hmmm. Last I checked, the UK was part of NATO. Unless, of course, they are talking about two separate
The United States is also a part of NATO and it will be looking at the MS code too. NATO is an umbrella organization, and if it wants to check MS Source Code to make sure shared resources amongst the member nations are secured, that is independent from any actions those member nations decide to do on their own. On the other hand, I'm sure France will opt to allow the European Union to check the source code itself. And yes, I know the U.K. is also a member of the EU as well, albeit not a happy one.
"it's much better to take the OS from the folks who brought us four dead in Ohio for protesting the Vietnam War"
Four dead at Kent State holds no comparison value to the massacre at Tiananmen. Our government [the U.S.] did not jail the hippies for years and run medical experiments on them, or, even worse, trump up their charges and then slaughter them for organ harvesting to the highest bidder as what the PLA in China practice...
If we didn't hold such a high opinion of the US and its history, we'd just not fucking bother and move somewhere else...
Please feel free to take Barbara Streissand (sic) and Alec Baldwin with you. They've lived in the US for three long years since promising they'd leave if Bush won the election...Its important to stay true to one's word...
There are many things wrong in the world, but nobody expects the US to solve them. What is so special about Iraque, that is lacking in korea and so many other country's?
Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons. North Korea DOES. Its very difficult to invade a country that has nuclear weapons. That's why we could invade Iraq. Had we sat around a few more years and allowed France to sell more techology to them, Saddam probably would've acquired nukes and then he could do as he pleased. Personally, I think we should take out North Korea. Of course, South Korea wouldn't like nuclear fall-out from the deal. And I'd also support the U.S. and the U.K. removing Robert Mugabe's regime too, in all fairness. If we are spending money on the military, they should be working 24/7 in my book.
*Um.... France gave us VietNam. We just tried to pick up where they left off.*
Yep. We helped France try to recolonize Vietnam (after aiding Ho Chi Minh during WWII against the Japanese) in order for them to go along with NATO. Then they lost. Then they backstabbed us in NATO. And then we lost 50,000+ people fighting a losing war nobody wanted to fight. Thank you, France, for everything. Feel free to take back the Statue of Liberty too after the next upcoming double-cross at the Security Council... Oh, thanks for the XYZ Affair too...
US apologists love to talk about these "Evil Regimes" who are "bent on destroying democracy & freedom". That's exactly what the US does! So is this a case of "You aren't allowed to destroy democracy and freedom! That's the job of the US!"
Yeah, whooptie. We [the US] overthrew left-leaning democratically elected governments that would've tilted toward the Warsaw Pact axis counter to our own government here in our hemisphere. While the Monroe Doctrine won't hold up under international law, it does under American law and the CIA pre-emptively cancelled out potentially hostile regimes which led us [the U.S.] to win the Cold War, thereby enabling your right to post on this website and complain freely. Look what Pakistan did just a few years ago when their military overthrew their government. Had the Pakistani military not done that, the Pakistani regime would directly be aiding bin Laden against us. The same goes for when the Turkish military stood up to their parliament after the public democratically elected non-secular Muslim activitist politicians. Seems if memory calls correctly, Germany democratically elected the Nazis into power too; perhaps one of the European powers should've pre-emptively overthrew them before they went on to start WWII. Would you complain about that?
"I think your "president", who lost the election but won the seat (partially with the help of his brother causing 50,000 floridians to be considered 'criminals' and ineligable for the vote) sounds more like these third-world dictators who fudge the elections to get into power. It's the same thing. Just as despicable."
Give that tired argument a rest. You obviously do not understand how presidents are elected in the U.S. Its just like the Dems complaining about how Bush lost the popular vote but won the Presidency. That party was in power for 50 solid years in Congress, yet they did not have the foresight to pass a Constitutional Amendment abolishing the Electoral College which would've prevented a Bush victory. Gore's people went through the courts and lost (rightfully so since there was no standard of judging what constituted a vote from that flawed voting system that a Dem appointee created in Florida in the first place). When you go back to the 1960 election, Nixon actually beat Kennedy in the Popular Vote, but there were ballot machines printing up votes from dead people and gave the win to Kennedy. But Nixon, fearing what would happen to the country if he challenged the election, stood aside. He also could not have won by a vote of the House of Representatives since the Dems controlled it, and he knew that if he were to challenge it. Gore never pushed the same issue to the House in 2000 because the Reps controlled it and he would've lost too. And please do not complain about disenfranchised voters in Florida. What, the Dems weren't able to bus enough homeless people to the polls via luring them with free cigarettes like in other parts of the country in 2000? Boo hoo. The pot is calling the kettle black!
I don't go out of my way to be partisan, but enough's enough.
Why would the NSA rely on Microsoft to create security holes in Windows? If Microsoft cannot be trusted to patch holes they mistakenly placed in the OS, how can the NSA trust them to actually produce reliable security holes for breaching? I'm sure the NSA has viewed Microsoft code long before. All it would take would be to use Echelon's combined computing power for probably a couple of minutes and they could find all the hidden BSD code buried deep within...
