But it's irrelevant, you don't have permission to rebroadcast copyrighted music no matter the scope of the delivery mechanism. Is your rendezvous network just a machine in the bedroom and one in the den? Or is it in an office with a hundred or so workstations? Or are you setting up a mini pirate radio station via 802.11 for your neighbourhood?
Comparing it to net radio is a more valid than comparing it to napster.
And Rendezvous will succeed where Napster failed. They'll be immune from lawsuits when they launch their own commercial take on P2P. Because Mac users are above the law.
The only way Rendezvous will work will be via DRM technology. And Apple will make sure it's the only game in town, as they do with most everything else about their platform.
I can't wait to read all the praise lauded on the inevitable iDRM technology that should creep into iTunes and iMovie over the next few years.
And it will happen, Apple just needs time to catch up. When there's no content on the 'net in QuickTime, they'll get to work on it.
Re:Hard to understand?
on
Hacker's Delight
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Many times the 'tricks' method is less readable, and nothing more.
A good compiler will recognize produce the same optimized byte code for different code blocks. It should unroll shorter fixed lenth loops and automatically inline function calls when it determines that it's not worth the overhead of popping the caller onto the stack.
In the end it's the design as a whole that will determine efficiency. For instance, recursion. As soon as it's learned, a coder has a tendency to use the 'cute trick' of recursion everywhere, and doesn't realize that it's rarely the optimal solution to a problem.
Personally, I loathe the 'cute-ass cryptic trick' coding philosophy. I constantly battle with all the bad habits I picked up having been born and raised on the Commodore 64. Unconditional branches (goto), cramming all the code you can onto one line, one or two letter variable names, functions longer than a chapter of the bible. Blech.
>It can't do PVR. (Crowd groans) >You currently need a xbox mod chip.
I've seen numerous reports that MS plans to introduce the 'XBox 1.5' this year that is basically a hybrid XBox/PVR.
They also plan to release (apparently quite soon) their own media player for XBox that'll do MP3s and DivX and all that silly shit. I've read this will ship with the "Xbox 1.5" but that's just conjecture (though a sensible conjecture).
So you will be able to get all the functionality without a mod chip. It won't be 'Open Source', but I'll bet cold hard cash it'll actually work and be usable by even the most computer illiterate consumer.
But the content, in the video game context, is the software.
Are you saying emulating a Mortal Kombat rom under MAME is somehow different from playing a copy of the Windows version under WINE?
Or that MAME or ZSnes are all that fundamentally different from the Java VM or Wine? It's all 'emulation', the technicalities are pretty irrelevant. It boils down to a tool to run software on a non-native platform.
The "I have legitimate backups of thousands of arcade games, even the extremely rare prototype units that have never existed outside of Atari's R&D dept" argument is utter bullshit. For the vast majority, it's an excuse to not pay for games and nothing more, and everyone knows it.
There are ways to legally acquire rights to some games, like buying one of HanaHos pricey rig-ups, but the only actual PD game MAME emulates is Robby Roto.
And it's all completely besides my point, it's not "Open Source" even if it is a "legitimate backup". If you want to stay "Open Source Free-As-In-Willy" stick with Tux Racer.
You do realize that the first 3 links arent 'open'.
Just because you can emulate arcade roms, snes roms and psx discs, doesn't mean it's legal to do so, or that they're somehow 'open'. Spyro the dragon and Mortal Kombat are not Open Source.
And to answer your question, you can do all that now. All you need is a machine with enough power and TV outs, or a VGA scan converter, and a lot of free time to set it all up and make it work adequately.
Or are you asking 'how long until someone sets up an easy to use linux interface for all of these softwares?' You can answer that by looking at how long it took to set up an easy to use linux interface at all.
Bill Finklebork thinks the donut he bought this morning might have been a day-old, it tasted a little stale. He also thinks that someone should be airing Beavis & Butthead in syndication.
Truly this is important to us all, as it affects society at it's very core.
I skimmed the article, and it seems to be about the Virtual Memory Manager's implementation in the kernel.
I assumed it was about Virtual Machines in user land as well.
Oh well, the fact that it's an incomplete document on something that noone but kernel hackers care about is irrelevent. It's only on/. because of the word 'Linux'.
Re:Practical Applications
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I've found ODBC-style data access in Java to be only slightly less painful than doing it in Visual C++.
I'm in a similar situation, developing and maintaining a data access application in VB6 that has reached 'critical mass', has gotten too big for it's britches, and needs to be rewritten from the ground up.
