So it's not so much a surprise that Pixar would consider this option, but that Pixar hadn't made the move yet said something about the Mac's capabilities.
I could agree with this statement. However, let's keep in mind that Pixar was in the middle of several productions, and everyone knows you don't rip your underpinnings out and replace them wholesale during the middle of a project. Additionally, they moved from SGI boxes to Linux boxes, and now to G5s. Each move about 18 months apart. This would be about the viable life time of high end graphics workstations. I recall as well that Panther made some serious improvements in various areas, and may have finally pushed the performance realm over the edge where the G5 was a better fit over generic Linux boxes.
After all, with Jobs as CEO of both companies, why wouldn't Apple be used for Pixar's needs, especially if they're capable? An american kiritsu?
I don't see this as big news. It would be big news, if, say, they moved to a linux distribution (considering that Jobs is CEO of both Pixar and Apple, and linux could be seen as a competitor to Apple). This is nothing more than free publicity for apple, and probably an "at-cost" transaction for Pixar for new hardware and software.
sometimes businesses give things away in order to generate goodwill, in order to be given preferential treatment (hopefully) in future dealings. Or, in this case, as an underhanded means of creating the impression that one business supports the idealogy of another business - after all, they "own" the matter in question, do they not?
To me, this is more a case of egg on the face of CA than anything else. Their quick response put to rest any speculation that they supported SCO's position.
I read USC 17 106, and it specifically states that the owner has exclusive rights to "create copies" and to " to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending".
To me, I see no restriction on what can be done with the physical copy once received as part of a distribution. There is no restriction on ownership of said copy. USC 17 109 explicitly states this, although to me this appears redundant. Distribution is not equal to transfer of ownership, although transfer of ownership can be part of a distribution. Publication is considered distribution. However, public display is not considered distribution (USC 17 101)
NT has a security model, it's predeccessor did not. However, IIRC, NT's security model was abrogated to the single user model, as initially MS conceived of it as a single simultaneous user being logged in. (Multiple user acounts, but only single user login) Running services with different security settings based on user permissions does not make for multiple simultaneous users in my book. (Then again, to be fair, running a 386/486 with NT 3.1 was almost unbearable even with only a single user logged in.)
Defining it as what it's not, which is what I did, and, btw, restricts it only to the broadest category of copyright (i.e., what you cannot do) is better than the "changing tests over time" issue that slowly wears away our fair use rights. See the DMCA for a classic case in point.
As for loaning your copy to a friend, nothing prevents that either in my proposal. You didn't create a copy for distribution, nor did you distribute, you passed along. Distribute means more than passing along, at least as far as copyright goes last time I checked. (obligatory IANAL)
Linux is more secure than Windows because Linux started out with a security model. Multiple simultaneous user logins were a criteria from the beginning.
Windows started out as a single user system, then, woah, let's add multiple user capabilities (although only one at a time) and then, woah, let's add multiple simultaneous user access (but still only one log in...and.....well, Citrix finally made multiple user logins viable around 98/99 I think, but a single bad app with a bad GDI call will still BSOD the whole damn system, or used to. And then wait, let's add some "security"
Wouldn't something like "I own this copy, I can do whatever I want with it, including making confetti out of it. I may not distribute it." pretty much solve any and all copyright issues? (Other than the RIAA wanting you to pay per play, of course) Since when has copyright equalled something akin to MS's EULA where you can only load it once, on a single piece of hardware, to only be used on that one piece of hardware?
wouldn't you take it as a business? If you're in a contract negotiations, and the other guy says "ok, we're ready to sign the deal, and because we're such nice guys, here's a hundred licenses thrown in just in case you ever want to use it". Do you really think any rational company would ever say "Hey, don't give me something for free!"?
I'm afraid that this is going to give people more reason to go back to using frames, and 'detecting' if their content has been hijacked, and writing more bad code that causes multiple windows to pop up all over the place, and/or crash browsers.
Popups are only a problem for IE browsers. No one else ever sees them, unless they really want to.
The real assessment is much more sobering to those of us in the software industry -- this is just another bit of proof that the general perception nowadays is that software should be free, or damn close to free. No one groans about $600 for an LCD monitor, $200 for a hard drive, or $250 for a new video card every two years, but $45 for tens of millions of lines of code that is the single most important element of the PC (how great is that PC minus software)? Whoa, that's just unacceptable!
I wouldn't say it needs to be free. $20-$30 is fine. Why that price? It seems to be the going rate for software once the newness wears off. BTW, those tens of millions of lines of code could probably be pared down to just a couple of million without all the added widgets and gadgets that MS wedges into the "kernel" in an effort to force an upgrade every year or two. Is there any real reason that the kernel needs to be replaced with a new $100 OS every year or two?
You reap what you sow, and I think MS has made their own bed....
