I know it was pointed out this could be an April's Fools joke, but based on the Devuan developers messages it seems to be actually hacked. Just well timed to pass as a joke.
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/...
You're spot on about linking to things like this.
I don't get the need to do this. People like the show as it is, why go muck with it? Same thing with Star Wars.
I was over at the starwars.com yesterday looking for information about the release of the unedited versions in a week or so. They have a side by side comparison of many frames they changed from the film. With something along the lines of "Many people don't realize the technical capabiltiy that went into this!"
Stop right there. I'm an engineer and I appreciate technical achievement as much as the next geek. But you're trying to SELL ME ON YOUR TECHNICAL MERITS?
Most people who don't like the edits don't like them for one of two reasons. 1) You're messing with something they remember and liked. This almost always pisses people off. 2) The CGI doesn't look right in the movie with late 1970s effects.
Star Wars was one of the highest grossing movies of all time without any mucking about. Star Trek is insanely popular. I think it's pretty arrogant to go messing with a historical show that's stood up for 30-40 years and expect people to like it (or not be outraged) because it's a technical feat.
I guess I better run buy a copy of the original series DVDs before someone at Paramount decides I don't have the privilidge to see them in their original form again.:-/
I've never really underderstood Transgaming's focus on cross platform gaming. Most Linux and Mac users aren't heavy gamers. Most people tend to use Windows or consoles for gaming. If you're using OS X or Linux it's generally to get something (real work) done.
Not that Linux and Mac aren't technically viable game platforms, but that's not their general use.
This happens every year on April 1st. Most of the joke articles are always pretty lame jokes and they tend to carry one theme out until most slashdotters are begging for it stop. I'm sure they derive some sick pleasure from it:)
In anycase, from your Slashdot ID, you've been around long enough to know how today works. So just sit back and show some pony love:) Or if you just can't stand it chill out, close your browser and go outside. Slashdot will be all normal and pony free again tomorrow.
Up until a few years ago, Ultima Online had exactly this system. Potion kegs were "almost full" or "nearly empty". You got a magic sword? Great. What is it? You need to use an Item ID skill on it to know. And it didn't suddenly make the stats available, you might get a "Supremely Accurate Katana of Vanquishing". Some keywords (Supremely Accurate, Vanquishing) there gave you a ball park of how good it was compared to others, but not exact numbers and even then, not all with the same name were exactly equal.
Pretty much everything worked this way. Also, there were no predifined classes, everything was based on a set of skills which you got better at the more you used. Want to be mage? Cast a lot of spells. Of course there was a skill limit, so you can't be great at everything. There are even some nearly useless skills like Camping, Herding, etc. that were really only useful for RP.
A couple years ago when they released the "Age of Shadows" expansion, all items were basically converted to a stat system. Lists of numbers on everything. I think they felt the pressure to do what all the other MMOs were doing. The game changed a lot over the years. In the end, I think they gave up what made them unique.
Just my two cents. But, this has been tried, and worked successfully for a long time. It would be nice if a newer game would do it, but it seems the mass market just isn't into it. They'd rather look at stats.
except for the fact that tablets seem to have been DOA. They seem to have been a great idea looking for a use instead of some actual need driving them. Granted, a few people love em (as with any niche technology), but I have yet to meet anyone who actually wants one and uses it on a regular basis, and I work with a bunch of other technophile engineers... Laptops still rule the portable landscape.
So this seems to me just like another Linux runs on ____________ story. (insert everything including a toaster in the blank)
Don't forget that $100 profit has to cover: * Packaging * Shipping * Retail margin
And hope to recover the costs of: * Advertising * R & D
Not to be picky here, but profit doesn't cover that. Profit is what you have after you pay all your costs. The revenue for the iPod has to cover everything you mentioned plus parts and labor to build it. So really, that $100 goes in their pocket.