Al Gore invented the Internet but (kinda) lost the elections. Common knowledge.
No, but Apple did nominate him to their board of directors. And just a few short months later, the U.S. Navy places a large order for Mac hardware pre-loaded with Linux. Coincidence???
"More candidates should do this. Frankly, I'd be interesting in hearing more about General Clarke's ideas on time travel. (Follow the link... he actually talks about this. I kid you not)."
Great. Keep time travel technology away from the Dems, lest they make it possible that Al Gore DID actually invent the internet...:)
I am not voting for you, Mr. Dean, even if you do get your party's nomination. I never visited your website, never participated in any web-based discussion on your politics, and I am not registered as being a member of your party. Therefore, I request that you stop spamming my email accounts. I will believe in the validity of the penis enlarging pill offers being sent to my email account before I believe in your campaign rhetoric...
I believe most people would agree with me on this basic list:
1. Quit treating Digital Cable Television as a premium service. It is more economical for the Cable Companies (after they've upgraded) to offer digital than analog because they can squeeze in 5 (or 6 if you are Dish or DirecTV) digital SDTV channels in the same bandwidth as 1 single analog cable station. It you'd [the Cable Companies] would simply dump your analog offerings and bring in digital at the same price for areas you've already upgraded, you'd make a lot more profit. Furthermore, you'd cut out the major hole in your revenues, which are analog blackboxes. How many actually working digital blackboxes do you see on the market? It isn't as widespread. And guess what, if you bring HDTV down to the existing digital (SDTV) cable rates, you have another competitive edge against the satellite providers because those DirecTV customers who want HDTV will have to buy another dish...
2. Offer a la carte. You [the cable industry] should jump on the bandwagon before Senator McCain forces you to offer it that way. I'm tired of paying for channels I don't want and never watch. If you have a database of what your customers actually want, you can better negotiate carrier charges for the channels and you won't be strongarmed by companies like Disney who force you to carry ABC Family Channel and other stuff. Furthermore, you get rid of another customer gripe that generally leads to pirating of your services. And you'll again be competitive with satellite services. Remember when you didn't like the court cases that forced you to carry local broadcast channels? Now you all use that as a competitive tool against the satellite providers.
3. Let customers buy the digital set-top boxes from retailers. Us consumers will be buying new televisions to take advantage of SDTV and HDTV signals. Why should we have to buy a digital receiver for broadcast and rent another ugly box from the cable companies? Then, we could pick and choose. We could buy a digital HDTV cable receiver with a TiVo built-in and you [the cable companies] profit by not having to offer that to all your customers.
4. Stop wasting money on PVR/DVR systems that are inferior to TiVo. If you cooperate with TiVo, you can share in their market research for what people are actually watching as well as what commercials the customers do not skip over so you can have better information to provide to advertisers to increase your revenue. For example, your competitor Dish Networks could offer TiVo but they'd rather waste efforts on using the inferior Dish Player. The same goes for Comcast with their DVR test market, or Time Warner Cable wasting valuable AOL Time Warner money that could be better spent elsewhere on the server based PVR Mystro system. Stupid. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
5. Offer *consumer* tiered broadband. Comcast has the regular internet service and the new *pro* service. You need lower broadband offerings. Try a pricing level of $14 - $19.99 for 128Kbps down/56Kbps up service. You'll pick up a large amount of dial-up customers with a promotion with that because they can ditch their dedicated telephone lines. This is a large customer base (most of AOL's, for example, 20 million + customer base) ripe for the taking and most of them won't move up and/or need the standard cable modem access, but why should AOL have all that revenue? Likewise, let the AOL's and Earthlink's have combined billing for cable service. If the customer wants it, you might as well profit from it. Similarly, there are plenty of people such as myself that don't want to use Comcast.net as their email service. Reduce our rates by $10 per month. Do we really want to go through another round of domain name switches? Let's see, we've had @home.com, @attbi.com, and now @comcast.net. How about some consistency?
Why does a guy named Lynxpro need high-speed access?
My user name has nothing to do with the Lynx text web browser. It is a reference to the late-great Atari Lynx handheld game system. The world's first portable color handheld game system. Brush up on your Atari history here:
"Had you bothered to research it, you'd see that the plastic is irrelevant, that it does run PocketPC"
Yes, but I stated PocketPC AND Palm OS.
"The Alchemy/AMD design group is completely separate from the x86 group. The design motivations are completely different. Move away from your PC and realize that hundreds of times more embedded processors are sold every year than PC processors."
Yes, I understand that. However, PDA's today generally run on ARM based chips, whether they are provided by Intel or TI, not AMD or IBM/Motorola. Whether AMD sells a bunch of chips to embedded device manufacturers is moot to the whole PDA argument. We've also seen past behavior on the part of AMD in selling off chip divisions outside of their microprocessor expertise, as with networking and WiFi. We've seen Intel stumble with graphics chips, again something outside their skills (and I won't even touch their backing of Rambus memory)...
