He never said Apple developed a codec, so no, he didn't refer to one. What he said was that it was interesting to see the difference in how the two companies approach a 'techincal problem'.
Apple has their zeroconf. What could be the wave on which home network surfs into ubiquity, Apple decided to make it an open standard, not just an Apple product. Now, Apple employees the lead developer of the standard and is way ahead of the curve.
Other examples would be things like Apple using things like SAMBA, CUPS, and (while not an open standard, an open source project) their Safari browser, based on KHTML is one of the most standard compliant browsers on the market(far beyong IE, in which, again, Microsoft chose to make proprietary extensions and flaws that drasticly change they way code is dispplayed.. Then they essentially dropped support of it for everything but security holes, which still exist.
I agree, it is a decent try for an initial release.
I think a version 02 would have an ethernet port or an ethernet adaptor plus a wireless nice/PCMCIA port for that use.
The more connected(and remain cheap) it can get, the better it will be for these devices to be sold to rural areas..
Now just imagine for a moment.
Get a handful of these devices with builtin 802.11B(cheap and well used). Put (ideally) a custom, stripped down, Ubuntu linux on their. Very basic, almost Kiosk mode, limiting you to your user folder only... Really hide the technology for those who don't know (ma and pa's of the world)... Now, implement a zeroconf implementation a la Apple's rendezvous. Now, if you have these devices within a couple hundred feet of eachother (read:small village) you can now automatically network them just by turning them on!
This leverages the ability to share files and communicate with the outside world. Imagine if one of these had a collection of e-books or teaching software, now anyone can network wireless to access it and have a (short)distance learning school setup.
"Bush has said often that there will not be a draft, there are enough troops."
Other than (another) verbal slip-ups a few nights ago, both Kerry and Bush have repetedly said there will be no draft. They have never left wiggle-room on the issue, they are ALWAYS very clearly against the idea, from both sides.
"Kerry says we need 40,000 more troops."
So does the General on the ground, I believe, who was quoted as saying we didn't have enough troops(correct me if I am wrong, that was from memory). Kerry, hasn't specifically outlined, as far as I know, from where he will get the troops. Most likely, he will do what Bush was considering to do in place of a draft, relocate troops from Europe and Asia(not all, just some) and have them go to Iraq... Since they are trained army and marine soldiers(and not National Guardsman), I am surprised this didn't happen earlier... Why weren't National Gaurdsman being sent to replace European-based American Soldiers so more veteran better trained troops could fight the war in Iraq?
"Kerry has said that he would go to war in Iraq. He hasn't been real clear, and who knows what he would have really done..."
OK, seriously, for all practical purposes, Kerry has explained what he would have like to see done(what he would have done) multiple times. A couple of times in the debates, even. A handful come to mind. John Kerry's website, which he has stated multiple times on national tv, explains in detail his plans(esspecially how he plans to pay for things like Health Care and such).
Kerry, so he has said, would have passed the UN resolution, and let UN inspectors do their job. Bush did not put the resolution to a vote and pulled the UN inspectors.
(This would have likely shown that Saddam did not have the WMD the Administration originally believed. Heck, I admit, the Federal Government as a whole(both parties) believed it. So everyone made that mistake. However, Bush pulled the inspectors before they could determine if there actually was a threat or not. Big mistake.)
Assuming those two acts would have failed(you have to atleast TRY the peaceful way before you try the military way) Kerry would have moved forward with the invasion. He would have also stressed the creation of a coalition... (don't EVEN start to defend our coalition today... Look at troop count, look at countries on the list, it is a JOKE. Palau, Rwanda, Latvia, Ethiopia. The vast majority are relatively miniscule, with only a few 'core' allies that are still supplying less than what, 5% of the troops?
So Kerry would have put a coalition together, one similar to the Gulf War(I). This would have been far more practical then, then now, because the US went through the diplomatic steps that Bush skipped over. We wouldn't look like war mongers to the world, so they would be more likely to support our cause.
Kerry, then, with his reasonably larger(but not necesarily Gulf-War-I-sized coalition, would have gone ahead and invaded Iraq to remove Saddam as Bush did. Prior to the invasion, Kery would have spelled out a plan for the peace. Iraqi police training and such, to get Iraq to support itself. This is essentially the way Bush has acted, only to my understanding, Kerry would have made a plan prior to attacking and make it public, Bush has a more after-the-fact peace plan.
Some democrats (Not kerry, AFAIK) have tried to start a draft. Call a political play, but the fact is it is the democrats that are trying to start the draft.
