I got found this interesting post on Google Groups. Remember, this is what Bill Gates wrote to the Apple CEO 13 years ago, just one and a half year after the launch of the original Apple Macintosh and the IBM AT, three years after Compaq introduced the first IBM clone.
Selected quotes from a confidential memorandum from Bill Gates to John Scully of Apple dated June 25, 1985.
Source: Wired Magazine, November 1997, page 126-128.
A memo on "Apple Licensing of Mac Technology."
Apple's stated position in personal computer is innovative technology
leader. This position implies that Apple must create a standard on new,
advanced technology. They must establish a "revolutionary" architecture,
which necessarily implies new development incompatible with existing
architectures.
Apple must make Macintosh a standard. But no personal computer company,
not even IBM, can create a standard without independent support. Even
though Apple realized this, they have not been able to gain the
independent support required to be perceived as a standard.
The significant investment (especially independent support) in a
"standard personal computer" results in an incredible momentum for its
architecture. Specifically, the IBM PC architecture continues to receive
huge investment and gains additional momentum [...] The investment in the
IBM architecture includes development of differentiated compatibles,
software, and peripherals; user and sales channel education; and most
importantly, attitudes and perceptions that are not easily changed.
Any deficiencies in the IBM architecture are quickly eliminated by
independent support [...] The closed architecture prevents similar
independent investment in the Macintosh. The IBM architecture, when
compared to the Macintosh, probably has more than 100 times the
engineering resources applied to it when investment of compatible
manufacturers is included. The ratio becomes even greater when the
manufacturers of expansion cards are included.
Conclusion:
As the independent investment in a "standard" architecture grows, so does
the momentum for that architecture. The industry has reached the point
where it is now impossible for Apple to create a standard out of their
innovative technology without support from, and the resulting credibility
of, other personal computer manufacturers. Thus APPLE MUST OPEN THE
MACINTOSH ARCHITECTURE TO HAVE THE INDEPENDENT SUPPORT REQUIRED TO GAIN
MOMENTUM AND ESTABLISH A STANDARD. [emphasis mine]
The Mac has not become a standard:
The Macintosh has failed to attain the critical mass necessary for the
technology to be considered a long term contender.
[...]
Recommendation:
Apple should license Macintosh technology to 3-5 significant manufacturers
for the development of "Mac Compatibles".
US manufacturers and contacts: ideal companies - in addition to
credibility, they have large account sales force that can establish the
Mac architecture in larger companies:
- AT&T, James Edwards
- Wang, An Wang
- Digital Equipment Corporation, Ken Olsen
- Texas Instruments, Jerry Junkins
- Hewlett Packard, John Young
Other companies:
[ list of companies and contact names deleted ]
Apple should license the Macintosh technology to US and European companies
in a way that allows them to go to other companies for manufacturing.
Sony, Kyocera [...] are good candidates for OEM manufacturing of Mac
compatibles.
MICROSOFT IS VERY WILLING TO HELP APPLE IMPLEMENT THIS STRATEGY. We are
familiar with the key manufacturers, their strategies and strengths. We
also have a great deal of experience in OEMing system software.
Rationale:
1. The companies that license Mac technology would add credibility to the
Macintosh architecture.
2. These companies would broaden the available product offerings through
their "Mac-compatible" product lines:
- They would each innovate and add features to the basic systems [...]
Why the hell does the ebook version cost only a buck less than the paperback version? It only costs a buck to print and ship to distributors? That's friggin news to me!
A buck per book is actually pretty close, see
this study (ok, so I nicked the link from someone else in the discussion). And those estimates are for pretty small runs, up to 4000 copies. The costs of printing, shipping and storage form a very small part of the final price of a book, most go to royalties, promotion, overhead and profit. I can easily pick up new public domain paperbacks for 1 - 1.5 euros, and these are not sold below cost.
This is the big problem with the diversity recommendations I've seen. If they had been implemented as recommended they would have had little impact on the MSBlast virus, which spread via common e-mail, and would likely increase the exposure for other types of threat.
The article mentions that SCO is trying to stall as much as possible. Probably the executives at Santa Clara have'nt sold off all their shares yet. Once that is done, you can be sure to see the cases flying off the shelves.
Also, McBride will get a large payoff if he manages to get 4 consecutive profitable quarters. He only has 2 more to go.
Re:these are narrow tests, not comprehensive tests
on
Linux File System Shootout
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Still, they are interesting in showing areas of performance where something is a bit amiss.