And I'm still right about the design of the "plastic". Its ugly.
Both Adobe Photoshop and a few of Macromedia's products such as Dreamweaver are documented to work via Wine.
That is not the same thing as offering actual Linux editions of the software. That is using a cheat to run Windows-based software on a Linux setup. Yes, several Hollywood studios are implementing that solution, but nothing beats having native support. Emulation is lazy support.
Personally, I see nothing I like on this reference PDA from AMD. The case is so ugly you'd think someone at Dell *designed* it. It runs Linux. Great. How much money did AMD waste on this when Intel and TI have a lock on this market? IBM has already shown a reference PDA for Linux based upon PPC architecture and we still haven't seen one PDA from an actual manufacturer come across the assembly line based upon it. Granted, the PPC chipset is probably the best idea for a PDA and its too bad the genuises at Motorola didn't think about it ages ago instead of trying to sell a modified version of the 20+ year old Motorola 68000 forever to companies like Palm; had that happened, PocketPC would not be strong at all in the PDA market. If they wanted credibility, they should've sought funding from Palm and Microsoft (if not IBM since they will be the actual producer of the chips under contract) to demonstrate that Palm OS and PocketPC OS could run viably on this platform alternative. As it stands now, it appears AMD wasted money they should've spent toward closing the physical megahertz deficiency they have with Intel on x86.
*What bundling? I run three Windows boxes and have yet to see where I was explicitly forbidden from using a third-party mail client, Mozilla browser, instant messaging tool and office suite. And how many people did Microsoft jail on DMCA premises, by the way?*
The better question is, *why are you posting as an anonymous coward on a subject relating to jailing people on DMCA issues?* Are you afraid Microsoft might make you a test case? And how can you deny the bundling issue after years of the antitrust case? Do you not remember how many times Microsoft has updated Windows to cripple competing software? I seem to remember several times where Netscape was cripped versus performance gains by IE, and it wasn't because of shoddy Netscape coding. What about people fined and jailed for modding their Xboxes because of DMCA prohibitions on reverse-engineering?
And please do not equate a grandmother running internet access on a 56k dial-up as one of your "stupid people" examples when it comes to bundling. For the longest, Microsoft prohibited OEM manufacturers from bundling competing web browsers and plenty of older folks who didn't know better used Internet Explorer instead of checking out the competitors because it came standard on the PC they purchased. Do you expect your own grandmother (if she is still alive) to build her own PC and install all the programs independently? For gosh sakes, if it wasn't for the Antitrust Case, Windows XP wouldn't run Quicktime or AIM... Are you oblivious to this or are you typing from a cubicle located in Redmond, Washington?
"While I'm wishin' and hopin' here, I'd also like to see Macromedia's products in Linux. Mod me a troll if you must but I genuinely do want to see these Linux support for these programs."
Why would Macromedia support Linux? Macromedia is too in-league with Microsoft to jeopardize that by releasing their products on the Linux platform. You have more chance of seeing the myriad of Symantec Norton programs on Linux before anything from Macromedia...hmmm...a modern version of Norton Desktop for Linux....interesting...
"Do not support the companies that abuse DMCA and make security research illegal. There's a close relation between the current spread of viruses and worms on the Internet, and the fact that Adobe tried to jail the developer who publicized security weaknesses of a commercial product. Hate to say it, but for the Windows platform Microsoft products are a much better price-efficiency alternative than Adobe. Unless you've spent two years at a community college learning Adobe toolset, Microsoft's PhotoDraw and Image Editor are easier to pick up and cheaper. Image Editor is distributed free with many Windows boxes, while PhotoDraw is part of the Office."
Wait a second; did I just read you correctly? And if so, are you high? You take this philosophical and moralistic position about not doing business with any company [Adobe in particular] that uses the DMCA in such a way, and then on the other hand, you recommend using (ie "buying") Microsoft products? The very Microsoft that has been convicted as a monopolist for illegally bundling products into -- get this -- the operating system to drive out competitors? Wow, someone should nominate you for the Florida Supreme Court when the next opening comes up!
1996 Telefilm rebroadcast on SciFi 10/9 at 3am
on
Doctor Who Comeback
·
· Score: 1
My TiVo just detected that the 1996 Fox/Universal/BBC Worldwide "Doctor Who" telefilm starring Paul McGann will be broadcast on Sci-Fi Network (in the U.S.) at 3am on October 9th.
I cannot believe anyone online hasn't pointed his finger at Linus being "The One" and Bill Gates as the Architect of "The Matrix" with a bunch of rogue programs messing up the place... I think I've just found a way with this analysis of making that series of schlock films relevant...
I am a big Doctor Who fan and have been since I was in the 5th grade. I have met both Peter Davison and Colin Baker and I have both of their autographs. Yet, I have mixed feelings about this Doctor Who revival.
