The processor speed was in fact much of the problem. The motherboards were expected to start at $500 for a a board that was less than spectacular, with a PPC750 (G3) processor running at 600MHz. Total system cost was not successfully reduced enough to make it worthwhile to many systems integrators, operating systems porters, etc.
They were in a catch-22. The systems needed to come down in price to gain wide spread acceptance, and they needed wide spread acceptance to come down in price. The competition is so stiff for servers and clusters that it was hard to compete. It is indeed sad.
Ah, finally somebody who understands that there might be other reasons for wanting a PPC computer than to build a cheap Apple clone.
Personally I liked the idea of building a Linux system that used a low power but powerful and advanced chip like the PPC. Why run an ultra cool and advanced OS like Linux on a throwback chip like the x86 and its derivitives. Maybe a cheap firewall/router box that ran (or could run) a full version of Linux with Flash storage (8MB would be plenty for a default config, then allow Flash card upgrades and/or external USB drives) USB could connect to external storage and printers, etc. Not fast enough to replace your home computer, just fast enough to be useful while drawing under 20W of power.
Honestly, Macs are cheap enough these days that If I want to run OS X I can buy a real Mac rather than deal with the headaches of a hacked up system.
Come on, an iBook is only $999 new. And used G4 cubes are real tempting as well (Well, not at the $700+ their going for on eBay! Damn, talk about resale value)
Let me qualify that. The *native OS* can get to a C: prompt. And "bash$" doesn't count.
Does "PS1='C: '" count? Why not?
The promblem is you bundled WinNT based OS's into your foolish slam. Windows 95, 98, and Me are at their core, DOS-based. WinNT is a completely different code base, and includes Win 2000 (5.0) and XP Home and Pro (5.1). Sure, there's a program included that allows you to open a command prompt (cmd.exe), but as I pointed out, there's a program on Mac OS X to get a command prompt as well (VirtualPC).
Better definitions might have been a "True preemptive multitaking environment" (would have included DOS/Win95 variants and Pre-OS X Macs, but not Win NT variants), or more in your spirit, a Micosoft OS (Ah!, that exactly covers your criteria).
I know its not proper Slashdot protocol, but please try to think about this stuff rather than blinding swearing alliegance to some party line.
You may note I lumped OS/2 in there. If it has the ability to run a C: prompt, it's legacy, even if it isn't DOS.
By this brilliant definition a Shiny new 17" Powerbook is a Legacy Computer. Mac folk will be so disappointed, though I suppose now they'll be more accepted.
By the way, I'll be sending you directions on how to pick up your "Stupid" sign via email
Don't bother going to see "Dumb and Dumberer", you won't get it.
The camera bit sounds a little over the top, surely an led and a receiver???
No Camera, and no robot arm. The article states a sensor is used, most likely a light sensitive device that picks up on the shadow of pendelum (I imagine you'd want to avoid obvious tech like LED's in 250 year old clocks. I am a bit curious about the method used to stop/start/alter the pendelum movement, the obvious answer in my book is air; a blast of air at the weight end would have a hefty lever effect and avoids any contact at all. Magnets are cooler, but require magnetic metals in the pendelum, not a given in 250 year old estate clocks, and adding such would not only corrupt the historical value, but would alter the timing of the movement,making it inherently less accurate (yeah, the net result is more accuracy, but these things have a mechanical brilliance to them that should not be corrupted. Why not just replace the movements with a Japanese Quartz unit...
Phil and Alex's guide to web publishing makes a good point about flash - search engines won't index it (yet). So people are going to have a hard time trying to find your content online.
But your forgeting about "Spyder Food", redirecting spiders (based on user agents) to special pages that are full of keywords, etc. that are optimized to getting high rankings, and may or may not have anything to do with the site.
Both Scientific American and Motorola are developing PVRs for cable set top box's. And these two companies have huge existing relationships with the cable companies (as in - they sell virtually everything the cable companies need to do business). If you have a cable STB right now take a look at it - it's almost certainly made by one of these two companies (General Instruments are OEM'd Motorola boxes).
If either of these companies wished to build a true PVR, they'd do well to license Tivo software for their boxes. It would bypass a lot of development time, letting them get a box out the door long before their competitor with a polished, well developed UI. With the two way cable networks, they could completely bypass the need for a phone line (you did know those set top boxes could spy on you, right?)
What these companies are building are "thin client PVR's", where almost all the intelligence is at the head end, where it can't be tampered with. There's plenty of comments out there about how this approach sucks, though potentially there's some advantages to it as well (see my history).
