And until the A1200/A4000 series, the UART's sucked on the Amiga as well. Use too high a resolution whilest getting a burst at 14.4K+ and you'd miss some data.
Of course... This sort of thing happened all the time in Windows 3.1 and that wasn't NEAR as much fun!:)
When will these people learn that if you can hear it, you can crack it? Is anyone here at Slashdot at all surprised by this? Why is it that the RIAA and Apple will act shocked by this news everytime?
If I buy it, it will be because I can put it where I want it. If these people continue to play games with DRM they will:
1) Spend WAY too much money trying to reengineer a 'non-crackable' standard.
2) Piss off a present and future customer the first time he/she wants to copy the song to a non-compliant device.
3) Discourge yet another generation from actually buying music rather than downloading free versions of it. Free as in beer, free as in freedom (DRM-free).
And it would've been inadmissible in court. Our lawyer was very skilled but when this was suggested he told us that it would be DEATH to our case.
Before my father learned the hard way what blind loyalty and trust in the gov't will do to you, we would never have DREAMED of breaking or bending such a rule.
I suspect that most Americans are like this, simply following the path of least resistance. Knowing what I know now (due much in part to this incident and the Internet), there's a LOT more we could have done but due to the way power was structured for the IRS, it still would've taken a congressional order to fix this.
It wasn't until later in the Reagan administration that the powers of the IRS were scaled back a bit and that business with the tape recorder/lawyer rule was recinded.
You realize of course that the type of media involved here would almost certainly need to be incased in some sort of plastic sheath (Like the Blu-Ray HD DVDs). One scratch and you'd be done!
Not as portable, and certainly not as cheap to produce. A format like this would be a godsend for admins who do backups but as a common medium... Well, I imagine it might get as popular as something like Super Audio CD's or CD+G's for music.
...If the damned IRS could keep it's OWN records straight, much less mesh them with others.
My father found out the hard way what happens between IRS 'zones' (we moved around a lot - military). There was a discrepancy (totally honest) that didn't show for almost 20 years and then they tried to slam us for back payments with interest. This is something that they KNEW about at the time, but never informed us through any other zone.
It took the work of a local representative to clear things up. At that time you couldn't even bring a lawyer or tape recorder in with you when you went to see them.
This is the kind of headline that scares me (and should scare YOU) green!:O
...I always buy whatever card gives me the most bang for the buck. I could care less about Macrovision since no DVD I watch ends up having it anyway regardless.
Based on what I'm hearing about NV40 (16 pipelines, MPEG encoding acceleration, etc.), it seems that Nvidia will be getting my business again this summer, and that hasn't happened for a couple of years now. I currently own a Radeon 9800 Pro.
I suppose it all depends on your application, but it seems silly to diss a card just because the rules that already exist are being enforced -albeit more stringently. Besides, do you really believe that the drivers are 'unhackable'?
I admit it, I'm the bitch when it comes to stuff I like also. Yes, if the ticket price to ROTK was $15.00, I probably would've done it. And YES, I'll be getting the special handcarved edition of ROTK in November - the one with the cut scene of Gimli's tobacco chewing accident.
Seriously though, Slashdot is probably one of the last places to talk about entertainment on TV since I suspect most of us consider our cable modems, ADSL lines, and T3's to be our main source of fun.
Think about this for a moment: How much would you pay for broadband - if you had to? Can you live without it once you've had it? Given no choice would you be a provider's bitch yourself and pay double - TRIPLE? I'll bet you would. Hey! Why not get Discovery HD thrown in as a package deal, hmmmmm?:)
I suspect the main reason why they don't is related to bundling from the providers. I think the cableco either loses money or breaks even on customers like you and my parents.
Still, the cableco figures, "What the hell, at least it will help offset costs..." Of course, if EVERYONE tried to do that the result would be an insolvent provider.
My parents were going to discontinue their cable service but are litterally in a 'rock in a hard place' as far as picking up any local stations on rabbit ears.
Nonetheless, my dad made the call and was informed that there was an unadvertised package for $15/month that would give them basic local and a few other channels. They called it the 'basic-basic' plan or some such garbage. I guess it was a way to keep people like my parents for leaving completely.