1. The BBC has now contradicted itself. For the longest time, the Beeb has claimed it needed a partnership with another company to make Doctor Who cost-effective so that it could have modern special effects and production values. That's why they turned the reigns over to BBC Worldwide which is a commercial company whereas the Beeb itself is in charge of offering unpatriotic news and broadcasting dart championships on television in time periods that would be considered *Prime Time* in the States. The BBC itself cannot afford to make *Who* itself and look like a modern show.
2. BBC Worldwide has been greedy about rights and merchadise residuals. That is why there hasn't been a successful launching of *Who* since the 1996 Telemovie which was botched by Fox here in the States.
3. The so-called *Fox Who* was British regardless of criticism. Paul McGann was British. The screenwriter (or telewriter) was Matthew Jacobs, who was also British. The producer, Philip Segal, was British. Just because there was a car chase and McGann was more sexual than any other Doctor incarnation does not make it an American bastardization of a British institution. The 1996 Telefilm is canon, unlike the books.
4. Fox botched the launching of the telefilm, which was a back-door pilot for an ongoing series. They put the movie on a Tuesday up against NBA Basketball and some baseball programming, not to mention a cliffhanger episode of "Roseanne" which was one of the most popular television shows at the time. Yet, according to the Nielsen ratings, Doctor Who was the most recorded television show that week. Had Fox shown the telefilm the week before when they broadcast the "Twister" ripoff telefilm called "Tornado" (starring fanboy favorite Bruce Campbell) -which received stellar ratings - Doctor Who would've become a big-budget series on Fox. And back in 1996, Fox was very receptive to sci-fi, unlike today (witness what happened to "Firefly").
5. Paul McGann was a great Doctor. Paul has often stated he doesn't want to be *the George Lazenby of Doctor Who.* He needs another shot. His portrayal was a cross between the strengths of Tom Baker's portrayal mixed with a wee bit of Peter Davison. It was great.
6. The Doctor is not a homosexual. He is a Time Lord, not a Catholic priest. Just because he historically has not had romantic relationships with his female companions does not indicate a taste for the male sex. He is a different species than humans. After all, just because humans have pets as companions does not mean they have sex with them. Even in one of the McCoy era episodes, the Doctor mentioned he wasn't fond of inter-species relationships, unlike the cavaleer (sic) attitudes of that in Star Trek. The Eighth Doctor (McGann) had a romantic interest with Dr. Grace Holloway. Big deal. She was hot. It was also revealed that the Doctor was half-human in that telefilm. I know if I was the Doctor, I also would've had "relations" with Peri, because to paraphrase the lyrical poetry of the great Sir Mix-A-Lot, "even gay guy's gotta shout, baby got back!" She also had quite a rack. There was, after all, a reason why Jonathan Frakes (Will Riker) wanted to bring Nicola Bryant Stateside to be on TNG after he met her at a sci-fi convention. Leela the Savage was also another hottie. And well, the Doctor had to have relations with both incarnations of Romana since there was a spark between them and they were both Time Lords (not to mention Tom Baker married the second Romana, however brief).
7. Returning to budget issues, to do Doctor Who properly, it would require a $1 million budget. Look how much Star Trek episodes cost, and they have fixed sets for the majority of the episodes. The cost would be the same in the U.K., if not more, and you'd still be confined to the
"But again, since you make it sound that Germany deliberately disrespects this treaty (at least thats how breaking whenever convinient sounds to me) let me say that it is not unwillingness to fullfill the treaty, but rather the inaptitude of our politicians (and the lobby groups) to do the reforms necessary to bring state finances and economy back on track. In some sense I hope for the additional pressure due to the stability pact that our politicians finally get their act together..."
Ahillen, I'm not claiming the German public is at fault for breaking the Stability Pact, but when I refer to Germany in this setting, I mean the elected government which are the politicians. They are the ones that are lacking the political courage to make budgetary cuts necessary to fulfill the treaty obligations. The politicians believe they will not be re-elected if they cut funds to popular programs. While it might cost the German citizen more money by cutting programs in the short term, they would benefit by a Euro that is fiscally sound long term in terms of better interest rates and purchasing power. Hey, we have the same problem here in America. Our officials won't make necessary budget cuts so we keep blowing up our budget deficits which eventually will mean interest rates will rise, thus homeowners will be paying more money out-of-pocket because of the collective stupidity of our elected officials.
"What do you mean "America's first Prime Minister"? Between 1800 and 1850, Congress had many famous orators and leaders, such as Henry Clay and Daniel Webster. Learn some history."
Orators, yes. But did they effectively usurp power from the Presidency? Nope. Gingrich did and dominated political debate until he miscalculated the eroded support from shutting down the Federal Government. Thank you, but I have a degree in history, do you Mr. AC?
Mind your tongue! Revealing the secrets of the Brotherhood is a hazardous thing to do...
Hey, I have a bone to pick with you. Where's my membership card? Did the mailman lose it again? If so, how come you guys couldn't predict that and sent the card via UPS or FedEx instead? Plus, I still don't have my ceremonial mask for the upcoming *Eyes Wide Shut* themed pot-luck!
