AppleTalk services are gone. Vista gets first class status, otherwise, Macs work, even the remote data client works (with screen size limitations). The rest is there. You expected perhaps, that all that talk about SMB2 was just joshing? When the SAMBA team gets the code info that Microsoft gave it a couple of months ago (search samba and microsoft for the correct hit) and churns it into SAMBA 4, then the rest of the world will be roughly as fast-and-featured as Vista clients. Even XP goes slower because of its older stacks and SMB1. They had to do something to give Vista a boost in sales, I guess.
Google has made a lot of money from ad sales and web search. That's one big fat market segment, without a doubt. But no one uses google for comporate data processing. They do, however (and for better or worse), use SAP. In the services sector, which Yahoo and Google aren't in, SAP is big. That's not to say that they're brilliant but they do make money and are a 'best of breed' (doesn't speak well of the breed, but that's another post).
Yahoo is real estate. SAP is a running, producing engine. I think SAP is a better idea. Leave Yahoo alone, I'd say to Microsoft. Stick with what you do best: tying up clientele with proprietary, always-needs-integration stuff.
You're entitled to your opinion, but not your 'facts'.
There are hundreds of print magazines that hit the dust, and good damn riddance to a lot of them. Mostly, they were goob publishers trying to make a buck of the computer 'waves' and dot-com rush. They were run by journalists that couldn't understand tech. Fortunately, what remains is a pretty decent core these days. There are only a few sycophants that remain, and they're easy to spot.
Every once in a while, even Microsoft does something right. You can hate them, or be opposed to their business model. I prefer open source and FOSS myself. But they have a right to survive if they behave legally. They have constraints placed on them now because they didn't behave legally.
Microsoft spends a lot of money to get third party opinions published; so does every major tech company in the world. This makes them no different. They DO NOT CONTROL the vast majority of journalists out there, and 'Pundits/Press and Moderators' are largely (but not all) independent thinkers. Just because you may not agree with them doesn't put them into Microsoft's pocket. It's not all about 'the marketing'.
My take on the newly 'open' Microsoft is that what they're doing so far is harmless. They approve a GPL license (e.g. non-commercial license model), not a BSD one. That's their choice, and those of Microsoft's customers. If you fight them, you play into their hands-- they're experts at 'winning'. If you want to do right by yourself, your community, and your employers and dependents, continue to make choices based on your own observations of the merits and the return on assets. If it points to FOSS, good. If not, don't be blinded by ignoring factual merits.
Most everything that Microsoft does unfortunately can become suspect. In this case, we haven't seen but the tip of the iceberg. If Microsoft sues the FOSS community over its patents, living hell will ensue, you can be assured of that.
Disinformation helps no body; sorry to get all Ausbergers on you. The inherent evil of the telcos will one day do them in. It will take a while, but they'll self-destruct because they're evil, and in denial about their inability to transition from their monopoly legacy. Just wait. Don't lie. Let them do themselves in. They're doing a great job right now with bad designs, and anti-customer policies.
Consider that websites ought to be hosted in non-residential, commercial facilities. Broadband does nothing for this at all. Broadband in its current form is a consumer entertainment component. Add in home office, remote access, VLANs with VoIP, and you might start to have benefits from 'telecommuter' sorts of profiles.
Otherwise, I want to download Linux distros but once a month, or less. I might consume media a few times a month. You can't download a dozen eggs, and pound of butter, otherwise. People's patience also don't figure in here. We're looking for real jobs. Allied or in Tech, or not. There aren't jobs that are by-products of broadband, except in broadband. I which this were not true.
A few lucky economic development wins doesn't constitute rapid job growth. I'm glad people shop online and glad they save fuel. But so far, no one has shown direct, only indirect benefits..... not job creation (save for nebulous 'tech' jobs) or anything else than infrastructure maintenance positions (truck rollers, moles, linemen, and so forth). It would be nice if there could be an easier quid pro quo data set that motivated communities (and not to get in bed with telcos without titanium strings attached to the deals). Look at the problems with muni-wifi, the failures of WiMAX, and the sheer dominance of the telcos. Community networking is in a sad state, and this study, sadly, doesn't help.
