The idea of shared wifi is to get wireless acess that leads to a wired connection that eventually leads to the internet(a series of wired networks sharing services). Why not move some of the shared services of the internet, and tune them for direct wifi use? Instead of needing a wifi connected to so WAN link to get access to slashdot.org, why not have palms, laptops, etc. use a combo webserver/cache + wifi? where they cache their visited sites, along with being able to host their own, and if you are in range, your network grows to encompass their websites...
So if you have a 512MB CF card, you could carry half a gig worth of websites, so that next time you pass by a palm pilot user, they could view all 1/2 gig of websites you have, as if they were via a normal connection to the internet...
This direct wifi p2p network would also work well with a customized IRC... anyone within signal distance would automaticly join the #wifi channel of the default server. it would ofcourse be a p2p irc server(where certain messages would have to be relayed, possibly), but it would allow for an entire internet cafe to join a virtual chatroom, just by being within range of eachother.
Services such as Freenet that create a more secured internet capable of websites and similar traffic, are getting close. And i2p (invisible internet project v2) might even hit it on the head, but all we need is some program, or api, or protocol (i am not sure how exactly it would be best to communicate directly to another wifi device) that lets us provide internet services (irc, im, www, etc.) by connecting directly with a wifi device in place of the traditional server.
use something like bochs, virtualPC, or wintel( a graphical bochs) to emulate an x86, and from there, you can get free(premade) freedos images to load right up. Pretty straight forward stuff:)
A second helpful thing on your POSIX compliance is that (virtually) all 'mainstream' operating systems outside of windows are posix compliant... *bsd, darwin(os x), linux, aix, solaris... the many corporate unices all have posix compatability... porting an X app or a command line app is easy, because they all share posix and X... once you get off windows and to a unix, switching between unices is relatively painless in the sense of porting software and file structure.:)
" Do you think a "couple extra bucks a month" are going to pay even the interest on the investment in burying a fiber to your home?"
Uh... no. That wasn't at all what i was asking for, though. What i want, is for ISPs to migrate to fastTCP in place of regular TCP... The fastTCP is able to do things to the protocol to(you guessed) go faster. it can be run on any media, since it is only an advanced TCP, but the speed increase is enormous, and well worth a "couple extra bucks a month"... This is a protocol upgrade, software, not a hardware upgrade like fiber.
that was exactly my line of thinking entirely. Maybe Apple can do a a corporate partnership with SGI, kind of a 'you rub my back, i'll rub yours' to enter a deal where SGI ports Maya(and whatever other highend apps they have) to the mac... I just don't know what apple has to give SGI.
I don't SGI would be willing to sell it's own software devision, but that would be highly cool as well. Well worth the money, for apple IMO.
Licensing OS X for x86, god, that just rekes of a bad idea. One of the first things Jobs did when he returned: killed the mac clones.
*Apple is a hardware company*, they make kickass software to sell kickass hardware (iLife sells iMacs, iTMS sells iPods...) They don't want to get rid of their BIGGEST MONEY MAKER by letting HP sell all the hardware on lowend boxes, and slapping macos on their... You can't keep the 'it just works' ideals of the mac that way, and Steve Jobs wouldn't allow it.
so apple will become the dominant player in the media market. Positioning themselves as the digital hub provider Steve has wanted to be for several years now. Since i only see this expanding, what should we expect from further buyouts and developments in music and movie making?
There were rumors for apple to buy one of the major record labels(vivendi, was it), this would give them a cheap access to the many thousands of artists it would now control(taking a bigger cut of that 99 cent deal than they normally would), while also give steve a better opportunity to open Apple Records(yes, i know of the cotract they would be breaking, humor me) to sign more indepedent artists and smaller labels like they did with the iTMS deal.
And what about Pixar, or Apple's highend video software? Could we see Apple merging with Pixar, or developing the Pixar animation software entirely? This would give Apple a huge customer of Disney, that is basicly following Pixar's every move, to this point.
So basicly, Apple has a lot of opportunity to OWN the video and music making software market. They could be THE company for all software to write produce create and deploy music or movies on for the forseeable future.