The cablecos know their pricing is out of hand, but the fact is, the PROVIDERS of the channels are equally blameworthy, if not more so.
Viacom: "Tell ya what. We'll give you VH2, MTV2 and 3, and the Munchkin Channel as part of our package deal!"
Comcast Exec: "Yeah, but all we really want is VH2 and MTV 2 and 3..."
Viacom: "Ah, so sorry. These channels only come as a package... Say! Would you like some Food Channel to go along with that?"
How exactly is this going to solve the problem of companies like Viacom charging for their own package deals? You all realize of course that this is how it works for cablecos as well?
I'm all for choice, but this will in no way affect the PROVIDERS of the entertainment. The American public has already shown a willingness to basically pay whatever they have to for their entertainment (look at ticket prices to any event nowadays for proof!) The program providers know this and so no matter what the cablecos do to split up channel selections, THEY will still pay out the ass.
...Google goes public. That's when it will most likely jump the shark - just like most other high-flying tech companies forced to keep up that unrealistic opening stock price.
I predict you'll see them charging for more inclusive searches and trying to gouge their advertisers for more revenue.
Don't get me wrong, I hope I'm not right, but there's a long track record of others who have gone this way before. Google is smart, investors aren't.
That's just it, Google manages to satisfy everyone they deal with:
- People who use the searching tools for free - Advertisers who want targets ads - Affiliates that carry the ads
It's a totally amazing business model that no one else has quite gotten right. I don't regret a dime we have spent with Google and their services as we have seen it returned to us 100-fold.
Cut me some slack over here! I've done what I can to promote OSS soutions at my school. In fact, we were the first school listed at OOo to go completely to it, so you're preaching to the choir here. Bottom line on Windows: When they release Photoshop for Linux we'll be one step closer to cutting the Windows cord.
As it is, Windows does what we need it to do (for the most part). Home directories, centralized directory system, the whole deal. That doesn't mean I haven't been using Linux here or planning for a bigger rollout of it, but it DOES mean that there needs to be better integration before I dive in completely.
So, I bitch a little about something so basic - especially considering I now use StarOffice 7 in-house and OOo for student installs. Installing OOo easily shouldn't be an issue for ANY OS - don't make excuses.
Things are well documented on how to install a program for all users under Windows. I know this since plenty of other programs seem to handle it. I also know it's a relatively simple fix for certain configs as they are relying on Local User keys as opposed to Local Machine ones. That change alone might not fix the problems in Term Server installs but the reg hack I use (which does the same thing) fixes it for W2K/WXP client installs.
I realize it's very different from the way the Mac or Linux does it, but you and I both know that the vast majority of OOo users will be on Windows first. What vexes me is that we have to wait until OOo 2.0 (StarOffice 8) to truly realize this and that's a year away.
And please, let's not flame over which system installs things the best. Last I checked Linux users still have to worry about dependancies, patched kernels, and/or editing scripts to get shit to work. EVERY OS has issues. If OOo wants to be a true player in Windows (especially in corporate) it will have to play by the rules people are familiar with.
This is the standard form answer Sun sends you on forum when you have ANY question regarding installation on Terminal Server / Citrix:
"It has been our experience that terminal servers are generally used only in small and medium-sized businesses and, to a lesser extent, in some larger companies.
For this reason, StarOffice was not specifically developed for or adapted to terminal server software. This is also why support for StarOffice on a terminal server needs to be handled differently than usual through a Sun sales rep.
Please contact your Sun sales representative to get further information on how to install and work with StarOffice on a terminal server."
I know plenty of small businesses and school like ours that use TS. I'd hardly call us an 'enterprise'. It bothers me that Sun puts this in that category.
So you got it working with 'no problems' huh? Tell me, how did you solve the local vs. global registry issues? Did you generate a response file for the/net install or do each of your users need to do a mini-install the first time they log into a machine?
I'm not saying it can't be done. But look at the forums for a few minutes and you will see request after request for information on installation on multi-user systems. It's not because the docs aren't being read either - it's that the install is BROKEN. They know it, that's why it gets a total revamp in 2.0.