There were 2. Two moronic Democrats that put the bill out their. The Republican leadership did the right thing, called this rediculous bill for a vote, and almost unanimously had it denied. Kerry was in no way a supporter or backer of it... Neither was any sane man on the planet. It was a petty political move, don't blame Bush OR Kerry for that.
"In short, you are more in danger - on this issue - if Kerry is elected."
"I'm afraid this totally rocks. This is why Microsoft is so rich... they keep doing things that totally rock."
You must be new hear.
Yes, this does have a potential to be very cool. But to say that this 'cool' announcement is on par for Microsoft is, at best, laughable. Microsoft is not rich because of it's ability to innovate. They are rich because of their ability to create an industry-wide vendor lock-in. From their, Microsoft is given the capital and userbase to evolve their software for a joke(win 3.0 and earlier, IE prior to, what, 4?) to pretty damn impressive,(Office for Win/Mac, Windows XP - plug'n'play specifically, Active Directory).
Microsoft is not an innovative company. That isn't a horrible blasphemis thing to say, it just isn't their style. Microsoft is an evolution company.. Release a product, sell it at sub par or lower quality initially to fund the devlopment of the next, better software. Rinse, repeat. Viola! Impressive, though not perfect, software.
Um, actually, they publicly flaunt that you get to use your iPod as an external harddrive for non-music files... That is one of their selling points in justifying large harddrives for people with non-large ammounts of music.
Oh My God! In just a few short moments, you completely outsmarted and debunked an ad campaign by Apple that hasn't even started yet.
Granted, they make the world's most popular MP3 player. Granted, they make the world's most used online music store. Granted, they ARE the digital hub company. But gosh, you sure showed them. I bet the entire iPod dev team just got fired for somebody not noticing that one.
Good thing you outsmarted Apple so early, they could have made a HUGE mistake there.
Apple doesn't DRM their OSes... You do not receive(nor required to enter on install or later) a activation/product key.. I believe you are given an optional 'registration' type mini-survey that gets sent to Apple, but no personal information is sent, nor is it required.
Apple doesn't care if you pirate it. They want you to buy it, they make multi-licenses and such a sweet deal and make it worth the money for single licenses. However, Apple makes money on the hardware, and the more users on the latest version of their OS, the less they have to support the old version and the more they can move forward.
Those "Dell's of the world" are under legal contract(covered in secrecy by trade secret laws) to use IE, an Windows Media, etc. as the default programs.
This information was leaked over the years, most notably during Be Inc's campiagn to GIVE AWAY any major OEM that wished to ship BeOS... None did, soley for the reason that they would be penalized heavily by Microsoft in the form of losing bulk sale deals, driving costs up in a very thin margin market.
Only small and MAYBE medium OEMs could even consider it.
Simple fix... Have 2 indexes, one public, shared over the entire computer, one private, for the specific user only.
All PUBLIC data(shared documents, etc) are in the public index, and all users can see them, private data, like documents in a user's home folder are sent to the private index.
GDS would then combine the two transparently for search results.
Any compitent person at slashdot(the "we" you are referring to) should have realized that a decade ago. Compare clock-to-clock a ppc(not just a mac, an ibm or moto box would work, but macs are most obvious) to an intel. PPC's do things (some, not necesarily all) in a much more efficient way, so an intel 1.2 ghz p4, doesn't necesarily mean it is faster than a motorla 1.0ghz G4. Quite the opposite most of the time.
Sparc and Alpha processors were the same way, to some extent. Basicly, Intel racked 1 category that determines performance up so high, that it compensated for x86 less-efficient designs. That isn't bad, but once that 1 category can't get racked up higher as easily, Intel needs to start looking at other factors on hardware design, distances and improved layout, frontside bus speeds, etc to make that 3 ghz box, actually perform to its potential.
That is why any sane company should make fat-binaries and have it be easy to create cross-platform binaries from their developer software(visual studio) the same way... TA-DA... steve jobs did with Nextstep in PPC and x86.
It appears that they are acting on the powers given to them by the Patriot Act. Revoke that, or atleast the parts giving agencies no need of judicial oversight(used in 'suspected' terrorists), etc. But then again, they are under a gag order...
Re:Overpriced small laptop?
on
OQO For Sale
·
· Score: 1
Buy one, but wait for the second version of the model.
The price isn't too bad, and the specs are decent. But USB 1.1, the processor, etc are a bit out of date. I would but they want enough money from the 01 model to fund the 02, and to get 02 on the market as fast as possible.