First off, no one can copyright the word "Linux." It doesn't qualify as a protected work and is explicity excluded under the following list of non-protectable works:
Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring; mere listings of ingredients or contents
Now, while I understand the desire to protect the name Linux, what they're doing is in violation of the spirit of the GPL under which Linux is licensed. Basically they're limiting the use of anything with Linux in the name (include the kernel) to people who pay up for the mark. While the GPL does not provide for the use of the mark, it does say anyone can use that software any which way they want.
That means if I want to run a porn site on Linux I can do so. That means if I want run a nuclear bomb on Linux I can. That means if I want run a ultra conservative christian business on Linux I can. That means if I want run a super flaming gay rights group on Linux I can.
Free Software means the author allows people to choose to do what they want. The GPL explicitly states that once the software is in my hands I can give it away if I so choose. Now Linus is setting up to recoup money ex post facto based on someone's use of said free software. It doesn't work that way.
Linus (nor his representatives) is NOT asking for any money from these companies. The letter mentions that they MAY be required to pay in the future, but it's not asking any money now, nor does that mean that they will be expected to pay in the future! It merely mentions something that may or may not happen in the future.
If Linus is just fucking with us, then I condemn this even more so than if he's serious, and the problem is a hell of a lot bigger.
Free Software doesn't mean you can ex post facto decide to get a trademark and then use it to charge a fee for use of the software. While it's quite a clever way to get around the GPL by restricting what people can do unless they pay, but it's certainly not consistant with the spirit of Free Software. Free Software doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with the software unless the author decides he doesn't like it.
If it's true that Linus is behind this, then it's time to fork the kernel and remove all references to the word "Linux"...
Something's wrong with the article. A search of the USPTO shows that Apple owns the trademark "TIGER". I'm not sure where it came from that TigerDirect owns it. Searching for marks that TigerDirect owns comes back with 2 records. Neither of which use the word Tiger.
Here's the record from the USPTO:
Word Mark TIGER Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 78269988 Filing Date July 2, 2003 Current Filing Basis 1B Original Filing Basis 1B Published for Opposition August 17, 2004 Owner (APPLICANT) Apple Computer, Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014 Attorney of Record John Donald Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
What's the deal with these low cost computers over the last few years. First the simputer for poor rural farmers in India that only cost about a year's salary. And more recently the $100 laptop coming out of MIT.
How about we really do something with technology to help these people? Like setting them up with running water, electricity, a house that doesn't leak? Maybe get them enough food or decent medical care... It seems like a waste to invest so much in giving out low cost computers to someone at risk of starving to death the next day or is at high risk of deadly illnesses.
It's a nice goal to have everyone connected. But you have to ask "why?" Are we trying to find a new source of ideas to exploit? I don't see how hooking people up to the net is going to help them out when their basic needs aren't met...
There's the education argument. I'm not sure whether these will provide more access to information. In certain areas it definitely will. But then what do you do with that education when you have no infrastructure to support it... I know it's slashdot and it's all about tech, but hwo about focusing on some tech that would really help people.
Everyone knows the only way to truly destroy the precious data on your old hard drive is to throw it in to the fires of Mount Doom where it was forged and watch that sucker melt.
Right after Apple released the iMac back in 1998, everyone started jumping on the "all-in-one" PC thing again. A new company at the time, eMachines, tried to market a near copy of it called the eOne PC. They were slapped with injunctions in the US and Tokyo shortly after that and later forced to stop production.
The review for the eOne is still up on epinions, along with a stock photo: eOne Photo
Daewoo tried something similar. They both got the smack down. See here.
Do you remember when Cobalt Networks was about to sue Apple over the Cube? Because of Cobalt's Qube design? Only to find out a few months later Apple owned NeXT at that point, which created the original Cube. At that point Cobalt changed their tune and decided suing might not be so smart. Some Cobalt info.
The reason for suing is brand dilution. When you make a look-a-like, you're copying a design that's identified with the product. It's the same reason stores brand soda tries to have similar color schemes to Coke, or Pepsi. You identify the product by the colors, shapes and patterns of the packaging or product itself.
