each app has its own volume control (and some DRM, but that's not relevent to this issue)
Yes it is! DRM is overhead, and quite possibly severe overhead. It is entirely relevant to this discussion.
It could have been "Inkjet Printing while playing audio fails"
Unlikely. The only DRM inkjet printing entails is that they don't want you printing money -- and the printer itself is usually on the lookout for that.
Windows puts much more emphasis on the desktop and audio playback has been much smoother. This comes at a cost, of course, as the article says. This is a simple trade-off between interactivity (for desktop) and throughput (for server).
So why is it that Win XP never had this problem on slower hardware? Nor Win2K, ME, 98SE, 98, 95...
P.S. Blaming big business for acting big business is like blaming a rattlesnake for biting you. They're doing exactly what's expected of them, and you're a fool if you think they are supposed to care more about you than their shareholders, and maybe employees. That's why you elect a government and give them the power to enforce oversight in your best interests.
Then put the blame where it belongs -- with the South African government, who let this situation continue for many years to the determent of the people who elected them. Or maybe it benefited the people who elected them, to the detriment of everyone else.
To the SA people, you got the government you elected, so blame yourselves, then fix the problem at the ballot box!
Anyone who thinks that the U.S. media back down from anything offensive to Moslems has clearly never listened to talk radio or read conservative political commentators.
You clearly equate the U.S. Media with independent talk show hosts. They could hardly be more different. Cross the line as a talk show host might do (see: Imus) and you're gone with the network hardly tarnished at all, and more left-leaning than ever.
In fact, after their victory against free speech in the Imus case, they [had to] bus in protesters from LA to San Francisco (imagine not finding enough liberal protesters in SF or all places!) to attempt to remove Michael Savage who echoed my thoughts that letting hunger strikers starve themselves to death (like this will actually ever happen in numbers larger than single digits, and is Darnwinism in action) rather than caving in to unreasonable demands might be a good solution.
To this day I've never understood why people cower in fear of a hunger strike -- which over all seems about the stupidest idea ever. Like a small child threating to hold their breath until they get their way. Rather than allowing hunger strikers make it someone else's fault for their predicament (also known as the death of self-responsibility), too often scared liberals allow their own feelings of guilt over everything else good that ever happened to them to extend to encompass this -- then they blame the conservatives!!
Instead, one should have asked that child, How blue can you become?
That's what what was attempted on Savage. Feeling all pumped up from their sacking of Don Imus, they tried to silence other speech they didn't agree with.
The true irony here is that Liberals, over all, have been the staunchest supporters of Free Speech over the decades. The First Amendment is the most important of all to the ACLU. Much more than they protect the other eight amendments in the Bill of Rights. (Yes, the other 8 that the ACLU considers worth protecting.)
But now, Free Speech seems to have become that only Left-Wing Approved speech is proper free speech. Talk about a change in position, that can only have come about because Liberals now lose too many truly open free speech battles.
And just because you have Free Speech, doesn't mean that anyone is required to listen to you!
Berkeley Breathed sure has shown more courage than Wiley Miller. While Non Sequitur has ripped on the Christian religion often, he's never once touched the truly horrible aspects of Islam. Anyone that finds that more than a bit hypocritical is free to point this out to him at: wileyink@earthlink.net .
Does Storm only attack Windows? Likely yes, I'm sure. Shouldn't Microsoft be attacking this one specifically with their malicious software scanner that's part of every Windows Update?
Apparently they believe an almost 90% drop in networking performance is 'slight,' only affects reception of data, and that this performance trade-off is necessary to simply play an MP3.
What a load of utter Crap! If such a trade-ff was ever necessary, then we would have been seeing it in Win XP as well, and obviously we don't.
Vista networking is broken! Try copying over files from your XP machine on a mapped drive if you don't believe me. And audio/video functions in Vista are equally broken. And I bet its for the same reason: Kiss-Up To Hollywood DRM.
Microsoft has caved to the almighty Hollywood dollar, and with Vista you're pwned more than ever!
I would suggest that the Taxi drivers have something to hide -- say ripping off of tourists -- if they're this much against this technology. And if they want to strike, the City of New York should consider taking away their "Badges" -- which are the immensely valuable permission they have to operate a taxi in the first place. It's like taking away copyrights from the RIAA for misuse. Such a threat would likely end the strike in its tracks, or every current and future RIAA lawsuit.
paging on a flash drive is waste of money - why spend so much on reliable flash ram (more reliable than HDD anyway) so you can use it to PAGE??