One of these machines, with 512meg RAM,.11g wifi, and a bit beefier processor(1.4ghz+) and I could see myself looking toward getting one.
now count how many have to do with 98se.... aww... a mildly(spybot, avg, software firewall, patches, good reliable hardware drives, firefox, stupid settings turned OFF, etc) locked down 98se is arguably more secure than a mildly locked down 2k/xp, as 99% of new vulnerabilties are not applicaable.
Now a strongly(relatively) locked down(hardware firewall, etc) 98 or xp is a whole nother story entirely.
The Ubuntu version of Synaptic(i believe), the graphical package manager for Apt, is as easy as any version I have seen. It is comparable, in my opinion, to Freebsd's ports system is ease of use and options. Very nice software, I wish we would either have Synaptic support source-based and rpm packages as well, or move to.debs... These standards should just happen, redhat needs to bite the bullet and give up on rpm, if they can'r release good, graphical easy-to-use software for it(like yum, which again, imo is good software for the command-line).
1 program for each category of software use(office, IM, email, calcultator, chat, etc).
All options have a graphical program that can be used to access them.
All programs are inherintly graphical, (gui IRC over irssi) if there is not a compelling reason to have 2 version of the same functionality of software.
Where practical and logical, have a gui and command-line version of software(firefox and lynx, vi(or something more simple, woudl be great) and OO.o or jedit,etc. wget and nautilus.
*sigh*
Oh well, that is just what i WISH fedora was, or any distro... ubuntu being the closest yet...
But then again, I would like to see a netBSD-based distro using ncurses as a graphical(text-based, actually) interface with plug-and-play like settings for easy use on the power user's desktop.
Slashdot Mirror
Not with the anti-gravity hover plates that come stock with the quad-processor model!
Forgive me, I couldn't resist.
You just need to by higher end PCs then:)
He never said Apple developed a codec, so no, he didn't refer to one. What he said was that it was interesting to see the difference in how the two companies approach a 'techincal problem'.
Apple has their zeroconf. What could be the wave on which home network surfs into ubiquity, Apple decided to make it an open standard, not just an Apple product. Now, Apple employees the lead developer of the standard and is way ahead of the curve.
Other examples would be things like Apple using things like SAMBA, CUPS, and (while not an open standard, an open source project) their Safari browser, based on KHTML is one of the most standard compliant browsers on the market(far beyong IE, in which, again, Microsoft chose to make proprietary extensions and flaws that drasticly change they way code is dispplayed.. Then they essentially dropped support of it for everything but security holes, which still exist.
I agree, it is a decent try for an initial release.
I think a version 02 would have an ethernet port or an ethernet adaptor plus a wireless nice/PCMCIA port for that use.
The more connected(and remain cheap) it can get, the better it will be for these devices to be sold to rural areas..
Now just imagine for a moment.
Get a handful of these devices with builtin 802.11B(cheap and well used). Put (ideally) a custom, stripped down, Ubuntu linux on their. Very basic, almost Kiosk mode, limiting you to your user folder only... Really hide the technology for those who don't know (ma and pa's of the world)... Now, implement a zeroconf implementation a la Apple's rendezvous. Now, if you have these devices within a couple hundred feet of eachother (read:small village) you can now automatically network them just by turning them on!
This leverages the ability to share files and communicate with the outside world. Imagine if one of these had a collection of e-books or teaching software, now anyone can network wireless to access it and have a (short)distance learning school setup.
Too much?
by bluGill (862) on Saturday October 23, @07:30AM (#10608488)"
Props to your User ID, that has to be by far the lowest I have seen on /.
"Bush has said often that there will not be a draft, there are enough troops."
Other than (another) verbal slip-ups a few nights ago, both Kerry and Bush have repetedly said there will be no draft. They have never left wiggle-room on the issue, they are ALWAYS very clearly against the idea, from both sides.
"Kerry says we need 40,000 more troops."
So does the General on the ground, I believe, who was quoted as saying we didn't have enough troops(correct me if I am wrong, that was from memory). Kerry, hasn't specifically outlined, as far as I know, from where he will get the troops. Most likely, he will do what Bush was considering to do in place of a draft, relocate troops from Europe and Asia(not all, just some) and have them go to Iraq... Since they are trained army and marine soldiers(and not National Guardsman), I am surprised this didn't happen earlier... Why weren't National Gaurdsman being sent to replace European-based American Soldiers so more veteran better trained troops could fight the war in Iraq?
"Kerry has said that he would go to war in Iraq. He hasn't been real clear, and who knows what he would have really done..."
