Some of the people posting this "I don't see what your problem is" theme are probably honest folk like yourself that don't see a problem. You could probably help the people who are hungry to run the thing by telling them precisely what hardware you're running that Vista likes so well.
Some of them are known to be Microsoft employees (and a few have admitted as much) who are banging the drum for their own vested interest (or at least until their options vest). They're barred from endorsing any specific product.
Some are believed to be paid bloggers. I suspect many of them are working out of Bangalore from linux thin clients and they've never seen Vista either. It's a sad sad world we live in. Since they've never seen Vista capable hardware either, they can't recommend any.
BTW, it's not that hard to post some links to your personal web server and see from the IP addresses where the browsers are coming from if they click your links, and what platform they're running. Google isn't the only one running analytics.
"This Dell thing" is not kinda retarded. It's really kinda cool. A long life laptop inside your laptop with Instant on. And it runs Linux. The way SDHC cards are running these days you could socket or solder a 16GB flash drive inside the notebook and install and OS on it, or use it for files. That way a lot of the hardware that burns juice can be turned off unless you need it. Brilliant! Why would you need to wait 7 minutes for Vista to get ready when all you want to do is something trivial like play some videos from your server, browse the Internet, video chat, remote desktop to a server for some weekend service, or mail merge your mailing list database from your document editor and print some letters with envelopes (Letter, both sides, #10 no window). For that stuff you can just use Linux with its instant on feature, and save Vista for the heavy lifting, like, uh, other stuff. Or maybe just pull that HDD out if you're not using it and save both weight and juice.
Bashing the netbooks is lame, though. I'll give you that.
No, it's not. Don't just judge by the middling article. This really is new and it's part of a new trend from Intel to focus more on the needs of the person using the gadget, which they've been somewhat disassociated from in the past. It's really cool. Try it and see.
If you want all of that in your long-life Windows laptop, then get yourself a $22 SDHC card and install Ubuntu on it with all the extras. I've tried it. Boots in 3 seconds. No moving parts. Snappy fast and low power if you set it up to turn off your HDD - or better yet, pull that out - you won't need it.
It's the guys like you that surprise me. Computers are variable. Just because you got lucky doesn't mean any of these other people did. You cannot look this forum up and down, read the numerous complaints and not acknowledge there is a problem. Sincerely. Denial will solve nothing. All these people aren't taking time out of their afternoon to make up stories for no purpose.
And a lot of them have load balancing, redundancy, and integrated failover.
The difference is between "a lot of them" and "all of them". It's a different way of thinking about provisioning services. Despite the hype it really is cool -- if you can get it to work correctly. Some people are having good luck with homegrown integration of this. Others not.
Uh, no. Cloud computing is a buzzword for non heirachical distributed infrastructure for services. If you have a set of nodes and any node can be any type of server, and the control of which node runs which service is part of a distributed infrastructure which self nominates nodes for running services based on some metric such as speed of storage, local need or need for offsite redundancy then you're in the cloud. Control of the cloud is yet another redundant self managed service.
I think on the sad day that Moonlight for Linux is feature complete enough to watch the 2008 Beijing Olympics, that content will no longer be available. It will have vanished into the DRM vaults of the license holders and dribble out as expensively licensed clips and stills. Although copyrights are granted "for a limited time" this content will never become a part of the commons. By 2012 we'll know as much these games as we know about the 65th Olympiad in 520BCE. A shame, too, because if the content were made public after a few weeks it would immensely increase interest in the games, thereby exponentially increasing the value of live coverage. Instead MSNBC and the IOC will suffocate their golden goose rather than let the world see its eggs.
So, meh. Some guys went to some stinky chinese city and did some stuff I'll never see. When they were done they had created nothing durable nor useful. They had learned nothing. For all I care they might as well have been playing competitive Nintendo Wii. Along the way a great deal of money had been passed around, most of it advertising to promote "brand awareness" instead of anything concrete. The olympics have become a "so, what?" thing for me.
Wow. All the sport fans on earth, two years of build up hype, tie ins from every company out there and they can't get 1/50th of a YouTube on an average day?
That's a flaming pile of fail right there. I wonder what they spent on that.
This really isn't for you, but it's a good place to put it.