I get what the Taiwanese company is doing. They would have been better off sticking to knock off Nintendo games though. I'd guarantee Apple already knows about the knock off at this point, and we'll probably be seeing lawsuits within a week or two.
Unveil it? What the hell? This is not even remotely new information. This plane's info has been available for quite a while, even on Airbus' website. See their own website. Not only that, but one of the links in the article is just a blank page that says "Europe"...
Nah, no one develops software for OS X. Oh... wait a minute! Yes they do!
Check out VersionTracker. I think you'll find more than you need or want. Considering the list of updated packages updated on any given day scrolls through several pages, I don't think you'll have to crack out gcc everytime you want some new softawre.;-)
I never said Apple or the iPod would fail because of it.
I just don't think this particular feature will be received well because at best it's a marginalized capability. Mostly due to the iPod's design (sizewise). They can't go too far away from the formula that works.
I'm sure Apple will sell some of these, if only for the fact it's the only iPod that has 60GB. But I don't think we're going to see a repeat of the iPod mini success.
When Apple entered the portable audio market, there were mp3 player's galore. They just didn't do the job very well. They had a small capacity or clnky interfaces. The ones that had hard drives or used CDs were large clunky things. Apple came out with a sleek design that held a ton of music and has an intuitive easy to use interface. It's perfect.
I just don't see a bunch of people running around wishing they could tote hundreds of photos with them to show their friends. Palm's and Windows (CE name of the month) handhelds both have the capability. But you just don't see people running around with SD/MMC cards full of pictures hoping to show them to people.
That's my thinking. I don't think Apple's just committed the world's biggest blunder. But at the same time, I don't think they're going to strike gold with this either. At worst they're starting to tread near the area where they compromise a good product. I don't think they've done it yet, and I hope they don't.
It's possible. But most product's that try to incorporate things beyond their original design tend to marginalize the new functionality.
The iPod's design is meant to provide a small form factor and usability for listening to music. Now they've slapped a color display on it, which is the same size as the original.
Now that works fine for a few lines of text, but is that really large enough to comfortably look at pictures on? It's very much like pictures on a cell phone. The idea is good, but the implementation is lacking. It also reminds me of trying to browse the web on a cell phone... There's just not enough screen real estate to browse normal websites. Even if it can page through the screens, it's just not a fun experience and more frustrating that usable.
I think limiting factor is that by design the iPod is a music player. It's mean to be small and light. They can't stray too far from that and keep the successful formula.
For a portable photo viewer, something like a 4x6 or 5x7 high resolution screen is more realistic, but do you really want to tote something that size around as a music player? I certainly wouldn't. And if you look at the success of the iPod Mini, I think the target audience's answer is an obvious no.
I think a more realistic target platform for photo viewing would be something along the lines of a portable DVD player. Though, I can't say I know of anyone who has one. A laptop isn't much larger and is by far more functional.
The iPod just jumped the shark. There's a point in the life of a product where you try to integrate too much functionality. The iPod does music, and it does it very well.
Granted some people like these new integrated all in one cellphone, photoholder, music player, portable video players, but I'm going to have to go with "more is less" in this case.
I think certain devices (like the GameBoy Advance and the iPod) do well because they do one thing and they do it well. As long as they don't cripple or obfuscate the basic functionality, the iPod will still do fine. But once a company loses sight of what the product was made for and start trying to make it a swiss army knife, things tend to go downhill (N-Gage?).
I still like the iPod and I don't think it's going away. But I think Apple's starting to toe the line on the border swiss army knife land...
Slashdot Mirror
I know it was pointed out this could be an April's Fools joke, but based on the Devuan developers messages it seems to be actually hacked. Just well timed to pass as a joke. https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/... You're spot on about linking to things like this.
It seems this actually hacked, and not an April Fool's joke. https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/...
This would be a good chance to retcon the Klingons into Klingons that look like Klingons.
Eh? No it wouldn't.
The difference was explained in Enterprise. There's a whole multi-episode story arc on it...
It wouldn't make any sense to retcon them since there being two different kinds of klingons is part of the story line.