P.S. If this pipedream ever happened(I bet money it won't, btw), I would forsee a mac-favorable pricing deal similar to what Steve has done with other highend apps. Sell the APP for the thousands it would normally cost on the windows version, but sell the mac version for half that. if you save 2+ grand on the mac version, and save on all following upgrades, it pays to port your studio to all macs in software costs alone.... Thoughts, anyone?
buying in bulk makes things MUCH cheaper... i thought i read 70 bucks per drive, in quantities of several 10s of thousands at a time, but don't quote me.
A better question would be when will fastTCP get rolled out mainstream? paying a couple extra bucks a month(i pay 15/mo for dialup) to get fastTCP speeds(rediculous-fast, in some cases) would be worth it. plus, it would make broadband reach the supreme level of super-duper-fast.
The problem is, if the wars are to be fought by robots, then whose robots will ours fight? The US, for good or bad, is the world sole super power, and with our gigantic(*cringe*) military budget, we can build and develop these robots. But against who?
For the forseeable future, it will be US robots bombing military installations, so that both sides will be avoiding a frontline war in the trenches.
yes, IBM supports linux because it makes them money. IBM is a hardware and service company, they sell hardware and support contracts as their primary income. if linux is free to sell, then they don't have to take a chunk os a $1,000 dollar sale and give $100 of it away to Microsoft, they keep all $1,000 for themselves. That is fine by me.
but IBM has always been a hardware company... Why did they seek out, and then license the OS to their early PC(a contract Microsoft got with DOS, which they didn't own at the time, and leas to the Windows monopoly today)? They use software to sell hardware. They develop software to make money, yes, but that comes second to their hardware business(the same approach that Apple takes, by the way, only IBM is grossly more diversified)....
when IBM goes 100% linux, which they will, it is just a matter of when, you can bet to see oodles of code from what they have collected in their multiple operating systems(the mainframe OSes that are able to run linux, thanks to the porting project) and all their applications in one form or another will also be ported to linux.
What, you think IBM will back linux with billions of dollars and not use it themselves? And you think they will use it themselves but not bring along Notes, that they so heavily depend upon in Windows? No, they will migrate to linux, and they will bring all their internal and external software with them.:)
understandable, but you are IBM. You have the resources to port what apps you control, or fund development of WINE so that you can run what apps you can't port. Plus, the porting of ALL your apps also helps when you go to move another company to Linux. Eating your own food is the cheapest way to find what needs to be fixed and rush it's development in the corporate world.
I first read the headline and i thought it said the Internet Archive would be archiving L/GPL code.
That would be cool actually, like a 1stop shop for all the opensource cvs servers... get to see the linux kernel from.01 to 2.6.0 and a couple thousand other applications too. Oh well, the real story is neat too.
but then the question goes to: what would you rather have, innovation that leads to products, or innovation that leads to nothing? the latter can be more useful, when it is so innovative that it is simply too far ahead of its time, but i don't see microsoft having this. Apple's research has regularly turned out very new, creative and USEFUL applications and hardware.
my point being, apple is and was a hardware company. They produce amazing software to sell hardware. Examples: iTMS to sell iPods, iLife to sell iMacs/iBooks and all macs in general, really. So why would they produce xGrid software to run non-mac computers? they don't want to sell more pcs or sparc systems with xGrid installed. They want to sell xServers and powermacs with xGrid installed.
Microsoft has decided they want to develop software and have others sells that on their system. Apple develops software so they can sell it on their own system.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea of shared wifi is to get wireless acess that leads to a wired connection that eventually leads to the internet(a series of wired networks sharing services). Why not move some of the shared services of the internet, and tune them for direct wifi use? Instead of needing a wifi connected to so WAN link to get access to slashdot.org, why not have palms, laptops, etc. use a combo webserver/cache + wifi? where they cache their visited sites, along with being able to host their own, and if you are in range, your network grows to encompass their websites...