Slashdot Mirror
hmmm. Last I checked, the UK was part of NATO. Unless, of course, they are talking about two separate
The United States is also a part of NATO and it will be looking at the MS code too. NATO is an umbrella organization, and if it wants to check MS Source Code to make sure shared resources amongst the member nations are secured, that is independent from any actions those member nations decide to do on their own. On the other hand, I'm sure France will opt to allow the European Union to check the source code itself. And yes, I know the U.K. is also a member of the EU as well, albeit not a happy one.
"it's much better to take the OS from the folks who brought us four dead in Ohio for protesting the Vietnam War"
Four dead at Kent State holds no comparison value to the massacre at Tiananmen. Our government [the U.S.] did not jail the hippies for years and run medical experiments on them, or, even worse, trump up their charges and then slaughter them for organ harvesting to the highest bidder as what the PLA in China practice...
If we didn't hold such a high opinion of the US and its history, we'd just not fucking bother and move somewhere else...
Please feel free to take Barbara Streissand (sic) and Alec Baldwin with you. They've lived in the US for three long years since promising they'd leave if Bush won the election...Its important to stay true to one's word...
There are many things wrong in the world, but nobody expects the US to solve them. What is so special about Iraque, that is lacking in korea and so many other country's?
Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons. North Korea DOES. Its very difficult to invade a country that has nuclear weapons. That's why we could invade Iraq. Had we sat around a few more years and allowed France to sell more techology to them, Saddam probably would've acquired nukes and then he could do as he pleased. Personally, I think we should take out North Korea. Of course, South Korea wouldn't like nuclear fall-out from the deal. And I'd also support the U.S. and the U.K. removing Robert Mugabe's regime too, in all fairness. If we are spending money on the military, they should be working 24/7 in my book.
*Um.... France gave us VietNam. We just tried to pick up where they left off.*
Yep. We helped France try to recolonize Vietnam (after aiding Ho Chi Minh during WWII against the Japanese) in order for them to go along with NATO. Then they lost. Then they backstabbed us in NATO. And then we lost 50,000+ people fighting a losing war nobody wanted to fight. Thank you, France, for everything. Feel free to take back the Statue of Liberty too after the next upcoming double-cross at the Security Council... Oh, thanks for the XYZ Affair too...
US apologists love to talk about these "Evil Regimes" who are "bent on destroying democracy & freedom". That's exactly what the US does! So is this a case of "You aren't allowed to destroy democracy and freedom! That's the job of the US!"
Yeah, whooptie. We [the US] overthrew left-leaning democratically elected governments that would've tilted toward the Warsaw Pact axis counter to our own government here in our hemisphere. While the Monroe Doctrine won't hold up under international law, it does under American law and the CIA pre-emptively cancelled out potentially hostile regimes which led us [the U.S.] to win the Cold War, thereby enabling your right to post on this website and complain freely. Look what Pakistan did just a few years ago when their military overthrew their government. Had the Pakistani military not done that, the Pakistani regime would directly be aiding bin Laden against us. The same goes for when the Turkish military stood up to their parliament after the public democratically elected non-secular Muslim activitist politicians. Seems if memory calls correctly, Germany democratically elected the Nazis into power too; perhaps one of the European powers should've pre-emptively overthrew them before they went on to start WWII. Would you complain about that?
"I think your "president", who lost the election but won the seat (partially with the help of his brother causing 50,000 floridians to be considered 'criminals' and ineligable for the vote) sounds more like these third-world dictators who fudge the elections to get into power. It's the same thing. Just as despicable."
Give that tired argument a rest. You obviously do not understand how presidents are elected in the U.S. Its just like the Dems complaining about how Bush lost the popular vote but won the Presidency. That party was in power for 50 solid years in Congress, yet they did not have the foresight to pass a Constitutional Amendment abolishing the Electoral College which would've prevented a Bush victory. Gore's people went through the courts and lost (rightfully so since there was no standard of judging what constituted a vote from that flawed voting system that a Dem appointee created in Florida in the first place). When you go back to the 1960 election, Nixon actually beat Kennedy in the Popular Vote, but there were ballot machines printing up votes from dead people and gave the win to Kennedy. But Nixon, fearing what would happen to the country if he challenged the election, stood aside. He also could not have won by a vote of the House of Representatives since the Dems controlled it, and he knew that if he were to challenge it. Gore never pushed the same issue to the House in 2000 because the Reps controlled it and he would've lost too. And please do not complain about disenfranchised voters in Florida. What, the Dems weren't able to bus enough homeless people to the polls via luring them with free cigarettes like in other parts of the country in 2000? Boo hoo. The pot is calling the kettle black!
I don't go out of my way to be partisan, but enough's enough.
Why would the NSA rely on Microsoft to create security holes in Windows? If Microsoft cannot be trusted to patch holes they mistakenly placed in the OS, how can the NSA trust them to actually produce reliable security holes for breaching? I'm sure the NSA has viewed Microsoft code long before. All it would take would be to use Echelon's combined computing power for probably a couple of minutes and they could find all the hidden BSD code buried deep within...
Al Gore invented the Internet but (kinda) lost the elections. Common knowledge.