OK, seriously, for all practical purposes, Kerry has explained what he would have like to see done(what he would have done) multiple times. A couple of times in the debates, even. A handful come to mind. John Kerry's website, which he has stated multiple times on national tv, explains in detail his plans(esspecially how he plans to pay for things like Health Care and such).
Kerry, so he has said, would have passed the UN resolution, and let UN inspectors do their job. Bush did not put the resolution to a vote and pulled the UN inspectors.
(This would have likely shown that Saddam did not have the WMD the Administration originally believed. Heck, I admit, the Federal Government as a whole(both parties) believed it. So everyone made that mistake. However, Bush pulled the inspectors before they could determine if there actually was a threat or not. Big mistake.)
Assuming those two acts would have failed(you have to atleast TRY the peaceful way before you try the military way) Kerry would have moved forward with the invasion. He would have also stressed the creation of a coalition... (don't EVEN start to defend our coalition today... Look at troop count, look at countries on the list, it is a JOKE. Palau, Rwanda, Latvia, Ethiopia. The vast majority are relatively miniscule, with only a few 'core' allies that are still supplying less than what, 5% of the troops?
So Kerry would have put a coalition together, one similar to the Gulf War(I). This would have been far more practical then, then now, because the US went through the diplomatic steps that Bush skipped over. We wouldn't look like war mongers to the world, so they would be more likely to support our cause.
Kerry, then, with his reasonably larger(but not necesarily Gulf-War-I-sized coalition, would have gone ahead and invaded Iraq to remove Saddam as Bush did. Prior to the invasion, Kery would have spelled out a plan for the peace. Iraqi police training and such, to get Iraq to support itself. This is essentially the way Bush has acted, only to my understanding, Kerry would have made a plan prior to attacking and make it public, Bush has a more after-the-fact peace plan.
Some democrats (Not kerry, AFAIK) have tried to start a draft. Call a political play, but the fact is it is the democrats that are trying to start the draft.
There were 2. Two moronic Democrats that put the bill out their. The Republican leadership did the right thing, called this rediculous bill for a vote, and almost unanimously had it denied. Kerry was in no way a supporter or backer of it... Neither was any sane man on the planet. It was a petty political move, don't blame Bush OR Kerry for that.
"In short, you are more in danger - on this issue - if Kerry is elected."
I have to disagree, s
Which one will fit in your pocket or small bag, for use when you need a server or portable desktop on the go?
maybe netbsd for the pocketPC platform, but not a native x86 OS, sadly.
Zarf: 1
Burns210: 0
Game. Set. Match.
"I'm afraid this totally rocks. This is why Microsoft is so rich... they keep doing things that totally rock."
You must be new hear.
Yes, this does have a potential to be very cool. But to say that this 'cool' announcement is on par for Microsoft is, at best, laughable. Microsoft is not rich because of it's ability to innovate. They are rich because of their ability to create an industry-wide vendor lock-in. From their, Microsoft is given the capital and userbase to evolve their software for a joke(win 3.0 and earlier, IE prior to, what, 4?) to pretty damn impressive,(Office for Win/Mac, Windows XP - plug'n'play specifically, Active Directory).
Microsoft is not an innovative company. That isn't a horrible blasphemis thing to say, it just isn't their style. Microsoft is an evolution company.. Release a product, sell it at sub par or lower quality initially to fund the devlopment of the next, better software. Rinse, repeat. Viola! Impressive, though not perfect, software.
Don't kid yourself.
TiVo with 10 seasons of Friends....
A tivo with a multi-terabyte raid 0 array built-into a settop box that plugs into my TV for saving digital recordings... Oh my, there is a god.
Um, actually, they publicly flaunt that you get to use your iPod as an external harddrive for non-music files... That is one of their selling points in justifying large harddrives for people with non-large ammounts of music.
Oh My God! In just a few short moments, you completely outsmarted and debunked an ad campaign by Apple that hasn't even started yet.
Granted, they make the world's most popular MP3 player. Granted, they make the world's most used online music store. Granted, they ARE the digital hub company. But gosh, you sure showed them. I bet the entire iPod dev team just got fired for somebody not noticing that one.
Good thing you outsmarted Apple so early, they could have made a HUGE mistake there.
Apple doesn't DRM their OSes... You do not receive(nor required to enter on install or later) a activation/product key.. I believe you are given an optional 'registration' type mini-survey that gets sent to Apple, but no personal information is sent, nor is it required.
