Who modded this interesting? this is such a troll!!
In advertising, why would it make any sense for Microsoft to make ads IE specific? Advertising is about reaching as many people as possible with relevant ads. M$ are money grubbers, not just power-mongers.
Personally, I hope the parent is right, because the one thing that it is hard for my adblock in firefox to block is the google adwords. If M$ did use active-x that would completely eliminate the problem for me:).
But it won't happen. If you have been reading/. recently MS has been coming out with new AJAX based technologies that work cross platform/browser. Take a look at their new home page previously referred to here on/. I dare say it is a lot nicer than Googles, feature-wise.
So maybe Microsoft is waking up and realizing that if they are going to compete with Google, they are going to have to abandone their "Windows is the only OS" model.
IANAC , and it's been a while since I took chemistry, although I did ACE it. Isn't the specific heat of water 4x greater than that of metal?, or does the specific heat of metal increase in a liquid state.
IIRC, the specific heat of water is around 4 while most metals are around 1. This means it takes 4x the amount of heat energy to raise water by 1 degree than to raise a similar metal by 1 degree.
therefore, what is the benefit of metal cooling?
Just because they used it to cool nuclear reactors, doesn't mean its good for computer cooling.
I am not trashing on any party, simply pointing out their hipocritical practices...
Go ahead research it yourself...
Oh and my party
Libertarian Party A party that stands for individual freedom and responsibility, and allowing people to keep the money that our governments legislatively STEAL from us.
You know this one has been proposed by people who drive SUV's the size of aircraft carriers.
Actually, I live in california, and you would think this was true. But the people pushing this are the liberal dems, who are supposed to be in favor of environmentally friendly vehicles.
So WHY, you ask, do they do it?
Because they want more money, and since they're policies are encouraging people to purchase cars that don't use as much gas, and they say WHOA, where's my money that I can waste on my agendas? So they are trying to get money in other ways now.
One reason they want to use GPS instead of just mileage, is so they can charge more on some roads than others. What do you think the charge for the roads they drive will be?
i miss the problem, maybe, wmv is a 'standard' also for GNU/Linux, isn't it ?
I hope that was a joke. It reminded me of all the Microsoft Bigots who want to 'standardize' on Microsoft where I work. BAH!!! Microsoft is the ANTI-STANDARD!
Just because it can be used/played doesn't make it a standard!
Why not use RealVideo. I have seen many good sites that stream their content in both.WMV and realvideo to allow everyone to see it.
With the new Helix open source player and RealPlayer 10 realvideo is available everywhere, and real has been a leader in creating good low bandwidth codecs.
I don't work for Real BTW. And I agree with many that XViD would be nice, but if you went that route you would need to provide a link/instructions for people to download/install the xvid codec under windows/macos.
Geeks like us don't worry about installation, but the average user is not going to want to install something that requires a small amount of computer knowledge.
there are plenty of very smart people running windows networks
REALLY?
I have a coworker who used to swear by windows, heck I used to swear by windows (ah the days...) but as soon as these "very smart people" are introduced to linux/un*x they realize what they have been missing. (Security)
Now before you go modding me as a troll... I do concede that Windows is used by people because of the superior interface, but even that is being erroded by the likes of KDE/GNOME/XFCE4... I mean I get frustrated when I have to use a windows box because of the LACK of features..., but I know that many smart people do use windows, and I am simply saying it is because they haven't been properly introduced to the alternatives.
If the software is only designed to work on windows, then you are using, or providing heaven forbid, software that is not designed for serving in a secure environment.
If the software runs on a older version of redhat then it shouldn't be too hard for the company that provides the software to recompile it for a newer version of linux or other *nix based OS's.
For example, I run on my laptop/workstation a source based distribution of linux. I am a Oracle Database developer. Our Company uses Oracle 8 still and mostly the older Developer 6i utillities for creating forms/reports. These were compiled against older libraries that came with redhat years ago. Solution: just install compatibility libraries to allow the software to run in my modern linux environment. Works perfectly.
Don't tell me that you can't use the software on a newer version of *nix.
Problem! not everything runs or runs well on a *nix.
True, not every thing has been designed with security in mind. Take (insert M$ product here) for example.
If you were running a *nix based OS, you wouldn't have to restart every time you patched something. Windows is a flawed design, and the reboots are one of the chief reasons I would NEVER use windows as a server unless I am forced to.