No, but Apple did nominate him to their board of directors. And just a few short months later, the U.S. Navy places a large order for Mac hardware pre-loaded with Linux. Coincidence???
"More candidates should do this. Frankly, I'd be interesting in hearing more about General Clarke's ideas on time travel. (Follow the link... he actually talks about this. I kid you not)."
:)
Great. Keep time travel technology away from the Dems, lest they make it possible that Al Gore DID actually invent the internet...
I am not voting for you, Mr. Dean, even if you do get your party's nomination. I never visited your website, never participated in any web-based discussion on your politics, and I am not registered as being a member of your party. Therefore, I request that you stop spamming my email accounts. I will believe in the validity of the penis enlarging pill offers being sent to my email account before I believe in your campaign rhetoric...
Considering SCO's Unix product offerings, they [SCO] need to be on an antiques themed show...
:)
And just like the televised program, they'll be demonstrating a whole bunch of krap I'm particularly not interested in viewing...
Do I hear the television program's theme during the SCO Unix bootup?
I believe most people would agree with me on this basic list:
1. Quit treating Digital Cable Television as a premium service. It is more economical for the Cable Companies (after they've upgraded) to offer digital than analog because they can squeeze in 5 (or 6 if you are Dish or DirecTV) digital SDTV channels in the same bandwidth as 1 single analog cable station. It you'd [the Cable Companies] would simply dump your analog offerings and bring in digital at the same price for areas you've already upgraded, you'd make a lot more profit. Furthermore, you'd cut out the major hole in your revenues, which are analog blackboxes. How many actually working digital blackboxes do you see on the market? It isn't as widespread. And guess what, if you bring HDTV down to the existing digital (SDTV) cable rates, you have another competitive edge against the satellite providers because those DirecTV customers who want HDTV will have to buy another dish...
2. Offer a la carte. You [the cable industry] should jump on the bandwagon before Senator McCain forces you to offer it that way. I'm tired of paying for channels I don't want and never watch. If you have a database of what your customers actually want, you can better negotiate carrier charges for the channels and you won't be strongarmed by companies like Disney who force you to carry ABC Family Channel and other stuff. Furthermore, you get rid of another customer gripe that generally leads to pirating of your services. And you'll again be competitive with satellite services. Remember when you didn't like the court cases that forced you to carry local broadcast channels? Now you all use that as a competitive tool against the satellite providers.
3. Let customers buy the digital set-top boxes from retailers. Us consumers will be buying new televisions to take advantage of SDTV and HDTV signals. Why should we have to buy a digital receiver for broadcast and rent another ugly box from the cable companies? Then, we could pick and choose. We could buy a digital HDTV cable receiver with a TiVo built-in and you [the cable companies] profit by not having to offer that to all your customers.
4. Stop wasting money on PVR/DVR systems that are inferior to TiVo. If you cooperate with TiVo, you can share in their market research for what people are actually watching as well as what commercials the customers do not skip over so you can have better information to provide to advertisers to increase your revenue. For example, your competitor Dish Networks could offer TiVo but they'd rather waste efforts on using the inferior Dish Player. The same goes for Comcast with their DVR test market, or Time Warner Cable wasting valuable AOL Time Warner money that could be better spent elsewhere on the server based PVR Mystro system. Stupid. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
5. Offer *consumer* tiered broadband. Comcast has the regular internet service and the new *pro* service. You need lower broadband offerings. Try a pricing level of $14 - $19.99 for 128Kbps down/56Kbps up service. You'll pick up a large amount of dial-up customers with a promotion with that because they can ditch their dedicated telephone lines. This is a large customer base (most of AOL's, for example, 20 million + customer base) ripe for the taking and most of them won't move up and/or need the standard cable modem access, but why should AOL have all that revenue? Likewise, let the AOL's and Earthlink's have combined billing for cable service. If the customer wants it, you might as well profit from it. Similarly, there are plenty of people such as myself that don't want to use Comcast.net as their email service. Reduce our rates by $10 per month. Do we really want to go through another round of domain name switches? Let's see, we've had @home.com, @attbi.com, and now @comcast.net. How about some consistency?
There, I've said my peace.
Why does a guy named Lynxpro need high-speed access?
My user name has nothing to do with the Lynx text web browser. It is a reference to the late-great Atari Lynx handheld game system. The world's first portable color handheld game system. Brush up on your Atari history here:
http://www.atarimuseum.com
"Had you bothered to research it, you'd see that the plastic is irrelevant, that it does run PocketPC"
Yes, but I stated PocketPC AND Palm OS.
"The Alchemy/AMD design group is completely separate from the x86 group. The design motivations are completely different. Move away from your PC and realize that hundreds of times more embedded processors are sold every year than PC processors."
Yes, I understand that. However, PDA's today generally run on ARM based chips, whether they are provided by Intel or TI, not AMD or IBM/Motorola. Whether AMD sells a bunch of chips to embedded device manufacturers is moot to the whole PDA argument. We've also seen past behavior on the part of AMD in selling off chip divisions outside of their microprocessor expertise, as with networking and WiFi. We've seen Intel stumble with graphics chips, again something outside their skills (and I won't even touch their backing of Rambus memory)...