I know of one organization that has an old-fashioned color TV degaussing tool that erased their tapes very nicely. I'm sure there's an equivalent method for DRAM. Perhaps the heel of a good boot.
I usually use Mac portables, but the ultra-lightweight, while a decided gift, also means reduced functionality. I don't want to load my stuff via a wireless connnection; it's slow and ties up the resources used.
The Lenovo when compared to the MB Air SSD version comes out nearly the same in price as might be expected, and for good Cost-of-Goods reasons.
But if you want to use a Fujitsu Lifebook, you can get a tablet-based notebook, airline usable, all the ports and guts, and a reasonably decent (Lenovo and Apple are known for theirs, sorry Dell users) and run whatever you want if it's Windows or Linux Something.
It's very cute and sexy, and if that's why you buy Apple, you'll be happy. Still, it's a stunted machine, and the Lenovo, while pretty cool, is pretty expensive, too. The Lifebook ain't cheap, but it's a contender here.
If it's done under open source, then non-commercial might well apply as various forms of commercial licenses aren't commercial in the strictest sense anyway. You could charge for media, but not the code. However, if you try and BSD-license some of it-- giving it commercial purposes and intent, then I can see by the licensing stricture that it wouldn't be allowed.
That doesn't mean I'm not very suspicious, rather non-commercial is the basis of GPL licensing, generally speaking.
No, this is the problem; even with a ground, there's a charge held. DRAM isn't a charged-coupled device (CCD), instead, the charge drain doesn't work quickly, allowing DRAM to be read for a short while until things go to zero. The only protection you can give (see other posts) is to forcibly write a charge to all locations, or a sufficient number to scramble the eggs. All DRAM will eventually have cell decay to an unreadable point when the vcc is dropped. Several aforementioned schemes tell how to keep vcc on (capacitors, batteries, who knows-- maybe a DRAM fuel cell-- give your DRAM a drink). SRAM, photo-sensitive RAM, flash, and other ROM-ish RAM devices 'hold' a charge somewhat indefinitely depending on the technology in the device. DRAM eventually loses a detectable charge.
IF they get a hit, then the explosion may or may not get blasted into space where it could do damage. Very small particles in space make a very big impact at say, 23,000mph, or faster still. Although we have great resolution on observing space junk in tiny sizes, we're doing the essentially the same thing that the Chinese did when they shot down an orbiter.
Azimuth, zenith, and charge value will dictate what happens. Might be a clean kill. Might not. I wouldn't take the Army's word for much, however, they're the ones that goosed it in the first place.
First, we must destroy it lest someone else (like the Chinese, because that's where it looks like it's headed if they're launching in Hawaii) get the item, from a US- controlled range. But they'll get it on a pass where the visibility is especially good (think signal to noise ratio on a moon-lit night) and kablooey.
And for decades, maybe centuries, we'll be picking the shards out of the sky, let they be run into by some of our more expensive remaining (and possibly working stuff). Egads. Another one in the drink. I wonder how many things might have been substituted that really matter.
If you RTFA, you'll see that there are lots of wireless holes. It's a constant battle to keep things patched-- when the vendors elect to issue one. It's also a company that's done a lot of work, and is now looking for more work to do. It reminds me a bit of Symantec's Macintosh threat PR.
This doesn't excuse the rotten wireless security we have today, it nonetheless doesn't provide models for improvements or other advice or recommendations on how security can be improved.
D has some how become HD. Whether interlaced or progressive, the actual broadcast spec is mostly matter of the age of the content, as most content isn't 'remixed' to make it sexier in a nicer format. Indeed, some actors/actresses look just a bit too detailed in 1080p/i. You should see them in Japanese HighDef; something will force change as the detail is perhaps unrealistic.
HD is now synonymous with digital broadcast. HighDef just presumes a raster that exceeds NTSC's 525x400/30fps. Most of what is now broadcast in D-HD does this. The two-dozen+ formats supported by ATSC tuners will get exercised, in terms of stream identification/field size change. I think PBS exercises them the most in the US with format changes.
