300dpi You fail to understand that PPI (not dpi) is quite different than the resolution of a printing device. Where did you get the magical 300 DPI number? Even if 300PPI came from Fujitsu they are probably the last company to mention the LPI of their production equipment.
Like most "Common Knowledge," you are automatically accepting everything everyone around you says. If you asked, "Where did that belief come from?" you will find nearly all digital imaging beliefs are based on rumors, press releases and magazines who have been pumped full of convenient half-truths to sell products.
Please, take a great deal of time to establish the facts regarding digital imaging and it's translation into the analog world. In the end, there will be a whole lot less to talk about and you won't be so poorly informed.
That drive me crazy about digital photography enthusiasts:
Superior Sensors: DSLRs typically use a sensor that is approximately the same dimensions as an APS film negative (22.7 x 15.1 mm). In contrast, the 2/3" sensor size of an 8 Megapixel digicam is dramatically smaller, about the size of the tip of your pinky (8.8 x 6.6 mm). The larger sensor translates directly to higher image quality in terms of detail, color depth, and dynamic range. In most instances, no one will notice the difference. What's the line resolution on the average Fujistu photo processor that prints digital to photo paper? What file formats do they print from again?
Less Noise: This is at least in part a result of the larger sensor size mentioned above, however it is significant enough to warrant getting its very own bullet point. With your typical digicam, you will get noticeable noise which is detrimental to image quality at pretty much anything above the lowest possible ISO setting. Contrast that with your typical modern DSLR, where you can actually make acceptable prints even at some of the highest ISO settings.
Noise shmoize. No one will notice.
Please, enjoy your new toys but don't try to justify them for technical reasons to your SO. You just want one and that's fine.
Which ones I can't get to right now, but the attitude is common.
1. If you are not following politics, then how would you -ever- know if your representatives did something you did not agree with. 2. It's a good bet your Representatives are going to do things you disagree with. Again, since you don't follow politics, I'm not sure how it is you will know. 3. It took me about an hour last night to check my understanding of the candidates/issues and then make voting notes. Your favorite search engine makes it easy.
It's 1:45 PST, so pretty much everywhere in the U.S., your polls should be open and you have an hour to get your facts straight on the issues and candidates in your area.
Many people have fought and died for over the last 200+ years so that YOU have the priviledge of participating in our democracy. There is no excuse. Get informed and Go vote.
Microsoft is basically saying "If you want to run your ASP.NET app with open source software then Novell is your only choice"
The first step is Embracing. Which they've done with the intention of starving every distro but SUSE's AND destroy the LAMP stack at the same time.
Next comes Extending which will look and sound great to just about everyone including the DOJ who stopped paying attention 6 years ago. AND the LAMP stack becomes less impressive because MS has a foothold to smash the stack apart with.
The final step is Extinguish. Which they've made easy because they've narrowed Linux popularity to SUSE and litigate the remaining distros making any money into bankruptcy.
What is more depressing is that allowing the monopoly to continue, it affects sysadmins like me who don't want to be dependent on a single platform for my job and economic welfare.
After over a decade of this behavior from MS, I am astounded you can't see the obvious. I'm equally astounded this comment was modded insightful. (sigh...)
And when this story was brought up a few days ago, (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/03 /2024206) most comments were doubtful that MS would do such a thing.
MS will simply drag a very visible company selling linux-based software (or two or three) into court and bankrupt them with legal expenses. (Obviously not IBM) Innovative entrepreneurs will surely stop after the litigation begins. MS will continue to raise the price of their products with consumers having no other options. They are after all, a price-maker and can sell at almost any price with no repercussions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
Please provide an alternative (likely) scenario if you disagree. I'd like to consider it.
It's very clear that consumers of all kinds (home/office/enterprise) don't actually want an open marketplace for computer software and hardware where innovation is the norm.
Those in IT who have chosen to go along with MS only have themselves to blame when they look around in 3-5 years and there is less work at much lower wages as a result of an MS monopoly.
The author is vaguely correct, so it sounds good and very comforting.
The most compelling reason why users will switch is because Linux/BSD desktop will have an application that this guy needs.
At the end of the article the writer claims he'll set up a linux file server. Which is what this guy needs and MS won't give you one when you purchase a desktop from them. (please don't split hairs with me on this one. XP is not a file server.)