Of course, to do it right they'd want a DirecTivo type approach, where the box simply recorded a pre-encoded digial stream (keeps client costs down), but that mean the would need to broadcast a digitized version of analog channels as well, which consumes bandwidth; the best solution would be to reduce the number of analog channels, but then that means TV's w/o a set top box get fewer channels (not a bad thing in cable co's mind likely).
To bad congress/FCC can't legislate a Digital cable standard so TV's could come equiped from the factory.
Next on Ask Slashdot: How small is your 'Library of Congress'? Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge.
Actually, this is a good question. How big is a LOC? We've been talking about making this a standard unit, but I've really got no idea what this translates to. 1 GB? (Horray, my palm can store a quater LOC!) A TeraByte? A PetaByte? I also assume we really need to anchor the size of the LOC, since in theory it expands every year. I propose we anchor it to a particular year, sort of like comparing things to 1960's dollars (Why was 1960 chosen? End of the gold standard?)
Two possible dates for the anchoring stand out, 1976, america's bicentenial, and 2000, the millennium (second millenium, and to satisfy the nitpickers, we'll declare it to be Dec 31st, 2000; that way its in the year 2000, but should quite all those "there was no year Zero" bozos)
Since fixing the LOC size in 1976 doesn't seem practical, I vote we use the millennium LOC a the "standard LOC"
PS: We should also determine the height of the LOC, to be considered the distance from street level to the top of the LOC building in DC (we'll ignore satellite warehouses, basements, etc.) This will be important when future folks want to start declaring "Thats enough LOC's to stretch to the moon and back!" This is important to the marketing folks, you young'uns might not recall the constant comparisons to the stacks of double spaced typed pages in the begining of the computer revolution by folks who never realized MS would makea 3 word note in Office use more disk space that some early hard drives.
The one advantage I could see to doing this server side is to allow me to time shift shows "post-mortem"; after they have aired (or begun airing). With a Tivo/VCR, you generally have to tell the box in advance "record this show/event" (Tivo will sometimes successfully guess, but thats a crap shoot) Tivo's "Season Pass" helps a lot here, I don't have to know when 24 is going to air (I really have no idea!) but when it does its in my now playing list, wee! But some stuff, like the Emmy's, (I won't mind watching Emmy commercials, but PLEASE let me skip parts of the show:^) comes out of left field for me. I found it was on 30 minutes till the "end", so I didn't bother.
Actually, thats the one feature I'd like to see added to my Tivo, a "Water Cooler" filter, to automatically record shows that are likely to be the subject of Water Cooler talk at the office.
But anyway, the idea is that while I didn't record the Emmy's, someone did, let me access the recording and watch it. Or the Final Four, or the Coca-Cola 400, or BattleBots Blooper Show (Tivo rely's on exact matches, so it misses stuff like that)
That's the way it is. Just as soon as you say a computer can't do it, someone makes a computer do it. But I'm quite sure that my computer can't run a realistic Uma Thurman simulation, with full tactile responses, just like a holodeck. Not possible.
Mine can. Now you'll have to excuse me for about 20 years...
Anybody who buys a printer with proprietary cartriges is a moron. They could double the price of those cartriges tomorrow, and whatcha gonna do about it?
So I should stick to printers that use the OPCF (Open Printer Cartridge Format)? Can you tell me where else besides Fantasy Island I could buy them?
If they double the price tomorrow, they'll lose tons of customers, because there's 4 other printer company's out there (And if they all did it there'd be a price fixing lawsuit so fast folks heads would spin) Hell, the current market of "subsidized" printers virtually ensures this can't happen, If your Dell cartridge suddenly cost $90, why wouldn't you drop an extra $20 and get a new Epson with its $40 cartridges?
These printer manufacturers are evil. Yes they want profits, but they've all been in buisness for quite a while, and the model is far more developed than you realize. Low entry costs is key for a big segment, image quality and reliability are key to maintain your customer base. Refilled carts are bad for both of those.
Much of their profits? What would you honestly estimate the percentage of comptuer users who overclock their CPU? I'd guess well below 0.1%.
I'd guess it's below.000001%. But since some of these fools actually try to get Intel to honor the warranty when they burn their chips out, and are buying the low cost chips instead of the big profit chips, most likely Intel's actually running a loss on the overclockers.
But Intel's bigger concern are the folks who repackage slower chips and sell them as more expensive units. Fix a 400Mhz 2.0 Ghz unit to run at 533Mhz and sell it as the more expensive 2.6Ghz chip. Not only does Intel miss out on profits, but their reputation suffers when the system burns out after 1.5 years. This isn't a maybe, this has been done and continues to be done, right down to milling of Intel's labeling and repainting the bogus data on the chip, and suddenly a $150 chip can be sold for $300.