No, how about YOU actually DO it in my environment? Check the forums - it works as long as your users understand how to do a small install on login.
Not acceptable here. I have 24 computers in our labs. No student 'owns' a computer - they sit where there is space. So what, they're supposed to do a quick install everytime they log in to a new computer? What about when I reinstall the lab (every month or so). They all get to reinstall again. That's stupid.
Also, see Sun's advice about installing Open/StarOffice on a Terminal Server. They tell you to call them... Wow, great help those docs!
Check the features list for Version 2.0 and you'll see one of the biggest improvements is in the install process as it relates to multiple user environments. There's a reason for this...
I'm a big supporter of OOo here at Linden Hall but I gotta tell you that this is the suckiest thing about Open/StarOffice.
This has been an issue since day uno and I can't figure out why they haven't prioritized this - especially in light of the fact that Sun is using the code to go head to head against MS! Sure, the install process will be completely changed in V. 2.0, but that's at least a YEAR AWAY!
As it is, I have to use a script and a reg hack to make StarOffice work for all users in my labs without foolishness. I can kind of understand why Sun may not want it to work with Terminal Services - they require you to call them if you want to install it on a term server (unbelievable in itself); but not supporting multiple users in XP HOME??!! WTF??!! This is the sort of thing MS can pick on because it's totally true.
Slashdot Mirror
And until the A1200/A4000 series, the UART's sucked on the Amiga as well. Use too high a resolution whilest getting a burst at 14.4K+ and you'd miss some data.
:)
Of course... This sort of thing happened all the time in Windows 3.1 and that wasn't NEAR as much fun!
When will these people learn that if you can hear it, you can crack it? Is anyone here at Slashdot at all surprised by this? Why is it that the RIAA and Apple will act shocked by this news everytime?
If I buy it, it will be because I can put it where I want it. If these people continue to play games with DRM they will:
1) Spend WAY too much money trying to reengineer a 'non-crackable' standard.
2) Piss off a present and future customer the first time he/she wants to copy the song to a non-compliant device.
3) Discourge yet another generation from actually buying music rather than downloading free versions of it. Free as in beer, free as in freedom (DRM-free).
And it would've been inadmissible in court. Our lawyer was very skilled but when this was suggested he told us that it would be DEATH to our case.
Before my father learned the hard way what blind loyalty and trust in the gov't will do to you, we would never have DREAMED of breaking or bending such a rule.
I suspect that most Americans are like this, simply following the path of least resistance. Knowing what I know now (due much in part to this incident and the Internet), there's a LOT more we could have done but due to the way power was structured for the IRS, it still would've taken a congressional order to fix this.
It wasn't until later in the Reagan administration that the powers of the IRS were scaled back a bit and that business with the tape recorder/lawyer rule was recinded.
You realize of course that the type of media involved here would almost certainly need to be incased in some sort of plastic sheath (Like the Blu-Ray HD DVDs). One scratch and you'd be done!
Not as portable, and certainly not as cheap to produce. A format like this would be a godsend for admins who do backups but as a common medium... Well, I imagine it might get as popular as something like Super Audio CD's or CD+G's for music.
In other words, not very much...
...If the damned IRS could keep it's OWN records straight, much less mesh them with others.
:O
My father found out the hard way what happens between IRS 'zones' (we moved around a lot - military). There was a discrepancy (totally honest) that didn't show for almost 20 years and then they tried to slam us for back payments with interest. This is something that they KNEW about at the time, but never informed us through any other zone.
It took the work of a local representative to clear things up. At that time you couldn't even bring a lawyer or tape recorder in with you when you went to see them.
This is the kind of headline that scares me (and should scare YOU) green!
...I always buy whatever card gives me the most bang for the buck. I could care less about Macrovision since no DVD I watch ends up having it anyway regardless.
Based on what I'm hearing about NV40 (16 pipelines, MPEG encoding acceleration, etc.), it seems that Nvidia will be getting my business again this summer, and that hasn't happened for a couple of years now. I currently own a Radeon 9800 Pro.