So if you have a 512MB CF card, you could carry half a gig worth of websites, so that next time you pass by a palm pilot user, they could view all 1/2 gig of websites you have, as if they were via a normal connection to the internet...
This direct wifi p2p network would also work well with a customized IRC... anyone within signal distance would automaticly join the #wifi channel of the default server. it would ofcourse be a p2p irc server(where certain messages would have to be relayed, possibly), but it would allow for an entire internet cafe to join a virtual chatroom, just by being within range of eachother.
Services such as Freenet that create a more secured internet capable of websites and similar traffic, are getting close. And i2p (invisible internet project v2) might even hit it on the head, but all we need is some program, or api, or protocol (i am not sure how exactly it would be best to communicate directly to another wifi device) that lets us provide internet services (irc, im, www, etc.) by connecting directly with a wifi device in place of the traditional server.
use something like bochs, virtualPC, or wintel( a graphical bochs) to emulate an x86, and from there, you can get free(premade) freedos images to load right up. Pretty straight forward stuff :)
A second helpful thing on your POSIX compliance is that (virtually) all 'mainstream' operating systems outside of windows are posix compliant... *bsd, darwin(os x), linux, aix, solaris... the many corporate unices all have posix compatability... porting an X app or a command line app is easy, because they all share posix and X... once you get off windows and to a unix, switching between unices is relatively painless in the sense of porting software and file structure. :)
" Do you think a "couple extra bucks a month" are going to pay even the interest on the investment in burying a fiber to your home?"
Uh... no. That wasn't at all what i was asking for, though. What i want, is for ISPs to migrate to fastTCP in place of regular TCP... The fastTCP is able to do things to the protocol to(you guessed) go faster. it can be run on any media, since it is only an advanced TCP, but the speed increase is enormous, and well worth a "couple extra bucks a month"... This is a protocol upgrade, software, not a hardware upgrade like fiber.
that was exactly my line of thinking entirely. Maybe Apple can do a a corporate partnership with SGI, kind of a 'you rub my back, i'll rub yours' to enter a deal where SGI ports Maya(and whatever other highend apps they have) to the mac... I just don't know what apple has to give SGI.
I don't SGI would be willing to sell it's own software devision, but that would be highly cool as well. Well worth the money, for apple IMO.
three words: NEVER, GONNA & HAPPEN.
Licensing OS X for x86, god, that just rekes of a bad idea. One of the first things Jobs did when he returned: killed the mac clones.
*Apple is a hardware company*, they make kickass software to sell kickass hardware (iLife sells iMacs, iTMS sells iPods...) They don't want to get rid of their BIGGEST MONEY MAKER by letting HP sell all the hardware on lowend boxes, and slapping macos on their... You can't keep the 'it just works' ideals of the mac that way, and Steve Jobs wouldn't allow it.
so apple will become the dominant player in the media market. Positioning themselves as the digital hub provider Steve has wanted to be for several years now. Since i only see this expanding, what should we expect from further buyouts and developments in music and movie making?
There were rumors for apple to buy one of the major record labels(vivendi, was it), this would give them a cheap access to the many thousands of artists it would now control(taking a bigger cut of that 99 cent deal than they normally would), while also give steve a better opportunity to open Apple Records(yes, i know of the cotract they would be breaking, humor me) to sign more indepedent artists and smaller labels like they did with the iTMS deal.
And what about Pixar, or Apple's highend video software? Could we see Apple merging with Pixar, or developing the Pixar animation software entirely? This would give Apple a huge customer of Disney, that is basicly following Pixar's every move, to this point.
So basicly, Apple has a lot of opportunity to OWN the video and music making software market. They could be THE company for all software to write produce create and deploy music or movies on for the forseeable future.
P.S. If this pipedream ever happened(I bet money it won't, btw), I would forsee a mac-favorable pricing deal similar to what Steve has done with other highend apps. Sell the APP for the thousands it would normally cost on the windows version, but sell the mac version for half that. if you save 2+ grand on the mac version, and save on all following upgrades, it pays to port your studio to all macs in software costs alone.... Thoughts, anyone?
buying in bulk makes things MUCH cheaper... i thought i read 70 bucks per drive, in quantities of several 10s of thousands at a time, but don't quote me.