Two problems here with your idea:
1: Paging is the most disk intensive part of computing, and therefore offers the greatest performance increase in going to an SSD. To just use the SSD for ordinary program storage negates much of the advantage of having a faster drive.
2: The idea of an SSD is to get away from a mechanical drive due to power requirements, its much more fragile nature, and slower speeds. You want to include BOTH.
If you wrote 40GB worth of data to it every single day (with the circuitry inside a drive to spread writes out over cells evenly), then you would average 1 write per day across each cell.
I may be paging to my swap file multiple times each minute. It might prove hard to level that activity out across the drive as a whole.
When you have to pay people to switch, expect that they're switching to the worst system. You don't have to pay people to switch to the better system. That's how Betamax lost out to VHS.
Can calling someone a 'classic crackpot' in the face of such incorrect data have any chance at making it to court, or even winning the suit?
It can, if you're the RIAA. They're suing on less than this much evidence, and the courts are allowing those cases to continue until the RIAA is forced to drop them themselves.
Reading TFA the implication is that other people can put files and registry entries onto your computer AND REQUIRE YOU TO KEEP THEM THERE AND INTACT. And they don't even have to tell you this. This is wrong on so many levels that the case against this guy should be thrown out of court immediately, and him receive all his legal fees post haste!
Suppose you have one computer for an entire family, and the coupon is one per person. Shouldn't each family member be allowed to print one coupon from the same family computer without violating the terms?
And if you have to game the system to gain your rights, who is at fault here?
My guess is that Vista is intensively scanning the sound hardware to ensure that all the voltages and other parameters remain in compliance -- and hiding this fact from the user. It's well known that part of the Vista DRM infection is that it checks to ensure that the Secure Audio Path remain intact, and that part of this is that it tries very hard to detect any "illegal" modifications or equipment.
Vista is just overall a hugely bad idea -- the idea being the Hollywood now owns your PC.
HD-DVD has a weaker DRM system since it doesn't have the BD+ capabilities of BluRay. Hey, that's a plus for the (worse) standard.
As for the rumor posited above in another post that Microsoft paid a combined $150M to these two studios to induce a switch, the answer is obvious. Microsoft sells an HD-DVD player add-on for XBox 360, and likely hopes to see game titles released in the future utilizing it. It has totally thrown in with the (worse) HD-DVD system, and can't change horses now since Sony owns BluRay. Microsoft has a huge stake in seeing HD-DVD win.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is! DRM is overhead, and quite possibly severe overhead. It is entirely relevant to this discussion.
Unlikely. The only DRM inkjet printing entails is that they don't want you printing money -- and the printer itself is usually on the lookout for that.
So why is it that Win XP never had this problem on slower hardware? Nor Win2K, ME, 98SE, 98, 95...
P.S. Blaming big business for acting big business is like blaming a rattlesnake for biting you. They're doing exactly what's expected of them, and you're a fool if you think they are supposed to care more about you than their shareholders, and maybe employees. That's why you elect a government and give them the power to enforce oversight in your best interests.
To the SA people, you got the government you elected, so blame yourselves, then fix the problem at the ballot box!
You clearly equate the U.S. Media with independent talk show hosts. They could hardly be more different. Cross the line as a talk show host might do (see: Imus) and you're gone with the network hardly tarnished at all, and more left-leaning than ever.
In fact, after their victory against free speech in the Imus case, they [had to] bus in protesters from LA to San Francisco (imagine not finding enough liberal protesters in SF or all places!) to attempt to remove Michael Savage who echoed my thoughts that letting hunger strikers starve themselves to death (like this will actually ever happen in numbers larger than single digits, and is Darnwinism in action) rather than caving in to unreasonable demands might be a good solution.
To this day I've never understood why people cower in fear of a hunger strike -- which over all seems about the stupidest idea ever. Like a small child threating to hold their breath until they get their way. Rather than allowing hunger strikers make it someone else's fault for their predicament (also known as the death of self-responsibility), too often scared liberals allow their own feelings of guilt over everything else good that ever happened to them to extend to encompass this -- then they blame the conservatives!!