I suppose it all depends on your application, but it seems silly to diss a card just because the rules that already exist are being enforced -albeit more stringently. Besides, do you really believe that the drivers are 'unhackable'?
Sometimes it's about visibility more than clicks. When your .org is stuck on the 75th page of a search - ANY visibility can be considered a win.
There's a saying that an old boss of mine used to use and I think it applies here. It's simple, consise, and to the point:
"Hey man, ya gotta eat!"
Heh, no I wasn't aware of that. But funny, YOU seemed to know what it meant. :)
I'm in the office another 5 hours today and have no access to my mega-Devo collection.
:P
Damn song'll be in my head the rest of the day...
I admit it, I'm the bitch when it comes to stuff I like also. Yes, if the ticket price to ROTK was $15.00, I probably would've done it. And YES, I'll be getting the special handcarved edition of ROTK in November - the one with the cut scene of Gimli's tobacco chewing accident.
:)
Seriously though, Slashdot is probably one of the last places to talk about entertainment on TV since I suspect most of us consider our cable modems, ADSL lines, and T3's to be our main source of fun.
Think about this for a moment: How much would you pay for broadband - if you had to? Can you live without it once you've had it? Given no choice would you be a provider's bitch yourself and pay double - TRIPLE? I'll bet you would. Hey! Why not get Discovery HD thrown in as a package deal, hmmmmm?
I suspect the main reason why they don't is related to bundling from the providers. I think the cableco either loses money or breaks even on customers like you and my parents.
Still, the cableco figures, "What the hell, at least it will help offset costs..." Of course, if EVERYONE tried to do that the result would be an insolvent provider.
My parents were going to discontinue their cable service but are litterally in a 'rock in a hard place' as far as picking up any local stations on rabbit ears.
Nonetheless, my dad made the call and was informed that there was an unadvertised package for $15/month that would give them basic local and a few other channels. They called it the 'basic-basic' plan or some such garbage. I guess it was a way to keep people like my parents for leaving completely.
The cablecos know their pricing is out of hand, but the fact is, the PROVIDERS of the channels are equally blameworthy, if not more so.
Viacom: "Tell ya what. We'll give you VH2, MTV2 and 3, and the Munchkin Channel as part of our package deal!"
Comcast Exec: "Yeah, but all we really want is VH2 and MTV 2 and 3..."
Viacom: "Ah, so sorry. These channels only come as a package... Say! Would you like some Food Channel to go along with that?"
Frustrating indeed!
How exactly is this going to solve the problem of companies like Viacom charging for their own package deals? You all realize of course that this is how it works for cablecos as well?
I'm all for choice, but this will in no way affect the PROVIDERS of the entertainment. The American public has already shown a willingness to basically pay whatever they have to for their entertainment (look at ticket prices to any event nowadays for proof!) The program providers know this and so no matter what the cablecos do to split up channel selections, THEY will still pay out the ass.
Now THAT'S 'reality television' for you...
Funny! I'd never seen that before..
:)
Hax0r.. Ahaahahhaha!
...Google goes public. That's when it will most likely jump the shark - just like most other high-flying tech companies forced to keep up that unrealistic opening stock price.
I predict you'll see them charging for more inclusive searches and trying to gouge their advertisers for more revenue.
Don't get me wrong, I hope I'm not right, but there's a long track record of others who have gone this way before. Google is smart, investors aren't.
That's just it, Google manages to satisfy everyone they deal with:
- People who use the searching tools for free
- Advertisers who want targets ads
- Affiliates that carry the ads
It's a totally amazing business model that no one else has quite gotten right. I don't regret a dime we have spent with Google and their services as we have seen it returned to us 100-fold.
Cut me some slack over here! I've done what I can to promote OSS soutions at my school. In fact, we were the first school listed at OOo to go completely to it, so you're preaching to the choir here. Bottom line on Windows: When they release Photoshop for Linux we'll be one step closer to cutting the Windows cord.
As it is, Windows does what we need it to do (for the most part). Home directories, centralized directory system, the whole deal. That doesn't mean I haven't been using Linux here or planning for a bigger rollout of it, but it DOES mean that there needs to be better integration before I dive in completely.