You sell your liberties forever for fleeting moments of pleasure when you listen to commercial radio or Internet radio or go to the movies or buy or rent a movie. The advertisers pay the stations to get in your ear, the movie studios to promote their products. The stations pay the MafIAA to get the content to draw you to listen. The MafIAA pays some of that money to lobbyist groups, and in some cases directly to politicians, to secure from you your liberties so they may continue to expand their business model. The relationship is direct and harmful. Just by listening you are contributing to the problem. Don't do that. A dear price was paid for your liberties and you should not sell them so cheap.
What you may not realize is that SoundExchange is the mandatory collector for EVERYONE. Even if you release your works under CC license and explicitly say "no royalties for 'web radio'" in your license, the operator still has to play the fee.
This is only true if they also play *IAA pap. If the Internet Radio station doesn't play that stuff they don't have to pay royalties.
From Wikipedia : SoundExchange collects royalties for artists and copyright owners whose work is used under the statutory license.
801(b)(7)(C): (C) Interested parties may negotiate and agree to, and the
Copyright Royalty Judges may adopt, an agreement that specifies
as terms notice and recordkeeping requirements that apply in
lieu of those that would otherwise apply under regulations.
So apparently as long as you only stream creative commons licensed audio separately licensed for streaming with terms for recordkeeping and terms notice you should be ok to stream audio because you are not relying on the "statutory license" but rather "License agreements voluntarily negotiated".
The problem for the Internet Radio stations is they don't want to air the commons. Waah. They want to pump the same garbage that's coming out of my radio and I've heard all of it I care to. There's been nothing new there for a decade it seems like, and when they do get an interesting piece they play it until I'm sick of it in one day. And they should have to pay to air the garbage that gets airtime on over-the-air radio so as to discourage the practice. It's awful. Not one thin dime to the *IAA and their artists. If the artist wants to get his work played in that forum - even if it's CC licensed - he's part of the persistence of that problem and I'm not interested in his work either. You can't roll in the sewer without getting stinky.
What you may not realize is that SoundExchange is the mandatory collector for EVERYONE. Even if you release your works under CC license and explicitly say "no royalties for 'web radio'" in your license, the operator still has to play the fee.
That's not legal. No matter what the law says, that's not legal.
It just won't contain the overdubbed pop tarts and overworked back catalog of the RIAA. I'm ok with that. The sooner we hear the last of them, the better.
That slashdot's Goatse troll server guy proves useful.
Note: This is not a troll. One of the guys that offers open web services to slashdot trolls is also responsible for considerable development of CAPTCHA breakage and is an eminent Debian developer. This is why I've said that we should respect his efforts despite the unpleasant side effects. The truly brilliant we should grant exceptions from social behavior because they discover things more proper folk would not.
More and more jurisdictions are requiring gps and monitoring equipment in autos for road tax and toll collection purposes. Surely they have no desire to use this data to track the movements of every citizen. That would be Orwellian. Besides, if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to hide, right?
A supplier of Free Software can never be sure that someone he doesn't even know about let alone control will decide to review his source code.
The GP is correct. You have to trust others to not jack you.
The GP is also correct. In a wide world a piece of software that becomes popular will be audited, if for no other reason than the government agency adopting it requires it. As soon as it's discovered to be nefarious (which, think about it... it almost never happens) it will be publicized and everybody will drop it like a hot rock.
I'm not disagreeing with you either. At some point you have to trust others not to jack you. Open fans prefer to push that down to the hardware level as frequently as possible. Sometimes software vendors need to trust you not to jack them too. Like the vendor in this fine article. They should have exercised some trust when considering whether or not to build in a retarded kill switch that might misfire and destroy the (absolutely mandatory for the product) reliability reputation of their brand in the marketplace. Now for six months we have to listen to the "VMWare is dead" flamewar because they couldn't lighten up about their preccciousssss.
If nothing else, it gives you some confidence that you will pass an audit.
What gives me confidence from software is knowing that it will do what I tell it to do without asking for permission from somebody else. I don't expect that from people, but when it comes to software and hardware I'm a control freak that way. Perhaps there's a treatment plan for this.