The only reason a *nix box would have to be restarted, is if the patch goes against the kernel.
Solution:Drop Windows. Grow some real technical knowhow, and install a *nix to do your serving.
>> but check your bill
OK, just did, and no charges for the vision service that I have used on my phone out the WAZOO since I got it in May!
I have it setup to dial #777 on my linux laptop through the phone.. and it works GREAT!!! 128kb connection speeds minimum... don't know what your talking about when you say that you get charged for them.. but, I don't see it.
They really thought that creating softwer that when installed actually wrote something on my MBR was not going to upset me?
How dumn are they?
Up till this year I used turbotax for the past several returns, but this year I use TaxAct. And although their interface was not as nice as turbotax, it saved me money and didn't tamper with my machine!
It completely defeats the purpose of MOL... and Mac OS X. MOL is designed to allow you to access your mac os x programs when running linux on a dual boot mac, but as far as I know you loose most of the flashy speed that you would get from a standard OS X install.
orry, I just don't believe that Apple would go and purchase Universal, and then support drm, when they themselves have already come out against drm. They are also the people who ran the "RIP MIX BURN" ad campaign. I believe that they will be moving universal music into the 21st century. Of coarse this is all speculation, but Apple is an innovator. It will be interesting to see what they do.
Uh... if Apple buys Universal then Apples in charge.. not the other way around. But I'm not sticking by that. Apple has been known to shoot themselves in the foot.
Separate programs are separate programs whether they are running on your home pc or on a set top box. I understand that a set top box is single purpose, but they only thing that would require GPL licensing is the software that was modified directly from a previously GPL licenced piece of software.
I'll give you a couple of examples. Safari, which is Apple's new browser based on the khtml engine from kde is NOT released under the GPL, in fact they are staying quite closed about their updates. The only thing that has been released are the specific changes to the khtml engine, and this is in agreeance with the GPL.
Another example, this time a set top box, would be Tivo. Their entire box is based almost soley upon Linux, obviously the kernel is GPL, not sure what other software they are using in the box, but I do know that you cannot go to Tivo.com and download their software and create you're own tivo machines. Hence the projects like Freevo and others to emulate what Tivo is doing. Here is a set top box, that uses the linux Kernel, but doesn't release their software under the GPL.
So once again I will reiterate that they would NOT have to release their code under the GPL just to use it in a set top box.
The only way they would is if they directly modified the kernel or some other GPL licenced software to include support for WMP.... and that would be just STUPID
I disagree, what your saying is that there are no user space applications running on a set top box. I am not an expert in embedded devices, but I would assume that you don't put everything into the kernel and simply run it... doesn't sound like good design to me. So if there are userspace apps then they don't have to be GPL unless directly derived from the kernel
Yes you are missing a great deal. The GPL only restricts the code that is covered by the GPL. So if Microsoft chose to take the linux kernel and rerelease it, then they would have to release the source, otherwise they don't have to release anything under the GPL simply because they are using Linux as their kernel. Take, for example, Oracle, win4lin, Opera, and a host of other BSD licensed material that runs on linux.
What are you talking about?, XBox doesn't even run linux without a mod chip.. well I guess someone has hacked up another way to steal the code from some bond game, but that's not the point. This has NOTHING to do with the XBOX!!!
This may not be a dupe as it clarifies that Microsoft is not going to allow the port of WMP to be used in regular linux boxes, so all of the discussions about GPL licensing are mute!
Way to go Microsoft! You never let us down in our expectations of your imperialist powers
It's simple. If this is not released under an open source licence then it is pointless. MPlayer can already play windows media files, although not licenced by Microsoft.
The point is that Mplayer although supporting multiple architectures only plays windows media files well if at all on Intel machines. For those of us running PC's this is fine, but those running PPC or SPARC machines will have a few more troubles with the win32 dll's.
Unless Intervideo plans on supporting all of these architectures or simply not even allowing this to be used in the desktop arena, and only in the handheld/embedded, then they need to make it some form of open source.
Hey even shared source (don't kill me) would be better than nothing for alternate architectures, as long as it supports them.
Slashdot Mirror
Who modded this interesting? this is such a troll!!
