The original BIOS was designed by one vendor (IBM). This one will be designed by a committee. So it is hardly likely to be any simpler, especially as the hardware is now more complicated than the original IBM PC. So the implementations of this are hardly likely to be less buggy.
As for documentation, you can get as much of that as you like once you've paid $2500 to the UEFI consortium.
Perhaps the reason is that the EFI webite says that the spec is available to anyone who cares to pay them $2500 and sign an NDA, whereas OpenFirmware is widely documented, so doesn't offer the same opportunity for profit.
You can be sure that this won't record any Sky channels, because they are all encrypted and can only be received with equipment provided by Sky.
It would be relatively easy to record all the Freeview channels at once. You only need one receiver per multiplex, not per channel, then you just record the raw data stream which contains all the channels on that multiplex. IIRC there are only about half a dozen multiplexes. So 6 tuners would be enough to record everything on Freeview.
This was supposed to have been featured at OpenTech 2005, according to their website.
OpenTech 2005 was featured in a Slashdot article a few minutes ago here
Did anyone go to OpenTech and see this thing?
Although... it says there that it will record an entire week, not a month. So maybe that was this one's baby brother.
In South Africa they used to call 5-1/4 inch disks "floppies" and 3-1/2 inch disks "stiffies".
It sort of makes sense, but it gave me a huge amount of amusement when I was there.
Not as funny as the American who used to phone up our office (in England) and announce his name by saying "Hello, I'm Randy", until it was gently explained to him why it was sending the secretary into a fit of giggles every time he called.
The point of the injunction is precisely to prevent that.
The whole idea of injunctions is to criminalize behaviour that would otherwise be perfectly legal. Anyone with access to a sufficiently persuasive lawer can get any behaviour they choose made illegal in this way, albeit for a short time.
With 390000 people going through the system, there's not a hope in hell of a body scanner, or explosive sniffer, or anything being of any use whatsoever. If it were sensitive enough to actually detect anything, the number of false positives from people carrying odd-looking packages, or who had handled chemicals, or whatever, would bring the system to a halt.
And there are hundreds of stations on the system, many of them in outlying areas, and the big central stations have hundreds of turnstiles. The cost of buying and manning enough scanners would be astronomical.
And it would all be useless even it it worked. The trains don't always run underground. A terrorist could just drop a bomb onto the track from a bridge, without going through the scanners at all. Or blow up something else next time.
Something other hardware platforms don't? Like what? Higher price?
You can already get every variation of x86 hardware you could possibly wish for. All that Apple could possibly bring to the party is their desktop environment. Their hardware will be different, but that will just be to lock their buyers into their higher hardware prices.
This shouldn't be modded "funny". It's a much worse design flaw than not having tabbed browing.
If a popup can grab the focus like that, a malicious program that needs user interaction to do its badness could keep on popping up dialogs until it gets lucky and the user just happens to be hitting the "Y" key at the same time.
The license agreement in the article says that competitors must license all their IP rights and also "waive all moral rights".
My understanding of this last phrase is that they give up their right under UK law to be named as the author of the film. So Microsoft could pass off the film as their own production, without mentioning the real author.
Of course it's not theft if you sign your rights away voluntarily.
I knew someone who got a job with the old (pre-privitised) BT. This was back in the day when modems were an expensive rarity, provided by BT at monopoly prices.
When I asked him what his job was, he said "people send us modems that they want to connect to the telephone line; my job is to discover some reason why they can't do it".
He didn't last long in that job, but I suspect many of the people who were doing that job then are still doing the same sort of thing now.
Whereas you just mentioned Hitler, so you're zero steps away from that.
The BSD license allows you to use the code freely. It also allows you to remove that freedom from others, by converting the code into a closed-source product. So it gives you one additional freedom: the right to deny freedom to anyone else.
Obviously, people who want to make use of this
additional freedom are very much in favour of it. Those on the receiving end of proprietory software tend to be less well disposed to giving away this one extra freedom.
Ah, but it's not stealing, is it. The thief has still got all the music, even after you've taken it.
This is the first time in history that we've ever had any valuable goods that could be duplicated for free like this. That's why people are still trying to get their heads round the issues involved.
Must be bloody slow then.
In my experience (and I'm a Java developer), Java on a fairly recent PC with lots of memory runs reasonably fast, so long as you don't try to use Swing, and you don't count the load time in your performance figures.
But Java on anything older than a year or two is pretty well unusable. I can run plenty of C or Python apps on an old 266MHz machine that I use for a web server, but I wouldn't dream of putting Java on it.