As all linux users know, it will install easily, he'll figure out the way things work in the distro of his choice and it will be all good. Because it's linux, he'll start adding things to it and pretty soon it'll be doing other things really well. Meanwhile MS will be tightening the handcuffs on his new vista machine. And pretty soon Linux will be doing even more and the desktop will be even better.
Right now, Linux is working it's way through the enterprise pretty anonymously and media people get to say bad things about it because they can and most enterprises don't want the specter of IP litigation. The usefulness of Linux and the Vista handcuffs will drive many more users to it, the litigation bombs will drop and there will be too many people too invested in it to -not- go to battle.
The submitter is a little -too- optimistic when it comes to historic analysis.
The decades of television and film that are quite simply gone/i> because no one, not even the mega-corps that made some of the stuff wanted to keep them around is an excellent example. What television/movies are still around may not be accesible because the storage media may not be playable for whatever reason.
The wikipedia has the same problems. Maybe not right this minute, but very soon.
Establishing facts 100 years from now will be just as difficult, if not more so because fewer and fewer things are being printed.
1. It's a trap! 2. Embrace (today) Extend (tomorrow) and Extinguish (next year) 3. There's going to be a whole lot more newsgroup traffic from MS support phone jockies from whatever developing country they live in this year. 4. MS says "All your corporate monies belong to us!". 5. Redhat should be renamed DeadHat.
Good thing I'm on Debian Etch. Which has been running beautifully despite the "testing" moniker.
In May of this year when I predicted Vista is going the way of the set top box Matt replied:
No rational person thinks this, but suppose anyway that that is our secret plan, and that we're going to come up with some scheme whereby apps can't run unless they're magically signed or some other scheme.
Guess what - we already have that, in a few forms even (i.e. SAFER, SRP, etc), and the majority of people don't use it, and don't want to, and even if we did have it, there will still need to be a box that says "run anyway".
The context in which that comment was made:...You are teaching them (end users) to: 1. click okay and let the chips fall where they may. 2. turn the PC into a DRM'd set-top box. We all know you can't teach users anything they don't -really- want to know, so I believe you are paving the way for option 2 with Longwait.
The DRM noose around the average user's neck is being sold like a nice, new necktie. The 32-bit version of Vista will be dropped ASAP in favor of 64-bit locked-by-microsoft-only version. This in turn kills the 32-bit processor.
Then it is only a matter of tightening the noose.
So what? Well, there is no market mechanism for loosening the noose. Therefore, the price of loosening the noose around your neck is made by Microsoft. (A price maker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Coercive_mon opoly)
If you value your personal freedom, you will switch to something freer, then you will tell your friends and help them to do the same. Perhaps a Linux or BSD desktop is a good start.
Sadly, the price will be right though, so most users won't know or care.
Today's lesson: Monopolies and Oligopolies are bad for consumers.
I work for a company that runs their application in a clustered windows shop. The cluster is active passive for highest availability. Microsoft and "high availability" is the greatest contradiction. Ever.
Every once in a while, we max the two dual-cores out on the server. So a quad core should help us avoid those maxed-out periods.
I don't know anything about windows cluster, is there a way to add more servers as processing power in this environment?
Don't forget the microsoft branded hardware being made in..... China.
Either said MS Exec is posturing (likely) or the individual is having a morality attack. If it's the latter, then I'd say his career is not looking so good at Microsoft.
In practice, it's not what makes people switch. They will switch when there is an overwhelming need for something that is not provided by their current PC.
Otherwise, they don't switch.
Despite Apple's temporarily high visibility (pre vista media onslaught) these days, they know from experience getting people to switch even -if- you have a beautiful desktop and good advertising marketing budgets is tough.
This is one more step toward owning a computer you no longer control.
It's not about end-user encryption, it's about the OS using encryption in some form to eliminate your personal freedoms.
The price will be right though, so most users won't know or care.
The DRM noose around the average user's neck is being sold like a nice, new necktie. Most users will have one in 3-5 years. Then it is only a matter of tightening the noose. If you want it loosened, pay and pay some more.