In advertising, why would it make any sense for Microsoft to make ads IE specific? Advertising is about reaching as many people as possible with relevant ads. M$ are money grubbers, not just power-mongers.
Personally, I hope the parent is right, because the one thing that it is hard for my adblock in firefox to block is the google adwords. If M$ did use active-x that would completely eliminate the problem for me :).
But it won't happen. If you have been reading /. recently MS has been coming out with new AJAX based technologies that work cross platform/browser. Take a look at their new home page previously referred to here on /. I dare say it is a lot nicer than Googles, feature-wise.
So maybe Microsoft is waking up and realizing that if they are going to compete with Google, they are going to have to abandone their "Windows is the only OS" model.
I hope they do, competition is ALWAYS good.
I used to live in Denver and have always felt that DIA is one of the best airports I've ever flown in and out of.
Thank you, I should have thought of that.
:)
IIRC, the specific heat of water is around 4 while most metals are around 1. This means it takes 4x the amount of heat energy to raise water by 1 degree than to raise a similar metal by 1 degree.
therefore, what is the benefit of metal cooling?
Just because they used it to cool nuclear reactors, doesn't mean its good for computer cooling.
I apologize if it came across that way. I just don't like it when the government thinks up new ways to take my money :(
I am not trashing on any party, simply pointing out their hipocritical practices...
Go ahead research it yourself...
Oh and my party
Libertarian Party A party that stands for individual freedom and responsibility, and allowing people to keep the money that our governments legislatively STEAL from us.
Actually, I live in california, and you would think this was true. But the people pushing this are the liberal dems, who are supposed to be in favor of environmentally friendly vehicles.
So WHY, you ask, do they do it?
Because they want more money, and since they're policies are encouraging people to purchase cars that don't use as much gas, and they say WHOA, where's my money that I can waste on my agendas? So they are trying to get money in other ways now.
One reason they want to use GPS instead of just mileage, is so they can charge more on some roads than others. What do you think the charge for the roads they drive will be?
I hope that was a joke. It reminded me of all the Microsoft Bigots who want to 'standardize' on Microsoft where I work. BAH!!! Microsoft is the ANTI-STANDARD!
Just because it can be used/played doesn't make it a standard!
Why not use RealVideo. I have seen many good sites that stream their content in both .WMV and realvideo to allow everyone to see it.
With the new Helix open source player and RealPlayer 10 realvideo is available everywhere, and real has been a leader in creating good low bandwidth codecs.
I don't work for Real BTW. And I agree with many that XViD would be nice, but if you went that route you would need to provide a link/instructions for people to download/install the xvid codec under windows/macos.
Geeks like us don't worry about installation, but the average user is not going to want to install something that requires a small amount of computer knowledge.
You could do .WMV/real/Xvid and satisfy everyone :)
REALLY?
I have a coworker who used to swear by windows, heck I used to swear by windows (ah the days ...) but as soon as these "very smart people" are introduced to linux/un*x they realize what they have been missing. (Security)
Now before you go modding me as a troll ... I do concede that Windows is used by people because of the superior interface, but even that is being erroded by the likes of KDE/GNOME/XFCE4 ... I mean I get frustrated when I have to use a windows box because of the LACK of features..., but I know that many smart people do use windows, and I am simply saying it is because they haven't been properly introduced to the alternatives.
Come on what a Cop-out!
If the software is only designed to work on windows, then you are using, or providing heaven forbid, software that is not designed for serving in a secure environment.
If the software runs on a older version of redhat then it shouldn't be too hard for the company that provides the software to recompile it for a newer version of linux or other *nix based OS's.
For example, I run on my laptop/workstation a source based distribution of linux. I am a Oracle Database developer. Our Company uses Oracle 8 still and mostly the older Developer 6i utillities for creating forms/reports. These were compiled against older libraries that came with redhat years ago. Solution: just install compatibility libraries to allow the software to run in my modern linux environment. Works perfectly.
Don't tell me that you can't use the software on a newer version of *nix.
True, not every thing has been designed with security in mind. Take (insert M$ product here) for example.
If you were running a *nix based OS, you wouldn't have to restart every time you patched something. Windows is a flawed design, and the reboots are one of the chief reasons I would NEVER use windows as a server unless I am forced to.
The only reason a *nix box would have to be restarted, is if the patch goes against the kernel.
