The biggest problem with SD is it's proprietary nature meaning any non-binary drivers have to be built from scratch. The specs are only availible from the SD Card Association under NDA.
I agree that people always hack consoles, but it's undeniable that the xbox has had more things done to it by more people and in a faster and more versatile way than just about any of the other players offerings. Okay, so there's Linux on the GameCube and PS2, but in no way can either of those compare to the various distributions availible for the xbox. Look at the way USB devices can be plugged in, not only the HD and DVD drive being replaced, but now the CPU and RAM being upgraded. The XDK is out there and there are independandt open-sourec efforts to create Dev Kits. The closest I've seen to this was with the Dreamcast, most hacks for the playstation were just chips to pirate games.
Microsofts next console may not be less hackable, but I'm sure it's something that they're looking at and it's something they've publically admitted to being concerned about.
It may be great for a company to be able to say "look we have an X million installed user base" but they also need that to be backed up with sales of actual games for the publishers to stick with the product and fund development.
With the original Xbox Microsoft ended up with an extremely open and hackable console mainly because of their single-minded drive to get into the console market. It was a sensible decision, use hardware and software that you'r already familiar with, throw a load of cash at it, get a good market share. We're now coming upto stage2 of the plan. Now microsoft have proved themselves as a serious player in the console market and gained some experience, they can look forward to the future. They're creating something that will be more of a traditional closed-architecture console in many ways and far far less of a pc-in-a-box. They'll have more control over the platform, less hackability and although through the original Xbox they've got a lot of users and developers on-side, they may have to prove themselves over again.
If you already have the file, please join the swarm anyway, the more seeders we have, the better this will work. To join as a seed, just download the.torrent file and open it in your client of choice as normal, but point the location to save the demo, to the location of your already downloaded demo.
Allthough 1000+ 'refurbs' could distort the 2nd-hand market a bit and I'm not sure Apple would want to buy them back, why don't VT make some money out of this. I'm sure that a Mac with an official "In my previous life I was part of BigMac" plaque on it would sell for more than the price of a vanilla 2Ghz G5. With all the publicity over the last 5/6 months these things are collectors items. VT could come out of this with a profit! (Guess I should have phrased this in a 1... 2... 3... Profit format);)
Not to mention that Linus and Alan's letter was dated yesterday and no committee I know of can come up with a decision let alone ammendments to a document like this in under 24 hours.
Certification costs don't seem to be a problem to me. After reading the rfc it seems that self-signed certificates are fine:
A system operator MAY establish different criteria for use over a private network. For example, an ISP may provide self-signed certificates for use by its customers from dynamically-allocated address space. The ISP system operator must use its own precautions to ensure that those self-signed certificates are considered valid only when presented from connections under its control.
Using self-certification a web of trust can be built up, if this is abused, then whichever server is casuing the problems can easily be removed as a trusted server from associated agents. Sure, the system isn't perfect, but it appears to provide a nice balance of compatibility and authentication without adversely effecting a users e-mail experience.
Overall a good and fair article of the browsers used by the majority of people, but what's this about Safari rendering Apple's ADC site incorrectly?
From Apple's Developer
page (which does not render properly in Safari)
It seems fine to me and looks exactly the same in Safari, IE, Camino. Sure, Safari has it's problems, and IMHO the pre-releases were more stable, although even more feature bereft that 1.0. I'm sure Safari 'final' was rushed out. this said I'd like the author of the article to back up his statement re these particular errors and ask whether he reported them to the Safari team at Apple and the Webmaster of the ADC site.
Erm... how did you come to this conclusion when there's a whole load of GPL'd tools as part of OS X, not least of which, gcc, Apple heavily use as the core of their IDE and of course pass all their modifications back to the FSF. They've been relying and contributing to GPL'd projects from the very beginning.
The Linux version is indeed just x86, but three versions (free, Pro-w/Ads and Pro-paid) are availible for the Mac. Alas no source for any platforms. Of course there are plenty of open prjects out there with varying degrees of compatibility with DivX Networks codecs.
Not to mention that it seems that a win32 codec download is still available...
Well, not exactly;) But the point is it's only the Win32 version that follows this 'pricing' format. Freed download of the 5.0.5 codec for Mac and Linux are still available.
It turns out that two-thirds of all threads in Usenet, in 2002, had a whopping two messages. And two-thirds of all authors are the people who write a message, post once one day, and never again.
