You're entirely correct, in that there are definitely "honest" uses for the mod chip. And that I don't know the exact motives of the sellers.
But by and large, the mod chip likely uses pirated code from an existing chip off the Xbox board. I would be truly amazed, if the developers reverse engineered the needed chip, using completely legitimate means, completely "black box/clean room" etc. And the mod chip wouldn't be nearly as viable as a commercial product if it wasn't designed to allow playing pirated games.
If you had the skill to build your own chip that does everything the exisiting one does, in a clean room way, you could just as easily leave the copy protection code intact, and still make it capable of running Linux I bet. And you'd have a much better legal leg to stand on, in the process.
In paragraph 5, he talks about MS getting the Xbox mod chip pulled off the market. No mention of Linux at all.
In paragraphs 9-10 he talks about Valve selling Counter-Strike, which was created after the Halflife engine was released source (aka an open toolset).
In the second half of paragraph 10, he claims that MS allowing Counter-Strike on the Xbox, is some sort of validation by MS of the Mod community.
MS selling Counter-strike on the XBox, is selling a product. Nothing more. Not deeper political meaning at all. Just merchants selling a packaged good.
With regards to Microsoft, he's comparing selling a legitimate product, that was created using tools that were opened by the developer. To selling a chip, that likely uses copyrighted code in the chip, that's primarily designed to allow pirating of games for the Xbox.
Given the crappy jobs outlook in the Bay Area lately. At least there's one less person that you'll EVER have to worry about competing again, for a job. Any job.
I sure as hell wouldn't trust this bozo behind a register at McD's after all.
He's complaining about bandwidth being wasted on the airwaves . And his example (and the follow-on example from SomeoneGotMyNick are both Cable-only channels. I would LOVE an explanation how one relates to the other.
As long as you're purchasing more than 5 units for a "starter" purchase, you can get corporate licensed product. That's 5 total units, across multiple sku's if so desired. So 3 Office, and 3 Windows, and you're already there. And corporate product doesn't require activation at all.
Nobody is forcing you to upgrade. But at the same time, if there was no market in improving the product, MS would just let it die off. And in that case there wouldn't be support for it either. Just try and find patches for MS Bob.
As I said. ALL consumer products have a finite life span. Computer based products moreso than any other. And sooner or later, you have to either upgrade, or live with a static, unsupported product.
Enough customers do want added features, that product revs are inevitable.
And as the codebase moves forwards, eventually older versions of it are going to become sufficiently arcane that nobody continues to understand them, etc. It's just the nature of business, that they can't possibly support all products forever. Not even when it comes to vulnerabilities. I'm sure that you could dig up vulnerabilities in other 5 year old applications, and odds are, most/all of those vendors either aren't supporting the product anymore. Or they simply don't exist anymore at all.
Just ring up IBM, and ask them for bugfixes for SmarSuite 97. Good luck.
It's the nature of the beast, that eventually support WILL die off for old products. That's the case with almost any industry. And the computer industry prides itself in moving further, and faster than any other industry in history. Part of moving fast, is the danger of getting left behind.
At some point a vendor has a reasonable right to drop support for a product. There is no way they could afford to support with patches etc. Every product released has a "life span" and face it. Office 97 is WELL past it's expected life span. It's 5+ years old, and 2 full versions back now.
If you want code that's open to updates forever, go with open source. No vendor in the commercial software markets will support products once they have reached "end of life" status.
No matter what ill will the average/. user bears towards Microsoft, you can't possibly say that they are idiots.
And starting to charge for hotfixes, and obvious security holes in the OS would be an act of complete idiocy.
I have a feeling that whatever security initiatives MS is working on, certainly aren't aimed at hte average home user. There's no money in it. MS makes it's wad off corporate licensing. Where they don't have to worry about retailers, or packages, etc. The home user is an important market to them. But it's not what put Bill on top of the Forbes 400.
It's ridiculous to draw conclusions from a sample of 2 data points.