And I'm still right about the design of the "plastic". Its ugly.
Both Adobe Photoshop and a few of Macromedia's products such as Dreamweaver are documented to work via Wine.
That is not the same thing as offering actual Linux editions of the software. That is using a cheat to run Windows-based software on a Linux setup. Yes, several Hollywood studios are implementing that solution, but nothing beats having native support. Emulation is lazy support.
Personally, I see nothing I like on this reference PDA from AMD. The case is so ugly you'd think someone at Dell *designed* it. It runs Linux. Great. How much money did AMD waste on this when Intel and TI have a lock on this market? IBM has already shown a reference PDA for Linux based upon PPC architecture and we still haven't seen one PDA from an actual manufacturer come across the assembly line based upon it. Granted, the PPC chipset is probably the best idea for a PDA and its too bad the genuises at Motorola didn't think about it ages ago instead of trying to sell a modified version of the 20+ year old Motorola 68000 forever to companies like Palm; had that happened, PocketPC would not be strong at all in the PDA market. If they wanted credibility, they should've sought funding from Palm and Microsoft (if not IBM since they will be the actual producer of the chips under contract) to demonstrate that Palm OS and PocketPC OS could run viably on this platform alternative. As it stands now, it appears AMD wasted money they should've spent toward closing the physical megahertz deficiency they have with Intel on x86.
*What bundling? I run three Windows boxes and have yet to see where I was explicitly forbidden from using a third-party mail client, Mozilla browser, instant messaging tool and office suite.
And how many people did Microsoft jail on DMCA premises, by the way?*
The better question is, *why are you posting as an anonymous coward on a subject relating to jailing people on DMCA issues?* Are you afraid Microsoft might make you a test case? And how can you deny the bundling issue after years of the antitrust case? Do you not remember how many times Microsoft has updated Windows to cripple competing software? I seem to remember several times where Netscape was cripped versus performance gains by IE, and it wasn't because of shoddy Netscape coding. What about people fined and jailed for modding their Xboxes because of DMCA prohibitions on reverse-engineering?
And please do not equate a grandmother running internet access on a 56k dial-up as one of your "stupid people" examples when it comes to bundling. For the longest, Microsoft prohibited OEM manufacturers from bundling competing web browsers and plenty of older folks who didn't know better used Internet Explorer instead of checking out the competitors because it came standard on the PC they purchased. Do you expect your own grandmother (if she is still alive) to build her own PC and install all the programs independently? For gosh sakes, if it wasn't for the Antitrust Case, Windows XP wouldn't run Quicktime or AIM... Are you oblivious to this or are you typing from a cubicle located in Redmond, Washington?
"While I'm wishin' and hopin' here, I'd also like to see Macromedia's products in Linux. Mod me a troll if you must but I genuinely do want to see these Linux support for these programs."
Why would Macromedia support Linux? Macromedia is too in-league with Microsoft to jeopardize that by releasing their products on the Linux platform. You have more chance of seeing the myriad of Symantec Norton programs on Linux before anything from Macromedia...hmmm...a modern version of Norton Desktop for Linux....interesting...
"Do not support the companies that abuse DMCA and make security research illegal. There's a close relation between the current spread of viruses and worms on the Internet, and the fact that Adobe tried to jail the developer who publicized security weaknesses of a commercial product.
Hate to say it, but for the Windows platform Microsoft products are a much better price-efficiency alternative than Adobe. Unless you've spent two years at a community college learning Adobe toolset, Microsoft's PhotoDraw and Image Editor are easier to pick up and cheaper. Image Editor is distributed free with many Windows boxes, while PhotoDraw is part of the Office."
Wait a second; did I just read you correctly? And if so, are you high? You take this philosophical and moralistic position about not doing business with any company [Adobe in particular] that uses the DMCA in such a way, and then on the other hand, you recommend using (ie "buying") Microsoft products? The very Microsoft that has been convicted as a monopolist for illegally bundling products into -- get this -- the operating system to drive out competitors? Wow, someone should nominate you for the Florida Supreme Court when the next opening comes up!
My TiVo just detected that the 1996 Fox/Universal/BBC Worldwide "Doctor Who" telefilm starring Paul McGann will be broadcast on Sci-Fi Network (in the U.S.) at 3am on October 9th.
I cannot believe anyone online hasn't pointed his finger at Linus being "The One" and Bill Gates as the Architect of "The Matrix" with a bunch of rogue programs messing up the place... I think I've just found a way with this analysis of making that series of schlock films relevant...
I am a big Doctor Who fan and have been since I was in the 5th grade. I have met both Peter Davison and Colin Baker and I have both of their autographs. Yet, I have mixed feelings about this Doctor Who revival.