I worry also that there will be interlaced data (already done in some locales) that has no standard of protection/integrity. With huge data rates, and the temptations to multiplex data into rasters, various schemes will/have evolved to get that data. But there's no security for it, no mandate to use various headers to identify the data, just the same madness we have now. And closed captioning needs to be worked out, too.
Let's see. How many US consumers still have NTSC tuners, even those going back to the old rotary tuners? 15M you say? Nothing to worry about. Yes, you can go and buy a down-verter ATSC->NTSC analog box with your coupon. No worries. The other 120M sets can just get good old NTSC from cable, right?
And I know that most of the broadcast stations use HD signals, some 480, some 720, some 1080. Some even use nifty multiplexed data on them right now.
HD? Silent? Puhhleeeze. The transition has been known about for years and years. Nonetheless, digital transmission will be here soon, and there will be a stupid stink because 1) the networks and broadcasters loafed around for years arguing various transmission standards and 2) Washington Inc doesn't want to take blame, so it's been vewwy vewwy quiet up on Capitol Hill, rather than a broad-based, serious media campaign to prepare consumers.
I appreciate your explanations, but your facts obscure other difficulties with analog RF transmission.
Look at root-hertz noise, aperiodic broadband burst noise, pure signal/noise accuracy, slewing distortion (including various phase delay distortions). The ear can hear these things.
None of these exist in a CDMA conversation-- and all of them have an effect on AMPS and TDMA.
It's nice to have dedicated, POTS-like bandwidth-- a channelization of the available spectra that doesn't exist in CDMA in a meaningful way. As for GSM, it's not quite as nice. And trust me, I have no Qualcomm stock. And I'm about to ditch my last Motorola phone-- the RAZR software was written by a monkey.
I had a nice Uniden 3W carry-around with a rubber duckie antenna. I got out when no one else got out and used a magmount antenna on the roof of my vehicle to get the best possible reception on the road. I thought that AMPS quality was pretty darn good.
But the theory doesn't follow the facts. A Sprint guy came in with his PCS phone. Two calls, and I was convinced. I dropped Sprint later because of their fraudlent-like business practices. We disagree on the actual quality, but I also lose anonymity by explaining how I come to this observation. CDMA is fine; for voice distinction, it's superior even to GSM. I have both phones right now; Verizon RAZR for US, and SonyEricsson T610 for Euro use. Both of them beat that Uniden phone, which goes dead next week, as does its account, thankfully.
While there's something to that, a lot of the quality issue had with who had how many cells on what topology. The radial difference also had other difficulties, like multipath tower switch offs to dead air, broadband RF interference and noise cancellation, as well as cell switch-back/hand-off problems from hell. Higher freqs diminish weather cut-through, have an affect on antenna gain, and yet EV-DO (and predecessor 1xRTT) could do data so much faster than any analog system that there is just no comparison (except where 1xRTT behaves like an ISDN line). Stationery connections could be good for voice on analog, but mobility issues are simply not the same.
I feel for anyone that gets left behind (think HD in about a year and two days), but even with analogies like what NTSC vs HD TV is, dropping analog is a wise move. For those left behind, I feel for you. Call your carrier and scream--- like you should've done three years ago when the termination date was proposed.
I've tried T-Mobile's GSM, and simply put, in the US in the urban areas I travel, it stank, uniformly. I have friends with new iPhones that bemoan the day they plunked down lots of $$$ on them specifically because of AT&T's coverage problems, and the fact that AT&T is only now starting to roll out sufficient digital coverage to catch the larger moaners.
Certainly there's an immense geography that isn't sufficiently covered by digital/CDMA or GSM. I wonder if fiber will get there first; you can never tell with those crazy carriers.
Slashdot Mirror
AppleTalk services are gone. Vista gets first class status, otherwise, Macs work, even the remote data client works (with screen size limitations). The rest is there. You expected perhaps, that all that talk about SMB2 was just joshing? When the SAMBA team gets the code info that Microsoft gave it a couple of months ago (search samba and microsoft for the correct hit) and churns it into SAMBA 4, then the rest of the world will be roughly as fast-and-featured as Vista clients. Even XP goes slower because of its older stacks and SMB1. They had to do something to give Vista a boost in sales, I guess.
