It was definitely a thing, in the sense that the technology existed in the U.S. It just never took off.
I used to work for a company that built a Ringback Tone platform for carriers. I thought it was pretty nifty that you could change the ringback tone heard by people calling you, even if I never used the service myself. Thought it was usually used to play popular music, there are probably ways that businesses could have used it for marketing / etc.
Commodore didn't use the index hole or hard sectors.
Commodore's disk format had a variable number of sectors per track. They took advantage of the fact that the outer tracks on the disk are physically longer, and can therefore fit more sectors at the same bit density. Hard sectoring would have been impossible.
This isn't about restoring a JPEG file back into its original RAW format. The information lost from converting RAW to JPEG is gone. There is no way to get that back.
This is about storing JPEG files more efficiently. DropBox is in the business of providing cloud storage, and it is in their best interest to keep their costs as low as possible. The more they can compress data for their customers, the more efficiently they use their infrastructure. Some files such as text documents are easy to compress. Some files such as JPEG files are difficult to compress, especially with lossless algorithms.
For DropBox, this allows them to store the LEP representation of a JPEG file instead of the actual JPEG file. This saves them approximately 22% of their storage needs. They can then decompress it on the fly whenever a user tries to read the original JPEG file, essentially trading savings in storage costs for a bit of extra CPU demand. As long as the compression is lossless and the user sees acceptable performance, there is no user impact.
Depending on the cost of extra CPU cycles vs. the cost of reduced storage, and the relative mix of JPEG files vs. other data files, this could save DropBox quite a bit of money.
I bought a used XBox 360 that unbeknownst to me had been repaired by the previous owner (they did some kind of RROD fix involving washers instead of the X-Brace that holds the heat sink in).
After a few months, it eventually developed the RROD, so I sent it to Microsoft for repair. Prior to sending it to Microsoft, I could play a game for a couple of minutes before the console died and gave me the RRoD.
After they received it, they quickly flagged my work order as an exception for hardware tampering. I was surprised to learn of this, since the seal was intact. Microsoft then sent it back to me, except that now it wasn't even bootable. When I turned it on, the lights would alternate between red and green (half red, half green). The screen showed an E49 error. Basically, it was bricked for being modified.
I don't know what happened while Microsoft had it, but I'm figuring it was one of the following. * The only tampering done to my box was the RRoD repair. Nevertheless, Microsoft plays it safe by nuking any boxes where they detect tampering, as it's possible the DRM has been defeated using an undiscovered new method. Maybe their policy is to nuke boxes whenever they detect tampering? * Possibly my XBox actually had been modded to play pirated games. Somehow it survived several console updates without a console ban, but maybe that was coming eventually. Microsoft nuked it.
In any case, when I explained the situation to them, that I had sent a semi-working XBox 360 to them and got a dead one back, they politely told me to pound sand.
This would be much simpler than using a GeoIP database and trying to play whack-a-mole with VPN providers. I'd be surprised if Netflix hasn't already considered this and decided against it. Usually if a company is not using a technically obvious and simple solution, it is because there is a business reason in the way.
It's possible that content providers want the content controlled by viewing location, rather than the subscriber's billing address. Today, if you are a US subscriber and you visit Canada, Netflix will only show you its Canadian content while you're traveling. Similarly, if your DSL modem's IP address changes and the new one is incorrectly listed as being in the UK, you will see content from the UK instead of the US (ask me how I know this!:) )
If your account were tied to your billing address, it would be very easy to swap your login with friends in other countries to get around the content locks. To prevent this, Netflix would have to make your account work only in your home country, making it impossible to travel with Netflix. That becomes a customer satisfaction issue.
In any case, I don't think Netflix believes there's a foolproof way to prevent content from being viewed outside of its authorized regions, because anybody who understands the problem knows it's impossible to be perfect. However, it's reasonable to make a good faith effort to try, as this is probably required by their licensing agreements. I think that's what Netflix is trying to do here.
You are speaking my language. We've got two teenagers at home that basically live off streaming video and game downloads. The general rule is that when they're awake and home, video is streaming.
On a typical school day, we use about 10 GB of bandwidth. Some days, we use much more -- 20 GB in one day isn't unusual. Our high score is about 35GB in one day.