Solution:Drop Windows. Grow some real technical knowhow, and install a *nix to do your serving.
>> but check your bill OK, just did, and no charges for the vision service that I have used on my phone out the WAZOO since I got it in May! I have it setup to dial #777 on my linux laptop through the phone.. and it works GREAT!!! 128kb connection speeds minimum... don't know what your talking about when you say that you get charged for them.. but, I don't see it.
They really thought that creating softwer that when installed actually wrote something on my MBR was not going to upset me?
How dumn are they?
Up till this year I used turbotax for the past several returns, but this year I use TaxAct. And although their interface was not as nice as turbotax, it saved me money and didn't tamper with my machine!
fp!
Why would you want to run Mac OS X under MOL?
It completely defeats the purpose of MOL... and Mac OS X. MOL is designed to allow you to access your mac os x programs when running linux on a dual boot mac, but as far as I know you loose most of the flashy speed that you would get from a standard OS X install.
I say just run linux and be happy.
orry, I just don't believe that Apple would go and purchase Universal, and then support drm, when they themselves have already come out against drm. They are also the people who ran the "RIP MIX BURN" ad campaign. I believe that they will be moving universal music into the 21st century. Of coarse this is all speculation, but Apple is an innovator. It will be interesting to see what they do.
Uh... if Apple buys Universal then Apples in charge.. not the other way around. But I'm not sticking by that. Apple has been known to shoot themselves in the foot.
After a little googling I turned up this looks like they do provide their mod's to the public.
Separate programs are separate programs whether they are running on your home pc or on a set top box. I understand that a set top box is single purpose, but they only thing that would require GPL licensing is the software that was modified directly from a previously GPL licenced piece of software.
I'll give you a couple of examples. Safari, which is Apple's new browser based on the khtml engine from kde is NOT released under the GPL, in fact they are staying quite closed about their updates. The only thing that has been released are the specific changes to the khtml engine, and this is in agreeance with the GPL.
Another example, this time a set top box, would be Tivo. Their entire box is based almost soley upon Linux, obviously the kernel is GPL, not sure what other software they are using in the box, but I do know that you cannot go to Tivo.com and download their software and create you're own tivo machines. Hence the projects like Freevo and others to emulate what Tivo is doing. Here is a set top box, that uses the linux Kernel, but doesn't release their software under the GPL.
So once again I will reiterate that they would NOT have to release their code under the GPL just to use it in a set top box.
The only way they would is if they directly modified the kernel or some other GPL licenced software to include support for WMP.... and that would be just STUPID
but hey they are microsoft right?
Thanx :) I flunked spelling.. and damnit this post writer has no spellchecker!! :)
I disagree, what your saying is that there are no user space applications running on a set top box. I am not an expert in embedded devices, but I would assume that you don't put everything into the kernel and simply run it... doesn't sound like good design to me. So if there are userspace apps then they don't have to be GPL unless directly derived from the kernel
Yes you are missing a great deal. The GPL only restricts the code that is covered by the GPL. So if Microsoft chose to take the linux kernel and rerelease it, then they would have to release the source, otherwise they don't have to release anything under the GPL simply because they are using Linux as their kernel. Take, for example, Oracle, win4lin, Opera, and a host of other BSD licensed material that runs on linux.
What are you talking about?, XBox doesn't even run linux without a mod chip.. well I guess someone has hacked up another way to steal the code from some bond game, but that's not the point. This has NOTHING to do with the XBOX!!!
This may not be a dupe as it clarifies that Microsoft is not going to allow the port of WMP to be used in regular linux boxes, so all of the discussions about GPL licensing are mute!
Way to go Microsoft! You never let us down in our expectations of your imperialist powers
It's simple. If this is not released under an open source licence then it is pointless. MPlayer can already play windows media files, although not licenced by Microsoft.
The point is that Mplayer although supporting multiple architectures only plays windows media files well if at all on Intel machines. For those of us running PC's this is fine, but those running PPC or SPARC machines will have a few more troubles with the win32 dll's.
Unless Intervideo plans on supporting all of these architectures or simply not even allowing this to be used in the desktop arena, and only in the handheld/embedded, then they need to make it some form of open source.
Hey even shared source (don't kill me) would be better than nothing for alternate architectures, as long as it supports them.