.
The large problem is that Windows relies of a huge assortment of components at various levels of the OS, which would all need either a further layer of abstraction to change, or to be re-written for a new OS.
The change could be a good thing as well. Moving to another OS might require Microsoft to fix some of their outstanding issues with security, but ultimately the project would involve a huge time investment for Microsoft and every hardware and software vendor who wants to survive in the plan.
The financial strain on Microsoft could be handled - the initial expense of converting the Windowing System would offset the reduced expense of the OS for years, most likely. It's the vendors who would suffer - thousands of them collapsing under the sudden burden of a complete re-design of software and drivers that have been built upon Microsoft quirks and hacks for years.
How do you figure that not making yourself a huge target for the RIAA is stupid? Is it stupid to make a product and then protect your investment from unwanted liabilities, after having clearly stated that additions of that nature were not to be made.
What I have a problem with is the assumption that the companies are "evil". Who decided this, and when did it become accepted? A company making a product isn't evil, clearly. A company trying to make a profit (whether succeeding or not) isn't evil. A company producing bad products? A company breaking the law? Then was Enron evil? A monopoly?
I don't care for Microsoft or Bill Gates' managerial style (let others come up with something and scream at them for getting details wrong) but I don't see them in dark robes sacrificing young employees to the God of Pain.
It inconveniences you only because you are used to having the option to have it in three places at once. But how often do you read a book in three places simultaneously? This is the perspective of DRM. There's no reason you would ever read something in three places at once because you aren't in three places at once.
Lets look to the average user. How often is John Q Public going to need the eBook they are reading on their home PC, their PDA, their travelling laptop and their work PC all at once? About as often as they need a physical book in all four locations at the same time. That's the point. It comes down to protection of license or merchandise. You bought one copy of the book, not an indiscriminant number of copies.
I'm not saying it won't be restrictive. I keep my MP3s on my Mac and my PC at the same time. I read electronic versions of physical books I have because it is more convenient for me. As far as the DRM is concerned, I am not a "good consumer." That's why I hope that we don't see DRM soon. When I have a high-speed encrypted link to my home server where I can keep all of my personal documents, and I can access them from work, other people's houses, on the road, on the plane, etc, then DRM isn't an inconvenience, because you aren't limited by it. Until then, it will never be able to live up to others hopes, and will cause plenty of discontent in its own right.
OK. Here's the part where people mod me down. But the scenario you provide is strained at best, fictionalized at worst. Poorly implemented DRM is a burden on the user. It can interfere with the completion of your task. It can waste time and frustrate the user. DRM like that is indeed something to be spoken out against. But clean, seamless, integrated DRM is not the terrible monster people make it out to be. Instead of screaming, "No!" you should try to ensure that the DRM being implemented isn't oppressive and inconvenient.
Fair enough. We residents of the USA, most specifically those of us without experience outside the country, are prone to preferring Ptolemy's model of the solar system.:)
What does it get you? While the market might be smaller, you have a sight better chance that the people who do read your eBook will pay for it. Ideally, teh restrictions should never prevent you from copying it, merely from having it in multiple places, just as you cannot loan a friend a copy of the book you are reading. This could mean some media restrictions if certain OSes don't play fairly.
For instance: you download an eBook with DRm on your desktop PC. You start reading it there and decide you want it on your laptop. You could move it, but not copy it.
There are some limitations with a system like that. If you burned a copy of the eBook onto CD-ROM, you could never move it elsewhere - unless your DRM-enabled Burner could damage that part of the disc or some other such tactic. What's bad about this theory? You can't indescriminately copy files. You have to own things.
What's good about this theory? If it works, content could become much cheaper. With less complex distribution and management methods, new "media companies" built from the ashes of the RIAA and MPAA could offer better rates to artists and have lower overhead (imagine: 10 execs, 100 lawyers, and 250 techies...:) and reduce the overall cost to consumers, not only because of the better, cheaper distribution, but because you don't have to factor the cost of piracy into your content.
Something that makes your computer run faster also makes free operatings systems faster too?!
I wonder what it does for commercial OSes.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but isn't that obvious? If you have a processor that can do more work than another processor at equivalent MHz, it, by most estimations, will speed something up.
If I can't get the raw key out, the black box has no data interface.
At some point data has to enter and/or exit the box, and by observing that data, we have something. Like cracking Wi-Fi packets.
Anyhow, the basic concept behind having something like that is identical to having an electronic door key at a hotel, isn't it? Maybe it's closer to ATM cards, a device and a PIN. Again, it's only as secure as the user. If I steal your black box, I now have the access the intended user should have.