As for how we use that bandwidth, kids do the darndest things.
Sometimes they'll turn on Netflix for background noise, while they download a game from Steam or XBox Live. To pass the time while that game is downloading, they'll start watching YouTube on their iPad.
Sometimes, they'll listen to a YouTube music video while they shower. Teenagers know nothing of quick showers.
Sometimes they'll watch a YouTube video at bedtime, then fall asleep with it playing. Thanks to YouTube's autoplay feature, they automatically stream YouTube all night. Netflix has something similar, but at least you can disable it on an account-wide basis. I haven't yet found a way to do this on YouTube (especially the XBox 360 or iPad apps).
Once in a while, I download a new Linux distro, VM appliance, or OS update, but compared to our streaming video usage, that's probably a rounding error.
In any case, I am not looking forward to the day Comcast rolls out bandwidth caps in our area. Whatever their cap is, we're going to blow it out of the water (unless we can change some habits!)
This keeps them from closing the doors on Grooveshark, and then immediately starting some new service, say GrooveBarracuda (or selling their software, patents and IP to some other enterprise looking to do the same thing).
Since the record companies now own their IP, anybody who tries to resurrect Grooveshark using the old software would also face charges of patent infringement, trademark infringement, etc (unless they build everything from scratch, which would be a much larger investment).
For the record companies, this helps them avoid future legal battles, and lowers the threat of a similar service emerging.
For Grooveshark, maybe this gave them a better settlement (e.g. lower damages owed to the record labels).
They don't have to issue overt threats for this to be intimidation. It would be similar to them torching his car or leaving some other well-understood method of intimidation. Burning crosses come to mind.
In any case, whoever did this shown that they know where this person lives, and they're willing to break some laws / do property damage in order to silence him. By going after his "internet cable", they are clearly referencing his internet postings / blogging activity. Sure, this doe have the effect of censoring him (at least until the cable provider can fix it), but they're also sending a warning that next time, they might do something more severe.
What's extra nice is that by them not leaving a note, he has nothing to take to the police.
"Then again, how do we know this wasn't purposely put out by an anti-gunner? I hate tossing conspiracy stuff out there, but there's no way to really know."
You're right. It could have been an anti-gun troll, or it could have actually been a pro-gun commenter. From one comment, we can't tell. You'd have to look at their other posts to get a better sense of their motives.
I'm more interested in the community reaction. Did they call him out for giving them a bad image or name? Or did they stay quiet... and if so, why?
I remember there was a thick coax variant of ethernet too (I think called 10 base 5).
I've never used it, but I remember there were AUIs (attachment unit interface) with a vampire tap that would connect your station to the ethernet cable at specific points (where the standing wave from the carrier would be strongest). The points were marked with dots, and you had to be careful to cut the cable in the right places. The vampire tap would drill into the cable until it reached the inner conductor. Your workstation connected to the AUI tap by a DB-15 cable.
Kids these days have no idea what they're missing!
To be honest, I'm not sure how the LTE side works, or how closely it's integrated with the legacy CDMA2000 network (if at all)... if this means the carriers are implementing an EIR as part of their LTE rollouts, then yes, the newer LTE devices would be covered.
Older CDMA2000 subscribers wouldn't be covered (and right now, there are still millions of those, especially in areas where LTE is not yet available).
As long as the carrier knows the ESN / MEID of the CDMA phone is blacklisted, I assume they'd refuse to activate it.
The tricky part is sharing that blacklist across all carriers in some standard (so if a Verizon handset is marked as stolen, Sprint or another CDMA carrier would know not to activate it). With GSM, that shared database is already defined as a standard and widely implemented (though I'm not sure all GSM carriers actually use it).
WCDMA, and iDEN are basically variations of GSM. Traditional GSM phones run on a TDMA air interface... WCDMA is the use of a CDMA air interface to provide GSM service. It is *not* the same thing as CDMA2000, which is traditionally called "CDMA" here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WCDMA#Deployment
The GSM standards define a database called the Equipment Identity Register (EIR), which is what carriers would use to blacklist stolen equipment. GSM network elements already know how to query an EIR to see if a handset is marked as stolen / etc.