1. The BBC has now contradicted itself. For the longest time, the Beeb has claimed it needed a partnership with another company to make Doctor Who cost-effective so that it could have modern special effects and production values. That's why they turned the reigns over to BBC Worldwide which is a commercial company whereas the Beeb itself is in charge of offering unpatriotic news and broadcasting dart championships on television in time periods that would be considered *Prime Time* in the States. The BBC itself cannot afford to make *Who* itself and look like a modern show.
2. BBC Worldwide has been greedy about rights and merchadise residuals. That is why there hasn't been a successful launching of *Who* since the 1996 Telemovie which was botched by Fox here in the States.
3. The so-called *Fox Who* was British regardless of criticism. Paul McGann was British. The screenwriter (or telewriter) was Matthew Jacobs, who was also British. The producer, Philip Segal, was British. Just because there was a car chase and McGann was more sexual than any other Doctor incarnation does not make it an American bastardization of a British institution. The 1996 Telefilm is canon, unlike the books.
4. Fox botched the launching of the telefilm, which was a back-door pilot for an ongoing series. They put the movie on a Tuesday up against NBA Basketball and some baseball programming, not to mention a cliffhanger episode of "Roseanne" which was one of the most popular television shows at the time. Yet, according to the Nielsen ratings, Doctor Who was the most recorded television show that week. Had Fox shown the telefilm the week before when they broadcast the "Twister" ripoff telefilm called "Tornado" (starring fanboy favorite Bruce Campbell) -which received stellar ratings - Doctor Who would've become a big-budget series on Fox. And back in 1996, Fox was very receptive to sci-fi, unlike today (witness what happened to "Firefly").
5. Paul McGann was a great Doctor. Paul has often stated he doesn't want to be *the George Lazenby of Doctor Who.* He needs another shot. His portrayal was a cross between the strengths of Tom Baker's portrayal mixed with a wee bit of Peter Davison. It was great.
6. The Doctor is not a homosexual. He is a Time Lord, not a Catholic priest. Just because he historically has not had romantic relationships with his female companions does not indicate a taste for the male sex. He is a different species than humans. After all, just because humans have pets as companions does not mean they have sex with them. Even in one of the McCoy era episodes, the Doctor mentioned he wasn't fond of inter-species relationships, unlike the cavaleer (sic) attitudes of that in Star Trek. The Eighth Doctor (McGann) had a romantic interest with Dr. Grace Holloway. Big deal. She was hot. It was also revealed that the Doctor was half-human in that telefilm. I know if I was the Doctor, I also would've had "relations" with Peri, because to paraphrase the lyrical poetry of the great Sir Mix-A-Lot, "even gay guy's gotta shout, baby got back!" She also had quite a rack. There was, after all, a reason why Jonathan Frakes (Will Riker) wanted to bring Nicola Bryant Stateside to be on TNG after he met her at a sci-fi convention. Leela the Savage was also another hottie. And well, the Doctor had to have relations with both incarnations of Romana since there was a spark between them and they were both Time Lords (not to mention Tom Baker married the second Romana, however brief).
7. Returning to budget issues, to do Doctor Who properly, it would require a $1 million budget. Look how much Star Trek episodes cost, and they have fixed sets for the majority of the episodes. The cost would be the same in the U.K., if not more, and you'd still be confined to the
"But again, since you make it sound that Germany deliberately disrespects this treaty (at least thats how breaking whenever convinient sounds to me) let me say that it is not unwillingness to fullfill the treaty, but rather the inaptitude of our politicians (and the lobby groups) to do the reforms necessary to bring state finances and economy back on track. In some sense I hope for the additional pressure due to the stability pact that our politicians finally get their act together..."
Ahillen, I'm not claiming the German public is at fault for breaking the Stability Pact, but when I refer to Germany in this setting, I mean the elected government which are the politicians. They are the ones that are lacking the political courage to make budgetary cuts necessary to fulfill the treaty obligations. The politicians believe they will not be re-elected if they cut funds to popular programs. While it might cost the German citizen more money by cutting programs in the short term, they would benefit by a Euro that is fiscally sound long term in terms of better interest rates and purchasing power. Hey, we have the same problem here in America. Our officials won't make necessary budget cuts so we keep blowing up our budget deficits which eventually will mean interest rates will rise, thus homeowners will be paying more money out-of-pocket because of the collective stupidity of our elected officials.
"What do you mean "America's first Prime Minister"? Between 1800 and 1850, Congress had many famous orators and leaders, such as Henry Clay and Daniel Webster. Learn some history."
Orators, yes. But did they effectively usurp power from the Presidency? Nope. Gingrich did and dominated political debate until he miscalculated the eroded support from shutting down the Federal Government. Thank you, but I have a degree in history, do you Mr. AC?
Mind your tongue! Revealing the secrets of the Brotherhood is a hazardous thing to do...
Hey, I have a bone to pick with you. Where's my membership card? Did the mailman lose it again? If so, how come you guys couldn't predict that and sent the card via UPS or FedEx instead? Plus, I still don't have my ceremonial mask for the upcoming *Eyes Wide Shut* themed pot-luck!