I was pokeing fun at the fact that Microsoft appears to have a case against Lindows (at least in some countries), ergo they must also be claiming the trademark "Windows" for themselves, not just "Microsoft Windows".
Oh? What makes you think the situation is fragile?
I do not see the patent process being reformed any time soon. Corporations (the chief source of frivolous patents) are greedy, and can afford many lobbyists.
Ok, fine, fine, perhaps it is just what the doctor ordered. But ONLY if it touches down dead center between China, India, and most of the Middle East;)
I think the article got this wrong. If you read the Anandtech Report, they believe it is going to be an Opteron-ish number scheme, not an AthlonXP-ish one.
Quote from the report:
News broke earlier today that Intel will most likely change its current "Megahertz" strategy in favor of a more subdued "Model Name" approach. This does not necessarily mean Intel will change its processors to a PR rating, like "3000+". Rather, the new model system sounds very familiar to AMD's Opteron approach, with three or four digit numbers replacing the product name.
For example, I have about ten 128mb PC100 DIMMs lying around. I'd love to stick them on some kind of PCI card to make a ramdisk, but I have no idea where to go about getting such hardware... google's results are useless, they're all links to *SOFTWARE* ramdisks that use main memory =(
2) Read on, he qualifies his statement further. As someone who uses both XP and Linux about equally, I believe he is correct about this.
It is important to note however that (largely due to its OSS nature) Linux is more customizable for particular security/stability needs, which means that if you *need* maximum stability Linux has more to offer than, say, Windows 2003 server. However if you are comparing a desktop Linux distro to XP, they are about equal stability-wise.
Another important consideration is that whenever possible Linux users typically do not run userland programs as root, whereas the majority of Windows XP installations are single-user and default to root-like privileges.
I cannot comment on *BSD stability as compared to XP, but there are so few *BSD desktops that the point is moot.
Slashdot Mirror
Trademarks are relative. Someone can have a trademark on e.g. Goldfish (the crackers), but they don't own the trademark wrt actual live fish.
Wordperfect came before Word. And Wordperfect is one word AFAIK.
Ami is too small for anyone to give a shit.
X Windows... I dunno, but I'm sure there must be a good reason for it to be a valid name.
I was pokeing fun at the fact that Microsoft appears to have a case against Lindows (at least in some countries), ergo they must also be claiming the trademark "Windows" for themselves, not just "Microsoft Windows".
> Microsoft has "Microsoft Windows" and "Microsoft Word." They don't have just "Windows" or just "Word."
So according to you it should be ok for me to trademark something "Lindows", right, since they don't own "Windows" ?
Though it's not like Zilla ever owned the trademarks to 'Phoenix' and 'Firebird' in the first place.
Good rule of thumb: do not uninstall anything with 'lib' in it. Odds are it is a 'library', which means it is used by other programs!
> That's why you should always RTFA.
Yes, because:
Internal Server Error
Process limit exceeded for uid 11363.
is sooo informative
you have to remove the space
Oh? What makes you think the situation is fragile?
I do not see the patent process being reformed any time soon. Corporations (the chief source of frivolous patents) are greedy, and can afford many lobbyists.
actually its a joke taken straight from a book called "the devil's dictionary"
As games go, Latency is public enemy #1.
Gridcomputing has horrible latency.
> I generally loath the idea of gridcomputing, but rendering is one of the areas it is good at.
Yes, but not real time rendering!
Ok, fine, fine, perhaps it is just what the doctor ordered. But ONLY if it touches down dead center between China, India, and most of the Middle East ;)
> So an asteroid could actually be the solution to these serious problems! I like your thinking.
Isn't that a bit like curing the disease by killing the patient?
</pulaski>
I think the article got this wrong. If you read the Anandtech Report, they believe it is going to be an Opteron-ish number scheme, not an AthlonXP-ish one.
Quote from the report:
News broke earlier today that Intel will most likely change its current "Megahertz" strategy in favor of a more subdued "Model Name" approach. This does not necessarily mean Intel will change its processors to a PR rating, like "3000+". Rather, the new model system sounds very familiar to AMD's Opteron approach, with three or four digit numbers replacing the product name.
I thought they were opening a new terawatt plant or something.
> I figured it would be funny because Linux distros make constant releases while microsoft delays and delays and delays.
And when MS does finally release people complain about forced upgrades.
no thanks
Yeah, and there are about 3 billion softwares out there that will do exactly the same thing.
The whole point is I do *not* want to use main RAM memory. I want a hardware solution, but not $1000 one.
My fairly top-of-the-line motherboard cost me $120. A P4 2.8 was around $180, and two sticks of 512MB PC3200 ran for a little over 100 appiece.
Thats almost a whole system for half the price of a measly PCI ramdrive!
There has to be a cheaper way....
Hmm, well thats at least $500 for 1GB... not very cost effective. My idea was to find a good use for old DIMMs...
I'd be willing to try something like that RocketDrive, but my budget is only a few hundred dollars.
Where can I buy a *small* ramdisk, on the cheap?
For example, I have about ten 128mb PC100 DIMMs lying around. I'd love to stick them on some kind of PCI card to make a ramdisk, but I have no idea where to go about getting such hardware... google's results are useless, they're all links to *SOFTWARE* ramdisks that use main memory =(
1) No one cares.
2) Read on, he qualifies his statement further. As someone who uses both XP and Linux about equally, I believe he is correct about this.
It is important to note however that (largely due to its OSS nature) Linux is more customizable for particular security/stability needs, which means that if you *need* maximum stability Linux has more to offer than, say, Windows 2003 server. However if you are comparing a desktop Linux distro to XP, they are about equal stability-wise.
Another important consideration is that whenever possible Linux users typically do not run userland programs as root, whereas the majority of Windows XP installations are single-user and default to root-like privileges.
I cannot comment on *BSD stability as compared to XP, but there are so few *BSD desktops that the point is moot.
to me it looks more like a camel
Sad that I first heard about this story over here...
It was only modded +1 Interesting when I replied and regardless, I do not think it's funny.