CDMA2000 phones have something similar to an IMEI, called a MEID. Unfortunately, the standards used in CDMA2000 networks have no concept of an EIR, let alone any way of querying one. I have no idea how much is involved to retrofit CDMA2000 networks to support an EIR or what components need to be upgraded, but it would definitely include updates to standards, software changes across all equipment manufacturers, and then coordinated deployments across all carriers. It's technically feasible, but I don't see that happening quickly. Remember how long it took operators to adopt number portability in North America?
I was thinking about this the other day as a technical challenge.
Assuming their SMS system handles tens of thousands of texts per second, each of which needs to be tested against this user-definable dictionary of 1600 words, is it even possible for the platform to keep up? Are there sophisticated search / pattern matching algorithms for testing a message against 1600 substrings? I can think of a very naive way to do this, but I'm sure it would not scale.
How would one implement this kind of high-speed pattern matching??
If you have an older unit that needs service, Sony won't railroad you into a newer unit.
I recently sent in a 60GB backward compatible PS3 for repair (wouldn't power on). They gave me the option of a $129 repair, or for $99 I could swap it for one of the newer models instead. The Sony rep left the choice up to me but she definitely understood why I wanted to stick with the older model, in fact almost encouraged me to go that route (I would have anyway).
I paid the $129... they ended up swapping mine for another 60GB backward compatible console. I got my replacement a week after I shipped my old one. The unit I received looked brand new. It was shiny... clean... still had the vinyl cling film. It was a different serial number... but the same model number (CECHA01). It may have been a refurbed unit, but regardless, Sony definitely took care of me.
In what ways is it more complex to administer an email server vs. an SMSC? Have you ever operated an SMSC?
One big difference between email and SMS is the way that messages are delivered to the recipient.
With email, it is up to the client to pull messages from the server periodically. The server doesn't need to worry about the client being unreachable -- if the client is logged in, the POP3 / IMAP transfer is likely to succeed. Thus, the server doesn't need to do anything special to handle retries to millions of clients -- that is all handled client side.
Unlike Email, SMS uses a push model for delivery. The push model minimizes the use of the phone's transmitter, which helps preserve handset battery life. Also, server push allows for immediate delivery of messages (rather than waiting around for the client to log in a few minutes later).
The problem with server push is that it is difficult to scale it to handle thousands of messages per second / millions of oustanding messages, especially when the recipients are often unavailable to receive messages. Sure, a large percentage of SMS messages go through on the first attempt, but definitely not all. There are a number of reasons why SMS delivery might fail (handset powered off, poor signal, overloaded cell site or network, etc).
It is up to the SMSC to implement the retry mechanism. It must handle a large number of queued messages, destined for possibly millions of recipients. The retry mechanism must be effective, minimizing messaging delays. At the same time, it must not be wasteful (SS7 and control channel bandwidth are a finite resource). The carrier may incur SS7 network charges for every delivery attempt, successful or not. In other words, scheduling retries to maximize success, minimize bandwidth demands, and minimize delay is a difficult thing to get right. Blindly retrying everything in the queue every couple of minutes will not fly.
The server push architecture of SMS is one of the main things that makes SMS so much more complex than you seem to think it is. I don't deny that email can be surprisingly complex too, but SMS is far from the simple packet pipe that many people seem to confuse it with.
The DMCA has been (ab)used to limit development of DVD player software, and I am fully aware that the DMCA is being abused six ways 'till Sunday. Lexmark printer cartridges, anybody?
Apple may be abusing it, but they may be technically within the law at the same time. I'm no lawyer or judge obviously.
As for the EULA, again, it really depends on whether the court will allow Apple to enforce the requirement that OSX only run on Apple hardware. If not, that's obviously bad news for Apple.
Finally, how does Psystar distribute the added software with the originals? Do they distribute a separate DVD containing only the added software along with the actual original OSX disc? Do they include a recovery disk? I have no idea... that detail seems quite important.
I don't necessarily take sides, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out in court.
My bad:) Copyrighted, not trade secret. I stand corrected.
I forgot about the assembler listing... that's an interesting way to make clean-room efforts more difficult.
If you actually bought an IBM PC, you would have had the opportunity to read that assembler listing, and therefore you would be "contaminated"
That would certainly make it harder to prove you used a clean-room process when reverse engineering the BIOS. Maybe not impossible, but certainly more tricky.