I would strongly disagree.
Google has made a lot of money from ad sales and web search. That's one big fat market segment, without a doubt. But no one uses google for comporate data processing. They do, however (and for better or worse), use SAP. In the services sector, which Yahoo and Google aren't in, SAP is big. That's not to say that they're brilliant but they do make money and are a 'best of breed' (doesn't speak well of the breed, but that's another post).
Yahoo is real estate. SAP is a running, producing engine. I think SAP is a better idea. Leave Yahoo alone, I'd say to Microsoft. Stick with what you do best: tying up clientele with proprietary, always-needs-integration stuff.
You're entitled to your opinion, but not your 'facts'.
There are hundreds of print magazines that hit the dust, and good damn riddance to a lot of them. Mostly, they were goob publishers trying to make a buck of the computer 'waves' and dot-com rush. They were run by journalists that couldn't understand tech. Fortunately, what remains is a pretty decent core these days. There are only a few sycophants that remain, and they're easy to spot.
Every once in a while, even Microsoft does something right. You can hate them, or be opposed to their business model. I prefer open source and FOSS myself. But they have a right to survive if they behave legally. They have constraints placed on them now because they didn't behave legally.
Microsoft spends a lot of money to get third party opinions published; so does every major tech company in the world. This makes them no different. They DO NOT CONTROL the vast majority of journalists out there, and 'Pundits/Press and Moderators' are largely (but not all) independent thinkers. Just because you may not agree with them doesn't put them into Microsoft's pocket. It's not all about 'the marketing'.
My take on the newly 'open' Microsoft is that what they're doing so far is harmless. They approve a GPL license (e.g. non-commercial license model), not a BSD one. That's their choice, and those of Microsoft's customers. If you fight them, you play into their hands-- they're experts at 'winning'. If you want to do right by yourself, your community, and your employers and dependents, continue to make choices based on your own observations of the merits and the return on assets. If it points to FOSS, good. If not, don't be blinded by ignoring factual merits.
Most everything that Microsoft does unfortunately can become suspect. In this case, we haven't seen but the tip of the iceberg. If Microsoft sues the FOSS community over its patents, living hell will ensue, you can be assured of that.
I wish your link was in the headline, or the topical post. Egads. I suspected as much.
It's our FUD vs theirs!
Disinformation helps no body; sorry to get all Ausbergers on you. The inherent evil of the telcos will one day do them in. It will take a while, but they'll self-destruct because they're evil, and in denial about their inability to transition from their monopoly legacy. Just wait. Don't lie. Let them do themselves in. They're doing a great job right now with bad designs, and anti-customer policies.
Consider that websites ought to be hosted in non-residential, commercial facilities. Broadband does nothing for this at all. Broadband in its current form is a consumer entertainment component. Add in home office, remote access, VLANs with VoIP, and you might start to have benefits from 'telecommuter' sorts of profiles.
Otherwise, I want to download Linux distros but once a month, or less. I might consume media a few times a month. You can't download a dozen eggs, and pound of butter, otherwise. People's patience also don't figure in here. We're looking for real jobs. Allied or in Tech, or not. There aren't jobs that are by-products of broadband, except in broadband. I which this were not true.
My fellow Americans are rather myopic. Most of the rest of the world doesn't exist to them
And yes, the numbers have the smell of bull excrement.
A few lucky economic development wins doesn't constitute rapid job growth. I'm glad people shop online and glad they save fuel. But so far, no one has shown direct, only indirect benefits..... not job creation (save for nebulous 'tech' jobs) or anything else than infrastructure maintenance positions (truck rollers, moles, linemen, and so forth). It would be nice if there could be an easier quid pro quo data set that motivated communities (and not to get in bed with telcos without titanium strings attached to the deals). Look at the problems with muni-wifi, the failures of WiMAX, and the sheer dominance of the telcos. Community networking is in a sad state, and this study, sadly, doesn't help.