Unless you are using sub-dermal thermally-powered (radioactive, maybe) short-range wireless - dermal contact with a terminal or door plate would be a great system - cryptographic devices, security is still a concern.
Without the additional details that are "required" by some of the posters, you can only speculate at an answer. Twirlip Of The Mists has done that, and had some very reasonable suggestions.
However, for a complete and assuredly valid answer, we simple need for information. As he said "let us have (for free) dark fiber links" that may mean that he really has nothing but fiber between buildings. Telcos aren't known for their sweeping generosity. He may have a lambda, which is absolutely reasonable in a metro area, which would give him something to work with.
If the fiber has sufficient bandwidth, he could split the fiber into data and video traffic (my high school used an OC3 in this manner for ITV classes and Internet access), but this would likely cost a good deal more.
The issue I have with the whole thing is "...when we are not using the fiber for cablecast." If you want cheap, as Twirlip Of The Mists suggests, that will mean (I could be wrong) physical disconnection of network cabling at both ends each time you broadcast, and then re-connection after broadcast. Would you have trained network people at each "public access" location, or would you end up driving around town before shows? Is it worth it to you?
Granted public access television isn't rolling in money, but to make your life easier, you probably want something you don't have to physically connect each time. Of course, you could get a fiber switch, and some X10 appliance switches and the Home Connect kit. Then you could just call up and switch off the data and switch on the feed.
I want it to be clear that I am not saying that would work.
Not only sued into oblivion, but the individuals creating/distributing/authorizing the worm/virus/invasive program are subject to arrest and a per infection fine should the government feel the desire.
10 Gbps ethernet v. FireWire. Hmm. And you're managing to get 10 Gbps out of your desktop by overclocking your PCI bus to 2.4 GHz? How's the liquid nitrogen bath working?
If you have a USB printer, you don't say you are getting a USB adapter for it. You go out and buy a USB A to B cable. If you don't have this magic cable, you go buy it.
DB-9 and DB-25 are both serial, and you can buy adapters for them, but you can also buy cables.
I'm sure that you will be able to get an adapter at some point, as well. -- All right, I'm done.
I don't know how beneficial writing your own assembler or DBMS is. If your plan on becoming a programmer with a foot in DBMS, this might be a good thing, as it teaches you the underlying functions and limitations.
To me, and I quite probably am very alone on this, it would be better to conceive of a DBMS (forgive the gravitation toward this one example) - to chart the program flow at a general level. Not:
When an "Insert" is called, run the Entry function, which handles insertion, integrity, keys, indexes, etc...
But instead of spending the time sitting down and creating a whole DBMS, why not understand how to do so. It is part of the writing process to understand the function of your application (hopefully), but what we need more than rote programming is imaginative conceptualizing.
And, if you choose, you can take your concept, and follow the iterations down and break modules into components, components into functions, functions into code.
Of course, none of this has much to do with debugging.
And poor spelling doesn't mean poor organization skills. Poor mental organizers tend to have sequencing problems more than specific spelling problems, and crap classes like Study Skills in high school teach all the wrong ways to remember things (you "web" a database, not a textbook. Textbooks are almost always sequential, not relational).
Some people were never properly taught to spell, and some people don't type well. This does not make them poor organizers.
"There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it." - William James
Or you could define a function, dbprint, for example, that all your flow notes call, make dbprint do nothing when you don't need it, and delete any dbprint calls when you're done debugging.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, it is not Apple's fault if Chimera loses developers. Chimera isa great browser, I use both it and Safari, and while i keep IE around to check the HTML I write, I haven't used it for over a month now.
Chimera was my only browser until Safari came out. And while I now primarily use Safari, Chimera is still in my Dock, right next to Safari. Several pages I visit do not load properly (or at all) in Safari, and I have sent bug reports in. Chimera continues to run reliably and without fail for me.
Twirlip of the Mists makes good points about how tabs, while convenient, are also making a mess of the function of the browser. I love Tabs, I swear by them when I'm in Chimera, but Twirlip's points about making tabs draggable are a consideration. I tend to keep a two windows with 2-5 tabs up when using Chimera, and the last thing I want is Excel-style contextual-menus for working with tabs.
I hope Chimera does stick around, and that someday Safari will have tabs. But Apple is the champion of Drag-n-Drop, having brought it to us in System 7 Pro (some programs installed it in System 7.1, though) and faithfully carried it with them. Tabs, as they are today, have their static place in preferences and programs, but such dynamic tabs may be hard for Apple to stomach.
Nah, it'll be, "Damn, I've got alot of e-mail!"
I once used this technique to wipe a disk:
/mnt/mp3/* > /dev/hd1
cat
With DV editing or tv capture cards, it's even easier.