Seems Microsoft have discovered spam in it's natural habitat. Apparently they're not tracing posts by ip, but by 'identity'... which makes it not surprising that many 'authors' appear and disappear. Spam is often from semi-randomised 'authors', case solved...
Any tracking system is going to have problems drawing valid conclusions from an inherently non forced-id based system, or one that is abused by bots/scripts/spammers with semi-random and constantly changing id's. This covers usenet and a lot of other 'communities' mentioned in the article. Of course, all spam would be eliminated, all communities would be solid, rated and useful, and the world would be a generally lovely place if Microsoft implemented a new protocol from the ground up which had embedded traceable and secure id's wouldn't it...
I can so see where this is all going:-/
Just to clarify, you only get the nice GUI's for a variety of servers, system monitoring apps, etc. with Mac OS X Server. The majority of actualy functionality is either there or readily available for Mac OS X client/standard, but you need to play under the hood or use third-party GUI's to configure them. Apache can be turned on simply by clicking the Web-Sharing button in System Prefs, but any custom configuration needs knowledge of Apache and the underpinnings of OS X.
They're obviously worried that something is in the wild that is hard-coded to attack WindowsUpdate.com, else there would be no point in abandoning that domain and moving to another.
Here, Here. Sales staff in generic electronics or other shops don't know about what they're selling full stop, let alone more obscure computer systems. If you find someone who does know what they're talking about, it's a rarity, not the norm, and their probably someone working there 'in-between' other jobs anyhow. Try going into any consumer electronics shop and getting accurate and informed information about Windows machines (or even that funky new dishwasher you've been looking at) and hardware they're selling, it ain't gonna happen. So it's not surprising that when these places end up selling Acorn's, Mac's, Linux boxen etc that they don't have a clue. When you have a customer withhout a clue and poorly paid staff without a clue, no sort of 'cheat-sheet' whould help. What would you put on there? Specs that make it sound like a windows system.... or obscure versions of kernel's and software that confuse the uninitiated?
I totally agree, and so do the authors of this book:
"Let's get one thing straight: this book is absolutely not a total security solution for your Linux computers. Don't even think it."
"....this book won't teach you security, but it will demonstrate helpful solutions to targeted problems, guiding you to close common security holes, and saving you the trouble of looking up specific syntax."
Also, accordeing to recent specs released by Apple (and rumoured from peoples visual inspection of machines at WWDC), each processor in the DP machines is on an individual daughter-card.
Except that toolkit is windows only:-/ (yes their are people working damn hard on Linux/OS X/etc tools, but IMHO you don't want to be learning in either a closed, or in-development dev enviornment)
Slashdot Mirror
The biggest problem with SD is it's proprietary nature meaning any non-binary drivers have to be built from scratch. The specs are only availible from the SD Card Association under NDA.
I agree that people always hack consoles, but it's undeniable that the xbox has had more things done to it by more people and in a faster and more versatile way than just about any of the other players offerings. Okay, so there's Linux on the GameCube and PS2, but in no way can either of those compare to the various distributions availible for the xbox. Look at the way USB devices can be plugged in, not only the HD and DVD drive being replaced, but now the CPU and RAM being upgraded. The XDK is out there and there are independandt open-sourec efforts to create Dev Kits. The closest I've seen to this was with the Dreamcast, most hacks for the playstation were just chips to pirate games.
Microsofts next console may not be less hackable, but I'm sure it's something that they're looking at and it's something they've publically admitted to being concerned about.
It may be great for a company to be able to say "look we have an X million installed user base" but they also need that to be backed up with sales of actual games for the publishers to stick with the product and fund development.
Flash media is generally not very durable, especially with frequent read/writes, also, per Mb, it's a lot more expensive than IDE HD's.
With the original Xbox Microsoft ended up with an extremely open and hackable console mainly because of their single-minded drive to get into the console market. It was a sensible decision, use hardware and software that you'r already familiar with, throw a load of cash at it, get a good market share.
We're now coming upto stage2 of the plan. Now microsoft have proved themselves as a serious player in the console market and gained some experience, they can look forward to the future. They're creating something that will be more of a traditional closed-architecture console in many ways and far far less of a pc-in-a-box. They'll have more control over the platform, less hackability and although through the original Xbox they've got a lot of users and developers on-side, they may have to prove themselves over again.
Is it just me or does it look suspiciously like a scene from the TV series of The Hitch Hikers Guide To The Galaxy?
