I am a crypto-novice, but this is something I've always wondered about... Does it really make any difference to have username & password & secret word & (whatever) over just using a password? Isn't a name and password just really a single password that you enter in two steps? Can someone explain why name & password is mathematically different? Are two 64-bit keys different than a single 128-bit one?
Your hardware point is a valid one. Sony already knew how to sell consumer electronics. It remains to be seen how MS will handle this. They have the brand name and the $$$ to jump right into the channel. But do they have the marketing experience? Time will tell.
I don't agree with your second point at all, though. You can do anything in a demo. There is pretty much no connection at all between the quality of the demos and what you can see in a game. Remember the PSX demos with thousands of lit, textured, shaded triangles bouncing around the screen?
I don't know if the/. readership is not familar with the console scene or what, but all of these arguments people are making against MS entering the console market were made against Sony before the Playstation came out.
Reality Check #1: Sony was considered that big, massive, evil, money-grubbing consumer electronics company that didn't know anything about video games. It was predicted that they would release a bunch of crap, and that Sega would kick their butt.
In the end, Sony won. They had $$$ in marketing, of course, but a big factor in why they won was that it is easier to develop for the PSX. Saturn was a nightmare to program, and Sega was a pain to work with. PSX was much easier to program, and Sony was much more flexible. As a result, PSX got the titles.
IMO, MS has the two things it really needs to win: major $$$ to shove it down everyone's throats, and an EXCELLENT development story. Their development story will be MUCH nicer than Sony's.
Reality check #2: For all of those people who are saying "oh man, there is no way an AMD/GeForce can compete with the massive power of the PS2" - PLEASE! Stop believing Sony's press releases. For comparison, go back and read the pre-release "specs" of the PSX or the Saturn or the Jaguar or the N64 or ANY of the consoles. Here is a little hint: The PS2 will be slower than a high-end PC is today. Did you catch that? SLOWER.
The most likely failure case for MS is that they are simply unable to get it together in the "squash-the-PS2" timeframe.
Jesus, why do people complain about voter apathy? If you don't care about the issues, please - don't vote!
It is like open-source vs. closed source. A government voted into power by people who don't care is just like software written by people who don't care: bloated, stupid, and inefficient!
Paraphrase of actual conversation with Tim O'Reily:
Tim:blah blah, software should be free blah blah Me: Why do you charge for books, then? Tim: Books are different; they cost money to print. Me: Why don't you offer online versions for free, then, and only charge for the printed ones? Tim: I still have to pay the authors. Me: Why can't they work for free, like you want programmers to? Tim: Authors would never do that. Me: Would you have a problem with me repackaging a bunch of your books into my own book and selling it for money? Tim: They are copyrighted. Me: Why don't you "open source" them? Tim: Authors would never do that.
It is like Linus going on about Sun's community license... geesh, what a hypocrite - going off on them, while working for the most closed-lipped company in The Valley. Why isn't he releasing the Transmeta details for the greater good? I mean, come on, surely the community at large could produce a better CPU than some proprietary house, right? What is so unique about software?
Personally, I think money will destroy the Linux effort just like it did the home computing industry in the mid-1970s. No one cares about making money when no one else is making it, either. But when you work 3 years and get squat and I work one week and sell your stuff for $1 million, suddenly you start to care. It is just human nature.
MS is irrelevant to Linux. Who gives a crap if anyone besides us uses it? I couldn't care less about MS, RedHat, or any of the other big companies. Go away, all of you! Let me hack in peace!!
Has anyone located an email address for these fools so that we in the community at large can educate them? Perhaps they are not malicious, and are rather just clueless as to how the web works.
Keep in mind that a company can open source SOME of their products without open sourcing the others. That said, there are two main reasons for MS to open source some of their products.
First, most Software is innovative at first, but at a certain point, it becomes a commodity. For example, Windows comes with a note pad, a calculator, a painting program, and various other little accessories. All of these applications used to be innovative, and could be sold for money. Now, they are just expected features. As long as they are expected features, why should MS continue to spend any money on them? They could open source them, and then incorporate the latest and greatest in the next version of their OS. I would guess that the first things MS would open source are things like Paint that are considered commodity items. This might also apply to individual operating system features. This is almost no risk for the company, because most of the code would be highly windows-specific anyway
Second, there may be technology which requires a large, diverse development effort but for which there is no profit model (other than helping to sell windows itself). DirectX comes to mind. By going open source, MS could focus their developers on the nitty-gritty interaction with Win2k kernel parts and allow the developers at large to work on drivers, higher-level API features, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
The PRC is among those huge institutions that have signed up for Windows 2000. It is a done deal.