While the concept of putting Windows on Linux (BSD is more likely, as you mentioned) is a great thought, I agree that it would be a huge undertaking. The changeover would essentially need to happen in the same manner as the Mac OS X conversion - with the previous operating system running as well to manage old apps.
The large problem is that Windows relies of a huge assortment of components at various levels of the OS, which would all need either a further layer of abstraction to change, or to be re-written for a new OS.
The change could be a good thing as well. Moving to another OS might require Microsoft to fix some of their outstanding issues with security, but ultimately the project would involve a huge time investment for Microsoft and every hardware and software vendor who wants to survive in the plan.
The financial strain on Microsoft could be handled - the initial expense of converting the Windowing System would offset the reduced expense of the OS for years, most likely. It's the vendors who would suffer - thousands of them collapsing under the sudden burden of a complete re-design of software and drivers that have been built upon Microsoft quirks and hacks for years.
Karma's broken. :(
It's always interesting to see how close some of the "predictions" come to real life.
How do you figure that not making yourself a huge target for the RIAA is stupid? Is it stupid to make a product and then protect your investment from unwanted liabilities, after having clearly stated that additions of that nature were not to be made.
What I have a problem with is the assumption that the companies are "evil". Who decided this, and when did it become accepted? A company making a product isn't evil, clearly. A company trying to make a profit (whether succeeding or not) isn't evil. A company producing bad products? A company breaking the law? Then was Enron evil? A monopoly?
I don't care for Microsoft or Bill Gates' managerial style (let others come up with something and scream at them for getting details wrong) but I don't see them in dark robes sacrificing young employees to the God of Pain.
It inconveniences you only because you are used to having the option to have it in three places at once. But how often do you read a book in three places simultaneously? This is the perspective of DRM. There's no reason you would ever read something in three places at once because you aren't in three places at once.
Lets look to the average user. How often is John Q Public going to need the eBook they are reading on their home PC, their PDA, their travelling laptop and their work PC all at once? About as often as they need a physical book in all four locations at the same time. That's the point. It comes down to protection of license or merchandise. You bought one copy of the book, not an indiscriminant number of copies.
I'm not saying it won't be restrictive. I keep my MP3s on my Mac and my PC at the same time. I read electronic versions of physical books I have because it is more convenient for me. As far as the DRM is concerned, I am not a "good consumer." That's why I hope that we don't see DRM soon. When I have a high-speed encrypted link to my home server where I can keep all of my personal documents, and I can access them from work, other people's houses, on the road, on the plane, etc, then DRM isn't an inconvenience, because you aren't limited by it. Until then, it will never be able to live up to others hopes, and will cause plenty of discontent in its own right.
OK. Here's the part where people mod me down. But the scenario you provide is strained at best, fictionalized at worst. Poorly implemented DRM is a burden on the user. It can interfere with the completion of your task. It can waste time and frustrate the user. DRM like that is indeed something to be spoken out against. But clean, seamless, integrated DRM is not the terrible monster people make it out to be. Instead of screaming, "No!" you should try to ensure that the DRM being implemented isn't oppressive and inconvenient.
Fair enough. We residents of the USA, most specifically those of us without experience outside the country, are prone to preferring Ptolemy's model of the solar system. :)
What does it get you? While the market might be smaller, you have a sight better chance that the people who do read your eBook will pay for it.
:) and reduce the overall cost to consumers, not only because of the better, cheaper distribution, but because you don't have to factor the cost of piracy into your content.
Ideally, teh restrictions should never prevent you from copying it, merely from having it in multiple places, just as you cannot loan a friend a copy of the book you are reading. This could mean some media restrictions if certain OSes don't play fairly.
For instance: you download an eBook with DRm on your desktop PC. You start reading it there and decide you want it on your laptop. You could move it, but not copy it.
There are some limitations with a system like that. If you burned a copy of the eBook onto CD-ROM, you could never move it elsewhere - unless your DRM-enabled Burner could damage that part of the disc or some other such tactic. What's bad about this theory? You can't indescriminately copy files. You have to own things.
What's good about this theory? If it works, content could become much cheaper. With less complex distribution and management methods, new "media companies" built from the ashes of the RIAA and MPAA could offer better rates to artists and have lower overhead (imagine: 10 execs, 100 lawyers, and 250 techies...
So, what's good about DRM? Plenty.
Something that makes your computer run faster also makes free operatings systems faster too?!
I wonder what it does for commercial OSes.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but isn't that obvious? If you have a processor that can do more work than another processor at equivalent MHz, it, by most estimations, will speed something up.
Not true for everything, but pretty close.