Seems a bit stark....
I know of one organization that has an old-fashioned color TV degaussing tool that erased their tapes very nicely. I'm sure there's an equivalent method for DRAM. Perhaps the heel of a good boot.
I usually use Mac portables, but the ultra-lightweight, while a decided gift, also means reduced functionality. I don't want to load my stuff via a wireless connnection; it's slow and ties up the resources used.
The Lenovo when compared to the MB Air SSD version comes out nearly the same in price as might be expected, and for good Cost-of-Goods reasons.
But if you want to use a Fujitsu Lifebook, you can get a tablet-based notebook, airline usable, all the ports and guts, and a reasonably decent (Lenovo and Apple are known for theirs, sorry Dell users) and run whatever you want if it's Windows or Linux Something.
It's very cute and sexy, and if that's why you buy Apple, you'll be happy. Still, it's a stunted machine, and the Lenovo, while pretty cool, is pretty expensive, too. The Lifebook ain't cheap, but it's a contender here.
If it's done under open source, then non-commercial might well apply as various forms of commercial licenses aren't commercial in the strictest sense anyway. You could charge for media, but not the code. However, if you try and BSD-license some of it-- giving it commercial purposes and intent, then I can see by the licensing stricture that it wouldn't be allowed.
That doesn't mean I'm not very suspicious, rather non-commercial is the basis of GPL licensing, generally speaking.
No, this is the problem; even with a ground, there's a charge held. DRAM isn't a charged-coupled device (CCD), instead, the charge drain doesn't work quickly, allowing DRAM to be read for a short while until things go to zero. The only protection you can give (see other posts) is to forcibly write a charge to all locations, or a sufficient number to scramble the eggs. All DRAM will eventually have cell decay to an unreadable point when the vcc is dropped. Several aforementioned schemes tell how to keep vcc on (capacitors, batteries, who knows-- maybe a DRAM fuel cell-- give your DRAM a drink). SRAM, photo-sensitive RAM, flash, and other ROM-ish RAM devices 'hold' a charge somewhat indefinitely depending on the technology in the device. DRAM eventually loses a detectable charge.
Yes.
Now hold down the A and semi-colon keys. We now have a e-Reading. Sorry.
You're right. I had Dr Stangelove in my brain when I wrote that.....
This depends on the azimuth and zenith and charge of the missile used to shoot it 'down'. You're basing your information on unreliable sources.
IF they get a hit, then the explosion may or may not get blasted into space where it could do damage. Very small particles in space make a very big impact at say, 23,000mph, or faster still. Although we have great resolution on observing space junk in tiny sizes, we're doing the essentially the same thing that the Chinese did when they shot down an orbiter.
Azimuth, zenith, and charge value will dictate what happens. Might be a clean kill. Might not. I wouldn't take the Army's word for much, however, they're the ones that goosed it in the first place.
First, we must destroy it lest someone else (like the Chinese, because that's where it looks like it's headed if they're launching in Hawaii) get the item, from a US- controlled range. But they'll get it on a pass where the visibility is especially good (think signal to noise ratio on a moon-lit night) and kablooey.
And for decades, maybe centuries, we'll be picking the shards out of the sky, let they be run into by some of our more expensive remaining (and possibly working stuff). Egads. Another one in the drink. I wonder how many things might have been substituted that really matter.
Oh, wait.
If you RTFA, you'll see that there are lots of wireless holes. It's a constant battle to keep things patched-- when the vendors elect to issue one. It's also a company that's done a lot of work, and is now looking for more work to do. It reminds me a bit of Symantec's Macintosh threat PR.
This doesn't excuse the rotten wireless security we have today, it nonetheless doesn't provide models for improvements or other advice or recommendations on how security can be improved.
D has some how become HD. Whether interlaced or progressive, the actual broadcast spec is mostly matter of the age of the content, as most content isn't 'remixed' to make it sexier in a nicer format. Indeed, some actors/actresses look just a bit too detailed in 1080p/i. You should see them in Japanese HighDef; something will force change as the detail is perhaps unrealistic.