So i firewire cable and a 40 gig ipod then? :)
What kind of realtime lossless compression could be done to suck that size down from 13gig/hour, i wonder.
A better question would be when will fastTCP get rolled out mainstream? paying a couple extra bucks a month(i pay 15/mo for dialup) to get fastTCP speeds(rediculous-fast, in some cases) would be worth it. plus, it would make broadband reach the supreme level of super-duper-fast.
The problem is, if the wars are to be fought by robots, then whose robots will ours fight? The US, for good or bad, is the world sole super power, and with our gigantic(*cringe*) military budget, we can build and develop these robots. But against who?
For the forseeable future, it will be US robots bombing military installations, so that both sides will be avoiding a frontline war in the trenches.
yes, IBM supports linux because it makes them money. IBM is a hardware and service company, they sell hardware and support contracts as their primary income. if linux is free to sell, then they don't have to take a chunk os a $1,000 dollar sale and give $100 of it away to Microsoft, they keep all $1,000 for themselves. That is fine by me.
but IBM has always been a hardware company... Why did they seek out, and then license the OS to their early PC(a contract Microsoft got with DOS, which they didn't own at the time, and leas to the Windows monopoly today)? They use software to sell hardware. They develop software to make money, yes, but that comes second to their hardware business(the same approach that Apple takes, by the way, only IBM is grossly more diversified)....
:)
when IBM goes 100% linux, which they will, it is just a matter of when, you can bet to see oodles of code from what they have collected in their multiple operating systems(the mainframe OSes that are able to run linux, thanks to the porting project) and all their applications in one form or another will also be ported to linux.
What, you think IBM will back linux with billions of dollars and not use it themselves? And you think they will use it themselves but not bring along Notes, that they so heavily depend upon in Windows? No, they will migrate to linux, and they will bring all their internal and external software with them.
they recruited the Novell workforce as the invasion army for SCO headquarters, ofcourse.
understandable, but you are IBM. You have the resources to port what apps you control, or fund development of WINE so that you can run what apps you can't port. Plus, the porting of ALL your apps also helps when you go to move another company to Linux. Eating your own food is the cheapest way to find what needs to be fixed and rush it's development in the corporate world.
I first read the headline and i thought it said the Internet Archive would be archiving L/GPL code.
.01 to 2.6.0 and a couple thousand other applications too. Oh well, the real story is neat too.
That would be cool actually, like a 1stop shop for all the opensource cvs servers... get to see the linux kernel from
just like the perfect girlfriend! :)
there are third-party applications that do this for you.
imagine an Xgrid cluster of these!
so don't read them. APPLE.slashdot.org should have clued you in.
macos 9 and prior are dead. you could code it yourself, but as for apple, they are osX only now.
but then the question goes to: what would you rather have, innovation that leads to products, or innovation that leads to nothing? the latter can be more useful, when it is so innovative that it is simply too far ahead of its time, but i don't see microsoft having this. Apple's research has regularly turned out very new, creative and USEFUL applications and hardware.
my point being, apple is and was a hardware company. They produce amazing software to sell hardware. Examples: iTMS to sell iPods, iLife to sell iMacs/iBooks and all macs in general, really. So why would they produce xGrid software to run non-mac computers? they don't want to sell more pcs or sparc systems with xGrid installed. They want to sell xServers and powermacs with xGrid installed.
Microsoft has decided they want to develop software and have others sells that on their system. Apple develops software so they can sell it on their own system.
yes, apple could do that.. but then why would you buy a mac?
battery promlem is resolved:
1. batteries die, period. from 1 1/2 years to 2 or 3 years of good life, but they will eventually die, no exception.
2. apple will sell you a new battery for 100 bucks, they install and all that.
3. you can buy the battery yourself from a 3rd party and install it(easy enough) for 50 bucks.
4. you can buy applecare for like 70 bucks for your ipod.