It was based on a Zilog Z80A processor (same as that used in the Sinclair ZX Spectrum and the Colecovision console, and similar to that used in the original Gameboy), but curiously, used Motorola peripheral chips.
It came bundled with a wide selection of software - Supercalc, Wordstar, an operating system called CP/M (the blueprint for DOS), and a BASIC interpreter by a small software company called Microsoft.
The Z80 based CP/M machines were sort of the Wintel boxes of their day. Many different manufacturers of hardware with a common OS. Hell, the original IBM PC was supposed to run CP/M, just using cheaper components, but the creater of CP/M was busy the night IBM came a calling and kicked them out. (And Bill claimed to have an OS ready to go in order to save his compiler contract, thus launching him on the road to world domination).
I still remember the family Superbrain QD. QD being Quad Density, meaning it had 2! double Density 5.25" floppy drives, for an amazing 720k of storage, backed with an amzing 64k of RAM in a world where 16k was considered enough.
The spammers will just build an automated response system.
Good. I'd love it if they did. That way, we'd have a "good" return address with which we could track them down. Right now, I'll bet a very large percentage (approaching 100%) of U[B|C]E has a fake return/from address.
I was thinking a third party service, or perhaps a tool to be dropped on other comprimised systems. The main spammer rule of thumb is to use other folks resources as much as possible. Since I haven't seen the complexity of the "confirmation", there's really no telling how easily the reply can be forged, but since they concievably have millions of outstanding "confirmations" (How long do they hold these for? Humans can be slow to reply...) making it too complex could be self defeating.
I'll be sticking with SpamNet. according to my Spamnet sig
I've stopped 40,543 spam messages. You can too!
Get your free, safe spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsigs/
I like the approach, biggest problem with them is the knuckleheads who can't tell the difference between a subscribed list and spam (I hate the UCE acronym)
so they can debug it for the non-subscribing users which are far more likely to be using it for some enterprise application?
Your logic defies me. Why would a enterprise application user:
1) Be less likely to pay the fee for RHN?
2) Be considering upgrading ASAP anyway?
Crikey, I'm just getting around to trusting 8.0
The cult of Linux strikes again, in that case. Paying for advance release of this is a scam.
RedHat has been guaranteeing subscribers to its RHN prefered access for quite a while, this isn't anything new. And they aren't denying access to anyone, the mirror sites will likely make he ISO available ASAP, and likely put their own limits on access to protect their bandwidth. But then, I usually go ahead and buy a copy in the store, just to keep the wheels of linux commerce greased.
This setup may not be perfect, but to me it's a step in the right direction. Working towards a system that doesn't allow spammers to exist is wholly more admirable.
The spammers will just build an automated response system. Plus, this thing could no be used as a source for a DOS attack, since its happily generating emails. And god help us if they ever decide they need to sell their "contact list to be profitable, since to work it must have a list of every person who might email you. And hopefully they've considered the feed back loop as service A asks for a confirmation of the confirmation email service B just asked for...:^)
Yeah, I think I'll give this a pass
Curiously, why were open relays ever in existence? And once spam started, why were open relays kept around? Is there a use for them? Why not have all mail servers require authentication for outgoing mail, much like POP retrieval. That would have to stop a great deal of spam
Yes, it would. The idea is you send a single mail to the open relay with a huge list of recipients, the server then burns its bandwidth sending 900 copies of that mail. Not to mention it gets to deal with all the bounced emails messages, etc.
So why do they exist?
1) Best compatibility. Not everything understands how to authenticate SMTP.
2) Firewall compatibility. Some firewalls don't allow authenticated SMTP in more secure modes
3) Traveling clients. If your client could concievably pop up at any IP, its very difficult to filter access by IP, the usual method of blocking unauthorized access
4) Don't fix what aint broke. If its working, some folks are hesitant to make changes they aren't comfortable with.
5) A workaround opened a previously closed relay. Spammers have gotten tricky in fooling Mail relays into forwarding their spam. there's a lot of ope relays that were closed when originally set up.
6) Philosphical reasons. Folks may wish to provide a service that bypasses listening in by corporations or governments
I'm not going to argue the validity of these points, I'm just pointing out some of the possible why's...
Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.
That's not the fault of the laptop...that's the fault of having no centralized document management system. With wireless internet connectivity, you could maintain all of your documents on a server somewhere over a VPN connection and just make sure that you upload your latest changes whenever your finished, no matter where you are. Not unlike how software development is done -- when your finished for the day, you "check in" your changes.
I blame the laptop. just like I blame the table I stubbed my toe on last night:^) Seriously, the laptop is a tool, and I found having three tools for the job caused problems. But your idea has merit...