HD is now synonymous with digital broadcast. HighDef just presumes a raster that exceeds NTSC's 525x400/30fps. Most of what is now broadcast in D-HD does this. The two-dozen+ formats supported by ATSC tuners will get exercised, in terms of stream identification/field size change. I think PBS exercises them the most in the US with format changes.
I worry also that there will be interlaced data (already done in some locales) that has no standard of protection/integrity. With huge data rates, and the temptations to multiplex data into rasters, various schemes will/have evolved to get that data. But there's no security for it, no mandate to use various headers to identify the data, just the same madness we have now. And closed captioning needs to be worked out, too.
Let's see. How many US consumers still have NTSC tuners, even those going back to the old rotary tuners? 15M you say? Nothing to worry about. Yes, you can go and buy a down-verter ATSC->NTSC analog box with your coupon. No worries. The other 120M sets can just get good old NTSC from cable, right?
And I know that most of the broadcast stations use HD signals, some 480, some 720, some 1080. Some even use nifty multiplexed data on them right now.
HD? Silent? Puhhleeeze. The transition has been known about for years and years. Nonetheless, digital transmission will be here soon, and there will be a stupid stink because 1) the networks and broadcasters loafed around for years arguing various transmission standards and 2) Washington Inc doesn't want to take blame, so it's been vewwy vewwy quiet up on Capitol Hill, rather than a broad-based, serious media campaign to prepare consumers.
Fie on your sense of falsehood.
I appreciate your explanations, but your facts obscure other difficulties with analog RF transmission.
Look at root-hertz noise, aperiodic broadband burst noise, pure signal/noise accuracy, slewing distortion (including various phase delay distortions). The ear can hear these things.
None of these exist in a CDMA conversation-- and all of them have an effect on AMPS and TDMA.
It's nice to have dedicated, POTS-like bandwidth-- a channelization of the available spectra that doesn't exist in CDMA in a meaningful way. As for GSM, it's not quite as nice. And trust me, I have no Qualcomm stock. And I'm about to ditch my last Motorola phone-- the RAZR software was written by a monkey.
I had a nice Uniden 3W carry-around with a rubber duckie antenna. I got out when no one else got out and used a magmount antenna on the roof of my vehicle to get the best possible reception on the road. I thought that AMPS quality was pretty darn good.
But the theory doesn't follow the facts. A Sprint guy came in with his PCS phone. Two calls, and I was convinced. I dropped Sprint later because of their fraudlent-like business practices. We disagree on the actual quality, but I also lose anonymity by explaining how I come to this observation. CDMA is fine; for voice distinction, it's superior even to GSM. I have both phones right now; Verizon RAZR for US, and SonyEricsson T610 for Euro use. Both of them beat that Uniden phone, which goes dead next week, as does its account, thankfully.
While there's something to that, a lot of the quality issue had with who had how many cells on what topology. The radial difference also had other difficulties, like multipath tower switch offs to dead air, broadband RF interference and noise cancellation, as well as cell switch-back/hand-off problems from hell. Higher freqs diminish weather cut-through, have an affect on antenna gain, and yet EV-DO (and predecessor 1xRTT) could do data so much faster than any analog system that there is just no comparison (except where 1xRTT behaves like an ISDN line). Stationery connections could be good for voice on analog, but mobility issues are simply not the same.
I feel for anyone that gets left behind (think HD in about a year and two days), but even with analogies like what NTSC vs HD TV is, dropping analog is a wise move. For those left behind, I feel for you. Call your carrier and scream--- like you should've done three years ago when the termination date was proposed.
CDMA vs AMPS? No contest.
I've tried T-Mobile's GSM, and simply put, in the US in the urban areas I travel, it stank, uniformly. I have friends with new iPhones that bemoan the day they plunked down lots of $$$ on them specifically because of AT&T's coverage problems, and the fact that AT&T is only now starting to roll out sufficient digital coverage to catch the larger moaners.
Certainly there's an immense geography that isn't sufficiently covered by digital/CDMA or GSM. I wonder if fiber will get there first; you can never tell with those crazy carriers.
Until Tuesday.