If you already have the file, please join the swarm anyway, the more seeders we have, the better this will work. To join as a seed, just download the .torrent file and open it in your client of choice as normal, but point the location to save the demo, to the location of your already downloaded demo.
Will people please leave their torrent windows open once they've downloaded the demo. Suggested clients: Official BitTorrent client Azureus Java client
Aha, thanks for the info, I'll have to check it out (no pun intended).
I think one of the main reasons that people are having to stick with the 2.4.6 and 2.4.18 kernels is because of the binary-only SD driver from Sharp.
Allthough 1000+ 'refurbs' could distort the 2nd-hand market a bit and I'm not sure Apple would want to buy them back, why don't VT make some money out of this. I'm sure that a Mac with an official "In my previous life I was part of BigMac" plaque on it would sell for more than the price of a vanilla 2Ghz G5. With all the publicity over the last 5/6 months these things are collectors items. VT could come out of this with a profit! ;)
(Guess I should have phrased this in a 1... 2... 3... Profit format)
Not to mention that Linus and Alan's letter was dated yesterday and no committee I know of can come up with a decision let alone ammendments to a document like this in under 24 hours.
Erm... how did you come to this conclusion when there's a whole load of GPL'd tools as part of OS X, not least of which, gcc, Apple heavily use as the core of their IDE and of course pass all their modifications back to the FSF. They've been relying and contributing to GPL'd projects from the very beginning.
/me looks to the sky....waiting for petunias and whales
The Linux version is indeed just x86, but three versions (free, Pro-w/Ads and Pro-paid) are availible for the Mac. Alas no source for any platforms. Of course there are plenty of open prjects out there with varying degrees of compatibility with DivX Networks codecs.
Not to mention that it seems that a win32 codec download is still available...
Well, not exactly ;) But the point is it's only the Win32 version that follows this 'pricing' format. Freed download of the 5.0.5 codec for Mac and Linux are still available.
Any tracking system is going to have problems drawing valid conclusions from an inherently non forced-id based system, or one that is abused by bots/scripts/spammers with semi-random and constantly changing id's. This covers usenet and a lot of other 'communities' mentioned in the article. Of course, all spam would be eliminated, all communities would be solid, rated and useful, and the world would be a generally lovely place if Microsoft implemented a new protocol from the ground up which had embedded traceable and secure id's wouldn't it... I can so see where this is all going
Just to clarify, you only get the nice GUI's for a variety of servers, system monitoring apps, etc. with Mac OS X Server. The majority of actualy functionality is either there or readily available for Mac OS X client/standard, but you need to play under the hood or use third-party GUI's to configure them. Apache can be turned on simply by clicking the Web-Sharing button in System Prefs, but any custom configuration needs knowledge of Apache and the underpinnings of OS X.
They're obviously worried that something is in the wild that is hard-coded to attack WindowsUpdate.com, else there would be no point in abandoning that domain and moving to another.
Good point, blatant mistake on my part, thanks for picking it up. I shall make a mental note not to make the mistake again. ;)
Here, Here. Sales staff in generic electronics or other shops don't know about what they're selling full stop, let alone more obscure computer systems. If you find someone who does know what they're talking about, it's a rarity, not the norm, and their probably someone working there 'in-between' other jobs anyhow.
Try going into any consumer electronics shop and getting accurate and informed information about Windows machines (or even that funky new dishwasher you've been looking at) and hardware they're selling, it ain't gonna happen. So it's not surprising that when these places end up selling Acorn's, Mac's, Linux boxen etc that they don't have a clue.
When you have a customer withhout a clue and poorly paid staff without a clue, no sort of 'cheat-sheet' whould help. What would you put on there? Specs that make it sound like a windows system.... or obscure versions of kernel's and software that confuse the uninitiated?
Seems like the obvious choice to me, if people agree then both M$ and the Lawyers win... how does that help the forces of good!
I totally agree, and so do the authors of this book:
"Let's get one thing straight: this book is absolutely not a total security solution for your Linux computers. Don't even think it."
"....this book won't teach you security, but it will demonstrate helpful solutions to targeted problems, guiding you to close common security holes, and saving you the trouble of looking up specific syntax."
Also, accordeing to recent specs released by Apple (and rumoured from peoples visual inspection of machines at WWDC), each processor in the DP machines is on an individual daughter-card.
Except that toolkit is windows only :-/
(yes their are people working damn hard on Linux/OS X/etc tools, but IMHO you don't want to be learning in either a closed, or in-development dev enviornment)