Engineering in a deliberate "don't work under certain conditions" case is a first order design flaw as evidenced by this article, the Windows Genuine Advantage validator fiasco and the maintenance headaches faced by users of ESRI software among many others. It's hard enough to get rid of those type of issues that are accidentally introduced. There's no way I'd submit to one added deliberately as a "feature". But then I guess I'm lucky not to have to do the jobs those products serve so well.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the people posting this "I don't see what your problem is" theme are probably honest folk like yourself that don't see a problem. You could probably help the people who are hungry to run the thing by telling them precisely what hardware you're running that Vista likes so well.
Some of them are known to be Microsoft employees (and a few have admitted as much) who are banging the drum for their own vested interest (or at least until their options vest). They're barred from endorsing any specific product.
Some are believed to be paid bloggers. I suspect many of them are working out of Bangalore from linux thin clients and they've never seen Vista either. It's a sad sad world we live in. Since they've never seen Vista capable hardware either, they can't recommend any.
BTW, it's not that hard to post some links to your personal web server and see from the IP addresses where the browsers are coming from if they click your links, and what platform they're running. Google isn't the only one running analytics.
"This Dell thing" is not kinda retarded. It's really kinda cool. A long life laptop inside your laptop with Instant on. And it runs Linux. The way SDHC cards are running these days you could socket or solder a 16GB flash drive inside the notebook and install and OS on it, or use it for files. That way a lot of the hardware that burns juice can be turned off unless you need it. Brilliant! Why would you need to wait 7 minutes for Vista to get ready when all you want to do is something trivial like play some videos from your server, browse the Internet, video chat, remote desktop to a server for some weekend service, or mail merge your mailing list database from your document editor and print some letters with envelopes (Letter, both sides, #10 no window). For that stuff you can just use Linux with its instant on feature, and save Vista for the heavy lifting, like, uh, other stuff. Or maybe just pull that HDD out if you're not using it and save both weight and juice.
Bashing the netbooks is lame, though. I'll give you that.
No, it's not. Don't just judge by the middling article. This really is new and it's part of a new trend from Intel to focus more on the needs of the person using the gadget, which they've been somewhat disassociated from in the past. It's really cool. Try it and see.
If you want all of that in your long-life Windows laptop, then get yourself a $22 SDHC card and install Ubuntu on it with all the extras. I've tried it. Boots in 3 seconds. No moving parts. Snappy fast and low power if you set it up to turn off your HDD - or better yet, pull that out - you won't need it.
It's the guys like you that surprise me. Computers are variable. Just because you got lucky doesn't mean any of these other people did. You cannot look this forum up and down, read the numerous complaints and not acknowledge there is a problem. Sincerely. Denial will solve nothing. All these people aren't taking time out of their afternoon to make up stories for no purpose.
My geek friends don't try and sell me a $3.00 1 year extended warranty on an $8 pen drive.
The difference is between "a lot of them" and "all of them". It's a different way of thinking about provisioning services. Despite the hype it really is cool -- if you can get it to work correctly. Some people are having good luck with homegrown integration of this. Others not.
Uh, no. Cloud computing is a buzzword for non heirachical distributed infrastructure for services. If you have a set of nodes and any node can be any type of server, and the control of which node runs which service is part of a distributed infrastructure which self nominates nodes for running services based on some metric such as speed of storage, local need or need for offsite redundancy then you're in the cloud. Control of the cloud is yet another redundant self managed service.
I think on the sad day that Moonlight for Linux is feature complete enough to watch the 2008 Beijing Olympics, that content will no longer be available. It will have vanished into the DRM vaults of the license holders and dribble out as expensively licensed clips and stills. Although copyrights are granted "for a limited time" this content will never become a part of the commons. By 2012 we'll know as much these games as we know about the 65th Olympiad in 520BCE. A shame, too, because if the content were made public after a few weeks it would immensely increase interest in the games, thereby exponentially increasing the value of live coverage. Instead MSNBC and the IOC will suffocate their golden goose rather than let the world see its eggs.
So, meh. Some guys went to some stinky chinese city and did some stuff I'll never see. When they were done they had created nothing durable nor useful. They had learned nothing. For all I care they might as well have been playing competitive Nintendo Wii. Along the way a great deal of money had been passed around, most of it advertising to promote "brand awareness" instead of anything concrete. The olympics have become a "so, what?" thing for me.
Close... people can still do something that model's can't do yet -- understand the problem and want to solve it. Someday....
And... for nerds I get, but - this is news?
Not everybody is calling it "decent streaming video".