Especially when the second data point, has a beginning, but no fixed end yet. You really don't know anything about the length of the second time period.
So in reality you're taking a single observable fact, the length of the historic ice age, and extrapolating wildly from that single point of data.
Completely meaningless conclusions are all you can draw from a single point of data.
I have at least 500,000 in stock and have used at least 250,000 in models that I have sold over the past few years. and there are (a few) people with more than I.
pecifically, if I consume too much sugar too quickly it puts me to sleep
Pretty simple reason for this. You take on a load of sugar like this, and your body freaks out. Your pancreas goes into overdrive, and dumps massive amounts of insulin into your bloodstream. Very quickly, all the sugar in your bloodstream will get picked up by other cells, and your blood sugar will crater. Once that happens, you're a zombie.
The surge in your blood sugar, causes the crater effect. A more moderate intake won't be nearly as extreme on the downside.
Both charges are entirely at the discretion of the seller. Ebay is merely a marketplace, it doesn't set the terms of sale, at all.
And my point was, that when you're selling something for 15k, it just seems cheesy, to squeeze an extra couple hundred out of someone for shipping and packing.
He's selling a bunch of sheets of wood, with some switches bolted on. And some pretty artistic stuff. I can't imagine why anyone would want this. But then ppl will buy anything, apparently.
Slashdot Mirror
You're entirely correct, in that there are definitely "honest" uses for the mod chip. And that I don't know the exact motives of the sellers.
But by and large, the mod chip likely uses pirated code from an existing chip off the Xbox board. I would be truly amazed, if the developers reverse engineered the needed chip, using completely legitimate means, completely "black box/clean room" etc. And the mod chip wouldn't be nearly as viable as a commercial product if it wasn't designed to allow playing pirated games.
If you had the skill to build your own chip that does everything the exisiting one does, in a clean room way, you could just as easily leave the copy protection code intact, and still make it capable of running Linux I bet. And you'd have a much better legal leg to stand on, in the process.
In paragraph 5, he talks about MS getting the Xbox mod chip pulled off the market. No mention of Linux at all.
In paragraphs 9-10 he talks about Valve selling Counter-Strike, which was created after the Halflife engine was released source (aka an open toolset).
In the second half of paragraph 10, he claims that MS allowing Counter-Strike on the Xbox, is some sort of validation by MS of the Mod community.
MS selling Counter-strike on the XBox, is selling a product. Nothing more. Not deeper political meaning at all. Just merchants selling a packaged good.
counterpoints himself, saying that MS appears to support the mod market, by selling CounterStrike.
There's a world of difference between a legitimate commercial product that is produced using open toolsets. And a hacked illegitimate product.
With regards to Microsoft, he's comparing selling a legitimate product, that was created using tools that were opened by the developer. To selling a chip, that likely uses copyrighted code in the chip, that's primarily designed to allow pirating of games for the Xbox.
Make that "wont EVER" or NEVER as you see fit.
Given the crappy jobs outlook in the Bay Area lately. At least there's one less person that you'll EVER have to worry about competing again, for a job. Any job.
I sure as hell wouldn't trust this bozo behind a register at McD's after all.
is that you can't slam Creative for "stealing" Apples innovation, when Apple was far from the first to market.
Right there in the specs, that it plays .wav files as well.
At least with regard to the iPOD, Apple was late to the game. Archos had products on the market LONG before Apple released the iPod.
Keep clinging to the fantasy, that everyone wants to be as innovative as Steve tho.
How is targeting P2P networks that are used to extensively trade in copyrighted materials, "declaring war on your own customers"?
And how is asking to be paid for transmission rights in a similar way to how broadcast radio pays for those rights, "Silencing Internet Radio"?
He's complaining about bandwidth being wasted on the airwaves . And his example (and the follow-on example from SomeoneGotMyNick are both Cable-only channels. I would LOVE an explanation how one relates to the other.
get support on 7.5? Or did your innocent, pure "hardware" comapny end-of-life that product too?