I'd could put my ultra-portable in some sort of "fast doc", then initiate a syncronization script. Yes, it could work:^) I could even call the scripts "Hot Sync" and kick them off with a button on the dock, which I could call a "cradle". Maybe even go way ultra-portable, maybe Palm(tm) sized. But wait, I got one, my Palm Tungsten T:^)
Certainly the challenges can be surmounted, and in todays massively connected world its easier than ever. But it requires effort, and a system (MS's "Briefcase" initiative didn't work well as I recall), and might not be immediately obvious to joe user who thinks he'll get a cool micro laptop to impress his friends
Personally I'm getting ready to buy a laptop, and I think a desktop replacement is the way I want to go for how I intend to use it (pursuing an EMBA, I think big screens will be an advantage, and I doubt I'll be far from a wall plug for extended periods; if I am, I suspect I'll be on the beach or somewhere where I don't want to use it, or hanging in Starbucks for 30 minutes sipping a double half decaffe mocha super latte (complete with silly straw).
Point being, I'm not buying a big screened power hungry monster because I'm brain washed by greedy corporate marketing guru's, but because it fits my needs.:^b
Re:This is going to be a joyous thing
on
BusinessWeek on Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That's because they've bought into the marketing hype and have forgotten that the number 1 advantage of a laptop is to be able to work anywhere, anytime. Laptops don't NEED to be desktop replacements, they should be thought of as desktop complements, rather than replacements.
Nonsense. While a laptop doesn't NEED to be a desktop replacement, if its a "desktop companion" it radically changes the function. If I chose a desktop companion laptop, it would be and "ultraportable", the biggest I'd consider would be the new 12" powerbook. I could carry it into wiring closets to attach to network equipment, keep documentaion handy, check website, and test network functionality.
But I couldn't pop it open an work on spreadsheets and the like, update my resume, etc., even though technically its capable?
Why?
Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.
With a "desktop replacement", I use the same computer everywhere. Sure, maybe the battery only lasts two hours (I've never seen a laptop go much further than this except when brand new), but how often am I that far away from a power outlet?
Actually, My palm does a really good job at being a desktop companion. Keeps my contacts, schedule, etc., stays in sync with my desktop (even key spreadsheets and documentation with its 256MB SD card) and has some handy games for keeping me entertained. Now only if it had a serial port for managing the network equipment...
Please explain what their yearly subscription gets you? I don't understand what they're providing. Security updates? Doesn't that already happen in RH for free?
With paid support you get priority access to those security updates. I don't know if you've noticed, but I had a heck of a time getting to those sendmail errata after all the publicity. In theory, cheap schmucks like me were held back so those who paid could get them. (And I'm even a RHCE! Thought that might count for something:^)
But support is more than that, it's being able to call up and whine "It broke, how do I fix it". And having somebody who knows something about it help you out. Even things that seem easy can go south fast even if you know what you're doing, what do you think an MCSE thats feeling adventurious is going to do when he needs to set up a sendmail relay?
I don't understand why companies are willing to splash out on such products whilst the software being sold is essentially free.
Its all about the support. Even the "Pro" editions, which do include support, have only minimal support, you out of luck if you need to configure even included sodtware, such as INN.
With "Enterprise" edition, I assume you get support on a broader range of implemntations, as well as support beyond 30 days. I just wonder if their staff is up to it:^).
PCs have had USB and Firewire for over 5 years now. What on earth are you talking about?
The key word was *utilizes*. Order a Dell today, and they keyboard will come with a PS/2 keyboard and mouse. Order a Mac 3 years ago and you got a USB keyboard. Part of this is that Windows has been slow to embrace these new technologies, I know my old Windows 2000 system couldn't go into safe mode from a USB keyboard (not sure if XP can or not) I had to buy a new motherboard because my PS/2 ports were dead. (Mind you, i did this for about $150 and doubled my Mhz (because Slot 1 was dead, it was that or $150 for the same speed):^)
Not that PC's suck and Mac's rule, just that PC's tend to lag like crazy before adopting new technologies, even when the technology is there first. How long was it before USB became the default way to plug in printers (is it yet?)
Because he has to protect his copyright. Because by sending him a copy, they ensured that he "knew" of the violation, and hence if he failed to enforce the copyright, a big step towards liberating him of his "Binky" and "Life in Hell" copyrights.
I think you misunderstood what Matt was sorry about. He's sorry "Bunnyhop" didn't secure permission before publishing (obviously not professionals since pros would not have made such an obvious mistake) He's not sorry he failed to defend his copyright, he's not sorry he allowed the "Binky" character to fall into the public domain.
And please note the difference between "parody" and "using a known image/character to draw attention to you premiere issue." While there's a lot of dumb stuff out there that gets done in the name of copyright protection, this ain't one of them. This is rookie publishers making a foolish mistake. Its not a battle worth fighting, or that should be fought.