Wow. All the sport fans on earth, two years of build up hype, tie ins from every company out there and they can't get 1/50th of a YouTube on an average day?
That's a flaming pile of fail right there. I wonder what they spent on that.
This really isn't for you, but it's a good place to put it.
You sell your liberties forever for fleeting moments of pleasure when you listen to commercial radio or Internet radio or go to the movies or buy or rent a movie. The advertisers pay the stations to get in your ear, the movie studios to promote their products. The stations pay the MafIAA to get the content to draw you to listen. The MafIAA pays some of that money to lobbyist groups, and in some cases directly to politicians, to secure from you your liberties so they may continue to expand their business model. The relationship is direct and harmful. Just by listening you are contributing to the problem. Don't do that. A dear price was paid for your liberties and you should not sell them so cheap.
That doesn't seem like a good source, though I don't disagree with your conclusion. I've posted more below.
This is only true if they also play *IAA pap. If the Internet Radio station doesn't play that stuff they don't have to pay royalties.
From Wikipedia : SoundExchange collects royalties for artists and copyright owners whose work is used under the statutory license.
After reviewing Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004 I find this:
So apparently as long as you only stream creative commons licensed audio separately licensed for streaming with terms for recordkeeping and terms notice you should be ok to stream audio because you are not relying on the "statutory license" but rather "License agreements voluntarily negotiated".
The problem for the Internet Radio stations is they don't want to air the commons. Waah. They want to pump the same garbage that's coming out of my radio and I've heard all of it I care to. There's been nothing new there for a decade it seems like, and when they do get an interesting piece they play it until I'm sick of it in one day. And they should have to pay to air the garbage that gets airtime on over-the-air radio so as to discourage the practice. It's awful. Not one thin dime to the *IAA and their artists. If the artist wants to get his work played in that forum - even if it's CC licensed - he's part of the persistence of that problem and I'm not interested in his work either. You can't roll in the sewer without getting stinky.
So where are you getting your information from?
I am not a lawyer. If you need one hire one.
That's not legal. No matter what the law says, that's not legal.
Internet radio will live forever
It just won't contain the overdubbed pop tarts and overworked back catalog of the RIAA. I'm ok with that. The sooner we hear the last of them, the better.
And so it begins.
That slashdot's Goatse troll server guy proves useful.
Note: This is not a troll. One of the guys that offers open web services to slashdot trolls is also responsible for considerable development of CAPTCHA breakage and is an eminent Debian developer. This is why I've said that we should respect his efforts despite the unpleasant side effects. The truly brilliant we should grant exceptions from social behavior because they discover things more proper folk would not.
But I didn't care for the last one or the first one.
More and more jurisdictions are requiring gps and monitoring equipment in autos for road tax and toll collection purposes. Surely they have no desire to use this data to track the movements of every citizen. That would be Orwellian. Besides, if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to hide, right?
You don't want to be the generation that carries their children for 20 years and their parents for 80.
The GP is also correct. In a wide world a piece of software that becomes popular will be audited, if for no other reason than the government agency adopting it requires it. As soon as it's discovered to be nefarious (which, think about it ... it almost never happens) it will be publicized and everybody will drop it like a hot rock.
I'm not disagreeing with you either. At some point you have to trust others not to jack you. Open fans prefer to push that down to the hardware level as frequently as possible. Sometimes software vendors need to trust you not to jack them too. Like the vendor in this fine article. They should have exercised some trust when considering whether or not to build in a retarded kill switch that might misfire and destroy the (absolutely mandatory for the product) reliability reputation of their brand in the marketplace. Now for six months we have to listen to the "VMWare is dead" flamewar because they couldn't lighten up about their preccciousssss.
What gives me confidence from software is knowing that it will do what I tell it to do without asking for permission from somebody else. I don't expect that from people, but when it comes to software and hardware I'm a control freak that way. Perhaps there's a treatment plan for this.
Engineering in a deliberate "don't work under certain conditions" case is a first order design flaw as evidenced by this article, the Windows Genuine Advantage validator fiasco and the maintenance headaches faced by users of ESRI software among many others. It's hard enough to get rid of those type of issues that are accidentally introduced. There's no way I'd submit to one added deliberately as a "feature". But then I guess I'm lucky not to have to do the jobs those products serve so well.