I disagree. Sony ultimately wants to scare other hobbyists from tinkering with their PS3's. Walking away would have removed any fear of being sued. By coming to a secret settlement, they leave a lot of uncertainty about what their customers can do with their PS3's.
If Sony is the big winner, why not disclose all the details of the settlement?
I believe Sony settled because there was a significant chance they would lose. When Sony removed the OtherOS feature from the PS3, they opened the door to a legitimate purpose for hacking the PS3. They established a significant non-infringing use of a hacked console. Without that, it would have been fairly easy for Sony to convince the court that the hack was a violation of the DMCA.
This ends Hotz' problems but does nothing to fix Sony's.
If you listen to the Chrome people, they will say the version number is interesting only from a engineering or technical point of view and don't expect their users to pay attention to it. I think it's working because you rarely hear talk about Chrome 10 whereas Firefox users often state a version number (like Firefox 4).
If Firefox continues to release frequent updates, by the time version 81 rolls around, nobody will be quoting version numbers any more. It will just be Firefox.
They often rely on the scientific method (predict, experiment, observe, repeat) and are very pleased when the outcome is not what they predicted up front. Why not call them scientists? IMHO, scientist or engineer is a false dichotomy.
I'm not assuming anything. I was just saying you can't assume that the Saturn V would cost 6x today what it cost in 1969. In fact, one of the main points of the article is that we should now be able to get stuff into orbit for about $1,000 / lb. I don't have Saturn V number, but I bet it was more than $170 / lb in 1969. So, while the physics haven't changed, the economics certainly have. I'm guessing a respectable chunk of that decline is related to advances in hardware and software.
I don't think you can use standard inflation rates for high tech equipment. Consider how much you could accomplish with $1000 of computer time in 1969 with what $1000 of computer time will get you today.
This ludicrous overhead is the reason the NYT will cease to be a functioning business in the near future.
During the early to middle part of the 2000's, money was very cheap and readily available. For some reason, the management decided to take advantage of that cheap money and they took on huge debt. Now, the cost of that money has gone up quite a bit and they are really struggling to pay the interest. If they wouldn't have taken on that debt, they would actually be in pretty good shape right now. Don't blame the internet for problems at the NYT, blame financial mismanagement.
STOP outsourcing god damn it , if you have to oursource, and the external company can make $$$ profit on it, then thats proof enough that you can do it cheaper and own the IP.
This is way too simplistic and often wrong. First, IP ownership is almost always negotiable. Secondly, comparative advantage works for corporations as well as for countries. There are bakeries all of the country making money by supplying hamburger buns to McDonald's. Do you really think McD should bring that all in-house?
It's crazy that the NYT spent so much money on a paywall. It makes no sense at all. They should have funded 40 start ups to try to find a way to make more money from the news. Rather than trying to innovate and find the future of news, they spend money trying to preserve their old business model.
The iPod wasn't nearly the best player on the market
I think it was the best player on the market. It worked well, it looked good, and the iTunes store cemented Apple's win. DRM made it potentially very costly to leave the iPod ecosystem. Your "marketing + digital lifestyle" equation is exactly right. The iPod win wasn't entirely marketing.
Non-Apple hardware from the early days of MP3 players were ugly and poorly designed. They competed by including features (like a radio) that added clutter but were mostly unwanted. Sometimes less is more (vi user here).
I have an Android phone that I think is fantastic and the Android tablets are interesting, but if I were to choose a tablet today, I would definitely pick up an iPad. The Xoom looks interesting, but they need to double the battery life, improve the industrial design, and work the kinks out of the software. The next generation should be more interesting. This generation belongs to Apple.
This is my biggest pet peeve with laptop sellers. I've been looking at Dell and Lenovo and all I want is a list of their highest resolution laptops. I haven't found any way to filter my searches this way.
Well, much of the cell telephone infrastructure runs on Haskell. That's probably the most famous example.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. If you are teaching computer science, you pick the tools that are the best for that job. If the university has done a good job, when you graduate you will be able to use whatever tools are required for the job at hand.
How do these acquisitions typically work? At any point, is there a chance for the public to register the concerns with the regulatory bodies?