The sticking point was always the Mac ROMs, since those contained Apple's proprietary / copyrighted code.
Any company could slap a 680x0 chip, some RAM, and other misc. parts onto a motherboard and call it a Mac emulator board... but the Mac ROMs were the tough part, and they were essential.
IIRC, there were Mac emulator boards for the Amiga and Atari ST, but you had to transplant the ROMs yourself (from your old Mac).
Apple did actually license clones at one point, but only for a brief period of time...
But the publisher / author haven't included EULA terms to prevent you from changing your copy of the book and reselling it.
Apple's EULA does restrict you from running OSX on non-Apple hardware. Also, to make that possible, you would have to defeat some technical measures that effectively control access to the protected work (the OSX code that verifies that it's running on Apple hardware). Never mind the morality of EULAs or the DMCA... but those are what distinguish this case from selling a whited-out / modified Harry Potter book.
A while ago, there was a DVD editing company called that ran into problems with this (they are like Netflix, but they rent / sell edited versions of movies). They may have been called Clean Flicks... I can't remember... When selling an edited version of a movie, they would include a legitimately purchased original DVD, but carefully rendered unplayable (possibly by scratching or breaking the disk). This protected them against charges of piracy, however, I believe they still faced other copyright issues.
Apple sold them thousands of copies at full retail, which would mean those copies are subject to the usual EULA for OSX. One of the conditions is that OSX is only licensed for use on Apple-branded hardware.
Additionaly, I'm pretty sure it's full of language preventing you from selling modified copies of OSX (specifically, modified to allow it to run on non-Apple hardware).This also means bypassing a technical means of controlling access to a copyrighted work (DMCA violation).
I don't necessarily love EULAs or the DMCA, but those form the legal framework that Psystar has broken. Hence the lawsuit...
Slashdot Mirror
It was definitely a thing, in the sense that the technology existed in the U.S. It just never took off.
I used to work for a company that built a Ringback Tone platform for carriers. I thought it was pretty nifty that you could change the ringback tone heard by people calling you, even if I never used the service myself. Thought it was usually used to play popular music, there are probably ways that businesses could have used it for marketing / etc.
Alas, it was not a huge seller for us.
Commodore didn't use the index hole or hard sectors.
Commodore's disk format had a variable number of sectors per track. They took advantage of the fact that the outer tracks on the disk are physically longer, and can therefore fit more sectors at the same bit density. Hard sectoring would have been impossible.
This isn't about restoring a JPEG file back into its original RAW format. The information lost from converting RAW to JPEG is gone. There is no way to get that back.
This is about storing JPEG files more efficiently. DropBox is in the business of providing cloud storage, and it is in their best interest to keep their costs as low as possible. The more they can compress data for their customers, the more efficiently they use their infrastructure. Some files such as text documents are easy to compress. Some files such as JPEG files are difficult to compress, especially with lossless algorithms.
For DropBox, this allows them to store the LEP representation of a JPEG file instead of the actual JPEG file. This saves them approximately 22% of their storage needs. They can then decompress it on the fly whenever a user tries to read the original JPEG file, essentially trading savings in storage costs for a bit of extra CPU demand. As long as the compression is lossless and the user sees acceptable performance, there is no user impact.
Depending on the cost of extra CPU cycles vs. the cost of reduced storage, and the relative mix of JPEG files vs. other data files, this could save DropBox quite a bit of money.
Yes, they do.
I bought a used XBox 360 that unbeknownst to me had been repaired by the previous owner (they did some kind of RROD fix involving washers instead of the X-Brace that holds the heat sink in).
After a few months, it eventually developed the RROD, so I sent it to Microsoft for repair. Prior to sending it to Microsoft, I could play a game for a couple of minutes before the console died and gave me the RRoD.
After they received it, they quickly flagged my work order as an exception for hardware tampering. I was surprised to learn of this, since the seal was intact. Microsoft then sent it back to me, except that now it wasn't even bootable. When I turned it on, the lights would alternate between red and green (half red, half green). The screen showed an E49 error. Basically, it was bricked for being modified.
I don't know what happened while Microsoft had it, but I'm figuring it was one of the following.