So, I bitch a little about something so basic - especially considering I now use StarOffice 7 in-house and OOo for student installs. Installing OOo easily shouldn't be an issue for ANY OS - don't make excuses.
Things are well documented on how to install a program for all users under Windows. I know this since plenty of other programs seem to handle it. I also know it's a relatively simple fix for certain configs as they are relying on Local User keys as opposed to Local Machine ones. That change alone might not fix the problems in Term Server installs but the reg hack I use (which does the same thing) fixes it for W2K/WXP client installs.
I realize it's very different from the way the Mac or Linux does it, but you and I both know that the vast majority of OOo users will be on Windows first. What vexes me is that we have to wait until OOo 2.0 (StarOffice 8) to truly realize this and that's a year away.
And please, let's not flame over which system installs things the best. Last I checked Linux users still have to worry about dependancies, patched kernels, and/or editing scripts to get shit to work. EVERY OS has issues. If OOo wants to be a true player in Windows (especially in corporate) it will have to play by the rules people are familiar with.
This is the standard form answer Sun sends you on forum when you have ANY question regarding installation on Terminal Server / Citrix:
/net install or do each of your users need to do a mini-install the first time they log into a machine?
"It has been our experience that terminal servers are generally used only in small and medium-sized businesses and, to a lesser extent, in some larger companies.
For this reason, StarOffice was not specifically developed for or adapted to terminal server software. This is also why support for StarOffice on a terminal server needs to be handled differently than usual through a Sun sales rep.
Please contact your Sun sales representative to get further information on how to install and work with StarOffice on a terminal server."
I know plenty of small businesses and school like ours that use TS. I'd hardly call us an 'enterprise'. It bothers me that Sun puts this in that category.
So you got it working with 'no problems' huh? Tell me, how did you solve the local vs. global registry issues? Did you generate a response file for the
I'm not saying it can't be done. But look at the forums for a few minutes and you will see request after request for information on installation on multi-user systems. It's not because the docs aren't being read either - it's that the install is BROKEN. They know it, that's why it gets a total revamp in 2.0.
Uh, maybe. But see the thing is - OOo crashes for FREE. :)
Hmmm.. I'm so glad you're totally familiar with my environment, finances, and experience to comment. Gee, how'd you know?
/net install process is BROKEN.
Firstly, nothing mitigates the fact that the
Secondly, don't be an ass. I have many reasons for installing monthly or even bi-monthly. You could've asked first instead of being insulting.
How about... THINKING instead of posting first, hmmmm?
So's all those macro viruses and other various security issues associated with MS Office product, right?
Shit happens - get a helmet.
No, how about YOU actually DO it in my environment? Check the forums - it works as long as your users understand how to do a small install on login.
Not acceptable here. I have 24 computers in our labs. No student 'owns' a computer - they sit where there is space. So what, they're supposed to do a quick install everytime they log in to a new computer? What about when I reinstall the lab (every month or so). They all get to reinstall again. That's stupid.
Also, see Sun's advice about installing Open/StarOffice on a Terminal Server. They tell you to call them... Wow, great help those docs!
Check the features list for Version 2.0 and you'll see one of the biggest improvements is in the install process as it relates to multiple user environments. There's a reason for this...
I'm a big supporter of OOo here at Linden Hall but I gotta tell you that this is the suckiest thing about Open/StarOffice.
This has been an issue since day uno and I can't figure out why they haven't prioritized this - especially in light of the fact that Sun is using the code to go head to head against MS! Sure, the install process will be completely changed in V. 2.0, but that's at least a YEAR AWAY!
As it is, I have to use a script and a reg hack to make StarOffice work for all users in my labs without foolishness. I can kind of understand why Sun may not want it to work with Terminal Services - they require you to call them if you want to install it on a term server (unbelievable in itself); but not supporting multiple users in XP HOME??!! WTF??!! This is the sort of thing MS can pick on because it's totally true.
Installation issues should be fixed ASAP!
MS Office X - for Linux!
Uh... No? Hmmmm.. Guess I'll have to use Open/StarOffice then, huh?