I signed up with T-Mobile at the end of last year when I bought a Nexus S. T-Mobile has been great and I love that I can tether my laptop to my phone (or create a wifi hotspot) without having to pay an extra fee. AT&T is notorious for not allowing this and for having ridiculously low caps and I'm worried that once AT&T takes over, I'm going to lose this capability or have its usefulness seriously limited.
I would like to see the regulators require AT&T to set reasonable caps and eliminate tethering fees before allowing the deal to go through. Any way to voice this?
WP7 is definitely related to WP6.5. The entire UI/shell layer is new, but the core OS is still CE. Dump the emulator kernel image and you will find CE kernel files.
It's a hard thing to explain to somebody who isn't a programmer. Read the wikipedia page on the Cell microprocessor for a pretty good description of what makes the Cell so cool and why you might want to do it. It's a little like asking somebody who plays a musical instrument why they bother if they aren't getting paid to do so.
A PS3 is an order of magnitude less expensive than a Cell Accelerator Board ($7000). Plus I already have a PS3 and it does other nifty stuff like play Pandora through my stereo. If you are building a cluster, an order of magnitude difference starts to seem quite large.
There were quite a few people who built large computing clusters using the PS3. They chose the PS3 because it was cheap and because Sony was projecting a 10 year lifecycle (ie replacements would be available for a long time). At the time, nobody could have predicted that Sony would start dropping features from the PS3, including OtherOS support.
Joe Sixpack should also look at the current mess in Libya and Bahrain. Count the number of lives lost there and compare that to the number of lives lost to the reactors in Japan. How many lives have been lost in wars over oil? Tell me again which energy source is a better choice?
At the end of the day, we can learn from what's happening in Japan and build even better reactors. What can be done about the despots ruling oil rich countries?
For battery performance, I found that the iPad 2 lasted nearly twice as long as the Xoom -- 9 or 10 hours versus the Xoom's 5 or 6 -- in regular use with Wi-Fi enabled. In light use, the Xoom stretched to 8 hours, while the iPad 2 ran 11 hours. That matches the iPad 1's battery performance.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. Sony ultimately wants to scare other hobbyists from tinkering with their PS3's. Walking away would have removed any fear of being sued. By coming to a secret settlement, they leave a lot of uncertainty about what their customers can do with their PS3's.
If Sony is the big winner, why not disclose all the details of the settlement?
I believe Sony settled because there was a significant chance they would lose. When Sony removed the OtherOS feature from the PS3, they opened the door to a legitimate purpose for hacking the PS3. They established a significant non-infringing use of a hacked console. Without that, it would have been fairly easy for Sony to convince the court that the hack was a violation of the DMCA.
This ends Hotz' problems but does nothing to fix Sony's.
I wouldn't call the version number a feature.
If you listen to the Chrome people, they will say the version number is interesting only from a engineering or technical point of view and don't expect their users to pay attention to it. I think it's working because you rarely hear talk about Chrome 10 whereas Firefox users often state a version number (like Firefox 4).
If Firefox continues to release frequent updates, by the time version 81 rolls around, nobody will be quoting version numbers any more. It will just be Firefox.
How do you know this? I take the position that if they can, they will.
One of the definitions of scientist is one who follows the scientific method. I have no problem calling them scientists.
That's funny.
They often rely on the scientific method (predict, experiment, observe, repeat) and are very pleased when the outcome is not what they predicted up front. Why not call them scientists? IMHO, scientist or engineer is a false dichotomy.
They charge hourly.
http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/#pricing
I'm not assuming anything. I was just saying you can't assume that the Saturn V would cost 6x today what it cost in 1969. In fact, one of the main points of the article is that we should now be able to get stuff into orbit for about $1,000 / lb. I don't have Saturn V number, but I bet it was more than $170 / lb in 1969. So, while the physics haven't changed, the economics certainly have. I'm guessing a respectable chunk of that decline is related to advances in hardware and software.
I don't think you can use standard inflation rates for high tech equipment. Consider how much you could accomplish with $1000 of computer time in 1969 with what $1000 of computer time will get you today.
I think you are agreeing with me. I was disagreeing with cheekyboy who said:
I was merely trying to point out that outsourcing makes a great deal of sense sometimes.