* The only tampering done to my box was the RRoD repair. Nevertheless, Microsoft plays it safe by nuking any boxes where they detect tampering, as it's possible the DRM has been defeated using an undiscovered new method. Maybe their policy is to nuke boxes whenever they detect tampering?
* Possibly my XBox actually had been modded to play pirated games. Somehow it survived several console updates without a console ban, but maybe that was coming eventually. Microsoft nuked it.
In any case, when I explained the situation to them, that I had sent a semi-working XBox 360 to them and got a dead one back, they politely told me to pound sand.
This would be much simpler than using a GeoIP database and trying to play whack-a-mole with VPN providers. I'd be surprised if Netflix hasn't already considered this and decided against it. Usually if a company is not using a technically obvious and simple solution, it is because there is a business reason in the way.
It's possible that content providers want the content controlled by viewing location, rather than the subscriber's billing address. Today, if you are a US subscriber and you visit Canada, Netflix will only show you its Canadian content while you're traveling. Similarly, if your DSL modem's IP address changes and the new one is incorrectly listed as being in the UK, you will see content from the UK instead of the US (ask me how I know this! :) )
If your account were tied to your billing address, it would be very easy to swap your login with friends in other countries to get around the content locks. To prevent this, Netflix would have to make your account work only in your home country, making it impossible to travel with Netflix. That becomes a customer satisfaction issue.
In any case, I don't think Netflix believes there's a foolproof way to prevent content from being viewed outside of its authorized regions, because anybody who understands the problem knows it's impossible to be perfect. However, it's reasonable to make a good faith effort to try, as this is probably required by their licensing agreements. I think that's what Netflix is trying to do here.
You are speaking my language. We've got two teenagers at home that basically live off streaming video and game downloads. The general rule is that when they're awake and home, video is streaming.
On a typical school day, we use about 10 GB of bandwidth. Some days, we use much more -- 20 GB in one day isn't unusual. Our high score is about 35GB in one day.
As for how we use that bandwidth, kids do the darndest things.
Sometimes they'll turn on Netflix for background noise, while they download a game from Steam or XBox Live. To pass the time while that game is downloading, they'll start watching YouTube on their iPad.
Sometimes, they'll listen to a YouTube music video while they shower. Teenagers know nothing of quick showers.
Sometimes they'll watch a YouTube video at bedtime, then fall asleep with it playing. Thanks to YouTube's autoplay feature, they automatically stream YouTube all night. Netflix has something similar, but at least you can disable it on an account-wide basis. I haven't yet found a way to do this on YouTube (especially the XBox 360 or iPad apps).
Once in a while, I download a new Linux distro, VM appliance, or OS update, but compared to our streaming video usage, that's probably a rounding error.
In any case, I am not looking forward to the day Comcast rolls out bandwidth caps in our area. Whatever their cap is, we're going to blow it out of the water (unless we can change some habits!)
This keeps them from closing the doors on Grooveshark, and then immediately starting some new service, say GrooveBarracuda (or selling their software, patents and IP to some other enterprise looking to do the same thing).
Since the record companies now own their IP, anybody who tries to resurrect Grooveshark using the old software would also face charges of patent infringement, trademark infringement, etc (unless they build everything from scratch, which would be a much larger investment).
For the record companies, this helps them avoid future legal battles, and lowers the threat of a similar service emerging.
For Grooveshark, maybe this gave them a better settlement (e.g. lower damages owed to the record labels).
They don't have to issue overt threats for this to be intimidation. It would be similar to them torching his car or leaving some other well-understood method of intimidation. Burning crosses come to mind.
In any case, whoever did this shown that they know where this person lives, and they're willing to break some laws / do property damage in order to silence him. By going after his "internet cable", they are clearly referencing his internet postings / blogging activity. Sure, this doe have the effect of censoring him (at least until the cable provider can fix it), but they're also sending a warning that next time, they might do something more severe.
What's extra nice is that by them not leaving a note, he has nothing to take to the police.
I think this is more about intimidation than censorship.
By cutting his cable, they may be silencing him temporarily, but more importantly they are sending him a message. "We know where you live."
It's like the butterfly effect but with birds!
"Then again, how do we know this wasn't purposely put out by an anti-gunner? I hate tossing conspiracy stuff out there, but there's no way to really know."