It would be nice if exactly what they did was explained. You know, things like how you can get both the lowest total elapsed time and the worst overall score on one of the runs (because of CPU usage? ), what task was measured by each of the numbers printed, what the different settings on the different runs mean.....
Just looking at the table of results, it seems clear that the bonnie test has a penalty for cpu utilization, while the iozone test only considers total run time.
Sigh, time to go read the source code for them.
I just hope we're not going to get benchmark-optimized filesystems.
searching google for
stone dog quote
returns no results. Also try
stone cat quote
or changing the order of the words for weird results. Queries on alltheweb or altavista return numerous results, as expected. This has been reported in threads in alt.usage.english, rec.puzzles and (of all places) alt.fan.tolkien.
> 95 used to take ages on a p233, but 3.11 started almost instantly
A cleanly installed win95 system was very fast on a P233 with sufficient memory. You may have forgotten it but the P233-mmx wasn't even introduced until 1996, the Pentium II-233 followed in 1997. Booting was (and still is) slow if you installed virus scanners, ms-office, and other autostart items, and if you used networking. Sadly, more and more application writers feel that their application is so important that is should be started on every boot.
So what can we get from manned spacecrafts that couldn't just as easily be handled by automated crafts? Science perhaps? Practically any form of production would be handled better by onboard robots, IMHO.
In every article on recent PC advancements, there have been remarks along the lines of "who needs 64-bit on the desktop" and "how are we ever going to fill a 250GB hard disk". This should shut them up for a while. Remember what passed for "rich multimedia experience" only 10 years ago? Grainy 15fps 320x200 video clips that lasted half a minute. Playing something with dvd or divx quality from your hard disk seemed like science fiction. Who knows, maybe in 15 years our current dvd and divx quality will seem just as laughable.
Slackware is above all a very focussed distribution. It aims to give you a fairly complete, simple and stable operating system for 486+ computers, that can be easily customized by yourself. In the past, there were also Alpha and Sparc versions, but now I think only Intel is officially supported. Slackware does not attempt to include every open source software package under the sun. There is sendmail, but not postfix, qmail, exim etc. There is mysql but not postgre, firebird, etc. There are a few window managers, as opposed to dozens. It does include the usual development tools and the most common libraries. If you want something not provided in the default distribution, you are expected to download and compile/install it yourself.
The result is that the complete distribution can more or less be managed by a single person. Of all the major distributions, Slackware has probably the smallest development team. If the Mandrake or Gentoo company (yes folks, Gentoo is not a non-profit org like Debian!) were to fold next month, it is not easy to continue the distributions, because they need a reasonable amount of supporting infrastructure and developers. If Patrick Volkerding quits next month, I can maintain my own Slackware tree reasonably well, because I have a reasonable overview of how the entire distribution works.
zdnet, Didio, and the like, would be ranting that such a move was proof that scox has a strong case.
IBM has offered to "protect their customers" (whatever that means). Didio has already pointed to that as evidence that scox has put IBM customers are in a positon where they need IBM's
Even if Linux isn't as good as Solaris today, who doubts that they are catching up quickly and will be extremely competitive sooner or later?
"Rich" refers to net worth, not income
on
Tech Rich Get Richer
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
This is an important point that has been stated in several posts. Being rich means having a high net worth, usually in equity, savings and real estate. Although there is an overlap with high income earners, the two categories are not identical. For example "taxing high income earners" is not the same as "taxing the rich".
Ah, this myth again...this was not a frivolous lawsuit. Perhaps you should check out the facts.
The issue is not that this particular lawsuit was frivolous, but that the (initially) awarded punitive damage was disproportional to the actual damage. This was done deliberately, mostly to punish McDonalds rather than to compensate the victim; as such it was probably set too low. As I've stated, the problem with such a system is that it will encourage abuse of the law through frivolous lawsuits.
I'm not an American, so correct me if I'm wrong. In the US, wronged parties in lawsuits are often awarded punitive damage. Large companies can be fined for huge sums, totally out of proportion to the actual damage done (e.g. the McDonalds coffee lawsuit). The idea is that the punishment should be large enough that it will actually affect the offender. This is in principle a sensible approach; it can prevent rich people or corporations breaking the law because they can afford to. The flipside, however, is that it encourages what economists refer to as rent-seeking behaviour, capturing existing wealth (in this case through lithigation) rather than creating new wealth. We can all come up with numerous examples of rent-seeking behaviour in the past few years, indeed, some people fear that the entire US is in danger of becoming a nation of rent-seekers. Maybe the potential wealth gain through lawsuits and such are simply too big to resist. Maybe the punitive part of the fine should go to the government (which in principle is owned by the people). This would keep the advantage of punitive fines, while discouraging people from starting lawsuits primarily for personal gain.
nope. windows xp can only format filesystems as fat32 up to 32gb. however, windows 2000 can format fat32 disks much larger than that (i've never hit the limit). the reason this is intentionally disabled in xp is to discourage the use of fat32 in favor of ntfs on new drives. whether this is due to purposeful compatibility breaking (yes, everything reads fat), or simply a well-intentioned plan to get rid of the ancient fat file system is only known to microsoft.
Although fat32 supports filesystems up to 2TB in theory, there are sound reasons to get rid of it soon. Summary: for large filesystems, you end up with either large cluster sizes (leaving you with a lot of wasted space like on fat16), or large file allocation tables (FATs).
Re:Why go back to the CLI
on
GTK+ TTY Port
·
· Score: 1
> I really like high resolution frame buffer consoles, much more than any X session at the equivalent resolution. > I like X, but not for consoles where I do text editing.
Why not just use X with a minimalistic wm and maximized xterms? An accelerated X server is usually much faster than a vesa framebuffer. Besides, I've never found out how to get a higher refresh rate than 60hz on a framebuffer.
Slashdot Mirror
Selected quotes from a confidential memorandum from Bill Gates to John Scully of Apple dated June 25, 1985.
Source: Wired Magazine, November 1997, page 126-128.
A memo on "Apple Licensing of Mac Technology."
Apple's stated position in personal computer is innovative technology leader. This position implies that Apple must create a standard on new, advanced technology. They must establish a "revolutionary" architecture, which necessarily implies new development incompatible with existing architectures.
Apple must make Macintosh a standard. But no personal computer company, not even IBM, can create a standard without independent support. Even though Apple realized this, they have not been able to gain the independent support required to be perceived as a standard.
The significant investment (especially independent support) in a "standard personal computer" results in an incredible momentum for its architecture. Specifically, the IBM PC architecture continues to receive huge investment and gains additional momentum [...] The investment in the IBM architecture includes development of differentiated compatibles, software, and peripherals; user and sales channel education; and most importantly, attitudes and perceptions that are not easily changed.
Any deficiencies in the IBM architecture are quickly eliminated by independent support [...] The closed architecture prevents similar independent investment in the Macintosh. The IBM architecture, when compared to the Macintosh, probably has more than 100 times the engineering resources applied to it when investment of compatible manufacturers is included. The ratio becomes even greater when the manufacturers of expansion cards are included.
Conclusion:
As the independent investment in a "standard" architecture grows, so does the momentum for that architecture. The industry has reached the point where it is now impossible for Apple to create a standard out of their innovative technology without support from, and the resulting credibility of, other personal computer manufacturers. Thus APPLE MUST OPEN THE MACINTOSH ARCHITECTURE TO HAVE THE INDEPENDENT SUPPORT REQUIRED TO GAIN MOMENTUM AND ESTABLISH A STANDARD. [emphasis mine]
The Mac has not become a standard:
The Macintosh has failed to attain the critical mass necessary for the technology to be considered a long term contender.
[...]
Recommendation:
Apple should license Macintosh technology to 3-5 significant manufacturers for the development of "Mac Compatibles".
US manufacturers and contacts: ideal companies - in addition to credibility, they have large account sales force that can establish the Mac architecture in larger companies:
- AT&T, James Edwards - Wang, An Wang - Digital Equipment Corporation, Ken Olsen - Texas Instruments, Jerry Junkins - Hewlett Packard, John Young
Other companies:
[ list of companies and contact names deleted ]
Apple should license the Macintosh technology to US and European companies in a way that allows them to go to other companies for manufacturing. Sony, Kyocera [...] are good candidates for OEM manufacturing of Mac compatibles.
MICROSOFT IS VERY WILLING TO HELP APPLE IMPLEMENT THIS STRATEGY. We are familiar with the key manufacturers, their strategies and strengths. We also have a great deal of experience in OEMing system software.
Rationale:
1. The companies that license Mac technology would add credibility to the Macintosh architecture.
2. These companies would broaden the available product offerings through their "Mac-compatible" product lines:
- They would each innovate and add features to the basic systems [...]
-
> Having to memorise keyboard commands is not an intuitive interface.
That's exactly what I told my piano teacher.
best: jfs
worst: ext3_journal
bonnie++ benchmark
best: ext2
worst: reiser4/reiser4_extents, ext3_ordered/ext3_journal
Yawn, yet another X alternative/replacement. My prediction is that 15 years from now we'll still be using X11. Probably still XFree86, even.
searching google for stone dog quote returns no results. Also try stone cat quote or changing the order of the words for weird results. Queries on alltheweb or altavista return numerous results, as expected. This has been reported in threads in alt.usage.english, rec.puzzles and (of all places) alt.fan.tolkien.
Sign me up for 22.33 Nuclear Systems Design Project.
> 95 used to take ages on a p233, but 3.11 started almost instantly
A cleanly installed win95 system was very fast on a P233 with sufficient memory. You may have forgotten it but the P233-mmx wasn't even introduced until 1996, the Pentium II-233 followed in 1997. Booting was (and still is) slow if you installed virus scanners, ms-office, and other autostart items, and if you used networking. Sadly, more and more application writers feel that their application is so important that is should be started on every boot.
In every article on recent PC advancements, there have been remarks along the lines of "who needs 64-bit on the desktop" and "how are we ever going to fill a 250GB hard disk". This should shut them up for a while. Remember what passed for "rich multimedia experience" only 10 years ago? Grainy 15fps 320x200 video clips that lasted half a minute. Playing something with dvd or divx quality from your hard disk seemed like science fiction. Who knows, maybe in 15 years our current dvd and divx quality will seem just as laughable.
everybody is using XFree86 7.8.9 and ignoring all the X replacements, which by then number into the 100s.
Slackware is above all a very focussed distribution. It aims to give you a fairly complete, simple and stable operating system for 486+ computers, that can be easily customized by yourself. In the past, there were also Alpha and Sparc versions, but now I think only Intel is officially supported. Slackware does not attempt to include every open source software package under the sun. There is sendmail, but not postfix, qmail, exim etc. There is mysql but not postgre, firebird, etc. There are a few window managers, as opposed to dozens. It does include the usual development tools and the most common libraries. If you want something not provided in the default distribution, you are expected to download and compile/install it yourself. The result is that the complete distribution can more or less be managed by a single person. Of all the major distributions, Slackware has probably the smallest development team. If the Mandrake or Gentoo company (yes folks, Gentoo is not a non-profit org like Debian!) were to fold next month, it is not easy to continue the distributions, because they need a reasonable amount of supporting infrastructure and developers. If Patrick Volkerding quits next month, I can maintain my own Slackware tree reasonably well, because I have a reasonable overview of how the entire distribution works.
Who the heck is Didio?
> New technology allows the consumer to use the downloaded content, but not distribute it outside of their home.
Dang, I used to hand out mp3 cdr's on the street corner. Now I have to resort to sharing on kazaa inside my home.
> a personal TIA program to track my own electronic movements
So is he an Autobot or a Decepticon?
Even if Linux isn't as good as Solaris today, who doubts that they are catching up quickly and will be extremely competitive sooner or later?
This is an important point that has been stated in several posts. Being rich means having a high net worth, usually in equity, savings and real estate. Although there is an overlap with high income earners, the two categories are not identical. For example "taxing high income earners" is not the same as "taxing the rich".
I'm not an American, so correct me if I'm wrong. In the US, wronged parties in lawsuits are often awarded punitive damage. Large companies can be fined for huge sums, totally out of proportion to the actual damage done (e.g. the McDonalds coffee lawsuit). The idea is that the punishment should be large enough that it will actually affect the offender. This is in principle a sensible approach; it can prevent rich people or corporations breaking the law because they can afford to. The flipside, however, is that it encourages what economists refer to as rent-seeking behaviour, capturing existing wealth (in this case through lithigation) rather than creating new wealth. We can all come up with numerous examples of rent-seeking behaviour in the past few years, indeed, some people fear that the entire US is in danger of becoming a nation of rent-seekers. Maybe the potential wealth gain through lawsuits and such are simply too big to resist. Maybe the punitive part of the fine should go to the government (which in principle is owned by the people). This would keep the advantage of punitive fines, while discouraging people from starting lawsuits primarily for personal gain.
> I really like high resolution frame buffer consoles, much more than any X session at the equivalent resolution.
> I like X, but not for consoles where I do text editing.
Why not just use X with a minimalistic wm and maximized xterms? An accelerated X server is usually much faster than a vesa framebuffer. Besides, I've never found out how to get a higher refresh rate than 60hz on a framebuffer.
chsh