I am a crypto-novice, but this is something I've always wondered about... Does it really make any difference to have username & password & secret word & (whatever) over just using a password? Isn't a name and password just really a single password that you enter in two steps? Can someone explain why name & password is mathematically different? Are two 64-bit keys different than a single 128-bit one?
Thanks!
Your hardware point is a valid one. Sony already knew how to sell consumer electronics. It remains to be seen how MS will handle this. They have the brand name and the $$$ to jump right into the channel. But do they have the marketing experience? Time will tell.
I don't agree with your second point at all, though. You can do anything in a demo. There is pretty much no connection at all between the quality of the demos and what you can see in a game. Remember the PSX demos with thousands of lit, textured, shaded triangles bouncing around the screen?
I don't know if the /. readership is not familar with the console scene or what, but all of these arguments people are making against MS entering the console market were made against Sony before the Playstation came out.
Reality Check #1: Sony was considered that big, massive, evil, money-grubbing consumer electronics company that didn't know anything about video games. It was predicted that they would release a bunch of crap, and that Sega would kick their butt.
In the end, Sony won. They had $$$ in marketing, of course, but a big factor in why they won was that it is easier to develop for the PSX. Saturn was a nightmare to program, and Sega was a pain to work with. PSX was much easier to program, and Sony was much more flexible. As a result, PSX got the titles.
IMO, MS has the two things it really needs to win: major $$$ to shove it down everyone's throats, and an EXCELLENT development story. Their development story will be MUCH nicer than Sony's.
Reality check #2: For all of those people who are saying "oh man, there is no way an AMD/GeForce can compete with the massive power of the PS2" - PLEASE! Stop believing Sony's press releases. For comparison, go back and read the pre-release "specs" of the PSX or the Saturn or the Jaguar or the N64 or ANY of the consoles. Here is a little hint: The PS2 will be slower than a high-end PC is today. Did you catch that? SLOWER.
The most likely failure case for MS is that they are simply unable to get it together in the "squash-the-PS2" timeframe.
Jesus, why do people complain about voter apathy? If you don't care about the issues, please - don't vote!
It is like open-source vs. closed source. A government voted into power by people who don't care is just like software written by people who don't care: bloated, stupid, and inefficient!
Tim: blah blah, software should be free blah blah
Me: Why do you charge for books, then?
Tim: Books are different; they cost money to print.
Me: Why don't you offer online versions for free, then, and only charge for the printed ones?
Tim: I still have to pay the authors.
Me: Why can't they work for free, like you want programmers to?
Tim: Authors would never do that.
Me: Would you have a problem with me repackaging a bunch of your books into my own book and selling it for money?
Tim: They are copyrighted.
Me: Why don't you "open source" them?
Tim: Authors would never do that.
It is like Linus going on about Sun's community license... geesh, what a hypocrite - going off on them, while working for the most closed-lipped company in The Valley. Why isn't he releasing the Transmeta details for the greater good? I mean, come on, surely the community at large could produce a better CPU than some proprietary house, right? What is so unique about software?
Personally, I think money will destroy the Linux effort just like it did the home computing industry in the mid-1970s. No one cares about making money when no one else is making it, either. But when you work 3 years and get squat and I work one week and sell your stuff for $1 million, suddenly you start to care. It is just human nature.
MS is irrelevant to Linux. Who gives a crap if anyone besides us uses it? I couldn't care less about MS, RedHat, or any of the other big companies. Go away, all of you! Let me hack in peace!!
Whew! I feel much better now!
Has anyone located an email address for these fools so that we in the community at large can educate them? Perhaps they are not malicious, and are rather just clueless as to how the web works.
First, most Software is innovative at first, but at a certain point, it becomes a commodity. For example, Windows comes with a note pad, a calculator, a painting program, and various other little accessories. All of these applications used to be innovative, and could be sold for money. Now, they are just expected features. As long as they are expected features, why should MS continue to spend any money on them? They could open source them, and then incorporate the latest and greatest in the next version of their OS. I would guess that the first things MS would open source are things like Paint that are considered commodity items. This might also apply to individual operating system features. This is almost no risk for the company, because most of the code would be highly windows-specific anyway
Second, there may be technology which requires a large, diverse development effort but for which there is no profit model (other than helping to sell windows itself). DirectX comes to mind. By going open source, MS could focus their developers on the nitty-gritty interaction with Win2k kernel parts and allow the developers at large to work on drivers, higher-level API features, etc.
Just my $0.02. - Strict/9