Slashdot Mirror
The original BIOS was designed by one vendor (IBM). This one will be designed by a committee. So it is hardly likely to be any simpler, especially as the hardware is now more complicated than the original IBM PC. So the implementations of this are hardly likely to be less buggy.
As for documentation, you can get as much of that as you like once you've paid $2500 to the UEFI consortium.
Perhaps the reason is that the EFI webite says that the spec is available to anyone who cares to pay them $2500 and sign an NDA, whereas OpenFirmware is widely documented, so doesn't offer the same opportunity for profit.
It would be relatively easy to record all the Freeview channels at once. You only need one receiver per multiplex, not per channel, then you just record the raw data stream which contains all the channels on that multiplex. IIRC there are only about half a dozen multiplexes. So 6 tuners would be enough to record everything on Freeview.
OpenTech 2005 was featured in a Slashdot article a few minutes ago here
Did anyone go to OpenTech and see this thing?
Although... it says there that it will record an entire week, not a month. So maybe that was this one's baby brother.
Especially ignoance of spelling.
They don't want to mess with it. They just want the cheapest deal on license costs and support.
So you think the kids shouldn't be shown anything at school that they're not already used to seeing at home? What do you think schools are for, then?
It sort of makes sense, but it gave me a huge amount of amusement when I was there.
Not as funny as the American who used to phone up our office (in England) and announce his name by saying "Hello, I'm Randy", until it was gently explained to him why it was sending the secretary into a fit of giggles every time he called.
I must be an average user, since his server seems to have become invisible too!
The point of the injunction is precisely to prevent that.
The whole idea of injunctions is to criminalize behaviour that would otherwise be perfectly legal. Anyone with access to a sufficiently persuasive lawer can get any behaviour they choose made illegal in this way, albeit for a short time.
And there are hundreds of stations on the system, many of them in outlying areas, and the big central stations have hundreds of turnstiles. The cost of buying and manning enough scanners would be astronomical.
And it would all be useless even it it worked. The trains don't always run underground. A terrorist could just drop a bomb onto the track from a bridge, without going through the scanners at all. Or blow up something else next time.
They aren't real bins (they're an art installation). You can't put rubbish in them. There are going to be signs saying "please don't feed the bins".
But this is on the "real world" side of Reality Checkpoint (a lamppost in the middle of Parkers Piece).
Something other hardware platforms don't? Like what? Higher price?
You can already get every variation of x86 hardware you could possibly wish for. All that Apple could possibly bring to the party is their desktop environment. Their hardware will be different, but that will just be to lock their buyers into their higher hardware prices.
If you want to use the correct unit of measure for us English people, you have to say: it's about half the size of Wales.
This shouldn't be modded "funny". It's a much worse design flaw than not having tabbed browing.
If a popup can grab the focus like that, a malicious program that needs user interaction to do its badness could keep on popping up dialogs until it gets lucky and the user just happens to be hitting the "Y" key at the same time.
But getting a 10-inch diameter cable out of the average spider is proving to be a slight technical problem.
Oh, wait ...
The license agreement in the article says that competitors must license all their IP rights and also "waive all moral rights".
My understanding of this last phrase is that they give up their right under UK law to be named as the author of the film. So Microsoft could pass off the film as their own production, without mentioning the real author.
Of course it's not theft if you sign your rights away voluntarily.
That was Mussolini.
I knew someone who got a job with the old (pre-privitised) BT. This was back in the day when modems were an expensive rarity, provided by BT at monopoly prices.
When I asked him what his job was, he said "people send us modems that they want to connect to the telephone line; my job is to discover some reason why they can't do it".
He didn't last long in that job, but I suspect many of the people who were doing that job then are still doing the same sort of thing now.
The BSD license allows you to use the code freely. It also allows you to remove that freedom from others, by converting the code into a closed-source product. So it gives you one additional freedom: the right to deny freedom to anyone else.
Obviously, people who want to make use of this additional freedom are very much in favour of it. Those on the receiving end of proprietory software tend to be less well disposed to giving away this one extra freedom.
This is the first time in history that we've ever had any valuable goods that could be duplicated for free like this. That's why people are still trying to get their heads round the issues involved.
Must be bloody slow then.
In my experience (and I'm a Java developer), Java on a fairly recent PC with lots of memory runs reasonably fast, so long as you don't try to use Swing, and you don't count the load time in your performance figures.
But Java on anything older than a year or two is pretty well unusable. I can run plenty of C or Python apps on an old 266MHz machine that I use for a web server, but I wouldn't dream of putting Java on it.