If you value your personal freedom, you will switch to something freer, then you will tell your friends and help them to do the same. Perhaps a Linux or BSD desktop is a good start.
As much as they will beat this feature to death over the next few months, it will only deter the least sophisticated methods. Most of which are already history.
Meanwhile "web 2.0" applications will suffer phishing attacks anyway because the 2.0 complexity offers so many new ways to do bad things.
Today myspace, tomorrow your web 2.0 bank? Google 2.0 application?
I'm not saying progress is bad. But there's no penalty/liability for writing insecure web 2.0 apps.
Since both companies are publicly traded, it's easy to see what the people who are paid the big buck$ to carefully evaluate the future of both companies because 10's (100's?) of millions of dollars are riding on it have decided about the future of both companies.
I'd say the big-money decision makers have declared Oracle the winner in this one. RedHat's a dead man walking. Meanwhile, microsoft is unchanged over the same 12 month period.
Slashdot Mirror
300dpi
You fail to understand that PPI (not dpi) is quite different than the resolution of a printing device. Where did you get the magical 300 DPI number? Even if 300PPI came from Fujitsu they are probably the last company to mention the LPI of their production equipment.
Like most "Common Knowledge," you are automatically accepting everything everyone around you says. If you asked, "Where did that belief come from?" you will find nearly all digital imaging beliefs are based on rumors, press releases and magazines who have been pumped full of convenient half-truths to sell products.
Please, take a great deal of time to establish the facts regarding digital imaging and it's translation into the analog world. In the end, there will be a whole lot less to talk about and you won't be so poorly informed.
This is what the GIMP is for.
Flame on!
That drive me crazy about digital photography enthusiasts:
Superior Sensors: DSLRs typically use a sensor that is approximately the same dimensions as an APS film negative (22.7 x 15.1 mm). In contrast, the 2/3" sensor size of an 8 Megapixel digicam is dramatically smaller, about the size of the tip of your pinky (8.8 x 6.6 mm). The larger sensor translates directly to higher image quality in terms of detail, color depth, and dynamic range.
In most instances, no one will notice the difference. What's the line resolution on the average Fujistu photo processor that prints digital to photo paper? What file formats do they print from again?
Less Noise: This is at least in part a result of the larger sensor size mentioned above, however it is significant enough to warrant getting its very own bullet point. With your typical digicam, you will get noticeable noise which is detrimental to image quality at pretty much anything above the lowest possible ISO setting. Contrast that with your typical modern DSLR, where you can actually make acceptable prints even at some of the highest ISO settings.
Noise shmoize. No one will notice.
Please, enjoy your new toys but don't try to justify them for technical reasons to your SO. You just want one and that's fine.
Those handcuffs Microsoft are selling will look pretty good. The price will be right so no one will notice.
/ 1435204)
But then, as the handcuffs start to tighten when MS demands more and more in license costs then what? Where do enterprises go in 3-5 years?
You won't be able to switch to linux because MS will have Embraced/Extended/Extinguished it. (as mentioned here: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/07
If you value your freedom, then you will switch OS's. Now. Mac/BSD/Linux are three to consider.
Which ones I can't get to right now, but the attitude is common.
1. If you are not following politics, then how would you -ever- know if your representatives did something you did not agree with.
2. It's a good bet your Representatives are going to do things you disagree with. Again, since you don't follow politics, I'm not sure how it is you will know.
3. It took me about an hour last night to check my understanding of the candidates/issues and then make voting notes. Your favorite search engine makes it easy.
It's 1:45 PST, so pretty much everywhere in the U.S., your polls should be open and you have an hour to get your facts straight on the issues and candidates in your area.
Many people have fought and died for over the last 200+ years so that YOU have the priviledge of participating in our democracy. There is no excuse. Get informed and Go vote.
Microsoft is basically saying "If you want to run your ASP.NET app with open source software then Novell is your only choice"
The first step is Embracing. Which they've done with the intention of starving every distro but SUSE's AND destroy the LAMP stack at the same time.
Next comes Extending which will look and sound great to just about everyone including the DOJ who stopped paying attention 6 years ago. AND the LAMP stack becomes less impressive because MS has a foothold to smash the stack apart with.
The final step is Extinguish. Which they've made easy because they've narrowed Linux popularity to SUSE and litigate the remaining distros making any money into bankruptcy.