I don't get the need to do this. People like the show as it is, why go muck with it? Same thing with Star Wars.
:-/
I was over at the starwars.com yesterday looking for information about the release of the unedited versions in a week or so. They have a side by side comparison of many frames they changed from the film. With something along the lines of "Many people don't realize the technical capabiltiy that went into this!"
Stop right there. I'm an engineer and I appreciate technical achievement as much as the next geek. But you're trying to SELL ME ON YOUR TECHNICAL MERITS?
Most people who don't like the edits don't like them for one of two reasons. 1) You're messing with something they remember and liked. This almost always pisses people off. 2) The CGI doesn't look right in the movie with late 1970s effects.
Star Wars was one of the highest grossing movies of all time without any mucking about. Star Trek is insanely popular. I think it's pretty arrogant to go messing with a historical show that's stood up for 30-40 years and expect people to like it (or not be outraged) because it's a technical feat.
I guess I better run buy a copy of the original series DVDs before someone at Paramount decides I don't have the privilidge to see them in their original form again.
*beats head on desk some more*
I've never really underderstood Transgaming's focus on cross platform gaming. Most Linux and Mac users aren't heavy gamers. Most people tend to use Windows or consoles for gaming. If you're using OS X or Linux it's generally to get something (real work) done.
Not that Linux and Mac aren't technically viable game platforms, but that's not their general use.
This happens every year on April 1st. Most of the joke articles are always pretty lame jokes and they tend to carry one theme out until most slashdotters are begging for it stop. I'm sure they derive some sick pleasure from it :)
:) Or if you just can't stand it chill out, close your browser and go outside. Slashdot will be all normal and pony free again tomorrow.
In anycase, from your Slashdot ID, you've been around long enough to know how today works. So just sit back and show some pony love
The fact that a slashdot editor knows that the ponies from My Little Pony are from Butterfly Island scares the shit out of me.
Or rather, I'm assuming knows, as no self-respecting geek like myself would dare look up.
Up until a few years ago, Ultima Online had exactly this system. Potion kegs were "almost full" or "nearly empty". You got a magic sword? Great. What is it? You need to use an Item ID skill on it to know. And it didn't suddenly make the stats available, you might get a "Supremely Accurate Katana of Vanquishing". Some keywords (Supremely Accurate, Vanquishing) there gave you a ball park of how good it was compared to others, but not exact numbers and even then, not all with the same name were exactly equal.
Pretty much everything worked this way. Also, there were no predifined classes, everything was based on a set of skills which you got better at the more you used. Want to be mage? Cast a lot of spells. Of course there was a skill limit, so you can't be great at everything. There are even some nearly useless skills like Camping, Herding, etc. that were really only useful for RP.
A couple years ago when they released the "Age of Shadows" expansion, all items were basically converted to a stat system. Lists of numbers on everything. I think they felt the pressure to do what all the other MMOs were doing. The game changed a lot over the years. In the end, I think they gave up what made them unique.
Just my two cents. But, this has been tried, and worked successfully for a long time. It would be nice if a newer game would do it, but it seems the mass market just isn't into it. They'd rather look at stats.
It's a tablet PC stripped down for a sprecific purpose or a PDA on steroids, your pick. :)
except for the fact that tablets seem to have been DOA. They seem to have been a great idea looking for a use instead of some actual need driving them. Granted, a few people love em (as with any niche technology), but I have yet to meet anyone who actually wants one and uses it on a regular basis, and I work with a bunch of other technophile engineers... Laptops still rule the portable landscape.
So this seems to me just like another Linux runs on ____________ story. (insert everything including a toaster in the blank)
Don't forget that $100 profit has to cover:
* Packaging
* Shipping
* Retail margin
And hope to recover the costs of:
* Advertising
* R & D
Not to be picky here, but profit doesn't cover that. Profit is what you have after you pay all your costs. The revenue for the iPod has to cover everything you mentioned plus parts and labor to build it. So really, that $100 goes in their pocket.