Here's the solution I think the content providers should embrace:
If you fear you content being pirated that much, don't broadcast it. I promise I won't miss it.
Since I'm already using a DirecTiVo (hacked to 120GB) I can't see switching to a "new" technology that limits me so much; personally I sort of expected all but the basic HD tuners to be TiVo'ized (PVR'd?). Even if it was just a 30 minute buffer it be a huge win being able to pause what you are watching, or catch what the actor just mumbled out, rewind to let a spouse watch an important news story, etc.
I'm not sure what content they are trying to protect, any movie thats going to get broadcasted is very likely been available on DVD, an already comprimised medium, already. Sure, HDTV MIGHT give a better picture, but when you are talking about "closing the analog hole" you're clearly off the "perfect copy" plan. So are we trying to protect mini-series, such as "Taken"? Is this why I can't watch CSI and Monday Night Football in full HiDef glory?
I suppose they could be trying to protect their "buisness" of reselling series on DVD. After all, why pay $100 for the Sopranos Season 1 when you have archived it in HiDef Digital, but what about fans of less popular shows? I can't borrow a copy of MTV's music awards from my co-worker because some fool might pay $$$ for the complete first season of Cop Rock? (Ok, I paid for the animated Clerks half season, but only two episodes were ever aired...)
Reminds me of all the studios that claimed they would never release movies on DVD because of piracy concerns (long before it was cracked); even now that its cracked none of them are willing to pass on the revenues they get by releasing a DVD. Can anyone name a movie that has been released to video but NOT to DVD?
Slashdot Mirror
They were in a catch-22. The systems needed to come down in price to gain wide spread acceptance, and they needed wide spread acceptance to come down in price. The competition is so stiff for servers and clusters that it was hard to compete. It is indeed sad.
Ah, finally somebody who understands that there might be other reasons for wanting a PPC computer than to build a cheap Apple clone.
Personally I liked the idea of building a Linux system that used a low power but powerful and advanced chip like the PPC. Why run an ultra cool and advanced OS like Linux on a throwback chip like the x86 and its derivitives. Maybe a cheap firewall/router box that ran (or could run) a full version of Linux with Flash storage (8MB would be plenty for a default config, then allow Flash card upgrades and/or external USB drives) USB could connect to external storage and printers, etc. Not fast enough to replace your home computer, just fast enough to be useful while drawing under 20W of power.
Honestly, Macs are cheap enough these days that If I want to run OS X I can buy a real Mac rather than deal with the headaches of a hacked up system.
Come on, an iBook is only $999 new. And used G4 cubes are real tempting as well (Well, not at the $700+ their going for on eBay! Damn, talk about resale value)
Does "PS1='C: '" count? Why not?
The promblem is you bundled WinNT based OS's into your foolish slam. Windows 95, 98, and Me are at their core, DOS-based. WinNT is a completely different code base, and includes Win 2000 (5.0) and XP Home and Pro (5.1). Sure, there's a program included that allows you to open a command prompt (cmd.exe), but as I pointed out, there's a program on Mac OS X to get a command prompt as well (VirtualPC).
Better definitions might have been a "True preemptive multitaking environment" (would have included DOS/Win95 variants and Pre-OS X Macs, but not Win NT variants), or more in your spirit, a Micosoft OS (Ah!, that exactly covers your criteria).
I know its not proper Slashdot protocol, but please try to think about this stuff rather than blinding swearing alliegance to some party line.
By this brilliant definition a Shiny new 17" Powerbook is a Legacy Computer. Mac folk will be so disappointed, though I suppose now they'll be more accepted.
By the way, I'll be sending you directions on how to pick up your "Stupid" sign via email
Don't bother going to see "Dumb and Dumberer", you won't get it.
No Camera, and no robot arm. The article states a sensor is used, most likely a light sensitive device that picks up on the shadow of pendelum (I imagine you'd want to avoid obvious tech like LED's in 250 year old clocks. I am a bit curious about the method used to stop/start/alter the pendelum movement, the obvious answer in my book is air; a blast of air at the weight end would have a hefty lever effect and avoids any contact at all. Magnets are cooler, but require magnetic metals in the pendelum, not a given in 250 year old estate clocks, and adding such would not only corrupt the historical value, but would alter the timing of the movement,making it inherently less accurate (yeah, the net result is more accuracy, but these things have a mechanical brilliance to them that should not be corrupted. Why not just replace the movements with a Japanese Quartz unit...
Its a poor summary of the article is the problem.