That's is absolutely an option.
As long as you're purchasing more than 5 units for a "starter" purchase, you can get corporate licensed product. That's 5 total units, across multiple sku's if so desired. So 3 Office, and 3 Windows, and you're already there. And corporate product doesn't require activation at all.
Nobody is forcing you to upgrade. But at the same time, if there was no market in improving the product, MS would just let it die off. And in that case there wouldn't be support for it either. Just try and find patches for MS Bob.
As I said. ALL consumer products have a finite life span. Computer based products moreso than any other. And sooner or later, you have to either upgrade, or live with a static, unsupported product.
Enough customers do want added features, that product revs are inevitable.
And as the codebase moves forwards, eventually older versions of it are going to become sufficiently arcane that nobody continues to understand them, etc. It's just the nature of business, that they can't possibly support all products forever. Not even when it comes to vulnerabilities. I'm sure that you could dig up vulnerabilities in other 5 year old applications, and odds are, most/all of those vendors either aren't supporting the product anymore. Or they simply don't exist anymore at all.
Just ring up IBM, and ask them for bugfixes for SmarSuite 97. Good luck.
It's the nature of the beast, that eventually support WILL die off for old products. That's the case with almost any industry. And the computer industry prides itself in moving further, and faster than any other industry in history. Part of moving fast, is the danger of getting left behind.
At some point a vendor has a reasonable right to drop support for a product. There is no way they could afford to support with patches etc. Every product released has a "life span" and face it. Office 97 is WELL past it's expected life span. It's 5+ years old, and 2 full versions back now.
If you want code that's open to updates forever, go with open source. No vendor in the commercial software markets will support products once they have reached "end of life" status.
No matter what ill will the average /. user bears towards Microsoft, you can't possibly say that they are idiots.
And starting to charge for hotfixes, and obvious security holes in the OS would be an act of complete idiocy.
I have a feeling that whatever security initiatives MS is working on, certainly aren't aimed at hte average home user. There's no money in it. MS makes it's wad off corporate licensing. Where they don't have to worry about retailers, or packages, etc. The home user is an important market to them. But it's not what put Bill on top of the Forbes 400.
I've never paid for a patch. They are all freely downloadable from their support site currently.
It's ridiculous to draw conclusions from a sample of 2 data points.
Especially when the second data point, has a beginning, but no fixed end yet. You really don't know anything about the length of the second time period.
So in reality you're taking a single observable fact, the length of the historic ice age, and extrapolating wildly from that single point of data.
Completely meaningless conclusions are all you can draw from a single point of data.
According to Eric...
I have at least 500,000 in stock and have used at least 250,000 in models that I have sold over the past few years. and there are (a few) people with more than I.
pecifically, if I consume too much sugar too quickly it puts me to sleep
Pretty simple reason for this. You take on a load of sugar like this, and your body freaks out. Your pancreas goes into overdrive, and dumps massive amounts of insulin into your bloodstream. Very quickly, all the sugar in your bloodstream will get picked up by other cells, and your blood sugar will crater. Once that happens, you're a zombie.
The surge in your blood sugar, causes the crater effect. A more moderate intake won't be nearly as extreme on the downside.
Both charges are entirely at the discretion of the seller. Ebay is merely a marketplace, it doesn't set the terms of sale, at all.
And my point was, that when you're selling something for 15k, it just seems cheesy, to squeeze an extra couple hundred out of someone for shipping and packing.
He's selling a bunch of sheets of wood, with some switches bolted on. And some pretty artistic stuff. I can't imagine why anyone would want this. But then ppl will buy anything, apparently.
The parts are already packed. But he'll charge you $350 for packing anyhow.
And he wants to charge shipping on it as well.
I suppose with an opening bid of 15k, a couple hundred extra gets to be chump change for the buyer. Assuming anyone ever bids on it.