What is more depressing is that allowing the monopoly to continue, it affects sysadmins like me who don't want to be dependent on a single platform for my job and economic welfare.
After over a decade of this behavior from MS, I am astounded you can't see the obvious. I'm equally astounded this comment was modded insightful. (sigh...)
And when this story was brought up a few days ago, (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/03 /2024206) most comments were doubtful that MS would do such a thing.
MS will simply drag a very visible company selling linux-based software (or two or three) into court and bankrupt them with legal expenses. (Obviously not IBM) Innovative entrepreneurs will surely stop after the litigation begins. MS will continue to raise the price of their products with consumers having no other options. They are after all, a price-maker and can sell at almost any price with no repercussions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
Please provide an alternative (likely) scenario if you disagree. I'd like to consider it.
It's very clear that consumers of all kinds (home/office/enterprise) don't actually want an open marketplace for computer software and hardware where innovation is the norm.
Those in IT who have chosen to go along with MS only have themselves to blame when they look around in 3-5 years and there is less work at much lower wages as a result of an MS monopoly.
You fail to understand that "Plays For Sure" and all the OEM suckers that bought into it were simply a part of MS's larger experiment.
Zune is, practically speaking, a DRM 2.0 for MS and entertainment mega-corps.
Which goes to show you how much MS actually values companies using their platform in 2006.
Anything that grows the NDS/Netware line is good for Novell. Anything that grows .Net is good for MS.
1. So, suddenly after years of competing directly with Novell, they are "giving an inch" to Novell in the battle for corporate customers?
2. I'm all for win-win situations, but how many deals does microsoft make where they don't eat the other party alive?
Please, show me some examples.
can just sue people for patent infringement at will
You fail to understand is that's exactly how it works in many american industries. The sole purpose is to eliminate competition. Legally of course.
In this case, it's happened once with SCO. What makes you so certain it won't happen again?
This is SOP for anyone re-distributing anything made in hollywood.
Nothing to see here, please move along.
The author is vaguely correct, so it sounds good and very comforting.
The most compelling reason why users will switch is because Linux/BSD desktop will have an application that this guy needs.
At the end of the article the writer claims he'll set up a linux file server. Which is what this guy needs and MS won't give you one when you purchase a desktop from them. (please don't split hairs with me on this one. XP is not a file server.)
As all linux users know, it will install easily, he'll figure out the way things work in the distro of his choice and it will be all good. Because it's linux, he'll start adding things to it and pretty soon it'll be doing other things really well. Meanwhile MS will be tightening the handcuffs on his new vista machine. And pretty soon Linux will be doing even more and the desktop will be even better.
Right now, Linux is working it's way through the enterprise pretty anonymously and media people get to say bad things about it because they can and most enterprises don't want the specter of IP litigation. The usefulness of Linux and the Vista handcuffs will drive many more users to it, the litigation bombs will drop and there will be too many people too invested in it to -not- go to battle.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi
Linux is somewhere between ingoring and laughing.
The EULA and DRM is still like a pair of handcuffs and only Microsoft has the key.
The price will be right, so most consumers won't care until those handcuffs start getting too tight around the wrist.
If you value your freedom, you will switch to a different OS. BSD and Linux are two options.
The submitter is a little -too- optimistic when it comes to historic analysis.
The decades of television and film that are quite simply gone/i> because no one, not even the mega-corps that made some of the stuff wanted to keep them around is an excellent example. What television/movies are still around may not be accesible because the storage media may not be playable for whatever reason.
The wikipedia has the same problems. Maybe not right this minute, but very soon.
Establishing facts 100 years from now will be just as difficult, if not more so because fewer and fewer things are being printed.
1. It's a trap!
2. Embrace (today) Extend (tomorrow) and Extinguish (next year)
3. There's going to be a whole lot more newsgroup traffic from MS support phone jockies from whatever developing country they live in this year.
4. MS says "All your corporate monies belong to us!".
5. Redhat should be renamed DeadHat.
Good thing I'm on Debian Etch. Which has been running beautifully despite the "testing" moniker.