You're right. It could have been an anti-gun troll, or it could have actually been a pro-gun commenter. From one comment, we can't tell. You'd have to look at their other posts to get a better sense of their motives.
I'm more interested in the community reaction. Did they call him out for giving them a bad image or name? Or did they stay quiet... and if so, why?
When the police officers pulled the driver over, they smelled marijuana. That gave them probable cause, which allows them to search without consent.
I remember there was a thick coax variant of ethernet too (I think called 10 base 5).
I've never used it, but I remember there were AUIs (attachment unit interface) with a vampire tap that would connect your station to the ethernet cable at specific points (where the standing wave from the carrier would be strongest). The points were marked with dots, and you had to be careful to cut the cable in the right places. The vampire tap would drill into the cable until it reached the inner conductor. Your workstation connected to the AUI tap by a DB-15 cable.
Kids these days have no idea what they're missing!
To be honest, I'm not sure how the LTE side works, or how closely it's integrated with the legacy CDMA2000 network (if at all)... if this means the carriers are implementing an EIR as part of their LTE rollouts, then yes, the newer LTE devices would be covered.
Older CDMA2000 subscribers wouldn't be covered (and right now, there are still millions of those, especially in areas where LTE is not yet available).
As long as the carrier knows the ESN / MEID of the CDMA phone is blacklisted, I assume they'd refuse to activate it.
The tricky part is sharing that blacklist across all carriers in some standard (so if a Verizon handset is marked as stolen, Sprint or another CDMA carrier would know not to activate it). With GSM, that shared database is already defined as a standard and widely implemented (though I'm not sure all GSM carriers actually use it).
WCDMA, and iDEN are basically variations of GSM. Traditional GSM phones run on a TDMA air interface... WCDMA is the use of a CDMA air interface to provide GSM service. It is *not* the same thing as CDMA2000, which is traditionally called "CDMA" here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WCDMA#Deployment
The GSM standards define a database called the Equipment Identity Register (EIR), which is what carriers would use to blacklist stolen equipment. GSM network elements already know how to query an EIR to see if a handset is marked as stolen / etc.
CDMA2000 phones have something similar to an IMEI, called a MEID. Unfortunately, the standards used in CDMA2000 networks have no concept of an EIR, let alone any way of querying one. I have no idea how much is involved to retrofit CDMA2000 networks to support an EIR or what components need to be upgraded, but it would definitely include updates to standards, software changes across all equipment manufacturers, and then coordinated deployments across all carriers. It's technically feasible, but I don't see that happening quickly. Remember how long it took operators to adopt number portability in North America?
I was thinking about this the other day as a technical challenge.
Assuming their SMS system handles tens of thousands of texts per second, each of which needs to be tested against this user-definable dictionary of 1600 words, is it even possible for the platform to keep up? Are there sophisticated search / pattern matching algorithms for testing a message against 1600 substrings? I can think of a very naive way to do this, but I'm sure it would not scale.
How would one implement this kind of high-speed pattern matching??
If you have an older unit that needs service, Sony won't railroad you into a newer unit.
I recently sent in a 60GB backward compatible PS3 for repair (wouldn't power on). They gave me the option of a $129 repair, or for $99 I could swap it for one of the newer models instead. The Sony rep left the choice up to me but she definitely understood why I wanted to stick with the older model, in fact almost encouraged me to go that route (I would have anyway).
I paid the $129... they ended up swapping mine for another 60GB backward compatible console. I got my replacement a week after I shipped my old one. The unit I received looked brand new. It was shiny... clean... still had the vinyl cling film. It was a different serial number... but the same model number (CECHA01). It may have been a refurbed unit, but regardless, Sony definitely took care of me.
In what ways is it more complex to administer an email server vs. an SMSC? Have you ever operated an SMSC?
One big difference between email and SMS is the way that messages are delivered to the recipient.
With email, it is up to the client to pull messages from the server periodically. The server doesn't need to worry about the client being unreachable -- if the client is logged in, the POP3 / IMAP transfer is likely to succeed. Thus, the server doesn't need to do anything special to handle retries to millions of clients -- that is all handled client side.
Unlike Email, SMS uses a push model for delivery. The push model minimizes the use of the phone's transmitter, which helps preserve handset battery life. Also, server push allows for immediate delivery of messages (rather than waiting around for the client to log in a few minutes later).