Instead, one should have asked that child, How blue can you become?
That's what what was attempted on Savage. Feeling all pumped up from their sacking of Don Imus, they tried to silence other speech they didn't agree with. The true irony here is that Liberals, over all, have been the staunchest supporters of Free Speech over the decades. The First Amendment is the most important of all to the ACLU. Much more than they protect the other eight amendments in the Bill of Rights. (Yes, the other 8 that the ACLU considers worth protecting.)
But now, Free Speech seems to have become that only Left-Wing Approved speech is proper free speech. Talk about a change in position, that can only have come about because Liberals now lose too many truly open free speech battles.
And just because you have Free Speech, doesn't mean that anyone is required to listen to you!
Berkeley Breathed sure has shown more courage than Wiley Miller. While Non Sequitur has ripped on the Christian religion often, he's never once touched the truly horrible aspects of Islam. Anyone that finds that more than a bit hypocritical is free to point this out to him at: wileyink@earthlink.net .
This is just one too many hits against Skype. I'd rather use Vonage.
So does this affect all Windows media players (e.g. WinAmp), or just WMP? Could be a great argument to jump ship to non-MS software.
Does Storm only attack Windows? Likely yes, I'm sure. Shouldn't Microsoft be attacking this one specifically with their malicious software scanner that's part of every Windows Update?
What a load of utter Crap! If such a trade-ff was ever necessary, then we would have been seeing it in Win XP as well, and obviously we don't.
Vista networking is broken! Try copying over files from your XP machine on a mapped drive if you don't believe me. And audio/video functions in Vista are equally broken. And I bet its for the same reason: Kiss-Up To Hollywood DRM.
Microsoft has caved to the almighty Hollywood dollar, and with Vista you're pwned more than ever!
Have you tried shooting them? This is, after all, a matter of survival.
I would suggest that the Taxi drivers have something to hide -- say ripping off of tourists -- if they're this much against this technology. And if they want to strike, the City of New York should consider taking away their "Badges" -- which are the immensely valuable permission they have to operate a taxi in the first place. It's like taking away copyrights from the RIAA for misuse. Such a threat would likely end the strike in its tracks, or every current and future RIAA lawsuit.
I can't tell from the summary if the good guys are winning -- or losing.
Excuse me, but, doesn't this happen on the atomic level? Apply heat, and atoms vibrate.
Two problems here with your idea:
1: Paging is the most disk intensive part of computing, and therefore offers the greatest performance increase in going to an SSD. To just use the SSD for ordinary program storage negates much of the advantage of having a faster drive.
2: The idea of an SSD is to get away from a mechanical drive due to power requirements, its much more fragile nature, and slower speeds. You want to include BOTH.
I'll have a book out about it as soon as I can find a publisher.
I may be paging to my swap file multiple times each minute. It might prove hard to level that activity out across the drive as a whole.
When you have to pay people to switch, expect that they're switching to the worst system. You don't have to pay people to switch to the better system. That's how Betamax lost out to VHS.
1: Totally self-contained, i.e. you don't need an Internet connection at all to run Stellarium, let alone broadband.
2: No ads.
It can, if you're the RIAA. They're suing on less than this much evidence, and the courts are allowing those cases to continue until the RIAA is forced to drop them themselves.
Reading TFA the implication is that other people can put files and registry entries onto your computer AND REQUIRE YOU TO KEEP THEM THERE AND INTACT. And they don't even have to tell you this. This is wrong on so many levels that the case against this guy should be thrown out of court immediately, and him receive all his legal fees post haste!
And if you have to game the system to gain your rights, who is at fault here?
The DMCA exists to protect lousy, ineffective, DRM against circumvention. Good DRM doesn't need legal protection to be effective.
Vista is just overall a hugely bad idea -- the idea being the Hollywood now owns your PC.
As for the rumor posited above in another post that Microsoft paid a combined $150M to these two studios to induce a switch, the answer is obvious. Microsoft sells an HD-DVD player add-on for XBox 360, and likely hopes to see game titles released in the future utilizing it. It has totally thrown in with the (worse) HD-DVD system, and can't change horses now since Sony owns BluRay. Microsoft has a huge stake in seeing HD-DVD win.