Heck, some people would argue we were farther along when OS/2 was around than today. Until MS broke compatibility with the now infamous 2GB memory request for all its programs from Office 97 onwards and the total backwards incompatibility of Office 97 with previous versions (OS/2 was limited to 512MB max memory for VMs). If an MS app crashed within OS/2, the window would just close. OS/2 didn't care. Not to mention all the other nifty aspects of OS/2: true OO consistent interface, true multi-threading, support for multi-casting, etc. Yes, the PM had some issues, but after having used it extensively, and used all flavors of MS, PM is still years ahead of MS's latest effort, heck, it's years ahead of Longhorn's purported features list.
Next: is windows OO yet? nuff said.
Be: fast, small, fast, consistent, fast...did I mention fast? Ok, it had some short comings too, but it was a good system for what it did do, and it did those exceedingly well.
I'm not supporting the current state of Microsoft Windows, but Microsoft DOS had a critical role in the development of the modern PCs. We all owe it a lot.
What do we owe it exactly? The non-standard and now ubiquitous usage of the backslash in path names? The 640KB memory barrier and memory segmentation (that may finally go away as the last DOS based OS dissappears from common usage)? MS Basic (shipped with every early copy I can remember, and then GW Basic, because MS Basic blew major chunks)?
I'd say that any of the non (MS Q)DOS based systems would have been a major improvement over DOS, and several were available (CPM comes to mind immediately, although I do recall 1 or 2 others existing at the time).
About the only thing we can thank MS for are the universal understanding that computers are fallible (via the ubiquitous BSOD) and that everything should work the MS defacto standard way: CUE92 anyone? IMAP? HTML?
I'm a current dish customer. I've been waiting for HD DVR systems to come out. Dish just did, wants over $1000 for it. DirectTV is coming out in another month or so. Dish also restricts any deals to new customers, guess they think once in, always in.
We'll they're right about one thing, once you've used a DVR, you'll always want one (total freedom to do whatever you want over being locked into your TV broadcasters schedule is you want to see something does that). However, they're by no means the only game in town for DVRs, and if they don't wise up soon, they may soon be less at least 1 customer, as I'm currently looking at HTPCs to replace my Dish PVR system for HD reception (just a simple addition of about $200 to my extra PC, and off air HD broadcasts will be taken care of).
in a kinder, more gentle way. Instead of causing huge pain in reformed criminals when they hear music, you can now just give them "corrective shocks" for the misbehaving brain segment! Next, we'll all be stepping in lock-step....
Re:Big Brother is coming BB is coming... BB....
on
Guilty By Association
·
· Score: 1
If you really want to know, at this time I prefer a split control executive/legislative branches, and preferably even have the two houses of the legislature split. In truth, I'd prefer more parties, after thinking about this a bit, because the current situation leaves us with little choice, as you mention. Of these two desires, splitting party control between the executive and legislative branches seems the most likely possibility. It would most likely guarantee that neither party has its will enforced on the entire populace, since both parties seem a little out of touch with said populace. (my own impression)
Got some news for you, College books were very expensive 20 years ago, too. Many weren't resellable for a variety of reasons, new editions, omg, they changed books for the next semester, whatever. My general cost at the time for college books was a minimum of $50 per class, and that was for used books as well (ok - Racquetball PE book was only $11;). My most expensive useless book was a continuum mechanics book in grad school that was a whole 100 pages, cost me $89, and we sort of used it over a 4 week period.
Skimming over this particular story's comments and the linked story of overpriced books thread, I only came across one session that in today's $s showed a single class being expensive - a $300 set of books for a single class. Halve that at least for inflation effects over 20 years, and it's $150 max, in 1984 $s. Note the above statement about 1 $89 book used for less than 4 weeks in a 15 week course, and realize books are actually cheaper today, on average, than 20 years ago.
Tuition, however, is another story. In 1983, I paid $3/semester hour.
I'd be more than happy if they removed that POS (IE) from the OS. But, then again, their inclusion of it is finally pushing me off of MS products. I personally hate the fact that I cannot have multiple versions of the browser running on a single machine (but why would anyone want to do that? you ask: *development*). That is only 1 reason among many for disliking IE's "integration" into the OS. Others would be security, new bugs in previously predictable programs, new nifty effects on OS stability, etc.
So, thanks to MS for their latest security patch I actually installed that not only addressed the security issue in question, but also totally fubar'ed my then current mail client. It has finally given me the incentive to get off my lazy but and start using the alternatives I've been looking at full time.
when you consider that MS codec was chosen as the new stadard for HD DVDs, and MS had to truly make the standard "open" before they got this boondoggle. What would be the ramifications of this? In Europe, MS OSes would have to be shipped with Third Party implementations? That might be a good thing.
a way to separate all the ungodly noise in the "standard" stupid cube-ville environments where employees are expected to produce 60+ hours worth of creative productivity a week, while in an environment that can sometimes be as loud as a factory floor.