First off, no one can copyright the word "Linux." It doesn't qualify as a protected work and is explicity excluded under the following list of non-protectable works:
Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring; mere listings of ingredients or contents
You can find that list here:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci
Now, while I understand the desire to protect the name Linux, what they're doing is in violation of the spirit of the GPL under which Linux is licensed. Basically they're limiting the use of anything with Linux in the name (include the kernel) to people who pay up for the mark. While the GPL does not provide for the use of the mark, it does say anyone can use that software any which way they want.
That means if I want to run a porn site on Linux I can do so. That means if I want run a nuclear bomb on Linux I can. That means if I want run a ultra conservative christian business on Linux I can. That means if I want run a super flaming gay rights group on Linux I can.
Free Software means the author allows people to choose to do what they want. The GPL explicitly states that once the software is in my hands I can give it away if I so choose. Now Linus is setting up to recoup money ex post facto based on someone's use of said free software. It doesn't work that way.
Linus (nor his representatives) is NOT asking for any money from these companies. The letter mentions that they MAY be required to pay in the future, but it's not asking any money now, nor does that mean that they will be expected to pay in the future! It merely mentions something that may or may not happen in the future.
If Linus is just fucking with us, then I condemn this even more so than if he's serious, and the problem is a hell of a lot bigger.
Free Software doesn't mean you can ex post facto decide to get a trademark and then use it to charge a fee for use of the software. While it's quite a clever way to get around the GPL by restricting what people can do unless they pay, but it's certainly not consistant with the spirit of Free Software. Free Software doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with the software unless the author decides he doesn't like it.
If it's true that Linus is behind this, then it's time to fork the kernel and remove all references to the word "Linux"...
Something's wrong with the article. A search of the USPTO shows that Apple owns the trademark "TIGER". I'm not sure where it came from that TigerDirect owns it. Searching for marks that TigerDirect owns comes back with 2 records. Neither of which use the word Tiger.
Here's the record from the USPTO:
Word Mark TIGER
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 78269988
Filing Date July 2, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition August 17, 2004
Owner (APPLICANT) Apple Computer, Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014
Attorney of Record John Donald
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
What's the deal with these low cost computers over the last few years. First the simputer for poor rural farmers in India that only cost about a year's salary. And more recently the $100 laptop coming out of MIT.
How about we really do something with technology to help these people? Like setting them up with running water, electricity, a house that doesn't leak? Maybe get them enough food or decent medical care... It seems like a waste to invest so much in giving out low cost computers to someone at risk of starving to death the next day or is at high risk of deadly illnesses.
It's a nice goal to have everyone connected. But you have to ask "why?" Are we trying to find a new source of ideas to exploit? I don't see how hooking people up to the net is going to help them out when their basic needs aren't met...
There's the education argument. I'm not sure whether these will provide more access to information. In certain areas it definitely will. But then what do you do with that education when you have no infrastructure to support it... I know it's slashdot and it's all about tech, but hwo about focusing on some tech that would really help people.
Everyone knows the only way to truly destroy the precious data on your old hard drive is to throw it in to the fires of Mount Doom where it was forged and watch that sucker melt.
Right after Apple released the iMac back in 1998, everyone started jumping on the "all-in-one" PC thing again. A new company at the time, eMachines, tried to market a near copy of it called the eOne PC. They were slapped with injunctions in the US and Tokyo shortly after that and later forced to stop production.
The review for the eOne is still up on epinions, along with a stock photo: eOne Photo
Daewoo tried something similar. They both got the smack down. See here.
Do you remember when Cobalt Networks was about to sue Apple over the Cube? Because of Cobalt's Qube design? Only to find out a few months later Apple owned NeXT at that point, which created the original Cube. At that point Cobalt changed their tune and decided suing might not be so smart. Some Cobalt info.
The reason for suing is brand dilution. When you make a look-a-like, you're copying a design that's identified with the product. It's the same reason stores brand soda tries to have similar color schemes to Coke, or Pepsi. You identify the product by the colors, shapes and patterns of the packaging or product itself.