But your forgeting about "Spyder Food", redirecting spiders (based on user agents) to special pages that are full of keywords, etc. that are optimized to getting high rankings, and may or may not have anything to do with the site.
If either of these companies wished to build a true PVR, they'd do well to license Tivo software for their boxes. It would bypass a lot of development time, letting them get a box out the door long before their competitor with a polished, well developed UI. With the two way cable networks, they could completely bypass the need for a phone line (you did know those set top boxes could spy on you, right?)
What these companies are building are "thin client PVR's", where almost all the intelligence is at the head end, where it can't be tampered with. There's plenty of comments out there about how this approach sucks, though potentially there's some advantages to it as well (see my history). Of course, to do it right they'd want a DirecTivo type approach, where the box simply recorded a pre-encoded digial stream (keeps client costs down), but that mean the would need to broadcast a digitized version of analog channels as well, which consumes bandwidth; the best solution would be to reduce the number of analog channels, but then that means TV's w/o a set top box get fewer channels (not a bad thing in cable co's mind likely).
To bad congress/FCC can't legislate a Digital cable standard so TV's could come equiped from the factory.
Actually, this is a good question. How big is a LOC? We've been talking about making this a standard unit, but I've really got no idea what this translates to. 1 GB? (Horray, my palm can store a quater LOC!) A TeraByte? A PetaByte? I also assume we really need to anchor the size of the LOC, since in theory it expands every year. I propose we anchor it to a particular year, sort of like comparing things to 1960's dollars (Why was 1960 chosen? End of the gold standard?)
Two possible dates for the anchoring stand out, 1976, america's bicentenial, and 2000, the millennium (second millenium, and to satisfy the nitpickers, we'll declare it to be Dec 31st, 2000; that way its in the year 2000, but should quite all those "there was no year Zero" bozos)
Since fixing the LOC size in 1976 doesn't seem practical, I vote we use the millennium LOC a the "standard LOC"
PS: We should also determine the height of the LOC, to be considered the distance from street level to the top of the LOC building in DC (we'll ignore satellite warehouses, basements, etc.) This will be important when future folks want to start declaring "Thats enough LOC's to stretch to the moon and back!" This is important to the marketing folks, you young'uns might not recall the constant comparisons to the stacks of double spaced typed pages in the begining of the computer revolution by folks who never realized MS would makea 3 word note in Office use more disk space that some early hard drives.
Actually, thats the one feature I'd like to see added to my Tivo, a "Water Cooler" filter, to automatically record shows that are likely to be the subject of Water Cooler talk at the office.
But anyway, the idea is that while I didn't record the Emmy's, someone did, let me access the recording and watch it. Or the Final Four, or the Coca-Cola 400, or BattleBots Blooper Show (Tivo rely's on exact matches, so it misses stuff like that)
Mine can. Now you'll have to excuse me for about 20 years...
So I should stick to printers that use the OPCF (Open Printer Cartridge Format)? Can you tell me where else besides Fantasy Island I could buy them?
If they double the price tomorrow, they'll lose tons of customers, because there's 4 other printer company's out there (And if they all did it there'd be a price fixing lawsuit so fast folks heads would spin) Hell, the current market of "subsidized" printers virtually ensures this can't happen, If your Dell cartridge suddenly cost $90, why wouldn't you drop an extra $20 and get a new Epson with its $40 cartridges?
These printer manufacturers are evil. Yes they want profits, but they've all been in buisness for quite a while, and the model is far more developed than you realize. Low entry costs is key for a big segment, image quality and reliability are key to maintain your customer base. Refilled carts are bad for both of those.
I'd guess it's below .000001%. But since some of these fools actually try to get Intel to honor the warranty when they burn their chips out, and are buying the low cost chips instead of the big profit chips, most likely Intel's actually running a loss on the overclockers.
But Intel's bigger concern are the folks who repackage slower chips and sell them as more expensive units. Fix a 400Mhz 2.0 Ghz unit to run at 533Mhz and sell it as the more expensive 2.6Ghz chip. Not only does Intel miss out on profits, but their reputation suffers when the system burns out after 1.5 years. This isn't a maybe, this has been done and continues to be done, right down to milling of Intel's labeling and repainting the bogus data on the chip, and suddenly a $150 chip can be sold for $300.
Its better than printing money.
It came bundled with a wide selection of software - Supercalc, Wordstar, an operating system called CP/M (the blueprint for DOS), and a BASIC interpreter by a small software company called Microsoft.
The Z80 based CP/M machines were sort of the Wintel boxes of their day. Many different manufacturers of hardware with a common OS. Hell, the original IBM PC was supposed to run CP/M, just using cheaper components, but the creater of CP/M was busy the night IBM came a calling and kicked them out. (And Bill claimed to have an OS ready to go in order to save his compiler contract, thus launching him on the road to world domination).