Coffee (or soda) is a great part of the solution to hangovers. No more than 1-2 servings though, coupled with some Vitamin E and a good dose of B-complex, a little starch and fat if you really overdid it, and 15 minutes later, you start feeling human again.
Slashdot Mirror
I could agree with this statement. However, let's keep in mind that Pixar was in the middle of several productions, and everyone knows you don't rip your underpinnings out and replace them wholesale during the middle of a project. Additionally, they moved from SGI boxes to Linux boxes, and now to G5s. Each move about 18 months apart. This would be about the viable life time of high end graphics workstations. I recall as well that Panther made some serious improvements in various areas, and may have finally pushed the performance realm over the edge where the G5 was a better fit over generic Linux boxes.
After all, with Jobs as CEO of both companies, why wouldn't Apple be used for Pixar's needs, especially if they're capable? An american kiritsu?
I don't see this as big news. It would be big news, if, say, they moved to a linux distribution (considering that Jobs is CEO of both Pixar and Apple, and linux could be seen as a competitor to Apple). This is nothing more than free publicity for apple, and probably an "at-cost" transaction for Pixar for new hardware and software.
sometimes businesses give things away in order to generate goodwill, in order to be given preferential treatment (hopefully) in future dealings. Or, in this case, as an underhanded means of creating the impression that one business supports the idealogy of another business - after all, they "own" the matter in question, do they not?
To me, this is more a case of egg on the face of CA than anything else. Their quick response put to rest any speculation that they supported SCO's position.
I read USC 17 106, and it specifically states that the owner has exclusive rights to "create copies" and to " to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending".
To me, I see no restriction on what can be done with the physical copy once received as part of a distribution. There is no restriction on ownership of said copy. USC 17 109 explicitly states this, although to me this appears redundant. Distribution is not equal to transfer of ownership, although transfer of ownership can be part of a distribution. Publication is considered distribution. However, public display is not considered distribution (USC 17 101)
NT has a security model, it's predeccessor did not. However, IIRC, NT's security model was abrogated to the single user model, as initially MS conceived of it as a single simultaneous user being logged in. (Multiple user acounts, but only single user login) Running services with different security settings based on user permissions does not make for multiple simultaneous users in my book. (Then again, to be fair, running a 386/486 with NT 3.1 was almost unbearable even with only a single user logged in.)
Defining it as what it's not, which is what I did, and, btw, restricts it only to the broadest category of copyright (i.e., what you cannot do) is better than the "changing tests over time" issue that slowly wears away our fair use rights. See the DMCA for a classic case in point.
As for loaning your copy to a friend, nothing prevents that either in my proposal. You didn't create a copy for distribution, nor did you distribute, you passed along. Distribute means more than passing along, at least as far as copyright goes last time I checked. (obligatory IANAL)
Linux is more secure than Windows because Linux started out with a security model. Multiple simultaneous user logins were a criteria from the beginning.
Windows started out as a single user system, then, woah, let's add multiple user capabilities (although only one at a time) and then, woah, let's add multiple simultaneous user access (but still only one log in...and.....well, Citrix finally made multiple user logins viable around 98/99 I think, but a single bad app with a bad GDI call will still BSOD the whole damn system, or used to. And then wait, let's add some "security"
will be box, or some other unknown.
Most people are home and awake between 5pm and 11pm. So, when would most people playing games play them? Could it be? Naah...
Wouldn't something like "I own this copy, I can do whatever I want with it, including making confetti out of it. I may not distribute it." pretty much solve any and all copyright issues? (Other than the RIAA wanting you to pay per play, of course) Since when has copyright equalled something akin to MS's EULA where you can only load it once, on a single piece of hardware, to only be used on that one piece of hardware?
wouldn't you take it as a business? If you're in a contract negotiations, and the other guy says "ok, we're ready to sign the deal, and because we're such nice guys, here's a hundred licenses thrown in just in case you ever want to use it". Do you really think any rational company would ever say "Hey, don't give me something for free!"?
Popups are only a problem for IE browsers. No one else ever sees them, unless they really want to.
I wouldn't say it needs to be free. $20-$30 is fine. Why that price? It seems to be the going rate for software once the newness wears off. BTW, those tens of millions of lines of code could probably be pared down to just a couple of million without all the added widgets and gadgets that MS wedges into the "kernel" in an effort to force an upgrade every year or two. Is there any real reason that the kernel needs to be replaced with a new $100 OS every year or two?
You reap what you sow, and I think MS has made their own bed....