I've been doing a lot of thinking about what it will be rewritten in, and so far C# and VB.net are leading the pack. All Java has to offer me is some platform independence, which is pretty much irrelevant in my particular case, and I doubt it would be worth headaches like throwing out all the code that's written.
Anyways, this is all contingent on the dorks in marketing not selling imaginary software that I have to write 2 weeks before shipping, that I may have time to make the actual software work.
From the people who brought you:
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 0, Funny
The Little Giant Military Intelligence Advanced BASIC Resident Alien Found Missing
now comes Effective Java, another great title in the series by noted author Ox E. Moron
The ranking systems could be their undoing. The larger they get, the more people will distrust them. Pretty soon the conspiracy theories will start about biases, kickbacks, payola, etc.
My point being that so long as people don't know exactly how the pages are being ranked, they'll eventually start believing that they're being forced to wade through other commercial sites and spam to find their subjects.
Then along comes $NEW_SITE to the rescue with a simple, straightforward, easily understandable and demonstrable searching feature.
Noone really uses Xerox, Kleenex, Hoover or Google colloquially.
I've never heard "Google" or "Slashdotted" as verbs/adjectives outside of slashdot. Nor do I ever hear anyone say "Xerox me that memo" or "Kleenex me", or "Hoover up that dirt".
People say "Photocopy", "Tissue" and "Vaccuum".
Besides which, who gives a shit.
Google isn't perfect by far, sometimes it's really frustrating trying to find information on it. There's room for improvement.
Google's honeymoon is over if they just sit back expecting money to roll in forever, because someone will make up for it's shortcomings and become the new king of the hill.
I remember when Yahoo! was THE search engine. Now it's more of a portal, as they piled on the added services. I remember when Netscape was THE web browser, Wordperfect was THE word processing package, and CorelDraw was THE drawing application.
What makes you think the same thing can't happen to google?
I never understood why anyone would use TCL ever, even when it first showed up. It's just condusive to cryptic and hard-to-read code, and dealing with everything as lists of lists of lists was a bit to wrap my head around at first.
I guess if I used it more it'd come easier, but I just never had the need nor desire to learn beyond what was required to get an A in the course I was taking.
Of course, there are those who believe that the more cryptic and confusing their code is, the more adept a coder it makes them; "credibility through obscurity". I never bought into that.
The 'monsters' are named Bub and Bob, and are actually princes who've been transformed into the little bubble-blowing dragons, and are on an adventure to be returned to their original states.
It was followed with an incredibly poor sequel: Rainbow Islands, which as legend has it, was rushed to production in 2 weeks after the developers sat around doing nothing while they were being paid to do a Bubble Bobble sequel.
Then came Puzzle Bobble/Bust-A-Move, and later came Snow Bros - which is pretty much an update of Bubble Bobble with shinier graphics, boss battles, more powerups, and this time featuring princes who've been converted to snowmen who ensnare their enemies in big snowballs instead of bubbles.
And thats the story of Bubble Bobble.
Oh yeah, every game in the series, save Rainbow Islands has been cloned to death by unoriginal game developers. Snood among them.
Multithreaded, sure but I'm not sure if it supported SMP, because I don't think it was a reality on Intel hardware yet (?) Of course, back then there was an Alpha tree so maybe it was.
At any rate, I find it easier to live as though NT 3.x never existed.
It doesn't 'emulate' SMP, it actually performs two operations at the same time by splitting the instruction pipeline in half (well not in half, it varies as to how much pipeline each 'cpu' gets). It's not as good as SMP for various reasons, mostly boiling down to the two threads sharing the rest of the chip.
It does 'hurt' sometimes, but it's usually negligable, and you have to pretty much go out of your way to design code that would run slower - such code can 'hurt' traditional SMP systems as well.
I'm sure there will be plenty of cooked benchmarks for fanboys to rant about in the future, just like there are between 3DNow! and MMX/SSE/2..
It is a cool development, and *can* be shut off if it's only hindering your system (ie; you're running Windows 98 or a linux kernel with no HT support - and thus wasting pipeline to a 'CPU' that isn't used)
Slashdot Mirror
What was her name?
It could easily be tunnelled over TCP/IP.
But it's irrelevant, you don't have permission to rebroadcast copyrighted music no matter the scope of the delivery mechanism. Is your rendezvous network just a machine in the bedroom and one in the den? Or is it in an office with a hundred or so workstations? Or are you setting up a mini pirate radio station via 802.11 for your neighbourhood?
Comparing it to net radio is a more valid than comparing it to napster.