I still remember the family Superbrain QD. QD being Quad Density, meaning it had 2! double Density 5.25" floppy drives, for an amazing 720k of storage, backed with an amzing 64k of RAM in a world where 16k was considered enough.
Good Times :^)
Good. I'd love it if they did. That way, we'd have a "good" return address with which we could track them down. Right now, I'll bet a very large percentage (approaching 100%) of U[B|C]E has a fake return/from address.
I was thinking a third party service, or perhaps a tool to be dropped on other comprimised systems. The main spammer rule of thumb is to use other folks resources as much as possible. Since I haven't seen the complexity of the "confirmation", there's really no telling how easily the reply can be forged, but since they concievably have millions of outstanding "confirmations" (How long do they hold these for? Humans can be slow to reply...) making it too complex could be self defeating.
I'll be sticking with SpamNet. according to my Spamnet sig
I've stopped 40,543 spam messages. You can too! Get your free, safe spam protection at http://www.cloudmark.com/spamnetsigs/
I like the approach, biggest problem with them is the knuckleheads who can't tell the difference between a subscribed list and spam (I hate the UCE acronym)
Your logic defies me. Why would a enterprise application user:
1) Be less likely to pay the fee for RHN?
2) Be considering upgrading ASAP anyway?
Crikey, I'm just getting around to trusting 8.0
The cult of Linux strikes again, in that case. Paying for advance release of this is a scam.
RedHat has been guaranteeing subscribers to its RHN prefered access for quite a while, this isn't anything new. And they aren't denying access to anyone, the mirror sites will likely make he ISO available ASAP, and likely put their own limits on access to protect their bandwidth. But then, I usually go ahead and buy a copy in the store, just to keep the wheels of linux commerce greased.
The spammers will just build an automated response system. Plus, this thing could no be used as a source for a DOS attack, since its happily generating emails. And god help us if they ever decide they need to sell their "contact list to be profitable, since to work it must have a list of every person who might email you. And hopefully they've considered the feed back loop as service A asks for a confirmation of the confirmation email service B just asked for... :^)
Yeah, I think I'll give this a pass
Curiously, why were open relays ever in existence? And once spam started, why were open relays kept around? Is there a use for them? Why not have all mail servers require authentication for outgoing mail, much like POP retrieval. That would have to stop a great deal of spam
Yes, it would. The idea is you send a single mail to the open relay with a huge list of recipients, the server then burns its bandwidth sending 900 copies of that mail. Not to mention it gets to deal with all the bounced emails messages, etc.
So why do they exist?
1) Best compatibility. Not everything understands how to authenticate SMTP.
2) Firewall compatibility. Some firewalls don't allow authenticated SMTP in more secure modes
3) Traveling clients. If your client could concievably pop up at any IP, its very difficult to filter access by IP, the usual method of blocking unauthorized access
4) Don't fix what aint broke. If its working, some folks are hesitant to make changes they aren't comfortable with.
5) A workaround opened a previously closed relay. Spammers have gotten tricky in fooling Mail relays into forwarding their spam. there's a lot of ope relays that were closed when originally set up.
6) Philosphical reasons. Folks may wish to provide a service that bypasses listening in by corporations or governments
I'm not going to argue the validity of these points, I'm just pointing out some of the possible why's...
I blame the laptop. just like I blame the table I stubbed my toe on last night :^) Seriously, the laptop is a tool, and I found having three tools for the job caused problems. But your idea has merit...
I'd could put my ultra-portable in some sort of "fast doc", then initiate a syncronization script. Yes, it could work :^) I could even call the scripts "Hot Sync" and kick them off with a button on the dock, which I could call a "cradle". Maybe even go way ultra-portable, maybe Palm(tm) sized. But wait, I got one, my Palm Tungsten T :^)
Certainly the challenges can be surmounted, and in todays massively connected world its easier than ever. But it requires effort, and a system (MS's "Briefcase" initiative didn't work well as I recall), and might not be immediately obvious to joe user who thinks he'll get a cool micro laptop to impress his friends
Personally I'm getting ready to buy a laptop, and I think a desktop replacement is the way I want to go for how I intend to use it (pursuing an EMBA, I think big screens will be an advantage, and I doubt I'll be far from a wall plug for extended periods; if I am, I suspect I'll be on the beach or somewhere where I don't want to use it, or hanging in Starbucks for 30 minutes sipping a double half decaffe mocha super latte (complete with silly straw).