In May of this year when I predicted Vista is going the way of the set top box Matt replied:
...You are teaching them (end users) to:
4 07574
No rational person thinks this, but suppose anyway that that is our secret plan, and that we're going to come up with some scheme whereby apps can't run unless they're magically signed or some other scheme.
Guess what - we already have that, in a few forms even (i.e. SAFER, SRP, etc), and the majority of people don't use it, and don't want to, and even if we did have it, there will still need to be a box that says "run anyway".
The context in which that comment was made:
1. click okay and let the chips fall where they may.
2. turn the PC into a DRM'd set-top box.
We all know you can't teach users anything they don't -really- want to know, so I believe you are paving the way for option 2 with Longwait.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=186700&cid=15
Matt's snarky comments aside, the new EULA is yet another step forward with a 64-bit locked kernel coming in the set top box plan.
If you value your personal freedom, please consider an alternative OS. Perhaps Linux or BSD may work for you.
Around end-user's necks.
n opoly)
The DRM noose around the average user's neck is being sold like a nice, new necktie. The 32-bit version of Vista will be dropped ASAP in favor of 64-bit locked-by-microsoft-only version. This in turn kills the 32-bit processor.
Then it is only a matter of tightening the noose.
So what? Well, there is no market mechanism for loosening the noose. Therefore, the price of loosening the noose around your neck is made by Microsoft. (A price maker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Coercive_mo
If you value your personal freedom, you will switch to something freer, then you will tell your friends and help them to do the same. Perhaps a Linux or BSD desktop is a good start.
Sadly, the price will be right though, so most users won't know or care.
Today's lesson: Monopolies and Oligopolies are bad for consumers.
Why?
I work for a company that runs their application in a clustered windows shop. The cluster is active passive for highest availability. Microsoft and "high availability" is the greatest contradiction. Ever.
Every once in a while, we max the two dual-cores out on the server. So a quad core should help us avoid those maxed-out periods.
I don't know anything about windows cluster, is there a way to add more servers as processing power in this environment?
Don't forget the microsoft branded hardware being made in..... China.
Either said MS Exec is posturing (likely) or the individual is having a morality attack. If it's the latter, then I'd say his career is not looking so good at Microsoft.
In principal, I agree.
In practice, it's not what makes people switch. They will switch when there is an overwhelming need for something that is not provided by their current PC.
Otherwise, they don't switch.
Despite Apple's temporarily high visibility (pre vista media onslaught) these days, they know from experience getting people to switch even -if- you have a beautiful desktop and good advertising marketing budgets is tough.
This is one more step toward owning a computer you no longer control.
n opoly)
It's not about end-user encryption, it's about the OS using encryption in some form to eliminate your personal freedoms.
The price will be right though, so most users won't know or care.
The DRM noose around the average user's neck is being sold like a nice, new necktie. Most users will have one in 3-5 years. Then it is only a matter of tightening the noose. If you want it loosened, pay and pay some more.
Finally, there is no market mechanism so the price of loosening the noose around your neck is made by the producer. (A price maker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Coercive_mo
If you value your personal freedom, you will switch to something freer, then you will tell your friends and help them to do the same. Perhaps a Linux or BSD desktop is a good start.
Thorstein Veblen followers may agree that this phone is merely an entry point.
/.'ers like me.
It's not desirable on it's own outside of a few
As much as they will beat this feature to death over the next few months, it will only deter the least sophisticated methods. Most of which are already history.
Meanwhile "web 2.0" applications will suffer phishing attacks anyway because the 2.0 complexity offers so many new ways to do bad things.
Today myspace, tomorrow your web 2.0 bank? Google 2.0 application?
I'm not saying progress is bad. But there's no penalty/liability for writing insecure web 2.0 apps.
Good work.
Don't tell anyone because you'll be helping the terrists.
Since both companies are publicly traded, it's easy to see what the people who are paid the big buck$ to carefully evaluate the future of both companies because 10's (100's?) of millions of dollars are riding on it have decided about the future of both companies.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=RHAT&t=1y. RedHat's 1 year price trend.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=ORCL&t=1y Oracle's 1 year price trend.
I'd say the big-money decision makers have declared Oracle the winner in this one. RedHat's a dead man walking. Meanwhile, microsoft is unchanged over the same 12 month period.
Money talks people.