If I can't get the raw key out, the black box has no data interface.
At some point data has to enter and/or exit the box, and by observing that data, we have something. Like cracking Wi-Fi packets.
Anyhow, the basic concept behind having something like that is identical to having an electronic door key at a hotel, isn't it? Maybe it's closer to ATM cards, a device and a PIN. Again, it's only as secure as the user. If I steal your black box, I now have the access the intended user should have.
Unless you are using sub-dermal thermally-powered (radioactive, maybe) short-range wireless - dermal contact with a terminal or door plate would be a great system - cryptographic devices, security is still a concern.
Look,
Without the additional details that are "required" by some of the posters, you can only speculate at an answer. Twirlip Of The Mists has done that, and had some very reasonable suggestions.
However, for a complete and assuredly valid answer, we simple need for information. As he said "let us have (for free) dark fiber links" that may mean that he really has nothing but fiber between buildings. Telcos aren't known for their sweeping generosity. He may have a lambda, which is absolutely reasonable in a metro area, which would give him something to work with.
If the fiber has sufficient bandwidth, he could split the fiber into data and video traffic (my high school used an OC3 in this manner for ITV classes and Internet access), but this would likely cost a good deal more.
The issue I have with the whole thing is "...when we are not using the fiber for cablecast." If you want cheap, as Twirlip Of The Mists suggests, that will mean (I could be wrong) physical disconnection of network cabling at both ends each time you broadcast, and then re-connection after broadcast. Would you have trained network people at each "public access" location, or would you end up driving around town before shows? Is it worth it to you?
Granted public access television isn't rolling in money, but to make your life easier, you probably want something you don't have to physically connect each time. Of course, you could get a fiber switch, and some X10 appliance switches and the Home Connect kit. Then you could just call up and switch off the data and switch on the feed.
I want it to be clear that I am not saying that would work.
Not only sued into oblivion, but the individuals creating/distributing/authorizing the worm/virus/invasive program are subject to arrest and a per infection fine should the government feel the desire.
If you follow the link you will notice at the top of the page, "Confirmed Bogus by Darwin".
Sorry, just didn't see the point in it.
Didn't mean to be mean.
Next time, I'll take a few deep breaths first.
Why didn't you take friggin screen shots and post 'em somewhere for us to view, instead?
10 Gbps ethernet v. FireWire. Hmm. And you're managing to get 10 Gbps out of your desktop by overclocking your PCI bus to 2.4 GHz? How's the liquid nitrogen bath working?
Anyway, Apple release an IP over FireWire preview a little while back.
And, yes, the laptops can be a FireWire device. I've used my PowerBook G3 from an iMac - it's a good bit faster than 100 base-T.
It's not like a DVI to VGA adapter.
If you have a USB printer, you don't say you are getting a USB adapter for it. You go out and buy a USB A to B cable. If you don't have this magic cable, you go buy it.
DB-9 and DB-25 are both serial, and you can buy adapters for them, but you can also buy cables.
I'm sure that you will be able to get an adapter at some point, as well.
--
All right, I'm done.
Did anyone ever hear the one about the guy with the JATO?
USB 1.0 isn't anything significant. You can't even find it in devices. That would be USB 1.1
USB 2.0 isn't anything to dismiss, granted, but I'd like FireWire 800.
Notably, the 17" PowerBook G4 also sports a FireWire 400 port, so no extra cables needed for current FireWire.
To me, and I quite probably am very alone on this, it would be better to conceive of a DBMS (forgive the gravitation toward this one example) - to chart the program flow at a general level. Not: But instead of spending the time sitting down and creating a whole DBMS, why not understand how to do so. It is part of the writing process to understand the function of your application (hopefully), but what we need more than rote programming is imaginative conceptualizing.
And, if you choose, you can take your concept, and follow the iterations down and break modules into components, components into functions, functions into code.
Of course, none of this has much to do with debugging.
And poor spelling doesn't mean poor organization skills. Poor mental organizers tend to have sequencing problems more than specific spelling problems, and crap classes like Study Skills in high school teach all the wrong ways to remember things (you "web" a database, not a textbook. Textbooks are almost always sequential, not relational).
Some people were never properly taught to spell, and some people don't type well. This does not make them poor organizers.
"There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it." - William James
Or you could define a function, dbprint, for example, that all your flow notes call, make dbprint do nothing when you don't need it, and delete any dbprint calls when you're done debugging.
Of course, that would be much easier...
It would be nice to have the option to run WMP in Linux - this would also be a beneficial step toward desktop use of Linux.
QuickTime would be damn nice, too. We could start an e-mail campaign (check out their contact QuickTime page and see if it goes anywhere...