Apple doesn't care if you pirate it. They want you to buy it, they make multi-licenses and such a sweet deal and make it worth the money for single licenses. However, Apple makes money on the hardware, and the more users on the latest version of their OS, the less they have to support the old version and the more they can move forward.
Those "Dell's of the world" are under legal contract(covered in secrecy by trade secret laws) to use IE, an Windows Media, etc. as the default programs.
This information was leaked over the years, most notably during Be Inc's campiagn to GIVE AWAY any major OEM that wished to ship BeOS... None did, soley for the reason that they would be penalized heavily by Microsoft in the form of losing bulk sale deals, driving costs up in a very thin margin market.
Only small and MAYBE medium OEMs could even consider it.
Simple fix... Have 2 indexes, one public, shared over the entire computer, one private, for the specific user only.
All PUBLIC data(shared documents, etc) are in the public index, and all users can see them, private data, like documents in a user's home folder are sent to the private index.
GDS would then combine the two transparently for search results.
Yes, absolutely I do. It didn't dawn on me, buy .net is excatly the right way to support multiple architectures.
.net app that runs on the the .net framework.
Along with the HAL and what not for the core system. Just make every app(notepad to MS Word) be a
Different solution, same end result.
Any compitent person at slashdot(the "we" you are referring to) should have realized that a decade ago. Compare clock-to-clock a ppc(not just a mac, an ibm or moto box would work, but macs are most obvious) to an intel. PPC's do things (some, not necesarily all) in a much more efficient way, so an intel 1.2 ghz p4, doesn't necesarily mean it is faster than a motorla 1.0ghz G4. Quite the opposite most of the time.
Sparc and Alpha processors were the same way, to some extent. Basicly, Intel racked 1 category that determines performance up so high, that it compensated for x86 less-efficient designs. That isn't bad, but once that 1 category can't get racked up higher as easily, Intel needs to start looking at other factors on hardware design, distances and improved layout, frontside bus speeds, etc to make that 3 ghz box, actually perform to its potential.
That is why any sane company should make fat-binaries and have it be easy to create cross-platform binaries from their developer software(visual studio) the same way... TA-DA... steve jobs did with Nextstep in PPC and x86.
It appears that they are acting on the powers given to them by the Patriot Act. Revoke that, or atleast the parts giving agencies no need of judicial oversight(used in 'suspected' terrorists), etc. But then again, they are under a gag order...
Buy one, but wait for the second version of the model.
.11g wifi, and a bit beefier processor(1.4ghz+) and I could see myself looking toward getting one.
The price isn't too bad, and the specs are decent. But USB 1.1, the processor, etc are a bit out of date. I would but they want enough money from the 01 model to fund the 02, and to get 02 on the market as fast as possible.
One of these machines, with 512meg RAM,
What mod would be needed for an x86 computer? Just so long as the drivers exist, but that is true of any PC you buy... Modding not required here.
now count how many have to do with 98se.... aww... a mildly(spybot, avg, software firewall, patches, good reliable hardware drives, firefox, stupid settings turned OFF, etc) locked down 98se is arguably more secure than a mildly locked down 2k/xp, as 99% of new vulnerabilties are not applicaable.
Now a strongly(relatively) locked down(hardware firewall, etc) 98 or xp is a whole nother story entirely.
Fink(and fink commander) very nicely and graphically install lynx and irssi on my machine without prolems and without mistake.
Makes me feel warm inside when I can have text irc going around a lickable gui... *mmm*
The Ubuntu version of Synaptic(i believe), the graphical package manager for Apt, is as easy as any version I have seen. It is comparable, in my opinion, to Freebsd's ports system is ease of use and options. Very nice software, I wish we would either have Synaptic support source-based and rpm packages as well, or move to .debs... These standards should just happen, redhat needs to bite the bullet and give up on rpm, if they can'r release good, graphical easy-to-use software for it(like yum, which again, imo is good software for the command-line).
1 program for each category of software use(office, IM, email, calcultator, chat, etc).
All options have a graphical program that can be used to access them.
All programs are inherintly graphical, (gui IRC over irssi) if there is not a compelling reason to have 2 version of the same functionality of software.
Where practical and logical, have a gui and command-line version of software(firefox and lynx, vi(or something more simple, woudl be great) and OO.o or jedit,etc. wget and nautilus.
*sigh*
Oh well, that is just what i WISH fedora was, or any distro... ubuntu being the closest yet...
But then again, I would like to see a netBSD-based distro using ncurses as a graphical(text-based, actually) interface with plug-and-play like settings for easy use on the power user's desktop.