During the early to middle part of the 2000's, money was very cheap and readily available. For some reason, the management decided to take advantage of that cheap money and they took on huge debt. Now, the cost of that money has gone up quite a bit and they are really struggling to pay the interest. If they wouldn't have taken on that debt, they would actually be in pretty good shape right now. Don't blame the internet for problems at the NYT, blame financial mismanagement.
This is way too simplistic and often wrong. First, IP ownership is almost always negotiable. Secondly, comparative advantage works for corporations as well as for countries. There are bakeries all of the country making money by supplying hamburger buns to McDonald's. Do you really think McD should bring that all in-house?
It's crazy that the NYT spent so much money on a paywall. It makes no sense at all. They should have funded 40 start ups to try to find a way to make more money from the news. Rather than trying to innovate and find the future of news, they spend money trying to preserve their old business model.
I think it was the best player on the market. It worked well, it looked good, and the iTunes store cemented Apple's win. DRM made it potentially very costly to leave the iPod ecosystem. Your "marketing + digital lifestyle" equation is exactly right. The iPod win wasn't entirely marketing.
Non-Apple hardware from the early days of MP3 players were ugly and poorly designed. They competed by including features (like a radio) that added clutter but were mostly unwanted. Sometimes less is more (vi user here).
I have an Android phone that I think is fantastic and the Android tablets are interesting, but if I were to choose a tablet today, I would definitely pick up an iPad. The Xoom looks interesting, but they need to double the battery life, improve the industrial design, and work the kinks out of the software. The next generation should be more interesting. This generation belongs to Apple.
This is my biggest pet peeve with laptop sellers. I've been looking at Dell and Lenovo and all I want is a list of their highest resolution laptops. I haven't found any way to filter my searches this way.
Well, much of the cell telephone infrastructure runs on Haskell. That's probably the most famous example.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. If you are teaching computer science, you pick the tools that are the best for that job. If the university has done a good job, when you graduate you will be able to use whatever tools are required for the job at hand.
How do they deal with nodes failing? Did they buy a bunch of spares? If not, they might be in trouble because you can't buy the OtherOS PS3's anymore.
How do these acquisitions typically work? At any point, is there a chance for the public to register the concerns with the regulatory bodies?
I signed up with T-Mobile at the end of last year when I bought a Nexus S. T-Mobile has been great and I love that I can tether my laptop to my phone (or create a wifi hotspot) without having to pay an extra fee. AT&T is notorious for not allowing this and for having ridiculously low caps and I'm worried that once AT&T takes over, I'm going to lose this capability or have its usefulness seriously limited.
I would like to see the regulators require AT&T to set reasonable caps and eliminate tethering fees before allowing the deal to go through. Any way to voice this?
WP7 is definitely related to WP6.5. The entire UI/shell layer is new, but the core OS is still CE. Dump the emulator kernel image and you will find CE kernel files.
The start-over is from the user's perspective.
It's a hard thing to explain to somebody who isn't a programmer. Read the wikipedia page on the Cell microprocessor for a pretty good description of what makes the Cell so cool and why you might want to do it. It's a little like asking somebody who plays a musical instrument why they bother if they aren't getting paid to do so.
A PS3 is an order of magnitude less expensive than a Cell Accelerator Board ($7000). Plus I already have a PS3 and it does other nifty stuff like play Pandora through my stereo. If you are building a cluster, an order of magnitude difference starts to seem quite large.
There were quite a few people who built large computing clusters using the PS3. They chose the PS3 because it was cheap and because Sony was projecting a 10 year lifecycle (ie replacements would be available for a long time). At the time, nobody could have predicted that Sony would start dropping features from the PS3, including OtherOS support.
The PS3 has some pretty neat hardware. Tell me, what other machine can I buy if I want to dig into Cell programming?
I'm not too worried about what's going to happen 10,000 years from now.
Joe Sixpack should also look at the current mess in Libya and Bahrain. Count the number of lives lost there and compare that to the number of lives lost to the reactors in Japan. How many lives have been lost in wars over oil? Tell me again which energy source is a better choice?
At the end of the day, we can learn from what's happening in Japan and build even better reactors. What can be done about the despots ruling oil rich countries?
From the linked article: