First, you spelled it wrong. The word is 'eunuchs', a name for a man who has been castrated (yikes!).
Second, your 'Q:' is really 2 questions, not one, given the pun.
Your 'Q:' was:
What UnixWare are you running?
But, given the pun, it would be interpreted:
What Eunuchs wear? Are you running?
Meaning the answer, originally:
I really don't want to concern myself with what UnixWare.
Becomes:
I really don't want to concern myself with what Eunuchs wear. And, no, I'm not running.
Or, even:
I really don't want to concern myself with what Eunuchs wear. I would imagine its not a g-string - possibly a kilt? And, no, I'm not running.
Otherwise, I think your post should be modded up as at least +1 or +2 Funny, since the Unix/Eunuchs pun is so little used these days.
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
Bit-player House politicians introduce bills such as these as a way to demonstrate to their constituencies that they are doing 'something' to address whatever problems said constituents are complaining to them about.
In this case, based on the intensity of the **AA's prosecutions of persons using file sharing, the more draconian their suggested bills appear, the better chance they having of pleasing their constituents, and hence raising more funds and votes the next time they're up for election.
Based on the success of these types of bills in the past, this measure likely will not make it outside of the house, much less the senate, where it will most assuredly get chewed up and spit out.
Beyond that, even if this measure did make it to the senate, and did get passed as law by the president, it would be struck down through litigation as a gross violation of the 1st Amendment.
AOL is making a *huge* mistake by not using the Gecko engine as the core of their browser/ISP product. Right now they're using Gecko as the core in their Compuserve and Mac AOL product, but still using IE in the Windows product. Seems like they could streamline their internal coding operations by standardizing on one code base, which would ultimately save them more money than letting developers go.
Also, by using the Gecko engine in the product, they could in theory start offering AOL on Linux-based PC's; while that might sound like an unprofitable venture at first, I can't imagine all of those people purchasing Lindows-based PC's at Walmart not wanting AOL as their ISP... and Walmart sure is selling a whole lotta Lindows PC these days.
You're absolutely right - from what i've read on c|net et al, kazaa has the largest following (it took the lead after the closing of the sharman network to other p2p clients such as morpheus). Actually, isn't Kazaa the only p2p app that uses the Sharman network these days? Or, are there others? I was pretty sure that the sharman network closing was what spawned the kazaa download craze...
I was just offering up a p2p app that runs on linux to the guy, thats all.
Credit card companies are one of the major stop gaps to allowing truly online, global commerce from happening.
No major credit card company will validate a credit card from one country to the next. Hence, if I live in Canada, and want to purchase a product from a company in the UK, Visa (or Mastercard, Discover, American Express, etc) won't do a check on my credit card for the company in the UK to ensure that I'm the cardholder, that my address & postal code match, etc.
If credit card companies would allow cross-border validation to occur, online commerce would see an enormous increase in activity. Unfortunately, fraudulent purchases would be one of those increases, hence why the credit card companies won't budge. If there is a solution to the fraud issue (.NET? Liberty Alliance?), then convincing the credit card co's/banks/financial institutions to allow cross-border validation would be much easier...
Analysis of the quantity of bugs in a software application is by no means a qualitative analysis of the performance of that application.
The predominant httpd servers available on the market today are Apache; iPlanet/SunOne; and IIS. Additionally, there are lesser-known httpd servers (zeus, cern), as well as 'niche' httpd servers (caucho) which typically perform additional functions to parsing HTML code (such as acting as a Java server, etc).
Regardless of the purported 'quality' provided by commercial, closed-source alternatives, the Apache httpd server is the only solution in the marketplace that supports - in a stable, qualitative fashion - a startling variety of additional software to provide functionality to a website.
A primary example of this bundled flexibility would be the vast number of scripting languages supported by Apache. Java, Perl, PHP, and TCL are all free, stable, and work wonderfully with Apache. This kind of flexibility in application environments is simply unparalleled by the other httpd servers.
You might say that 'you can run java, perl, php, and tcl on iPlanet or IIS, though'. Sure you can. Have you tried that?
First, your commercial vendor won't support it - Microsoft will only support you if you're running ASP.NET et al on IIS; Sun will only support you if you're running Java on iPlanet.
Second, non-supported scripting languages often don't work on non-apache httpd servers. Why? Because the source code for the httpd server isn't available to the scripting language developers - making intelligent integration more difficult - additionally, the major vendors don't test competitive scripting language functionality on their products, meaning that while the writers of PHP, Perl, TCL, etc may offer a version of their product for other httpd servers - Microsoft and Sun aren't testing them on their httpd servers - plus, they aren't guaranteed to work, and often don't. (At my company, we've never been able to get PHP to work correctly under iPlanet - and guess what? Sun doesn't give a shit. Big surprise, huh?).
Commerical httpd servers may indeed have less bugs - but they certainly are not as stable in performance, nor do they support as wide a variety of available software extensions - as Apache.
I'll gladly take that extra.02 in software bugs over a commercial, proprietary httpd server any day.
Adobe tried to make webpages 3D, with Atmosphere. It never really took off. Interesting browser, fun people to chat w/, but there simply aren't enough 3D 'worlds' out there to explore... after awhile, you just get bored and fire Mozilla back up into the 2D realm.
Do not read this book. It is a plagiarism of
Moby DICK. They just replaced some of the names.
The Bug = The DICK,
Roberta = Ishmael,
Ethan = Cpt. Ahab.
Just like Tanya Grotter! Melville WILL sue!
The real threat here isn't that Melville will sue (he is dead, after all).
The problem here is that, if your analogy is true, that means that the great-grandson of Ellen Ullman will become a new-age euro-trash remix artist calling himself "Bug", after his great-grandmother's famous antagonist by the same name.
Actually, the shortcomings, security issues, and failures in performance of NT4 could be sited as one of the #1 reasons that Linux was so rapidly adopted as a server - replacing an NT box was a key reason that IT managers chose Linux.
I want to agree with you, but the issue with your argument (at least in the mind of the author @ the slate who wrote the article) is that the competition between Apple, Microsoft and Linux for the desktop is a zero-sum game. Essentially, the only available customers must be taken from a competitor's pool of clientele, hence 'zero-sum': nothing is really added or removed, just shifted around a bit (much like e=mc^2, but as applies to the marketplace).
In this argument (which, again, is the one proposed by the slate article) Apple stands the most to lose. As customers decide to abandon the Windows platform, Apple is hoping that they'll choose Macintosh as the replacement - hence the glitz-&-blitz behind their 'switchers' campaign (which is basically towing the 'zero-sum' line in a glossy way).
If people *aren't* choosing Apple when they leave Microsoft, then by default they're choosing Linux for their desktop (and server, and devices, et al). In this manner, Microsoft does _lose_ clients, but at the same time, Apple doesn't _gain_ any additional ones.
From Microsoft's perspective, with a 95% stranglehold on desktop OSes, losing 10, 15, 20 percent isn't endgame. It would reduce marketshare, and hence profitability, of one of their key product lines - but, keep in mind that MS has been working hard to re-work their business model around software, services, web services, etc etc. Losing ground on Windows is a *reality* for Microsoft - they've been preparing for that reality since 1999, or possibly 1998, when.NET starting taking root w/in the company.
Apple, on the other hand, with a less than 2.5% desktop marketshare, has bet the farm on taking MS' customers. You might argue that Apple also provides services -.Mac, iTunes, iPod, etc - but, I would counter that these efforts focus primarily (at least at the moment) on one target customer base - Macintosh owners. While Apple will likely extend their non-desktop efforts - services, servers, software, et al - their core business begins in their hardware, and extends outward from there - which means, if people aren't buying Apple computers, then Apple is not making much money. If that bet against MS' clientele ultimately doesn't pay off, and Linux ends up taking more of MS' clientele than Apple, I think the future would suddenly become very uncertain for Jobs @ Co.
Well, fwiw, I'd rather not to get into a pissing match about the pissing capabilities of a couple of pissant computers... somebody might get, well, pissed.
mLan is obscure, in a sense, but at the same time almost every major Music Industry manufacturer making technology-based products has accepted mLan as a standard, and either does build the port into their products, or has plans to. Yamaha just hasn't done a very good job of getting the word on the street, or making the spec a priority for consummers... Apple has invested into the research & implementation of the mLan spec, and in regards to their hiring of Wyatt and the aquisition of eMagic, they have a vested interest in promotion of the mLan spec, as it helps to perpetuate sales of Apple products w/in the Music Industry (not just Apple computers, but the eMagic Logic software as well, in addition to a whole slew of related products they could develop if this whole thing were to take off for them... mLan is sort of the key to making this all happen for Apple).
Absolutely - you really can just plug mLAN into any firewire port. The other guy had a good point, though - Yamaha hasn't done a very good job at marketing mLAN, and Apple has a vested interest in seeing the mLAN technology gain wide acceptance in the Music Industry.
My point was that if Apple labelled one of the firewire ports on the new G5 an 'mLAN' port, they could tout its music-production-readiness, while at the same time pitching OSX's built-in OS-level MIDI capability, and perhaps begin marketing an Apple-brand version of eMagic's Logic software (Some have speculated that this would eventually become the basis for a consummer-grade 'Final Mix Pro' application, which would be the audio brother to the video 'Final Cut Pro' app).
Really, such labelling would just be a marketing decision, not a technical one, but it would solve several problems Apple has in the market position of some of its products, as well as tie its core product (the G5/PPC/tower computer) into these product lines (mLAN, eMagic, etc.), making the G5 a branded "digital hub" for audio enthusiasts and professionals (not that its not already the digital hub for many of these people, its just not officially branded that way yet).
Now, why would Apple release a G5-based PPC with a dedicated mLAN port? I think Apple's hiring of Doug Wyatt - the guy who invented MIDI Timecode at Opcode - as well as Apple's aquisition of eMagic - in addition to their collaboration with Yamaha on the mLAN spec - would give Apple every incentive to put an 'mLAN' port on the back of their computer, even if it is only another firewire port.
Keep in mind that OSX has MIDI capability built-in - unlike any other OS. ALso, with the addition of a simple mLAN port, Apple can now state that their PPC is music-production ready right out of the box.
Doug Wyatt hired by apple eMagic Corporate info
Clustering is nice and all, but it's really just a linux gimmick. When you factor in power and staffage, it's much easier and cheaper just to get one really beastly computer than 20 old ones clustered.
I'm sure Brin and Page would love to hear more about your unique insights into the cost-effectiveness of Linux clusters.
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
Slashdot Mirror
First, you spelled it wrong. The word is 'eunuchs', a name for a man who has been castrated (yikes!).
:D
Second, your 'Q:' is really 2 questions, not one, given the pun.
Your 'Q:' was:
What UnixWare are you running?
But, given the pun, it would be interpreted:
What Eunuchs wear? Are you running?
Meaning the answer, originally:
I really don't want to concern myself with what UnixWare.
Becomes:
I really don't want to concern myself with what Eunuchs wear. And, no, I'm not running.
Or, even:
I really don't want to concern myself with what Eunuchs wear. I would imagine its not a g-string - possibly a kilt? And, no, I'm not running.
Otherwise, I think your post should be modded up as at least +1 or +2 Funny, since the Unix/Eunuchs pun is so little used these days.
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
Oh, BTW - IITYWIMWYBMAD?
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
Oh, BTW - IITYWIMWYBMAD?
I can just imagine the process of coming up w/ the new release name...
RH Dev Manager: "Hey y'all - how many lines-a-code did we find copied over from-a UNIX?"
RH Dev'er: "Urrmmm... looks like about severn er ait to me, hoss."
RH Dev Mng: "Well'um then, that there's the next ree-leease name then. Severn."
of this bill being passed.
Bit-player House politicians introduce bills such as these as a way to demonstrate to their constituencies that they are doing 'something' to address whatever problems said constituents are complaining to them about.
In this case, based on the intensity of the **AA's prosecutions of persons using file sharing, the more draconian their suggested bills appear, the better chance they having of pleasing their constituents, and hence raising more funds and votes the next time they're up for election.
Based on the success of these types of bills in the past, this measure likely will not make it outside of the house, much less the senate, where it will most assuredly get chewed up and spit out.
Beyond that, even if this measure did make it to the senate, and did get passed as law by the president, it would be struck down through litigation as a gross violation of the 1st Amendment.
50 developers is 10% of the Netscape work force... however, AOL's 'official' position is that they're still supporting the browser & the web portal.
... and Walmart sure is selling a whole lotta Lindows PC these days.
aol official position
AOL is making a *huge* mistake by not using the Gecko engine as the core of their browser/ISP product. Right now they're using Gecko as the core in their Compuserve and Mac AOL product, but still using IE in the Windows product. Seems like they could streamline their internal coding operations by standardizing on one code base, which would ultimately save them more money than letting developers go.
Also, by using the Gecko engine in the product, they could in theory start offering AOL on Linux-based PC's; while that might sound like an unprofitable venture at first, I can't imagine all of those people purchasing Lindows-based PC's at Walmart not wanting AOL as their ISP
moz lovas get funky wit da fp
wherz ma nigaz?
You're absolutely right - from what i've read on c|net et al, kazaa has the largest following (it took the lead after the closing of the sharman network to other p2p clients such as morpheus). Actually, isn't Kazaa the only p2p app that uses the Sharman network these days? Or, are there others? I was pretty sure that the sharman network closing was what spawned the kazaa download craze... I was just offering up a p2p app that runs on linux to the guy, thats all.
Limewire
Runs on anything, has a decent following, so there's a good chance the song/file/app you're looking for is available.
Altavista, as Altavista was owned by Overture.
http://www.altavista.com/about
Credit card companies are one of the major stop gaps to allowing truly online, global commerce from happening.
No major credit card company will validate a credit card from one country to the next. Hence, if I live in Canada, and want to purchase a product from a company in the UK, Visa (or Mastercard, Discover, American Express, etc) won't do a check on my credit card for the company in the UK to ensure that I'm the cardholder, that my address & postal code match, etc.
If credit card companies would allow cross-border validation to occur, online commerce would see an enormous increase in activity. Unfortunately, fraudulent purchases would be one of those increases, hence why the credit card companies won't budge. If there is a solution to the fraud issue (.NET? Liberty Alliance?), then convincing the credit card co's/banks/financial institutions to allow cross-border validation would be much easier...
Analysis of the quantity of bugs in a software application is by no means a qualitative analysis of the performance of that application.
.02 in software bugs over a commercial, proprietary httpd server any day.
The predominant httpd servers available on the market today are Apache; iPlanet/SunOne; and IIS. Additionally, there are lesser-known httpd servers (zeus, cern), as well as 'niche' httpd servers (caucho) which typically perform additional functions to parsing HTML code (such as acting as a Java server, etc).
According to Netcraft, Apache is the #1 httpd server in use today, and has been for nearly 7 years.
Regardless of the purported 'quality' provided by commercial, closed-source alternatives, the Apache httpd server is the only solution in the marketplace that supports - in a stable, qualitative fashion - a startling variety of additional software to provide functionality to a website.
A primary example of this bundled flexibility would be the vast number of scripting languages supported by Apache. Java, Perl, PHP, and TCL are all free, stable, and work wonderfully with Apache. This kind of flexibility in application environments is simply unparalleled by the other httpd servers.
You might say that 'you can run java, perl, php, and tcl on iPlanet or IIS, though'. Sure you can. Have you tried that?
First, your commercial vendor won't support it - Microsoft will only support you if you're running ASP.NET et al on IIS; Sun will only support you if you're running Java on iPlanet.
Second, non-supported scripting languages often don't work on non-apache httpd servers. Why? Because the source code for the httpd server isn't available to the scripting language developers - making intelligent integration more difficult - additionally, the major vendors don't test competitive scripting language functionality on their products, meaning that while the writers of PHP, Perl, TCL, etc may offer a version of their product for other httpd servers - Microsoft and Sun aren't testing them on their httpd servers - plus, they aren't guaranteed to work, and often don't. (At my company, we've never been able to get PHP to work correctly under iPlanet - and guess what? Sun doesn't give a shit. Big surprise, huh?).
Commerical httpd servers may indeed have less bugs - but they certainly are not as stable in performance, nor do they support as wide a variety of available software extensions - as Apache.
I'll gladly take that extra
Adobe tried to make webpages 3D, with Atmosphere. It never really took off. Interesting browser, fun people to chat w/, but there simply aren't enough 3D 'worlds' out there to explore... after awhile, you just get bored and fire Mozilla back up into the 2D realm.
Do not read this book. It is a plagiarism of Moby DICK. They just replaced some of the names.
The Bug = The DICK, Roberta = Ishmael, Ethan = Cpt. Ahab.
Just like Tanya Grotter! Melville WILL sue!
The real threat here isn't that Melville will sue (he is dead, after all).
The problem here is that, if your analogy is true, that means that the great-grandson of Ellen Ullman will become a new-age euro-trash remix artist calling himself "Bug", after his great-grandmother's famous antagonist by the same name.
Now that's a frightening thought.
Actually, the shortcomings, security issues, and failures in performance of NT4 could be sited as one of the #1 reasons that Linux was so rapidly adopted as a server - replacing an NT box was a key reason that IT managers chose Linux.
I want to agree with you, but the issue with your argument (at least in the mind of the author @ the slate who wrote the article) is that the competition between Apple, Microsoft and Linux for the desktop is a zero-sum game. Essentially, the only available customers must be taken from a competitor's pool of clientele, hence 'zero-sum': nothing is really added or removed, just shifted around a bit (much like e=mc^2, but as applies to the marketplace).
.NET starting taking root w/in the company.
.Mac, iTunes, iPod, etc - but, I would counter that these efforts focus primarily (at least at the moment) on one target customer base - Macintosh owners. While Apple will likely extend their non-desktop efforts - services, servers, software, et al - their core business begins in their hardware, and extends outward from there - which means, if people aren't buying Apple computers, then Apple is not making much money. If that bet against MS' clientele ultimately doesn't pay off, and Linux ends up taking more of MS' clientele than Apple, I think the future would suddenly become very uncertain for Jobs @ Co.
In this argument (which, again, is the one proposed by the slate article) Apple stands the most to lose. As customers decide to abandon the Windows platform, Apple is hoping that they'll choose Macintosh as the replacement - hence the glitz-&-blitz behind their 'switchers' campaign (which is basically towing the 'zero-sum' line in a glossy way).
If people *aren't* choosing Apple when they leave Microsoft, then by default they're choosing Linux for their desktop (and server, and devices, et al). In this manner, Microsoft does _lose_ clients, but at the same time, Apple doesn't _gain_ any additional ones.
From Microsoft's perspective, with a 95% stranglehold on desktop OSes, losing 10, 15, 20 percent isn't endgame. It would reduce marketshare, and hence profitability, of one of their key product lines - but, keep in mind that MS has been working hard to re-work their business model around software, services, web services, etc etc. Losing ground on Windows is a *reality* for Microsoft - they've been preparing for that reality since 1999, or possibly 1998, when
Apple, on the other hand, with a less than 2.5% desktop marketshare, has bet the farm on taking MS' customers. You might argue that Apple also provides services -
Well, fwiw, I'd rather not to get into a pissing match about the pissing capabilities of a couple of pissant computers... somebody might get, well, pissed.
Apparently, the G5's aren't entirely house-broken, yet.
G5-based computers previously leaked on the Apple store
mLan is obscure, in a sense, but at the same time almost every major Music Industry manufacturer making technology-based products has accepted mLan as a standard, and either does build the port into their products, or has plans to. Yamaha just hasn't done a very good job of getting the word on the street, or making the spec a priority for consummers... Apple has invested into the research & implementation of the mLan spec, and in regards to their hiring of Wyatt and the aquisition of eMagic, they have a vested interest in promotion of the mLan spec, as it helps to perpetuate sales of Apple products w/in the Music Industry (not just Apple computers, but the eMagic Logic software as well, in addition to a whole slew of related products they could develop if this whole thing were to take off for them... mLan is sort of the key to making this all happen for Apple).
Absolutely - you really can just plug mLAN into any firewire port. The other guy had a good point, though - Yamaha hasn't done a very good job at marketing mLAN, and Apple has a vested interest in seeing the mLAN technology gain wide acceptance in the Music Industry.
My point was that if Apple labelled one of the firewire ports on the new G5 an 'mLAN' port, they could tout its music-production-readiness, while at the same time pitching OSX's built-in OS-level MIDI capability, and perhaps begin marketing an Apple-brand version of eMagic's Logic software (Some have speculated that this would eventually become the basis for a consummer-grade 'Final Mix Pro' application, which would be the audio brother to the video 'Final Cut Pro' app).
Really, such labelling would just be a marketing decision, not a technical one, but it would solve several problems Apple has in the market position of some of its products, as well as tie its core product (the G5/PPC/tower computer) into these product lines (mLAN, eMagic, etc.), making the G5 a branded "digital hub" for audio enthusiasts and professionals (not that its not already the digital hub for many of these people, its just not officially branded that way yet).
My speculation: The 'optical audio' that this ad touts is an implementation of Yamaha's mLAN, a joint project between Apple and Yamaha begun in 1999.
mLAN essentially allows the transfer of all audio-related signals - be they MIDI, audio, whatever - over 1 firewire cable.
yamaha press release, mlan, 2000 [opens in new window]
Now, why would Apple release a G5-based PPC with a dedicated mLAN port? I think Apple's hiring of Doug Wyatt - the guy who invented MIDI Timecode at Opcode - as well as Apple's aquisition of eMagic - in addition to their collaboration with Yamaha on the mLAN spec - would give Apple every incentive to put an 'mLAN' port on the back of their computer, even if it is only another firewire port.
Keep in mind that OSX has MIDI capability built-in - unlike any other OS. ALso, with the addition of a simple mLAN port, Apple can now state that their PPC is music-production ready right out of the box.
Doug Wyatt hired by apple
eMagic Corporate info
"you've got your ass in a sling now!"
Clustering is nice and all, but it's really just a linux gimmick. When you factor in power and staffage, it's much easier and cheaper just to get one really beastly computer than 20 old ones clustered.
s _google.html
I'm sure Brin and Page would love to hear more about your unique insights into the cost-effectiveness of Linux clusters.
http://www.internetwk.com/lead/lead060100.htm
http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/2000/pres
[each link opens in new window]
Mainly just to see first hand an accused Spammer being cross-examined by a Microsoft Lawyer, dressed up in that stupid butterfly outfit...
If I were a CIO or CTO debating the TCO of *nix vs. Win2K3 to a CEO, would IBM vs. SCO be the TKO that stops the CEO from approving A/P to pay my PO for RH's LGX?
FWIW, even if OSS is FAIB, if the DOJ considers *nix IP with a TM, then it basically become's SCO's LIC, meaning our OSS becomes a CSS OS, which would RSTBO.
AIBO going w/ an ASP that manages our OS? BTA, we might end up w/ a BOFH giving us ZA, which WWAD PMS.
AFAIK, INMP if SCO wants to be ITM by enforcing its supposed IPR - *nix IP should be PD or GNU, like BSD just on GP, IYKWIM. I keep asking myself in this situation - WWLD?
Oh, BTW - IITYWIMWYBMAD?