Sure..
And Rendezvous will succeed where Napster failed. They'll be immune from lawsuits when they launch their own commercial take on P2P. Because Mac users are above the law.
The only way Rendezvous will work will be via DRM technology. And Apple will make sure it's the only game in town, as they do with most everything else about their platform.
Would you be as elated if the single, united, supported P2P network was a MicroSoft product?
Naw.. Of course you wouldnt. It's cute when Apple preemptively crushes OSS competition, because they're run by care bears.
I can't wait to read all the praise lauded on the inevitable iDRM technology that should creep into iTunes and iMovie over the next few years.
And it will happen, Apple just needs time to catch up. When there's no content on the 'net in QuickTime, they'll get to work on it.
Many times the 'tricks' method is less readable, and nothing more.
A good compiler will recognize produce the same optimized byte code for different code blocks. It should unroll shorter fixed lenth loops and automatically inline function calls when it determines that it's not worth the overhead of popping the caller onto the stack.
In the end it's the design as a whole that will determine efficiency. For instance, recursion. As soon as it's learned, a coder has a tendency to use the 'cute trick' of recursion everywhere, and doesn't realize that it's rarely the optimal solution to a problem.
Personally, I loathe the 'cute-ass cryptic trick' coding philosophy. I constantly battle with all the bad habits I picked up having been born and raised on the Commodore 64. Unconditional branches (goto), cramming all the code you can onto one line, one or two letter variable names, functions longer than a chapter of the bible. Blech.
And back on earth: The first Linux suppository successfully goes where no OS has gone before, and it's life cycle comes full-circle.
>It can't do PVR. (Crowd groans)
>You currently need a xbox mod chip.
I've seen numerous reports that MS plans to introduce the 'XBox 1.5' this year that is basically a hybrid XBox/PVR.
They also plan to release (apparently quite soon) their own media player for XBox that'll do MP3s and DivX and all that silly shit. I've read this will ship with the "Xbox 1.5" but that's just conjecture (though a sensible conjecture).
So you will be able to get all the functionality without a mod chip. It won't be 'Open Source', but I'll bet cold hard cash it'll actually work and be usable by even the most computer illiterate consumer.
But the content, in the video game context, is the software.
Are you saying emulating a Mortal Kombat rom under MAME is somehow different from playing a copy of the Windows version under WINE?
Or that MAME or ZSnes are all that fundamentally different from the Java VM or Wine? It's all 'emulation', the technicalities are pretty irrelevant. It boils down to a tool to run software on a non-native platform.
The "I have legitimate backups of thousands of arcade games, even the extremely rare prototype units that have never existed outside of Atari's R&D dept" argument is utter bullshit. For the vast majority, it's an excuse to not pay for games and nothing more, and everyone knows it.
There are ways to legally acquire rights to some games, like buying one of HanaHos pricey rig-ups, but the only actual PD game MAME emulates is Robby Roto.
And it's all completely besides my point, it's not "Open Source" even if it is a "legitimate backup". If you want to stay "Open Source Free-As-In-Willy" stick with Tux Racer.
You do realize that the first 3 links arent 'open'.
Just because you can emulate arcade roms, snes roms and psx discs, doesn't mean it's legal to do so, or that they're somehow 'open'. Spyro the dragon and Mortal Kombat are not Open Source.
And to answer your question, you can do all that now. All you need is a machine with enough power and TV outs, or a VGA scan converter, and a lot of free time to set it all up and make it work adequately.
Or are you asking 'how long until someone sets up an easy to use linux interface for all of these softwares?' You can answer that by looking at how long it took to set up an easy to use linux interface at all.
It's a trade secret
OR
Your PDA is obsolete. Just buy a new one, and quit asking questions.
Bill Finklebork thinks the donut he bought this morning might have been a day-old, it tasted a little stale. He also thinks that someone should be airing Beavis & Butthead in syndication.
Truly this is important to us all, as it affects society at it's very core.
I skimmed the article, and it seems to be about the Virtual Memory Manager's implementation in the kernel.
/. because of the word 'Linux'.
I assumed it was about Virtual Machines in user land as well.
Oh well, the fact that it's an incomplete document on something that noone but kernel hackers care about is irrelevent. It's only on
I've found ODBC-style data access in Java to be only slightly less painful than doing it in Visual C++.
I'm in a similar situation, developing and maintaining a data access application in VB6 that has reached 'critical mass', has gotten too big for it's britches, and needs to be rewritten from the ground up.
