I just can't figure out what justifies that price tag
Don't be so hard on Sony. We all know where $699 are going. That leaves them $1 for covering development, production, shipping, service and a profit margin. Pretty impressive, if you ask me.
I don't really see the need for dual-sided disks. Flipping the disk is just as annoying as changing disks. Two single sided disks are more flexible and probably even less expensive. You can even get cases which hold two disks, if you want to "group" your data.
You may recall that recently SCO declared the GPL invalid. I believe the real reason why they did that is not, as many believe, because they continued to distribute Linux after they announced their lawsuit, but instead because they have actual Linux code inside their own SCO Unix. So far, this is just a hypothesis, but I think it best explains their action.
If the GPL really were invalid, as they claim, they would still not have been allowed to use GPLd code. Even they should know that.
Now SCO obviously doesn't give a shit about what's allowed and what's not, but claiming the GPL is invalid in order to be able to use GPLd code doesn't make sense.
So to sum it up: SCO sued IBM, because HP comitted a patch copied by SGI from an old Bell Labs Unix, which was released under a BSD license by SCO. Seems like Sun are the only ones not involved. That's probably the reason they bought one of those Unix licenses from SCO, just to be part of the picture.
You can buy whatever format you want to. None of them is clearly superior to the other, none is any more "standard" than the other (the DVD-Forum is just a group of corporations, just like the DVD+Alliance), both offer the same amount of compatibility, the prices for blank media are the same (at least in Germany). The only risk there is, is that someday, there won't be any blank media for one format anymore, and I don't see that coming at all.
I also believe that multi-format-drives are too expensive for the advantage of being able to use both types. After all, when you burn, you still have to choose.
Just ignore the format and choose a drive that suits your needs in terms of price and speed.
Slashdot Mirror
best...sci-fi...series...ever
Shatner! This is betrayal!
I just can't figure out what justifies that price tag
Don't be so hard on Sony. We all know where $699 are going. That leaves them $1 for covering development, production, shipping, service and a profit margin. Pretty impressive, if you ask me.
And no, I'm not new to /.
:-)
A slow learner then, maybe?
Just kidding...
I don't really see the need for dual-sided disks. Flipping the disk is just as annoying as changing disks. Two single sided disks are more flexible and probably even less expensive. You can even get cases which hold two disks, if you want to "group" your data.
How the hell did I get modded -1 redundant when I was the second post? What is that?
Because millions of people had already said nothing before you. The only difference is they weren't as vocal as you...
solution ? the opensource community comes up with with a distrbuted IM system that relies on loosely coupled servers, something like freenet.
Jabber does that already.
"If there is unauthorized access to our network, it opens us up to potential security and privacy vulnerabilities"
I can't seem to remember the last time a malicious programmer bought a license to write his exploit...
Additionally you get lots of false positives for words including SCO by not including whitespace around the string,
Actually not, because it was a joke!
I can't believe, people thought I was serious...
According to this story over at The Inquirer [...], SCO has officially announced that HP is safe from their infringement lawsuit brigade ...
No.
You may recall that recently SCO declared the GPL invalid. I believe the real reason why they did that is not, as many believe, because they continued to distribute Linux after they announced their lawsuit, but instead because they have actual Linux code inside their own SCO Unix. So far, this is just a hypothesis, but I think it best explains their action.
If the GPL really were invalid, as they claim, they would still not have been allowed to use GPLd code. Even they should know that.
Now SCO obviously doesn't give a shit about what's allowed and what's not, but claiming the GPL is invalid in order to be able to use GPLd code doesn't make sense.
Come on, guys! He's talking about the corporate world!
I know there have been like 200 comments stating the exact same thing, but they have all been modded +5 Insightful. I just love those points...
So to sum it up: SCO sued IBM, because HP comitted a patch copied by SGI from an old Bell Labs Unix, which was released under a BSD license by SCO. Seems like Sun are the only ones not involved. That's probably the reason they bought one of those Unix licenses from SCO, just to be part of the picture.
It should be: Microsoft to do to Usenet what it did to Email & The Web?
s/s\/ODSL\/OSDL/s\/ODSL\/OSDL\//
...allright...I'll shut up...
You can buy whatever format you want to. None of them is clearly superior to the other, none is any more "standard" than the other (the DVD-Forum is just a group of corporations, just like the DVD+Alliance), both offer the same amount of compatibility, the prices for blank media are the same (at least in Germany). The only risk there is, is that someday, there won't be any blank media for one format anymore, and I don't see that coming at all.
I also believe that multi-format-drives are too expensive for the advantage of being able to use both types. After all, when you burn, you still have to choose.
Just ignore the format and choose a drive that suits your needs in terms of price and speed.