The problem with server push is that it is difficult to scale it to handle thousands of messages per second / millions of oustanding messages, especially when the recipients are often unavailable to receive messages. Sure, a large percentage of SMS messages go through on the first attempt, but definitely not all. There are a number of reasons why SMS delivery might fail (handset powered off, poor signal, overloaded cell site or network, etc).
It is up to the SMSC to implement the retry mechanism. It must handle a large number of queued messages, destined for possibly millions of recipients. The retry mechanism must be effective, minimizing messaging delays. At the same time, it must not be wasteful (SS7 and control channel bandwidth are a finite resource). The carrier may incur SS7 network charges for every delivery attempt, successful or not. In other words, scheduling retries to maximize success, minimize bandwidth demands, and minimize delay is a difficult thing to get right. Blindly retrying everything in the queue every couple of minutes will not fly.
The server push architecture of SMS is one of the main things that makes SMS so much more complex than you seem to think it is. I don't deny that email can be surprisingly complex too, but SMS is far from the simple packet pipe that many people seem to confuse it with.
Interesting -- you do raise good arguments.
The DMCA has been (ab)used to limit development of DVD player software, and I am fully aware that the DMCA is being abused six ways 'till Sunday. Lexmark printer cartridges, anybody?
Apple may be abusing it, but they may be technically within the law at the same time. I'm no lawyer or judge obviously.
As for the EULA, again, it really depends on whether the court will allow Apple to enforce the requirement that OSX only run on Apple hardware. If not, that's obviously bad news for Apple.
Finally, how does Psystar distribute the added software with the originals? Do they distribute a separate DVD containing only the added software along with the actual original OSX disc? Do they include a recovery disk? I have no idea... that detail seems quite important.
I don't necessarily take sides, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out in court.
My bad :) Copyrighted, not trade secret. I stand corrected.
I forgot about the assembler listing... that's an interesting way to make clean-room efforts more difficult.
If you actually bought an IBM PC, you would have had the opportunity to read that assembler listing, and therefore you would be "contaminated"
That would certainly make it harder to prove you used a clean-room process when reverse engineering the BIOS. Maybe not impossible, but certainly more tricky.
The sticking point was always the Mac ROMs, since those contained Apple's proprietary / copyrighted code.
Any company could slap a 680x0 chip, some RAM, and other misc. parts onto a motherboard and call it a Mac emulator board... but the Mac ROMs were the tough part, and they were essential.
IIRC, there were Mac emulator boards for the Amiga and Atari ST, but you had to transplant the ROMs yourself (from your old Mac).
Apple did actually license clones at one point, but only for a brief period of time...
And therein lies the rub... Apple's EULA prohibits using OSX on anything other than Apple-branded hardware. Psystar is not adhering to that term.
But the publisher / author haven't included EULA terms to prevent you from changing your copy of the book and reselling it.
Apple's EULA does restrict you from running OSX on non-Apple hardware. Also, to make that possible, you would have to defeat some technical measures that effectively control access to the protected work (the OSX code that verifies that it's running on Apple hardware). Never mind the morality of EULAs or the DMCA... but those are what distinguish this case from selling a whited-out / modified Harry Potter book.
A while ago, there was a DVD editing company called that ran into problems with this (they are like Netflix, but they rent / sell edited versions of movies). They may have been called Clean Flicks... I can't remember... When selling an edited version of a movie, they would include a legitimately purchased original DVD, but carefully rendered unplayable (possibly by scratching or breaking the disk). This protected them against charges of piracy, however, I believe they still faced other copyright issues.
http://www.cedarcityreview.com/articles.php?id=2786&art_title=Court_Ruling_Affects_Edited_Movie_Stores
Apple sold them thousands of copies at full retail, which would mean those copies are subject to the usual EULA for OSX. One of the conditions is that OSX is only licensed for use on Apple-branded hardware.
Additionaly, I'm pretty sure it's full of language preventing you from selling modified copies of OSX (specifically, modified to allow it to run on non-Apple hardware).This also means bypassing a technical means of controlling access to a copyrighted work (DMCA violation).
I don't necessarily love EULAs or the DMCA, but those form the legal framework that Psystar has broken. Hence the lawsuit...