Heck, some people would argue we were farther along when OS/2 was around than today. Until MS broke compatibility with the now infamous 2GB memory request for all its programs from Office 97 onwards and the total backwards incompatibility of Office 97 with previous versions (OS/2 was limited to 512MB max memory for VMs). If an MS app crashed within OS/2, the window would just close. OS/2 didn't care. Not to mention all the other nifty aspects of OS/2: true OO consistent interface, true multi-threading, support for multi-casting, etc. Yes, the PM had some issues, but after having used it extensively, and used all flavors of MS, PM is still years ahead of MS's latest effort, heck, it's years ahead of Longhorn's purported features list.
Next: is windows OO yet? nuff said.
Be: fast, small, fast, consistent, fast...did I mention fast? Ok, it had some short comings too, but it was a good system for what it did do, and it did those exceedingly well.
What do we owe it exactly? The non-standard and now ubiquitous usage of the backslash in path names? The 640KB memory barrier and memory segmentation (that may finally go away as the last DOS based OS dissappears from common usage)? MS Basic (shipped with every early copy I can remember, and then GW Basic, because MS Basic blew major chunks)?
I'd say that any of the non (MS Q)DOS based systems would have been a major improvement over DOS, and several were available (CPM comes to mind immediately, although I do recall 1 or 2 others existing at the time).
About the only thing we can thank MS for are the universal understanding that computers are fallible (via the ubiquitous BSOD) and that everything should work the MS defacto standard way: CUE92 anyone? IMAP? HTML?
I'm a current dish customer. I've been waiting for HD DVR systems to come out. Dish just did, wants over $1000 for it. DirectTV is coming out in another month or so. Dish also restricts any deals to new customers, guess they think once in, always in.
We'll they're right about one thing, once you've used a DVR, you'll always want one (total freedom to do whatever you want over being locked into your TV broadcasters schedule is you want to see something does that). However, they're by no means the only game in town for DVRs, and if they don't wise up soon, they may soon be less at least 1 customer, as I'm currently looking at HTPCs to replace my Dish PVR system for HD reception (just a simple addition of about $200 to my extra PC, and off air HD broadcasts will be taken care of).
in a kinder, more gentle way. Instead of causing huge pain in reformed criminals when they hear music, you can now just give them "corrective shocks" for the misbehaving brain segment! Next, we'll all be stepping in lock-step....
If you really want to know, at this time I prefer a split control executive/legislative branches, and preferably even have the two houses of the legislature split. In truth, I'd prefer more parties, after thinking about this a bit, because the current situation leaves us with little choice, as you mention. Of these two desires, splitting party control between the executive and legislative branches seems the most likely possibility. It would most likely guarantee that neither party has its will enforced on the entire populace, since both parties seem a little out of touch with said populace. (my own impression)
Got some news for you, College books were very expensive 20 years ago, too. Many weren't resellable for a variety of reasons, new editions, omg, they changed books for the next semester, whatever. My general cost at the time for college books was a minimum of $50 per class, and that was for used books as well (ok - Racquetball PE book was only $11;). My most expensive useless book was a continuum mechanics book in grad school that was a whole 100 pages, cost me $89, and we sort of used it over a 4 week period.
Skimming over this particular story's comments and the linked story of overpriced books thread, I only came across one session that in today's $s showed a single class being expensive - a $300 set of books for a single class. Halve that at least for inflation effects over 20 years, and it's $150 max, in 1984 $s. Note the above statement about 1 $89 book used for less than 4 weeks in a 15 week course, and realize books are actually cheaper today, on average, than 20 years ago.
Tuition, however, is another story. In 1983, I paid $3/semester hour.
It's called, come on now, repeat with me:
"A Monopoly"
I'd be more than happy if they removed that POS (IE) from the OS. But, then again, their inclusion of it is finally pushing me off of MS products. I personally hate the fact that I cannot have multiple versions of the browser running on a single machine (but why would anyone want to do that? you ask: *development*). That is only 1 reason among many for disliking IE's "integration" into the OS. Others would be security, new bugs in previously predictable programs, new nifty effects on OS stability, etc.
So, thanks to MS for their latest security patch I actually installed that not only addressed the security issue in question, but also totally fubar'ed my then current mail client. It has finally given me the incentive to get off my lazy but and start using the alternatives I've been looking at full time.
when you consider that MS codec was chosen as the new stadard for HD DVDs, and MS had to truly make the standard "open" before they got this boondoggle. What would be the ramifications of this? In Europe, MS OSes would have to be shipped with Third Party implementations? That might be a good thing.
HD DVD are not available yet.... but, they're talking about them already. Check out stories on Blu-ray, and MS HD DVD Codec or DVD Forum approves new DVD standard
a way to separate all the ungodly noise in the "standard" stupid cube-ville environments where employees are expected to produce 60+ hours worth of creative productivity a week, while in an environment that can sometimes be as loud as a factory floor.
Coffee (or soda) is a great part of the solution to hangovers. No more than 1-2 servings though, coupled with some Vitamin E and a good dose of B-complex, a little starch and fat if you really overdid it, and 15 minutes later, you start feeling human again.