I've been doing a lot of thinking about what it will be rewritten in, and so far C# and VB.net are leading the pack. All Java has to offer me is some platform independence, which is pretty much irrelevant in my particular case, and I doubt it would be worth headaches like throwing out all the code that's written.
Anyways, this is all contingent on the dorks in marketing not selling imaginary software that I have to write 2 weeks before shipping, that I may have time to make the actual software work.
The Little Giant
Military Intelligence
Advanced BASIC
Resident Alien
Found Missing
now comes Effective Java, another great title in the series by noted author Ox E. Moron
The ranking systems could be their undoing. The larger they get, the more people will distrust them. Pretty soon the conspiracy theories will start about biases, kickbacks, payola, etc.
My point being that so long as people don't know exactly how the pages are being ranked, they'll eventually start believing that they're being forced to wade through other commercial sites and spam to find their subjects.
Then along comes $NEW_SITE to the rescue with a simple, straightforward, easily understandable and demonstrable searching feature.
Noone really uses Xerox, Kleenex, Hoover or Google colloquially.
I've never heard "Google" or "Slashdotted" as verbs/adjectives outside of slashdot. Nor do I ever hear anyone say "Xerox me that memo" or "Kleenex me", or "Hoover up that dirt".
People say "Photocopy", "Tissue" and "Vaccuum".
Besides which, who gives a shit.
Google isn't perfect by far, sometimes it's really frustrating trying to find information on it. There's room for improvement.
Google's honeymoon is over if they just sit back expecting money to roll in forever, because someone will make up for it's shortcomings and become the new king of the hill.
I remember when Yahoo! was THE search engine. Now it's more of a portal, as they piled on the added services. I remember when Netscape was THE web browser, Wordperfect was THE word processing package, and CorelDraw was THE drawing application.
What makes you think the same thing can't happen to google?
I never understood why anyone would use TCL ever, even when it first showed up. It's just condusive to cryptic and hard-to-read code, and dealing with everything as lists of lists of lists was a bit to wrap my head around at first.
I guess if I used it more it'd come easier, but I just never had the need nor desire to learn beyond what was required to get an A in the course I was taking.
Of course, there are those who believe that the more cryptic and confusing their code is, the more adept a coder it makes them; "credibility through obscurity". I never bought into that.
The 'monsters' are named Bub and Bob, and are actually princes who've been transformed into the little bubble-blowing dragons, and are on an adventure to be returned to their original states.
It was followed with an incredibly poor sequel: Rainbow Islands, which as legend has it, was rushed to production in 2 weeks after the developers sat around doing nothing while they were being paid to do a Bubble Bobble sequel.
Then came Puzzle Bobble/Bust-A-Move, and later came Snow Bros - which is pretty much an update of Bubble Bobble with shinier graphics, boss battles, more powerups, and this time featuring princes who've been converted to snowmen who ensnare their enemies in big snowballs instead of bubbles.
And thats the story of Bubble Bobble.
Oh yeah, every game in the series, save Rainbow Islands has been cloned to death by unoriginal game developers. Snood among them.
I'd never heard of Snood in my life until today, but I've been a fan of Bust-a-move/Puzzle Bobble forever.
There are tons of clones of it about, maybe I did play Snood and then immediately forgot about it as soon as I saw another Bust-A-Move clone.
Multithreaded, sure but I'm not sure if it supported SMP, because I don't think it was a reality on Intel hardware yet (?) Of course, back then there was an Alpha tree so maybe it was.
At any rate, I find it easier to live as though NT 3.x never existed.
It doesn't 'emulate' SMP, it actually performs two operations at the same time by splitting the instruction pipeline in half (well not in half, it varies as to how much pipeline each 'cpu' gets). It's not as good as SMP for various reasons, mostly boiling down to the two threads sharing the rest of the chip.
It does 'hurt' sometimes, but it's usually negligable, and you have to pretty much go out of your way to design code that would run slower - such code can 'hurt' traditional SMP systems as well.
I'm sure there will be plenty of cooked benchmarks for fanboys to rant about in the future, just like there are between 3DNow! and MMX/SSE/2..
It is a cool development, and *can* be shut off if it's only hindering your system (ie; you're running Windows 98 or a linux kernel with no HT support - and thus wasting pipeline to a 'CPU' that isn't used)
No, the SMP setup would thoroughly trounce the HT chip.
In SMP each chip has it's own cache, with HT two VCPUs fight for the same cache (twice the latency)
Each SMP chip has full access to the pipeline for more complicated calculations, with HT the pipeline for each VCPU will vary.