Point being, I'm not buying a big screened power hungry monster because I'm brain washed by greedy corporate marketing guru's, but because it fits my needs. :^b
Nonsense. While a laptop doesn't NEED to be a desktop replacement, if its a "desktop companion" it radically changes the function. If I chose a desktop companion laptop, it would be and "ultraportable", the biggest I'd consider would be the new 12" powerbook. I could carry it into wiring closets to attach to network equipment, keep documentaion handy, check website, and test network functionality.
But I couldn't pop it open an work on spreadsheets and the like, update my resume, etc., even though technically its capable?
Why?
Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.
With a "desktop replacement", I use the same computer everywhere. Sure, maybe the battery only lasts two hours (I've never seen a laptop go much further than this except when brand new), but how often am I that far away from a power outlet?
Actually, My palm does a really good job at being a desktop companion. Keeps my contacts, schedule, etc., stays in sync with my desktop (even key spreadsheets and documentation with its 256MB SD card) and has some handy games for keeping me entertained. Now only if it had a serial port for managing the network equipment...
With paid support you get priority access to those security updates. I don't know if you've noticed, but I had a heck of a time getting to those sendmail errata after all the publicity. In theory, cheap schmucks like me were held back so those who paid could get them. (And I'm even a RHCE! Thought that might count for something :^)
But support is more than that, it's being able to call up and whine "It broke, how do I fix it". And having somebody who knows something about it help you out. Even things that seem easy can go south fast even if you know what you're doing, what do you think an MCSE thats feeling adventurious is going to do when he needs to set up a sendmail relay?
Its all about the support. Even the "Pro" editions, which do include support, have only minimal support, you out of luck if you need to configure even included sodtware, such as INN.
With "Enterprise" edition, I assume you get support on a broader range of implemntations, as well as support beyond 30 days. I just wonder if their staff is up to it :^).
The key word was *utilizes*. Order a Dell today, and they keyboard will come with a PS/2 keyboard and mouse. Order a Mac 3 years ago and you got a USB keyboard. Part of this is that Windows has been slow to embrace these new technologies, I know my old Windows 2000 system couldn't go into safe mode from a USB keyboard (not sure if XP can or not) I had to buy a new motherboard because my PS/2 ports were dead. (Mind you, i did this for about $150 and doubled my Mhz (because Slot 1 was dead, it was that or $150 for the same speed) :^)
Not that PC's suck and Mac's rule, just that PC's tend to lag like crazy before adopting new technologies, even when the technology is there first. How long was it before USB became the default way to plug in printers (is it yet?)
Because he has to protect his copyright. Because by sending him a copy, they ensured that he "knew" of the violation, and hence if he failed to enforce the copyright, a big step towards liberating him of his "Binky" and "Life in Hell" copyrights.
I think you misunderstood what Matt was sorry about. He's sorry "Bunnyhop" didn't secure permission before publishing (obviously not professionals since pros would not have made such an obvious mistake) He's not sorry he failed to defend his copyright, he's not sorry he allowed the "Binky" character to fall into the public domain.
And please note the difference between "parody" and "using a known image/character to draw attention to you premiere issue." While there's a lot of dumb stuff out there that gets done in the name of copyright protection, this ain't one of them. This is rookie publishers making a foolish mistake. Its not a battle worth fighting, or that should be fought.
Here's the solution I think the content providers should embrace:
If you fear you content being pirated that much, don't broadcast it. I promise I won't miss it.
Since I'm already using a DirecTiVo (hacked to 120GB) I can't see switching to a "new" technology that limits me so much; personally I sort of expected all but the basic HD tuners to be TiVo'ized (PVR'd?). Even if it was just a 30 minute buffer it be a huge win being able to pause what you are watching, or catch what the actor just mumbled out, rewind to let a spouse watch an important news story, etc.
I'm not sure what content they are trying to protect, any movie thats going to get broadcasted is very likely been available on DVD, an already comprimised medium, already. Sure, HDTV MIGHT give a better picture, but when you are talking about "closing the analog hole" you're clearly off the "perfect copy" plan. So are we trying to protect mini-series, such as "Taken"? Is this why I can't watch CSI and Monday Night Football in full HiDef glory?
I suppose they could be trying to protect their "buisness" of reselling series on DVD. After all, why pay $100 for the Sopranos Season 1 when you have archived it in HiDef Digital, but what about fans of less popular shows? I can't borrow a copy of MTV's music awards from my co-worker because some fool might pay $$$ for the complete first season of Cop Rock? (Ok, I paid for the animated Clerks half season, but only two episodes were ever aired...)
Reminds me of all the studios that claimed they would never release movies on DVD because of piracy concerns (long before it was cracked); even now that its cracked none of them are willing to pass on the revenues they get by releasing a DVD. Can anyone name a movie that has been released to video but NOT to DVD?