I get what the Taiwanese company is doing. They would have been better off sticking to knock off Nintendo games though. I'd guarantee Apple already knows about the knock off at this point, and we'll probably be seeing lawsuits within a week or two.
If I had to guess, I'd go with, DRM, broadcast flag, and various forms of CD/DVD copy protection.
Unveil it? What the hell? This is not even remotely new information. This plane's info has been available for quite a while, even on Airbus' website. See their own website. Not only that, but one of the links in the article is just a blank page that says "Europe"...
Not to mention countless other places:
google
pretty pictures
chat about this back to 2001...
Nah, no one develops software for OS X. Oh... wait a minute! Yes they do!
;-)
Check out VersionTracker. I think you'll find more than you need or want. Considering the list of updated packages updated on any given day scrolls through several pages, I don't think you'll have to crack out gcc everytime you want some new softawre.
C'mon guys. This isn't news, especially since you reported it yourself here. It's just a two day old dupe of old news.
I never said Apple or the iPod would fail because of it.
I just don't think this particular feature will be received well because at best it's a marginalized capability. Mostly due to the iPod's design (sizewise). They can't go too far away from the formula that works.
I'm sure Apple will sell some of these, if only for the fact it's the only iPod that has 60GB. But I don't think we're going to see a repeat of the iPod mini success.
When Apple entered the portable audio market, there were mp3 player's galore. They just didn't do the job very well. They had a small capacity or clnky interfaces. The ones that had hard drives or used CDs were large clunky things. Apple came out with a sleek design that held a ton of music and has an intuitive easy to use interface. It's perfect.
I just don't see a bunch of people running around wishing they could tote hundreds of photos with them to show their friends. Palm's and Windows (CE name of the month) handhelds both have the capability. But you just don't see people running around with SD/MMC cards full of pictures hoping to show them to people.
That's my thinking. I don't think Apple's just committed the world's biggest blunder. But at the same time, I don't think they're going to strike gold with this either. At worst they're starting to tread near the area where they compromise a good product. I don't think they've done it yet, and I hope they don't.
It's possible. But most product's that try to incorporate things beyond their original design tend to marginalize the new functionality.
The iPod's design is meant to provide a small form factor and usability for listening to music. Now they've slapped a color display on it, which is the same size as the original.
Now that works fine for a few lines of text, but is that really large enough to comfortably look at pictures on? It's very much like pictures on a cell phone. The idea is good, but the implementation is lacking. It also reminds me of trying to browse the web on a cell phone... There's just not enough screen real estate to browse normal websites. Even if it can page through the screens, it's just not a fun experience and more frustrating that usable.
I think limiting factor is that by design the iPod is a music player. It's mean to be small and light. They can't stray too far from that and keep the successful formula.
For a portable photo viewer, something like a 4x6 or 5x7 high resolution screen is more realistic, but do you really want to tote something that size around as a music player? I certainly wouldn't. And if you look at the success of the iPod Mini, I think the target audience's answer is an obvious no.
I think a more realistic target platform for photo viewing would be something along the lines of a portable DVD player. Though, I can't say I know of anyone who has one. A laptop isn't much larger and is by far more functional.
The iPod just jumped the shark. There's a point in the life of a product where you try to integrate too much functionality. The iPod does music, and it does it very well.
Granted some people like these new integrated all in one cellphone, photoholder, music player, portable video players, but I'm going to have to go with "more is less" in this case.
I think certain devices (like the GameBoy Advance and the iPod) do well because they do one thing and they do it well. As long as they don't cripple or obfuscate the basic functionality, the iPod will still do fine. But once a company loses sight of what the product was made for and start trying to make it a swiss army knife, things tend to go downhill (N-Gage?).
I still like the iPod and I don't think it's going away. But I think Apple's starting to toe the line on the border swiss army knife land...
time-shifted Internet audio application
So basically, using an RSS and MP3 wrapper, they've created the 21st century equivalent of a tape recorder hooked up to a radio...